- 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: this is what pisses me off about the bcs
Posted on 11/11/10 at 12:33 am to jwill37
Posted on 11/11/10 at 12:33 am to jwill37
quote:
My biggest problem with TCU and Boise is their schedule. I think they're both quality teams; however, how many teams in the top 25 do you think could go undefeated with that schedule? My guess would be quite a few. It's not our fault their schedule is weak. Its theirs. And until they play tougher teams they should not be considered for a NC in this BCS format.
The resolution to their schedule problem isn't within their control. The teams that will improve their schedule strength won't play them because they have nothing to benefit from doing it. Maybe if TCU and Boise end up in the national championship, a few big BCS schools will take off their skirts, put down their shirley temples and put these guys on the schedule and at least attempt to prove they don't belong, instead of just claiming it all year then losing to them if they face them in a BCS bowl (ala Utah vs Alabama, Boise vs. OU, Utah vs. Pitt).
Imagine if Auburn with the talent they have being in a weaker conference where they absolutely kill everyone, everyone that is decent outside their conference refuses to play them, and everyone detracts from their accomplishments because of their inferior opponents. It's also quite convenient that those that stand to benefit from keeping Auburn down in this situation have the ability to do so by refusing to play them, thus keeping their "they don't play anyone" argument intact. Auburn would still be the great and championship-caliber team that they are, but everyone would be so hung up on SOS that they would argue Auburn out of the title picture.
0
Posted on 11/11/10 at 12:38 am to dreaux
Your argument is a thinly veiled plea for LSU to play for the BCS title, but no matter how awesome the win was last Saturday, does LSU really deserve to be there?
Do you think if LSU played Auburn another 9 times that the outcome would be substantially different?
Do you think if LSU played Auburn another 9 times that the outcome would be substantially different?
Posted on 11/11/10 at 12:39 am to DeafJam73
quote:
TCU and Boise State don't schedule better teams because they don't want to lose. They don't even have conference championship games. Like the fellow above said, it is their own fault if they don't get respect; they don't deserve a shot a team like LSU
Correction: They deserve a shot at LSU, they just don't deserve a shot at a national championship. If it comes down to it, I'd love for TCU play LSU in the sugar bowl. That's fine, but a shot at the national championship? Really? TCU's ADs set up easy schedules because that's the caliber of teams that they WANT to play against. Just because they're doing well against the 80th ranked teams doesn't mean they get the right to play in the big show. It means it's time to step up and join a major conference or set up a home and home (maybe two a year) with top 10-15 teams. If they would ever play a team like Alabama and/or LSU during a season and beat them, and went undefeated, they're in the NC for sure.
But they don't play that kind of competition, plain and simple. For example, LSU plays Alabama, Auburn, Florida, and Arkansas. Do you guys really think Boise could come out 3-1 against that schedule? No way, maybe 1-3 or 2-2 at best, and that's just 4 games! Maybe I have my big boy SEC glasses on, but man, there's just no way they could do it.
When they change their schedule and play 2 legitimate opponents per year, I'd vote them to the top two. Until then, they can be happy with going undefeated and going to a decent bowl game, because that's the best they can do with what their schedule allows, nothing more.
ETA:
quote:
Your argument is a thinly veiled plea for LSU to play for the BCS title, but no matter how awesome the win was last Saturday, does LSU really deserve to be there?
Do you think if LSU played Auburn another 9 times that the outcome would be substantially different?
No, Auburn definitely deserves it over LSU because they won, fair and square. (Except for paying their players to play for them, but that's another story) Our of 9 tries? i'd say we win 3-4. We lost on the last drive you know...
This post was edited on 11/11/10 at 12:57 am
Posted on 11/11/10 at 12:46 am to TigerSkin12
Also, I understand that you guys would love to play the big boys, but that has to be set up years in advance (2013-2014 vs LSU is coming). Your horrible schedule dictates your place in the grand scheme of things, end of story. It may seem unfair that you can't schedule the big boys (again, you're getting there in the future), but that's just what you have to deal with. It's not our fault that you can't prove yourself against a big time opponent. If/when TCU/Boise plays Oregon in the NC and loses 65-14, don't you think that a one loss Auburn or LSU will be upset that they didn't have a shot at actually competing for a NC?
Until we get a playoff these things will be said again and again, it sucks, but it gives us something to argue about.
Until we get a playoff these things will be said again and again, it sucks, but it gives us something to argue about.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 3:36 am to thetigerman
quote:
Judge a team by how they play, not who they play
And how exactly do you quantify that?
Is going 12-0 with the 70th best SOS and beating up a bunch of shitty teams 49-10 somehow more impressive than going 11-1 with a top 10 SOS and beating a bunch of top 30 teams by single digits?
