BCS rankings out.....I call BS

[tideguy]

There isn't enough cocaine in the world to keep my eyes open through the replay of that LSU Bama game

Hmmmm... Cocaine addict, that explains a lot now!!

 

[occupant]

I don't give a fuck anymore...

It's more than obvious that there are interested parties guiding public opinion here.

Just give us some good competition in our BCSham bowl please.

 

[daglafe]

i guess Houston should be above Bama then. They must be better because they are undefeated according to your tragic logic. No one thinks Boise is better, sorry to burst your bubble. Id save your breath anyhow since you still have to get past TCU. EDIT: oh you're a UT fan eh, well that makes sense...still butthurt.

I do too.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

Hmmmm... Cocaine addict, that explains a lot now!!

Cocaine is a hell of a drug

 

[BoiseStateFan27]

Why does everyone seem to think that Bama can't win the SEC? Oh, because they still have to play Auburn, right?

I'll take it, sir


just lose to Georgia

 

[HighTide]

Nope, Bama beats the Barners.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

Nope, Bama beats the Barners.

That's not what my magic 8 ball says

 

[bamabear82]

Bama at 3? REALLY?

Voters HAVE to correct this. You can't put a 1 loss Bama over undefeated teams.

NCAA College Football BCS Standings Week 11 - ESPN

Looks like I may get to use this several times today..

 

[rmilia1]

I find it interesting that in 2006 when number 1 ranked Ohio State beat number 2 Michigan by 3 points at Ohio State the SEC fans, coaches, press people were literally screaming about how there shouldnt be a rematch because Michigan already had their shot, Michigan didnt win their conference and the such ( it was largely thought that those were by far the 2 best teams in the country that year by the majority of people, of course we found out those people were wrong after the bowl games ) but now when its 2 teams in their own conference the flip-flop has ensued and its just plain crazy to not have a rematch if most people think these are the 2 best teams in the country. If OK State and Stanford lose then why should Bama get another shot at LSU when they already had one ( at home even) and couldnt get it done when Michiagn didnt deserve another one for losing by the same amount of points on the road??? Answers please.

 

[rmilia1]

I find it interesting that in 2006 when number 1 ranked Ohio State beat number 2 Michigan by 3 points at Ohio State the SEC fans, coaches, press people were literally screaming about how there shouldnt be a rematch because Michigan already had their shot, Michigan didnt win their conference and the such ( it was largely thought that those were by far the 2 best teams in the country that year by the majority of people, of course we found out those people were wrong after the bowl games ) but now when its 2 teams in their own conference the flip-flop has ensued and its just plain crazy to not have a rematch if most people think these are the 2 best teams in the country. If OK State and Stanford lose then why should Bama get another shot at LSU when they already had one ( at home even) and couldnt get it done when Michiagn didnt deserve another one for losing by the same amount of points on the road??? Answers please.

Dont forget that in 06 Michigan only had 2 games decided by less than 10 points, Florida had 5 including 2 by 1 point and a 6 point win over Vandy that Michiga beat by 30 points and that Michigans loss was to the numebr 1 team by 3 where Floridas was to a 7 win team by 10. There was literally no reason to have Florida ahead of Michiagn based on body of work that year but they got chosen based on the outcry about " no rematch", mostly from Urban Meyer and other SEC higher ups. That means that even if you think Bama has a better resume than Oklahoma, Oregon etc you still cant be a proponent of a rematch if you werent in 06.

 

[yeodonie]

Answers please.

SEC

 

[TigerBait1971]

dude....did you just quote yourself?

 

[rmilia1]

Answers please.

SEC

And when you give me an answer try to refrain from the " Its because its the SEC argument" because in 06 the SEC wasnt considered even close to the best conference in CFB. The B10 was the number 1 ranked conference by the computers, and featured 3 top 10 teams. Factually the SEC had only had 1 title game PARTICIPANT in the 8 years prior to this so conference affiliation played no part either.

 

[rmilia1]

dude....did you just quote yourself?

LOL, yep. Trying to make it easier to read all at once

 

[TigerBait1971]

LOL....

as for the argument...I'm not going to contribute....

LSU still has some big games to play.....not gonna put the cart before the horse...

