Bcs - wtf 2011

[357]

Originally Posted by rizzle

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.

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.

[rizzle]

Originally Posted by 357

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.

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.

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.

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

And LSU would win both those matchups. Big.

[E.J.]

Originally Posted by rizzle

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

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.

Yes, big Utah fan....

If not for the BCS, there would be no BCS games....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.

[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.

[E.J.]

Originally Posted by rizzle

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

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

[OLS]

Originally Posted by rizzle

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.

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.

[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]

Originally Posted by E.J.

You keep coming back to this as if it is somehow relevant, IMO it is not. I

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

[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

[longknocker]

Originally Posted by E.J.

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.

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

[chippewastud79]

Originally Posted by longknocker

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

In a playoff system

[E.J.]

Originally Posted by chippewastud79

In a playoff system

X 2

[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.

[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/

[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.

[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

[Powers]

Originally Posted by OLS

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.

Ain't that the truth, Meyer left us in a pile of sh*t

[OLS]

Originally Posted by Powers

Ain't that the truth, Meyer left us in a pile of sh*t

Ever the honest broker, Michael, lol. That's what I always tell the intransigent bama fans,
back when I used to give you and others a hard time about UF, you took it like a realistic person who
understood that it's all relative, a viable world exists outside your team-view. Of course I did
NOT get too much understanding over my thoughts about Tebow, but if you check the archives,
I was right (as usual) in that I said God I hate Tebow, BUT I think that he will still be successful
in the pros. People who dog Tebow for religious showmanship usually also say he will never amount
to anything in the NFL. I knew that couldn't be. It is still an open question but as long as the team
around him supports his efforts, they seem to be capable of winning games. I think it's great that he
has taken a big step to shutting up a lot of people. I saw him once at the two yard line throw a back-
shoulder BULLET to the front corner of the endzone for a TD once against us and I thought 'say what
you will about his motion but the boy can make the hard throws with accuracy.'

What were we talking about again?

[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.

[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.