Bcs - wtf 2011

[E.J.]

Originally Posted by rizzle

Understand your point completely. It may not be "fair", but it is what we have. Life isn't fair. And if we're trying to discredit teams based on the whole strenght of schedule, etc, argument, you can't. Because all the rankings are subjective anyway. It's all somebody's opinion.

However, I can tell you this -- you'll never get me, or any other SEC fans, to agree that BIG 12 is a stronger conference top to bottom than the SEC. That dog ain't hunting with us. So, nyah...

Again, you skirted the question....

Not asking you to say it is fair or agree that the BIG12 is better ect....?

I am asking that if the shoe was on the other foot, would you think Alabama was getting the shaft....?

Would you, but on a more personal level, feel like I do....that the wrong team is playing in the BCS Championship game....?

[OLS]

Originally Posted by rizzle

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.

Now that is a real mischaracterization. Where you and I battled most is that I define balance as
offense-defense-special teams, the same definition as the football commentating world. You're
comeback comment was about running and passing, TRUE, one definition of balance, but not where
I was headed EDIT (and certainly not something you could gauge superiority on.)
When you said that my statement was a crock, naturally, I differed, because I feel like special teams
is a gigantic part of the game and is an integral portion of good balance. When I said we were superior
to you in balance, it was easy for anyone to see. IN THAT GAME, We severely out-kicked you
guys in place-kicking and punting. To a smaller degree in that game, but a huge degree over the season,
we also have a Heisman candidate that changed the complexion of games IN SPECIAL TEAMS as well as
on defense. To me that means superior special teams, i.e. superior balance. We both have monumental
running backs, (we have more, but...), we both have superior defenses, and LSU has superior special teams
play IN 2011 at least. What was so difficult to understand about that?
Your respons in the end was basically "whatever". So no I was not trying to paint you all as lunatics.
I was making the valid point that you didn't want to hear anything about you being inferior to LSU in
any way. The loss was still too painful for you to see not just why you lost the game but why you guys
are actually number two in the polls by an admittedly tiny margin. I like Alabama, but the fans of Alabama
REALLY made a poor showing in that thread, because all of you basically reacted the same way. YES I pick
at scabs, Yes I pour salt in the wounds, yes It takes me 40 words to say one word, but I am the nicest guy
in the world on a level field. I give due where it is due and I respect people who can do the same. Me and
Michael (Powers) bet on LSU-UF for years with jabs and pokes for whole seasons and in the end I don't think
he and I are on all that bad of terms. In the end I have no ill thoughts of you at all. I just figured you were
so offended by the presentation that you ignored the facts. I would have to go back and check on what facts
you presented for your argument. I am guessing they were Richardson and Saban based.

[rizzle]

Found it. Pretty good read.

ATLANTA – There’s a sizeable portion of college football lamenting that the BCS championship game will feature a rematch of two teams from the same league – LSU and Alabama of the Southeastern Conference.

Go ahead and be frustrated.

Just don’t blame the SEC...

...If it were up to the SEC, though, it never would’ve happened. At least not without giving teams from two other leagues a chance to prove themselves on the field.

Don't blame us...

[rizzle]

Originally Posted by E.J.

Again, you skirted the question....

Not asking you to say it is fair or agree that the BIG12 is better ect....?

I am asking that if the shoe was on the other foot, would you think Alabama was getting the shaft....?

Would you, but on a more personal level, feel like I do....that the wrong team is playing in the BCS Championship game....?

I've felt many times we "should have" gotten/done something. But I don't feel anyone getting shafted. I guess that's where we'll have to agree to disagree. Because I wouldn't feel we were shafted, I would feel like it was our fault we lost when it mattered.

[Powers]

Originally Posted by OLS

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Originally Posted by rizzle

I can tell you this -- you'll never get me, or any other SEC fans, to agree that BIG 12 is a stronger conference top to bottom than the SEC. That dog ain't hunting with us. So, nyah...

This ain't the SEC thread any more 'gents, gotta make sure the Yankee boys understand us

[E.J.]

Originally Posted by rizzle

I've felt many times we "should have" gotten/done something. But I don't feel anyone getting shafted. I guess that's where we'll have to agree to disagree. Because I wouldn't feel we were shafted, I would feel like it was our fault we lost when it mattered.

If that is your honest assessment and you feel like if the tables were turned & even with a tougher schedule, conference championship ect, you were being held out of a chance at the BCS Championship, by a team that aready played(at home) and lost to the eventual opponent, you'd feel it was on your team, you didn't do what you needed to do, great attitude. Fair enough.

