LSU and Alabama are the best teams in the nation. Get over it.

How is it so impossible to believe that the best two teams in the nation happen to be in the same division of the same conference, and therefore have to play each other, and therefore both cannot go undefeated?

There is no logic that says this is impossible. It *is* possible. People act like its absolutely crazy that this scenario could happen, and dismiss it based on the faulty logic that "they played each other once".

Also- every game DOES count. Alabama, the second best team in the nation, lost one game... to the best team.

That doesn't make them *not* the second best team in the nation.

SoCalSurfer: Yeah just what we need, another low scoring boring ass game.

F**K the BCS right in the ear

So because one game was boring to you, that makes them NOT the best two teams in the nation?

I don't care what happened in that game, it doesn't make Alabama worse than #3 on down...

If you want to make a serious, logical argument that Alabama is a worse team than another... I'm all ears. But if your only argument is you were bored one Saturday night, whatever.

Also, it wasn't that terrible of a game. But maybe you're the type of person who hates a 1-0 pitchers duel in baseball.

I'll buy his argument that OSU had a stronger strength of schedule than Alabama. Okay, let's go with that, but Alabama's SOS was higher than the other three teams he mentioned - Va. Tech, Stanford, BSU. So that narrows it down to OSU and Alabama. Alabama lost one game to the number one team in the country, by three points in overtime. OSU lost to a vastly inferior Iowa State team. Sure, it was an emotional week for the school, but I have a hard time thinking the football team was that close to the women's basketball coach. Just looking at the losses each team has, you have to give the nod to Alabama over OSU. And so what if it was a rematch? Remember the Giants upsetting the Patriots in the Super Bowl and spoiling their undefeated season a few years ago? They played to close out the regular season and the Patriots eeked out a three point win. Arguably, that made the Super Bowl even more interesting to see those two play again.

And I really don't get ESPN's butthurt over a rematch. They were lobbying so damned hard for a rematch of Michigan and Ohio State not so long ago, only to see Florida jump over Michigan and then wail the tar out of the Buckeyes. I suppose this sudden change of heart has nothing to do with Big Ten football being an ABC/ESPN programming product while CBS gets the marquis SEC games. Nope, nothing at all.

Sanduskyed In The Shower: I would rather stick my dick in a toaster then watch a rematch of LSU-Alabam

Then don't watch the two best teams in the nation play for the National Championship... you know, as that's what "championship" is supposed to mean.

Nabb1: I'll buy his argument that OSU had a stronger strength of schedule than Alabama. Okay, let's go with that, but Alabama's SOS was higher than the other three teams he mentioned - Va. Tech, Stanford, BSU. So that narrows it down to OSU and Alabama. Alabama lost one game to the number one team in the country, by three points in overtime. OSU lost to a vastly inferior Iowa State team. Sure, it was an emotional week for the school, but I have a hard time thinking the football team was that close to the women's basketball coach. Just looking at the losses each team has, you have to give the nod to Alabama over OSU. And so what if it was a rematch? Remember the Giants upsetting the Patriots in the Super Bowl and spoiling their undefeated season a few years ago? They played to close out the regular season and the Patriots eeked out a three point win. Arguably, that made the Super Bowl even more interesting to see those two play again.

And I really don't get ESPN's butthurt over a rematch. They were lobbying so damned hard for a rematch of Michigan and Ohio State not so long ago, only to see Florida jump over Michigan and then wail the tar out of the Buckeyes. I suppose this sudden change of heart has nothing to do with Big Ten football being an ABC/ESPN programming product while CBS gets the marquis SEC games. Nope, nothing at all.

Exactly. Every other sport has re-matches in their respective championships, and no one cares. Its even possible in baseball nowadays.

Why are people treating it like they'll get AIDS if those two teams are in the finale?

Another good reason for an LSU/Alabama rematch: It'll bore most of the nation, and maybe that will be the tipping point to finally have a playoff.

(While I'm defending the LSU/Alabama matchup, I'm only defending it based on the current system, which I hate. I'd love to see a playoff... and if LSU/Alabama make it to the final, no one could complain.)

Sanduskyed In The Shower: Yes, a computer says those are the two best teams. Bullshiat. Only a playoff can determine the best team

I totally agree and caveated my statement afterwards to reflect that.

