- 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
re: Ranking the BCS Controversies
Posted on 8/3/08 at 12:29 pm to H-Town Tiger
Posted on 8/3/08 at 12:29 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
so that makes it 17-13 instead of 24-13? Still a USC win.
Its all about the momentum. That call was basically game changing in the grand scheme of things.
quote:
There's always hyperbole, they did have some close scrapes, but it was still a great team. 2001 Miami and 95 Nebraska were better IMO.
Yeah, they were a great team, they just aren't anywhere near "the greatest team of all time" which people were calling them after the Oklahoma beatdown.
quote:
playing for seeding is not as important as playing for a spot in the playoffs. What diminishes the regular season is having weaker teams win the title, so the more teams you put in the playoff the greater the chance the best team in the regular does not win. I can think of several years besides 2004 (the worst case scenario) were there were 2-3 teams that could argue for being in the title game, but I can't think of any were it went 5 or 6 deep.
I guess this is true, but I REALLY don't like the BCS, almost fully because of 2004.
0
Posted on 8/3/08 at 12:38 pm to thetempleowl
quote:
One could say a playoff enhances the regular season
How? If there was an 8 team playoff in CFB last year, the LSU-Ark, VT-BC and WVU-Pitt games are meaningless, under the BCS all of those games were huge.
Also look at the Texas-Ohio State game in 2005, that game was huge, it set UT up for a title run and basically knock tOSU out of the NC picture, if there was a playoff, what does it mean? Nada
quote:
If you have to win the conference championship to get into the playoffs
Not if you have a CCG like the SEC, in 2001, Florida had a better SEC record and beat us 44-15 in BR. yet LSU played in the SEC CG, Florida didn't, so that game was basically meaningless.
Posted on 8/3/08 at 12:42 pm to H-Town Tiger
I'm sure the undefeated Auburn team feels that every one of their wins meant something...
Or maybe they would want a playoff system. Not sure about that one.
Or maybe they would want a playoff system. Not sure about that one.
Posted on 8/3/08 at 12:48 pm to thetempleowl
Am I the only one in the country that actually likes the BCS system? Everyone is touting playoffs, which would alleviate alot of controversy, but doesn't the controversy make all of this a lot more, ummm, titillating? 
"tittillating"
Anyway, would the same number of people be on this or other football boards arguing about all of this kind of thing if we had a playoff.
No, I'll concede to a plus one but I wouldn't agree to anything beyond that; if it were up to me.
"tittillating" Anyway, would the same number of people be on this or other football boards arguing about all of this kind of thing if we had a playoff.
No, I'll concede to a plus one but I wouldn't agree to anything beyond that; if it were up to me.
Posted on 8/3/08 at 12:49 pm to Zamoro10
Auburn getting screwed out of the NC was the best controversy.
Posted on 8/3/08 at 1:02 pm to fanrun
quote:
Auburn getting screwed out of the NC was the best controversy.
I am still mad about how that whole thing played out, and it was four years ago.
Posted on 8/3/08 at 1:03 pm to thetempleowl
quote:
I'm sure the undefeated Auburn team feels that every one of their wins meant something
All their games did mean something, OU almost lost to A&M, USC almost lost to UCLA, Auburn had to keep winning to keep their hope alive, it just sucks for them that there were 2 other undefeated teams. I have said I'd prefer a 4 team playoff, to avoid situations like 2004 and there are some other years like 98 00 and 01, where I think teams that were left out, had a case to be in the game, but like I said, I can't think of year, were there were more than 4 teams that have an argument. As much as it sucks for Auburn in 2004, I would rather that than to have a team like the 2007 NYG as champion.
Posted on 8/3/08 at 1:07 pm to Ross
Auburn deserved to be in the NC. That is the very reason for playoffs to get the politics out of it.
Posted on 8/3/08 at 1:08 pm to fanrun
quote:
Auburn getting screwed out of the NC was the best controversy.
2004 is the BCS worst case scenario, but the 2003 controversy should be #1. The #1 team in both traditional polls got left out. If the title game that year had been LSU-USC, there would not have been any controversy, no matter how you cut it in 2004, someone gets the shaft.
Posted on 8/3/08 at 1:10 pm to fanrun
quote:
That is the very reason for playoffs to get the politics out of it.
there would still be politics picking teams for an 8 or 16 team playoff. 2004 sucks, but its the only time that happened.
This post was edited on 8/3/08 at 1:13 pm
Posted on 8/3/08 at 1:16 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
there would still be politics picking teams for an 8 or 16 team playoff. 2004 sucks, but its the only time that happened.
BCS should have done something other than just tell us "Aw, so sorry, you're number two, deal with it" at the end of the season.
