Bcs - wtf 2011
 

The Alabama contingent is not happy with me gleefully tugging on their legs everyday in the SEC thread.
Now that there IS no SEC action, let us turn our focus to the annual cluster-fork that has become
the BCS and exactly WTF they think they are doing over there. Here all can argue as vehemently as they
choose and no one will get their feelings hurt. Because I say so. Let it fly. We are all brothers and sisters
here, and if anyone is offended by good-natured ribbing and commentary, let them go and find something
else to read. Your whining will not be acted upon here. Because it TRULY IS us against the BCS in my thread.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

NO BIG BOWL FOR BOISE!!!!!!!!!! You have got to be kidding me. VA TECH barely played anybody and they
get to go to N.O.?? They travel extremely well, it's true, and they are playing another great-travelling team
in MICHIGAN, and of course by travelling, I mean they bring a lot of fans down. And Michiganders are good
people. Who knows who would come down from Boise. But is that the POINT? I guess it is for the BCS barons.

And if it's all about the money (it is), then how in the world do you take your two show ponies and pit them against
each other?? It's a MUCH better use of resources and a much better yardstick of who can hang with who if you let
each "Top team" play a 3-5 level team. Oh the madness. But in the end, it looks like the BCS will be used to handle
un-finished SEC business....well, in a way. Not fair to try and characterize it that way completely.
But doesn't anybody even want to KNOW what OK state has in the gun?....Stanford???

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

The BCS sucks.

I guess we should get ready to watch another snooze fest.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

Good, and sad article here. Easy read. Not so easy to digest.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/footbal...jection_120311

"Now his league has grown so dominant that in any given season, the SEC is all but assured of one spot in
the title game. The other 100-some odd schools compete for the other. And now they have to compete
with the second-best SEC team for it"...

Ouch....

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

I want LSU to win. I don't like Saban.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

Unfortunately the BS is motivated by money, as is all of college sports. There is a reason that the 'not-for-profit' NCAA is a billion Billion BILLION dollar business. And it isn't for rational thought, its by creating whatever game(s) will generate the most revenue.

Things the BS got wrong in my opinion:

Michigan, although its good for the college football landscape when they are relevant, shouldn't be in the Sugar Bowl. Money definitely motivated that, Michigan may travel better than any other college football team.

Boise St. getting jobbed, again. What do they have to do to not be considered a mid-major every season? Any school from an AQ who played their non-conference schedule (see: Big East) and finished with one loss would make the BCS. :td

National Championship Game is a rematch of 'The Game of the Century' aka 'Snoozefest Part I' aka 'Alabama's Quest for a Kicker' aka 'Three and Out'. LSU defeated Alabama in Tuscaloosa, then had to essentially go undefeated the remainder of the season including playing in the SEC Championship game, while Alabama benefited from losing the game. :sh

Oklahoma State defeated five top 25 opponents, Alabama defeated 2. But the SEC is the 'most dominant' conference in the country. The media gets to hype a matchup that less than half the country wants to see, I think we all saw...........:sleep:. Oh, sorry, I fell asleep thinking about that first game.

That doesn't include West Virginia and Clemson getting bids more based on previous bowl tie-ins than current BCS structure.

At this point, they might as well return to the previous structure given that higher ranked teams in the BS are only allowed to play if they:
A. Travel well
B. Create ideal matchups
C. Bring revenue
D. Media can hype

The whole system is a joke, every year there is contoversy. I don't know what the perfect structure is, but the current one isn't correct. :2

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

Brad,

Though I think the cream of the SEC is playing OUTSTANDING FOOTBALL right now, as a conference, I just don't buy into the fact that the SEC is as a whole, is heads and tails better than the rest(BIG12 specifically this year). They're damn good, just not dominant as we are led to believe. I think the numbers back that up...

Unfortunately, it seems that perception is what drives this....not numbers...


As far as the BCS, as is the norm....they failed again. I am on the Baylor bandwagon, mostly because of Robert Griffen III...his play brings a smile to my face.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

Playoffs .... every other level of college football has them ... and they seem to do just fine.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

All I can say is "meh".

I'm just glad Boise isn't in any of the big games. Until they move to a conference where it's a fight EVERY week, they need to be undefeated to get in, and I'm OK with that. Of course, I lived in Boise for a couple years, and didn't like the attitude of the people and fans there, so I'm a bit biased.

