Shitting the bed, Part Deaux

[Townhallsavoy]

Has anyone mentioned the possibility that Oklahoma State was a bit distracted from the death of the women's basketball coaches? 

I mean, not saying that's an excuse the BCS should consider.  But that's still fucking sad.  Bad day for Oklahoma State.

[RWS]

Just admit it.  Alabama's the best team left. 

Oregon may have an argument, but it's still laden with excuses.  People who watched that game saw how LSU beat the hell out of them, and they noticed that the scoreboard didn't indicate how bad of a beat down it actually was. 

I do wish conference champions were rewarded for their accomplishments, but if the BCS is set out to determine the two best teams, I don't see why Alabama wouldn't be considered.

No point in trying to reason.

If this were to benefit AU, you would see all sorts of justification as to why AU is deserving of a spot in the NCG. The problem is it works out for Alabama, so therefore, it is a travesty. Forget that Oregon has a weaker schedule than Alabama. I mean, they had some injuries. Plus, the first game of the season doesn't count anyway. And Oklahoma, even though they lost to an unranked 5 loss team, well it doesn't matter. We pick and choose what games don't count anyway, so that one probably doesn't count either. Just because.

[AUTiger1]

And this is why we need a playoff.  Oh, what's that you say "What if it ended up being LSU/Alabama in the finals if there were a playoff?"  Well that would be fine b/c at least they would be there by beating teams and not because they have the best loss.

Then again why do  they get a rematch when they lost at home and Oregon doesn't get a rematch when they lost on the road to the same team?

We wouldn't be having this discussion if we had a playoff. 

[Tiger Wench]

And all but three or four people in the BFTC picked Okie State and 9 or 10 points...

FML...

[Townhallsavoy]

You want to be the fly in the ointment?  You root for Mississippi State this weekend.  Arkansas struggled against Vanderbilt and Ole Miss.  Miss State will hopefully still be fighting for a bowl berth. 

If Miss State upsets Arkansas, it will hurt Bama's computer numbers.  Also, Penn State should lose to Ohio State and Wisconsin. 

If LSU then beats Arkansas, Alabama won't have a meaningful win on their schedule. 

I know it's petty, but sorry.  I really don't want to watch my arch-rival back into the national championship game and win it. 

[Townhallsavoy]

Bama fans at Innisfree in Birmingham, AL cheering the Oklahoma State loss and then singing the fight song:

http://www.twitvid.com/H3NY5

 

[AUChizad]

If this were to benefit AU, you would see all sorts of justification as to why AU is deserving of a spot in the NCG. The problem is it works out for Alabama, so therefore, it is a travesty. Forget that Oregon has a weaker schedule than Alabama.

Fuck you.

Who the fuck did you beat that is on par with Stanford? The best you've got is Arkansas who should have lost to Ole Miss & Vandy. And they'll lose to LSU next weekend.

You lost at home to LSU. The rematch will be in New Orleans. If you couldn't do it in your back yard, you ain't doin it here.

[The Prowler]

The top two teams should play for the BCS Championship, that would be a rematch between uat and LSU.

[JR4AU]

The top two teams should play for the BCS Championship, that would be a rematch between uat and LSU.

BCS is designed to pit #1 vs #2, not "best 2 teams".  Bammer had their their shot, and had it at home.  THEY shit their bed.  Fuck 'em.  Voters, however, will be left with little choice in the matter BECAUSE the day following bammers shitting their bed, they only dropped them a couple of spots, instead of the traditional 5 to 7. 

However, as I said in original post...seems the teams in the way will simply bow out, and allow bammer back in.  Voters wont' allow Oregon back in for some reason, Boise, fuck them too...any of you Boise haters still hate them more than bammer now? 

Ok. State looked completely disinterested last night.  Weeden was sleep walking. 

Only hope is LSU can take care of business from here out, including bammer.  Remember, bammer lost because, mainly, McBrodie isn't up to the task...lets hope  he's still not in Jan. 

God help us all if LSU can't beat Ark. and UGA.  It will be like LSU at Bammer never happened.

[Townhallsavoy]

I hate to play devil's advocate with this subject, but....

BCS is designed to pit #1 vs #2, not "best 2 teams".

How does that make any sense? 

The regular season - despite what many college football apologists claim - is not a playoff in itself.  No one is playing for a spot in a tournament; every team is playing to win its conference and/or impress human voters. 

There's no stipulation that says, "If a team has lost to the current #1 team, they cannot be voted #2 until the current #1 team has lost or so happens to be voted to #3."  Maybe there should be to prevent rematches, but as of right now, there's nothing to prevents Bama or Oregon from being ranked #2. 

