In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 1326
Online now 1403 Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)
We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.
Where the madness isn't just in March.
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
They had a shot. They lost to an unranked team. Had they focused and won that game they would have been in. Oklahoma State is the one that held their fate in their hands and they dropped the ball. Alabama took advantage of it with a much better loss to the eventual runner ups.
Honestly I think this post is an indictment on our society. We all think we deserve something; I deserve a vacation or a promotion that someone else got. Not a flame on you, but there really has been a shift in society where the mindset is that we are entitled to certain things (I am not exempt from this statement). IMO OSU didn't deserve a shot just like we didn't deserve a shot. I feel like both of us had a great year and we obviously were the teams that should have been in the discussion to play LSU, but when we lost a game we each lost the right to feel like we deserved anything.
So what is this mythical football sense ? Is it the same mythical sense that said Boise couldn't beat teams like Oklahoma....Virginia Tech....Georgia ? Because honestly you have no clue how a team will perform against another unless they play each other. They may expose a weakness no other team could. On message boards people quote "Football sense" a lot... Yet they tend to not explain what it is. Alabama or LSU would have had a heck of a game against Oklahoma St this past season. Neither team would have cake walked them. You saying that doesn't make it true.
At least admit they got screwed to some degree by the system in place. Be unbiased and say it. Alabama won the BCS title. No one is going to take it from them. You can admit it and it won't take that trophy away. At least say they got lucky and Oklahoma St got left out when they had a legitimate argument to be there. Either way this board is being slow and I have hit send on this 4 times now. Good Night.
Exactly. The only team that "deserved" a shot was Auburn in 04. That's the only team that didn't fail once an still got put out. They didn't leave anything up to speculation and judgement. Alabama and OSU both did and Alabama came out on top. Tough break for OSU. It will be a tough break for Alabama if it happens to us. It's the system we have and one poster isn't going to change who the majority of the country thinks is the true National Champion.
So did Alabama against LSU twice. Both teams lost a game. You can't make that argument against them and then say Alabama gets a pass. That is bias.
Not at all. way off course with this comment. We are talking about sports and what is fair to everyone who competes not society. The NCAA has a tournament in every major sport but football. Every football league but the NCAA Div.1 has a playoff. We are not talking about society here we are talking about athletic competition. Things are decided on a field... But the BCS scenario hinders that from happening in its current state considering most games played are regional and you only get 2 teams a season on a national level that get a shot at the title. It is unfair on more than one level and has nothing to do with society or its mindset.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by SignalBama 2 years ago
Is it bias that says Alabama had a much better loss than OSU? Thats what put us in the game. If OSU lost to Oklahoma or a good Texas team your point would be valid. It would be like me saying Alabama should have made it in if we lost to Vanderbilt. That argument simply wouldn't hold water.
How is he way off course with his opinion? Who died and made you the end all be all of what comments and opinions are on or off course? You clearly have the opinion that you're the smartest guy in the room.
Oklahoma St had better wins than Alabama (Pre-BCS title game). See what happens there ? Both teams have a case. The current system of the BCS hinders both teams from getting a shot at the title. Stop trying to validate what Alabama did win. We have the trophy and no one is taking it away. Doesn't change the fact that Oklahoma St had a case and the system in place hindered them.
This post was edited by SignalBama 2 years ago
I appreciate you being man enough to own up to the fact that the computers were not the reason that Bama got in over OSU. I totally agree with you that we need another system and as long as we remain in the curent system there needs to be transparency within it.
What ? I meant in regards to NCAA division 1 football. You can't compare that to society. In society people who complain have a chance to better their lives. In NCAA division 1 football you do not have the same opportunities that are afforded teams in other leagues. Heck you are at the mercy of voters and opinions. You have to finish 1 or 2 or you have no chance of getting an opportunity. I think you are taking things a bit too personally. Society and NCAA division 1 football is not a good "Comparison". One is hindered by its system... The other is only hindered by what choices one makes.
The only reason that OSU was percieved to have better wins was because the Big 12 SOSs was grossly over-rated due to the fact that they played a round robin and not in a league with devisions and a championship. The same thing had taken place in the Pac 10 the previous 10 years.
Did OSU have an opportunity to defeat ISU? And if they did would they have been in the championship game?
Guys..I am not doing this thread to bash Alabama. I have no allegiance to Okie lite, and am not making any case on the field for why one team deserved it over another. The only thing I said in relation to Alabama, is the suspicious activity regarding a couple of computer programs, where those programmers refuse to discuss or divulge how they came to their conclusions. It is just odd that a team with a much higher SOS, from a tougher conference, with the same record, should be ranked below another team. If that other teams name was Alabama, or Michigan or Boise State or whatever. Its the BCS and the system put in play that I am discussing, and how easy it is to manipulate, because there is zero accountability or transparency to it.
I dont think the powers that be at the BCS were manipulating the numbers because they favor Alabama. I think they did it, because they feared a situation where the number two team in the human polls lost, while the number one team in those same polls won, thereby creating another split title. It just happened that it was Alabama in that situation, and I certainly dont blame or accuse them of any wrong doing.
