Too soon to discuss which SEC team will win the BCS Championship for '12 season?

[WinterBorn]

Ok, so spring practice hasn't started, and the season is still over 6 months away....


LSU is going to be a powerhouse again and might have a good QB.

Bama lost some serious talent, but the cupboards are far from bare.

Arkansas will have their RB back and one of the best QBs around.

GA is looking strong.


Who will be the next SEC team to take home the crystal football?

 

[WinterBorn]

Ok, I listed Arkansas as a potential championship team. They have plenty of talent and experience returning. They have a top level QB. They have one of the better RBs in the league this year. And finally, they have a tougher defense.


But what about a head coach?? Bobby Petrino has been suspended indefinitally because of his dalliances with an employee?

OOPS!!

 

[Jon]

Ok, I listed Arkansas as a potential championship team. They have plenty of talent and experience returning. They have a top level QB. They have one of the better RBs in the league this year. And finally, they have a tougher defense.


But what about a head coach?? Bobby Petrino has been suspended indefinitally because of his dalliances with an employee?

OOPS!!

I wouldn't count us out just yet. Losing Bobby was a major blow to our team, but with the assistant coaches calling the plays, I don't think we lose much on the field. John L. Smith as an interim coach was a great move to keep players motivated and the staff together. I'm hoping we pull an Ohio State and hire a big name head coach before 2012 is up so he can start recruiting and putting together his staff.

 

[ginscpy]

Some recent crap BCS "championship games" : Alabama -Texas, Alabama-LSU.

Tide won both.

awfull teams/awfull games

 

[WinterBorn]

Some recent crap BCS "championship games" : Alabama -Texas, Alabama-LSU.

Tide won both.

awfull teams/awfull games

Both games had the two best teams in the nation playing for the BCS Championship. Your opinions are your own. I have shown, several times, the reasons I disagree.

 

[WinterBorn]

Ok, I listed Arkansas as a potential championship team. They have plenty of talent and experience returning. They have a top level QB. They have one of the better RBs in the league this year. And finally, they have a tougher defense.


But what about a head coach?? Bobby Petrino has been suspended indefinitally because of his dalliances with an employee?

OOPS!!

I wouldn't count us out just yet. Losing Bobby was a major blow to our team, but with the assistant coaches calling the plays, I don't think we lose much on the field. John L. Smith as an interim coach was a great move to keep players motivated and the staff together. I'm hoping we pull an Ohio State and hire a big name head coach before 2012 is up so he can start recruiting and putting together his staff.

I agree that the Hawgs have the talent. I can see them running the table and dismantling whoever they play for the BCS Championship.

The biggest thing is the defense looks tougher this year. That will be a big deal.

 

[ginscpy]

The BCS has good lawyers.............................

everybody hates the thing

wants a March Madness/NFL style no BS playoff system (SIXTEEN TEAMS- not 8 or 4)

 

[WinterBorn]

The BCS has good lawyers.............................

everybody hates the thing

wants a March Madness/NFL style no BS playoff system (SIXTEEN TEAMS- not 8 or 4)

The BCS system is a joke. But the idea of putting the two best teams in one championship game is a good one. It just needs to be determined on the field.

But stick with your post. Who would you have had play in the two championship games you mentioned? You obviously didn't like Alabama/Texas or Alabama/LSU. If those teams were so awful, who should have been in the 2009 & 2011 BCS Championship games?

 

[ginscpy]

The BCS has good lawyers.............................

everybody hates the thing

wants a March Madness/NFL style no BS playoff system (SIXTEEN TEAMS- not 8 or 4)

The BCS system is a joke. But the idea of putting the two best teams in one championship game is a good one. It just needs to be determined on the field.

But stick with your post. Who would you have had play in the two championship games you mentioned? You obviously didn't like Alabama/Texas or Alabama/LSU. If those teams were so awful, who should have been in the 2009 & 2011 BCS Championship games?

