View Full Version : Bowl Championship SEC (BCS)



Pages : [1] 2

Thunder
01-09-2012, 05:00 PM
Alabama vs LSU
Time: Unknown
Channel: Unknown

Thunder's rooting for Alabama.

In other news, the Bowl Championship SEC (BCS) may be coming to an end by 2014. This was posted on KOCO's Facebook as a discussion and brought up during the morning news, but I can not find the story on the site.

kevinpate
01-09-2012, 05:18 PM
Ought to be a real high scoring thriller, unless the FG kickers get hurt. then it'll get boring right quick.

OKCisOK4me
01-09-2012, 05:21 PM
Who cares...

Thunder
01-09-2012, 05:44 PM
Its on 28 starting at 7:30 our time.

Just the facts
01-09-2012, 05:54 PM
I for one am not watching. I hope it gets the lowest TV ratings ever. Beside, I am washing my hair during those 4 hours.

Uncle Slayton
01-09-2012, 05:54 PM
Not going to watch a down of it, as it's a complete sham faux-championship anyway. I do however predict a win for the inbred hicks...

Just the facts
01-09-2012, 06:06 PM
Not going to watch a down of it, as it's a complete sham faux-championship anyway. I do however predict a win for the inbred hicks...

Going out on limb with that prediction aren't you.

adaniel
01-09-2012, 06:10 PM
There's a good episode of Hoarders on.

Thunder
01-09-2012, 06:14 PM
Its actually on ch29.

The game is already rigged on the ticket side. The stadium is filled with 65% LSwho and 35% Alabama fans. This means Alabama fans will have to work extra hard to distract LSwho wannabes on the field.

Lets hope majority of refs are Alabama fans.

Thunder
01-09-2012, 06:42 PM
The first commercial break is way too long, so it appears that the game keep going (don't think the refs will stop the game for commercials) and cable viewers will be watching it several minutes behind. :-/

OKCDrummer77
01-09-2012, 06:52 PM
Oh, look. A field goal.

MDot
01-09-2012, 07:02 PM
Alabama's kicker must have brought his A-game this time.

MikeOKC
01-09-2012, 07:08 PM
No way do I want Alabama to win. LSU is the only team that deserves to be there.

Thunder
01-09-2012, 07:25 PM
No way do I want Alabama to win. LSU is the only team that deserves to be there.

I agree about Alabama getting there with the SEC coaches cheating by rigging the Coaches Poll, but since they are there, its best to pick the lesser evil. Alabama is the lesser evil. Beside, Alabama winning could potentially bring OSU to #1.

This is another score-less game regarding actual touchdowns. Only field goal made is by Alabama and one blocked (thinking that LSU player had his shoes rigged with bouncey springs).

MikeOKC
01-09-2012, 07:29 PM
I agree about Alabama getting there with the SEC coaches cheating by rigging the Coaches Poll, but since they are there, its best to pick the lesser evil. Alabama is the lesser evil. Beside, Alabama winning could potentially bring OSU to #1.

This is another score-less game regarding actual touchdowns. Only field goal made is by Alabama and one blocked (thinking that LSU player had his shoes rigged with bouncey springs).

Thunder, If OSU had blown out Andrew Luck and Stanford there might be a case for OSU jumping over LSU/Bama with a Tide win. But, with OSU winning a close game and winning because the Stanford kicker missed two easy field goals (both game-winners) - not a chance.

Just the facts
01-09-2012, 07:35 PM
Thunder, If OSU had blown out Andrew Luck and Stanford there might be a case for OSU jumping over LSU/Bama with a Tide win. But, with OSU winning a close game and winning because the Stanford kicker missed two easy field goals (both game-winners) - not a chance.

The second Stanford attempt was not a game winner. It was a field goal in overtime. Even if he had made it OSU took a knee at the 6 inch line to setup their game winning field goal. If Stanford had made it OSU would have just scored the winning touchdown instead.

Just the facts
01-09-2012, 07:39 PM
There's a good episode of Hoarders on.

I just watched American Pickers buy a $9,500 elephants head.

MikeOKC
01-09-2012, 07:45 PM
The second Stanford attempt was not a game winner. It was a field goal in overtime. Even if he had made it OSU took a knee at the 6 inch line to setup their game winning field goal. If Stanford had made it OSU would have just scored the winning touchdown instead.

You're right. But, Stanford still played well enough to win, it was no route by any stretch - in fact, Luck had an incredible game against the OSU defense. Point being, nothing happening tonight in New Orleans would make OSU #1. Nothing.

In fact, look at this and tell me who most would have thought won the game?
http://i41.tinypic.com/a9p8oo.jpg

Thunder
01-09-2012, 07:48 PM
Halftime.

Alabama with 3 field goal scores for a grand total of 9.

