- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
re: 9 months later...how ridiculous was the BCS NC selection?
Posted on 10/18/12 at 5:06 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Posted on 10/18/12 at 5:06 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Guys there is an SEC bias not an Alabama bias. Just look at the current BCS poll. LSU is sixth, the highest rated 1 loss team. South Carolina is 7th . Both are rated higher than an undefeated Oregon State.
Three 1 loss SEC teams are rated higher than FSU.
The bias is pro SEC. Right now, LSU is the beneficiary of that bias. Last December, Bama was the beneficiary. A 1 loss SEC team will always be ranked higher than a 1 loss non SEC team.
Three 1 loss SEC teams are rated higher than FSU.
The bias is pro SEC. Right now, LSU is the beneficiary of that bias. Last December, Bama was the beneficiary. A 1 loss SEC team will always be ranked higher than a 1 loss non SEC team.
0
Posted on 10/18/12 at 5:07 pm to Brettesaurus Rex
quote:
don't understand how or why we were forced to play Bama a second time
This is the problem. Everyone was looking at it like "Who gets to play LSU?", but in reality it is supposed to be "Who is the number two team in the country?".
quote:
It was almost comical how they pushed an pushed for the rematch.
All I heard on ESPN was how Okie State had a better resume.
quote:
I get LSU and Bama might have been the two best teams, but how can you force us to beat a team we already had in the regular season
Because it was the selection for the National Championship Game, the selection should NOT be made based on whomever the other team playing for it is.
Posted on 10/18/12 at 5:13 pm to AllBamaDoesIsWin
quote:
It was almost comical how they pushed an pushed for the rematch.
All I heard on ESPN was how Okie State had a better resume.
yeah, I heard a lot about Okie Lt as well, but any mention of a rematch will set the rantards off. Some of our fans have a victim mentality.
Posted on 10/18/12 at 5:16 pm to Rickdaddy4188
quote:
Everyone knows that #1 and #2 isn't always the best teams. South Florida was ranked #2 not to long ago
I think it gets a real hard look at the end of the season.
Also losing late in the season is a killer. Very difficult to overcome if other teams are winning, particularly losing to an average team.
This post was edited on 10/18/12 at 5:23 pm
Posted on 10/18/12 at 5:17 pm to Penrod
quote:
Okay, Thunder, just give me one honest answer. If Ok St had faced Bama at the end of last year how many points would you have had to get before you bet OSU? If you say less than seven I will, of course, respect your integrity, but I won't have a very high opinion of your handicapping.
At least 10. But what does that have to do with anything?
Posted on 10/18/12 at 5:25 pm to Rickdaddy4188
quote:
There is a reason we Play the games. Did anyone believe Utah was gonna stomp Bama in 08?
Rickdaddy4188 - very good point.
As I mentioned in some earlier posts in this thread, the intent of the season should be for one team to demonstrate its superiority to the exclusion of the most other teams.
We demonstrated our superiority over the Pac-10 (Oregon), the Big East (WVU), and the SEC. What wasn't demonstrated was our superiority over the Big-12, Big-10, independents, and the smaller conferences in some cases. While logistically impossible to have a true round-robin, one team could have excluded at least one other conf. last year via the BSCCG.
How many times do two teams have to play to demonstrate who's better? It has to be an odd # of games.
The (Bama) fans who think Okie State was a given need only to remind themselves of Uath in '08. Upsets happen.
Posted on 10/18/12 at 6:15 pm to notiger1997
You miss the point which is that Bama was from our conference which we won and had already beaten them once. The fact that they had only one loss and probably were the second best team had nothing to do with it. In my opinion no college team should have to play a rematch in a bowl whether it is the NCG or not. The atmosphere and preparation are so different that it really doesn't prove anything. We still beat them once and they beat us once but somehow we aren't co-champions. Total bullshite that we had to play them again.
Posted on 10/18/12 at 6:21 pm to Tom Bronco
Selecting Bama was the biggest failure of the BCS.
Why some on here wanted to play them again was beyond me.
It was not so much that Bama deserved to be there but more that LSU won the right to play someone else.
Why some on here wanted to play them again was beyond me.
It was not so much that Bama deserved to be there but more that LSU won the right to play someone else.
Posted on 10/18/12 at 6:31 pm to Tom Bronco
quote:
You miss the point which is that Bama was from our conference which we won and had already beaten them once. The fact that they had only one loss and probably were the second best team had nothing to do with it. In my opinion no college team should have to play a rematch in a bowl whether it is the NCG or not. The atmosphere and preparation are so different that it really doesn't prove anything. We still beat them once and they beat us once but somehow we aren't co-champions. Total bullshite that we had to play them again.
No one has even mentioned that the bowl system is set up for conferences to play other conferences. The SEC hast played the SEC in a bowl game in 50 years , but it was ok now? Bama is the first National Champ to not win their conference in 80 years. 1935.
Posted on 10/18/12 at 6:51 pm to cattus
quote:This is almost as delusional as AlwysaTigr's rant a few posts up.. All LSU won was the right to be there, more-so than any other team.
