College Football Bowl Season Thread

[Huckleberry]

oligirl is in some parallel universe where the SEC doesn't get respect.

[General Mike]

Originally Posted by oliegirl

Not trying to threadjack here, but I am stumped...I swear that yesterday I saw something on ESPN about how one of the players in the game last night (don't remember which team) is the son of someone famous...I want to say an athlete, but I can't remember who and it's driving me crazy. Does anyone here know what/who I'm talking about?

James Laurinitius is the son of Road Warrior Animal.

[astrosfan64]

Originally Posted by oliegirl

That to me shows a lack of respect.

SEC had a good year this year. NO doubt. But, take a look at this from 2 years ago.




Capital One
Wisconsin 24
Auburn 10
Orlando, Fla.
Jan. 2, 1 p.m. ABC Buy Tickets
Flights to Orlando
Orlando Hotels




Tostitos Fiesta
Ohio State 34
Notre Dame 20
Tempe, Ariz.
Jan. 2, 4:30 p.m. ABC Buy Tickets
Flights to Tempe
Tempe Hotels




Nokia Sugar
West Virginia 38
Georgia 35
Atlanta
Jan. 2, 8:30 p.m. ABC Buy Tickets
Flights to Atlanta
Atlanta Hotels




FedEx Orange
Penn State 26
Florida State 23 (3 OT)
Miami, Fla.
Jan. 3, 8 p.m. ABC Buy Tickets
Flights to Miami
Miami Hotels




The Rose Bowl Game Presented by Citi
Texas 41
USC 38
Pasadena, Calif.
Jan. 4, 8 p.m. ABC Buy Tickets
Flights to Pasadena
Pasadena Hotels

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by astrosfan64

SEC had a good year this year. NO doubt. But, take a look at this from 2 years ago.

I don't know why you specifically called those two losses out. That year the SEC went 3-3. Not good by SEC standards, but still .500. The Big Ten would kill for that record.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by mckerney

So I'm not the only one who cannot stand the Big 10 homers?

Hes actually a big 12 homer, but we all have them. Every school/conference has good fans and "interesting" fans, and i dont want to hear anyone saying their allegiance is exempt.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Glad to see Mizzou get the #4 spot in the final poll. They'll likely be at least that high in the preseason poll next year given the large number of returning starters.

They will likely fall in the 6-10 range, not as high as you hope. A vast improvement from the past, but dont think 1 good season garnered us the respect that schools like USC and Ohio State get. And even that ranking will be a 1 year rental if we dont do it all over again.

[Lathum]

Rice is going pro

[astrosfan64]

Originally Posted by KWhit

I don't know why you specifically called those two losses out. That year the SEC went 3-3. Not good by SEC standards, but still .500. The Big Ten would kill for that record.

I was just pointing out the BCS games. The SEC Champ played and lost to the Big East Champ.

They went 0 and 2 in the BCS.

If you mean overall record, the Big East went a perfect 5 and 0 last year.

[oliegirl]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry

oligirl is in some parallel universe where the SEC doesn't get respect.

I wish I was in a parallel universe where people knew how to spell my freakin name! Come on people, it's on every post I've ever made...O-L-I-E-G-I-R-L.




In all seriousness...I know in the past the SEC has had it's rough years, but every conference has! Football, like any sport is cyclical...how many years was USC/OSU the BIG powerhouse teams? Who ever thought ND would have a crappy season like they did this year? Right now, the SEC teams are doing well, but for some reason, some people (not anyone specifically here, I'm talking about the real world that exists outside of FOFC) just refuse to say "Yeah, the SEC is great right now". I just don't get it.

[NoMyths]

Breaking news: people have different opinions about things for little or no good reason.

[Warhammer]

As a Big 10 fan that lives in the heart of SEC country, Memphis, TN, (note for those who contest this, this is the closest major city to 3 SEC programs, and is home to large fan contigents from two more) the SEC gets plenty of respect. The reason for the hatred is that SEC fans quite honestly are the most delusional fans I have ever met.

