- 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: The way the voters should view the Alabama rematch situation
Posted on 11/27/11 at 12:59 am to RockChalkTiger
Posted on 11/27/11 at 12:59 am to RockChalkTiger
quote:
Only it was on the road, and he has more wins over ranked teams and, possibly, a conference championship in an arguably tougher conference.
According to the computers, it is.
0
Posted on 11/27/11 at 1:02 am to jonanthans
quote:
Can you honestly crown Bama as National Champions in that scenario?
They would have to. The coaches have to vote the winner of that game #1. I truly believe that bama would get the majority of ap votes. Sucks, but thats how it would go.
Posted on 11/27/11 at 1:11 am to RockChalkTiger
One thing people need to realize about the SEC Championship game is that it is about making money and nothing else. It was added in purely as a marketing and money making aspect of the conference. It's not about determining the best team in the conference.
Just like in Basketball, you can name an SEC regular season championship, but the automatic bid to the NCAA tournament comes from the SEC tournament.
In the end, the BCS is about putting a matchup of two teams that have earned it, not who people think are the 2 best teams. For example, in 2007, OSU earned it by being the 1 loss BCS champ that was available. LSU earned its spot because of their resume, particularly their wins, not their losses.
I am personally hoping the coaches and harris poll voters see the light and vote on the best resume if OSU wins against OU. They'll have better wins across the board and also lost in OT but on the road in extenuating circumstances as well as won their conference.
Bama has only beaten 3 teams with winning records all year, and only 5 that are bowl eligible. OSU has beaten 7 right now and would've beaten 8 with a win over OU (7 with winning records).
Just like in Basketball, you can name an SEC regular season championship, but the automatic bid to the NCAA tournament comes from the SEC tournament.
In the end, the BCS is about putting a matchup of two teams that have earned it, not who people think are the 2 best teams. For example, in 2007, OSU earned it by being the 1 loss BCS champ that was available. LSU earned its spot because of their resume, particularly their wins, not their losses.
I am personally hoping the coaches and harris poll voters see the light and vote on the best resume if OSU wins against OU. They'll have better wins across the board and also lost in OT but on the road in extenuating circumstances as well as won their conference.
Bama has only beaten 3 teams with winning records all year, and only 5 that are bowl eligible. OSU has beaten 7 right now and would've beaten 8 with a win over OU (7 with winning records).
Posted on 11/27/11 at 1:16 am to Tigerinasia
quote:
If the current push from ESPN that "Blama is in" continues then it is a done deal. Voters seem to be unduly influenced by the talking heads.
They're just doing that this week so they can be all over OSU's jock next week and not be accused of being impartial. Who's broadcasting that game anyway...
Okie Light was already #4 in the BCS (behind Arky) and will be #3 tomorrow. From there it's only a short jump to #2, and they still get to play the #6 team in the computers. A win there might be enough of a reason.
This post was edited on 11/27/11 at 1:20 am
Posted on 11/27/11 at 1:22 am to RockChalkTiger
The computers aren't going to be the issue for OSU. The human voters will be.
The thing that worries me is going to be the corruption that's going to occur in the votes. Bama homer's/people wanting a rematch will push back OSU, while those against a rematch will do the opposite.
It's shown what a joke the BCS has become honestly, and all because of USC in 2003. They adjusted the votes to give humans way too much power and this is the bullshite that will result from it.
The thing that worries me is going to be the corruption that's going to occur in the votes. Bama homer's/people wanting a rematch will push back OSU, while those against a rematch will do the opposite.
It's shown what a joke the BCS has become honestly, and all because of USC in 2003. They adjusted the votes to give humans way too much power and this is the bullshite that will result from it.
Posted on 11/27/11 at 7:22 am to Tigerinasia
quote:
The purpose of the BCS is NOT to match the two best teams. It is simply to match #1 vs #2. It uses a system of polls and computers to determine who those should be and is weighted more towards the human polls. Therefore, it is up to who the humans want to rate as #1 and #2 and thus meet in the National Championship game. If the the polls believe that Blama got their shot and don't deserve another one and rate someone else #2 then the system worked. If Blama gets ranked #1 or #2 then it worked. It always works for what it is stated to be: #1 vs #2. It is based on opinion and preference - that is all.
