re: Official BCS Discussion Thread

quote:

---

That PR firm Bama is rumored to have hired (if true) has some strong ammunition with this. If they really are doing a PR campaign with the voters, you can bet the voters will see Gundy's quotes on this. Emphasis will be placed on the difference in the losses, using Gundy's own words.

---

You're joking, right? Gundy will do what he needs to do to ensure that his team gets consideration for #2. If you don't believe that, you are a fool.

And if Bama has hired a PR firm to help their cause, that just shows what a pitiful bunch you Gumps really are.

If Ok St and Clemson win, Bama may need a PR firm. Post-game crew for Monday Night Football just said, "please don't give us a rematch of LSU - Bama". If the voters, especially those in the Big 12 and Pac 12, have any alternative to Bama, they will take it.

quote:

---

The size of the win doesn't matter to computers. MOV was removed from all computer polls.

---

But MOV matters to the human polls.

IMHO, you need to be careful making bright line rules in response to specific circumstances. Thus, I would prefer "voting guidelines" which tell the human voters that "avoidance of a rematch" is an acceptable consideration. I would add "conference champions may be favored over teams that did not win a championship." These would not be hard and fast but would make clear what many have long thought.

One instance where a rematch would be very understandable: when the two teams have the same record, especially if the team that lost the head to head beat the team that beat #1. For example, LSU at 11-1 because of a loss to Miss. State is #1 playing 11-1 Bama. In any event, I am one of those people who does not like rematches but also must admit that Bama is the team I consider to be #2 if avoidance of a rematch is not considered.

quote:

---

IMHO, you need to be careful making bright line rules in response to specific circumstances.

---

I agree you need to be careful, but you shouldn't avoid them altogether. I don't have a problem with rematches in principle, but there are certain situations that should be avoided no matter what that the current setup allows.

I believe conference champions should be unambiguous--no tiebreaker decisions for who wins. This is the hardest one to implement because it implies a one game playoff may be necessary for teams from non CG conferences. This champion needs to be respected totally to have the meaning it should. So no non-conference winner advances unless his conference champion advances.

This means I have no problem in principle with an LSU Bama rematch if LSU wins the SEC. However, if GA were to win, and if they wouldn't be selected to play in the NCG, then neither LSU or Bama should go. If the BCS is to function as a reasonable substitute for a playoff, you must accept the singular most playoff like result that we have as a playoff result.

The one problem that I have with a Bama rematch currently is the fact that only two teams can advance. While we all think Bama is #2, we don't know that for a fact. The only true fact is that Bama lost to us. We don't know for sure if somebody else would. Your guideline would be helpful in here.

I should disclose that I am a proponent of a playoff that some would see as extreme - 16 teams, the bowls be damned. I don't mean to get into that argument, but it does inform why I support a "selection process" mindset for selecting the 2 teams to participate in a one game playoff - because that's what it really is - over merely voting for whom the voters subjectively believe to be the 1st and second best teams. Presumably, this sort of process worked in 2006 with UF leapfrogging Michigan.

Not so fast. Do not forget about 2007. Stanford and VT lose and OSU takes care of business stranger things have happened. Gives some of these on the fence voters over the edge. Don't punch your Bama tickets to Nawlins just yet. Do not care who we play but this scenario would be good with me.

Bottom line is that if we beat UGA and face Bama again, the best they can hope for is not only a split series, but a split MNC as well. Serendipitously, if that situation unfolds the AP will give their share of the NC to us. And as all of us remember, from our 2003 trash talk, that title means nothing, but the history books WILL record LSU as having a share of the MNC. Its a lose-lose situation for the gumps.

I'm feeling pretty bullish about our chances against Bama in the NC if it ends up that way. Bring it on Tide, I think you're going down.