College Football 2011

Originally posted by no1marauder
That they are the two best teams is just an assertion. By every measure, Oklahoma State played a tougher schedule. The computers gave OK St. the nod. Alabama is playing for the championship only because a lot of people are as stupid as you and QQ. Get over that.

Why is it that anyone who takes an adverse position to your in anything is considered stupid?

You aren't the sharpest tack in the pack, you just spout off like you are.

I made this projection over a month ago that this would happen.
You came up with a bunch of reasons that it wouldn't or might not happen.
Now that it has happened, you get off on your "No1 is God" podium and preach to the
crowd why we are all stupid and you have a better way.

Got news for you chief....your way is NOT the better way.
That is why they are NOT using it.
You can't get a grip that you can be WRONG!!!!
You are WRONG....and fairly often.
You do get a fair share correct as well.
You are passionate in your arguments, even when you are deluded.

Why don't you climb down off of your soapbox and give it a rest? Please.

And, by the way, I am not stupid, not by a long shot.

Originally posted by Eladar
What I don't get is why there is no mention of the plane crash that killed the OSU women's basketball coaches. It happened very close to game time and I'm sure it was a major distraction for the football team, especially the coaches.

You'd think that it would be taken into consideration with the loss, but since OSU didn't play the card, I never saw it mentioned by anyone else either.

Yes it was mentioned, in this thread by me.
I said that it was quite strange that the coaches died the same weekend that Oklahoma
State lost their football game.
I also said that Alabama fell more spots in the polls for losing to #1 LSU than
Oklahoma State did losing to unranked Iowa State.
I said the voter sympathy to the second tragedy OSU experienced had something to do with it.
Historically, teams that lose late in the season suffer a far worse fate than those who lose early.
This was not the case for OSU.

Originally posted by shortcircuit
Why is it that anyone who takes an adverse position to your in anything is considered stupid?

You aren't the sharpest tack in the pack, you just spout off like you are.

I made this projection over a month ago that this would happen.
You came up with a bunch of reasons that it wouldn't or might not happen.
Now that it has happened, you get off on ...[text shortened]... apbox and give it a rest? Please.

And, by the way, I am not stupid, not by a long shot.

You're a Texas fan who hates Oklahoma teams. What a surprise you're happy OK St. got screwed.

Originally posted by no1marauder
How is that logical? Just because they lost at home to the best team means they are automatically the second best team? On what basis? They have one other win against a Top 20 team in the BCS while Oklahoma State has beaten 3 teams in the Top 14!

If Oklahoma State is that good, why didn't they beat Iowa State?
Had they done that, the rest would have been academic.
They lost the game to an inferior team.
Alabama lost their game to a slightly superior team.
Alabama took care of their business in EVERY other game.

You have said, if a team runs the table they deserve it.
They didn't run the table....only LSU did.
LSU is clearly #1.
Alabama came the closest to beating LSU, losing by 3 in overtime. By all rights,
Alabama should have won the game, but we won't argue about that now.

Originally posted by no1marauder
You're a Texas fan who hates Oklahoma teams. What a surprise you're happy OK St. got screwed.

Blow that out of your head.

I do not have a thing against Oklahoma State.
I hate OU and tamu. period.

You, of all people should realize that I am a staunch Big 12 supporter because of Texas.
I would much rather have a Big 12 team in the title game than two SEC teams.

But, I am not as bullheaded as you, and I recognize who the two best teams are.
This year, they got it right!! Get over it.

Originally posted by no1marauder
As I said, hanging your hat on Alabama's win over Penn State is a bit absurd; the Nittany Lions lost by 38 against Wisconsin. Some "signature" win.

If it isn't clear who should be #2, the team that hasn't had the shot already against #1 should get it for the Championship. Alabama already got to play LSU, at HOME, and couldn't beat them. Th ...[text shortened]... ....................). That would have been a joke, but we would have never have known it.

There really is nothing left to discuss. It has already been decided and we will see the two best team play. There are sixty people on the AP polll. They picked Alabama. There are 59 people in the US today poll. They picked Alabama. There is a Harris poll. It has former players, coaches, administrators, and current and former media. It picked Alabama. Even two of the six computers picked Alabama. A lot of people certainly thought there was a basis to pick Alabama.

