- 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: Two schools of thought this year with the BCS
Posted on 12/23/11 at 9:21 am to DArbonneDuke
Posted on 12/23/11 at 9:21 am to DArbonneDuke
1. The two best teams already played and LSU won. Alabama lost their chance at number 1.
2. I can hear all of ESPN experts now, after LSU beats Alabama.."Well we don't know LSU is the best team because they didn't play Oklahoma State"
That's why I didn't want a rematch. LSU deserved a shot to beat both Bama and Oklahoma State.
2. I can hear all of ESPN experts now, after LSU beats Alabama.."Well we don't know LSU is the best team because they didn't play Oklahoma State"
That's why I didn't want a rematch. LSU deserved a shot to beat both Bama and Oklahoma State.
1
Posted on 12/23/11 at 9:29 am to Chimlim
quote:
I can hear all of ESPN experts now, after LSU beats Alabama.."Well we don't know LSU is the best team because they didn't play Oklahoma State"
You don't really believe that, do you?
Posted on 12/23/11 at 9:36 am to shel311
quote:
You don't really believe that, do you?
I don't.
They'll be saying it about USC, not Okie lite.
I can't wait to be proven right.
Posted on 12/23/11 at 9:43 am to shel311
There was no rational reason to exclude the big12 champ this year. Espn concocted reasons to keep out okie (or keep in Bama). Never before has a major conf champ been excluded from the bcs game for reasons such as "eyeball test" and low defensive rankings.
So after slogging through the most difficult schedule in the country, after defeating the pac12 and big east champs, winning the sec west and then the sec, lsu has the honor of playing the sec west division runner-up. Again.
Pretty sweet deal for Bama.
So after slogging through the most difficult schedule in the country, after defeating the pac12 and big east champs, winning the sec west and then the sec, lsu has the honor of playing the sec west division runner-up. Again.
Pretty sweet deal for Bama.
Posted on 12/23/11 at 10:03 am to biglego
quote:
Pretty sweet deal for Bama.
Yup.
Posted on 12/23/11 at 10:24 am to drexyl
ESPN set the whole thing up because they knew what would get the best ratings- LSU/Bama not LSU/OSU. It was an inside job perpetuated on the American public but it was done in full view.
Posted on 12/23/11 at 10:37 am to therocketscientist
quote:
This is simple shite. Put your "well, it just bothers me" emotions to the side (if that applies)...
1) Everyone knew the rules all along. Gundy has stated this all along also. If he is not complaining, why should anyone else?
2) The for majority of people really do think Bama is better than Ok State.
3) Ok State lost to a far-less-than-impressive Iowa State team. That is a huge dent in any claim to be a legit top-5 or top-10 team, much less a top-2 team. Gundy admits they lost the control of their own destiny when THEY lost this game.
Bama is undefeated in regulation. We made it in 2007 with 2 OT losses, whereas they are given a chance with 1 OT loss, not to Kentucky or Arkansas, but to the undefeated consensus best team in the country.
This is some simple shite.
Okie Lite is undefeated in regulation too. Matter of fact they are undefeated in single period overtime games too, something Bammers can't claim.
Okie Lite also lost on the road. Bammers lost at home.
Bammers also lost to the team that already stamped their names on one line of the _______ v _______ for the NC.
Acting like either team belongs there over the other without question is stupid.
Posted on 12/23/11 at 10:45 am to lashinala
quote:
So if they were a 2 TD underdog instead of 4 it would be OK? (or 5 points?) The line in Vegas determines who is a valid opponent?
Wha? That shite is WEAK.
No the line in vegas doesn't determine it, but the talent on the field and she record does. Those things also help to determine the line. The line is generally an accurate depiction of which team is better. Not always, but generally.
Not defending Bama, just saying.
Posted on 12/23/11 at 10:52 am to cajunjj
quote:
this. eyeball test is bullshite and bama had their shot.
the world swore up and down that Michigan/Ohio State were CLEARLY the best two teams in the nation after they played to a virtual standoff in 2006 and then UF ripped 15 new assholes in buckeye.
#2
Posted on 12/23/11 at 11:00 am to strose
quote:
Okie Lite is undefeated in regulation too. Matter of fact they are undefeated in single period overtime games too, something Bammers can't claim.
Okie Lite also lost on the road. Bammers lost at home.
Bammers also lost to the team that already stamped their names on one line of the _______ v _______ for the NC.
Acting like either team belongs there over the other without question is stupid.