Until they actually institute a playoff system, there will always be plenty of teams saying they got the shaft in terms of bowl games. Team X travels better than Team Y, even though Team Y is a better team, the bowl selects Team X. It's all about the Benjamins, baby! A playoff with neutral site games might fill the stadiums that they wouldn't fill otherwise. Maybe keep the "bowl games" for teams that don't make it into the tourney. The NIT still draws fans when the "Road to the Final Four" is going on.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

I agree.... Hell, I'll go further and say that they have to go undefeated AND other teams have to all have 1 loss...maybe more. One huge win does not a season make. Going to the PAC12 this year, it was apparent how difficult it is, week in and week out, playing teams with talent and depth....regardless if they are actually good. Even against terrible teams, if you don't bring your A game....a loss is possible... READ : LOSING TO COLORADO....:gary

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

Boise going to Las Vegas makes sense to me... It is easy travel for their fan base....

I have no love for Boise....

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

See above in red. Just some thoughts.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

Just a couple of points, if it matters, which it doesn't.

The NCAA has nothing to do with the BCS at all. As to the money part of it, that's absolutely why. School presidents are smart enough to know that to turn the "championship" over to the NCAA in tournament style, like with basketball, would mean giving up their negotiating rights, and in turn their power, and in turn the money. Who wants the NCAA meddling in their business any more than they already do?
If they can ever figure out a way to do a playoff and keep the NCAA out of it, you'll see it happen. Until then, we have what we have. It isn't perfect, never has been and never will be. But it is designed to match the two best teams in a game to crown the national champion. They appear to have gotten that right this year. The other BCS bowls are just fluff, and have done nothing more than to dilute the value of the other bowls.

It's just a pure fluke that the two best teams this year, hands down, happen to reside in the same division of the same conference. Everybody had their "chance". The door was wide open and nobody wanted to come in.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

BCS is a joke. Think about 2006. Michigan and Ohio State were #1 and #2. Michigan lost a heck of a game 42-39 in Columbus. Some of the locals here wanted a rematch. It WASN'T granted and I think they made the right decision. I would argue that Michigan losing by 3 on the road must have been closer overall to Ohio State that year than Alabama is to LSU this year given Alabama lost by 3 at home. Yet, for the title game, the SEC is what it's all about. For all the rest, it's purely about money. Whoever brings in the most money (aka travels the best) will get the best bowl invitations.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

The part that's frustrating is the conferences won't change because they like the money generated by the BCS. In fact the 6 major conferences rigged it so they could get the lions' share of the revenue and make it nearly impossible for any other conference team to get into a title game. If they would do their homework they might understand that a playoff could generate a lot more revenue. The article below shows how a playoff could actually generate 3-4 times as much money and would crown a winner worthy of calling themselves the national champions. http://ology.com/sports/16-team-coll...-proposed-ncaa

What we have now (BCS) is commonly referred to as "The Mythical National Title" by local sports radio.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

In your opinion the two best teams.... I don't agree with that....and it certainly isn't "hands down." Is Alabama a great team, yes...but they are not the only great team out there.

We have discussed the OSU/Alabama wins vs the BCS top 25 and top ten, bla...bla..bla... Let's go deeper into the opponents, teams that actually win games.

Alabama beat a grand total of 4 teams with a record better than .500. So they have 11 wins, but of those 11 opponents, 4 have won more than half their games. So 36% of the teams they beat, finished the season with a winning record.

Oklahoma State beat 7 teams with a record better than .500. So 64% of their wins are against teams that are winning more than half their games.


Let's be clear.... Alabama had their chance and didn't take advantage of that at their own house. Time to open that door, that has been shut by the voters, for a deserving team to get a shot at that MONSTER of a team, LSU.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

Oh God I hope I never give anyone the impression that I think the SEC is top to bottom better than
the rest, goodness, far from it. Out of the 12 member schools, I would think that over half of them
failed to perform anywhere near "standards" and way below all of their fan's expectations. Oddly enough,
Vanderbilt fans got a chance to see their team play extremely well for most of the year, but still had
to live with a dismal record. This year was an embarassment for a LOT of SEC schools. Back when
I used to argue with the Florida fans here, they used to tell me, "We just reload, babay..."
Not this year, apparently, lol. When I talk about these teams, bama and LSU, I am talking about those
teams and no one else. The rest are quite beatable....the top 2, I am not sure they can be beaten.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

Who do you think is better than Alabama or LSU?

