Official College Football Thread - Championship Week

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I don't think it's a conspiracy, but it's just reputation. If the resumes were reversed, do you really think OSU would be getting a rematch title shot instead of Alabama?

I think the voters looked at Bama's only loss being to the #1 team in the country, in which Bama could have easily won while Oklahoma State's only loss being to Iowa State and decided Bama's loss was much better.

If Alabama had gotten smoked by LSU I think Oklahoma State would have gotten it.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Presumably you didn't watch them before the BCS either then.

Frankly, the only thing the BCS did was match up No. 1 and No. 2 ... but it has fucked up all the other bowls.

Let's say it's 1985 ... here would have been the bowl match ups based on this year's teams:

Orange Bow: Oklahoma State vs. Alabama
Sugar Bowl: LSU vs. Stanford
Rose Bowl: Wisconsin vs. Oregon
Fiesta Bowl: Kansas State vs. South Carolina
Cotton Bowl: Arkansas vs. Boise State

Yeah, it sucks that LSU is probably playing the No. 4 team that didn't win their conference. But those are still five great games. And better overall games than we have this year.

And for anyone who says that we'll have a clear champion this year ... if Alabama and OSU win, we still won't have a clear champion. But if under the 1985 scenario, if Stanford and Oklahoma State win, it's about the same -- maybe a bit better. I wouldn't have any issue with a conference champion Oklahoma State being champs over a 2nd-place Stanford team.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Oklahoma was behind Alabama when they lost to Texas Tech in the BCS standings. Clearly they werent being favored then. At some point Oklahoma would have had to pick up a lot of votes from the voters like what happened with Oklahoma State.

Also, An SEC team(LSU) was the team that was screwed in 2004. It goes differently each year.

Fine you hate the system I understand. But making comments that arent true followed by a smiley face dont make you right

I think it is true. Oklahoma State would be in if they were a traditional powerhouse like Alabama and Alabama was an up-and-comer. There is a huge human element and people will make judgements based on prior conceptions.

It's all a matter of opinion though, just like other beauty pageants.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

I think the voters looked at Bama's only loss being to the #1 team in the country, in which Bama could have easily won while Oklahoma State's only loss being to Iowa State and decided Bama's loss was much better.

Why not look at quality wins then? That's all I hear everytime Boise State or TCU goes undefeated. Guess the criteria changes based on what school we're talking about.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

I think the voters looked at Bama's only loss being to the #1 team in the country, in which Bama could have easily won while Oklahoma State's only loss being to Iowa State and decided Bama's loss was much better.

If Alabama had gotten smoked by LSU I think Oklahoma State would have gotten it.

So rather than look at all 12 games, we're deciding No. 2 based on the outcome of one game. The other 11 games don't matter, only one. That makes perfect sense.

If this were the NCAA tournament selection and the committee were looking at two pieces of paper with no team names on them, OSU would be the No. 2 seed overall.

If I ever play poker with a college football poll voter, I will have no problem convincing them that my pair of aces with a king-jack-seven kicker is better than their pair of aces with a king-queen-deuce kicker. Seven beats the deuce ... I win.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by cartman

Even if you take out the computers, the gap between #3 OSU and #4 Stanford is 5 times the gap between #2 Alabama and #3 OSU. And the gap between #3 and #4 is about the same as between #1 and #2 without the computers.

But the reality gap between Alabama & Ok State (which isn't in those numbers) is more similar to the reality gap between Ok State & Stanford (which seems to be there)

And that's without even talking about Oregon.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I think it is true. Oklahoma State would be in if they were a traditional powerhouse like Alabama and Alabama was an up-and-comer. There is a huge human element and people will make judgements based on prior conceptions.

It's all a matter of opinion though, just like other beauty pageants.

They ended up 3rd in the human voting and were in the top 10 most of the year. They dropped to 5th after the Iowa State loss but recovered a lot of votes with the Oklahoma win. The Iowa State loss was a huge blow. I dont see how Oklahoma or Texas would have done any better in the human voting after a loss to Iowa State.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

If this were the NCAA tournament selection and the committee were looking at two pieces of paper with no team names on them, OSU would be the No. 2 seed overall.