 

[rmilia1]

LOL....

as for the argument...I'm not going to contribute....

LSU still has some big games to play.....not gonna put the cart before the horse...

I wouldnt even consider LSU a part of this argument yet. Obviously LSU is unbeaten and has done the most out of all the unbeatens. I just want to know why a reamtch was such a horrible, catastrophic idea in 06 according to SEC fans, coaches and media personnel but in 2011 its just a great idea. Especially since the scenarios are so similar ( if anything Michigan would have had a better argument in 06 than Bama does this year albeit only slightly better). I men other thanjust pure monetary reasons or being a HUGE conference homer I cant see any reasonable explanation. Itd be interesting to get Urban Meyers take on this

 

[JTEGGER]

And when you give me an answer try to refrain from the " Its because its the SEC argument" because in 06 the SEC wasnt considered even close to the best conference in CFB. The B10 was the number 1 ranked conference by the computers, and featured 3 top 10 teams. Factually the SEC had only had 1 title game PARTICIPANT in the 8 years prior to this so conference affiliation played no part either.

I'm not in favor of a rematch. I've said that several times. But as for your '06 argument, Michigan lost their final game of the year. No way they were going to the National Championship game. Just as LSU won't if they happen to lose the SEC CG. I don't agree w/ BAMA getting a rematch, as long as there is a worthy unbeaten team ahead of them. A worthy unbeaten does not include Boise St. If Stanford or Okie Light stays unbeaten, they will both jump BAMA in the BCS standings and one of em will get their shot. If they both lose, a one loss team will have to play LSU in New Orleans and BAMA would have as good an argument as anyone that it should be them.

 

[rmilia1]

I'm not in favor of a rematch. I've said that several times. But as for your '06 argument, Michigan lost their final game of the year. No way they were going to the National Championship game. Just as LSU won't if they happen to lose the SEC CG. I don't agree w/ BAMA getting a rematch, as long as there is a worthy unbeaten team ahead of them. A worthy unbeaten does not include Boise St. If Stanford or Okie Light stays unbeaten, they will both jump BAMA in the BCS standings and one of em will get their shot. If they both lose, a one loss team will have to play LSU in New Orleans and BAMA would have as good an argument as anyone that it should be them.

Was hoping you'd chime in JT, I can always expect a reasonable answer from you. I get your point about Michigan losing the last game but thats just semantics based on when the games were scheduled. I mean if Michigan ahd lost to OSU game 9 and then beat Northwestern, Western Michigan and Michigan State the last 3 games ( pretty comparable to the Miss St, Georgia Southern, Auburn finish the Tide has) I dont think the argument from the SEC faction would have changed one bit. The reality is that in 06 it was widely considered true that OSU and Michigan were far and away the 2 best teams in the country ( just like Bama and LSU this year), the B10 was ranked the number 1 conference in CFB ( just like the SEC this year) and the two teams played a close, hard fought game to the finish decided by 3 points ( just like LSU-Bama this year). I am hard pressed to believe that if Oregon and OK State had already lost and Bama-LSU was the last game of the year and the game played out like it did that the SEC faction wouldnt be clamoring for a rematch.

 

[yeodonie]

best argument in my opinion would be:

OU - clear cut the most logical choice at that point.
Oregon - It's a rematch but a rematch of week 1 and not from the same conference. That is important. Oregon still would have had to play their CCG and they'd have won the conference.
Bama - worst argument here. They don't win their conference. Game was played just weeks prior. LSU would have had to won the right to play them again while Bama sits around getting more film and resting their players.

 

[rmilia1]

best argument in my opinion would be:

OU - clear cut the most logical choice at that point.
Oregon - It's a rematch but a rematch of week 1 and not from the same conference. That is important. Oregon still would have had to play their CCG and they'd have won the conference.
Bama - worst argument here. They don't win their conference. Game was played just weeks prior. LSU would have had to won the right to play them again while Bama sits around getting more film and resting their players.

I think Clemson would have an argument if they win out as well. The ACC isnt that great but Clemson would have wins over Auburn, VT, USCe, Florida State, UNC and then a win in the ACC title game with their only loss to a top 20 caliber GT team on the road.