LSU with a glorious fat ZERO. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Thunder
01-09-2012, 07:51 PM
You're right. But, Stanford still played well enough to win, it was no route by any stretch - in fact, Luck had an incredible game against the OSU defense. Point being, nothing happening tonight in New Orleans would make OSU #1. Nothing.

You're wrong. If they keep scoring only field goals with no touchdown, that is going to be a huge boost for OSU. And with OU winning their bowl game, that is a huge boost for OSU, because OSU previously defeated OU. Just watch when the computer points come out. :-)

OKCDrummer77
01-09-2012, 07:52 PM
Six quarters and an overtime between the "2 best teams in college football" and not one touchdown.

MikeOKC
01-09-2012, 08:03 PM
You're wrong. If they keep scoring only field goals with no touchdown, that is going to be a huge boost for OSU. And with OU winning their bowl game, that is a huge boost for OSU, because OSU previously defeated OU. Just watch when the computer points come out. :-)

Thunder, the computer rankings are over. That was the BCS that uses a computer component. The winner of tonight's game (for better or worse) is the BCS National Champion. There's no more BCS polls. The same goes with the USA Today-Coaches Poll. (They require the winner of tonight's game to be #1.) The only other post-bowl poll is the AP poll. OSU is not going to jump over Alabama and LSU. After all, LSU would still have only one loss if they lose tonight. The OSU victory was great - but it hardly was the performance of the country's best team. In fact, many columnists thought Stanford was the best team on the field that night. Nothing can happen tonight that will make OSU - a winner because Stanford missed a game winning field goal - the number one team in the AP poll.

Thunder
01-09-2012, 08:19 PM
:'-(

Thunder
01-09-2012, 08:58 PM
Entering the 4th quarter, Alabama is enjoying the 15 points while LSU is becoming depressed with the big zero.

dmoor82
01-09-2012, 09:10 PM
THE BEST DEFENSIVE GAME I HAVE EVER SEEN BY BAMA!OSU would have gotten throttled by these teams!

Thunder
01-09-2012, 09:18 PM
The closest shutout game for national champ was Oklahoma vs Florida State with 14-2. Oklahoma just may lose that title (closest shutout) to Alabama for definitely shutout. :-O

Jake
01-09-2012, 09:19 PM
I've seen more scoring at a Dungeons and Dragons convention.

Thunder
01-09-2012, 09:20 PM
Alabama scores a touchdown!!!

Extra point no good bringing the grand total of 21 to 0.

dmoor82
01-09-2012, 09:35 PM
Total domination by Bama!The best defensive showing I've ever seen in any game on any stage!2011-12 National Champions The Alabama Crimson Tide-Undisputed!

dmoor82
01-09-2012, 09:40 PM
The showing LSU put up means OSU is a lock at #2.I would have loved to see OSU play LSU,but leaving Bama out also would have been a travesty as seen tonight!

Thunder
01-09-2012, 09:57 PM
Oh say can you see.....

MDot
01-09-2012, 10:13 PM
The closest shutout game for national champ was Oklahoma vs Florida State with 14-2. Oklahoma just may lose that title (closest shutout) to Alabama for definitely shutout. :-O

Oklahoma held the record for the fewest points allowed in the NC game until tonight.

Thunder
01-09-2012, 10:14 PM
Oklahoma held the record for the fewest points allowed in the NC game until tonight.

That was what I was saying, oh dearest one.

MDot
01-09-2012, 10:20 PM
That was what I was saying, oh dearest one.

I know, I was just stating it in proper English. LOL

Thunder
01-09-2012, 10:35 PM
I know, I was just stating it in proper English. LOL

I hate it when you (and everyone else) reveals my retardness frequently. :'-(

But..anyway, it was a good game. I'm still not happy with Alabama getting into that game through coaches cheating, but strictly for the players (and only for the actual physical players), they deserve and earned it. I'm happy for the players, like I said, for the players and they did extremely fantastic. OSU probably wouldn't play as well, but may have been a close game with multiple touchdowns if OSU was there...and I wouldn't know who would win, OSU or LSU. It really meant a lot to the Alabama players. Maze (#4) became very emotional not being able to play (as evidence with crying on video). He want to earn it when winning rather than standing on the sideline. I hope he forgives himself and accept that he is also a winner no matter how little he played before the injury. A team is still a team and everyone is together no matter what including the many players on the team that may have never played the entire season and/or didn't get to play in this game. Anyway, good game to both and congrats to the Alabama players (only the players).

Off Topic:
I know a deaf friend played football throughout his life in school and after graduating, he went to OU. I think he went to another college then onto OU (updates from his mom a few years ago). Anyway, she told me that when he was at OU, he wasn't able to play, even though he made the team. Bob Stoops kept him out like a whole lot (happens to many other players by only keeping the best of the best on the field) and he got frustrated waiting for the opportunity to play. Eventually, he decided to leave. I know how he feel. Its very rare for a coach to allow every team member the fair chance to play, but with media pressures, only the best of the best will only play.

