Rematch hypocrisy?

[nrg4isu]

ESPN (and every news outfit that regurgitates everything ESPN says) keeps saying that clearly LSU and Alabama are the #1 and #2 teams in the country. Honestly, I don't have much of a problem with that. My only true issue with that is that there should be a playoff to prove it.

That being said, I DO have a problem with LSU vs. Alabama playing for the national championship. The reason being how the 2006 season played out. Either that championship should have been OSU vs Michigan or this years championship should NOT be LSU vs. Alabama.

Please explain to me why this year is different than 2006 and why the almighty SEC gets a rematch where the B10 didn't.

 

[alarson]

As i recall, ESPN was fully pulling for a rematch in both situations.

The same thing shouldve been the rule as now: If you arent #1 for your conference, you shouldnt be in the championship game.

 

[Mizzoulander]

ESPN (and every news outfit that regurgitates everything ESPN says) keeps saying that clearly LSU and Alabama are the #1 and #2 teams in the country. Honestly, I don't have much of a problem with that. My only true issue with that is that there should be a playoff to prove it.

That being said, I DO have a problem with LSU vs. Alabama playing for the national championship. The reason being how the 2006 season played out. Either that championship should have been OSU vs Michigan or this years championship should NOT be LSU vs. Alabama.

Please explain to me why this year is different than 2006 and why the almighty SEC gets a rematch where the B10 didn't.

Because in 2006, Florida's one loss was in mid October to an Auburn team that went 11-2. That, along with the fact that OSU played Michigan in the last game of the season (with no CCG), it made sense when Florida jumped Michigan in the BCS rankings. (and even more sense when UF destroyed tOSU)

Any team with a loss has no room to complain about being excluded from the championship game. OKSt. controlled its own destiny, and blew it. So they were forced to rely on pollsters.

 

[Tre4ISU]

Because in 2006, Florida's one loss was in mid October to an Auburn team that went 11-2. That, along with the fact that OSU played Michigan in the last game of the season (with no CCG), it made sense when Florida jumped Michigan in the BCS rankings. (and even more sense when UF destroyed tOSU)

Any team with a loss has no room to complain about being excluded from the championship game. OKSt. controlled its own destiny, and blew it. So they were forced to rely on pollsters.

As did Alabama, at home, not to mention they played 3 teams that figure to be better than ISU. Alabama did not prove they are the second best team in the nation. That is a fact.

 

[Mizzoulander]

As i recall, ESPN was fully pulling for a rematch in both situations.

The same thing shouldve been the rule as now: If you arent #1 for your conference, you shouldnt be in the championship game.

Why? What would ESPN have to gain from a rematch of a low-scoring, defensive game?

Sure, their analysts might have predicted this outcome (most of us did) and they'll be talking (ad nauseum) about the interesting points about the game. But they would have done that if it was LSU-OKSt, or Boise-Houston, or whatever the NCG ended up being.

There's no conspiracy...Bama and OKSt are both good teams, and both have valid reasons to be in the NCG.

 

[Tre4ISU]

Why? What would ESPN have to gain from a rematch of a low-scoring, defensive game?

Sure, their analysts might have predicted this outcome (most of us did) and they'll be talking (ad nauseum) about the interesting points about the game. But they would have done that if it was LSU-OKSt, or Boise-Houston, or whatever the NCG ended up being.

There's no conspiracy...Bama and OKSt are both good teams, and both have valid reasons to be in the NCG.

But OSU didn't lose to the other team playing already.

 

[longtimeclone]

I don't know if it has been said but does anyone think that maybe there was a conspiracy to get this rematch to happen. There are quite a few people against the rematch from happening but if some voters purposely wanted it to occur to have more fans calling for a playoff system more than ever.

I honestly don't believe the voters are this smart though.

 

[Mizzoulander]

As did Alabama, at home, not to mention they played 3 teams that figure to be better than ISU. Alabama did not prove they are the second best team in the nation. That is a fact.

I count 4 teams that Bama played with records better than ISU: Penn St, Arkansas, LSU, and Auburn. Three more (Florida, Vandy, MSU) had the same record.

And remember, Bama BEAT all of those teams (except LSU).

If the BCS scores favored OKSt., then Bama shouldn't complain either. But as a lot of commentators have mentioned today, it matters who you lose to. Championship-caliber teams don't lose those games like OKSt. did.

