- 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: What happens if OU beats Texas this year
Posted on 6/14/09 at 8:44 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 6/14/09 at 8:44 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
2009
yeah I agree. I'm not a USC hater and I don't ever really say this, but I think they take a step back next year.
quote:
Oregon with dixon was better than USC. when was the last time, since 2002, that you could say that about a pac10 team? never
this is like people who say "but he always loses a game to someone he shouldn't" when talking about a coach. Even if you are the favorite, it's still hard to win every time. Oregon St was a solid team last year too.
1
Posted on 6/14/09 at 8:49 pm to LuckyLee
well the 2006 loss that stands out was stanford, obviously
Posted on 6/14/09 at 9:08 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
THAT is the worry about OU and OSU. they out talent their shitty conference competition and (at least used to) own their 1 conference competitor. because of this, they get overrated year in, year out
Wouldn't that be the worry about USC as well? I'll give that they play good OOC teams, but for instance last year, it was the same OSU team that half the people in this thread are slamming. Wouldn't that be the worry against any elite team in a mediocre conference?
Here's my question, and this is just a general question for anyone who argues against OU, OSU, etc. being in the title game. WHO do they want in there then? And for this argument, I'm assuming the SEC champ is already in. Surely they're not arguing for the ACC champ or the Big East champ.
That's my problem with the BCS in general...when you crown a champ based on a formula in which teams can "work the system," that's an issue.
Posted on 6/14/09 at 9:14 pm to Obi-Wan Tiger
quote:
That's my problem with the BCS in general...when you crown a champ based on a formula in which teams can "work the system," that's an issue.
How often has it worked? Which team has "worked" their way into the title game and then won it all?
Posted on 6/14/09 at 9:19 pm to The Easter Bunny
quote:
Which team has "worked" their way into the title game and then won it all?
it has nothing to do with who wins the game. The gripe seems to be OU and OSU getting in in the first place. I'm talking about who gets in. It was said earlier in the thread about OU and OSU working the system...ie playing and winning one big rivalry game, beating up on mediocre conference foes and getting into the title game.
Posted on 6/14/09 at 9:27 pm to Obi-Wan Tiger
quote:
Wouldn't that be the worry about USC as well?
they generally frick themselves so it hasn't been a concern. and i think only the biggest rantard would argue with their potential year in, year out
quote:
but for instance last year, it was the same OSU team that half the people in this thread are slamming. Wouldn't that be the worry against any elite team in a mediocre conference?
well that's why i laughed at sir alex saying they were clearly #2. they didn't do anything noteworthy last year
quote:
Here's my question, and this is just a general question for anyone who argues against OU, OSU, etc. being in the title game. WHO do they want in there then?
there were some options in 2007 and 2006, but OSU was a mythical pain train that year so what can you do?
honestly in 2006 it should have been 1. UF, 2 LSU, 3. USC 4. OSU going into bowls, but that won't happen. both LSU and USC fricked themselves during the year
last year it was clearly UF and OU/UT. i'm just mad that UF didn't show up aggressive in the title game
Posted on 6/14/09 at 9:36 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
honestly in 2006 it should have been 1. UF, 2 LSU, 3. USC 4. OSU going into bowls, but that won't happen. both LSU and USC fricked themselves during the year
Exactly. No way you can put either of those teams in (maybe LSU, but 2 losses compared to none) over Ohio St, even if they were better (and, FWIW, I really don't know how anybody could have seen a UF demolition of OSU coming, since, at that time, OSU was perfect in BCS bowls, and really hadn't had any huge big game disasters. Maybe some could have seen a UF win, even by 2 TDs or so, but I don't know how anyone could have thought they'd win by 4 TDs).
Posted on 6/14/09 at 9:39 pm to Buckeye Fan 19
in/before 2006, the SEC was seen as overrated and UF was seen as unworthy (remember UM was supposed to be AMAZING!!!)
we all owe a lot to UF for that night
in general though, you'd have to be a non-BCS team with a weak arse resume to be 2 losses ahead of a great 2-loss team and get left out
and i saw UF win, but not dominate. i figured there would be a few more long plays to ginn like the TD return
i knew OSU wasn't stopping UF and that UF's D was something OSU had never seen though
we all owe a lot to UF for that night
in general though, you'd have to be a non-BCS team with a weak arse resume to be 2 losses ahead of a great 2-loss team and get left out
and i saw UF win, but not dominate. i figured there would be a few more long plays to ginn like the TD return
i knew OSU wasn't stopping UF and that UF's D was something OSU had never seen though
Posted on 6/14/09 at 9:40 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
and i think only the biggest rantard would argue with their potential year in, year out
well, i agree, but their formula is essentially the same difficulty as Texas or OU. Difference being they play a harder OOC schedule, but their rivalry game doesn't compare to OU/UT.
Posted on 6/14/09 at 9:44 pm to Obi-Wan Tiger
and USC hasn't made a title game since 2005 
Posted on 6/14/09 at 10:03 pm to SlowFlowPro
UT can only bitch to their own conference leaders to change the rules. Wouldn't UT had made it had they used the SEC tie breaker?