Thank you. This is what I was saying earlier. Perhaps the way to state it is the BCS process selects the two most "deserving" teams to play in the BCSNCG. Many times in a playoff Team A is upset by Team B, although the consensus is that Team A is a better team. However, although not as strong of a team, Team B "earned" the right to move on.
I think this year you can make a case that a one loss team, other than Alabama, is more deserving if it won its conference and has not lost to LSU already.
Posted on 11/27/11 at 7:45 am to VOR
Exactly, VOR. The question is not really "Does Alabama deserve the shot at LSU" The real question is: "Is Alabama so much clearly better than OSU that they deserve 2 shots at LSU before OSU gets even 1."
Posted on 11/27/11 at 7:53 am to Neako27blitzz
quote:
Nov. 5th was basically the NFC or AFC championship. The two clear cut best teams in the country (let's say the packers and 49ers for example) have to duke it out before the big one and as a result one gets left out of the big game. There's no doubt in my mind that Bama is second only to LSU, but until a playoff system is implemented I don't see the logic in having a rematch in the national championship, regardless of what teams are involved.
Wrong! The voting should rank teams based on how well they played. Only if they think OSU would beat Bama should they rank them higher. Anything else is biased, dishonest and contrary to the rules. You don't change the rules after the fact just because they don't favor you. The BCS NC game is a 1 game playoff. I wish it were more but it isn't. That 1 game playoff pits the best two teams in the nation, regardless of conference affiliation - PERIOD. And those teams are LSU and Bama. This is not the NFL but even in your scenario, if the loser of the packers/49ers regular season game had no other losses, they would still make the playoffs and if both continued to win, they would eventually face the team that beat them. And the winner would go on regardless of what happened in the regular season.
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:02 am to PatriotAlum
quote:
The voting should rank teams based on how well they played. Only if they think OSU would beat Bama should they rank them higher. Anything else is biased, dishonest and contrary to the rules.
No, actually, I don't believe those are the written "rules".
quote:
This is not the NFL but even in your scenario, if the loser of the packers/49ers regular season game had no other losses, they would still make the playoffs and if both continued to win, they would eventually face the team that beat them. And the winner would go on regardless of what happened in the regular season.
No. There is no post-season playoff Division I. There is a single championship game. The regular season acts as a "playoff" in a sense.
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:05 am to natcheztiger
quote:
The question is not really "Does Alabama deserve the shot at LSU" The real question is: "Is Alabama so much clearly better than OSU that they deserve 2 shots at LSU before OSU gets even 1."
Its simpler than that! The question is: is Bama better than OSU? That is all that matters in the rankings. It doesn't matter if Bama is a lot better or only a little better. And in the BCS NC game, the rankings are all that matter in determining who plays. Spin it however you guys like but rematch or not, the top 2 teams are supposed to play in the BCS. Anything else is biased, unfair, and against the rules, even if its a rematch. Heck, there is a whole rule about what if two opponents from the same conference play for the NC game and neither won their conference (then their conference champion gets a BCS game giving their conference 3 BSC games)! Clearly, in that rule, rematches were expected. Just as clearly, conference championships are not required. If we had a +1, 4 team playoff, Bama would play OSU and LSU would play Stanford. Chances are, both SEC opponents would score some points but both would be beaten in the trenches and overpowered. LSU and Bama would advance and play each other in a rematch game for all the marbles. The current system skips the first round and jumps to the expected results.
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:16 am to VOR
quote:
No, actually, I don't believe those are the written "rules".
Voters are supposed to vote based on each teams performance to date and how impressive they've been. They are not supposed to consider previous years' performances, teams' reputations or other criteria such as conference alignment. They just rank teams based on how well or how poorly they've performed. I'm too tired to look up the link but I have read it more than once. So based on that, whether a ranking puts a team in or outside an NC game, whether or not they won their conference, or whether it results in a rematch should not be considered because none of that is an honest reflection of a teams performance. Even a pitiful 6 loss team might win a weak conference. Based on the written voting instructions, I don't see how anyone could vote OSU over Alabama. Alabama only had 1 close game and that was LSU. OSU struggled with Texas A&M (a team Arkansas beat). OSU clearly lacks the defense needed to win a national championship. Otherwise, they would have stopped Iowa State, off game or not. Bama would have - off game or not.