So, basically what I'm saying, for all the football teams out there winning games, bowl games, championship games, there are many players out there working hard during practices and supporting each other, but never get the spotlight in actual games, so keep them in mind and congratulate them on their job well done, because they contribute, too. Like for example, Alabama won, but only the best players received attention while the others celebrated in the shadow. Be sure to give them equal attention, too. They work hard, too, in practices hoping that their coach will let them play. And here I go again just talking away as usual while putting people to sleep while reading this. Until next time, enjoy the break and we'll meet again for the 2012-13 season.

MDot
01-09-2012, 10:55 PM
I hate it when you (and everyone else) reveals my retardness frequently. :'-(

I apologize buddy, I meant no harm.

Thunder
01-09-2012, 11:02 PM
I apologize buddy, I meant no harm.

I'll give you a muffin with nuts.

MDot
01-09-2012, 11:04 PM
I'll give you a muffin with nuts.

I'm allergic.

dankrutka
01-09-2012, 11:09 PM
The showing LSU put up means OSU is a lock at #2.I would have loved to see OSU play LSU,but leaving Bama out also would have been a travesty as seen tonight!

Not sure if it's a lock. I would vote LSU #2 because their overall resume far surpasses OSU. I think it ends up: 1. Alabama, 2. LSU, 3. OSU. You could make a case OSU should have been in the game over Alabama, but with LSU's season they deserve #2. They beat every other BCS winner besides OSU (Alabama, Oregon, Arkansas, and West Virginia)!!! That's amazing!

dankrutka
01-09-2012, 11:10 PM
Not sure if it's a lock. I would vote LSU #2 because their overall resume far surpasses OSU. I think it ends up: 1. Alabama, 2. LSU, 3. OSU. You could make a case OSU should have been in the game over Alabama, but with LSU's season they deserve #2. They beat every other BCS winner besides OSU (Alabama, Oregon, Arkansas, and West Virginia)!!! That's amazing!

Oops. Forgot that Arkansas-K-State game wasn't BCS, but both those teams were far better than the Sugar Bowl teams. You still get my point...

ljbab728
01-09-2012, 11:56 PM
Not sure if it's a lock. I would vote LSU #2 because their overall resume far surpasses OSU. I think it ends up: 1. Alabama, 2. LSU, 3. OSU. You could make a case OSU should have been in the game over Alabama, but with LSU's season they deserve #2. They beat every other BCS winner besides OSU (Alabama, Oregon, Arkansas, and West Virginia)!!! That's amazing!

I'm sorry, but a team that can't score one point against even a great defense does not deserve to be number two in the country no matter who they have defeated. I'm not saying OSU would beat Alabama but who thinks they would be shut out?

dankrutka
01-10-2012, 12:19 AM
I'm sorry, but a team that can't score one point against even a great defense does not deserve to be number two in the country no matter who they have defeated. I'm not saying OSU would beat Alabama but who thinks they would be shut out?

The poll isn't based on one game, but the entire season. I could easily say a team that lost to an Iowa State team that finished with a losing record doesn't deserve to be #2 also.Overall, LSU had a much better season than OSU based on the teams they beat. These arguments about which teams with the same records are more dereving are tough, but this one seems easy... and that's how the voters saw it too. The polls came out and LSU is easily #2. If Alabama had lost then OSU probably should have been #2, but it didn't work out that way.

ljbab728
01-10-2012, 12:30 AM
The poll isn't based on one game, but the entire season. I could easily say a team that lost to an Iowa State team that finished with a losing record doesn't deserve to be #2 also.Overall, LSU had a much better season than OSU based on the teams they beat. These arguments about which teams with the same records are more dereving are tough, but this one seems easy... and that's how the voters saw it too. The polls came out and LSU is easily #2. If Alabama had lost then OSU probably should have been #2, but it didn't work out that way.

I still see that as an SEC bias but everyone is entitled to their own opinion. LSU defeated 9 teams that were ranked at the time they played. 7 of those were SEC teams and 3 of those are not ranked in the final top 25. If we were stricly rating teams based on defenses I would agree with LSU being number two. But not when they scored three field goals total in two games against the number one team. They are a one dimensional team and don't deserve number two in my opinion. In the AP poll it was very close and OSU got more number one votes than LSU did. But to show you how silly the polls can be, OU dropped two spots in the final AP poll after winning their bowl game and finished behind a KState team which lost their bowl game and which had the same record and they defeated 58-17. Polls are always very subjective and most results should be taken with a grain of salt.

dankrutka
01-10-2012, 01:18 AM
I still see that as an SEC bias but everyone is entitled to their own opinion. LSU defeated 9 teams that were ranked at the time they played. 7 of those were SEC teams and 3 of those are not ranked in the final top 25. If we were stricly rating teams based on defenses I would agree with LSU being number two. But not when they scored three field goals total in two games against the number one team. They are a one dimensional team and don't deserve number two in my opinion. In the AP poll it was very close and OSU got more number one votes than LSU did. But to show you how silly the polls can be, OU dropped two spots in the final AP poll after winning their bowl game and finished behind a KState team which lost their bowl game and which had the same record and they defeated 58-17. Polls are always very subjective and most results should be taken with a grain of salt.