Plus, there is plenty of logic to the decision. Alabama went to overtime against the number one team in its one loss. The team you thinks needs to be in the championship lost to a SIX loss team. Penn State was a completely different team after the Paterno scandal. It certainly is a very good win for Alabama and a better out of conference win then any win Oklahoma State has. Alabama beat Arkansas. It is a better win than any win OSU has. Finally, the fact that SEC won the last 5 national championships (and plays defense) and has signature wins over other conference like LSU beating Oregon means that if there is a doubt on who plays a tougher schedule, I would tend to believe it is the SEC team.

Originally posted by quackquack
There really is nothing left to discuss. It has already been decided and we will see the two best team play. There are sixty people on the AP polll. They picked Alabama. There are 59 people in the US today poll. They picked Alabama. There is a Harris poll. It has former players, coaches, administrators, and current and former media. It picked Alaba ...[text shortened]... if there is a doubt on who plays a tougher schedule, I would tend to believe it is the SEC team.

The SEC will win a lot of championships if all the BCS does is pick SEC teams to play in the Championship Game.

Hopefully this farce will end the BCS system once and for all.

Originally posted by shortcircuit
If Oklahoma State is that good, why didn't they beat Iowa State?
Had they done that, the rest would have been academic.
They lost the game to an inferior team.
Alabama lost their game to a slightly superior team.
Alabama took care of their business in EVERY other game.

You have said, if a team runs the table they deserve it.
They didn't run the ...[text shortened]... vertime. By all rights,
Alabama should have won the game, but we won't argue about that now.

By that logic, Ohio State and Michigan should have played for the National Championship after the 2006 season.

Originally posted by no1marauder
How is that logical? Just because they lost at home to the best team means they are automatically the second best team? On what basis? They have one other win against a Top 20 team in the BCS while Oklahoma State has beaten 3 teams in the Top 14!

Where is your logic? You're saying the BCS system is flawed and then you use rankings by the BCS to prove why it is flawed.... 🙄

Originally posted by no1marauder
By that logic, Ohio State and Michigan should have played for the National Championship after the 2006 season.

Yes, it would have been much more intertaining. 😛

Originally posted by no1marauder
By that logic, Ohio State and Michigan should have played for the National Championship after the 2006 season.

That is an idiotic remark, even for you.
Florida had a better record than Michigan at the end of the season.
Granted, they played one more game than Michigan did,
but it appears they were, in fact, the best team in the country as well.

Originally posted by shortcircuit
That is an idiotic remark, even for you.
Florida had a better record than Michigan at the end of the season.
Granted, they played one more game than Michigan did,
but it appears they were, in fact, the best team in the country as well.

It's YOUR logic, not mine.

Both had one loss, but Michigan lost a close game to the unbeaten and undisputed #1 team. Florida lost to a lesser team. Therefore, by the argument YOU have made in this thread, Michigan should have gotten the shot in the title game.

EDIT: In fact, Michigan had a better argument than Alabama does as they lost on the road while Bama was beaten at home.

Originally posted by no1marauder
It's YOUR logic, not mine.

Both had one loss, but Michigan lost a close game to the unbeaten and undisputed #1 team. Florida lost to a lesser team. Therefore, by the argument YOU have made in this thread, Michigan should have gotten the shot in the title game.

EDIT: In fact, Michigan had a better argument than Alabama does as they lost on the road while Bama was beaten at home.

Florida WON an extra game as well!!!

Originally posted by no1marauder
By that logic, Ohio State and Michigan should have played for the National Championship after the 2006 season.

Perhaps they should have when you look at out of conference schedules and location of games. Just because Florida won does not mean they belonged there.
College football is the only sport where certain regions (South and California) get virtually every good bowl game. It is the biggest inequity in college football.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Every other division in college football solves this problem so it isn't insurmountable. Obviously the bowls would have to be used in a playoff system somehow though.

Like it or not (and I don't), the BCS is a "solution" to this problem too. I'm only a casual college football fan and don't really know much about the other divisions, but I'd be very surprised if there weren't disagreements over which teams get selected there too (or is it purely based on records?).

The bowls are first and foremost about making money. The organizers will always push for being able to have big schools with large fan bases. I don't know if they would agree to any system that might force them to have small market schools.