- 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: Rematches and "fairness"...rules of the BCS National Championship are laid out
Posted on 11/8/11 at 5:07 pm to ReauxlTide222
Posted on 11/8/11 at 5:07 pm to ReauxlTide222
quote:
There isn't doubt right now. From some Alabama fans yes, but the BCS has Alabama at 3 so there is obviously no doubt that LSU is better. I also believe LSU is better but at the end of the day it's just an opinion.
No...they use the final score at the end of regulation to determine this. Unless we're talking about moral victories, only real ones count when making this determination. It's not opinion based when two teams have played already...it would be an opinion if you were simply to declare BAMA is better than Stanford, without having played.
1
Posted on 11/8/11 at 5:11 pm to GeauxTigerTM
Your argument isn't a bad one but damn, have you never played any sports before? In the NFL a team can win the regular season games and still win the "Big Game." Whoever the best team is might still be up for debate but 1 team has the championship and the other team doesn't. Most all sports are like this. The BCS obviously keeps that scenario from happening most of the time. Have a problem with the BCS but Alabama shouldn't be disqualified from HAVING A CHANCE to get back to the #2 spot.
Posted on 11/8/11 at 5:13 pm to DeathValleyHobo
quote:
This is the exact reason the rematch could happen. If OK state and Stanford lose LSU will play either Bama or Oregon if they win out. Don't think that a rematch is out of the question because it could very likely happen.
Oregon is much more likely than Alabama. Boise St would get in before both of those teams, most likely.
Posted on 11/8/11 at 5:15 pm to ReauxlTide222
quote:
Your argument isn't a bad one but damn, have you never played any sports before? In the NFL a team can win the regular season games and still win the "Big Game." Whoever the best team is might still be up for debate but 1 team has the championship and the other team doesn't. Most all sports are like this. The BCS obviously keeps that scenario from happening most of the time. Have a problem with the BCS but Alabama shouldn't be disqualified from HAVING A CHANCE to get back to the #2 spot.
Alabama should have their chance to get back to the #2 spot, as long as LSU doesn't occupy #1 or #2. You don't reward a team for being idle during the SEC championship game, bottom line. LSU could represent the west in the SECCG, lose, and Alabama still should not be in the BCSCG.
Okie St/Oklahoma may be idle. It won't matter if Okie St beats OU.
This post was edited on 11/8/11 at 5:16 pm
Posted on 11/8/11 at 5:15 pm to ReauxlTide222
quote:
Your argument isn't a bad one but damn, have you never played any sports before? In the NFL a team can win the regular season games and still win the "Big Game." Whoever the best team is might still be up for debate but 1 team has the championship and the other team doesn't. Most all sports are like this. The BCS obviously keeps that scenario from happening most of the time. Have a problem with the BCS but Alabama shouldn't be disqualified from HAVING A CHANCE to get back to the #2 spot.
And while we appreciate that point of view, the Tide don't play in the NFL. They play in college football. The setup in college necessitates a rule in my opinion preventing a team that hasn't won a conference from playing in the NCG.
Posted on 11/8/11 at 5:20 pm to GeauxTigerTM
Exactly, LSU is #1 right now and that isn't an opinion. There might be a scenario at the end of the season of who the 2nd ranked team should be. If that team ends up being Oregon or Oklahoma, then so be it. If that team is Alabama then there ya go, it wouldn't be unwarranted or unfair to any other team. Yes LSU would have to play a dangerous extra game but nobody can fix that right now.
Posted on 11/8/11 at 5:22 pm to therick711
You might be right, but the rule isn't there right now.
Posted on 11/8/11 at 5:26 pm to bmy
Do you not see what's wrong with that statement? So because LSU occupies the 1st spot in the BCS Alabama in no way shape or form can work themselves back into the #2 spot?
Posted on 11/8/11 at 5:27 pm to lsusa
quote:
If Alabama or Oregon is rightfully the 2nd best team, and the voters "manipulate" the system for any reason to avoid a "rematch", then it is unfair to LSU and all of college football because the rules have been changed after the games have started
with all due respect, its the voters that decide who the #1 and #2 teams are at the end of the season. While there is no rule that says a team must win its conference to be in the BCS CG, if the voters fell that you should, that's their perogative to vote that team #2. There is not a definative, provable way to determine who the #2 team is, its who the voters say at the end of the season.
Posted on 11/8/11 at 5:29 pm to ReauxlTide222
quote:
Do you not see what's wrong with that statement? So because LSU occupies the 1st spot in the BCS Alabama in no way shape or form can work themselves back into the #2 spot?
No the way we conceive of it is if Bama can win the SEC, they can work their way back in it. Seems to me they would need an Arkansas win for that.
Posted on 11/8/11 at 5:30 pm to lsusa
quote:
the voters "manipulate" the system for any reason to avoid a "rematch"
Voters manipulate the BCS system virtually every year, just as voters manipulate every system they're involved with. If voters drop Bama to 7 or 8 on their ballots it won't be in the interests of fairness to LSU but some perceived benefit to their own team, conference, ratings, etc. An intra-SEC BCSCG would be engrossing to most of us here, and a handful of college football lunatics scattered across the country, but likely a ratings dud nationally.
On the issue of a split title, I've noticed more and more the last couple of years that no one in the media even mentions USCw's '03 AP title without including the caveat that it's legitimacy is still hotly disputed on the bayou. Our epic whining actually paid off for once.