And get their ass handed to them by an underseeded clearly superior team, either in the semis or the final, depending upon the brackets.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

And get their ass handed to them by an underseeded clearly superior team, either in the semis or the final, depending upon the brackets.

You mean decide it in an actual game? Blasphemy!

[Matthean]

I have no problem with 'Bama playing OSU for a play-in game since I don't see OSU winning anyway.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

So rather than look at all 12 games, we're deciding No. 2 based on the outcome of one game. The other 11 games don't matter, only one. That makes perfect sense.

If this were the NCAA tournament selection and the committee were looking at two pieces of paper with no team names on them, OSU would be the No. 2 seed overall.

If I ever play poker with a college football poll voter, I will have no problem convincing them that my pair of aces with a king-jack-seven kicker is better than their pair of aces with a king-queen-deuce kicker. Seven beats the deuce ... I win.

You act like Oklahoma St was clearly a better team during the season. Alabama was a dominant team. They were the only team LSU didnt dominate and Alabama went through their schedule easily minus the LSU loss.

Oklahoma State had a few scares other than Iowa State. They were down big at the half to Texas A&M and snuck one out against Kansas State.

Oklahoma State had an awful defense 85 percent of the time this year.

[ISiddiqui]

Just to stop this SEC chest thumping run, I think OSU takes Alabama. This sort of crap reminds me of when Georgia fans were crowing about how they were going to blow out West Virginia in the 2006 Sugar Bowl and West Virginia jumped to a huge lead and won the game. I know SEC fans can be the most obnoxious, but that doesn't mean they are right.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Matthean

47-14, 59-33, 41-21, 48-16. Those are the scores of the four teams they played with a pulse. All of them were losses.

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | 2011 OVERALL COLLEGE FOOTBALL RATINGS

They are around the 39th team. Nothing great but certainly not Louisiana bad I guess I dont feel Tulsa is a cakewalk game. They have an explosive offense.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

You act like Oklahoma St was clearly a better team during the season. Alabama was a dominant team. They were the only team LSU didnt dominate and Alabama went through their schedule easily minus the LSU loss.

Oklahoma State had a few scares other than Iowa State. They were down big at the half to Texas A&M and snuck one out against Kansas State.

Oklahoma State had an awful defense 85 percent of the time this year.

They have no common opponents. How can you possible compare two teams that didn't play any common opponents? You have nothing to base perceptions on.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

They have no common opponents. How can you possible compare two teams that didn't play any common opponents? You have nothing to base perceptions on.

as you have nothing to base your Oklahoma State thoughts on. So why are you complaining?

About the only thing we safely say is LSU was the most dominant team in the regular season and Alabama took them to OT. LSU wins over Oregon and W Virginia out of conference should help confirm that.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

as you have nothing to base your Oklahoma State thoughts on. So why are you complaining?

I'm not complaining. I think it's fundamentally retarded to have a beauty pageant decide the national championship.

I do think it's silly for anyone to say they know for sure who is 2nd best and find irony in the same people who used quality wins argument against non-AQ schools in the past ignoring it for Alabama.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I'm not complaining. I think it's fundamentally retarded to have a beauty pageant decide the national championship.

I do think it's silly for anyone to say they know for sure who is 2nd best and find irony in the same people who used quality wins argument against non-AQ schools in the past ignoring it for Alabama.

Why do you keep saying quality wins? That is something they use to decide the NCAA basketball tournament. What is a quality win for college football? Top 50 teams, Top 25, Top 100?

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Why do you keep saying quality wins? That is something they use to decide the NCAA basketball tournament. What is a quality win for college football? Top 50 teams, Top 25, Top 100?

Whenever a team like Boise or TCU goes undefeated, everyone says they don't deserve a title shot because they didn't beat enough good teams.

