Does Alabama Deserve a Rematch???

[cyclone22]

Absolutely they deserve a rematch. No doubt in my mind that these are the two best teams in the nation. LSU's line on both sides of the ball would manhandle OSU's. A closer game between the two best teams in the nation would be the rematch.

Not sure how you can make such a statement. Everyone says the BCS is such a great system because every game matters, well guess what, Alabama had their chance at home and they blew it, end of story.

You watch too much ESPN to just assume that these are the best teams when the majority of their wins come from DII schools and the Vandy's of the SEC, and they make fun of Boise for playing soft schedules.

Btw, Tex A&M was owning and shoulda beat Arkansas, and they are now number 7. Shows there is a little more parody than ESPN wants you to believe.

 

[cyclone22]

Here is some BAMA logic i read a post on why alabama deserves a rematch:
"Sure you can. If LSU is everyone's consensus #1, and Alabama and LSU were so evenly matched that 60 minutes of regulation couldn't even separate them, then they are obviously the best two teams in the country."

How can you possibly say that when there are a bunch of other really good teams that haven't even had a shot. DUMBAS.S SEC fans annoy the hell outta me.

 

[CysMyBoy]

The only way we should see a rematch is if Okie St and Stanford both lose. I don't care about Boise St, their schedule is too soft. Why should we just hand them BCS games just because they can't schedule quality opponents? I'm sorry Boise, you have to wait until you're at least in the Big East (if it's still around by then). There's no way that a team that beats Georgia and then blows away a bunch of patsies deserves the title game. Remember when Utah used to have dominant seasons before joining the Pac this year? Well they're 5-4 now that they can't prep for one big game each season.

 

[Stormin]

The only way we should see a rematch is if Okie St and Stanford both lose. I don't care about Boise St, their schedule is too soft. Why should we just hand them BCS games just because they can't schedule quality opponents? I'm sorry Boise, you have to wait until you're at least in the Big East (if it's still around by then). There's no way that a team that beats Georgia and then blows away a bunch of patsies deserves the title game. Remember when Utah used to have dominant seasons before joining the Pac this year? Well they're 5-4 now that they can't prep for one big game each season.

Good point about the patsies. We have played several rated teams already. We should be able to close with 3 patsies and close out at 8-4. Instead we close with 3 teams rated in the Top 17. If Boise played our schedule there is NO WAY they would be undefeated.

 

[KidSilverhair]

No. The national championship should be between two undeafeated teams. I too am sick of the SEC love fest. Alabama had the game AT HOME and lost, end of story.

Well, that's it, then. Houston-Boise State for the BCS Championship!

(Should LSU lose to Arkansas, OSU lose to OU, and Stanford lose to Oregon .. all conceivable outcomes.)

 

[KidSilverhair]

Those are far and away the two best teams in the NCAA

Comments like this actually make me yearn for the old days of the AP and UPI polls determining the national champion. Seriously. That was the opinions of sports writers and coaches (or sports information directors, whatever) choosing the "best" team at the end of the season. Isn't that what we're all saying here? Our opinion is that these are the best two teams in the land?

There is no perfect system to determine a champion. There never will be. A playoff finds a champion based on the restrictions and design of the playoff system. The BCS finds a champion based on the restrictions and design of the BCS (however goofy it may be). A poll finds a champion based on ... well, people's opinions. I contend they are all valid in their own ways.

Look at MLB. Can anyone say with a straight face that the Cardinals are actually the best baseball team of the 2011 season? They had to have another team lose to even get into the playoffs ... yet with the design of the baseball playoff system, they were able to win the games when it counted and become World Series champions. A World Series champion isn't necessarily the best team in baseball ... it's the team that succeeded through the restrictions and design of the playoffs.

You would have the same thing with a college football playoff, but magnified by the lose-and-you're-out quality of football. A red-hot 9-3 Georgia team, for instance, might sweep into the playoffs and bump off four one-loss or undefeated teams and win the championship game. Does that make them the best team in the country? No, it makes them the hottest team in the country at the end of the season that succeeded through the restrictions and design of the playoff system.

People are still going to gripe about whatever system is in place. And there's never going to be a perfect way to discover the BEST team in a given year. As long as you understand whatever system is in place will find a winner, based on the design of that system, that can only be called the "champion" of that particular system. That's what makes me shake my head whenever folks complain about a way to determine the "best" team. "Best" is subjective .. really. A categorically "lesser" team can win one game against a "better" team. It happens all the time. Just because Team B was better that day, on that field, doesn't necessarily mean they are a better team overall than Team A. You're just adjusting your definitions.

Anyway, TL; DR version ... Hell, no. Bama doesn't get another shot. This was their BCS playoff game, and they lost.

 

[KidSilverhair]

And one more thing .. Imma let you finish, but ..

Just so you don't think I'm a complete cretin about the current state of the national championship, I personally would really like to see a Plus-One system. Not only would it reduce the complaints from the "left-out" teams (especially undefeated ones), you could put into place immediately without changing the current bowl schedule/system one bit.

You take your top four teams at the end of the season. Seed them 4 vs 1/3 vs 2 in two of the big New Year's bowl games. The winners play a week later in the game currently called the BCS Championship. Done and done.

Yeah, those folks ranked at 5 or 6 or 7 might ***** and moan, but as I said, there ain't no perfect system. And how often would a team ranked in the bottom half of the top 10 legitimately have a claim as the National Champion? Not very often, I'd say.

 

[erikbj]

If Standford and Okie St. lose, then Bama should get another shot. If BSU plays for the championship, it will be the worst TV ratings ever!

 

[flycy]

Boise has no business in the top 10...I don't care how many crappy teams they beat.

That said, Alabama absolutely deserves another shot. These are by far the best two teams in the country.

Really????? Four missed field goals and you think Alabama is by far one of the best two teams in the country??? They absolutely do not deserve another boring bowl. The SEC is good, but always gets more credit than they deserve. Boise also does not deserve a shot. They need to work harder to actually schedule multiple tough games, not just there one game a year against a marginal ranked team.

 

[cyeah]

Absolutely they deserve a rematch. No doubt in my mind that these are the two best teams in the nation. LSU's line on both sides of the ball would manhandle OSU's. A closer game between the two best teams in the nation would be the rematch.

They are definitely the two best teams in the country. However they do NOT deserve a rematch. LSU proved they are better and a more complete team. To then turn around and say that 'bama can get in the ship while LSU still has to play the SECCG is stupid.

Jesus, that was great defense by Alabama, but those idiots missed 4 field goals. 2 pretty long ones, but the first miss was 44 yards and even our missed up kicking game made a 42 one to win it.

It was great D by both teams. The misses were bad coaching. Saban totally got outcoached by Miles. Making those kickers kick FGs outside their range, in that game was ignorant. Miles played for field position and layed out a patient game plan. Saban was terrible in this game.

the sec after lsu would get owned by the b12 teams, just an overrated conference.

:twitcy: :twitcy: :twitcy: :twitcy: :twitcy: That is funny.

I wouldn't want to watch a rematch of that game. 2 really good defenses and 2 really bad offenses. The game was boring.

The game was far from boring for many people (see the ratings) it was a defensive mastery. Those offenses are averaging over 40 points per game. They are not bad offenses they were up against GREAT d's. Look what Oregon has done since LSU skull stomped them...

 

[BigDH01]

The game was far from boring for many people (see the ratings) it was a defensive mastery. Those offenses are averaging over 40 points per game. They are not bad offenses they were up against GREAT d's. Look what Oregon has done since LSU skull stomped them...

A very mediocre WVU team put up over 500 total offensive yards against LSU's defensive mastery. We make fun of defenses in the Big 12 for doing that.

Alabama is 68th in the nation in passing offense, LSU in the 100s. Even ISU boasts a better passing offense than LSU. Defense becomes quite a bit easier when everyone in the stands and at home knows you won't be passing the ball.

As much as I like defensive matches, these offenses aren't all that impressive. The only ranked non-SEC teams (and WVU is no longer ranked in the top 25) that LSU has played have hung at least 21 points on them, more than any SEC team. Yes, the SEC is a defensive conference, but you can't ignore that their offenses seem to lag behind other conferences.

I think an OSU or Stanford vs LSU game would be interesting. Let's see how LSU's defense does against a team that can actually throw the ball (WVU had over 400 yards passing against LSU, so it's definitely possible). I just hope we get a chance to see this matchup instead of another game where both teams have great defenses and lackluster offenses.

 

[CTTB78]

The national championship should be OKie St. and LSU, if both go without a loss. It's the game I think most in the country would want to see.

If Alabama can't kick field goals, at home, quit whining.

 

[BigDH01]

Really????? Four missed field goals and you think Alabama is by far one of the best two teams in the country??? They absolutely do not deserve another boring bowl. The SEC is good, but always gets more credit than they deserve. Boise also does not deserve a shot. They need to work harder to actually schedule multiple tough games, not just there one game a year against a marginal ranked team.

Sagarin says that BSU has a tougher schedule right now than Stanford. If this remains true through the end of the regular season, I'm assuming an undefeated Stanford should also be left out.

 

[CloneFan65]

This is the time of the season where I like to look at hypothetical situations. What if LSU loses to Arkansas, Stanford loses to Oregon, and Oklahoma State loses to Oklahoma.

Would it be possible to have an Oregon vs Alabama championship game? That would be painful for LSU considering they've beaten both those teams.

 

[Clonefan94]

A very mediocre WVU team put up over 500 total offensive yards against LSU's defensive mastery. We make fun of defenses in the Big 12 for doing that.

