Bcs - wtf 2011

[Powers]

Originally Posted by E.J.

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.

As a Florida and SEC fan, I would honestly feel the same way. A loss to a crappy opponent outweighs a tougher schedule and conference championship. That's the way the polls have always worked

In principle I have long been in the opinion that a conference championship (and really having to play a conference title game) should be a prerequisite for going to the national title. But I think this year is an exception. As Richie says, its extremely unlikely that the two best teams will go from the same division of the same conference.

Look at the '08 and '09 SEC title game. I firmly believe that Alabama would have beaten Oklahoma in '08 had they beat Florida and that Florida would have beaten Texas in '09 had we beat Alabama in Atlanta. If we had a playoff system, I think you'd see a lot more national title rematches from SEC schools

I was actually hoping that LSU would get a loss before the SEC title game to Arkansas so that everyone would have 1 loss and the BCS computers would implode and hasten the path to a playoff. It's bond to happen one year that there is no undefeated team worthy to play in the title game and we're all left w/valid opinions as to which two loss teams deserves the shot

[rizzle]

Originally Posted by E.J.

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.

Here are my thoughts, and they're pretty simple, really. When we lost the LSU game, I said we're out of it. Done. Like dinner. Game over. Nobody's fault but ours. And if everyone else would have held up their end of the bargain there would be no arguing over it, we wouldn't even be in the conversation. But they didn't. Stanford loses. Oregon loses. Oklahoma State went out and lost to a 6-6 team and then their crowning achievement was beating an Oklahoma team that finished with three losses? Why is that impressive? All those teams had to do was win and you wouldn't hear a peep from me because it was our fault that we lost.

And really, to try and put this "tragedy" into the equation is cheap and a sickening attempt by the media to try and garner manufactrured sympathy. What about the tornadoes that came through Alabama and damn near demolished Tuscaloosa, killed hundreds of people, including a football player's girlfriend, or the death of one our starters right before the season started? I don't recall hearing any of the pundits mentioning those "tragedies" when it came time to cast votes. That's just classless, IMO, andthose people should be ashamed of themselves.

Now, let's say OK State had won out, or Stanford. My "bias" would tell me that I think we're still a better team, but we wouldn't have a chance to prove it. So we'd probably head to the Sugar Bowl wondering about what might have been. And hoping that we get a chance to get back there again someday.

[E.J.]

Originally Posted by rizzle

Here are my thoughts, and they're pretty simple, really. When we lost the LSU game, I said we're out of it. Done. Like dinner. Game over. Nobody's fault but ours. And if everyone else would have held up their end of the bargain there would be no arguing over it, we wouldn't even be in the conversation. But they didn't. Stanford loses. Oregon loses. Oklahoma State went out and lost to a 6-6 team and then their crowning achievement was beating an Oklahoma team that finished with three losses? Why is that impressive? All those teams had to do was win and you wouldn't hear a peep from me because it was our fault that we lost.

And really, to try and put this "tragedy" into the equation is cheap and a sickening attempt by the media to try and garner manufactrured sympathy. What about the tornadoes that came through Alabama and damn near demolished Tuscaloosa, killed hundreds of people, including a football player's girlfriend, or the death of one our starters right before the season started? I don't recall hearing any of the pundits mentioning those "tragedies" when it came time to cast votes. That's just classless, IMO, andthose people should be ashamed of themselves.

Now, let's say OK State had won out, or Stanford. My "bias" would tell me that I think we're still a better team, but we wouldn't have a chance to prove it. So we'd probably head to the Sugar Bowl wondering about what might have been. And hoping that we get a chance to get back there again someday.

That really skirted the real question, but again, I feel you are so biased, I thought it would be difficult at best. No big deal....

[rizzle]

Originally Posted by E.J.

That really skirted the real question, but again, I feel you are so biased, I thought it would be difficult at best. No big deal....

Sorry, EJ, I thought Ianswered the question directly. I felt we were out of it. Period. If we were on the outside looking in, I would blame us for our shortcomings, not try to discredit someone else for theirs.

I don't know how to answer it any other way.

[E.J.]

Originally Posted by rizzle

Sorry, EJ, I thought Ianswered the question directly. I felt we were out of it. Period. If we were on the outside looking in, I would blame us for our shortcomings, not try to discredit someone else for theirs.

I don't know how to answer it any other way.

The question is/was....if we were talking about Alabama being held out by 2 PAC12 teams, one that didn't win their conference, a rematch, better strength of schedule by Alabama ect....would you have the same argument, yea....the pollsters think they are better, so even though we played a tougher schedule, beat more ranked teams and won our conference.....they should get the rematch....

I find it hard to believe that you would think it was "fair".... Like everyone else, you would be forced to live with it....but I have a sneaking feeling you would be making these same arguments....

Who knows, maybe not....

[OLS]

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.

[OLS]

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

[E.J.]

Greg, would you care to try to objectively comment? I am really interested to hear an honest take on that from the 'Bama contingent....

Originally Posted by E.J.