We opened the door by losing. Evidently nobody wanted to come in. Just win, right?

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

On another topic brought up, I don't think we can discount a playoff as being just MORE MONEY thrown at the problem.
In my opinion, YES it is significantly more money on the pile, but the RESULT of the money is better in the end,
or viewed by more people as fair.

And E.J., I really hate that there can't be the bama-Stanford and LSU-OK State games on tap to show you how
incorrect I think you are on this 1&2 deal. I AM BIASED, but I think LSU and bama could take any and all comers
and walk away double digit winners. I guess we just lost our best chance to see if I am right, but YES, there are
a lot of great teams out there, I just don't think people fully comprehend the juggernaut that these two teams
really represent in full contact glory. There are great teams in football, but somehow they come down to the
bowl games and their awesome attacks just don't hold up for 60 minutes. I don't want this being a SEC against
the world thread, I started it specifically to get away from the chirping about that stuff, but there DOES exist
an element of that in my argument, I guess. I have watched all the "good games" over the past decade, and
I see the fans go nuts when Ohio State rips off a 80 yard touchdown pass, but in the 4th quarter it's always
glum looks and disbelief. NOT A SEC discussion, except that the teams I argue about in 2011 are in the SEC west.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

I know that on November 5th 2011, LSU went into Alabama's house and came out with a victory. Do you think the better team didn't win that game? The scoreboard was wrong?

Yes, apparently be a great team, in a great conference and "just win" against a bunch of .500/sub .500 teams....:r

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

#2 lost, thus I am 100% confident they can be beaten....in fact, they have been....:tu

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

Stanford is out, at least out with that scenario... Again, I don't think you get a shot at a national title if you cannot win your own conference(Oregon won the PAC12).
Right now we have a playoff system....or at least are told we do....and that is the regular season.

If they want to go a 16 team playoff and bring in at large teams, great.... But if it is 4 teams, IMO...those 4 teams better have won their conference... I could not care less if they had to go through a team that many consider the best in the Country... If you want to be the best in the country, beat that team when given the opportunity, if you can't, someone else should get a try.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

You want to know irony?? You well know I think LSU is better than bama. But I KNOW LSU can be beaten.
We are not disciplined enough on offense and we don't have a good enough passer in J. Jefferson to win every
time out. I don't think bama can be beaten. They are going to make some QB mistakes, and their kicking game is
a joke in 2011. But on balance, they are still gonna get ya. We escaped with a win in Tuscaloosa, and we will
likely do so again in New Orleans. But not because we are gonna score on bama through the run or the pass.
We are going to punch em in the mouth SO HARD that they are gonna make some mistakes, and we are going
to capitalize in points or field position. We are going to FORCE errors by their passers and runners and get a quick
defensive score. We are going to kick them into their own end and our D is gonna try to keep em there. We are
going to make field goals. But as good as I think we are, we are not going to do anything but escape with
a win, because they are just TOO TOUGH. And if we can't do it easily, I don't think anyone else even has a chance.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

I have argued this til they are blue in the face from ignoring me, lol.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

This is why I was asking you in the SEC thread to pick a dog in the hunt.
I know little or nothing about who I would pit against bama and LSU in separate
big-time BCS games. I am too focused on the god-like wonder of the LSU Tigers
to know who they would play if this were being done right. I need outside
perspectives to TELL me what they think would be proper.

Let's all play a game. BCS has set this up to be a tourney. Fill in
these brackets:

LSU versus

Bama versus

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

I witnessed first hand the greatness of an Alabama team that was going to mop the floor with the University of Utah in a bowl game. They had weeks to prepare and I heard it for weeks and weeks about how Utah couldn't play with a team built like that Alabama team.

Hell, I heard it from fans, from professionals on television, from everyone that had sound coming out of their mouth....but that is why you play the games. Didn't quite turn out how everyone thought.... I watched that game, have watched it a few times.....there was one team that was far more physical on the field, one team that dominated play, one defense that looked faster, stronger, better.....thing is, it wasn't the one everyone said it was going to be. It wasn't done with smoke and mirrors, but with blood and sweat...