It was not so much that Bama deserved to be there but more that LSU won the right to play someone else.
Posted on 10/18/12 at 6:53 pm to getback
So what did you find delusional about my post(s)?
I agree with this.
quote:
All LSU won was the right to be there, more-so than any other team.
I agree with this.
Posted on 10/18/12 at 7:13 pm to AlwysATgr
quote:Sorry, Alwys.. No offense. But your POV is a little bit LSU-centric, shall we say. The BCS wasn't formed so that one team could "demonstrate it's superiority" over as many different teams as possible, it was formed to match the 2 best teams, #1 and #2, against each other for the Championship. To state that LSU "demonstrated it's superiority" over 3 conferences is a tad over the top, as well. Not that I disagree that they were better.
So what did you find delusional about my post(s)?
Posted on 10/18/12 at 7:31 pm to getback
I'm not up-tp-speed on what the BCS's stated intent was/is. From how it played out l;ast season I would say it is inherently flawed.
My POV is much more general than the BCS and it would only be considered "LSU-centric" if LSU was one of the two teams at some defined penultimate point that had demonstrated their superiority, i.e., on the field, over the greatest number of other teams.
Obvioulsy, for logistical reasons with 100+ teams it is not possible to play a true round-robin format in a given season. Hence, some measure of subjectivity is going to come into play.
The intent should be after the season for one team to be able to say it demonstrated that it was the best team over the greatest number of other teams.
In '11, we demonstrated we were the best team in the SEC (by winning the SEC), better than the Pac-10 (by defeating their conf champ), and the Big East (by defeating their conf champ).
What wasn't shown on the field was that we (or Bama) were better than the teams in the Big-12, etc. It could have been shown that we were better than any team in the Big-12 had we played Okie State.
How the season is shaped is arbitrary. But the overarching goal should be for one team to demonstrate its superiority to the exclusion of the most number of other teams.
My POV is much more general than the BCS and it would only be considered "LSU-centric" if LSU was one of the two teams at some defined penultimate point that had demonstrated their superiority, i.e., on the field, over the greatest number of other teams.
Obvioulsy, for logistical reasons with 100+ teams it is not possible to play a true round-robin format in a given season. Hence, some measure of subjectivity is going to come into play.
The intent should be after the season for one team to be able to say it demonstrated that it was the best team over the greatest number of other teams.
In '11, we demonstrated we were the best team in the SEC (by winning the SEC), better than the Pac-10 (by defeating their conf champ), and the Big East (by defeating their conf champ).
What wasn't shown on the field was that we (or Bama) were better than the teams in the Big-12, etc. It could have been shown that we were better than any team in the Big-12 had we played Okie State.
How the season is shaped is arbitrary. But the overarching goal should be for one team to demonstrate its superiority to the exclusion of the most number of other teams.
Posted on 10/18/12 at 7:33 pm to AllBamaDoesIsWin
quote:
All I heard on ESPN was how Okie State had a better resume.
Probably because it was an irrefutable fact. Emotions rule college football though. I think they even let women cast a vote.
LSU and Alabama both beat every team on their schedule. shite happens. Life goes on.
This post was edited on 10/18/12 at 7:40 pm
Posted on 10/18/12 at 7:45 pm to AllBamaDoesIsWin
quote:
All I heard on ESPN was how Okie State had a better resume.
We must've been watching different ESPNs. All I heard about was Bama's "better loss", and that Bama passed the "eyeball test" - the first time I heard either of these terms.
Posted on 10/18/12 at 7:47 pm to Brettesaurus Rex
Your just upset that we are not as well liked as Alabama and Saban, we have to play Gators and dogs and they get to play vols and wildcats?
We are always the underdog
We are always the underdog
This post was edited on 10/18/12 at 7:48 pm
Posted on 10/18/12 at 7:49 pm to 756
quote:
Your just upset that we are not as well liked as Alabama and Saban, we have to play Gators and dogs and they get to play vols and wildcats?
We are always the underdog
Have to? Why would I rather play the vols or wildcats..? 2 exciting games vs 2 boring games..
I feel bad for people who think that the only thing that matters is the record at the end of the season.
Posted on 10/18/12 at 7:56 pm to AlwysATgr
quote:The intent is:
I'm not up-tp-speed on what the BCS's stated intent was/is.
"1. The top two teams in the final BCS Standings shall play in the National Championship Game."
LINK
Note, it is not the two "best" teams, it's #1 and #2, who may or may not be the two "best", depending on whom you ask. So, based on stated intent, the BCS arguably "gets it right" every single year, since #1 always faces #2, regardless of whether anyone thinks they're the "best".
This post was edited on 10/18/12 at 8:02 pm
Posted on 10/18/12 at 8:20 pm to Thunder Tiger
quote:
Thunder Tiger
Many thanks for the info.
In my way of thinking that's more of a method than an intent. IOW, what is the BCS intending to prove by having the top two teams play?
Posted on 10/18/12 at 8:24 pm to Brettesaurus Rex
I think we will play them again this year 
Page 20 of 21
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News