USC-LSU

[BishopMVP]

Or LSU-USC.

We've got threads complaining about the BCS, we've got threads complaining about the fact they won't meet and we've had threads arguing prior to the bowls who deserved to go, but now after both teams put on impressive performances, my question is which team do you think would win if LSU and USC played next weekend. Not which team deserves to be #1 in the country, but which team would win if the two played.

:)

[BishopMVP]

I think they're both great teams, but I'm going with LSU.

[Doug5984]

Agreed, I think they are both very good and it would be a great game if they played. Truly I do not know who would win, if it was in the Super Dome again I would say LSU...but at another field i have no idea. I voted LSU but I am biased.

[Darkiller]

The media put it this way :

LSU won the "BCS" Championship.
USC won the "AP" Title

awesome (sic)
When will EVERYONE figure how ridiculous that is.

[Axxon]

Originally posted by Darkiller
The media put it this way :

LSU won the "BCS" Championship.
USC won the "AP" Title

awesome (sic)
When will EVERYONE figure how ridiculous that is.

I'm sure JUST as soon as they figure out how ridiculous getting angry about losing posts on a message board is. :D

[Axxon]

dola,

I do agree it's ridiculous though. I learned long ago not to take something seriously that refuses to take itself seriously. A sport that can't be bothered to crown a champion?? Nonsense.

Since then, I just enjoy the games and that's about it.

[Darkiller]

you probably have the right attitude towards this ;-)

(as for the posts, I'm still angry indeed but since it looks like I have no hope at all, I store it away)

[Samdari]

I'd love to see the game....

[VPI97]

Eh...I guess I may be one of the few who thinks that LSU & OU were the top two teams....

[scooper]

USC, but it would be one heck of a game. Just like OU LSU was. I think USC's running game is their advantage over OU. Besides moving the ball on the ground, they could slow down that LSU pass rush with some play-action. OU's offense became very predictable based on down and distance and formation. LSU simply had to adjust accordingly.

[cincyreds]

We need 1 more game.

[Buccaneer]

But there never be a completely satisfactory solution. Think about it. You have to determine at the beginning of the season how you are going to do it. You have no way of knowing if there are going to be 3 top teams, or 2 or just 1. I still feel that an expanded playoffs where the #8 team plays the #5 team will be viewed as a fluke and everyone would come up what-if scenarios if the #1 and #2 seeds play. Okay this season you have three top teams. What if you had only two (like most years, including last season)? But you have pre-determined that you will have a post-bowl game (like what many are wanting this year - USC-LSU). With the top 2 teams playing in the Sugar (for example), the #3 team loses its bowl game and the #4 already has 2 losses. Now what? The #1 and #2 team repeat the game?? How about if you have just one team by far and away the best (as in some years). How do you ensure they get a shot at the championship game? What many seems to be whining for is that we make up something as the season progresses but you cannot do that. The bowl/post-season schedule must be determine ahead of time. My solution is keep it like it is, I have absolutely no problem with co-champions (or even no champion). There are too many apples and oranges to come up with a comparable system to the NFL. It really is not that big of a deal and does not diminish the excitement of the college football and bowl seasons.

[Buccaneer]

Originally posted by cincyreds
We need 1 more game.

You would have had to know that back in the summer. Could you have predicted and scheduled that game at the time?

[HornedFrog Purple]

Weren't you going on a rant a few weeks back about the whole thing is a mythical national championship anyhow?

No pity for USC. They signed up for the system and it bit them on the butt. Too bad. They can share it.

[cthomer5000]

I completely agree with Bucc on this.

Did we need one more game last year?

Unless there is crystal clear way to determine the playoff entrants (say... nothing but conference champions), then a playoff system will be inherently flawed.

[HornedFrog Purple]

11 conference champs determined by 11 mandatory conference championship games +5 at-large teams based on highest ranked teams not automatically qualified. Use the BCS formula(s) to determine strength of conference for seeding.

Keep the rest of the bowl system as is.

[The_herd]

Originally posted by HornedFrog Purple
11 conference champs determined by 11 mandatory conference championship games +5 at-large teams based on highest ranked teams not automatically qualified. Use the BCS formula(s) to determine strength of conference for seeding.

Keep the rest of the bowl system as is.