 

[nrg4isu]

Because in 2006, Florida's one loss was in mid October to an Auburn team that went 11-2. That, along with the fact that OSU played Michigan in the last game of the season (with no CCG), it made sense when Florida jumped Michigan in the BCS rankings. (and even more sense when UF destroyed tOSU)

Any team with a loss has no room to complain about being excluded from the championship game. OKSt. controlled its own destiny, and blew it. So they were forced to rely on pollsters.

Ok, but how is this different? Alabama lost to LSU mid-season, Michigan lost to tOSU late in the season. The time of the loss is the only difference I can see.

As far as who ELSE might play in the championship game if it wasn't a rematch: that is a bit of a different question. That being said, Florida lost to (11-2) Auburn mid-season by 10 in regulation, OkState lost to (6-6) ISU in double OT. I can't see how there's much of a difference. If Florida's loss was a fluke, wouldn't OkState's be a fluke as well?

I'm not calling this a conspiracy... I'm just saying it's not a good system.

 

[nrg4isu]

... But as a lot of commentators have mentioned today, it matters who you lose to. Championship-caliber teams don't lose those games like OKSt. did.

Right, but I'm trying to compare 2006 to 2011.

pre-bowl game records:
Michigan 2006 - 11-1 loss tOSU 12-0
Florida 2006 - 11-1 loss Auburn 11-1

Alabama 2011 - 11-1 loss LSU 12-0
OSU 2011 - 11-1 loss ISU 6-6

If who you lost to makes the biggest difference, Michigan should have played tOSU for the 2006 NC game. Period.

If avoiding a re-match is a bigger deal, then sure florida vs. tOSU in 2006 makes sense... but then it should be LSU vs. OkState!

 

[Tre4ISU]

Right, but I'm trying to compare 2006 to 2011.

pre-bowl game records:
Michigan 2006 - 11-1 loss tOSU 12-0
Florida 2006 - 11-1 loss Auburn 11-1

Alabama 2011 - 11-1 loss LSU 12-0
OSU 2011 - 11-1 loss ISU 6-6

If who you lost to makes the biggest difference, Michigan should have played tOSU for the 2006 NC game. Period.

If avoiding a re-match is a bigger deal, then sure florida vs. tOSU in 2006 makes sense... but then it should be LSU vs. OkState!

Right. This is an SEC bias thing. I have been saying for a few weeks now that the SEC, top to bottom, is not that good. So, who you beat doesn't really matter. It's that one game out of 12 for each team that matters which I find ridiculous. My hope is that OSU blasts their opponent and LSU blasts Bama.

 

[Clonefan32]

What bothers me is that the BCS process is so secretive and is obviously generated by a few people. How easy would it be for a handful of people to simply decide who they want to play and make the numbers match? I don't think it is necessarily as simple as the numbers being completely objective...

 

[Mizzoulander]

Right, but I'm trying to compare 2006 to 2011.

pre-bowl game records:
Michigan 2006 - 11-1 loss tOSU 12-0
Florida 2006 - 11-1 loss Auburn 11-1

Alabama 2011 - 11-1 loss LSU 12-0
OSU 2011 - 11-1 loss ISU 6-6

If who you lost to makes the biggest difference, Michigan should have played tOSU for the 2006 NC game. Period.

If avoiding a re-match is a bigger deal, then sure florida vs. tOSU in 2006 makes sense... but then it should be LSU vs. OkState!

Think about it this way: what allowed Florida to jump up over Michigan in 2006, and why didn't that happen again in 2011?

1. Michigan losing in the last week meant they had no time to rebound. Florida had many weeks AND an SEC Championship game over Arkansas to climb back up.

2. OKSt only played one game after their loss - not enough time to rebound. And with no CCG, they played a 2-loss OU team.

3. In terms of losses, there's only "good" and "bad" losses: both tOSU and Auburn in '06 would be considered "good" losses. So would LSU in 2011.

In all cases, the old adage holds true: if you must lose, lose early, and lose to somebody who's good.

 

[Tre4ISU]

I count 4 teams that Bama played with records better than ISU: Penn St, Arkansas, LSU, and Auburn. Three more (Florida, Vandy, MSU) had the same record.

And remember, Bama BEAT all of those teams (except LSU).