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.

[longknocker]

Originally Posted by E.J.

Greg, would you care to try to objectively comment? I am really interested to hear an honest take on that from the 'Bama contingent....

E.J.: I Am Truly Sorry For Oklahoma's Loss On The Plane Crash; I Do Feel It Affected Their Play. Alabama's Deep Snapper Lost His GF To The Tornado That Tore Tuscaloosa Apart, But He & The Entire Team Played A FB Game The Next Week & Won. I Realize The Only True Way To Determine A Champion May Be A Playoff System. Even Then, It Would Be Two Games Per Team & What Would That Prove? I Think A Team 's Performance Over An Entire Year Is More Relevant. The "Existing" System In The BCS Seeks To Place The Top Two Teams Against Each Other & Most Experts Agree This Year Those Teams Are LSU & BAMA.

[OLS]

Originally Posted by longknocker

I Think A Team 's Performance Over An Entire Year Is More Relevant.

I agree with what you say here, Greg, but another Bama fan was making a case in the SEC thread
that said basically, "look, here are the teams that bama and OKST played, and here is their ranking
AT THAT TIME, blablabla..." and my first thought was, wait, you would put early season rankings up
as (partial) proof of the solidity of a team? It's A WAY of doing it, but it's not a GOOD way. Everyone knows
pre-season rankings aren't worth the paper they're printed on, and anything prior to week 4-5 is
nearly useless. So I found that particular argument weak, but it might certainly help this person
make a point, just not what I would call a good point.

So I do agree that the season as a whole is a better arbiter than a playoff to a point. But when others
make their case with numbers that were a fantasy back when, I do not agree that they make a slam dunk
case for slotting team A ahead of team B at the end. I need to go back and look at those numbers. Well I don't
need to, this deal is done now by the oracles of the BCS and my team is in, so......

I would be willing to bet that if you looked at wins against top 25 teams in the final standings, one
team would be clearly on top. People might say, 'well no, we had injuries or this happened or that occurred,
but that is why you have depth, to surmount those issues. BETTER teams have BETTER depth, so that is
not valid to me, nor are untimely deaths for that matter. That kind of stuff happens and has to be left out
of the argument. That may well BE why OK St. lost, but it's not neccessarily valid here, in my book.
I DO understand it was only brought up as an afterthought, I'm not saying this was ever thrown up as
an excuse. Now, off to check the numbers, lol.

[E.J.]

Originally Posted by OLS

I agree with what you say here, Greg, but another Bama fan was making a case in the SEC thread
that said basically, "look, here are the teams that bama and OKST played, and here is their ranking
AT THAT TIME, blablabla..." and my first thought was, wait, you would put early season rankings up
as (partial) proof of the solidity of a team? It's A WAY of doing it, but it's not a GOOD way. Everyone knows
pre-season rankings aren't worth the paper they're printed on, and anything prior to week 4-5 is
nearly useless. So I found that particular argument weak, but it might certainly help this person
make a point, just not what I would call a good point.
.

I read that argument, but it was so ridiculous….as were previous comments, I considered the source, as well as my being ask to leave by said person and figured there was no reason to punch holes in it.

[E.J.]

Another fun little tid bit....

Seldom mentioned: Alabama, LSU still on probation

Posted on December 5, 2011 by Eric Crawford

In all of the adulation the two teams received during the leadup and rehash of their regular-season meeting, and now in the runup to their rematch in the BCS National Championship game, I haven’t heard anyone bring up this little reminder:

Both LSU and Alabama are on probation. Somehow, it seems fitting to me that this scandal-filled year in college football should end with two teams on NCAA probation playing for the national title. It just fits. Also, Connecticut was on probation when it won the men’s basketball championship last spring. Nice.

The term of LSU’s probation runs to July 18, 2012. From the AP story:

The investigation found that former assistant coach D.J. McCarthy improperly arranged for transportation and housing for former defensive lineman Akiem Hicks in 2009 before later trying to cover up those actions.

The NCAA accepted LSU’s self-imposed reduction of two scholarships during the 2010-11 academic year, as well as a 10 percent reduction in official visits and reductions in recruiting calls. LSU had already begun reducing official visits during 2010-11, but the NCAA expanded the punishment to include 2011-12.

McCarthy resigned in 2009. Hicks never played for the Tigers before leaving the school.

Alabama’s case was more serious and involved vacating victories from three seasons, but school officials were relieved that they didn’t incur further scholarship reductions. Alabama’s probation runs through June 10, 2012.

From the AP:

The violations include impermissible benefits obtained by 201 athletes through misuse of free textbooks.

Alabama identified 22, including seven football players, as “intentional wrongdoers” who knew they were receiving improper benefits.

The vacated football wins were from 2005 to 2007 in which those seven played.

The victories were vacated, meaning the school may not acknowledge a win. Vacating a win is different from forfeiture, in which the loser claims the victory, according to The Birmingham News.

No Alabama sport lost postseason eligibility or scholarships.