The BCS rankings took it up the butt years ago.
Anyone old enough to remember the 2000 season care explain how this final ranking made any damn sense?
Either this website doesn't exist or is not currently available.
Well now we are getting into an entirely different subject. The same thing could be said about Alabama, having a chance to beat the same LSU team they would face in the title game, at home, and failing there.
We can get into how unfair that entire situation was, not only to Okie lite, but also to LSU, but thats not what I wrote this thread about.
The Big 12 backed it up in bowl games this past season as well going 6-2. They had the better SOS this past season. Again competition is on the field not in what you "Think". On the field they performed well in bowl games. I can honestly say based on the schedules each team played in that conference they had a better SOS. The east is holding back the SEC at the moment.
That post was not directed at you. I posted that I agree with the overall point of your OP even if some of the facts were slightly off.
Did Alabama have the opportunity to beat LSU at home ? How did they receive a mulligan for that and not OSU for losing on the road in OT ? If your argument is based around the single concept that OSU had a chance if they went undefeated.... Why wasn't Alabama held to the same standards with a weaker overall schedule ? I am an Alabama fan... I live and breathe Alabama football... But the system in place rewarded one team while hindering another and by your argument one team was getting held to a different standard than the other.
"It doesn't matter if you played a weaker schedule you lost to number 1 at home in OT. So anyone else must go undefeated to get in over you now even if their resume of overall wins is better."
Now both teams had a case this past season. Both teams with the way things worked out still deserved an opportunity to play for the title. Would have been great seeing Alabama and Okie St playing a game on the field to decide that wouldn't it ? It would erase the question. I was responding in regards to the OP. The system in place hindered that from happening. It only allowed 2 teams that "Voters" chose to have an opportunity. It is corrupt and comes down to opinion. Until we have a system that everyone understands and everyone is afforded the same opportunities across the board for a championship... Then it will always be somewhat corrupt and debatable.
Of course its biased. Its making a value judgement based solely on opinion.
Making rankings based on the perception on "bad" losses is a logical fallacy. Any team can lose.....Alabama lost as well, but because people made the assumption that it was a good loss....despite being at home, they were given a pass that Okie Lite did not receive.
When you try to make rankings based on how you perceive those losses, rather than strictly on who a team beats, you then have to make that leap in faith that "Oh Alabama would have won that game.at Iowa State" despite there being no evidence to support that. Plenty of opinion, but no evidence. Alabama did not play Iowa State. Alabama did not play any teams that played Iowa State (I think) I believe the closest they came was playing Arkansas, who struggled big time with TAMU........who beat Iowa State. But when you have to make that many assumptions regarding rankings, its all about bias, and little to do with results on the field.
I understand what you're saying but to me it is more about the elite teams you play. OSU played nobody on the level of LSU or Arky (KSU was probably their biggest win). To me UA was so dominant last year that you could have lined up 50 8-4/9-3 teams and we would have beaten them all. We could have played ISU 100x and I don't think we would have found a way to lose to them.
So post a complete description on how to fix it without human factors involved. A tournament just isn't going to do that. Someone is goin to get left out that feels like they deserved a shot. Once that happens, all fairness in any system goes out the window. The NFL is the only league where this works and their system can not be applied to college football because of the amount of teams involved.
Maybe, but that is not the debate here. The debate is the system and how it is inconsistent. For years the people who defended this system said "The regular season means everything". Well last year it didn't mean anything. OSU played a tougher overall schedule they lost a game in OT by 3 on the road. Alabama lost head-to-head to LSU at home by 3 in OT. Now Oklahoma St had the worse Loss but more quality wins. Therefor It showed that the results of the regular season did not determine a clear number 1 and number 2 team. It came down to the decision of human voters for Alabama to hold on over what the computers said. Don't get me wrong I think Alabama was the better of the 2 teams. I am not making a case that Okie St was better. But they had as much claim to a shot at the title as Alabama. We as fans missed a great possible game between those 2 teams because of the current system.
In any tournament situation, the teams that get left out do not have a legitimate argument, because those teams had their destiny in their own hands at the beginning of the season.
Who cares if some team that cant win its conference is left out? Its the whole "The regular season means something in college football" thing.
Its not like anyone ever loses a lot of sleep because of number 66 in college basketball gets left out. Sure for a day or so there is a lot of "Oh they so deserved it over team B" crap". But the fact of the matter is, if you want to avoid getting left out, win your conference, and dont let it fall into others hands.
We did have a chance to beat LSU and we didn't. That is why we didn't "deserve" to be in the championship. When you lose, you give up the right to feel screwed or that you "deserve" anything, and you take what the voters give you. I agree that we can do better and the system should be modified, but I am also aware that people have been getting screwed since the advent of the sport and this is the best system we have ever had. I like the idea of a plus one and could even get on board with a 8 team playoff although I think that is too many. Although College FB has its obvious flaws I honestly believe that this system is better than the playoff in the NFL. I can't think of a single team in the last 20 years that I feel was as bad of a champion as the NYG in '07 or this past year.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports