- 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: Coaches Poll history - blantant homerism, conference nepotism and odd voting
Posted on 8/17/12 at 8:57 am to FightOn4ever
Posted on 8/17/12 at 8:57 am to FightOn4ever
quote:
Can't help it if it is too cerebral for you
Misusing a word isn't cerebral. You might want to learn what that means, too.
I always write lengthy responses. I was responding to both your terrible arguments and your ad hominem attack on me. I do care very much about the BCS, and my arguments were tailored accordingly. Sorry that's too cerebral for you.
1
Posted on 8/17/12 at 9:05 am to Finkle is Einhorn
quote:
Lsu got demolished in the biggest game of the year. That's how bama proved they deserved to be there.
LOL.
Yet, when Bama lost their "biggest game of the year"....AT HOME....they weren't "whiny and bitchy" when their "genius" coach was begging for a second chance they didn't deserve.
I love the double standard.
quote:
Remember this was "the greatest lsu team of all time". And they got embarrassed. No way I'd be saying shite right now if the same thing happened to me cause it makes you look pathetic
Sure you wouldn't. And no, this was the greatest LSU team of all time. Not by a long shot. Greatest LSU regular season of all time, yes. Not the greatest team.
Posted on 8/17/12 at 9:11 am to Finkle is Einhorn
quote:
Lsu got demolished in the biggest game of the year. That's how bama proved they deserved to be there.
Using the results of the game to justify a team making it is 20/20 hindsight. Its nota valid arguement. We did not know the result of 1/9/12 on 12/4/11 when the teams were picked. I made the exact same argument that day as I do right now. OSU had a better, more accomplished resume thru the REGULAR SEASON, than Alabama, plus had not already lost to LSU. I do beleive winning your conference is important and should trump the "best loss" argument. Its not whiny and bitchy, its called being consistent. If we are going to use "eyeball" tests and opinions, then we should stick with the old MNC system and LSU should have been the MNC. There weren't "2 best teams", there was 1 best team and then a 2nd best team.
ETA: if you had the exact same rosters and results but instead of Alabama and OSU it was Miss State and Texas, who do you think would have gone?
This post was edited on 8/17/12 at 9:21 am
Posted on 8/17/12 at 9:15 am to Baloo
quote:
I actually think USC should've been in the 2003 title game. Oklahoma was the team that didn't belong for similar reasons to Bama in 2011
I have not only long argued that USC should have been in the 2003 BCS CG, but defend their AP title as legit. It is, and does not detract from LSU's BCS Title that year, just like all past splits do not detract from other teams.
Posted on 8/17/12 at 9:21 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
Using the results of the game to justify a team making it is a circular argument. Its not valid. We did not know the result of 1/9/12 on 12/4/11 when the teams were picked. I made the exact same argument that day as I do right now. OSU had a better, more accomplished resume thru the REGULAR SEASON, than Alabama, plus had not already lost to LSU. I do beleive winning your conference is important and should trump the "best loss" argument. Its not whiny and bitchy, its called being consistent. If we are going to use "eyeball" tests and opinions, then we should stick with the old MNC system and LSU should have been the MNC. There weren't "2 best teams", there was 1 best team and then a 2nd best team.
Funny how you and I agree on this, yet disagree on how the game came about.
That is the issue that bothers me as a fan of CFB overall. Taking off my P&G glasses, I still feel that had LSU lost "the game of the century that didn't count", they too shouldn't have gone to NOLA despite the historical schedule.
My perspective all along has been "as a fan of CFB", not a butthurt LSU fan. What happened in 2011 was a travesty for the sport, and I really and truly believe it will hurt the sport for years to come, especially with ESPN now running the show.
As I stated on the rant this morning, I made the mistake of going to ESPN's college football page this AM to check out the Thursday/Friday night schedule for 2012. Check out their "maintaining the brand" article. I didn't click it, but the picture on the front said it all: USC and Bama logos.
That's all you need to know now as a fan of CFB. The big brand teams, like Bama and USC, will play by a different set of rules/standards than everyone else, just as they always have. 2011 justified ESPN being able to do this from here on out.
A four team playoff is just going to be a clusterfrick of ESPN forcing as many "branded programs" as they can into the final four. Get ready. It is coming. Like it or not.
Posted on 8/17/12 at 9:22 am to Zamoro10
the homerism towards SEC schools is at least justified
Posted on 8/17/12 at 9:26 am to Baloo
If he starts a shitty thread I simply don't respond anymore. Just let them sink to the abyss where they belong.
I understand that he wasn't the OP in this thread.
I understand that he wasn't the OP in this thread.
Posted on 8/17/12 at 9:28 am to EZE Tiger Fan
quote:
What happened in 2011 was a travesty for the sport, and I really and truly believe it will hurt the sport for years to come, especially with ESPN now running the show.
Actually, it may have helped the sport. It was such a travesty that the powers that be finally agreed to scrap the BCS and come up with a new system. The CFB hierarchy has been extremely resistant to change, but this result was so ridiculous that it got them to move and make some pretty massive institutional changes.
Someone had to get absolutely hosed for them to make those changes. This was a necessary event to cause change. The BCS wasn't going to change until it spit out an "accidental champion".
Posted on 8/17/12 at 9:33 am to Rocket
quote:
What evidence do you have that the people arguing now in this thread that Bama didn't deserve a shot in last year's title were the exact SAME ones that complained in the past(or have a history of complaining) about what happened with AP voters after the 2003 title game?
For real?
I think he's probably referring to the site as a whole...and really Rocket, you and others continue this nonsense.
You can go to the Rant right now and the thread..."If you could pick two non-conference opponents...which team would you most like to play OOC?"...and most of the responses (despite no real ties or history with them)...are USC "because we owe them an arse whipping" and "we need to shut them up."
It seems too many people on here are too concerned with USC and driven crazy by any talk of them on this forum (like you) or by the national media which is accused of bias...right, as if the preseason top 3 team in L.A. with a huge fanbase and winning history shouldn't be talked about.
Or you can go on the SEC Rant and find similar responses to questions..."what OOC team does your fanbase hate the most." And you'll see USC pop-up over far more traditional and real rivals.
So frankly Rocket...you and all the others fuel Fighton...with being unable to talk about USC in a rational manner and having this perpetual grudge to a team completely across the country that has no real rivalry history with LSU.
But you've created this make believe rivalry because you feel you got snubbed for love by media way back when. That's your beef with the media...there is no rivalry...rivalries must be two-way streets. USC fans frankly don't give a shite about your hurt feelings.
Posted on 8/17/12 at 9:36 am to FightOn4ever
quote:
For one Peej has said it several times over.
What have I said said several times????????????
Posted on 8/17/12 at 9:38 am to Baloo
quote:
FOUR. I do admit to hating USC trolls who constantly post on this board. That has nothing to do with 2003 and everything to do with finding trolls obnoxious -- you, specifically. Get your own board. I don't need a new USC thread every day, or turning non-USC threads into USC threads. I don't care. This is not the Trojan Forum.
Posted on 8/17/12 at 9:44 am to Zamoro10
I don't hate USC, but I do dislike having to read about them. I don't come to TD to read about OU/ND/tOSU unless their in the news about doing something stupid like UNC.
ETA: This statement excludes in game threads.
ETA: This statement excludes in game threads.
This post was edited on 8/17/12 at 9:45 am
Posted on 8/17/12 at 9:51 am to CajunFootball
More Sports Board.
I see nothing wrong with occasional threads about other teams on this board. What is silly is a new thread for every recruit/broken toenail on the team.
I see nothing wrong with occasional threads about other teams on this board. What is silly is a new thread for every recruit/broken toenail on the team.
Posted on 8/17/12 at 9:54 am to VABuckeye
quote:
I see nothing wrong with occasional threads about other teams
Me either when it's actually something worth reading. Hearing about A recruit or A coach doing something isn't really worth a thread.
Posted on 8/17/12 at 9:55 am to EZE Tiger Fan
quote:
My perspective all along has been "as a fan of CFB", not a butthurt LSU fan. What happened in 2011 was a travesty for the sport, and I really and truly believe it will hurt the sport for years to come, especially with ESPN now running the show
Espn has always been about brands and we all know that that's never going to change. But I don't see 2011 hurting the sport. Controversy brings criticism and criticism makes you look at what you have and the bcs has been getting that for years now. Finally they have done something about it. The bcs as it stands doesn't bother me that much though. Every year they have crowned the best team in the country IMO. I don't think Bama should have been there last year but they took it to the best team in the country to that point. The new system will only improve on that because you wouldn't have years like last year with OK St feeling like they got the shaft, and they did. I just don't see how last year could have hurt that's all.
Posted on 8/17/12 at 10:01 am to VABuckeye
Don't click then. There are hundreds of topics which do not interest me. I do not read.
Posted on 8/17/12 at 10:13 am to Baloo
quote:
Actually, it may have helped the sport.
I hope you are right, but $$$ talks. I don't watch ESPN, and quit watching ESPN almost a decade ago because of the obvious bias. ESPN owns the sport now. This concerns me.
quote:
It was such a travesty that the powers that be finally agreed to scrap the BCS and come up with a new system. The CFB hierarchy has been extremely resistant to change, but this result was so ridiculous that it got them to move and make some pretty massive institutional changes.
And you would trust this group/committee to not be influenced by ESPN and what they want? I don't. Like I said above, look for the four team playoff to consist of: SEC champ, Mulligan, Mulligan, Mulligan. I have no faith whatsoever this new format will get us any closer to a "fair" result at the end of the season. The "big brand" teams clearly play by a different set of rules than the hundred+ other programs. That isn't right, but that's the way it is.
quote:
Someone had to get absolutely hosed for them to make those changes. This was a necessary event to cause change. The BCS wasn't going to change until it spit out an "accidental champion".
I agree with this premise, I'm just less optimistic of what the final result will be.
This post was edited on 8/17/12 at 10:16 am
Posted on 8/17/12 at 10:15 am to Zamoro10
quote:
But you've created this make believe rivalry because you feel you got snubbed for love by media way back when. That's your beef with the media...there is no rivalry...rivalries must be two-way streets. USC fans frankly don't give a shite about your hurt feelings.
Yet you do. We have a large cadre of USC posters who are constantly on this board, stoking the flames, and then taking the Alfred E Neuman defense. You do care what LSU fans think, which is why you and your fellow Trojan fans are constantly here talking about USC on an LSU forum -- to ril up LSU fans.
Now, my objection isn't to USC, or even USC fans. USC is clearly one of the greatest programs in CFB and they usually have a real good team. I don't root for them, but more on my standard fan rules of never rooting for any team from NY or LA. My only objection is to the specific USC fans who constantly troll this board.
We have at least one USC thread every day and threads that aren't ostensibly about USC quickly become about USC. USC fans brought up 2003, and then accused LSU fans of being obsessed with it. Pot. Kettle. Black.
USC fans are obsessed with LSU fans. Or, at least the ones on this board are. Not obsessed with LSU, just our fanbase. Which is really, really weird.
Posted on 8/17/12 at 10:18 am to EZE Tiger Fan
quote:
And you would trust this group/committee to not be influenced by ESPN and what they want? I don't.
I do, but that's just from looking at other committees in other sports. As a general rule, they do a real good job. I see no reason to attack a mythical committee before they exist for bad decisions they have not made, particularly since the history of committees in college sports has been fairly positive. They aren't perfect, but they do a reasonable job.
If the committee acts unreasonably, then I will criticize it. But I see no reason not to give them the benefit of the doubt.
Posted on 8/17/12 at 10:22 am to Zamoro10
quote:
USC fans frankly don't give a shite about your hurt feelings.
Some must because we have USC fans who post on a board called TigerDroppings. Most people who post here have some kind of connections with either Louisiana or LSU. While this board may not be directly related to LSU, since that is the Rant, the site is still an LSU site. USC fans posting on an LSU site....seems to me some care.
Page 6 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News