Check to see how many national championships most SEC teams have won. Most have maybe two at most. Yet, talk to most fans and they would have you believe that each school has won a minimum of 5 titles. Ask why they haven't won more, and it is all due to regional bias.

Remember a few years back, SEC fans were moaning that they would never make it to the BCS title game because it was too hard to go undefeated in the SEC. Yet, they have won more titles because of the BCS than any other conference.

Now, to the argument that the SEC is best because of their record in the title game? Let's look and see where the games are held, Arizona, California, Florida, and Louisiana. Guess where 1/2 of the title games are played. Yep, SEC states. That amounts to a large homefield advantage in those games due to the amount of fans that travel as well as fans that will vote for other SEC programs over other conferences. All that 4-0 in the title game shows is that the SEC teams in the 4 years they played in the title games played better than the other team. No more, no less.

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by astrosfan64

I was just pointing out the BCS games. The SEC Champ played and lost to the Big East Champ.

They went 0 and 2 in the BCS.

If you mean overall record, the Big East went a perfect 5 and 0 last year.

I didn't know that the Capital One Bowl was a BCS Bowl.

My mistake.

[JW]

After reading some of these posts, I thought all of you would appreciate this quote:

"They didn't fight back like an SEC team would do," said LSU safety Harry Coleman, who filled in superbly for injured All-American Craig Steltz.

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by JW

After reading some of these posts, I thought all of you would appreciate this quote:

"They didn't fight back like an SEC team would do," said LSU safety Harry Coleman, who filled in superbly for injured All-American Craig Steltz.

I like it!

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by oliegirl

I wish I was in a parallel universe where people knew how to spell my freakin name! Come on people, it's on every post I've ever made...O-L-I-E-G-I-R-L.




In all seriousness...I know in the past the SEC has had it's rough years, but every conference has! Football, like any sport is cyclical...how many years was USC/OSU the BIG powerhouse teams? Who ever thought ND would have a crappy season like they did this year? Right now, the SEC teams are doing well, but for some reason, some people (not anyone specifically here, I'm talking about the real world that exists outside of FOFC) just refuse to say "Yeah, the SEC is great right now". I just don't get it.

I'm going to have to side with Huck on this one...the SEC is widely accepted as the best conference right now, and the reason SEC fans are sometimes hated is because they seem to think the rest of the country doesn't worship the ground they walk on enough. The SEC is top dog, and id argue 85% of the country would agree with that, but its a pretty slim margin in my eyes. Did LSU win the title, yes. Would other teams with the exact same record like USC or WVU have done the same? Never going to know, but let step of the high horse and be realistic that the SEC isn't disrespected. Its just SEC fans want more then respect, they seem to want to be worshiped for supposedly being the fastest and most talented conference out there when the the reality is all the top teams are fast and all of the top teams are talented, irregardless of their conference allegiance.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by astrosfan64

Look at LSU's two losses. To Arkansas who got stomped in their bowl game and an average Kentucky team.

I give them a pass on Kentucky. It was earlier in the season in a very hostile environment against a good team. The loss to Arkansas was at home on the last game of the regular season.

[MJ4H]

The Arkansas team that got stomped in the Cotton Bowl is drastically different than the team that beat LSU. The lame duck coaching staff was a huge part of it.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by MattJones4Heisman

The Arkansas team that got stomped in the Cotton Bowl is drastically different than the team that beat LSU. The lame duck coaching staff was a huge part of it.

I agree with this.

My point had more to do with LSU losing the last game of the regular season at home, and then miraculously leapfrogging several teams after beating Tennessee by 7 points in the SEC championship game.

[cschex]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

I agree with this.

My point had more to do with LSU losing the last game of the regular season at home, and then miraculously leapfrogging several teams after beating Tennessee by 7 points in the SEC championship game.

Well, it was still a better loss thatn SC's, or OU's or WVU, or UGA getting stomped by Tenn. We had a large amount of elite players out for Arkansas and UT, which was taken into account, as was the entire year's schedule by the voters and the computers. Which other team exactly was more deserving?

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by cschex

Which other team exactly was more deserving?

