wow...nm
- Thread starter TUSK.sixpack
- Start date
It could be argued they are the best team in the nation. They outplayed LSU that game, but you're not going to survive missing 4 fgs. I'm of the view that the national championship should be played between the top 2 teams in the nation. It is pretty apparent that those two teams are Alabama and LSU. Therefore they should play. Nobody owes LSU anything for beating Bama. They don't "deserve" to get a lesser opponent just because they already beat Bama.<div>
</div><div>And with this loss numbers 2 and 3 will both have been beaten by number 1. There is going to have to be some serious under the table works for there not to be a rematch in some capacity at this point.</div>
</div><div>And with this loss numbers 2 and 3 will both have been beaten by number 1. There is going to have to be some serious under the table works for there not to be a rematch in some capacity at this point.</div>
now you tell me they can just sit at home and relax while LSU has to play an extra game vs Georgia- and then get a rematch? LSU has to earn their way into it by beating Georgia, but Bama will already have clinched a spot by just beating Auburn?<div>
</div><div>********</div>
</div><div>********</div>
I dont feel like the SEC championship will matter. If LSU lost that game they still deserve to be in the national championship and believe they would be. Nobody said it was fair, nothing ever is. The whole BCS system isn't fair. Bama lost by a field goal in OT to the "BEST" team in the nation, how are they not number 2? Number 3 got thrashed by LSU. Do you not think #1 vs #2 should be the national championship scenario?
the system we have now andI agree it stinks.As it is what we have then if they win out it should be LSU-BAMA. I would rather go back to the old days before the BCS and all the bowl tie insother than the big conferance champsthanwhat we have now, What we really need is a playoff system.Coach34 said:
regardless of the situation, Alabama still did everything they needed to do to get their shot, which is not lose to everyone other than LSU. LSU no doubt has the hardest route to the championship than quite possibly anyone, but that doesn't mean Bama doesn't deserve it.
who "deserves" a shot at the NC over Bama... <div>
</div><div>Granted, it's a given that Bama and LSU are the two best teams....</div><div>
</div><div>Oregon got donkey stomped by LSU... Oklahoma and Okie St will have 3 losses between them with each having losses to horrible teams...</div><div>
</div><div>Stanford is out...</div><div>
</div><div>That leaves Arkansas (who plays at lsu) and was blasted by Bama...</div><div>
</div><div>I agree that Bama choked and lost to LSU at home... but they are definitely a Top 2 team and probably the best team in the country...</div>
</div><div>Granted, it's a given that Bama and LSU are the two best teams....</div><div>
</div><div>Oregon got donkey stomped by LSU... Oklahoma and Okie St will have 3 losses between them with each having losses to horrible teams...</div><div>
</div><div>Stanford is out...</div><div>
</div><div>That leaves Arkansas (who plays at lsu) and was blasted by Bama...</div><div>
</div><div>I agree that Bama choked and lost to LSU at home... but they are definitely a Top 2 team and probably the best team in the country...</div>
cluster17 it would be if Bama had dropped further than they did after Les beat them the first time. We would have an argument about who beat who worse, where, w/ more teams in the discussion.
I do not like them but they should get a shot. That is, unless Ark wins out. Then it should be Ark and someone else. Oregon may be a popular choice but I am not so sure they will beat USC. My guess is Bama plays LSU and loses again. I hope it happens. A few less trailers in Bama country could improve its image, huh?Coach34 said:
Plus, if Bama wins the rematch - then what? They'll both be 1-1 on the season and the national champions will have a home loss.
Let's just hope Oklahoma knocks off OSU next week.
Let's just hope Oklahoma knocks off OSU next week.
I thought LSU had the better team going into that game, but even though LSU won, coming out I thought Bama has the better team. If there is a rematch, I think Bama wins it. I'm pretty conflicted on whether I think Bama should get a rematch. On the one hand, they had their shot at LSU and lost. But on the other hand, I don't think there's any other team in the country that Bama wouldn't beat by more than 2 TDs on a neutral field.
Before the season, I read an article from somewhere (maybe the NY Times?) that said that the rest of college football had surrendered to the SEC and that the national title game would be played in Tuscaloosa on November 5. Maybe they should have really done it that way.