[E.J.]

^^^ I'll add....that is what we'll agree to disagree on, because I really believe that you would feel shafted....

[OLS]

Originally Posted by E.J.

Again, you skirted the question....

Not asking you to say it is fair or agree that the BIG12 is better ect....?

I am asking that if the shoe was on the other foot, would you think Alabama was getting the shaft....?

Would you, but on a more personal level, feel like I do....that the wrong team is playing in the BCS Championship game....?

I think you are right in that Rizzle and 'the others' cound NOT step outside themselves and see
that OK state is getting the shaft. Especially now that this rematch is not only looking more
possible with every loss by others, but actually set in stone. But that is the nature of things.
I am not sure I could either. I again bargain from a position of concensus, LSU is in. But in
another thread, it goes on still. People counting rankings from August and September when no one
knew WHAT was going to happen. That is the luxury of people who are IN and the bane of people
who are OUT. Always will be.
But that is why I laughed when Rizzle asked you "Who do YOU think is the best team, Alabama or LSU?"
He wanted to know where you were coming from so he could categorize 'the outlander', lol. It's just a
natural thing to do when your team is under attack, "who are my allies?' But all that said, I like this
thread more than the other one that is just unbearable right now, and yes, I started a lot of it.

----Edit---- I think one of the main reasons why they will not feel like OK state is getting the shaft
is that argument I made earlier, that bama has "4 top 25 wins". This is something that I think most
of them will adhere to over the long haul. You can chart OKstate's 4 top 25 wins right now, in the final
standings. In order to do it for bama, you have to start using what they call in Washington "fuzzy math".
And before I become the butthole again, let me state for the record that this is completely natural.
bama fans are fervent supporters of their team with an agenda to go with it, just like LSU would
be were OUR situations reversed. It is basically saying "the season is over for me now" or NOT saying
that. I remember I called my BIL who is a Duke fan a few years ago to ask him if he was watching
Memphis in the finals. He was sleeping. he told me "no, I quit caring about all that the night Duke
got bounced out."

[E.J.]

Originally Posted by OLS

But all that said, I like this
thread more than the other one that is just unbearable right now, and yes, I started a lot of it.

That other thread was quite amusing.... It would have been interesting to have watched it develop from day one. I made it about 2.5 pages and was in not so many words, told my presence there was not welcome by some....

My comments were no different than here, which I do not think appear to be argumentative or arguing just to argue.... I guess being that it was a SEC football thread and I was not chanting SEC...SEC....SEC, I probably shouldn't get involved anyway....what did I expect....

Who knows, to each their own...

[rizzle]

Originally Posted by OLS

Now that is a real mischaracterization. Where you and I battled most is that I define balance as
offense-defense-special teams, the same definition as the football commentating world. You're
comeback comment was about running and passing, TRUE, one definition of balance, but not where
I was headed and certainly not somehting you could gauge superiority on.
When you said that my statement was a crock, naturally, I differed, because I feel like special teams
is a gigantic part of the game and is an integral portion of good balance. When I said we were superior
to you in balance, it was easy for anyone to see. IN THAT GAME, We severely out-kicked you
guys in place-kicking and punting. To a smaller degree in that game, but a huge degree over the season,
we also have a Heisman candidate that changed the complexion of games IN SPECIAL TEAMS as well as
on defense. To me that means superior special teams, i.e. superior balance. We both have monumental
running backs, (we have more, but...), we both have superior defenses, and LSU has superior special teams
play IN 2011 at least. What was so difficult to understand about that?
Your respons in the end was basically "whatever". So no I was not trying to paint you all as lunatics.
I was making the valid point that you didn't want to hear anything about you being inferior to LSU in
any way. The loss was still too painful for you to see not just why you lost the game but why you guys
are actually number two in the polls by an admittedly tiny margin. I like Alabama, but the fans of Alabama
REALLY made a poor showing in that thread, because all of you basically reacted the same way. YES I pick
at scabs, Yes I pour salt in the wounds, yes It takes me 40 words to say one word, but I am the nicest guy
in the world on a level field. I give due where it is due and I respect people who can do the same. Me and
Michael (Powers) bet on LSU-UF for years with jabs and pokes for whole seasons and in the end I don't think
he and I are on all that bad of terms. In the end I have no ill thoughts of you at all. I just figured you were
so offended by the presentation that you ignored the facts.

That kind of sums it all up, doesn't it?