Nothing can be said that is going to change my mind on two things, that in my mind, should keep Alabama out of the BCS Championship game. 1 - Alabama didn't win their conference 2 - Alabama already played LSU and lost


I cannot express enough that YES, ALABAMA IS A GREAT TEAM! I will scream it from the rooftops....but they didn't win their conference and they already lost this game, on their home turf, a month ago.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

Ah, it's the old OLS treatment.....You simply do not believe they deserve to BE THERE in the first place.
Again, just in a different thread, I agree with you there. But I guess we are not going to be able to pin you
down on two best teams in major college football, huh? ;) And I watched that game, too where the Utes hung
with bama, but I think this is a better team......still, point taken.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

See, I wouldn't have Bama in a 4 team tourney, unless you had all the conference champions in already...then you could talk about teams like Stanford, Alabama, Virginia Tech, at large teams that couldn't win their own conference.

LSU vs Okie Lite and then everything else. Two best conferences this year, two conference champions. It is not like OSU is the winner of the Big East or has 2 losses. They are not exactly backdooring their way into this game...

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

fify ;)

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

Who thought Boise State would beat Oklahoma in the 2007 Fiesta Bowl; on a Statue of Liberty play of all things?

Yet it happened. You can't justify giving one team two shots to beat the #1 team and 4 other one loss teams 0 chances.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

I agree.....it is what I said...:confused:

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

I like the atmosphere in this thread. I can't say these kinds of things anywhere else.
There I don't know what I am talking about, here, I am in the majority, lol.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

I couldn't recall who actually won, so I put "hung with", lol.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

Neither would I, top 2 anyway, in fact I think it is an insult to LSU to throw bama in there as if they
deserved it. I think that they are a giant among teams, but it's like you said elsewhere, this was not
a foregone conclusion when the pre-season polls came out or anything, everyone had their chances
to take care of business. That's why I was thinking Houston deserved a shot like anyone else until the
past weekend. I understand why the pollsters did what they did, but that's not saying it was fair.
And I don't mean fair from the LSU perspective, hell no, bring em on, we can beat em twice. But
it's the obverse...say they win, after doing nothing but doing their nails for 6 weeks. That would be
a travesty. But a NC all the same.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

That's not what I asked you. And I do happen to still believe we are the better team, but that's a different argument all together.

And I acknowledged our loss. Had we have won that game, you're still probably looking at an Alabama - LSU championship game. Why? Because everybody else that had a clear path failed. All OK St had to do was beat a lowly 6-6 team and they were in. Done deal. Stanford got beat by Oregon who then proceeded to get beat by USC.

So again, who do you think is better than LSU and Bama?

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

Your being far from truthful. But don't grafitti up this thread, too. If you've got a problem with it and want to discuss it, I'm way more than willing to take it to PM, since you seem to have a huge freaking problem with it.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

So now your whole argument comes to light. You're a Utah fan. :r:r

Yes, you guys wiped the grass with us. We weren't ready, lost our 3 year starting left tackle the night before the game for illegal agent contact, came out flat and unmotivated, and got waxed. And then forgot about it. Well, not really forgot about it, but you get the point. You know the funny thing about this whole discussion? Were it not for the BCS, Utah would have never sniffed that BCS bowl game. But again, different argument. ;)

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

Sorry, I was agreeing with you. I just forgot to include that part. :D


I would argue Oklahoma State is better than Alabama. You can argue the strength of the teams that beat them, but the fact is we KNOW LSU is better than Alabama. We don't know if LSU is better than OK State; and that's the point.

We'll never know thanks to the BCS.

Think about this from the other side. If Alabama won, would you think it fair that LSU would get to play them again? Why should you have to beat one team twice and the winner of the SECOND game is the only one that counts?

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

The thing is, it isn't about fair. It's about matching 1 vs 2. In some people's minds, since we lost to the best, are not the best, it is impossible to be considered the second best.

Take it a step further. Bama lost by three to the best team in the country, who lost no other games. Ok State lost by three to a 6-6 Iowa State team that lost to 6 other teams by an average of 20+ points a game. If we had lost to Mississppi State instead of LSU, do you think we should be considered?

Look, I'm not a huge BCS fan, please don't mistake it. It's simply a fluke that the two best teams this year reside in the same division. Probably will never happen again. But I think a lot of the arguments out there are simply due to SEC fatigue. And that's understandable. But it is what it is.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

There is obviously only one way to settle this:

MORTAL KOMBAT!!!