Posted on 6/15/09 at 2:18 am to Obi-Wan Tiger
quote:
well, i agree, but their formula is essentially the same difficulty as Texas or OU. Difference being they play a harder OOC schedule, but their rivalry game doesn't compare to OU/UT.
Sometimes I feel like people on this site only see about 2-3 teams as worthy opponents. From this thread:
USC plays no one
tOSU plays no one
UT/OU play no one
Big East/ACC have no good teams
So basically there are 4 good teams out side of the SEC, but since they are the only decent team in their conference they really aren't that good because they never beat anyone
Posted on 6/15/09 at 5:29 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
well the 2006 loss that stands out was stanford, obviously
07. 2006 was Oregon St and UCLA
To me, eventually someone has to blame coaching, especially offensive coaching. Basically in every game USC has lost to bad teams except OSU in 06, the offense sucked supreme arse. Oregon or Cal could easily win the conference
As long as Carroll doesn't frick around with the offense again, which unfortunitly seems likely, and lets Bates manage everything, it should be better
That being said, if anyone is going to get USC, this should be the year. Too many questions at key spots and the Pac-10 should be a lot better with every key game on the road.
This post was edited on 6/15/09 at 5:30 am
Posted on 6/15/09 at 5:58 am to Buckeye06
quote:
Let's say the same scenario plays out as last year, except this year the situation is reversed, and OU beats UT but the losses to like a top 15 team a week later?
Do they give UT the benefit this year? I say OU still gets the nod but that would just drive Texas fans absolutely nuts, justifiably so of course IMO
I think you need to be more worried about your team winning the Big Ten.
Posted on 6/15/09 at 7:03 am to dukke v
I had like 2 responses to the question, then it was an OU/UT pissing contest debated between SEC fans
Posted on 6/15/09 at 7:14 am to The Easter Bunny
quote:
USC plays no one
tOSU plays no one
UT/OU play no one
Big East/ACC have no good teams
if you don't play in the SEC, you're instantly overrated and your schedule sucks you should know this by now
This post was edited on 6/15/09 at 7:24 am
Posted on 6/15/09 at 7:51 am to The Easter Bunny
quote:
Sometimes I feel like people on this site only see about 2-3 teams as worthy opponents.
oh no doubt about it. I was simply basing my questions/statements on what was being discussed. My primary point was, if not OU, tOSU, UT...then who? My USC point was that if people have no problem with them getting in, they shouldn't have a beef with any of the other three, especially since all three have BCS titles to their credit.
quote:
So basically there are 4 good teams out side of the SEC, but since they are the only decent team in their conference they really aren't that good because they never beat anyone
I'm certainly not saying that, but I agree that a lot of people do feel that way.
Posted on 6/15/09 at 7:53 am to Obi-Wan Tiger
quote:
My USC point was that if people have no problem with them getting in, they shouldn't have a beef with any of the other three, especially since all three have BCS titles to their credit.
Has more to do with performance in other BCS games, even if it's a very flawed way to look at it.
Also, USC has lost the benefit of the doubt that it clearly had in 04, 05, and even 06 as seen in the past couple years. If SC had the same number of losses as Florida or LSU in 05 or 06, it was pretty clear who was getting in even with a weaker schedule. Obviously that's not the case anymore
This post was edited on 6/15/09 at 7:58 am
Posted on 6/15/09 at 7:59 am to usc6158
the problem with the whole anti-SECbias is that traditional powers have sucked recently and there are a limited # of elite teams
there are some teams who have no excuse of sucking (Miami, FSU, Clemson). lots of the west coast has to face teh USC recruiting juggernaut, but UCLA may be able to increase talent and return to a good football school.
i mean if you wanna look at some sick shite, go look at the listings of the top 15-20 rated recruits by conference. i think last year OSU had 7 or 8 of the 10 highest-rated recruits. USC follows a similar pattern. there is a talent gap
there are some teams who have no excuse of sucking (Miami, FSU, Clemson). lots of the west coast has to face teh USC recruiting juggernaut, but UCLA may be able to increase talent and return to a good football school.
i mean if you wanna look at some sick shite, go look at the listings of the top 15-20 rated recruits by conference. i think last year OSU had 7 or 8 of the 10 highest-rated recruits. USC follows a similar pattern. there is a talent gap
Posted on 6/15/09 at 8:04 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
the problem with the whole anti-SECbias is that traditional powers have sucked recently and there are a limited # of elite teams
anti-SEC bias? Really? I'd say the SEC is closing in on being as respected as a conference has ever been
The Pac-10 has always been a 1 league team based on who could recruit California the best. For most of the time it's been USC, but UCLA and Washington had some years. The team that can do it usually ends up being talented as frick though
The Big-10's problem is the falling population in the rust belt means there isn't as much talent to go around as there once was when the conference was awesome and most is going to OSU
This post was edited on 6/15/09 at 8:08 am
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News