[cuervo72]

I believe that argument has been used against teams like TCU and Boise St. in the past.

edit: what he said

[Young Drachma]

Well I guess those folks have to have something to cheer about.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Matthean

Looking at the list, Missouri drops off for the first grouping. Putting Louisiana-Lafayette and Tulsa as part of your resume is kind of head shaking. Might as well put 'Bama beating GSU on 'Bama's resume.

Even more amusing is that Alabama played a dozen games this year and has only 3 wins over teams better than or equivalent to Tulsa or Louisiana-Lafayette

SI

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Even more amusing is that Alabama played a dozen games this year and has only 3 wins over teams better than or equivalent to Tulsa or Louisiana-Lafayette

SI

Yeah, but they didn't lose to a team worse than Tulsa or Louisiana-Lafayette like Okla. State did.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Just to stop this SEC chest thumping run, I think OSU takes Alabama. This sort of crap reminds me of when Georgia fans were crowing about how they were going to blow out West Virginia in the 2006 Sugar Bowl and West Virginia jumped to a huge lead and won the game. I know SEC fans can be the most obnoxious, but that doesn't mean they are right.

As previously mentioned in another thread, 55% of their passes are done at, or behind the line of scrimmage. You are naive to think a 'Bama secondary can't handle that. I believe the only teams in the past 2-3 years to have beaten 'Bama have been teams who throw little(20-22 passes, IIRC). LSU completed a grand total of 6 passes when they beat them this year. You can beat LSU throwing the ball and a mobile QB, see WVU. You will not beat 'Bama that way. This is not about the glory of the SEC. It's basic match ups and why OSU is a bad match up for 'Bama.

[B & B]

The only thing the BCS scheduling did wrong is stop me from making a MINT LOAD OF CEEEEESHHH on LSU destroying okie dokie ST.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by HiFiRevival

With a shitty schedule. They beat nobody. A shitty Penn State team and a shitty Arkansas team are their biggest wins.

How dare those shitty teams win 19 games combined.

[cschex]

Originally Posted by Matthean

As previously mentioned in another thread, 55% of their passes are done at, or behind the line of scrimmage. You are naive to think a 'Bama secondary can't handle that. I believe the only teams in the past 2-3 years to have beaten 'Bama have been teams who throw little(20-22 passes, IIRC). LSU completed a grand total of 6 passes when they beat them this year. You can beat LSU throwing the ball and a mobile QB, see WVU. You will not beat 'Bama that way. This is not about the glory of the SEC. It's basic match ups and why OSU is a bad match up for 'Bama.

47-21 isn't exactly beating a team, or maybe I should be listening to all of those people who claim yards gained/allowed is the better measure or a team than points scored. That was the Bama argument when they lost to LSU as well.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by HiFiRevival

Against who?

Arkansas' biggest wins are Texas A&M and South Carolina. I think we've all beaten to death how shitty the SEC East was this year.

Penn State has "impressive" wins like beating Temple by 4, Indiana by 6, Purdue by 5, and Illinois by 3. Barely beating 4 heaping piles of steaming shit by a combined 18 points isn't impressive.

Oklahoma State beat that A&M team you mention by 1 point and were down 20-3 at the half.

So I guess if we are going to call it a nice win for Oklahoma State and think we should include it as a nice win for a team("that shitty Ark team") that Alabama beat 38-14.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by cschex

47-21 isn't exactly beating a team, or maybe I should be listening to all of those people who claim yards gained/allowed is the better measure or a team than points scored. That was the Bama argument when they lost to LSU as well.

The most points LSU gave up all year where to teams with mobile QBs and solid passing games, WVU and Oregon. If you can think of a better way to break through the LSU defense, more than just me are all ears.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by HiFiRevival

Against who?

Arkansas' biggest wins are Texas A&M and South Carolina. I think we've all beaten to death how shitty the SEC East was this year.

Penn State has "impressive" wins like beating Temple by 4, Indiana by 6, Purdue by 5, and Illinois by 3. Barely beating 4 heaping piles of steaming shit by a combined 18 points isn't impressive.