This post was edited on 8/3/08 at 1:17 pm
Posted on 8/3/08 at 1:26 pm to Ross
It is going to happen again for sure.
Posted on 8/3/08 at 1:27 pm to Ross
Like?
Look both Auburn in 2004 and USC in 2003 have to accept that a system that all 6 BCS conferences agreed to, that they would use certain criteria to pick 2 team to play for the BCS C.
It sucks, that's why I'd rather a 4 team playoff, a while an Auburn fan may not agree, its better to have an undefeated BCS team not win a title, than to have a 3 or 4 loss team win one because they got hot in a playoff (like Villanova or the 2007 NYG)
Look both Auburn in 2004 and USC in 2003 have to accept that a system that all 6 BCS conferences agreed to, that they would use certain criteria to pick 2 team to play for the BCS C.
It sucks, that's why I'd rather a 4 team playoff, a while an Auburn fan may not agree, its better to have an undefeated BCS team not win a title, than to have a 3 or 4 loss team win one because they got hot in a playoff (like Villanova or the 2007 NYG)
Posted on 8/3/08 at 1:31 pm to H-Town Tiger
Have an elite 8 team conference with 2 divisions in each and have the winners of the conference play in a playoff system
Posted on 8/3/08 at 2:17 pm to Zamoro10
quote:
I'm not pimping 2003 USC btw... through no fault of their own they played a deplorably easy schedule and still lost a game...
Tell that to #6 ranked Auburn. 23-0
Do you know how many teams that finished the year ranked 03 USC beat?
Perhaps the only teams in modern college football history to play an easier schedule (and win a national championship) was BYU
Posted on 8/3/08 at 2:22 pm to fanrun
quote:
Have an elite 8 team conference with 2 divisions in each and have the winners of the conference play in a playoff system
Because of specific examples I think people overlook the truth... setting a must win the conference championship as a requirement is a completely arbitrary rule
It sounds good but breaks down when you realize it would place more value on one or two conference games played in the year... over most conference games and all non conference games played in a season
That's arbitrary because every team should be evaluated by as much information about them as possible... so ideally every voter and computer poll would take into account (in an educated fashion) the meaning of every game played in the year when considering who might be the best team in the country
Posted on 8/3/08 at 2:30 pm to molsusports
quote:
Perhaps the only teams in modern college football history to play an easier schedule (and win a national championship) was BYU
Those schedules are not even remotely comparable, Hawaii's schedule last year was tougher than BYU's in 84. USC did beat the #4 team by 2 TD's in the Rose Bowl, BYU beat a 6-5 team (same team BTW) by 7 in the Holiday.
Posted on 8/3/08 at 3:07 pm to H-Town Tiger
you did notice i used the word easier?
Posted on 8/3/08 at 4:51 pm to Ross
quote:
2001 Miami had one close game all year, against #14 Virginia Tech, which they won by two points. They blew everybody else out by an incredible margin.
Uh, they blew everyone out in a DYING Big East...that conference was on it's last legs and imploded two years later...Seriously, at that time besides VaTech there wasn't a Big East team that was even mediocre.
Miami 2001 was a great team but has been elevated to iconic status (a status it doesn't deserve) by the lazy who don't take this into account or understand how bad Nebraska was.
Also get your history right; Miami was leading BC 12-7 with 30 seconds and BC on Miami's 7 yard line for the go ahead score...the ball hits the receiver's leg bounces in the air and a Miami player runs it back for a junk TD when he could've just fallen on the ground. So TWO games they almost lost. Two really close calls. While 2004 USC blew everyone out as well and had to close calls; 23-17 against #7 Cal and a close score (not game) against archival UCLA. That 2004 USC NO DOUBT team had it all.
I would put Leinart, Bush, White, Tatupu, et al. against Ken Dorsey any day. Oh and 2004 USC had Chow and Miami still had Coker. I would even put 95 Nebraska over 2001 Miami and I hate Nebraska...1972 Trojans were the best though...
As for Auburn that team was nice...nothing spectacular. I don't think its fair when any team doesn't get a shot but like Miami-Nebraska, it wouldn't have made a difference...so who cares.
This post was edited on 8/3/08 at 5:12 pm
Posted on 8/3/08 at 4:55 pm to Ross
quote:
I am still mad about how that whole thing played out, and it was four years ago.
I can't blame you. I'd be furious. In any given year, if an SEC team goes undefeated and wins the conference championship, you could almost lock it that they would be in the National Title game.
And seeing Florida get in with 1 loss and LSU with 2 only a couple years later would make me even more irate. I'm getting angry typing it, and I'm not even an Auburn fan.
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News