Are we still bitching about having to play Bama again? Really??? Are you afraid?
Bama is better than OSU. Period. OSU has too shitty of a defense to beat a team like LSU or Bama, they are more similar to Arkansas. The two best teams are lined up to play in the NCG, LSU has every advantage and will win.
Will you people say the title is illegitimate when LSU beats Bama simply because LSU didn't play Okie lIght???
Posted on 12/23/11 at 11:09 am to sectops
quote:
The goal of the BS is to match the two best tams up at the end of the year
this is the one disappointment with this whole situation...this is not the goal. The intent of the BCS is to match up the 2 top-ranked teams at the end of the year. Had Ok State beaten Iowa State by 1 point they would be in the game vs. LSU because they "earned" the #2 ranking by going undefeated and winning their conference. I don't think anyone would think at that point that OSU was better than Bama. All this subjective stuff about LSU-Bama would be a better game, or difference in point spreads, or whether Bama would beat OSU in a hypothetical semi-final game should be meaningless.
As members of the SEC, we want voters to give a little extra credit to a conference winner. If this were Oklahoma and Texas in a rematch game, with the SEC winner having 1 loss to Miss State, for example, we'd be going ape-shite right now.
Posted on 12/23/11 at 11:15 am to RogerTheShrubber
Granted. What if we lose by 3?
In Overtime.
What's it prove?
Who's better?
Bama is fine as an opponent, but not as a way to determine who is 'number 1' unless LSU wins convincingly. I think we will, but I look at every scenario and there are some issues with a close loss.
In Overtime.
What's it prove?
Who's better?
Bama is fine as an opponent, but not as a way to determine who is 'number 1' unless LSU wins convincingly. I think we will, but I look at every scenario and there are some issues with a close loss.
Posted on 12/23/11 at 11:15 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Are we still bitching about having to play Bama again? Really??? Are you afraid?
Bama is better than OSU. Period. OSU has too shitty of a defense to beat a team like LSU or Bama, they are more similar to Arkansas. The two best teams are lined up to play in the NCG, LSU has every advantage and will win.
Will you people say the title is illegitimate when LSU beats Bama simply because LSU didn't play Okie lIght???
Are you an idiot?
All I said was acting like either team belongs there over the other without question is stupid.
ftr I do think the BCS got it right.
Posted on 12/23/11 at 11:16 am to DArbonneDuke
quote:
The two best teams are playing in the NCG
Posted on 12/23/11 at 11:32 am to drexyl
I'm pretty sure it wasn't the closest ever. And does anyone think that MAYBE ESPN had guys that knew how the BCS would shake out? And thus reported what they thought? Until OSU beat the shite out of Oklahoma and VT lost it looked like they had a very slim chance of making it. Once that happened ESPN said it would be very close. Wtf are people complaining about? Saban has been on espn many times. It wasn't just to get Alabama in the big dance.
Posted on 12/23/11 at 11:37 am to DArbonneDuke
OSU is clearly not the 2nd best team because they lost to a (6-6) Iowa State team on the road by 3pts. If they would have won that game by 3pts, they would CLEARLY be the 2nd best team in the country.
Posted on 12/23/11 at 11:39 am to ReauxlTide222
quote:
I'm pretty sure it wasn't the closest ever. And does anyone think that MAYBE ESPN had guys that knew how the BCS would shake out? And thus reported what they thought? Until OSU beat the shite out of Oklahoma and VT lost it looked like they had a very slim chance of making it. Once that happened ESPN said it would be very close. Wtf are people complaining about? Saban has been on espn many times. It wasn't just to get Alabama in the big dance.
LINK /
Closest ever.
Posted on 12/23/11 at 11:53 am to ALTiger
Uh, yeah. That's how it works most of the time. I'd pick 2010 Alabama to beat 2011 OSU. People will probably laugh at that because UA had 3 losses, it's about perception. If OSU is undefeated people would think they were the 2nd best team.
Posted on 12/23/11 at 12:01 pm to strose
I guess I'm wrong then. But I clearly remember them saying it wasn't the closest ever on ESPN when the revealed who made it. Thanks though.
Posted on 12/23/11 at 12:03 pm to ReauxlTide222
quote:
I guess I'm wrong then. But I clearly remember them saying it wasn't the closest ever on ESPN when the revealed who made it. Thanks though.
That doesn't help your argument about ESPN not pimping Bama for this game. I don't buy that argument either, though.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News