Before the season, I read an article from somewhere (maybe the NY Times?) that said that the rest of college football had surrendered to the SEC and that the national title game would be played in Tuscaloosa on November 5. Maybe they should have really done it that way.
Bama had their shot at home with 101,000 + screaming crimson-necks in their corner and couldn't get the job done. You just can't give a team the chance of winning a MNC when they don't even make it totheir own conference championship game. Who should play in the Nat'l Title Game? I don't have a frickin clue. All I know is that if Bama gets the opportunity to play for it all while sitting on their *** watching LSU-UGA play in Atlanta, then you basically have totally discounted the regular season matchup on November 5th. That's a very slippery slope to go down.Every weekend is supposed to matter in college football. Or so they say.
beat Alabama twice to win the NC but Alabama must only split with LSU? Alabama andOregon both had their shots and they both lost to LSU. Why not let LSU beat Oklahoma or Stanford? To allow Alabama a bye into the NC game from this point would becriminal. Let Alabama and Oregon play for undisputed 2nd place.
is more likely than not going to play for their conference championship. Also saying that they've only beaten 2 teams with winning records is misleading since (including those two teams) they've beaten 8 teams that can end the season being bowl eligible. Truthfully speaking, however, 3 of those teams bowl hopes could very well be eliminated after today.<div>
</div><div>I say that, to say this... you're trying to downplay Alabama's wins, but who did Oregon play? A #18 Arizona State you say? The same Arizona State team that's currently 6-4 and unranked? Well, if that's the case, why can't we say Florida who was #15 when they played Alabama and is only 1 loss worse than Arizona State?</div><div>
</div><div>Ok... what about a 1 loss Stanford? That's a pretty good win right? Sure, but because Oregon beat them, Stanford more than likely will not represent their division in their conference championship. That shouldn't matter you say? Well, ok... then why don't you tell me who Stanford has beaten? A 6-4 Washington team doesn't sound so good.. A currently 8-2 USC team that can't even go to the post season is about the best win they have.</div><div>
</div><div>Hell, just like Bama, Stanford has only beaten 2 teams with winning records. What's even worse about Stanford is that they have only beaten 2 teams that's bowl eligible (and USC can't even go to the post season) with only 1 that even has a chance to be bowl eligible. All of the other teams they've beaten are not even close to being .500. Sooo... by your logic... that would really make that Oregon win not look as good as it once did.</div><div>
</div><div>Taking things a bit further, Oregon's wins aren't that much better. The biggest OOC win they have had is Nevada... Think about that. You might say Penn State isn't any good...but they are a way more attractive win than Nevada. No team Oregon has beaten (other than Stanford) has over 6 wins and taking that even further, only 4 of those teams have 6 wins. The other 4 have 6 losses or more.</div><div>
</div><div>But no... Alabama's schedule is apparently soooo atrociously bad.</div><div>
</div><div>The only other 1 loss teams that have a better argument of having a better schedule than Alabama are OSU, OU, Clemson and VT, but here's the thing... OSU and OU not only lost.. they lost to some of the worst teams in their conference, which should eliminate them outright. Clemson and VT will more than likely play each other in their conference championship. Taking that a little bit further, VT's only loss is to Clemson and Clemson's only loss is to a pretty good GT. Those 2 teams are legitimately the only 2 teams that can say they should be considered over Alabama, but you can compare their similar opponents and should be able to say (by BCS standards) that Alabama is much better than both the ACC teams.</div><div>
</div><div>I just don't see how anyone can legitimately say that Alabama does not deserve a shot.</div>
</div><div>I say that, to say this... you're trying to downplay Alabama's wins, but who did Oregon play? A #18 Arizona State you say? The same Arizona State team that's currently 6-4 and unranked? Well, if that's the case, why can't we say Florida who was #15 when they played Alabama and is only 1 loss worse than Arizona State?</div><div>
</div><div>Ok... what about a 1 loss Stanford? That's a pretty good win right? Sure, but because Oregon beat them, Stanford more than likely will not represent their division in their conference championship. That shouldn't matter you say? Well, ok... then why don't you tell me who Stanford has beaten? A 6-4 Washington team doesn't sound so good.. A currently 8-2 USC team that can't even go to the post season is about the best win they have.</div><div>
