2012 BCS NCG Discussion Thread

Discussion in 'Sports' started by hallowed_hill, Oct 5, 2011.

  1. bigpapavol

    bigpapavol Super Moderator

    TBoone might be a little sharper than you give him credit for here. IIRC, he was one of the more successful LBO guys from back in the day when leverage actually existed. Those guys tend to be very talented and exceptionally bright.


    I don't buy any of the bunk about AL's wins. The SEC sucked apart from the top two and they lost to the lone other one. The best win was at home over Arky, who looked stupid against Ole Miss and Vandy.
     
  2. JT5

    JT5 Super Moderator

    Get out of here with that weak ass shit. Which would you rather do: travel to Iowa State or host LSU? ....that's what I thought.
     
  3. bigpapavol

    bigpapavol Super Moderator

    there is no argument that AL's was a better loss, whatever that means. However, the disingenuous nature of this whole process has been utter garbage. AL's resume is weaker than that of OSU and it further undermines this dumbass system that we use to identify those that get to vie for the crown.
     
  4. tvolsfan

    tvolsfan Chieftain

    I agree with this.

    The way I see it, OSU has a reason to complain. OSU beat quite a few ranked teams and destroyed Oklahoma in the last game of the year. We're basically just going on past perception that the SEC elite is better than the Big 12 elite. It's not like the Big 12 is the WAC. I definitely think LSU has proven to be the best and has easily had the most impressive resume so far, but I think OSU should have gotten the opportunity to prove themselves.

    If OSU got in, Bama would have nothing to complain about, regardless of the outcome of the title game. If OSU wins, they did what Bama couldn't do by winning their conference and beating LSU. If LSU won, Bama has no reason to assert they were as proven as LSU anyways.
     
  5. cotton

    cotton Stand-up Philosopher

    I agree with everything except OSU having a better resume. If nothing else, the ability to lose to Iowa State destroys that.

    The system, as jacked up as it is, worked. It was supposed to take several different methodologies, weight them, and produce the definitive #1 and #2 team in the country. Harris and Coaches' both have Bama #2. 4 of the 6 computers have OSU as #2. The weighting spits out Bama by a hair. The AP, who is now producing its ranking just for fun, I guess, agrees, and has Bama #2 by a 1418-1400 margin. Close vote, but the horrible loss is the deciding factor for the humans.
     
  6. cotton

    cotton Stand-up Philosopher

    Of course they would. They pounded everybody on their schedule except the #1 team in the country who edged them in OT by a FG, while the team that got in ahead of them lost to the 8th best team in the Big XII.
     
  7. tvolsfan

    tvolsfan Chieftain

    The bold is the key point. Bama can't really complain about getting left out because there is no argument for them being ahead of LSU. If Bama gets left out and LSU wins, Bama won't have any reason to claim they were more proven than LSU. If OSU wins, they did what Bama couldn't do. With Bama getting the rematch, OSU could potentially have an argument if the Big 12 plays very well in bowls and the SEC struggles. Just the way I see it.
     
  8. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    And yet as "clear cut as it is" based on that horrible loss, a very, very narrow difference was produced. Even if OSU hadn't lost to Iowa St, they wouldn't have been the number 2 team, and they still would have been selected to play in the title.

    So, if that had been the case, letting the non-number 2 team play as the #2, why not let the non-#2 play now...

    OSU was never better than Bama. Never. Even if OSU hadn't lost to Iowa St, they still weren't the number 2 team. The only difference is that the number 2 team had their shot, and blew it.
     
  9. tvolsfan

    tvolsfan Chieftain

    I look at this situation the same way I looked at it in 2006.
     
  10. XXROCKYTOPXX

    XXROCKYTOPXX Chieftain

    As it should be. A loss is a loss, but when deciding between two teams with a relatively equal body of work how else are you going to decide? Sounds logical enough to me.
     
  11. justingroves

    justingroves supermod

    I think the two best teams in the country are going against each other for the National Title.

    However, I don't think you should play for a National Title if you don't win your division, much less your conference. It slaps everything the NCAA says about the regular season being a "playoff" in the face.

    Okie State would have a very rough time hanging with either Bama or LSU. They haven't seen a defense like either one of those teams have. Blackmon would get loose a few times against either one, but I don't think that would be enough.

    Both Bama and LSU run the ball so well and use so much time doing it, Okie State would have to be near perfect on offense to score much.

    I think some voters wanted the BCS to die and by voting this way they may get their wish.
     
  12. droski

    droski Super Moderator

    this is my feeling. you lose to iowa state and you have no [itch bay] left IMO. maybe you deserve it, maybe you don't. but the only legit arguments come from those who have run the table.
     
  13. emainvol

    emainvol Administrator

    Yes
     
  14. Weak? BULLSHIT! Talk about weak, Bama might have had the weakest schedule in the SEC.

    LSU played their worst game and still beat the inbreds in their own backyard. Bama's only claim to fame seems to be, "we barely lost to LSU."
     
  15. tidwell

    tidwell Chieftain

    I've gotta think the team LSU was playing had something to do with them playing their worst game and needing that other team to miss five field goals in order to come out on top.
     
  16. tvolsfan

    tvolsfan Chieftain

    I think it was 2/6 on the field goals. And to be fair to LSU, Bama was attempting long field goals with bad kickers. It wasn't like they were knocking on the door the whole game.
     
  17. Indy

    Indy Irrational and hormonal

    LSU beat 3 of the 10 teams in BCS bowls. should be 4 if you take into account that Arkansas should be playing Kstate or Boise in the sugar bowl. Alabama was the only team to hang with them, and they nearly beat them. If LSU is the obvious #1 team in the nation, the Bama is the obvious #2.

    If Arkansas beats the hell out of K State (as i think they will), i think it will say a lot about the relation between SEC and Big 12 talent.
     
  18. Indy

    Indy Irrational and hormonal

    And i don't necessarily agree that the SEC sucked either. Maybe compared to past years, yeah. But off the top of my head, we beat Cincy, who went on to win a share of the big east, with ease, and USCjr handled Clemson at the end of the season and Clemson and VT are both in BCS Bowls. The SEC may have been bad, but it's not like the other conferences were any better.
     
  19. tidwell

    tidwell Chieftain

    ...and they still had more scoring opportunities than LSU, apparently. LSU wasn't even getting near long field goal range as often.
     
  20. tvolsfan

    tvolsfan Chieftain

    And a Michigan team that gave up about 500 points last year.
     

Share This Page