- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: USC - 2003 National Championship
Posted on 12/19/22 at 9:04 pm to MikeTheTiger71
Posted on 12/19/22 at 9:04 pm to MikeTheTiger71
quote:
They too never lost relevance.
quote:
They just stopped publishing/sponsoring the poll.
Oh so they are still relevant?
1
Posted on 12/19/22 at 9:06 pm to MikeTheTiger71
quote:
The pattern you are painting of waning relevance does not exist in reality
Except that it does... and the AP is proof of that since the events of 1998.. at least to about 98% of those people not in California.
Posted on 12/19/22 at 9:13 pm to Geaux Tahel
quote:
quote:They too never lost relevance. quote:They just stopped publishing/sponsoring the poll. Oh so they are still relevant?
It’s the Coaches’ Poll regardless of the name of the sponsoring publisher. There weren’t separate entities that went defunct. Let me know if it’s better for me to say that you were embellishing your argument by treating the UPI and USA Today as different polls from the ESPN Coaches’ Poll to make it look like there was more of a pattern or if I should say you were as ignorant of the history of the Coaches’ Poll as you were the NCF.
Posted on 12/19/22 at 9:17 pm to Geaux Tahel
quote:
Except that it does... and the AP is proof of that since the events of 1998.. at least to about 98% of those people not in California.
You were trying to paint a picture of this happening to polls other than the AP to strengthen your argument about the AP. There is no such pattern. One example doesn’t form a pattern. The link I posted in response to you from the Orlando Sentinel from January 4, 2004 shows the AP was still considered relevant in 2003. You never even tried to respond to that. You just kept plowing forward with your unsupported argument pretending that didn’t exist.
Posted on 12/19/22 at 9:23 pm to MikeTheTiger71
quote:
It’s the Coaches’ Poll regardless of the name of the sponsoring publisher. There weren’t separate entities that went defunct. Let me know if it’s better for me to say that you were embellishing your argument by treating the UPI and USA Today as different polls from the ESPN Coaches’ Poll to make it look like there was more of a pattern or if I should say you were as ignorant of the history of the Coaches’ Poll as you were the NCF.
Thats a lot of words describing events of things/polls that are ancient history which are currently irrelevant and have been for a looong time. But hey, congrats on being in the 2% of the country that still gives a shite about the AP. No wall of text is going to change that and your continued posts after posts pouting the same shite isn't going to change that. Not sure why you keep whining, I already said some people still care about the AP. Not sure what else you are expecting to get. We get it. You and 2% of the country outside of CA still cares about the AP. Ok.
Posted on 12/19/22 at 9:33 pm to Geaux Tahel
quote:
No wall of text is going to change that and your continued posts after posts pouting the same shite isn't going to change that
Are you sure you aren’t directing your comments at yourself there? I have presented plenty of external evidence to support my position. You have presented none. I would say that of the two of us, it is you who seems to believe that repeating the same thing over and over again without proof will somehow magically make it true. I have made several different arguments within this thread that you have just ignored, which I assume is because you have no good response to counter them. The Orlando Sentinel called USC co-champs the next day. Crickets. The BCS legitimized its champion by using a poll and its trophy thereby implicitly acknowledging the preeminence of the polls in establishing public opinion on who was champion. Crickets. No, instead you say the same thing and try to attack me instead of the arguments.
This post was edited on 12/19/22 at 9:34 pm
Posted on 12/19/22 at 10:03 pm to MikeTheTiger71
quote:
Are you sure you aren’t directing your comments at yourself there? I have presented plenty of external evidence to support my position. You have presented none. I would say that of the two of us, it is you who seems to believe that repeating the same thing over and over again without proof will somehow magically make it true. I have made several different arguments within this thread that you have just ignored, which I assume is because you have no good response to counter them. The Orlando Sentinel called USC co-champs the next day. Crickets. The BCS legitimized its champion by using a poll and its trophy thereby implicitly acknowledging the preeminence of the polls in establishing public opinion on who was champion. Crickets. No, instead you say the same thing and try to attack me instead of the arguments.
Jeez, more wall of text and none of it has any relevance, just like the AP. We still get it. You still think the AP is something. very few others agree. Period. Still wondering what you think you are going to gain by continued crying about outdated polls
Posted on 12/19/22 at 10:26 pm to Geaux Tahel
quote:
Jeez, more wall of text and none of it has any relevance, just like the AP. We still get it. You still think the AP is something. very few others agree. Period. Still wondering what you think you are going to gain by continued crying about outdated polls
I’m not the one who seems emotionally bothered by some people believing USC deserved a co-championship in 2003. It in no way diminishes LSU’s championship. I’m just acknowledging the reality of the situation in 2003 based on evidence you are yet again refusing to address. Do you really think Clemson fans are sitting around fretting about UCF’s bogus claim to the title in 2017 or will even have it enter into their mind 14 years from now? That, too, says something for the degree of acceptance of USC’s claim. If it were as illegitimate and uncommon as you claim, you wouldn’t be trying so hard to refute it 19 years later.
Posted on 12/19/22 at 10:37 pm to MikeTheTiger71
quote:
I’m not the one who seems emotionally bothered by some people believing USC deserved a co-championship in 2003. It in no way diminishes LSU’s championship. I’m just acknowledging the reality of the situation in 2003 based on evidence you are yet again refusing to address. Do you really think Clemson fans are sitting around fretting about UCF’s bogus claim to the title in 2017 or will even have it enter into their mind 14 years from now? That, too, says something for the degree of acceptance of USC’s claim. If it were as illegitimate and uncommon as you claim, you wouldn’t be trying so hard to refute it 19 years later.