After LSU's last game of the regular season, West Virginia, Missouri, Ohio State, Georgia, Kansas and Virginia Tech were all ranked ahead of LSU. LSU then beat #15 Tennessee by 7 points in the SEC championship game. I can certainly understand how West Virginia and Missouri then fell behind after losing. How did the other teams suddenly become inferior to LSU after either winning or not playing? I think that's the question that needs to be answered.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

How did the other teams suddenly become inferior to LSU after either winning or not playing? I think that's the question that needs to be answered.

And the answer would seem to be that you're sort of looking at it backwards. The other teams didn't suddenly become inferior, they always were but the voters were slow to recognize it but corrected themselves at the end.

[st.cronin]

Not sure if this has been mentioned: Both of LSU's losses were in OT. I think they should get some credit for that.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

And the answer would seem to be that you're sort of looking at it backwards. The other teams didn't suddenly become inferior, they always were but the voters were slow to recognize it but corrected themselves at the end.

I agree. Whether or not people agree with LSU being in the title game, I think the voters actually deserve credit for voting for who they thought the best team was rather than simply moving teams up and down based on who won/lost that week.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Not sure if this has been mentioned: Both of LSU's losses were in OT. I think they should get some credit for that.

I also think that when and where a team loses should carry a very significant weight in the decision making, and as I mentioned, LSU lost on their home field in the last week of the regular season.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by cschex

Well, it was still a better loss thatn SC's, or OU's or WVU, or UGA getting stomped by Tenn. We had a large amount of elite players out for Arkansas and UT, which was taken into account, as was the entire year's schedule by the voters and the computers. Which other team exactly was more deserving?

Missouri, who makes your arkansas and kentucky losses look like jokes. And you can say whole body of work, but who did you beat during the regular season that was a BCS level team? Not florida, they lost to michigan? Virginia Tech? They lost to the kansas team we beat. Not a single win really looks great now that the season is over...

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Not sure if this has been mentioned: Both of LSU's losses were in OT. I think they should get some credit for that.

Really? I think a win is a win, a loss is a loss

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Missouri, who makes your arkansas and kentucky losses look like jokes. And you can say whole body of work, but who did you beat during the regular season that was a BCS level team? Not florida, they lost to michigan? Virginia Tech? They lost to the kansas team we beat. Not a single win really looks great now that the season is over...

This really is not a good argument. You can compare losses, especially in this case. The Arkansas team Missouri killed and the Arkansas team that beat LSU were totally different. For the bowl game, the interim staff was not only already hired at other schools, but there replacements were already hired. I just don't think you can compare the two. Every time a team plays someone that someone else has beaten, there are differences in the teams makeup or even mindset that can range anywhere from minor to world-changing.

[astrosfan64]

I think most of us can at least agree, that LSU was probably the weakest BCS champion so far.

[timmynausea]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Missouri, who makes your arkansas and kentucky losses look like jokes. And you can say whole body of work, but who did you beat during the regular season that was a BCS level team? Not florida, they lost to michigan? Virginia Tech? They lost to the kansas team we beat. Not a single win really looks great now that the season is over...

But how can you put Missouri ahead of an Oklahoma team that beat them twice? And then the fact that West Virginia beat Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl knocks Missouri down another rung in my opinion.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Really? I think a win is a win, a loss is a loss

That can't be true. If it was then, Hawaii would have been playing in the title game since they had nothing but wins.

If we are looking at this as of today, shouldn't we be questioning Ohio State's place in the championship a lot more than LSU?

[JW]

Love the hate. Two numbers for all of you.

7-2. SEC bowl record this year. First conference with 7 bowl wins.

38-24. You know that one.

I can understand folks thinking there were other teams as good as LSU. There were. And LSU was fortunate to be there. The night of the SEC title game was like 2003, watching all the dominos fall that had to fall, except this time the last dominos fell after the SEC title game. But the interesting thing was that after WVU lost, lots of people ran the numbers, and LSU is what kept coming out as #2. LSU got to the BCS championship game and then beat OSU (otherwise known as the SEC's bowl bitch) and won the crystal. That is all that matters.