</div><div>Hell, just like Bama, Stanford has only beaten 2 teams with winning records. What's even worse about Stanford is that they have only beaten 2 teams that's bowl eligible (and USC can't even go to the post season) with only 1 that even has a chance to be bowl eligible. All of the other teams they've beaten are not even close to being .500. Sooo... by your logic... that would really make that Oregon win not look as good as it once did.</div><div>
</div><div>Taking things a bit further, Oregon's wins aren't that much better. The biggest OOC win they have had is Nevada... Think about that. You might say Penn State isn't any good...but they are a way more attractive win than Nevada. No team Oregon has beaten (other than Stanford) has over 6 wins and taking that even further, only 4 of those teams have 6 wins. The other 4 have 6 losses or more.</div><div>
</div><div>But no... Alabama's schedule is apparently soooo atrociously bad.</div><div>
</div><div>The only other 1 loss teams that have a better argument of having a better schedule than Alabama are OSU, OU, Clemson and VT, but here's the thing... OSU and OU not only lost.. they lost to some of the worst teams in their conference, which should eliminate them outright. Clemson and VT will more than likely play each other in their conference championship. Taking that a little bit further, VT's only loss is to Clemson and Clemson's only loss is to a pretty good GT. Those 2 teams are legitimately the only 2 teams that can say they should be considered over Alabama, but you can compare their similar opponents and should be able to say (by BCS standards) that Alabama is much better than both the ACC teams.</div><div>
</div><div>I just don't see how anyone can legitimately say that Alabama does not deserve a shot.</div>
just tell yourself had LSU lost to Bama, this same exact situation would be going on right now, but with LSU on the outside looking in. So technically...it's not AS unfair thinking of it that way.
Stanfords one loss was to Oregon, a beatdown. How could you put them in over Oregon? Oklahoma got beat by Texas Tech who got beat by Okie State 66-6. What would be the difference if Bama was in the East instead of the West? Or if we inserted Florida instead of Bama. LSU would still have to beat them twice in order to make it to the championship game. If Bama is the number 2 team in the nation, which is pretty much the national consensus, they should play in the championship. What makes a 1-loss team from another conference better than a 1-loss team from the SEC whose only loss was to LSU? I want to see the top 2 teams in the nation in the championship.
So LSU shouldn't have to beat the number 2 team in the nation to win the national championship? Right, makes sense. Using your logic we might as well put Houston in the game. I mean it obviously doesn't matter who teams win/lose to, and they are undefeated. Problem solved.
I'm not arguing that. But with how the BCS is setup, it is fair. That's the problem. The simple fact that a scenario like this is even possible is the issue. If we had a playoff and LSU had a bye week and Bama couldn't take a break and were able to replay LSU, then that would be a much fairer situation. It's still not the best way to decide which team is truly better than the other, but the game of football kind of prevents a best of series being admitted into playoffs.<div>
</div><div>Take the emotion out of the equation, and just looking at the rules, then this is fair under the current system, and because not other team has proven themselves to be a better team than either LSU or Bama, then a rematch shouldn't bedebarred.</div>
</div><div>Take the emotion out of the equation, and just looking at the rules, then this is fair under the current system, and because not other team has proven themselves to be a better team than either LSU or Bama, then a rematch shouldn't bedebarred.</div>
Everyone knows Bama and LSU are the two best teams in the country. But they played and LSU won. LSU gets to be the National Champs and Bama has to settle for number two. Bama lost, they need to grow up and face the consequences of piss poor play calling and choking kickers. It simply would not be fair to LSU to make them play a 13th game while Bama gets to rest and scout LSU again. Since we can't get a best of 3 series this is how it has to be.
And in the end Bammers will start saying the have 14 or 17 or 23 or whatever preposterous number of Nat'l Champs they claim this year.
And in the end Bammers will start saying the have 14 or 17 or 23 or whatever preposterous number of Nat'l Champs they claim this year.
He's clearly saying that LSU should play the CURRENT #2 team for the BCSCG. Alabama has a chance of being that current #2 team, despite having lost to LSU previously. That's the BCS' job. Match #1 with #2, and bothtof them will have thatcriteriafulfilled.