Congratulations, you've won the honor of authoring the dumbest ****ing post in this thread.

Why should a team be punished for playing in the best conference? OSU got beat by Iowa State. They wouldn't have won the SEC. No team other than LSU was going to win a conference with LSU in it.

I'm not even sure that Cassel can imagine a good throw.

may be boring, but bama and lsu are the two best teams in the country....pretty much men among boys

So I haven't heard anyone in here state why Alabama should get another chance?

You can't say OSU wouldn't beat LSU because they haven't played LSU. You know who has? Alabama

Because they're the 2nd best team in the country. That's the only thing that matters.

And here we go with the SEC is the best argument again. They didn't win their conference. the NC game should always have two conference winners in it.

OF course, the NC should be decided in a ****ing playoff too.

I guess I can't say that KU wouldn't beat LSU either, then.

Based on what metric?

based on opinions that heavily weigh in a computer generated poll.

now lets not get stupid here.

But we already know they aren't better than LSU. Why should they get to play them again. THey had their chance.

If OU and Clemson win, who would you put in the NC game?

If you're looking for complete fairness, there shouldn't be a NC game. LSU is undefeated. They are the champs. Every other team has warts. Oklahoma State's wart is based on the fact that they got beat by a shitty team. Alabama's wart is that they happen to share a conference with the best team in the country and thus finished second in their conference.

If both teams have a single loss, I'm going to punish Diet OK for what happened on the field rather than Alabama for how conferences are aligned.

Don't really know what that has to do with anything.

If OkState loses than Bama will be in the game.

For all of you who think that only the conference champs should get a shot at the title, who would you put in the NC game if Georgia had beat LSU and OU beats Diet OK?

The top rated conference winner.

I'm not a member of the "Conference champs only" camp, but my reasoning for OSU-LSU is twofold. Firstly, Alabama already lost to LSU at home. Secondly, and more importantly, that was one of the most boring football games ever (others may have viewed it differently, but that's my opinion) and I don't want to see the sequel.

We should just rename the NC game to the SEC championship game.



Wait, that was played today.

So "top rated conference winner" trumps "top rated team"?

How many chances did Bama have to win that game and blew it?

Enough to say that the teams were very equal.

they didn't win their conference. Make it a tournament and none of this even matters anymore.

Personally, I don't want to see rematches in the NC game. The season is short enough. If you lost, you lost.

save for the kicker

They missed four (I think) FGs. There were other things they didn't capitalize on either. Views will differ, but mine is they had their shot, and to use your words, they blew it.

**** yOU.

So if OSU routs this top 10 team, they'll be over-rated I assume.

Win-Win buddy

Let's say that LSU lost, Oklahoma wins, and Clemson wins.

In your scenario, LSU would be #1, but they would be disqualified. Alabama would be #2, but they would be disqualified. Stanford would be #3, but they would be disqualified. Boise State would be #4. Arkansas would be #5, but they would be disqualified. Oregon would be #6.

You would have a NC game with #4 against #6 where the #6 team would have 2 losses including being blown out by the #1 team in the country.

I'll take my plan of having the two top ranked teams play for the NC. Thanks, though.

They should definitely be in the NC game if they win.

So if OSU wins and is ranked higher than Alabama your fine with that?

I want it ALL.

I don't want Bama to play them again.

Thats why I love MARCH MADNESS. I would love to see shit like that happen.

Yes. I would put them behind Bama, but I wouldn't say that the NC would be bogus if it's LSU versus Diet OK.

Gimmicks deciding champions FTW!

The voters won't allow that to happen.

So March Madness is a gimmick. Gotcha.

Only conference champions should be allowed in the tourney by your logic.

Computers deciding who should play for the champions FTW!

No, it's a great way to determine who the best team is.

March madness is a gimmick. The best team rarely wins the NC. In college football, the BCS does a pretty damn good job of deciding the top two teams.