A few people didn't like it when I said before the Arkansas game that LSU would have a harder time getting to the BCS title game than winning it. Well, look at what happened. You don't mess with LSU at bowl time in New Orleans.

Oh, and the hate. That is very cool, too. Wahoooooooooooo.

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by astrosfan64

I think most of us can at least agree, that LSU was probably the weakest BCS champion so far.

In terms of what?

This LSU team has numerous round 1-2 draft picks, and I think Miles and company showed in the championship game that the team has good coaches.

I think this team could do plenty of good things against previous BCS champions, and I would favor them over at least 3 off the top of my head. When healthy(which they were at the end of the season) I would take this LSU team to beat the '03 LSU team for sure.

Now if you are talking weakest in terms of resume, thats understandable, they are the first two loss team. But given how the rest of the field did this year, one could argue its just the nature of the level of parity prevalent right now.

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by astrosfan64

I think most of us can at least agree, that LSU was probably the weakest BCS champion so far.

Why do you think that most of us agree to that?

[JW]

A little more for you.

2001 -2010.

LSU has 2 NCs
LSU has 3 SEC titles
LSU has 4 SECW titles
LSU has 5 bowl wins
LSU is 4-0 in BCS play

[astrosfan64]

Originally Posted by MattJones4Heisman

Why do you think that most of us agree to that?

Florida last year would stomp this team.
Texas or USC from 2 years ago would stomp this team.
USC from 3 years ago would stomp this team.

The LSU BCS champ and USC AP Champ year, both had better records and USC would of stomped LSU. The first LSU Champ team, I think was clearly better. They definately had better coaching.


All other BCS champions have been undefeated.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by JW

LSU is 4-0 in BCS play

You are correct.

They are also 4-0 is BCS games played in New Orleans.

What would really be interesting (and perhaps we'll get to see it someday) would be to see them play a team like 2004/2005/2006/2007 USC at the Rose Bowl or a team like 1984/1988/1989/1992 Miami at the Orange Bowl.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by timmynausea

But how can you put Missouri ahead of an Oklahoma team that beat them twice? And then the fact that West Virginia beat Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl knocks Missouri down another rung in my opinion.

And by that logic Missouri beat arkansas, who beat LSU. Or they beat illinois, who beat Ohio State. Or they beat Kansas, who beat Virginia Tech. Hell, they beat colorado who beat oklahoma. WVU lost to pitt, how does that not knock them down. Every team had bad losses, but Mizzou lost twice to a top 10 OU. WVU lost to unranked pitt. If your going to slip up, Mizzou did it against the best team of all the contenders.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

That can't be true. If it was then, Hawaii would have been playing in the title game since they had nothing but wins.

If we are looking at this as of today, shouldn't we be questioning Ohio State's place in the championship a lot more than LSU?

I think quality of the opponent comes into play, but i meant that a 49-10 win is the exact same end result as a 24-23 win. In fact, id say the 24-23 team may be more impressive as it shows they can win the close ones, as every team will have close ones. In the end though, a win is a win.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by JW

But the interesting thing was that after WVU lost, lots of people ran the numbers, and LSU is what kept coming out as #2.

Actually, most of the computers didnt. I know some even had VT #1. Now the humans all put them #2, but your statement was a little misleading.

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

You are correct.

They are also 4-0 is BCS games played in New Orleans.

What would really be interesting (and perhaps we'll get to see it someday) would be to see them play a team like 2004/2005/2006/2007 USC at the Rose Bowl or a team like 1984/1988/1989/1992 Miami at the Orange Bowl.

I think at this point there are probably a lot of LSU fans that would like to see that as well. Both because it would give the LSU fans and team a chance to go somewhere new, and because it would represent a new and different challenge.

4 Sugar Bowls or quasi Sugar Bowl in 7 years (4 of the last 6 years New Orleans has had bowls) is a bit much. Again, the 09 season is the best bet for LSU making a run at a NC away from home.

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by astrosfan64

Florida last year would stomp this team.
Texas or USC from 2 years ago would stomp this team.
USC from 3 years ago would stomp this team.

The LSU BCS champ and USC AP Champ year, both had better records and USC would of stomped LSU. The first LSU Champ team, I think was clearly better. They definately had better coaching.