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:17 am to LSU
quote:
Its purpose is not an opinion that you can disagree with.
It is when you don't understand its purpose as is the case with you here. I mean, you just quoted Swafford as though it somehow settled the argument over which team should play despite the fact that his statement mentions only rankings. #1 plays #2 in the BCS rankings every year. You aren't offering any insight there. But.... who should those teams be? To a large degree, that is left to voters to decide and Swafford's statement offers us no guidance there. Stop pretending that it does.
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:22 am to PatriotAlum
quote:
The question is: is Bama better than OSU?
No, it isn't.
quote:
That is all that matters in the rankings.
I'd be interested in hearing why you think Houston is "better" than Oklahoma. Clearly they are because they are ranked higher and "that is all that matters in the rankings."
This post was edited on 11/27/11 at 8:23 am
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:26 am to PatriotAlum
quote:
Based on the written voting instructions
Link that pdf please.
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:32 am to BleedPurpleGold
quote:
I disagree. The point is to decide on the field which is the best CFB team in the country. That decision, if it were between LSU and Alabama, has already been decided. Let someone else have a shot that hasn't already had a shot at proving they are the best.
AMEN!!
Clearly thought out and articulated simply and plainly!
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:33 am to PatriotAlum
quote:
They are not supposed to consider previous years' performances, teams' reputations or other criteria such as conference alignment.
I haven't suggested anything about previous years or reputations. And I haven't mentioned "conference alignment", alghough the BCS clearly takes that into consideration for many of its "rules" . . .e.g., automatic qualifiers, limits on conference representation, etc.
quote:
So based on that, whether a ranking puts a team in or outside an NC game, whether or not they won their conference, or whether it results in a rematch should not be considered because none of that is an honest reflection of a teams performance
A team's performance. In head to head competition for example? Like LSU at Alabama?
quote:
Alabama only had 1 close game and that was LSU. OSU struggled with Texas A&M (a team Arkansas beat). OSU clearly lacks the defense needed to win a national championship. Otherwise, they would have stopped Iowa State, off game or not. Bama would have - off game or not.
So now you're drifting into the truly subjective.
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:33 am to LSU1NSEC
quote:
A rematch won't prove a damn thing
you may as well get over this train of thought. you can flat out believe alabama will be in the championship game. maybe the only thing that could possibly change is who they will play, and that would only come into play if we get blown out by georgia. if there was ever any more reason to drop these bullshite championship games and install a playoff i couldn't imagine it. well, maybe had we lost to arkansas it could have been even harder to pick 2 teams. a seeded 16 team playoff like the fcs has would be the nuts
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:34 am to texastigerr
quote:
Alabama doesn't deserve it because they lost at home against us. The way this should work is that another team that won their conference and has one loss should be getting a shot at us. Right now that could be Va Tech, Oklahoma State. That should take priority. You shouldn't be playing for a National Championship if you already lost to the team you would be playing and you didn't even win your division.
STOP, PLEASE STOP!!!!!
Your logic is killing them!!
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:35 am to PatriotAlum
quote:
This is not the NFL but even in your scenario, if the loser of the packers/49ers regular season game had no other losses, they would still make the playoffs and if both continued to win, they would eventually face the team that beat them.
The Packers and 49ers would not be the only teams to qualify to play for a championship. In the NFL 12 teams qualify. In a scenario in which only two teams qualify (especially when out of a much larger pool of teams) regular season games should be treated like playoff games as nearly they can. No game is as easy to be so treated as a previous head-to-head matchup.
This post was edited on 11/27/11 at 8:40 am
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:37 am to BleedPurpleGold
quote:
I disagree. The point is to decide on the field which is the best CFB team in the country. That decision, if it were between LSU and Alabama, has already been decided. Let someone else have a shot that hasn't already had a shot at proving they are the best.
to add injury to insult, if alabama were to beat us you can believe they will be # 1
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News