re: LSU and Florida may discontinue playing each other every year

quote:

---

So you think peopke consciously decided to put Bama in because they would be a better draw? Forget the fact that the great majority of voters in the BCS formula had zeeo stake in the ESPN ratings,

---

I think ESPN wanted it. and they are the loudest voice in college football. And they influence voters just like the MSM influences voters how they want them to vote.

quote:

---

I didn't see anything I disagreed with in the part of his post you quoted. Are you saying it's insane to believe that Alabama didn't deserve to be in the NC game but was given their slot because of their media appeal? Because that's basically what he said, and it's 100% dead-on accurate.

---

Whether they deserved it or not is subjective and while media fawning over Saban and Bama as well as the name brand recognizition plays some role, it was not done with the express purpose of promoting Bama over Ok State because the like Bama better. They thought Bama was a better team and that's not unreasonable.

The notion that ESPN will stop the BCS from having a conference winners only playoff because they don't want to keep certain teams, like 2011 Bama out is whats insane.

quote:

---

The voters just flat-out handed the #2 ranking to Alabama when they clearly did not deserve it. That's an intentional act, which is, by definition, not a fluke. It means they will continue to do it. Saban will beg for special treatment, ESPN will champion the cause, and the voters will fall in line with it. There's nothing fluky about that. It's pure corruption, and that's not a one-year phenomenon.

---

I repeat, everytime I think the rant has sunk to a new level of insanity, we get new gems like this.

Alabama was not #2 in the human polls after 11/5. Had either OSU or Stanford won out, then Alabama would not have been in the BCS CG no matter how much you think ESPN likes them and Saban.

There were 3 BCS teams with 1 loss. Stanford, OSU and Alabama. Stanford's schedule was by far the worst of the 3 and they did not win their conference. They also lost by the largest margin. They have no case, so it boils down to 2 teams. OSU had a better paper resume and a case can be made that they deserved to go. But its simply ignorant and disengenious to say Alabama did not belong. The dominated 11 teams and lost in OT (that meanns after 60 minutes it was a tie) to the #1 team, they have a roster loaded with talent, they have a case to be in the game. Now did their name, coach and rep play a role in getting them in? OK, and maybe if it was Texas or OU instead of OSU, maybe that team would have been in over Bama. None of that means its corrupt or that they will not have a conference only requirement for a 4 team playoff.

quote:

---

some might have thought that, at the time of the bowls, USC was "better" than either team. If a majority of voters did, would USC deserve to be #1 with their 2 losses because they were subjectively thought to be "better"?

---

That would be valid if Alabama had more loses than OSU, but they didn't.

its more approriate for these types of threads

quote:

---

No matter how you slice it, Alabama did not deserve to be playing in the NC game.

---

Alabama proved they deserved to be there by kicking our arse in the Super Dome.

Let the butt hurt go.

quote:

---

thats a circular argument, you can't use 20/20 hindsight. I don't disagree that OSU had a better paper resume, but its ignorant to say Bama had no case.

---

concur.

quote:

---

I obviously meant the BCS

---

and I clearly stated human polls which most people realize means AP/Coaches polls.

quote:

---

The BCS standings are made up in part of voters not just computers, particulary after 2003 when media darling USC got left out

---

They tweeked the formula pretty much every year from 98-03 and the media poll was not used after 2003. you really need to get over your jealousy, LSU would have been in the 2003 regardless.

quote:

---

think a team that just lost the "game of the century", at home, should drop more than two spots in the human polls

---

They lost by 3 in OT, but if they should drop further, that means someone else should have been ranked higher. You can't just say, you lost you deserve to drop X number of spots. Its a ranking. The week following the 11/5 game, #5 was Boise, #6 Oregon (lost to the same team Bama did, only by a much greater margin) #7 was OU whou lost at home to a terrible TT team #8 was Arkansas who Bama beat the shite out of. So, how many of those teams should Bama have been behind?

quote:

---

And the only really good team Bama had beat up to that point was Arky.

---

Look at the schedules of the teams behind them and see who those teams beat. Hell look at #3 Stanford's schedule at that point, they only good team they beat was USC and I'd bet all kinds of money that if I was tauting USC as a good win, you'd be crying about USC being overrated and amedia darling