Sounds good, but would never happen. All because of Notre Dame. Their situation will screw up just about any playoff format. They still feel the college football world revolves around them and as long as they are Independent the BCS conferences will cater to every one of their needs. So unless there is some clause stating that if Notre Dame gets into the the top 20 in the BCS they automatically get in, then we can keep on dreaming.

[Eaglesfan27]

USC as they have the more potent offense by a significant margin and they have a defense that is not that far behind LSU's in quality.

[Samdari]

Originally posted by VPI97
Eh...I guess I may be one of the few who thinks that LSU & OU were the top two teams....

You could not have watched OU's last two games and thought that they were in the top two ........ in Oklahoma.

[Samdari]

Originally posted by Buccaneer
You would have had to know that back in the summer. Could you have predicted and scheduled that game at the time?

Actually, I think that the championship games should be called off, and leave that weekend for games to be scheduled later in the season, sort of like what they do with bracket buster Saturday. It would preserve the bowls and yet still allow spots in the bowls to be earned on the field.

[ISiddiqui]

I'll say USC in a neutral site game. It'd be a damned good game and great fun, but I think the Trojans pull it out (;)) in the end.

[WSUCougar]

Originally posted by Eaglesfan27
USC as they have the more potent offense by a significant margin and they have a defense that is not that far behind LSU's in quality.
Ditto.

[Noop]

USC would crush them easy... and I'm not a big fan of West Coast teams either. LSU's defense can maybe hold USC to 21 offense points but specials teams will break them.

[WSUCougar]

Originally posted by Noop
... and I'm not a big fan of West Coast teams either.
Care to elaborate on this, Noop? I'm not trying to start an argument, but I'm just curious what prompted you to say that.

[HornedFrog Purple]

Originally posted by The_herd
Sounds good, but would never happen. All because of Notre Dame. Their situation will screw up just about any playoff format. They still feel the college football world revolves around them and as long as they are Independent the BCS conferences will cater to every one of their needs. So unless there is some clause stating that if Notre Dame gets into the the top 20 in the BCS they automatically get in, then we can keep on dreaming.

Screw Notre Dame. They are an independent. If they don't qualify by the prescibed method above they can sit at home. So either A. Join a conference or B. Deal with it

Notre Dame only has to make the equivalent of one BCS bowl every ten years to make money.

The old mystique of Notre Dame is fading. Granted the atmosphere and the idea of playing the Irish is still there, but they are no longer a powerhouse in college football and haven't been for years. (Thank you NCAA for reducing scholarships)

Of course if what I have read before is true, Oklahoma was approached by NBC first regarding an exclusive TV contract. Wonder if Oklahoma would be the thorn in everyone's side now.

[Noop]

Originally posted by WSUCougar
Care to elaborate on this, Noop? I'm not trying to start an argument, but I'm just curious what prompted you to say that.

Because I am not a fan of west coast teams. Most of the time I would side with a non western team but in this case USC would destroy anybody they play.

[WSUCougar]

Originally posted by Noop
Because I am not a fan of west coast teams. Most of the time I would side with a non western team but in this case USC would destroy anybody they play.
So you dislike them simply because they are from the West Coast?

[Noop]

Originally posted by WSUCougar
So you dislike them simply because they are from the West Coast?

Hmm so you trying to cause a lil squabble?(sp?) I'm not a fan of West Coast teams most of the time... I like watching USC play because of the players they have.

[WSUCougar]

Originally posted by Noop
Hmm so you trying to cause a lil squabble?(sp?)
No, as stated above, I am not. I'm just struggling to comprehend your reasoning for disliking west coast teams, other than that they are on the west coast.

[MrBug708]

Noop's reinforcing the East Coast biased

I do understand what he's saying though. Somone who is a PAC-10 fan would not be given much credit for thinking USC is better because we'd be called Homers. Not many Florida State fans rooting for USC would be called Homers.

[Noop]

Originally posted by MrBug708
Noop's reinforcing the East Coast biased

I do understand what he's saying though. Somone who is a PAC-10 fan would not be given much credit for thinking USC is better because we'd be called Homers. Not many Florida State fans rooting for USC would be called Homers.

Thank you.


WSUCougar,

I never said I disliked them... I'm not a fan two west coast teams dont interest me. I dislike Gators and some other not to be named team fans.