Sanduskyed In The Shower: downstairs: SoCalSurfer: Yeah just what we need, another low scoring boring ass game.

F**K the BCS right in the ear

So because one game was boring to you, that makes them NOT the best two teams in the nation?

I don't care what happened in that game, it doesn't make Alabama worse than #3 on down...

If you want to make a serious, logical argument that Alabama is a worse team than another... I'm all ears. But if your only argument is you were bored one Saturday night, whatever.

Also, it wasn't that terrible of a game. But maybe you're the type of person who hates a 1-0 pitchers duel in baseball.

Yes, a computer says those are the two best teams. Bullshiat. Only a playoff can determine the best team

They utilize human polls that carry more weight than the super secret mathematical formula they use.

Nabb1: Sanduskyed In The Shower: downstairs: SoCalSurfer: Yeah just what we need, another low scoring boring ass game.

F**K the BCS right in the ear

So because one game was boring to you, that makes them NOT the best two teams in the nation?

I don't care what happened in that game, it doesn't make Alabama worse than #3 on down...

If you want to make a serious, logical argument that Alabama is a worse team than another... I'm all ears. But if your only argument is you were bored one Saturday night, whatever.

Also, it wasn't that terrible of a game. But maybe you're the type of person who hates a 1-0 pitchers duel in baseball.

Yes, a computer says those are the two best teams. Bullshiat. Only a playoff can determine the best team

They utilize human polls that carry more weight than the super secret mathematical formula they use.

But, I am also a supporter of a playoff system. That's not a defense of the BCS.

He made a lot of good points and I agree but then again...
fark you biatches

Roll tide

downstairs: How is it so impossible to believe that the best two teams in the nation happen to be in the same division of the same conference, and therefore have to play each other, and therefore both cannot go undefeated?

It's not impossible, but it's not really provable. We're going off an Ouroboros of SEC teams being highly ranked, playing each other, so they have a high strength of schedule, so they get ranked higher. Even with some losses. Generally doing things like having teams play each other are done to see who's the best. LSU already played Alabama, and won.
I'm a big proponent of a playoff system. Barring that, it would at least be nice to see the SEC champ go out and play a one-loss champ from another conference.
What's really ridiculous is the talk that if Georgia beats LSU in the title game, LSU and Alabama should still meet in the title game, despite neither winning their conference. The SEC is good, and deep, but that THAT much better than everyone else.

Honestly whether the game itself is low scoring or high scoring, it's boring to me. I don't really care who wins the SEC second-or-third chance title game. I'd rather see LSU or whomever beat the hell out of OK State than that, though I'm sure legions of red-faced spittle spewing Alabamans would not be happy. But they already had their shot at LSU, at home, and came up short.

Look the SEC has had an incredible run in national championship games in recent history, but this year, if they end up with two teams in the title game, it's officially jumping the shark.

Just imagine what the NFL would be like if they had a BCS style system to determine the champions. (based on records alone, Point Differential as a tie breaker)

2010 Super Bowl: Patriots - Falcons (Packers - Steelers)
2009 Super Bowl: Colts - Saints (Colts - Saints)
2008 Super Bowl: Giants - Titans (Steelers - Cardinals)
2007 Super Bowl: Patriots - Packers (Patriots - Giants)
2006 Super Bowl: Chargers - Bears (Colts - Bears)
2005 Super Bowl: Colts - Seahawks (Steelers - Seahawks)
2004 Super Bowl: Steelers - Eagles (Patriots - Eagles)
2003 Super Bowl: Patriots - Rams (Patriots - Panthers)
2002 Super Bowl: Raiders - Eagles (Bucs - Raiders)
2001 Super Bowl: Steelers - Rams (Patriots - Rams)
2000 Super Bowl: Titans - Giants (Ravens - Giants)

So draw whatever conclusions you want to from that comparison.

downstairs: Exactly. Every other sport has re-matches in their respective championships, and no one cares. Its even possible in baseball nowadays.

Other sports have playoffs. College football doesn't. I see you wrote that you support a playoff, as do I. But there isn't one currently.

