Is this the worst title game ever?

[howdydodat]

Osu should get half of the NC split it, forget Alabama. Glad I boycotted game

A team that lost to Iowa State should get half the championship?

Undefeated Auburn who had like the best defense in the country didn't even get half a championship. A team that lose to Iowa State certainly shouldn't. Plus, did you watch the Stanford game? Stanford had them beat if their kicker didn't miss two chip shots at the end of the fourth and in overtime. Oklahoma State was beyond lucky to win that game.

 

[howdydodat]

I dont know this is the game I would love to see. LSU and ALA have not seen on offense like OSU.

Oregon? If we're to assume Oklahoma State us the best offense, how much closer can you get? LSU crushed Oregon. Oregon's last score was a garbage touchdown with like 2 minutes left. LSU handled that offense easily. Just like Auburn who didn't even have that great of a defense in the SEC

 

[kuhntz]

You're really reaching now.

Not sure he's really reaching when it is a fact. Just sayin.

 

[hawkfan340]

Not sure he's really reaching when it is a fact. Just sayin.

If I were to ask you who won the NC in 2011, would you say Auburn?

 

[hawkfan340]

So what was Oklahoma and Oregon's excuse? They averaged like 50-60 points in the Big 12 and Pac 10. They ended up scoring 14 and 19 against Florida and Auburn.

It has nothing to do with SEC playing bad offense... top offenses in other conferences aren't able to do anything against it either. LSU ran right over Oregon's offense. Oregon went on to score 45 against Wisconsin and pretty much everyone they faced in the Pac 12. That's just how it is

I had a few beers in me last night as well, but I don't think anyone knows what you're talking about. Neither Oklahoma or Oregon played Florida or Auburn this year. If you're talking about other years, the B12 and Pac10 weren't as good in those years as the B12 was this year. And the SEC is not as good this year, as it was in those years.


Also, Oregon's offense has traditionally struggled to start the year and gotten much better when they get everything in sync. That's part of the difficulty of running the 'blur' offense, it relies heavily on communication and takes a certain amount of time for things to gel. LSU played well in the opening game but that doesn't mean they'd be able to do the same come bowl season.

Plus we're talking OKST playing for the BCS, not Oregon.

 

[racerhawk]

So what was Oklahoma and Oregon's excuse? They averaged like 50-60 points in the Big 12 and Pac 10. They ended up scoring 14 and 19 against Florida and Auburn.

It has nothing to do with SEC playing bad offense... top offenses in other conferences aren't able to do anything against it either. LSU ran right over Oregon's offense. Oregon went on to score 45 against Wisconsin and pretty much everyone they faced in the Pac 12. That's just how it is

I would've like to have seen an end of the year Oregon team play LSU.

It couldn't happen because Oregon lost to USC. Of course, Oregon lost to LSU, but then again, so did Alabama.

Alabama's defense was amazing, and LSU's offense was horrible.

LSU crossed the midfield stripe just once, and ended that drive back on their own side of the field. This wasn't a championship game. If LSU could've scored negative points, they would've. Bad, bad BCS game (let alone a mythical championship game).

Hopefully, we won't have to hear about the Honey Badger for awhile.

 

[hawkfarmer]

I haven't read every post but I'm going to vent.

All this showed to me is that the regular season doesn't matter if you are in the SEC. Bama loses head to head to LSU, doesn't win division or even play in conference champ game. I honestly don't know how LSU won that game but they did. on that day LSU was better, or Bama was the worst team, however you want to look at it.

OSU lost 1 game that they shouldn't have but had a great season, and I would have loved to see them play either of the teams that played last night.

Now, the BCS just said, don't worry bama, just cause you lost you get a second shot.

To me this was not fair to LSU, who won the first match up, or OSU.

This game was dumb and that is why I did not watch it.

 

[1977Hawkeye]

If I were to ask you who won the NC in 2011, would you say Auburn?

Auburn won the 2011 NC, like it or not. If you're referring to the 2010 season (2011 title game).

This year's game was one of the biggest yawners I have seen in a while. Ohio State got blown out in 2006 & 2007's title games, but at least there was some offense in those games so they were more watchable.

 

[1977Hawkeye]

I haven't read every post but I'm going to vent.

All this showed to me is that the regular season doesn't matter if you are in the SEC. Bama loses head to head to LSU, doesn't win division or even play in conference champ game. I honestly don't know how LSU won that game but they did. on that day LSU was better, or Bama was the worst team, however you want to look at it.

OSU lost 1 game that they shouldn't have but had a great season, and I would have loved to see them play either of the teams that played last night.

Now, the BCS just said, don't worry bama, just cause you lost you get a second shot.

To me this was not fair to LSU, who won the first match up, or OSU.

This game was dumb and that is why I did not watch it.

Well, OSU lost later in the season than Alabama did.. The way college football is set up since it's based on the polls, is that the team who loses last gets hosed.

That said, I'm convinced that this day and age, any team from the SEC will automatically get the nod over any other team from any other conference who has the same record. The voters can see to it. You don't have to be more deserving than everyone else - you just have to be from the SEC.

 

[Bohawk]

Well, OSU lost later in the season than Alabama did.. The way college football is set up since it's based on the polls, is that the team who loses last gets hosed.

That said, I'm convinced that this day and age, any team from the SEC will automatically get the nod over any other team from any other conference who has the same record. The voters can see to it. You don't have to be more deserving than everyone else - you just have to be from the SEC.

This won't happen when a rule is in place that requires the team to win their conference in order to compete in the NC.

I don't need big sweeping changes. I don't even need a +1. Just put this change in there and I'm ok. Personally, give me the old system above the current one. It was just as messed up and at least guaranteed me a good ol fashioned Rose Bowl

 

[1977Hawkeye]

This won't happen when a rule is in place that requires the team to win their conference in order to compete in the NC.

I don't need big sweeping changes. I don't even need a +1. Just put this change in there and I'm ok. Personally, give me the old system above the current one. It was just as messed up and at least guaranteed me a good ol fashioned Rose Bowl

Agree wholeheartedly. I wouldn't mind a "conference champion" rule when determining the title game. That would ensure two different conferences in the title game, and the only way you'd have a rematch was if the two teams played each other in the non-conference. Plus, the BCS couldn't load up the title game with SEC teams (or any other conference) just because that conference is perceived as better than the others.

Agree also on the old system - I thought it worked just as well or better and would be fine if they scrapped the BCS and went back to that.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the BCS was created to have a clear-cut #1 vs #2 matchup to determine a sole national champion, rather than having split championships in the event of two undefeated teams not playing each other (like Michigan/Nebraska in 1997).

As it turns out, haven't we had a split national title or two since the inception of the BCS anyway? I was pretty sure USC was awared a share of the national title after the 2003 season - the year LSU beat OK in the title game. Kind of defeats the purpose of the BCS, doesn't it?

 

[WhiteThunder]

I feel sorry for anyone who wasted their time watching this travesty.

 

[DwayneTwill]

As it turns out, haven't we had a split national title or two since the inception of the BCS anyway? I was pretty sure USC was awared a share of the national title after the 2003 season - the year LSU beat OK in the title game. Kind of defeats the purpose of the BCS, doesn't it?

Not really. The BCS has worked. It can't stop the AP from voting whoever they want as national champions. The AP could do the same thing after a playoff.