In 2011 - I would have put Okla St or Stanford over LSU. (Butthat would have been impossible - since LSU beat Bama earlier in the season. So you can't shut LSU out.Or maybe even Oregon -even though they lost at LSU.

Very few teams get 2nd chances like Bama did against LSU in 2011 to win theNC.

Sure I could have come up with somebody better than Texas in 2009 - can't recall the top teams back then.

And you guys were lucky to get even a split NC before the BCS back in 1978 with USC - when SC beat you guys handily at your place.

 

[WinterBorn]

The BCS has good lawyers.............................

everybody hates the thing

wants a March Madness/NFL style no BS playoff system (SIXTEEN TEAMS- not 8 or 4)

The BCS system is a joke. But the idea of putting the two best teams in one championship game is a good one. It just needs to be determined on the field.

But stick with your post. Who would you have had play in the two championship games you mentioned? You obviously didn't like Alabama/Texas or Alabama/LSU. If those teams were so awful, who should have been in the 2009 & 2011 BCS Championship games?

In 2011 - I would have put Okla St or Stanford over LSU. (Butthat would have been impossible - since LSU beat Bama earlier in the season. So you can't shut LSU out.Or maybe even Oregon -even though they lost at LSU.

Very few teams get 2nd chances like Bama did against LSU in 2011 to win theNC.

Sure I could have come up with somebody better than Texas in 2009 - can't recall the top teams back then.

And you guys were lucky to get even a split NC before the BCS back in 1979 with USC - when SC beat you guys handily at your place.

OK St or Stanford over LSU??? WTH? In the regular season LSU demolished everyone on their schedule except Alabama. They humiliated Oregon on a neutral field 40-27. They handed West VA their worst loss pf the season at 47-21. 9 of the 14 teams they played (from start to bowl game) were ranked at the time of the game. LSU whipped the Arkansas Razorbacks like they were a redheaded stepchild. Neither of the teams you mentioned were even close to being better. Plus, they had both lost a game previously that year. One lost to a team that LSU humiliated, and the other lost to an unranked nobody team.

 

[WinterBorn]

The BCS has good lawyers.............................

everybody hates the thing

wants a March Madness/NFL style no BS playoff system (SIXTEEN TEAMS- not 8 or 4)

The BCS system is a joke. But the idea of putting the two best teams in one championship game is a good one. It just needs to be determined on the field.

But stick with your post. Who would you have had play in the two championship games you mentioned? You obviously didn't like Alabama/Texas or Alabama/LSU. If those teams were so awful, who should have been in the 2009 & 2011 BCS Championship games?

And you guys were lucky to get even a split NC before the BCS back in 1978 with USC - when SC beat you guys handily at your place.

And this is relevant to this topic how?? This penchant you have to diving into history books is nonsense. If you want to discuss who in the SEC will win the BCS Championship, then step up. If you think someone outside the SEC will finally be able to do it, by all means throw a name out there.

But who won or didn't win in 1978 is totally irrelevant and only shows your bias and inability to converse on the current topic.

 

[ginscpy]

The BCS system is a joke. But the idea of putting the two best teams in one championship game is a good one. It just needs to be determined on the field.

But stick with your post. Who would you have had play in the two championship games you mentioned? You obviously didn't like Alabama/Texas or Alabama/LSU. If those teams were so awful, who should have been in the 2009 & 2011 BCS Championship games?

In 2011 - I would have put Okla St or Stanford over LSU. (Butthat would have been impossible - since LSU beat Bama earlier in the season. So you can't shut LSU out.Or maybe even Oregon -even though they lost at LSU.

Very few teams get 2nd chances like Bama did against LSU in 2011 to win theNC.

Sure I could have come up with somebody better than Texas in 2009 - can't recall the top teams back then.

And you guys were lucky to get even a split NC before the BCS back in 1979 with USC - when SC beat you guys handily at your place.