Also, college football 6 major automatic-qualifying conferences that maybe have one or two games of inter-conference play a year, several non-AQ conferences, and over a hundred teams.
That's why the SEC shouldn't have two teams in the title game. Decide which team is the best from the SEC, then have that team play someone else. I wouldn't care if Alabama was ranked #2 at the end of the BCS bowls, if they & LSU both won their bowl games.

I'm guessing you'll get what you want, LSU vs Alabama in the title game, but as I said I just don't care about that game at all, really. All it proves is who the best SEC team is.

Well first of all, LSU and Bama are the two best teams.
Second, Okie state has to beat big brother, so until then..........

tallguywithglasseson: What's really ridiculous is the talk that if Georgia beats LSU in the title game, LSU and Alabama should still meet in the title game

Well, to be fair, I would never argue that. I am going off the assumption that LSU will beat Georgia. If they don't, then LSU should face someone else in the national title game.

downstairs: LSU and Alabama are the best teams in the nation. Get over it.

How is it so impossible to believe that the best two teams in the nation happen to be in the same division of the same conference, and therefore have to play each other, and therefore both cannot go undefeated?

There is no logic that says this is impossible. It *is* possible. People act like its absolutely crazy that this scenario could happen, and dismiss it based on the faulty logic that "they played each other once".

Also- every game DOES count. Alabama, the second best team in the nation, lost one game... to the best team.

That doesn't make them *not* the second best team in the nation.

Which is why Alabama, by losing, gets an extra week off before playing for the national title to a team they already lost to that must play in a conference championship game. It's an awesome system.

If we KNOW that Alabama is the second best team in the nation (because lord knows it's not like the voters in the polls have any kinds of bias or lack of knowledge), then why even play the title game at all? They're not the best, LSU is, just give them the trophy now.

I think it would be slightly more valid if LSU had barely won at home. "Let's see them play on a neutral field", etc.
But Alabama blew it at home. Just like the Battle of Mobile Bay.

If LSU wins again, are we gonna play another one? Or how about if Alabama wins since they'll then be 1-1?

Why is it if someone questions if Alabama actually deserves #2, they have to immediately nominate another team to be #2? Is it not possible to say "hey considering this screwed-up subjective system and the lack of common opponents or valid comparison criteria, I'm not exactly sure who is #2"?

the guy's point is valid, if "every game counts" then the determination of who is better between LSU and alabama has already been decided. alabama did not do well enough to qualify for their conference championship, therefore they shouldn't qualify for the national championship. if the SEC doesn't like it, they should change their conference championship selection structure.

Rematches are fine in other sports because teams actually play their way into a rematch and teams that LOSE in the regular season have to play at least a theoretically harder postseason schedule. They don't get it handed to them by voters that don't watch the games and have questionable-at-best objectivity.

The difference in Alabama & LSU fans... (new window)

Threads like this often make me wonder if the only reason for the existance os the BCS make people like us argue about it just making it more popular. that being said f*** the bcs.

VTGremlin: downstairs: Exactly. Every other sport has re-matches in their respective championships, and no one cares. Its even possible in baseball nowadays.Why are people treating it like they'll get AIDS if those two teams are in the finale?

You realize other sports are all completely different in every possible way from how college football is run, right?

Yep. Which is why I hate college football and bowl season. Stuck in the 90s. And by 90s I mean 1890s.

When a playoff system is so bizarre and revolutionary in 2011.... you might be doing it wrong.

JK47: downstairs: Also- every game DOES count. Alabama, the second best team in the nation, lost one game... to the best team.


And by losing that game, and thus the division, they've essentially gotten a bye week before the Championship. After this weekend they won't even be the second best team in the SEC (that'll fall to either UGA or LSU). Hell, there's a chance that LSU will lose in the SEC Championship meaning that the BCS Championship will be played by teams that couldn't even take their own conference. Can't claim to be the best when you aren't the best.

Nope. Still the second best team in the nation. They're just unlucky to be in a division that has 1, 2, 3 as late as last weekend.

downstairs: Nope. Still the second best team in the nation. They're just unlucky to be in a division that has 1, 2, 3 as late as last weekend.

Unlucky? Maybe. Or it's the same kind of feedback loop that got us here in the first place.