- 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: Big 10 Commish - 2011 Bama wouldn't make playoff
Posted on 5/11/12 at 5:30 pm to H-Town Tiger
Posted on 5/11/12 at 5:30 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
90% of the time, taking only conference winners would not be remotely contraversial. If you did that last year and LSU won it, no one would care that Bama got left out.
100% of the time taking the top 4 wouldn't be controversial. Taking number 10 over number 2 seems like a stretch.
1
Posted on 5/11/12 at 5:38 pm to arwicklu
Uh-huh? Really?
And how are you determining the top 4 - more subjective polls?
Yeah, they are never controversial.
And how are you determining the top 4 - more subjective polls?
Yeah, they are never controversial.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 5:39 pm to Zamoro10
quote:
Uh-huh? Really? And how are you determining the top 4 - more subjective polls? Yeah, they are never controversial
How do you determine which conference champion is number 4... subjective polls?
Posted on 5/11/12 at 5:55 pm to Zamoro10
quote:
Uh-huh? Really? And how are you determining the top 4 - more subjective polls? Yeah, they are never controversial.
Last year would be a good example... Wisconsin played nobody out of conference. West Virginia lost to LSU. Clemson lost to USCe. Wisconsin would be the fourth conference champ based on ranking, however Clemson and West Virginia get punished for losing to two top 12 SEC teams.
So the polls decide that Wisconsin is in over 2 conference champions that decided to play tough out of conference games. Aren't we just back where we started?
Take the four best teams and just let them play. If you don't do that, then you're still allowing people to decide which conferences are tough and which ones are not. People boo hoo for OSU but say that Boise hasn't earned a shot. You don't see Boise lose to a team like Iowa State very often. People think their conference is weak so winning a conference championship doesn't matter. It seems pretty hypocritical to say conference championships are the most important thing and then spit on lower tier conferences.
Posted on 5/12/12 at 12:25 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
Whether you like it or not, winninga conference is a) an actual, measurable accomplishment and b) 100% objctive.
First nothing I said was a flame. The thread has plenty of back handed comments regarding the legitimacy of last yrs game. And how could Bama and Oregon playing the same team and one losing by three and the other by a couple of TD not be an objective measurement. Or how can an OSU team who lost to Iowa ST team have a more legitimate claim than Bama did last yr. There was nothing eyeball about that. This thread was started based on comments from the big ten doubting the legitimacy of yr. Hell you have one guy arguing that Oregon got screwed because they played LSu in week one while Bama played a worse team when Bama played the exact same team and lost by three. So don't give me this crap about not reading the thread, it doesn't take a genius to read between the lines because had LSU won on the 9th this wouldn't be an issue to LSU fans. The objective is to get the two best teams in cfb to play for a championship and there is nothing objective about it being conf champ considering the difference in difficulty in conferences. It is still an eyeball test considering even amongst conference champions you still have to determine by poll which are the best four teams. All this does is ensure that two teams from the same conference don't get in. The objective is to get the two best teams to play period. Even in this thread people are arguing about whether it should Stanford,, Oregon, OSU. The polls do not go away even with this chicken crap recommendation from the big ten.
Posted on 5/12/12 at 7:37 am to labamafan
quote:
Hell you have one guy arguing that Oregon got screwed because they played LSu in week one while Bama played a worse team when Bama played the exact same team and lost by three.
Your reading comprehension is a total failure, just like your flame.
You are referring to my comment.
What I stated clearly was this:
Had Oregon gone the "Bama route" and scheduled a nobody in Week 1 instead of LSU, they would have won the Pac 12 and had one loss. I thought that's what Delaney was referring to when he made this statement, which I highlighted in my response:
"I certainly wouldn't have as much regard for that team as I would for someone who played nine conference games in a tough conference and played a couple out-of-conference games on the road against really good opponents. If a poll doesn't honor those teams and they're conference champions, I do."
This, IMO, sounds like what Oregon did last year, even though I'm sure Delaney was really referring to a Big 10 team.
Again, just playing out possible scenarios of why other teams got punished for actually earning their way into Nola, as opposed to, you know, having the weakest resume in the history of the BCSNCG. And no, this isn't a "backhanded compliment". It is a fact.
quote:
So don't give me this crap about not reading the thread, it doesn't take a genius to read between the lines because had LSU won on the 9th this wouldn't be an issue to LSU fans.
As you continue with your flaming, read my post history on the subject. I've stated many times here that having Bama in the title game was bad for College Football. Period.