OK St or Stanford over LSU??? WTH? In the regular season LSU demolished everyone on their schedule except Alabama. They humiliated Oregon on a neutral field 40-27. They handed West VA their worst loss pf the season at 47-21. 9 of the 14 teams they played (from start to bowl game) were ranked at the time of the game. LSU whipped the Arkansas Razorbacks like they were a redheaded stepchild. Neither of the teams you mentioned were even close to being better. Plus, they had both lost a game previously that year. One lost to a team that LSU humiliated, and the other lost to an unranked nobody team.

I don't like the Ducks either. Their multiple Nike uniforms, their crimminality etc (story about how 40-60% of theplayers use marijuana.) I was rooting forAuburn and LSU when they played. (neitherwere neutral games - both in the South) They got exposed. But still a scary explosive team.

The LSU teams I watched were Neanthrethal
despite what you say how great they are. Came from behind in one gamein the secondhalf when they were way behind. (think against Georgia who were blowingthem out excepttheirWRdropped a TD pass) Mostly defense and special teams.

Didnt get a single first down in the BCS champ gameuntil the3rdquarter. Pathetic.

 

[WinterBorn]

In 2011 - I would have put Okla St or Stanford over LSU. (Butthat would have been impossible - since LSU beat Bama earlier in the season. So you can't shut LSU out.Or maybe even Oregon -even though they lost at LSU.

Very few teams get 2nd chances like Bama did against LSU in 2011 to win theNC.

Sure I could have come up with somebody better than Texas in 2009 - can't recall the top teams back then.

And you guys were lucky to get even a split NC before the BCS back in 1979 with USC - when SC beat you guys handily at your place.

OK St or Stanford over LSU??? WTH? In the regular season LSU demolished everyone on their schedule except Alabama. They humiliated Oregon on a neutral field 40-27. They handed West VA their worst loss pf the season at 47-21. 9 of the 14 teams they played (from start to bowl game) were ranked at the time of the game. LSU whipped the Arkansas Razorbacks like they were a redheaded stepchild. Neither of the teams you mentioned were even close to being better. Plus, they had both lost a game previously that year. One lost to a team that LSU humiliated, and the other lost to an unranked nobody team.

I don't like the Ducks either. Their multiple Nike uniforms, their crimminality etc (story about how 40-60% of theplayers use marijuana.) I was rooting forAuburn and LSU when they played. (neitherwere neutral games - both in the South) They got exposed. But still a scary explosive team.

The LSU teams I watched were Neanthrethal
despite what you say how great they are. Came from behind in one gamein the secondhalf when they were way behind. Mostly defense and special teams.

Didnt get a single first down in the BCS champ gameuntil the3rdquarter. Pathetic.

They were behind at halftime against Georgia. But the final score was 42-10. That is hardly all special teams and defense. If you hang 42 points on a ranked team and its kinda hard to say its all special teams and defense. The offense you maligned scored 3 rushing TDs and passed for another in the 2nd half.

Boise State was supposed to be a hotshot offensive team, and they only scored 35 points against GA. But LSU's 42 points makes them a Neanderthal-like team?

All special teams and defense? You say that like it makes them somehow less? Their offense was competent and their special teams and defense were stellar! That is what wins games.

In the final AP poll for the 2011 season, there are 5 ranked teams that LSU played. Of course Bama is in the #1 slot. But the #4, #5, #17 and #19 slots are also teams that played LSU. The difference? In those 4 games LSU scored 170 points while their opponents only scored 75. The two teams in the top 10?? Ranked #4 and #5?? LSU beat them by combined scored of 81 to 44. That is scoring alomst twice as many points as those top 5 opponents.

But they didn't deserve to be there?? LMAO!!


By comparison, one of the teams YOU think should have been there was OK State. 4 teams they played were in the final AP poll top 25. But only one was in the top 10 (compared to 3 with LSU). OK State had the #7, #13, #15, and #16 teams on their schedule and managed to beat them all. But they lost to a team that didn't even have a winning record for the season.