A quick scan says Penn State beat 5 bowl bound teams. Arkansas beat 3 bowl bound teams. I won't argue that they are likely deemed better than they should be, but they are far from shitty.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Matthean

A quick scan says Penn State beat 5 bowl bound teams

These days, that's hardly a strong argument. One of those teams - Illinois - went 6-6 on the strength of beating Ak St, SD St, Western Mich, 1-win Indiana, 6-6 ASU, 6-6 NW. Which speaks to how ridiculous both scheduling and bowl eligibility requirements are.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

These days, that's hardly a strong argument. One of those teams - Illinois - went 6-6 on the strength of beating Ak St, SD St, Western Mich, 1-win Indiana, 6-6 ASU, 6-6 NW. Which speaks to how ridiculous both scheduling and bowl eligibility requirements are.

Sounds a lot like ISU without OSU's meltdown in the second half.

[Karlifornia]

So many different sound sides to the argument that no matter what you'll wind up running in circles.

-Oklahoma State lost to a 6 win Iowa State team. Plane crash sucks, yeah, but it isn't the NCAA Sympathy Championship.

-The SEC wasn't all that great this year. You had two great teams in LSU and Bama, one very good team in Arkansas, one decent team in Georgia (remember that Georgia had an absolute GIFT of a conference schedule, and got outclassed at THE GEORGIA DOME by Boise State)....and then NOTHING. Doesn't sound far and away better than any other conference. Maybe there should be a rotating conference with just the top two SEC teams each year. Call it the "SEC Plus". This way, we don't have to pretend that two great teams make an entire conference great every season. The SEC was head and shoulders above the other conferences a few years ago, but now it's just top 2 heavy.

-The BCS is what it is. It isn't perfect, and there will always be travesties. Why shouldn't an amateur athletics competition be determined by an amateur beauty pageant of a championship system?

-As a Stanford fan, I'm happy. We get to play a really good team in a really good bowl game. Oh, and Stanford doesn't have any quasi-illiterates or criminals on the team that get a pass because they have ESS EE CEE SPEEEED. That's just a little bit of hubris, though.

-The ACC getting two bids is hilarious. I mean, the alternatives aren't really any better, but Clemson and Virginia Tech (mostly VPI) are so obviously third-tier that it will make for very entertaining non-viewing.

-Anyone who rages about their favorite teams inept QB play should watch LSU/Bama II. Actually, whenever one of their QBs throws an incompletion, go to tigerdroppings or the bama board and enjoy the show. They turn on every player on the team after every single play. Way to support the kids!

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by Karlifornia

-The SEC wasn't all that great this year. You had two great teams in LSU and Bama, one very good team in Arkansas, one decent team in Georgia (remember that Georgia had an absolute GIFT of a conference schedule, and got outclassed at THE GEORGIA DOME by Boise State)....and then NOTHING. Doesn't sound far and away better than any other conference. Maybe there should be a rotating conference with just the top two SEC teams each year. Call it the "SEC Plus". This way, we don't have to pretend that two great teams make an entire conference great every season. The SEC was head and shoulders above the other conferences a few years ago, but now it's just top 2 heavy.

Dude, the SEC had 4 of the top 9 teams in the country. What more do you want?

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

If Oklahoma State was named Texas or just Oklahoma, they'd be in the title game.

+1

[Ksyrup]

I thought Pat Forde summed up the ridiculousness of the Bama/OSU thing when he tweeted, before the OSU/OU game, something to the effect of, "I now invite OK State to beat OU by 40 points, otherwise it's Bama in the NCG." When that happened, he then said that watching the game, OU was terrible and that's why OSU won, so Bama still deserved the rematch.

So tell me... when's the last time you saw a team get beat by 40 points and NOT look terrible?! He wanted OSU to prove they could beat OU by 40, but in a way that made OU look like a quality team. Um...OK?

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

So tell me... when's the last time you saw a team get beat by 40 points and NOT look terrible?!

Saturday. SECCG. (Actually it was 32.)

[bronconick]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I thought Pat Forde summed up the ridiculousness of the Bama/OSU thing when he tweeted, before the OSU/OU game, something to the effect of, "I now invite OK State to beat OU by 40 points, otherwise it's Bama in the NCG." When that happened, he then said that watching the game, OU was terrible and that's why OSU won, so Bama still deserved the rematch.