Now, in 2012, teams like Bama, USC, Texas, ND, etc, just have to finish third in their conference to make the title game. That's assinine, but that's life when you deal with a sport that is more about entitlement than accomplishment. You will see ESPN attempt to give USC the same treatment this year if they finish third in the Pac 12. It will be sick to watch, and should concern you as a fan of CFB.
But it won't.
Why? Because your team is one of the entitled teams. You don't care. And you shouldn't. More power to you.
quote:
The polls do not go away even with this chicken crap recommendation from the big ten.
Funny how "the polls" didn't even jibe with your entry last year either. In the regular season, you played three ranked teams (ranked at the end of the regular season) and lost to one of them. OSU played more and beat more ranked teams. The pollsters essentially contradicted their own polls to get you in.
Posted on 5/12/12 at 7:52 am to labamafan
quote:
This horse crap about favorites from LSU fans is laughable.
There is no doubt that there was a subjective bias that put Bama in the national title game. LSU wouldn't have got a rematch.
The media wouldn't even truly accept that Bama lost the first time. Also the Superdome and Tiger Stadium are not the same thing.
Just admit the media and voters made a joke of the season. It also set a horrible precedent.
Posted on 5/12/12 at 7:54 am to Colonel Flagg
quote:
Just admit the media and voters made a joke of the season.
You will never have a fan of a media darling team admit this. Ever.
quote:
LSU wouldn't have got a rematch.
This. Over and over again.
Posted on 5/12/12 at 7:59 am to EZE Tiger Fan
quote:
Had Oregon gone the "Bama route" and scheduled a nobody in Week 1 instead of LSU, they would have won the Pac 12 and had one loss. I thought that's what Delaney was referring to when he made this statement, which I highlighted in my response:
Bama did schedule Penn State. When they scheduled the game it isn't like anyone knew Penn State would stink. They still finished 22 in the final BCS rankings above WVU.
The same thing could be said about Wisconsin though. Wisconsin was ranked above conference winners WVU and Clemson. Wisconsin was ranked higher because they didn't take the risk of playings teams like LSU and USCe out of conference. I wonder if Delaney has regard for his champion?
quote:
This, IMO, sounds like what Oregon did last year, even though I'm sure Delaney was really referring to a Big 10 team.
Sounds like Oregon to me as well. That being said who did Oregon beat, just Stanford. They lost their only other tough games to USC and LSU. They only beat 1 team in the BCS top 25 at the end of the regular season. Bama did beat 3 teams in the BCS top 25.
quote:
Again, just playing out possible scenarios of why other teams got punished for actually earning their way into Nola, as opposed to, you know, having the weakest resume in the history of the BCSNCG. And no, this isn't a "backhanded compliment". It is a fact.
By fact, I suppose you mean opinion. Saying that teams earned their way there is also silly. When you lose to ISU and claim that you earned your shot, then you're just being silly. It doesn't mean you couldn't get a shot after losing to ISU but you certainly didn't earn it. Oregon lost two games and only had one quality win. Who earned it and why?
quote:
As you continue with your flaming, read my post history on the subject. I've stated many times here that having Bama in the title game was bad for College Football. Period.
It was bad for LSU. It was good for college football. It pushed us to a playoff because the two best teams were from the same conference and other conferences got upset.
quote:
Now, in 2012, teams like Bama, USC, Texas, ND, etc, just have to finish third in their conference to make the title game. That's assinine, but that's life when you deal with a sport that is more about entitlement than accomplishment. You will see ESPN attempt to give USC the same treatment this year if they finish third in the Pac 12. It will be sick to watch, and should concern you as a fan of CFB.
Most sports have wildcards to compensate for the two best teams being in the same division. Olympic sports have the two top times in many heats advance to the finals. You're basically saying that almost every sport that has wildcards is a joke.
quote:
Why? Because your team is one of the entitled teams. You don't care. And you shouldn't. More power to you.
Your team is also one of the entitled teams. Honestly you wouldn't care if Bama hadn't won last year. Its all fake outrage.
quote:
Funny how "the polls" didn't even jibe with your entry last year either. In the regular season, you played three ranked teams (ranked at the end of the regular season) and lost to one of them. OSU played more and beat more ranked teams. The pollsters essentially contradicted their own polls to get you in.
OSU played four teams in the final BCS rankings. Bama played four teams in the final BCS rankings.
Bama went 3-1 (Arkansas, Penn St, Auburn, LSU) while OSU went 4-0 (K State, Baylor, OU, Texas). Bama went 8-0 outside of the top 25. OSU 7-1 versus unranked teams. The pollsters gave more weight to taking LSU to OT than losing to Iowa State. That isn't insane.
Plus after seeing Arky handle K State it appears our best win was better as well but you wouldnt have known that at regular season end. Your facts aren't correct to begin with but they're also full of opinion.