All other BCS champions have been undefeated.

No, I didn't ask why you think that.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

And by that logic Missouri beat arkansas, who beat LSU. Or they beat illinois, who beat Ohio State. Or they beat Kansas, who beat Virginia Tech. Hell, they beat colorado who beat oklahoma. WVU lost to pitt, how does that not knock them down. Every team had bad losses, but Mizzou lost twice to a top 10 OU. WVU lost to unranked pitt. If your going to slip up, Mizzou did it against the best team of all the contenders.

I think a few things come to my mind here...

1) I think most people who are unbiased to the situation agree that Missouri got robbed in not getting into the BCS this year.
2) This year is a good example of why you will always end up with debate about who deserves to be #1 or who deserves to be #2 or who deserves to be in a championship game. With more and more parity, this will only continue to get worse, not better. Only a playoff can settle that (it would actually change the arguement from who deserves to be #2 to who deserves to be #8 or #16 instead though).
3) As someone who has no ties to the SEC, Big10 or Big12, I have to view LSU as the national champion, as they won the championship game. Could USC have beat them? Perhaps.. I easily think LSU was deserving of being in the championship game though, as for the majority of the season, they looked like the dominant team. If people have issues with who was in the game, argue why your team should have been there instead of Ohio St.

[oliegirl]

I'm thinking it would be a good idea to NOT decide which bowl is going to be the BCS Championship bowl until the teams are decided so that we avoid either team having home field advantage. Playing USC in the Rose Bowl or UF in the Orange Bowl would still come out with the same arguable result...home field advantage. I'm sure it will never happen b/c of logistics/advertising/etc...but in the "parallel universe" I live in, I'd like to see it.

[Dr. Sak]

Technically each school is given the same amount of ticket allotments, and the rest are given to the sponsors.

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by bsak16

Technically each school is given the same amount of ticket allotments, and the rest are given to the sponsors.

Not true, because the general public can buy some tickets in advance. The problem becomes, who buys those tickets? The fanbase of the closest powerhouse(s).

Deciding the location of the BCS game a few weeks before it happens could be a logistical nightmare for a number of reasons.

The best/easiest solution to this today or in a plus 1, plus 3, or 8 team playoff, just put in a northern or northeastern dome stadium as part of the rotation. Ford Field perhaps?

[cartman]

Originally Posted by astrosfan64

All other BCS champions have been undefeated.

Ummm... no.

Last year, Florida had a loss, and in 2003 LSU had a loss.

[astrosfan64]

Originally Posted by cartman

Ummm... no.

Last year, Florida had a loss, and in 2003 LSU had a loss.

I mentioned those two teams seperately. I meant that all other BCS champions other then those two have been undefeated.

Those two/three teams. USC/LSU the one year and Florida last year, still had better records then LSU did this year.

All other BCS champions have been undefeated.

[astrosfan64]

Originally Posted by MattJones4Heisman

Why do you think that most of us agree to that?

Let me try to answer this again.

All other BCS championship teams had better records then this year's LSU team. Some runner ups have had better records then this years championship team.

[MJ4H]

You are missing the point. That is why you think they are the weakest champion. I am not asking why you think that. I am asking why you think the rest of us can agree with what you think. I, for one, do not think that you can judge a team based on their records in different seasons. Hell, it is flawed enough comparing records from the same season.

[timmynausea]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

And by that logic Missouri beat arkansas, who beat LSU. Or they beat illinois, who beat Ohio State. Or they beat Kansas, who beat Virginia Tech. Hell, they beat colorado who beat oklahoma. WVU lost to pitt, how does that not knock them down. Every team had bad losses, but Mizzou lost twice to a top 10 OU. WVU lost to unranked pitt. If your going to slip up, Mizzou did it against the best team of all the contenders.

My point was that going into the title game, why would you put Missouri ahead of Oklahoma? Nobody would. Because you tried to use Kansas' win over VT to strengthen your case, I pointed out that West Virginia beat Oklahoma pretty convincingly in the Fiesta, which hurts Missouri's case as much or more than the KU win helped.