Posted on 11/11/10 at 8:09 am to thetigerman
quote:
Should they be precluded because their opponents turned out sucky, while they were actually a really good team?
Playoffs.
playoffs are the obvious answer, but until they are a reality, WHO a team has beaten - and/or who has beaten them - has to be the deciding factor.
When a team runs over a bunch of teams that everyone else has beaten, what does it say?
A team can 'look good' playing a patsy - just like they can 'look good' in practice. You don't know if they are really any good at executing blocks, getting open on routes, handling pressure until they have actually had to block someone, or get open or handle pressure.
Until they do that against a good team - and overcome the inevitable bad breaks, injuries, and weird bounces - you really don't know if they are any good or not.
The Harlem Globetrotters "looked" pretty invincible. Would you bet on them if they played the worst team in the NBA????
Bring on the playoffs.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 9:31 am to TigerSkin12
quote:
Correction: They deserve a shot at LSU, they just don't deserve a shot at a national championship. If it comes down to it, I'd love for TCU play LSU in the sugar bowl. That's fine, but a shot at the national championship? Really? TCU's ADs set up easy schedules because that's the caliber of teams that they WANT to play against. Just because they're doing well against the 80th ranked teams doesn't mean they get the right to play in the big show. It means it's time to step up and join a major conference or set up a home and home (maybe two a year) with top 10-15 teams. If they would ever play a team like Alabama and/or LSU during a season and beat them, and went undefeated, they're in the NC for sure.
But they don't play that kind of competition, plain and simple. For example, LSU plays Alabama, Auburn, Florida, and Arkansas. Do you guys really think Boise could come out 3-1 against that schedule? No way, maybe 1-3 or 2-2 at best, and that's just 4 games! Maybe I have my big boy SEC glasses on, but man, there's just no way they could do it.
When they change their schedule and play 2 legitimate opponents per year, I'd vote them to the top two. Until then, they can be happy with going undefeated and going to a decent bowl game, because that's the best they can do with what their schedule allows, nothing more.
This board seriously should require an IQ test to login.
You honestly think that TCU is holding out on joining a conference with tougher competition to keep their schedule weaker? TCU is talking about joining the Big East just for the autobid, and so that the bottom of the conference schedule won't be so God-awful (though the top will suffer).
Another issue is, yeah we do schedule home and homes years out with big BCS schools. The only problem is, when it gets a year way from the game if TCU is looking good, the school buys their way out. It has so far happened with OU, UT, TTech, and Arkansas, and depending on how TCU is looking in 2012, it might happen with LSU as well. Even when we schedule them, they will only play us in years when they think we will be down (2005 was supposed to be a down year so we had OU in norman and kicked the snot out of the #5 team in the nation). If you honestly think that TCU and Boise are keeping their schedules weak on purpose and aren't doing everything in their power to play tougher teams, you're dumber than my coffee table.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 9:33 am to TigerSkin12
quote:
If/when TCU/Boise plays Oregon in the NC and loses 65-14, don't you think that a one loss Auburn or LSU will be upset that they didn't have a shot at actually competing for a NC?
I'll bet you $100,000 that if TCU or Boise play Oregon for the national championship they will keep it closer than 50 points. Put your money where your mouth is.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 9:40 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:
When a team runs over a bunch of teams that everyone else has beaten, what does it say?
A team can 'look good' playing a patsy - just like they can 'look good' in practice. You don't know if they are really any good at executing blocks, getting open on routes, handling pressure until they have actually had to block someone, or get open or handle pressure.
Why is this line of thinking only applied to TCU, Boise, and Utah and never to Oregon or one of the other garbage BCS teams that has had a chance to play for the national championship (see OSU in every year but 2002)
quote:
Until they do that against a good team - and overcome the inevitable bad breaks, injuries, and weird bounces - you really don't know if they are any good or not.
So, considering that's not in their locus of control, why penalize a bunch of student athletes because the power brokers of college football exist in a competition oligarchy and refuse to let anyone else into their circle? Why not promote the accomplishments of teams that succeed without the money, recruits, or publicity of the BCS and maybe we will force the big BCS schools' hands and they will finally start putting these schools on their schedules? As you say we don't know how good they are, why do you assume they aren't that good instead of giving them some benefit of the doubt? Why also do you then say when they do play up and beat a good team (in TCU's case, crush a good team) that it is easy to just get up for one game? Is it easy to crush every opponent on your schedule and have the expectation of winning every game by 30 points? Only TCU and Boise are held to that standard, yet when they achieve it they still have detractors.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 9:43 am to dreaux
standford kardinul is gude phootbol teem
Posted on 11/11/10 at 10:08 am to thetigerman
quote:
Should they be precluded because their opponents turned out sucky, while they were actually a really good team?
