Lsu vs oklahoma state

Hmm, sounds like tidaphobia to me.

 

LOL, Blackbird! It's because Alabama fans KNOW they handed the first game to LSU on a platter. They lost because Sabin didn't recruit a kicker that can kick consistantly. (wonder how long they'll keep him? Oh well, he won against AU so probably another year, lol)

Sour grapes. Let A play against OK ST and winner of that can play LSU.

 

LOL, Blackbird. Us AU fans understand all about harassment by Bammer.

 

Alabama's one loss to #1 LSU.

OSU's one loss, to a 6-6 ISU(who beat Northern Iowa 20-19 this year, btw).

They (OSU) had their chance and blew it.

 

Totally agree. Bama played LSU and lost already (in one of the most boring games of all time). Why should they get another chance?

Bama had wins against three top 25 teams -- Arkansas #6, Penn State #22 and Auburn #25. Who else did they play?
* North Texas State
* Ole Miss
* Georgia Southern

Oh yes, let's not forget Kent State too.

OSU had wins against more top 25 teams and higher ranked top teams -- K State (who got hosed out of the Sugar Bowl) #8, Baylor #12, OK #14 and Texas #24.

Yes, OSU lost to Iowa State. In double overtime. At Iowa State.

Bottom line, OSU got hosed on this one.

 

An Alabama fan playing the martyr?

When did this start happening?

They had LSU at home and lost. They (Alabama) had their chance and blew it.

Question. Assume that LSU lost to Alabama. Do they get to play for the BCS championship instead of OSU? I say no. Had LSU lost, I think it would be Alabama and Oklahoma State for the BCS championship.

 

Short of unusual developments, I see Alabama winning the NC game against LSU about, or almost, as narrowly as LSU won on Nov. 5. And LSU and their fans are going to say "Why didn't the first one count?" even though right now they seem to favor this matchup. They will say then the BCSNC should not be a rematch. And obviously the winner of that silly crystal football with be an SEC team for the 6th straight year; but this will be the first of those years that an SEC team lost that game.

And, of course, there are the annual "tweak the BCS" editorials. Sometimes they do that in some way, but the same situation that led to fans' frustrations is always a unique thing for that one year.

 

And each situation just goes to show how stupid it is to determine a champion in this fashion.

 

I disagree with you on this one. Put 'Bama and OSU on a neutral field, and 'Bama would be favored by 6.5 pts.

 

The SEC proposed a solution a few years ago, but no one wanted to listen.

It would have been exciting.

LSU vs. Stanford
Bama vs. OSU

Winners play for the championship.

We would have had the same result, but there would be no wondering about 'what if.'

 

It all boils down to $$$$$$ and all of us know it. If they went to a playoff format, what would happen to all the bowls, and their sponsor's $$$$? At the end of the day, it's not about doing the right thing, but about how many of these---------->$$$$$$$ the NCAA can get their grubby paws on.

 

Yes, it does boil down to $$$$$$$ for most bowls. One rather glaring manifestation of that circumstance this year is that Texas (7-5) is going to the Holiday Bowl, which is higher in the Big 12 'pecking order' that the Alamo Bowl, in which the B12 rep is Baylor (9-3), which soundly beat Texas last weekend. It comes down to more fans, and thus more business for hotels, restaurants, and Sea World if UT's fans, rather than Baylor's, come to San Diego.

Still, $$$$$$$ is directly related to tradition, and some old tie-ins and in-season rivalries and proprietary (that's selfish) conference ties that influence which tack the bowl situation is sheeted in. The Big Ten especially wants to hold on to its gluttony about its traditional Rose Bowl berth, and seems to think if its champion play in the NC it should still automatically get its next team in the Rose. 2 BCS games are now worth $34 million, plus that trip to southern California for the snowy, windy midwest fans remains a goal that other regions (they think) aren't so entitled.

The argument about a 4 -team playoff, such as this year's LSU, Alabama, OK St., and Stanford, is that in any year there may well a fifth team with as much claim. Same thing for an 8 or 16 team playoff. Well, all other sports do have that same type of dilemma, but the champion which emerges is not in dispute as often was, and still can happen, in football with the BCS [e.g., LSU and USC, 2003]. And it's rubbish that the regular schedule 'won't mean as much' is there were a playoff. Can you imagine there having been less significance to the LSU-Alabama match last Nov. 5 if they knew their teams would surely make the playoff system anyway? That was virtually the case as it was-- and both knew their quest for the NC was out with another loss-- also the same.