Sorry, but if you lose to a team that finishes the year at 6-7, you don't get to play for the big trophy.


And Stanford??? LMAO!! Stanford only played 3 teams that were in the top 25 of the final AP poll. And they LOST TO TWO OF THEM!! But you claim they should have been in the NC game instead of LSU??

 

[ginscpy]

Even if you are mostly correct on the technicalities of who should have been in the BCS championship game in the 2011 season - the public doesn't buy into it. The first Bama-LSU game was terrible (Bama lost because they coulnt make FGs) and the rematch was worse -the pits.

Probably even die-hard SEC fans would prefer a playoff.

Even the old bowl system was better than the BCS. Because the voters weren't locked into 2 teams. They just voted for the team they thought was the best after the bowl games.

The public wants a no-bs playoff system (not 2 or 4 teams -could live with 8 - but would prefer 16 teams)

 

[WinterBorn]

Even if you are mostly correct on the technicalities of who should have been in the BCS championship game in the 2011 season - the public doesn't buy into it. The first Bama-LSU game was terrible (Bama lost because they coulnt make FGs) and the rematch was worse -the pits.

Probably even die-hard SEC fans.

Even the old bowl system was better than the BCS.

The public wants a no-bs playoff system (not 2 or 4 teams -could live with 8 - but would prefer 16 teams)

Even if?? LMAO! You claimed that the teams in the game were awful. You claimed that OK State and Stanford should have been there. Now that I have blown your argument out of the water you want to start with this??

Hell yes we want a playoff. You make it sound like I am against it. I am all for a playoff system. In fact, only one NCAA conference commissioner has tried to formally submit a playoff system to be used for college football. Know which one?? Think it was the PAC-12? The Big-10?? The '78 Notre Dame team?? No, it was the SEC.

And yeah, I get that you don't like defensive football. You want scores that resemble basketball scores. You want lots of passing and 6 touchdowns per quarter, and trick plays and all the other drivel.

But guess what! That shit doen't stand up against a tough, solid defense. Maybe that is why the SEC has won the BCS Championship 8 times (including 6 in a row).

Now, if you look back at all the scoring stats I showed you for LSU. They scored 170 points against ranked teams. They scored 81 points against 2 teams that finished in the TOP 5.

And how many points did LSU score against Alabama???

And how many shutouts have ever happened in the BCS Championship Game???

Or even better, how many shutouts have ever happened in any BCS bowl game??

Thats right, Alabama did what no other team has ever done in the BCS bowl games. And they shutout the #1 team in the country. They shutout a team that averaged 38 points a game. And they did it in that team's back yard.

No, Bama didn't score a lotta points. Yep, we kicked mostly field goals.

But, (and this is REALLY important so you might wanna pay attention) the winner of a football game is the one with the most points. You don't have to get a certain number of points. Just more than your opponent. So if your defense shuts them down, you don't NEED to score 50 points. Hell, Stanford scored 38 against Oregon and 30 against OK State. I'm sure you think that was better. But Stanford LOST those games, because their defense couldn't stop the other OK ST from scoring 41 and Oregon from scoring 53! So if you have the hottest QB and score a buncha points and LOSE, who in their right mind would claim they were better??

And I am sure plenty of people whined that there wasn't enough scoring. In fact, if you could get them to call in a vote, they would probably have ranked LSU and Bama in the bottom of the polls. But this isn't American Idol. What counts is what happens on the field. And who you beat and who you lose to is what counts to get you in the big game. (You know, the BIG GAME?? The one Notre Dame hasn't won since 1988?? Yep, back when Reagan was president, The Wonder Years won a Grammy, and the cost of a first class stamp was 22 cents)


The teams were awful because you dislike them. It is that simple. Maybe you want some high flying circus of a game. But when it comes down to playing it on the field, there is a reason strong defenses win championships.