Sure...in college football most in the top 10 could beat any other top 10 team if given enough chances. I believe this LSU team should go down as one of the best of all time....seriously. And Alabama, simply darlings of the media (and BGP).

 

Agreed on your point. Not the question though.

 

Who ya got if you had to put your money on the line along with your prognosticating skills?

#8 Kansas State

#12 Baylor

#14 Oklahoma

 

Yep, saw the game. LSU's defense and special teams won the game. Their offense struggled. I'm sure it did have quite a bit to do with Georgia's defense. Never said otherwise, only that OSU could win if LSU's offense again struggled, as OSU stands the better chance of putting up some points against LSU's defense.

 

I missed Baylor since they weren't even ranked when OSU played them. Anyway... its interesting that Baylor and Oklahoma are also the two highest ranked teams with 3 losses.

 

And if LSU scores 42 when their offense struggles....

I get tired of hearing that argument. Oklahoma State had their shot too, but they lost to Iowa State. That loss is a lot worse than Bama losing to LSU.

 

:thumb:

 

That argument is also contingent on the fact that LSU is the opponent. If the opponent were Stanford, would everybody still be calling for OK State? The bottom line is that the goal is to get the two best teams in the same game. If you believe Alabama is one of those two, the fact that LSU already beat them isn't an issue.

 

And, no, I don't believe OK State could beat Alabama. I think Alabama would win that hypothetical matchup by a minimum of 2 TD's.

You don't think Alabama won a huge advantage by losing that game? That they got to sit at home during the week conferences were playing championship games and get a do-over with a team that already beat them?

 

That only exposes how ridiculous the system is. It isn't Alabama's fault, and they should not be punished for agreeing to play by the same rules as everyone else.

LSU has to sweep Alabama to win the NC. Alabama only has to split with LSU to win it. Do we have people agree that this is fair?

 

Fair? We're talking about the BCS. Fair isn't something to be considered.

 

It is fair because LSU, Alabama, and everyone else have agreed to play by the BCS rules. The BCS rules are that they pit the two best teams against each other on a neutral field in early January and the winner is the national champion. Everyone is aware of that. The winner of the game is the BCS Champion regardless of who it is or what happened in an earlier matchup.

Who cares if they would beat Bama? All that is is simple conjecture. This isn't about who should be playing Bama.

 

What we DO KNOW is that Bama has proven they can't beat LSU. That's been shown on the field, not in the polls, or in the computers, but on the field. They shouldn't get a second chance if teams like Oklahoma State have a more impressive resume and haven't had that chance.

 

They lost by a FG in OT and that proves they cannot beat LSU?

That only exposes how ridiculous the system is. It isn't Alabama's fault, and they should not be punished for agreeing to play by the same rules as everyone else.

 

Yes, the system is to blame. I don't have anything against Alabama and it isn't their fault. I would personally enjoy watching them beat the tar out of a Michigan or Stanford or such. But the question is whether the system got it right, and I don't believe it did.

Yes, the system is to blame. I don't have anything against Alabama and it isn't their fault. I would personally enjoy watching them beat the tar out of a Michigan or Stanford or such. But the question is whether the system got it right, and I don't believe it did.

 

My understanding is that the goal of the system is to get the top two teams in the title game. Not sure how anyone can argue they got it wrong based on that premise.

 

If you want to argue that you'd rather see OK State and LSU because you already saw Alabama and LSU, that's fine. That's a personal preference and a valid one, but I don't think you can make a valid argument that the system didn't get the two best teams in the title game.

My understanding is that the goal of the system is to get the top two teams in the title game. Not sure how anyone can argue they got it wrong based on that premise.

 

If you want to argue that you'd rather see OK State and LSU because you already saw Alabama and LSU, that's fine. That's a personal preference and a valid one, but I don't think you can make a valid argument that the system didn't get the two best teams in the title game.

 

But the point is that we don't truly know who number two is. I think I said this in this thread or another one (I'm losing track :lol:), but we really have no way of judging who the number two team is because the conferences don't play one another. Everyone is guessing. Which is why I am saying they should remove the guesswork as much as possible and put OK St. in the title game, because LSU already beat Alabama.

They lost by a FG in OT and that proves they cannot beat LSU?

 

Proves they couldn't beat LSU in their own building.

Proves they couldn't beat LSU in their own building.

 

On November 5th, yes.

I get tired of hearing that argument. Oklahoma State had their shot too, but they lost to Iowa State. That loss is a lot worse than Bama losing to LSU.

BINGO!!!!!! IOWA ST for crying out loud! Not the #1 team in the country! I'd say most people don't even realize yet that Okl St is an underdog to Stanford! For what it's worty I'm betting on Bama to win it even though Les Miiles has an incredible record with that much time to prepare for somebody.

Lets go through the arguments:

 

Argument: Bama already lost to LSU.

Response: OK St lost to Iowa State who is 6-6. So OK St should go to the title game because they lost to somebody WORSE?

 

Argument: Bama got out of playing in the SEC championship by losing.

Response: The Big12 didn't even have a championship game. So [edit: Bama] has the advantage here how? They both played 12 games.

 

What we don't know is how Bama would have done in the Big 12 maybe the lose to someone in the big 12. What we don't know is how Oklahoma State does in the SEC, maybe the only game they would have lost in the SEC was to LSU. That is the whole problem with this yes we look at who teams beat or lost to, but we don't know how that other team would have done with that schedule if they switched places. It all gets back to us putting two teams together in the Championship based on opinion. That is why there needs to be an 8 team playoff with the teams who win their conference in the BCS conferences and then two at larges. This way there really is no opinion deciding a championship, the only opinion would be who are the two at larges. Which if people don't get in as an at large they only have theirselves to blame, since they would know winning their conference automatically gets them in. Right now we have a Big 12 Champion with one lost who doesn't get a chance to at least see how they could do against LSU, while a team who didn't win it's conference gets the nod even though they already lost to that team. College football crowns it champion based on opinion and not on the field and that is not right.

BINGO!!!!!! IOWA ST for crying out loud! Not the #1 team in the country! I'd say most people don't even realize yet that Okl St is an underdog to Stanford! For what it's worty I'm betting on Bama to win it even though Les Miiles has an incredible record with that much time to prepare for somebody.

 

I think Bama wins it too. Which is crazy that we will say Bama is our National Champion even though they lost at home, and happen to beat LSU at a neutral site to make them 1 and 1 against them. I would have no problem if there was a playoff system and they won their way back to playing LSU. However there is not, so it is a problem when opinions put them back in the title game. Most likely Bama is better than Okl. St., however no one will ever know that for sure because they never played it on the field. In sports opinions are proved wrong a lot, so it's a shame that the title game is determined by opinion.

Who's to say that, given the circumstances of the OK St game, that Alabama wouldn't lose at Iowa State as well?

 

Bama has played pretty well after what happened this spring. The tornado was something that directly affected each players life that was enrolled at the U of A. The plane crash while tragic dealt with the women's basketball program. I highly doubt that any football players were friends with either coach and I would imagine that many hadn't even met them. Let me say again that the incident is very tragic as any untimely death is, but I think people are putting too much emphasis on this and OK State losing a football game.