Brad, I have yet to ignore a fact. I presented you with facts. Having better special teams, of which I clearly agree LSU is superior, doesn't make you a more "balanced" team. Obviously it does in your mind. We will obviosuly never agree on that. I would say it makes you a more complete team. Hell, that even sounds better. LSU is clearly better in one of the three phases of the game than Alabama. If that is balance, then so be it. Balance it is. You don't have superior depth, which was a statement you boldy made and bakced up with absolutley nothing.

[rizzle]

Originally Posted by E.J.

If that is your honest assessment and you feel like if the tables were turned & even with a tougher schedule, conference championship ect, you were being held out of a chance at the BCS Championship, by a team that aready played(at home) and lost to the eventual opponent, you'd feel it was on your team, you didn't do what you needed to do, great attitude. Fair enough.

That's the way I would feel. But again, tougher schedule--totally subjective.

Just as a side thought, who is the Big Ten champion?

[rizzle]

Originally Posted by OLS

I think you are right in that Rizzle and 'the others' cound NOT step outside themselves and see
that OK state is getting the shaft. Especially now that this rematch is not only looking more
possible with every loss by others, but actually set in stone. But that is the nature of things.
I am not sure I could either. I again bargain from a position of concensus, LSU is in. But in
another thread, it goes on still. People counting rankings from August and September when no one
knew WHAT was going to happen. That is the luxury of people who are IN and the bane of people
who are OUT. Always will be.
But that is why I laughed when Rizzle asked you "Who do YOU think is the best team, Alabama or LSU?"
He wanted to know where you were coming from so he could categorize 'the outlander', lol. It's just a
natural thing to do when your team is under attack, "who are my allies?' But all that said, I like this
thread more than the other one that is just unbearable right now, and yes, I started a lot of it.

----Edit---- I think one of the main reasons why they will not feel like OK state is getting the shaft
is that argument I made earlier, that bama has "4 top 25 wins". This is something that I think most
of them will adhere to over the long haul. You can chart OKstate's 4 top 25 wins right now, in the final
standings. In order to do it for bama, you have to start using what they call in Washington "fuzzy math".
And before I become the butthole again, let me state for the record that this is completely natural.
bama fans are fervent supporters of their team with an agenda to go with it, just like LSU would
be were OUR situations reversed. It is basically saying "the season is over for me now" or NOT saying
that. I remember I called my BIL who is a Duke fan a few years ago to ask him if he was watching
Memphis in the finals. He was sleeping. he told me "no, I quit caring about all that the night Duke
got bounced out."

Go back and re-read, Brad. Never, ever did I ask that question.

[E.J.]

Originally Posted by rizzle

That's the way I would feel. But again, tougher schedule--totally subjective.

Just as a side thought, who is the Big Ten champion?

See...you keep justifying(the schedule thing), if you had the tougher schedule, you wouldn't be doing that...IMO, you'd be bringing it up to back your side. See, that is how I feel like you have an inability to look at this objectively.... That said, I am not saying I have to be right.... Just discussing...

Wisconsin Badgers I believe

[OLS]

Originally Posted by rizzle

That kind of sums it all up, doesn't it?

Brad, I have yet to ignore a fact. I presented you with facts. Having better special teams, of which I clearly agree LSU is superior, doesn't make you a more "balanced" team. Obviously it does in your mind. We will obviosuly never agree on that. I would say it makes you a more complete team. Hell, that even sounds better. LSU is clearly better in one of the three phases of the game than Alabama. If that is balance, then so be it. Balance it is. You don't have superior depth, which was a statement you boldy made and bakced up with absolutley nothing.

Yes I do recall you saying that, sorry, I did not want to paraphrase where I needed to quote.
You saved me the trouble, that IS indeed what you said. Also right in that we will never agree
on it. But what I still can't see is how can you say Complete and adamantly oppose Balanced?
I know that next year you guys have a top kicker inbound, & will be more 'balanced' and a much closer
match to us in that regard, but what does semantics have to do with it if you will admit the idea?
Here is where I do not want you to get offended, but if you were beaten basically by your own weakness in
your "completeness", the kicking game, how could you deny that you were at least semantically "inferior"?
That, then, to me was arguing a point and covering your ears on my points, which is likely where
you got the idea I thought you guys were lunatics..

[rizzle]

Originally Posted by E.J.

See...you keep justifying(the schedule thing), if you had the tougher schedule, you wouldn't be doing that...IMO, you'd be bringing it up to back your side. See, that is how I feel like you have an inability to look at this objectively.... That said, I am not saying I have to be right.... Just discussing...

Wisconsin Badgers I believe

Sorry, I only bring up the schedule because you do. And of course I can't look at it completely objectively because I have a stake in it. Now couple years back, I thought it should have been us throttling Oklahoma instead of Florida, but objectively, they beat us striaght up. Interestingly enough, we were ranked 1 coming into the SECCG, Florida was ranked 2, and Oklahome got in with it's only loss coming to Texas earlier in the year. I didn't feel we got shafted, we lost when it mattered.

Yep. Wisconsin. Beat Michigan State in the title game. After Michigan State already beat them earlier this year. Not that it matters, I'm just making a point.

Originally Posted by OLS

Yes I do recall you saying that, sorry, I did not want to paraphrase where I needed to quote.
You saved me the trouble, that IS indeed what you said. Also right in that we will never agree
on it. But what I still can't see is how can you say Complete and adamantly oppose Balanced?
I know that next year you guys have a top kicker inbound, & will be more 'balanced' and a much closer
match to us in that regard, but what does semantics have to do with it if you will admit the idea?
Here is where I do not want you to get offended, but if you were beaten basically by your own weakness in
your "completeness", the kicking game, how could you deny that you were at least semantically "inferior"?
That, then, to me was arguing a point and covering your ears on my points, which is likely where
you got the idea I thought you guys were lunatics..

Oh, I still think we have the better team. Don't you?

[Powers]

Originally Posted by E.J.

See...you keep justifying(the schedule thing), if you had the tougher schedule, you wouldn't be doing that...IMO, you'd be bringing it up to back your side. See, that is how I feel like you have an inability to look at this objectively.... That said, I am not saying I have to be right.... Just discussing...

Wisconsin Badgers I believe

I don't know if you quite understand how much football in the SEC and the team you root for means. It goes beyond "I like this team/they're my alma mater".

Example: my grandfather starting working collecting tickets and selling Coke at Florida field in the late 1940s, got season tickets in the '60s and still does. My mother had a poster of Steve Spurrier in her room growing up. I grew up idolizing Danny Wuerffel and my little cousin was trained at the age of 2 to respond when asked "What do Gators eat for breakfast?" "Bulldogs!"

What I'm trying to say is that, for a substantial number of us, your SEC football team is a part of your identity. And that makes it difficult for objectivity

[OLS]

Originally Posted by rizzle

Go back and re-read, Brad. Never, ever did I ask that question.

Damnit, I knew I needed to go and get that acutal quote....yep, you got me, I read thorough it incorrectly.
The question should have been taken in context, and instead I took it as you asking the kind of question
I wanted you to be asking. I KNOW we never got a straight answer out of EJ on that one. I am also
curious on that from anyone, I THINK that OS got the shaft, but I cannot come up with a team I think is
either better than Bama OR capable of beating the Tigers.

[357]

Originally Posted by rizzle

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.

First, it's not impossible. See below. Plus, the end results doesn't matter. The debate is who should play who, not who won in the end.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_BC...mpionship_Game

Pre-game buildup
The Ohio State Buckeyes were the No. 1 ranked team for the entire 2006 NCAA Division I FBS football season, anchored by Heisman Trophy winning quarterback Troy Smith. The Buckeyes were 12–0 with several wins over ranked opponents: the defending national champions, then No. 2 Texas Longhorns, then No. 24 Penn State Nittany Lions, then No. 13 Iowa Hawkeyes, and their then undefeated Big Ten Conference rival, then No. 2 Michigan. The win over Michigan to finish the regular season essentially guaranteed the Buckeyes a spot in the National Championship game. Who they would play remained a highly-debated question. Despite the loss to Ohio State, Michigan remained No. 2 in the polls, followed by No. 3 Southern California (USC), No. 4 Florida, and No. 5 Notre Dame.

The next week, with both No. 1 Ohio State and No. 2 Michigan's regular season complete, No. 3 USC defeated then No. 5 Notre Dame. Fourth-ranked Florida defeated unranked in-state rival Florida State. With the victory over Notre Dame, USC passed Michigan in the polls, taking over the BCS No. 2 spot. Michigan fell to No. 3 with Florida remaining No. 4 and Notre Dame falling to No. 10.

The last week of the regular season was dynamic for the national championship race. Third-ranked Michigan remained idle. Fourth-ranked Florida faced No. 9 Arkansas in the SEC Championship, while No. 2 USC faced unranked, in-city rival UCLA. Both Florida and Michigan cheered as USC fell to UCLA 13–9. Florida defeated Arkansas to claim the 2006 SEC Championship Title. USC's loss knocked them out of contention, leaving No. 3 Michigan and No. 4 Florida as the most likely teams to earn the No. 2 ranking and face Ohio State for the BCS National Championship. The final BCS poll passed Florida over Michigan to take the No. 2 spot while Michigan remained unchanged at No. 3, with .0101 points separating the two teams. This small difference was a result of the human polls (the Coaches Poll and Harris Interactive Poll) ranking Florida above Michigan while the computer polls had the two teams tied for second.

Controversy over No. 2: Rematch or new opponent?
There were many theories how Florida jumped Michigan in the final poll. Some sportswriters theorized that it was not a matter of which was the better team, claiming Florida had an advantage in the polls because they had played the last two weeks while Michigan had not, or that voters were swayed due to Florida coach Urban Meyer's "campaign"[citation needed] to get Florida into the BCS National Championship Game.[4][5][6] The fact that the difference in the final BCS Poll was due to human voters, not computer rankings, gives some credence to these theories. Other theories suggest that since Michigan did not win their conference title, they did not deserve to play for the BCS National Championship, or that a rematch between Michigan and Ohio State was not favored by the poll voters.[7] The controversy was largely resolved when USC defeated Michigan 32–18 in the 2007 Rose Bowl, and Florida beat top-ranked Ohio State 41–14 in the BCS Championship Game.

Clearly the theory that "voters" feel that a team who failed to win their own conference should be excluded from playing in a national title game is BUNK. They forgot to exclude non-conference winning 1-loss SEC teams.

My point is a rematch reeks of an SEC bias. The Big-10 didn't get that chance in 2006. Why should the SEC get it now? Overall my point is pretty well summed up by E.J.

Originally Posted by E.J.

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.

Originally Posted by rizzle

And LSU would win both those matchups. Big.

Nobody in their right mind thought Boise State could be Oklahoma in 2007 but it happened. Alabama had their chance to beat LSU. Time for someone else to get a chance. LSU-Alabama was settled on the field. NEXT!

[OLS]

I agree a lot with Powers on that one, it is a lot deeper ingrained than most realize, but it is also a LOT like SEC
fans to not be able to see that that is COLLEGE FOOTBALL, not just SEC football. Not for all teams obviously,
some can barely fill a stadium. But in the main, fans are rabid homers everywhere.

I REALLY liked the way Wisconsin looked the other night, that Heisman kid looked like a man among boys
the way he picked his way downfield on what seemed like every down was for 10+ yards. But I would
counsel against people thinking that that kind of business plays down south. I know it sounds homery,
but you get Wisconsin down in the superdome and they get spanked. I have NO IDEA why it plays out the
same everytime, I hate it that we are viewed as so arrogant and so hated because of these annual collapses,
but it happens over and over again. That said, I'd like to see em come in and take a crack, more than a team
I have already beaten in their own place. Beaten is relative in overtime, but come on...at HOME?

And I DO know why it seems we win all the time. I think it is conditioning. When Wisconsin comes in for
spring or fall practice, it is not cold, but it sure ain't HOT. These guys down south dance on the line
between life and death at every practice, and by midseason, they are so well-conditioned to 60 brutal
minutes that I think they just wear down the competition come bowl time.

[E.J.]

Originally Posted by Powers

I don't know if you quite understand how much football in the SEC and the team you root for means. It goes beyond "I like this team/they're my alma mater".

Example: my grandfather starting working collecting tickets and selling Coke at Florida field in the late 1940s, got season tickets in the '60s and still does. My mother had a poster of Steve Spurrier in her room growing up. I grew up idolizing Danny Wuerffel and my little cousin was trained at the age of 2 to respond when asked "What do Gators eat for breakfast?" "Bulldogs!"

What I'm trying to say is that, for a substantial number of us, your SEC football team is a part of your identity. And that makes it difficult for objectivity

I think I understand, I am just having discussion, attempting to show another side. People don't have to agree, but there is no doubt that it has to have them think. It is why I have qualified many times that I really feel there are many here that have an inability to look at this objectivly.

Originally Posted by rizzle

Yep. Wisconsin. Beat Michigan State in the title game. After Michigan State already beat them earlier this year. Not that it matters, I'm just making a point.

So who goes to the Rose Bowl, the conference champion? Not that it matters, just making a point...