And if we're going to bitch about the BCS in 2004 and claim SEC dominance, then there's no way we can say that Alabama -  a team that pushed the obvious #1 team in the country to the wire - is a worse team than Oregon, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, or Clemson. 

[JR4AU]

I hate to play devil's advocate with this subject, but....

How does that make any sense? 

 

Who said it made sense?  That's the current design.

[Townhallsavoy]

So the current design isn't to put the two best teams together; it's supposed to put #1 vs. #2 in a bowl game. 

Who's to say #1 and #2 shouldn't be the best two teams? 

I agree that Bama should have dropped a little further than they did when they lost.  They lost at home.  They had an inept offense and a piss-poor special teams.  The only positive was their defense, which wasn't enough to win. 

But the fact remains that in terms of analyzing this objectively, we as Auburn fans can't simply because it's Bama.

Who do you think is the better team? 

Alabama vs. Oklahoma. 
Alabama vs. Oregon.
Alabama vs. Clemson.
Alabama vs. Boise State.
Alabama vs. Stanford. 
Alabama vs. Virginia Tech. 

Unless you can tell me why Alabama loses one of those games, then I don't see how anyone can argue that Bama isn't the #2 team in the country. 

[JR4AU]

So the current design isn't to put the two best teams together; it's supposed to put #1 vs. #2 in a bowl game. 

Who's to say #1 and #2 shouldn't be the best two teams? 

I agree that Bama should have dropped a little further than they did when they lost.  They lost at home.  They had an inept offense and a piss-poor special teams.  The only positive was their defense, which wasn't enough to win. 

But the fact remains that in terms of analyzing this objectively, we as Auburn fans can't simply because it's Bama.

Who do you think is the better team? 

Alabama vs. Oklahoma. 
Alabama vs. Oregon.
Alabama vs. Clemson.
Alabama vs. Boise State.
Alabama vs. Stanford. 
Alabama vs. Virginia Tech. 

Unless you can tell me why Alabama loses one of those games, then I don't see how anyone can argue that Bama isn't the #2 team in the country.

To be clear, I'm not arguing with you.  The stated goal of the BCS is to pit #1 vs #2.   Period, then end.  It is still up to the voters to make #1 and #2 the best 2 teams.  And, it's also up to the best 2 teams to make it possible to be #1 or #2, though teams don't have complete control of that either.  Who played for it all in 2004?  #1 and #2, or "The Best Two"?  Sometimes, like when "the best 2" meet in the regular season, that can be tough. 

Bammer had their shot.  Fuck 'em.  Call me a homer, I don't give a shit, they fucking got their shot, and got it at home no less.  FAIL.  I don't give a fuck what you say about the Pac 12, or Oregon, they have as much claim to "a rematch" as bammer, if not more, and I don't want to see that game either.  Hell  maybe there's no worthy opponent this year, but fuck bammer getting a shot at the NC when they can't even win the SECW! 

There is no scenario where "Ok, now this time it really counts" is fair, equitable, or desirable IMHO.  I didn't like it when Florida and FSU rematched, I didn't want it in 2005 or 2006 when everybody was crowing about a tOSU/Mich rematch, which in hindsight would have been a travesty.  I don't want to see it now. 

Oh, and fuck Stanford, Ok. State, Weeden and Luck for making this even a possibility.  Fuck 'em hard in da mouf!

[ssgaufan]

I heard some national sports reporter talking about how the nation was tired of the SEC style of play.  He said that the voters would likely put OU in against LSU because the thought of another defensive 9-6 type of game didn't excite anybody.  I can understand this way of thinking, but if you're tired of SEC style football then step up and beat the SEC.

Oh yeah, I think OU could/would beat bammer.  What type of offense does little nicky seem to struggle against?  That's right.  The spread.

[RWS]

Fuck you.

Who the fuck did you beat that is on par with Stanford? The best you've got is Arkansas who should have lost to Ole Miss & Vandy. And they'll lose to LSU next weekend.

You lost at home to LSU. The rematch will be in New Orleans. If you couldn't do it in your back yard, you ain't doin it here.