Posted on 5/12/12 at 8:01 am to Colonel Flagg
quote:
There is no doubt that there was a subjective bias that put Bama in the national title game. LSU wouldn't have got a rematch.
LSU got a huge benefit in 2007. It is funny that it is only outrageous when it causes your team to get destroyed.
Posted on 5/12/12 at 8:10 am to arwicklu
quote:
It was good for college football.
No, it wasn't.
quote:
It pushed us to a playoff because the two best teams were from the same conference and other conferences got upset.
What playoff? When does it start?
quote:
Most sports have wildcards to compensate for the two best teams being in the same division. Olympic sports have the two top times in many heats advance to the finals. You're basically saying that almost every sport that has wildcards is a joke.
Apples and Oranges. Good lord.
Those other sports are set up completely different. Their motto isn't "Every Game Counts" either. Actually, CFB should change it's sig line to "Every Game Counts.....Unless you draw serious ratings for ESPN".
quote:
Your team is also one of the entitled teams.
quote:
OSU played four teams in the final BCS rankings. Bama played four teams in the final BCS rankings.
I had a similar arguement with a Bama fan a few weeks ago. You are using rankings AFTER bowls. Before the bowls it wasn't close. Bama played four BCS teams with a winning record in the REGULAR season. Four. I originally thought it was three, but I was wrong.
quote:
Plus after seeing Arky handle K State it appears our best win was better as well but you wouldnt have known that at regular season end. Your facts aren't correct to begin with but they're also full of opinion.
So that's why you chose bowl records. I see.
You, along with ESPN had no way of knowing this either.
Posted on 5/12/12 at 8:13 am to arwicklu
quote:
LSU got a huge benefit in 2007. It is funny that it is only outrageous when it causes your team to get destroyed.
These issues are not the same.
If I were OSU I would be pissed to have the #2 computer score and be bumped for a non conference champion. The difference in 2007 was LSU and VT played. They were also both conference champs. Anyone from the outside looking in should feel the same. The thing is Bama is a bigger name than OSU and has a big name for a coach. That is why it happened.
Posted on 5/12/12 at 8:14 am to arwicklu
quote:
LSU got a huge benefit in 2007. It is funny that it is only outrageous when it causes your team to get destroyed.
Hmmm.
You want to bash our 2007 team, do you?
Let's see what LSU's 2007 team did, that your 2011 team didn't do.
LSU's 2007 team:
1) Won the SEC Western Division Title
2) Won the SEC Conference Championship Game (you know, the extra game your program no longer has to play)
3) Beat Five teams out of the FINAL Top 15 at the end of the bowl games (since you used that standard in your last post). Yes, that's right: 1/3 of the Final Top 15 in 2007 lost to LSU that year. Hell, LSU's 2007 team beat more teams in the Top 15 than your 2011 team beat that were actually ranked in the top 30.
I, as an LSU fan, can at least admit LSU got lucky to get in the title game in 2007. Had WVU not lost to Pitt, we would have been in the Sugar Bowl again, and rightfully so. However, we did WIN THE SEC, so we still would have fit under Delaney's scenario, which is what this thread is about.
This post was edited on 5/12/12 at 8:17 am
Posted on 5/12/12 at 8:21 am to EZE Tiger Fan
quote:
Those other sports are set up completely different. Their motto isn't "Every Game Counts" either. Actually, CFB should change it's sig line to "Every Game Counts.....Unless you draw serious ratings for ESPN".
Every game counts was a motto compensating for a bad system. There is no good system that takes 120 teams and randomly decides who is number 1 and 2. Every game doesn't count. In 2003 USC didn't think every game counted. In 2004 Auburn didn't think every team counted. In 2009 Cincy, TCU, and Boise didn't think every game counted. The system screwed those teams.
quote:
What playoff? When does it start?
Really... come on.
quote:
I had a similar arguement with a Bama fan a few weeks ago. You are using rankings AFTER bowls. Before the bowls it wasn't close. Bama played four BCS teams with a winning record in the REGULAR season. Four. I originally thought it was three, but I was wrong.
Bama played 4 teams in the final BCS rankings before the bowls. OSU did also. I think we're on the same page. I wasn't using rankings after the bowls. In the final polls, Bama beat 2 and 5.
quote:
So that's why you chose bowl records. I see.
Arkansas was ranked higher than K State before the bowl as well. They were 6 and 8. Arkansas was ranked higher before and after the bowl. K State went down 7 spots after the bowl while Arky went up 1.
Posted on 5/12/12 at 8:23 am to Colonel Flagg
quote:
These issues are not the same.