[The_herd]

Originally posted by HornedFrog Purple
Screw Notre Dame. They are an independent. If they don't qualify by the prescibed method above they can sit at home. So either A. Join a conference or B. Deal with it

Notre Dame only has to make the equivalent of one BCS bowl every ten years to make money.

The old mystique of Notre Dame is fading. Granted the atmosphere and the idea of playing the Irish is still there, but they are no longer a powerhouse in college football and haven't been for years. (Thank you NCAA for reducing scholarships)

Of course if what I have read before is true, Oklahoma was approached by NBC first regarding an exclusive TV contract. Wonder if Oklahoma would be the thorn in everyone's side now.

I wish it was that easy. However, both past and recent history has shown that the BCS and BCS conferences will bow down to any demands that the school makes. A few years ago when the bowls all became tied to conferences Notre Dame quickly realized they had no shot at going to a bowl unless it was one of the big 4 or a minor one and cried about it until the Big East made the stupid agreement with them that allowed them to qualify for their bowl slots, just because the Big East thought this was the 1st step toward ND joining the Big East. Because of this a more deserving West Virginia team was shut out of the Gator Bowl last year, while Notre Dame made an ass of themselves on national TV. The BCS is created and Notre Dame once again cries about it, saying that it isn't fair to them without some sort of guarantee that they can get in, since they aren't affiliated with a conference. The BCS caves in and every time you read the BCS rules they have an asterisk that explains the rules as they apply to Notre Dame in fine print.

I would love to see a fair 8 or 16 team playoff. But one of the reasons it won't happen is never spoken about, and that is the simple fact that there would need to be special rules that apply to Notre Dame and Notre Dame only.

[kingfc22]

USC is the best team when viewed by humans.

LSU is the best team when the computer looks at football.


What would you rather rely on?

[VPI97]

I'm a human and I think USC would present less of a challenge to LSU than UGA and Oklahoma did...

[tucker342]

I think it would be a great game, but USC would win

[JW]

NFL scout's view of LSU vs USC, excerpted from the linked story:

...Until a month ago, I knew LSU only from a few highlights -- none captivating or convincing. So before the Big 12 and Southeastern Conference championship games, I called three NFL scouts who had evaluated USC and LSU for the draft and asked which would be the better test for Oklahoma.
At that point, of course, OU appeared invincible at 12-0 and was projected to be a seven-point favorite over USC in the Sugar Bowl. Yet all three scouts said LSU undoubtedly would match up better with OU.
You're kidding.
Mike Hagen, an Atlanta Falcons scout who had spent time at USC and LSU practices, said: ``LSU has better overall team speed than USC, especially its running backs. LSU has a better secondary. And LSU plays in a more physical conference.''...

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/sports/7635977.htm

Interesting column if you read the whole thing. LSU would match up better than some of you think, with all due respect for USC, which is a great team. LSU's defense could play with USC. They're as fast as any defense in the country. And the LSU offense is capable of better play than against Oklahoma. The problem with the offense, which has tremendous athletes at skill positions, has been inconsistency. The offense showed up badly in some games this year, including the loss to Florida and 17-14 win over Ole Miss, which was similar in many ways to the win over OU. But the same offense put 34 on a great Georgia team in the Georgia Dome (If LSU doesn't beat Ga. twice, Ga. is in the top three at season's end.), 55 on Arkansas, and 31 on Auburn (about the same # of points as USC). The offense is inconsistent and prone to breakdowns, particularly Mauck, who is a solid QB but prone to throw into crowds sometimes, as he did against OU. My view would be that if the LSU offense played at its best and avoided the breakdowns, LSU could take USC, whose defense is ranked #30 in the country at season's end, compared to LSU's #1.

And USC's defensive showing against Michigan? This from the linked story...

...When I asked the pro scouts about Michigan, all three said the Wolverines weren't in the same league with Oklahoma, LSU or USC because quarterback John Navarre and running back Chris Perry are good college players who won't be high draft choices. By Michigan standards, they said, this is just a pretty good team....

I think LSU would match up well with USC and it would be very close, good game. But frankly, I'm quite happy with having LSU share the title with USC. I thought USC would be a tougher foe than OU.