Wait, who the fuck has Stanford beaten this season? The ranked teams they have beaten were #25 Washington (now unranked and a 4 loss team), #20 USC (now unranked and a 2 loss team), and they just lost to a then ranked #7 Oregon. And those are the ranked teams they played. San Jose St is 3-7, Duke is 3-7, Arizona is 2-8, UCLA is 5-5, Colorado is 2-9, etc etc. Their best win is over a 2 loss unranked team who hasn't even beaten a ranked team this season. So before we go claiming Stanford as destroyer of college football, you might want to check into who they have played. Not that Alabama has played an undefeated team every week, but they do have a much better strength of schedule than Stanford.

And your reasoning for why Alabama can't win a rematch is beyond stupid. Especially given how that game played out. 

[Townhallsavoy]

I heard some national sports reporter talking about how the nation was tired of the SEC style of play.  He said that the voters would likely put OU in against LSU because the thought of another defensive 9-6 type of game didn't excite anybody.  I can understand this way of thinking, but if you're tired of SEC style football then step up and beat the SEC.

Oh yeah, I think OU could/would beat bammer.  What type of offense does little nicky seem to struggle against?  That's right.  The spread.

I might agree with you if OU hadn't lost their starting running back and best wide receiver to injury. 

[JR4AU]

Wait, who the fuck has Stanford beaten this season? The ranked teams they have beaten were #25 Washington (now unranked and a 4 loss team), #20 USC (now unranked and a 2 loss team), and they just lost to a then ranked #7 Oregon. And those are the ranked teams they played. San Jose St is 3-7, Duke is 3-7, Arizona is 2-8, UCLA is 5-5, Colorado is 2-9, etc etc. Their best win is over a 2 loss unranked team who hasn't even beaten a ranked team this season. So before we go claiming Stanford as destroyer of college football, you might want to check into who they have played. Not that Alabama has played an undefeated team every week, but they do have a much better strength of schedule than Stanford.

And your reasoning for why Alabama can't win a rematch is beyond stupid. Especially given how that game played out.

I think LSU beats bammer 7 out of 10 times.  Solely because of McBrodie.  It's the other 3 that scare me in a rematch. 

[RWS]

I think LSU beats bammer 7 out of 10 times.  Solely because of McBrodie.  It's the other 3 that scare me in a rematch.

Maybe, maybe not. It's hard to tell from the game that was played who would win how many times out of 10. That's about as even as a game as you could get. Both teams missed some opportunities, and both teams left some points on the field. But to say since Alabama lost at home, they can't win in the Super Dome in the NC game is ridiculous.

[AUChizad]

Maybe, maybe not. It's hard to tell from the game that was played who would win how many times out of 10. That's about as even as a game as you could get. Both teams missed some opportunities, and both teams left some points on the field. But to say since Alabama lost at home, they can't win in the Super Dome in the NC game is ridiculous.

It's not. Sorry.

I know you've never been in BDS, so you are unaware, but when you're the home team, you have a significant advantage. It gets loud as shit when the visiting team has the ball in a big SEC game. And that stadium was about 95% crimson.

In New Orleans, it will be at the very least 75% purple & gold. LSU fans already have the tickets bought up. They have season tickets at the Super Dome and have connections.

It's a factor that makes Oregon a more suitable rematch, even though I don't want to see it either.

Another factor is with the SEC fatigue that's already in place, they're going to put two schools from the same division of the same conference who already played each other on the field be the only teams with an opportunity to play for it all? Think if it was hypothetically a Stanford-Oregon rematch. You'd be pissed beyond words. It makes no sense. No one outside of the northwest United States will give a shit. And it's unfair to the rest of the country.

The regular season - despite what many college football apologists claim - is not a playoff in itself.  No one is playing for a spot in a tournament; every team is playing to win its conference and/or impress human voters. 

Then seriously, why did we play a regular season game if it means nothing? People that don't want a playoff claim that every game is a playoff. Then your playoffs already happened and Bama lost. Adding one would diminish the extreme importance of each regular season game. But we're going to pretend like that game didn't happen? Was just a preseason game in the late/middle of the year?

So if LSU goes 13-0 after the SEC championship game, and Bama goes 11-1, they play head-to-head, and hypothetically Bama wins. What then? You have a 13-1 LSU with a win over Bama, and a 12-1 Bama with a win over LSU (and a weaker regular season schedule). We're supposed to crown Bama the undisputed National Champion over LSU?

[Townhallsavoy]

There's a reason why it's called the MNC. 

Mythical meaning it's not actually a legit championship.

The regular season is meaningful due to rivalry games and the difficulty of getting into the conference championship spot. 

I wish the regular season meant more for the bowl season, but who really cares about bowls?  I mean, they're fun.  But they don't matter.  The fans don't get any kind of a payout.  Only a few bowl games are actual legit vacation spots.