LSU infraction report - http://api.viglink.com/api/click?for...13231377463031

Alabama infraction report - http://api.viglink.com/api/click?for...13231377672062


http://blogs.courier-journal.com/eri...-on-probation/

[OLS]

Yep, judgin by the final AP top 25 rankings, it's a tie, basically.

Bama has 2 wins, OK St has 4
Bama's combined rankings of their 2 equal 32..divided by 2 is 15.5
OK St. combined rankings of their 4 equal 69..divided by 4 is 17.25

So bama has wins over higher average ranked opponents, OK state has more
actual wins against top 25 teams. Considering the arguments being made here
and there, this element is kind of telling and kind of useless. It shows that OK
St. did in fact play a higher ranked schedule, but bama did demolish their foes
rather convincingly and had no business screwing the pooch in front of their own
fans. When it came down to it, it WAS style points, after all. That was not supposed
to be a factor...hmm. It is sad to me because UA and LSU fans are going to be glued
to the screens. But after waiting 5 weeks for the show, I think very few outsiders
will care to watch. Some might, who knows.

I say OK State deserved the chance to play LSU.

[longknocker]

Originally Posted by OLS

Yep, judgin by the final AP top 25 rankings, it's a tie, basically.

Bama has 2 wins, OK St has 4
Bama's combined rankings of their 2 equal 32..divided by 2 is 15.5
OK St. combined rankings of their 4 equal 69..divided by 4 is 17.25

So bama has wins over higher average ranked opponents, OK state has more
actual wins against top 25 teams. Considering the arguments being made here
and there, this element is kind of telling and kind of useless. It shows that OK
St. did in fact play a higher ranked schedule, but bama did demolish their foes
rather convincingly and had no business screwing the pooch in front of their own
fans. When it came down to it, it WAS style points, after all. That was not supposed
to be a factor...hmm. It is sad to me because UA and LSU fans are going to be glued
to the screens. But after waiting 5 weeks for the show, I think very few outsiders
will care to watch. Some might, who knows.

I say OK State deserved the chance to play LSU.

I Agree It's Close, But Do You "Really" Think OK State Could Play LSU To A Tie In Regulation, Brad?

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by longknocker

I Agree It's Close, But Do You "Really" Think OK State Could Play LSU To A Tie In Regulation, Brad?

Doesn't really matter. Ok State deserves the opportunity to try moreso than Alabama. Alabama had their shot at LSU and came up short. Now, with that being said, I think Alabama wins the rematch.

[OLS]

Originally Posted by longknocker

I Agree It's Close, But Do You "Really" Think OK State Could Play LSU To A Tie In Regulation, Brad?

Oh HELL no.....like I said, I feel no stress, LSU is in the game. I am just picking apart BCS
arguments in a thread I made so that I could do it without offending the pure SEC crowd in a
thread that Michael created. I understand how I come off over there, I didn't want to throw
salt in it. No I just believe that by the pure logic of wins and losses, that bama has a less solid
case than OKSt. They would get mauled in the Superdome. bama will not be mauled.

[rizzle]

Originally Posted by OLS

Oh HELL no.....like I said, I feel no stress, LSU is in the game. I am just picking apart BCS
arguments in a thread I made so that I could do it without offending the pure SEC crowd in a
thread that Michael created. I understand how I come off over there, I didn't want to throw
salt in it. No I just believe that by the pure logic of wins and losses, that bama has a less solid
case than OKSt. They would get mauled in the Superdome. bama will not be mauled.

Bad, I know I'm a dumb Bama fan, but explain that to me, please.

[E.J.]

Originally Posted by longknocker

I Agree It's Close, But Do You "Really" Think OK State Could Play LSU To A Tie In Regulation, Brad?

Greg, the point isn't if people "think" they could play with LSU....it is giving them the chance to show they can. Alabama had that chance at home and lost.

There are MANY, MANY games every year that teams win, that NOBODY thought they could... It isn't as if Oklahoma State is some also ran Pitt team that people are saying should get a shot....

[OLS]

Rizzle, I have finally worn you to a nub, post No. 62 is absolutely perfect in it's reasoning and result.
See my post in No. 66 to prove that I also get it...sort of.

[rizzle]

Originally Posted by OLS

Rizzle, I have finally worn you to a nub, post No. 62 is absolutely perfect in it's reasoning and result.
See my post in No. 66 to prove that I also get it...sort of.

Actually, Brad, if you paid attention, that's what I said all along. I just added to it that I still thought we should have won the game and took exception to your "superior depth and balance" statement. And I provided facts to back up that argument--something you seem to appreciate. All you would have ever had to have said, and I would totally agree with, is that our kicking game sucks and cost us the game. And it may cost us the next one.

So no, you haven't worn me to a nub. You just weren't paying attention to what I was saying because you were hell bent on trying to yank my chain and somehow paint me, and any other Bama fan, as a bunch of lunatics. which we may very well be, but that's another story all together.

There's no reason to get personal about it--but garbage in, garbage out.