Posted on 11/8/11 at 5:31 pm to Michael J
One definition that needs to be established as that the BCS is a two-
team PLAYOFF.
Whoever wins that playoff is THE champion, regardless of a rematch, ect. It would be like the Patriots claiming when they were 16-0 a few years back and beat the Giants to end the season they we're "co champs" even though they lost the super bowl.
The only qualification for the two-team college football playoff is finishing in the top two of the BCS Standings. Winning your conference is not a requirement,
And the argument about "not winning your conference/division" has no validity when it comes to comparing teams from DIFFERENT conferences or divisions anyway.
team PLAYOFF.
Whoever wins that playoff is THE champion, regardless of a rematch, ect. It would be like the Patriots claiming when they were 16-0 a few years back and beat the Giants to end the season they we're "co champs" even though they lost the super bowl.
The only qualification for the two-team college football playoff is finishing in the top two of the BCS Standings. Winning your conference is not a requirement,
And the argument about "not winning your conference/division" has no validity when it comes to comparing teams from DIFFERENT conferences or divisions anyway.
Posted on 11/8/11 at 5:37 pm to shinerfan
quote:
Voters manipulate the BCS system virtually every year, just as voters manipulate every system they're involved with. If voters drop Bama to 7 or 8 on their ballots
Never have the voters en mass proposly moved a team way down to keep them out. There is no way they would coordinate like that. LSU moved up from 7 to 2 in 2007 after the 1 and 2 teams lost. #3 moved up to the top spot, LSU moved ahead of 2 teams that did not even win their divisions (UGA and Kansas) and a team with just as many losses as LSU, that LSU beat 48-7 in VT).
All that would have to happen is for Bama to be #3 in the polls (they are currently #4 in the coaches poll). The teams that are #1 and #2 will play for the BCS Title.
Posted on 11/8/11 at 5:37 pm to lsusa
quote:
The only qualification for the two-team college football playoff is finishing in the top two of the BCS Standings. Winning your conference is not a requirement,
And the argument about "not winning your conference/division" has no validity when it comes to comparing teams from DIFFERENT conferences or divisions anyway.
One factor in determining who the top two teams are in the playoff is did the team win a conference. I think you can easily differentiate teams based on that factor and that it is within the rules to vote a conference champion at two. I also believe that the vast majority of voters in this system agree with me. That is why it does matter even though it isn't a rule. It is a differentiating factor. Georgia fans know that all to well.
Posted on 11/8/11 at 5:45 pm to therick711
There is no conceiving. There isn't a rule that says a team has to win their conference to go to the BCSNC. There might should be, but there isn't.
Posted on 11/8/11 at 5:52 pm to therick711
"One factor in determining who the top two teams are in the playoff is did the team win a conference. I think you can easily differentiate teams based on that factor and that it is within the rules to vote a conference champion at two. I also believe that the vast majority of voters in this system agree with me. That is why it does matter even though it isn't a rule. It is a differentiating factor. Georgia fans know that all to well."
One of the problems in arguments like this is that people conveniently ignore FACTS.
UGA being bypassed for LSU was relevant because LSU and UGA are both in the SEC- PERIOD!!!!
If Bama is 11-1 and "doesn't even win it's division" it doesn't mean that USL at 8-4 and the Sun Belt champ should be ranked higher.
I realize big difference tween Pac12 and Sun Belt, but point is a "conference champion" is not inherantly better than a team that didn't win a different conference.
One of the problems in arguments like this is that people conveniently ignore FACTS.
UGA being bypassed for LSU was relevant because LSU and UGA are both in the SEC- PERIOD!!!!
If Bama is 11-1 and "doesn't even win it's division" it doesn't mean that USL at 8-4 and the Sun Belt champ should be ranked higher.
I realize big difference tween Pac12 and Sun Belt, but point is a "conference champion" is not inherantly better than a team that didn't win a different conference.
Posted on 11/8/11 at 5:59 pm to ReauxlTide222
quote:
Do you not see what's wrong with that statement? So because LSU occupies the 1st spot in the BCS Alabama in no way shape or form can work themselves back into the #2 spot?
I think it makes good sense. LSU already beat Alabama in Tuscaloosa, and that weighs against Alabama getting a rematch. If the BCSCG was #1 vs #3, Alabama could sit at #2 with no problem.
It's one of those unspoken rules -- unless shite absolutely hits the fan you gotta win your conference or you're SOL.
This post was edited on 11/8/11 at 6:03 pm
Posted on 11/8/11 at 6:01 pm to lsusa
quote:
I realize big difference tween Pac12 and Sun Belt, but point is a "conference champion" is not inherantly better than a team that didn't win a different conference.
But the Big12/Pac12 teams aren't scrubs. The champion of that conference has earned a spot in the title game. Hell, this may be Boise Sts year.
Posted on 11/8/11 at 6:04 pm to bmy
Of course it weighs against Alabama being #2 again. That is why they dropped in the polls. Now they have to work hard to make it back, also with some help from other teams. Again, just because LSU is #1 doesn't mean Alabama shouldn't have a chance to get back to #2.
Posted on 11/8/11 at 6:05 pm to ReauxlTide222
quote:
Of course it weighs against Alabama being #2 again. That is why they dropped in the polls. Now they have to work hard to make it back, also with some help from other teams. Again, just because LSU is #1 doesn't mean Alabama shouldn't have a chance to get back to #2.
What is your argument for Alabama getting in over a 1 loss Oregon?
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News