Alabama is 68th in the nation in passing offense, LSU in the 100s. Even ISU boasts a better passing offense than LSU. Defense becomes quite a bit easier when everyone in the stands and at home knows you won't be passing the ball.

As much as I like defensive matches, these offenses aren't all that impressive. The only ranked non-SEC teams (and WVU is no longer ranked in the top 25) that LSU has played have hung at least 21 points on them, more than any SEC team. Yes, the SEC is a defensive conference, but you can't ignore that their offenses seem to lag behind other conferences.

I think an OSU or Stanford vs LSU game would be interesting. Let's see how LSU's defense does against a team that can actually throw the ball (WVU had over 400 yards passing against LSU, so it's definitely possible). I just hope we get a chance to see this matchup instead of another game where both teams have great defenses and lackluster offenses.

Exactly! Seems the media bias for the SEC has gotten to a lot of people here. I woudl put there defense up against anyone, but offensively, I'm sorry, I just can't say that that makes them the best two teams in the country. Hell, that's why they play the games isn't it? The game seemed as much to me as a poor offensive showing as a great defensive game. All field goals? Hell, all I heard all night from Iowa fans I knew was how boring our game was, Only 13 to 10? I was actually pretty bored with the Alabama LSU game an definitely felt like it didn't even come close to living up to the hype.

As far as a rematch goes, hell no. Then what happens if Bama wins, do they have to paly again for the Rubber match if it's close? I'd much rather see what a nother team can do. Especially one that has an offense.

 

[cyzmyguy]

I just like how the media buys into the fact that it was two all world defenses, which I agree they are good. but they completely avoid the total ineptness of either quarterback to move the ball hell the best pass in the game was thrown by a receiver/rb and that was picked off.

 

[ahaselhu]

Maybe this has been mentioned already, but in 2006 there was a lot of people who thought that Ohio State and Michigan were worthy of a rematch for the national title, after Ohio State beat Michigan 42-39.

Ohio State ended up playing 12-1 Florida for the national title, and lost 41-14.
Michigan played 10-2 USC, and lost 32-18.

Its really impossible with 120 teams having 3-4 non-conference games a year to really determine if two teams from the same conference are the best two teams in the nation. So I'm of the opinion that the national championship should NEVER be two teams from the same conference.

 

[ahaselhu]

Comments like this actually make me yearn for the old days of the AP and UPI polls determining the national champion. Seriously. That was the opinions of sports writers and coaches (or sports information directors, whatever) choosing the "best" team at the end of the season. Isn't that what we're all saying here? Our opinion is that these are the best two teams in the land?

There is no perfect system to determine a champion. There never will be. A playoff finds a champion based on the restrictions and design of the playoff system. The BCS finds a champion based on the restrictions and design of the BCS (however goofy it may be). A poll finds a champion based on ... well, people's opinions. I contend they are all valid in their own ways.

Look at MLB. Can anyone say with a straight face that the Cardinals are actually the best baseball team of the 2011 season? They had to have another team lose to even get into the playoffs ... yet with the design of the baseball playoff system, they were able to win the games when it counted and become World Series champions. A World Series champion isn't necessarily the best team in baseball ... it's the team that succeeded through the restrictions and design of the playoffs.

You would have the same thing with a college football playoff, but magnified by the lose-and-you're-out quality of football. A red-hot 9-3 Georgia team, for instance, might sweep into the playoffs and bump off four one-loss or undefeated teams and win the championship game. Does that make them the best team in the country? No, it makes them the hottest team in the country at the end of the season that succeeded through the restrictions and design of the playoff system.

People are still going to gripe about whatever system is in place. And there's never going to be a perfect way to discover the BEST team in a given year. As long as you understand whatever system is in place will find a winner, based on the design of that system, that can only be called the "champion" of that particular system. That's what makes me shake my head whenever folks complain about a way to determine the "best" team. "Best" is subjective .. really. A categorically "lesser" team can win one game against a "better" team. It happens all the time. Just because Team B was better that day, on that field, doesn't necessarily mean they are a better team overall than Team A. You're just adjusting your definitions.

Anyway, TL; DR version ... Hell, no. Bama doesn't get another shot. This was their BCS playoff game, and they lost.

Very good post. I agree completely.

 

[Rick]

NO. They lost. If the loss was in week 3 would we have the same conversation? I agree it also wouldnt be fair to LSU. If it happens and bama wins do we go best 2 out of 3?

 

[cyclone22]

If Standford and Okie St. lose, then Bama should get another shot. If BSU plays for the championship, it will be the worst TV ratings ever!

Since when does TV ratings dictate who is the best team on the field? Time to for you to become a Longhorn fan! I think A LOT of fans are ready to see Boise St get their one shot at the championship, and I bet it would get HUGE ratings.