Its never the same when you get the benefit is it?
quote:
The thing is Bama is a bigger name than OSU and has a big name for a coach. That is why it happened.
The only reason OSU jumped in the polls is because regionally people didn't want the SEC to get two teams. Most people said they believed that LSU and Bama were one in two. If most people believed that, and voted for a team that lost to ISU, then wouldn't voter bias be a huge issue based on region?
Posted on 5/12/12 at 8:25 am to EZE Tiger Fan
quote:
Let's see what LSU's 2007 team did, that your 2011 team didn't do.
4. Lose two games
5. Lose to Kentucky
Posted on 5/12/12 at 8:28 am to EZE Tiger Fan
quote:
I, as an LSU fan, can at least admit LSU got lucky to get in the title game in 2007. Had WVU not lost to Pitt, we would have been in the Sugar Bowl again, and rightfully so. However, we did WIN THE SEC, so we still would have fit under Delaney's scenario, which is what this thread is about.
We got lucky ISU lost. I don't deny that. In 2009 we got lucky that boobs blocked the kick against Tennessee. Luck is part of it.
That being said, we'd still fit in under Delaneys proposal as well. There weren't 4 conference winners in the top 6 so the first at large (Bama) would have been in. It wouldn't have changed anything for us being in.
Posted on 5/12/12 at 8:31 am to EZE Tiger Fan
quote:
I, as an LSU fan, can at least admit LSU got lucky to get in the title game in 2007. Had WVU not lost to Pitt, we would have been in the Sugar Bowl again, and rightfully so. However, we did WIN THE SEC, so we still would have fit under Delaney's scenario, which is what this thread is about.
I just realized you don't even know what his proposal is. Delaney proposed that if a conference winner is in the top 6 (LSU, OSU, Oregon) then they are in the playoff. If there aren't four conference winners (Alabama, Stanford, Arkansas), then the top at large teams start to qualify.
This would have impacted Oregon jumping Stanford. This would not have impacted Alabama.
Posted on 5/12/12 at 8:35 am to arwicklu
quote:
Every game counts was a motto compensating for a bad system.
Funny you bring this up. I thought the system in 2003 was good bc it took into account quality wins, and even had a formula to compensate for that, until:
quote:
In 2003 USC didn't think every game counted
A media darling didn't get its way because.....drum roll....it played a WEAK schedule. So, what did the media do to account for one of their darlings getting left out? Had the formula changed and "quality wins" removed from the formula. Now, in 2012, thanks to another media darling (Bama), "quality losses" is now part of the lexicon of CFB.
I started a thread a while back that detailed the history of the BCS Formula and how it changes when a media darling is "shafted". Again, every game counts, unless you draw ratings.
quote:
In 2004 Auburn didn't think every team counted. In 2009 Cincy, TCU, and Boise didn't think every game counted. The system screwed those teams.
But the system didn't screw OSU in 2011? Quality Loss. LOLOLOLOLOLOL
quote:
Really... come on.
You stated it brought us to a playoff. I'm asking a question. What playoff? When does it start?
Oh yeah. There isn't one.
Just wait. 2012 will be a clusterfrick of epic proportions now. I do blame LSU partially for this though. Had we beaten the darling last year, a lot of this worry of fricking up CFB until a playoff is implemented would have been removed. But LSU didn't, which honestly didn't surprise me. It's hard to beat a top 3 team twice, much less one from your same division. ESPN knew this, as did the rest of the media. They needed to be proven right, though, since they were proven wrong in November of 2011. "The Game of the Century" was supposed to be Bama's coronation. Didn't happen, but they sure showed the country in the end. ESPN got Bama their unprecedented Mulligan and the world was right again.
quote:
Bama played 4 teams in the final BCS rankings before the bowls. OSU did also. I think we're on the same page.
We are. Sort of. I'll never forget ESPN finally "coming clean" on the Bowl selection show when they showed your resume next to OSU's resume AFTER they got the Mulligan they wanted. It wasn't close. OSU had beaten 7 or 8 bowl teams, something like 7 in the top 30, won the conference, etc. All of the sudden, it was now about this new "quality loss" thing no one had heard of before 2011.
I LOLed. Good stuff, but more power to you. You got your Mulligan and dominated. You can also rest easy knowing LSU will NEVER be allowed to repay you for that either. But that's another thread for another time.
This post was edited on 5/12/12 at 8:38 am
Posted on 5/12/12 at 8:36 am to arwicklu
quote:
4. Lose two games 5. Lose to Kentucky
Wouldn't these be quality losses? LOLOLOL
No. We got in bc of points 1-3.
And 1-3 trumps your 2011 team big time. But you knew this already.
Page 5 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News