- 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
1
Posted on 9/17/08 at 4:55 pm to dukke v
seriously peej if you dont mind just roll. this thread hadnt gotten to ranter level yet and i would like to keep it that way.
Posted on 9/17/08 at 4:55 pm to usc6158
quote:
no doubt
I hate to bring this up...but its the best example
Did you feel "no doubt" when USC was left out of the BCS NC in 2003? Because that is the situation I described.
Posted on 9/17/08 at 4:59 pm to lsumatt
All of this means nothing. The media (ABC,ESPN) will tout USC the greatest team of all time and will put them in the NC game anyway. It doesnt matter who they play because they will pump up how great VA is and how ND is back and Oregon beat bla bla bla.
They should be on probation anyway.
They should be on probation anyway.
Posted on 9/17/08 at 5:02 pm to lsumatt
seriously though, what are the chances usc dosen't get "stanford-ed?" its happened every year except '04
Posted on 9/17/08 at 5:02 pm to tigerdup07
quote:
doesn't matter. still a split.
How the frick was it a SPLIT when prior to the season ALL parties involved AGREED that the BCS would decide the CHAMPION of college football??? ARE YOU THAT IGNORANT!!
Posted on 9/17/08 at 5:03 pm to lsumatt
That wouldn't happen under the new BSC formula. The old formula allowed for a team like OU to get destroyed and based on a Hawaii loss left SC out. The new formula, with more weight on human polling wouldn't allow that to happen and, to me is a less controversial system.
And USC was undefeated in regulation that year anyway. i thought that meant something to you guys
And USC was undefeated in regulation that year anyway. i thought that meant something to you guys
Posted on 9/17/08 at 5:04 pm to DEANintheYAY
quote:
ALL parties involved AGREED that the BCS would decide the CHAMPION of college football???
The AP never agreed to that. There was an agreement that the Coaches poll would be awarded to the winner of the BCS, but that the AP still had the power to vote for whoever they wanted. It was a flaw in the system.
This post was edited on 9/17/08 at 5:05 pm
Posted on 9/17/08 at 5:06 pm to usc6158
Did or did not all conferences and the NCAA agree that the CHAMPION would be whoever won the BCS??
Posted on 9/17/08 at 5:07 pm to DEANintheYAY
The agreed they would be the BCS champion and win the coaches poll, not that the AP couldn't name a different champion
Posted on 9/17/08 at 5:08 pm to bbap
quote:
this thread hadnt gotten to ranter level yet and i would like to keep it that way.
And why don't I belong!! I know the point of the original post that USC plays in a shite comf. But its still not there fault the other teams suck!!! This also goes back to the argument that the Pac 10 is way worse than the SEC!!! Bottom line is the fact that IF USC goes unbeaten and LSU loses 1 game LSU will be left out!! And as of right now even if BOTH have one loss, LSU could still be left out!! Is it right ??? NO!! But its the way the STUPID system works!!!
Posted on 9/17/08 at 5:09 pm to dirtbag lsu
quote:
All of this means nothing. The media (ABC,ESPN) will tout USC the greatest team of all time and will put them in the NC game anyway.
1. They didn't play in the game in 2003...or 2007. Both times they had as many losses as LSU
2. There is nothing the media can do to change their computer score
Posted on 9/17/08 at 5:10 pm to usc6158
/thread!
Posted on 9/17/08 at 5:16 pm to DEANintheYAY
nobody ever said LSU doesn't have two titles or isn't possibly the team of the decade. congrats
Posted on 9/17/08 at 9:32 pm to usc6158
quote:
The agreed they would be the BCS champion and win the coaches poll, not that the AP couldn't name a different champion
That is what the peeps seem to miss. Hell, even the BCS called the 2003 MNC a "split decision" with 'LSU getting the coaches poll NC and USC the AP' title. Took them about a year to pull that down from their own website.
Posted on 9/17/08 at 9:50 pm to usc6158
quote:
The new formula, with more weight on human polling wouldn't allow that to happen and, to me is a less controversial system.
While I have long since giving a shite about USC trying to horn in on our title, this statement is completely idiotic. If more weight being given to the human polls would make the system less controversial, then there never would have been a BCS system in the first place. The whole point of the BCS was to take the human element out of it.
By making it more and more about the polls, the BCS is less an objective measure and more about simply trying to give human polls a veneer of mathematical respectibility.
You are only saying it would be "less controversial" because under your system, USC goes to the title game in 2003. But in the unpredictable future, that same system could screw over USC. Would it then be less controversial? Or is "less controversial" just code for "a system which places USC in the title game"?
Posted on 9/17/08 at 11:12 pm to Baloo
IMHO '03 was controversial because many people felt
the best two teams weren't paired in the BCSCG
after OU got blown out in Kansas City.
The system was supposed to do that, and it failed.
I believe if you don't win your conference,
whether it's via a CCG or the "play everybody in
the conference" metric, you don't belong in the BCSCG.
Georgia fans might disagree with this, but I'm right and they're wrong.
the best two teams weren't paired in the BCSCG
after OU got blown out in Kansas City.
The system was supposed to do that, and it failed.
I believe if you don't win your conference,
whether it's via a CCG or the "play everybody in
the conference" metric, you don't belong in the BCSCG.
Georgia fans might disagree with this, but I'm right and they're wrong.
This post was edited on 9/17/08 at 11:13 pm
Posted on 9/17/08 at 11:24 pm to usc6158
quote:
And how is that USC's fault that the Pac-10 sucks? What do you expect them to do about it? It's not like USC hasn't gone out and schedules as agressively as any team in the country in OOC games
My statement is for the media and general USC fan who thinks the Trojans' schedule is tougher than LSU's, which is a complete joke. Not a funny one though, a joke where whoever is telling it looks like such a moron that you want to ease your way out of the room.
Posted on 9/18/08 at 12:08 am to AlexLSU
quote:
re: USC Schedule Game! (Posted on 9/17 at 5:10 p.m. to usc6158)
I didn't know that college football started in 2003??
Posted on 9/18/08 at 12:17 am to AlexLSU
quote:
the Trojans' schedule is tougher than LSU's, which is a complete joke
I wouldn't say that.
UF is an excellent team.
UGA is a very good football team.
Auburn and Bama are good, but not nearly
as good as the media says they are.
I'd rate them about the same as Cal and Oregon.
Those are the best teams on LSU's schedule, IMHO.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News