The only way to judge a team is by who they played and who they beat.
By watching TCU and Boise dominate their schedules,I understand the argument about them both being "complete" teams and what not. However, there are inherent difficulties when trying to decide if Auburn or LSU would look as "complete" against their competition, or if TCU and Boise would look the same against LSU's competition. At the end of the day, until their is a playoff, I am all for the BCS erring on the side of caution with these teams that SEEM great, have not truly been tested. Basically, I would rather the BCS side with WHO you beat not HOW MANY you beat or BY HOW MUCH you beat them.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 10:10 am to dreaux
quote:
Just because TCU and BOISE go undefeated, does not mean they should automatically get in the NCG?
This is why we should not have preseason polls. If that were the case I don't think you would have this issue. Also, the human element always takes into effect the previous years team. What else can you base the rankings on?
Posted on 11/11/10 at 10:12 am to hpeair2
TigersandFrogs, mainly what people are telling you is, that it is easy to get up for one game. Try getting up and staying up for 3 to 4 games in a row. Not to mention the physical beating your team takes by playing LSU, Florida, Alabama, Auburn and Arkansas week in and week out. Oh by the way, Tenn. Ol'Miss, Miss. State and South Carolina. That's really the point people are trying to get accross to you. Why would one of these schools Schedule you when they already have to play this schedule. I think LSU is stupid for playing the OOC teams they have played and will play in the future. Next year we will have to travel to play Oregan and W. Virginia not to mention our regular Schedule- to Alabama, Florida, Tenn., Miss. State. I think we deserve a break now and then. Unlike your school every week. Until TCU plays a schedule like that, I think you should be quit and leave this board because what you argue is a joke. 
Posted on 11/11/10 at 10:21 am to TIGERSandFROGS
quote:
TIGERSandFROGS
I understand you gripe about bigger schools not wanting to play you, but even if a school "mans up" as you say, they are still at a disadvantage. The ONLY way I would schedule TCU/Oregon is in an opener, which, might I add, LSU has done with TCU for the 2013 schedule. If you get them in an opener, each team will have similar focus for the game. Although TCU/Boise arguably have more to play for when it can be reasoned that they usually have 1-2 game schedules, it is the best you are going to get. However, I would NEVER schedule either team after that first weekend, because that is where they will get you. More often than not, they can afford to practice for that game for 2 to 3 weeks, ignoring the opponents before that game. On the other hand, schools like LSU do not have the luxury of mailing it in as ofter as TCU and Boise can, so they would be at a disadvantage with only a week to prepare.
But, no matter how you slice it, it is the same reason big 5A schools do not schedule 1A and 2A schools. At the end of the day LSU has nothing to gain from a regular season victory over TCU. Absolutely nothing. It is like taking a schedule that is already top 20 in the nation every year and making it top 5. That being said, they scheduled Oregon next year and TCU in 2013. Neither game needed to happen, but LSU did them anyway. I think you have no gripe with LSU.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 10:48 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:
A team can 'look good' playing a patsy - just like they can 'look good' in practice. You don't know if they are really any good at executing blocks, getting open on routes, handling pressure until they have actually had to block someone, or get open or handle pressure.
Until they do that against a good team - and overcome the inevitable bad breaks, injuries, and weird bounces - you really don't know if they are any good or not.
Look at the current BCS top 15 and tell me how many of them have played 4 or more teams this season that were ranked in the top 25 at some point in the season.
How many of the current top 15 teams have played 4 or more opponets that were ranked in the top 25 after week 7?
How many of the current top 15 have won all of those ranked/previously ranked opponent games?
FWIW IMO currently AUB should be #1
TCU #2
LSU #3
ORG #4
Boise #5
This post was edited on 11/11/10 at 10:50 am
Posted on 11/11/10 at 11:17 am to Bleeding purple
Posted on 11/11/10 at 11:21 am to dreaux
quote:
Boise/tcu matchup in the title game would be the worst ratings ever. Horrible game.
Now you are catching on...
Posted on 11/11/10 at 11:27 am to latiger89
Is this now the emoticon for I am dodging the data? Or for I am to incompetent to understand the question?
Posted on 11/11/10 at 11:37 am to Bleeding purple
You people realize that TCU/Boise/Utah don't want a playoff, right? They really just want to be ushered into one game where they can take a month to prepare for it (like they do in the regular season). Imagine if Boise had to play 3-4 games against top 10 teams in a row in a playoff format. Their depth would be exposed quickly. They'll argue "no one can get past 3 top 10 teams in a row". My reply: it's a requirement every year in the SEC.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 11:39 am to bazeball
My point exactly!
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News