- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Nothing wrong with the idea of a split title
Posted on 12/7/11 at 9:58 am
Posted on 12/7/11 at 9:58 am
In 2003, the problem was not that the AP voted differently. The problem was that USC did not deserve the split title.
We played in the hardest conference in the land, played an extra game where we beat a top 5 Georgia team and then beat the #1 ranked team in the NC game. There was no reason to give the AP title to USC. Simply put, they did not deserve it and got it because of the media love.
Overall, split titles are legitimate. I just don't think USC had a case in 2003.
Flame away.
We played in the hardest conference in the land, played an extra game where we beat a top 5 Georgia team and then beat the #1 ranked team in the NC game. There was no reason to give the AP title to USC. Simply put, they did not deserve it and got it because of the media love.
Overall, split titles are legitimate. I just don't think USC had a case in 2003.
Flame away.
This post was edited on 12/7/11 at 10:00 am
11
Posted on 12/7/11 at 9:59 am to siliconvalleytiger
the were ranked #1 in the AP and did nothing really lose that ranking after their bowl game
are you saying they didn't deserve the #1 ranking to begin with?
are you saying they didn't deserve the #1 ranking to begin with?
Posted on 12/7/11 at 10:03 am to siliconvalleytiger
One of our arguments in 03 and 07 when referring to the teams that didn't get it was "You agreed on the system at the beginning of the year, now you have to live with it." The same applies to us now. If Alabama beats us, Alabama is champion. The only champion.
This post was edited on 12/7/11 at 10:04 am
Posted on 12/7/11 at 10:05 am to siliconvalleytiger
quote:In the end, there can be only one
Overall, split titles are legitimate
Posted on 12/7/11 at 10:08 am to siliconvalleytiger
quote:
We played in the hardest conference in the land, played an extra game where we beat a top 5 Georgia team and then beat the #1 ranked team in the NC game. There was no reason to give the AP title to USC. Simply put, they did not deserve it and got it because of the media love.
this.
quote:
Overall, split titles are legitimate
inevitable for legit.
quote:
I just don't think USC had a case in 2003.
agreed...they were a very good football team who failed to qualify for the natcham game. end of story.
Posted on 12/7/11 at 10:20 am to siliconvalleytiger
No split titles since 1998
BCS isn't a split title
BCS isn't a split title
Posted on 12/7/11 at 10:20 am to siliconvalleytiger
quote:
I just don't think USC had a case in 2003
The only reason you think this is because you are an LSU fan and feel the controversy took away from the greatest moment in your time as an LSU fan, assuming you are under 60.
USC was #1 in both traditional polls. OU was only #1 in the BCS, which was because of the complicated formula that was repetitive.
Posted on 12/7/11 at 10:27 am to siliconvalleytiger
Split titles are for pussy, "take my ball & go home" types.
Bama is in the game, get over it. If they beat us, they are THE national champs. I certainly will not be satisfied or recognize an AP championship
Bama is in the game, get over it. If they beat us, they are THE national champs. I certainly will not be satisfied or recognize an AP championship
This post was edited on 12/7/11 at 10:28 am
Posted on 12/7/11 at 10:27 am to siliconvalleytiger
I just like it because it makes the BCS look stupid and that alone is well worth it.
Posted on 12/7/11 at 10:40 am to siliconvalleytiger
When the AP chose in 2003 to become a slave to the BCS by being a component part of the system, they were not free to name a champion on their own.
The AP in 2011 is free from the BCS and can choose who they want
The AP in 2011 is free from the BCS and can choose who they want
Posted on 12/7/11 at 11:18 am to siliconvalleytiger
You're trying to justify a potential loss. Nobody cares about the AP title. The BCS is what we want.
Posted on 12/7/11 at 12:15 pm to siliconvalleytiger
The problem is that since there is a #1 vs #2 football game played on the field, the AP isn't a real title. It's a paper championship. A title that's voted on. Means nothing IMO. Whoever wins the game is the champion. Period. Maybe in the days when the championship was nothing more than a vote it may have counted, but not anymore.
If LSU loses and "wins" the AP vote it's 100% worthless IMO
If LSU loses and "wins" the AP vote it's 100% worthless IMO
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News