And another wall of text... and the AP is still irrelevant.
Posted on 12/19/22 at 10:47 pm to Geaux Tahel
quote:
And another wall of text... and the AP is still irrelevant.
And still dodging. If the AP was irrelevant in 2003, why did the Orlando Sentinel report co-champions the next day. Here’s another article from 2003 from CBS Sports (you know, the home of SEC football) saying there would be a split title if USC won their bowl. Explain to me based on those sources how no one at the time considered the AP relevant?
CBS - Split Title
ETA: Here’s another article from 2003 talking about a split title that was published in a HOUMA newspaper (though it was a nationally syndicated column.)
Houma Today - Split Title
I have others from the LA Times and ESPN, but I figured you’d just dismiss those as biased sources.
ETA: Here’s the ESPN game summary mentioning, again, a split championship. That’s a lot of sources saying the same thing about an irrelevant AP Poll, don’t you think?
ESPN - Split Title
This post was edited on 12/19/22 at 11:01 pm
Posted on 12/19/22 at 10:57 pm to MikeTheTiger71
quote:
And still dodging. If the AP was irrelevant in 2003, why did the Orlando Sentinel report co-champions the next day. Here’s another article from 2003 from CBS Sports (you know, the home of SEC football) saying there would be a split title if USC won their bowl. Explain to me based on those sources how no one at the time considered the AP relevant?
Still irrelevant. And if memory serves correct, didn't the Sentinel have a writer on staff that had a vote on the AP poll? So do you really think a member of the press that happened to be voting in a press poll would say anything other than there should be a split championship? Really? That's your claim as to why something irrelevant is still relevant? CBS sports? In the days of the internet I can't see any reason why CBS wouldn't be trying for clicks. So thats your play... citing the media's support of an irrelevant poll that happens to be run by the media. Sigh.
Oh and one last thing... the AP is still irrelevant and has been since 1998. No amount of your wall of pouting will change that. Cheers.
This post was edited on 12/19/22 at 11:14 pm
Posted on 12/19/22 at 11:05 pm to Geaux Tahel
Got it. You’re a more trustworthy source of public sentiment sitting here in 2022 than the newspapers and TV networks at the time it actually happened. Silly me for not recognizing your authority. I bow before your superior and thoroughly backed up opinion.
Posted on 12/19/22 at 11:12 pm to MikeTheTiger71
quote:
You’re a more trustworthy source of public sentiment sitting here in 2022 than the newspapers and TV networks
Considering I don't work for the media that happens to be voting in a poll organized by the media, I'm not bound to any agenda... so ya, I am a more reliable source. That and the fact that in 1998 it was decided on by vote that the BCS game was going decide the winner. And I'll leave you with one final point. This is why during the games on saturday when any commentators in any game talk about the rankings they ALWAYS say, "We'll have to wait til Tuesday when the BCS rankings come out". The don't say, "We'll have to wait til Sunday when the AP poll comes out". Why is that you ask? Because the AP is irrelevant.
Drop mic, BUB-BYE
This post was edited on 12/19/22 at 11:13 pm
Posted on 12/19/22 at 11:17 pm to Geaux Tahel
No, you’re just an LSU fan with no reason at all to be biased toward believing LSU was the only true champion.
Posted on 12/19/22 at 11:23 pm to MikeTheTiger71
quote:
No, you’re just an LSU fan with no reason at all to be biased toward believing LSU was the only true champion.
Well, there is only 1 BCS and since that was the basis voted for in deciding the champ...
And no, there is no bias. My practice jersey and gameday under pad shirt was a USC #88.
Wait, you are so retarded you probably think I wore it out of hate. Got it. Derp.
Posted on 12/20/22 at 7:34 am to juice4lsu
I think what is hilarious is - USC in 2003 'self-proclaimed' themselves as 'national champions' based on the media's opinion (AP poll), ignoring the universally agreed-upon BCS with calculations and criteria, etc.
Look ahead one year to 2004 when USC won the agreed-upon BCS national championship. AP poll champions? ~~crickets~~ Suddenly the BCS matters now, and the AP just.... doesn't exist...
Look ahead one year to 2004 when USC won the agreed-upon BCS national championship. AP poll champions? ~~crickets~~ Suddenly the BCS matters now, and the AP just.... doesn't exist...
Posted on 12/20/22 at 9:39 am to juice4lsu
Until USC can produce a BCS trophy, they are not the champs. End of story.
Posted on 12/20/22 at 9:56 am to MikeTheTiger71
quote:
If USC co-championship claim really is a minority opinion, why are we even having this conversation?
ESPN knows controversy gets viewers or playing up to the west coast; but whatever.
Posted on 12/20/22 at 11:05 am to Chrome
quote:
ESPN knows controversy gets viewers or playing up to the west coast; but whatever.
Yes, of course, ESPN is actively keeping a controversy alive from 19 years ago and LSU fans are so triggered that they can’t stop talking about it even though they “know” nobody really thinks USC’s claim is legitimate. That all makes perfect sense to me.
This post was edited on 12/20/22 at 11:07 am
Page 10 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News