If the BCS scores favored OKSt., then Bama shouldn't complain either. But as a lot of commentators have mentioned today, it matters who you lose to. Championship-caliber teams don't lose those games like OKSt. did.

Championship caliber teams don't miss a bunch of FGs and score 6 points at home with the best RB in the country. Like I said, ISU was rated better than all but three teams Bama played according to Sagarin. They lost one of those. OSU played 6(!) teams at ISU level or better and lost one, not to mention they laid the wood to 4 of the 5. Bama beat PSU by 16. Woopty frickin do. They also didn't do to Arkansas what OSU did to Oklahoma. We are judging to teams based on 8.3% (repeating of course) of the games they played instead of the other 91.67% (repeating of course) of the games they played.

 

[VeloClone]

Championship caliber teams don't miss a bunch of FGs and score 6 points at home with the best RB in the country. Like I said, ISU was rated better than all but three teams Bama played according to Sagarin. They lost one of those. OSU played 6(!) teams at ISU level or better and lost one, not to mention they laid the wood to 4 of the 5. Bama beat PSU by 16. Woopty frickin do. They also didn't do to Arkansas what OSU did to Oklahoma. We are judging to teams based on 8.3% (repeating of course) of the games they played instead of the other 91.67% (repeating of course) of the games they played.

<bolded for emphasis>

 

[Tre4ISU]

Think about it this way: what allowed Florida to jump up over Michigan in 2006, and why didn't that happen again in 2011?

1. Michigan losing in the last week meant they had no time to rebound. Florida had many weeks AND an SEC Championship game over Arkansas to climb back up.

2. OKSt only played one game after their loss - not enough time to rebound. And with no CCG, they played a 2-loss OU team.

3. In terms of losses, there's only "good" and "bad" losses: both tOSU and Auburn in '06 would be considered "good" losses. So would LSU in 2011.

In all cases, the old adage holds true: if you must lose, lose early, and lose to somebody who's good.

And beat them worse than Bama beat anyone not coached by Houston Nutt all year. Think about that. OSU beat Oklahoma worse than Bama beat Georgia Southern, Tennesee, PSU, Florida and Vanderbilt. Those are 5 extremely mediocre teams.

 

[Mizzoulander]

Right. This is an SEC bias thing. I have been saying for a few weeks now that the SEC, top to bottom, is not that good. So, who you beat doesn't really matter. It's that one game out of 12 for each team that matters which I find ridiculous. My hope is that OSU blasts their opponent and LSU blasts Bama.

The thing is, if this was true at some point the SEC SHOULD have been exposed in the national championship game. They've played teams from the Big 10, Pac-12, and Big 12 multiple times. They've played spread offenses, power offenses, and everything in between. And they've won 5 times straight.

Even facing what you consider "weak" competition in the conference, they've always won the title. Once or twice might be lucky, but SEVEN times? I don't think so.

A conference is only as good as its best teams. Any team after 4th or 5th place doesn't really matter...they're pretty much all the same. Is Vandy better than ISU? Is Ole Miss better than Kansas? I'd argue that it's irrelevant.

 

[Clones85']

But as a lot of commentators have mentioned today, it matters who you lose to. Championship-caliber teams don't lose those games like OKSt. did.

It matters sometimes. Other times it doesn't.

In 2007 LSU lost 2 games. 1 at home to a 7-5 Arkansas team and once on the road to a 7-5 Kentucky team. They still went on to play for the national title. Neither of those teams are significantly better than this years ISU teams.

So like I said, sometimes it matters and sometimes it doesn't. Why is that?

 

[Mizzoulander]

And beat them worse than Bama beat anyone not coached by Houston Nutt all year. Think about that. OSU beat Oklahoma worse than Bama beat Georgia Southern, Tennesee, PSU, Florida and Vanderbilt. Those are 5 extremely mediocre teams.

Two problems with this:

1. Margin of victory isn't taken into account by the computer polls. A 1-pt OT loss is the same as a 50-pt loss.

2. As a defensive team, Bama doesn't blow out many teams. OKSt. is build to score a lot of points. Unfortunately, they give up a lot too (#107 in total defense?)

 

[Spam]

What would happen if:
(i) OSU lost on November 5th rather than November 18th
AND
(ii) Alabama lost on November 18th rather than 5th.

I'm not sure. But I am guessing OSU would be in the championship game?