The thing is, after Bama lost, ever team that had a chance LOST. So hey, thems the breaks I say.

No, I'm not saying that at all. In the current BCS BS setup only conference winners should be allowed in the NC game is what I'm saying.

Make it a tournament and all bets are off and we would have an amazing 3 weeks of college football to determine a champion.

Of course the tourney is a gimmick. It's a great gimmick, so nobody bitches. People care much more about the tourney x 1000 than they care about the regular season.

The body of work barely matters in college basketball, and the best team is rarely crowned champion. Because it's basketball, people care less about crowning the best team champion than they care about their brackets. I know that's true for me.

Exactly my thought.

Computers deciding who plays, or those teams that win the games?

I'd love an 8 team tournament, but I don't see why a team that isn't a conference champ should be invited by your logic.

Funny, I don't see anyone bitching about the March Madness format. Matter of fact, pretty much everyone that wants a playoff is using that as the argument of how to make the college football system better.

A playoff won't matter. It'll be the top 2 SEC teams playing against each other in the end anyway.

,.

UCONN won the basketball championship last year. They were 9-9 in their conference.

People don't bitch about March Madness because they don't give a shit about the regular season or about crowning a true champion. People don't care about basketball, so we are perfectly happy with a gimmick that provides amazing entertainment value.

If you're trying to highlight your inconsistencies, you've done a fine job.

I don't think anyone arguing for a playoff has ever said that wouldn't happen.

Looks like most don't want to see the LSU-Bama rematch according to the ESPN poll

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/fp/fl...&pollId=128016

And they beat 6 teams - including UK & SDSU - on their way to that Championship.

I guess they should have just put KU & UNC in the title game and called it good.

I disagree. I think the best team wins every time in the playoffs. Emphasis on TEAM. IMO every so-called "national champion" in the BCS era should have an asterisk by it. It's a joke. Almost like a freaking video game. It's not real.

March Madness determines the hottest teams at that time. That's about it.

I know they haven't. But it will. Then what is your argument? Put them in the same bracket? Sorry, no.

Why would they have put a non top-10 team in the NC game?

If you want to argue to make the tournament smaller & put the top 20ish teams in it to battle for the championship, I'm all for it.

Anyone who says they like Landry is stupid or lying.

He's Matt Cassel. Nothing more.

I just want a ****ing playoff and not computers deciding our champion. Odds are most teams in a 8 game tourney would have won their conference anyway.

And since you want to press it so hard, Yes, I would be fine with only conference winners in the tourney too. I seriously doubt they would do that though.

I would also rather a 16 game tourney but we all know that won't happen.

I think college basketball allows too many teams into the tourney.

The BCS has the perfect system for a playoff. Take the top 8, seed it, play it out, then have your bowls and stuff after when you get down to the top two.

THe computers only decide 1third. 2/3rds are human element.

Exactly.

The SEC would have 3 of the 8 this year. The PAC 12 would have 2 of the others.

If you're a good team you're playing well because it's win it go home, not because you're hot or not.

So you think UConn was the best team last year?

Some might hate on them but the NBA and MLB have the best playoff systems.

To determine the actual best team, I'd agree. I, and most people, like the whole "lose and go home" mentality of the NCAA Bball tournament.

That still makes for 5 conference champs out of 8.

KU, and a lot of the bigger basketball programs, would have a lot more championships if they did a Best of 7 series.

:rolleyes: you don't know that.

I suppose Packers and Ravens should play in the Superbowl? Just skip the playoffs.

If you are not in favor of a play off, then surrender your man card, because you are a ****ing pussy!

It makes for excitement that's for sure.

Big hit there. They don't do that in any other league than the SEC.

Yeah, NBA and MLB teams can afford to do a "best of _" playoffs. Football players would be dead by the time they got out of the first rounds.

Yep

I don't care either way. I'm just warning you, that when what I say happens, DO NOT bitch about it. To prove me right, I want a damn playoff.