<queue techno music>

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

First I never said anything about fair. It's not just about 1-2 because in 2006 after Ohio State beat Michigan 42-39 they were still 1-2 and yet they didn't play again in the title game. All we KNOW is LSU is better than Bama. We dont' know if any other conference champs are better because they haven't played them. Why play again when we know who is better? The only way to prove who's the best is to play it on the field. LSU-Bama has already been proven for this season. LSU-OK State or OK-Boise St hasn't been done. Nobody knows who would win either of those matchups.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

Impossible. In the BCS championship game, 1 plays 2. Always. Michigan went and got thumped by USC and then Ohio State got thumped by Florida anyways.

We're arguing about two different things. You have to be able to separate them.

And LSU would win both those matchups. Big. ;)

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

Yes, big Utah fan....:tu

If not for the BCS, there would be no BCS games:confused:....it would be back to the regional games, pitting conference champions, conference tie ins ect... Kind of like all the other bowls now.... But because Utah has been invited to the dance twice and won 2 BCS bowl games...that does not mean I don't think the system is broken.

Utah is in the "haves" now....they're in the PAC12, I still think the system is broken.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

Rizzle, what is your response to the fact that Alabama had an easier road to their 1 loss record, that they played an easier schedule...?

It is unfortunate, because you are biased, but it would be interesting to see what your thoughts & all the SEC crowd's thoughts would be if the situation was reversed. If we were talking about USC and Oregon or Texas and Oklahoma in a rematch and Alabama or another SEC team with a loss to a 6-6 SEC team, but having played a tougher schedule. That SEC team having beat more ranked teams, won their conference Championship ect.. That mentioned loss being just days after the school lost 2 coaches in a horrific plane crash ect....

I wonder if your thoughts on the subject would be the same. See, that is where I think that my not having a dog in this hunt, but looking at this objectively(what I feel is objective?) and thinking I'm getting the shaft on seeing the "right game" for the BCS Championship.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

You keep coming back to this as if it is somehow relevant, IMO it is not. I don't know who is better. I know they played....and one team won and one team lost and that is that....

I could not care less if the masses would say the better team didn't win the game....who cares? They played the game and there was a winner and a loser, you move on from there.

As of Monday December 5, 2011 - LSU > Alabama

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

Don't graffitti up my own thread? I think I am perfectly able to do whatever I want with it.
As for your inference that I am being less than truthful, it's all there in the other thread to
read. I told all of you that the better team won, many times over, and I proved it from my
own perspective with facts. The only thing you could ever admit to was the final score.
You acted as if the kicking game had no part in determining 'balance". I told you that we
had superior depth in relevant positions, and you basically told me that I was deluded.

And just as I replied and you quoted, talking about it to you Crimson people was an excercise
in futility. Then some of you huffed and puffed and said I had ruined the thread, as if!...it's a
discussion forum. The bama contingent just didn't want to 'discuss". They wanted to basically
do what you did above, make statements like we had guys hurt, we weren't ready to play, we
came out flat, etc. Not that you SAID these things this year, but it was the same mood. Denial
of the facts. SURE, I admit that I made giant statements that were more easily digestible on
one side of the discussion, like we are better balanced, we have faster players, etc. But in the
end, did you guys WIN?? Nope. So no matter what it WAS in fact, there was a reason you lost.
And I THINK you are going to lose again.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

And lest you paint me again as an argumentative child, I DO think bama and LSU are the two best teams, I have
seen it with my own eyes. I am just telling you that Bama is only number one in their fans eyes. LSU has the
confidence of the masses. I KNOW, I know, we did not get all the votes. We got enough.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

he wants to know if you are rational or can be dismissed.

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

I also want to apologize for making your crimson fever out to be a disease. You can support your team
to whatever degree you find appropriate, you can cap on me to no end over my support for the Tigers or
liken me to a child. It is all fine. I couldn't do this for a month while we wait to see the results. But I will
do just what I did in the SEC thread weeks and weeks in advance, predict victory and likely be proven
correct.......TWICE. Bwah-haha-ha-ha

Re: Bcs - wtf 2011
 

Green Bay Didn't Win Their Division Last Year & Look Where That Got Them In The Last Super Bowl!;)