So tell me... when's the last time you saw a team get beat by 40 points and NOT look terrible?! He wanted OSU to prove they could beat OU by 40, but in a way that made OU look like a quality team. Um...OK?

He wanted them to beat an SEC team. SEC teams look like quality when losing by 40.

Maybe ESPN will go back to their 2005 gameplan and spend the next 6 weeks talking about these two like the greatest teams of history, since there's no Vince Young to make them look like idiots this time.

I'm rooting for the ratings outside of the southeast to take a dive and ESPN look in disbelief as the Rose Bowl is the highest rated bowl this season.

[Ksyrup]

FYI, Pat Forde is no longer with ESPN.

[Ksyrup]

He still looked pretty stupid trying to justify his opinion after that tweet, though.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Saturday. SECCG. (Actually it was 32.)

I didn't get to watch the game. If it was anything like the Arkansas game, though, they couldn't have exactly looked great, either.

Not sure if anyone posted this, and I don't know at what point in the OU/OSU game this was tweeted, but I saw that since Broyles got injured, Landry Jones had 0 TDs and 7 INTs.

[bronconick]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

FYI, Pat Forde is no longer with ESPN.

He's obviously still infected with their 2.25 billion dollar mind-taint.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

Dude, the SEC had 4 of the top 9 teams in the country. What more do you want?

Ya, but one of those was a "shitty Arkansas team".

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I didn't get to watch the game. If it was anything like the Arkansas game, though, they couldn't have exactly looked great, either.

Heck, no. But you said "not terrible."

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Matthean

Sounds a lot like ISU without OSU's meltdown in the second half.

Yep, it does sound like ISU. But that's indicative of what I've been saying is the problem with the whole setup. Teams that are 2-6/3-6/3-5 in conference play winding up 6-6 or 7-5 and bowl eligible because they feasted on the dregs, then the actual good teams in turn being able to say "look! we beat all these bowl teams from BCS conferences!" Everyone winds up inflated. Had Alabama played a couple more real teams instead of playing Kent State, North Texas and Geo Southern, they could well still be 11-1. If OSU played some rather than U-L-L and Tulsa, maybe they don't wind up 11-1. While "every game means something", they don't mean enough to sufficiently distinguish teams as far as records are concerned.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Check me, see if I've got this correct.

Top 2 - #1 LSU & #2 Alabama locked
Conf champs - #15 Clemson, #22 West Virginia, #10 Wisconsin, #5 Oregon, #3 Oklahoma State
Conf runner up at #4 overall - #4 Stanford

That's 8 teams, with 2 slots remaining

#6 Arkansas & #9 South Carolina ineligible
#7 Boise, #8 Kansas State, #11 Va Tech, #12 Baylor , #13 Michigan, and #14 Oklahoma all at-large options

From there we got ...
NCS - LSU vs Alabama
Rose - Wisconsin vs Oregon (automatics)
Orange- Clemson (auto) vs TBD
Fiesta - Oklahoma State (auto) vs TBD
Sugar - TBD vs TBD

And from there, based on selection order
(January 2012 games: Fiesta, Sugar, Orange)

Sugar replacement pick = Michigan or VT
Fiesta at-large = Stanford
Sugar at-large = Michigan or VT
Orange at-large = West Virginia (required since they had auto-bid)

Yes?

Michigan or VT ahead of Stanford is surprising.

EDIT: Unless the thought is that it's a long trip for Stanford fans.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by HiFiRevival

Before the BCS they didn't lie about putting together a National Championship game. Now they do and OSU was clearly the more qualified team for the game.

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

LOL. Anybody who believes that* either needs remedial help with college football & should not be allowed to watch without that (or at least a responsible adult) present or serious psychotherapy. Or both.

*the possible exception of someone on the Cowboys payroll who is at least being paid to say something that silly.

So they did lie about putting together a National Championship game before? Maybe it was before my time, but I don't remember that.