We could go back and forth all night, but LSU's offense was great except against one of the best defenses in college football history. No one did anything on them. Their may be an SEC bias, but don't they deserve it at this point? 6 straight champions. They had a great bowl record again this year...

Thunder
01-10-2012, 01:52 AM
They had a great bowl record again this year...

Speaking for the SEC, no the record was assisted with cheating to ensure SEC get another win no matter who lose. :-/

RadicalModerate
01-10-2012, 08:05 AM
I hate it when you (and everyone else) reveals my retardness frequently. :'-(

I think it's actually: "I hate it when you (and everyone else) frequently reveal my mild grammatical mistakes that some might misinterpret as being mentally challenged.

But " . . . reveal, frequently, . . ." is probably also acceptable.

I can't be sure, but I'll bet that a whole bunch of members of a certain sub-set of the citizenry of Alabama is glad that the legacy of George Wallace--vis-a-vis educational integration and diversity--is only a faded, painful, memory from the past.

Major congratulations to The Crimson Tide!

Sheetkeecker
01-10-2012, 08:20 AM
From the Superdome "Boot Hill"

Here lies Les Miles
Four quarters from a gunslinger called McCarran
No Les
No More.

village idiot
01-10-2012, 09:15 AM
Iowa State was the factor in determining the national champion. Alabama can thank ISU for giving them the chance to be national champs. On the other hand, LSU can blame Iowa State for letting Bama back in, plain and simple. OSU would have been a better opponent for LSU to win. Move on and wait till next year to start the whole argument again.

MDot
01-10-2012, 01:36 PM
Iowa State was the factor in determining the national champion. Alabama can thank ISU for giving them the chance to be national champs. On the other hand, LSU can blame Iowa State for letting Bama back in, plain and simple. OSU would have been a better opponent for LSU to win. Move on and wait till next year to start the whole argument again.

For a village idiot you summed that up pretty nicely. Well done. :congrats:

venture
01-10-2012, 09:09 PM
How to make the BCS change...hurt their wallets.

http://eye-on-collegefootball.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/24156338/34308344


The overnight ratings for the BCS National Championship Game show that last night's rematch between Alabama and LSU was the lowest-rated title game in the 14-year history of the BCS, bringing in a 13.8 overnight rating, a 14% drop from last year's game between Auburn and Oregon. The previous low had been set in 2002 when Miami played Nebraska for the title and the game brought a 14.3 rating.

Just the facts
01-10-2012, 09:14 PM
How to make the BCS change...hurt their wallets.

http://eye-on-collegefootball.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/24156338/34308344

That is exactly the reason I refused to watch the game. I watched American Pickers instead.

Just the facts
01-10-2012, 09:21 PM
Iowa State was the factor in determining the national champion. Alabama can thank ISU for giving them the chance to be national champs. On the other hand, LSU can blame Iowa State for letting Bama back in, plain and simple. OSU would have been a better opponent for LSU to win. Move on and wait till next year to start the whole argument again.

Which shows how just how screwed up the current system is. The teams playing for the National Championship should not be determined in Ames, Iowa in Mid-November by a team that finished 6-7.

MikeOKC
01-10-2012, 10:12 PM
Which shows how just how screwed up the current system is. The teams playing for the National Championship should not be determined in Ames, Iowa in Mid-November by a team that finished 6-7.

It wasn't. That game in Ames didn't happen in a vaccum. You would have to break down the other one-loss teams and the circumstances on each loss and all the woulda, coulda, shoulda scenarios from those teams. Pointing to the OSU game in Ames and saying that it determined the NC game is forgetting that all the other teams could point to a loss that they maybe shouldn't have lost, etc.

As we know, OSU ended up 3rd in the AP voting behind Alabama and LSU. Using the above logic of "what if..." the Cowboys would be ranked somewhere around 7th or 8th had that Stanford kicker made one of his two field goals. But he didn't. OSU lost in Ames. They shouldn't have - but they did. And the other one-loss schools also have their own versions of this. (Oregon, in fact, missed a field goal that would have left them as another one-loss team. That loss, btw, to LSU early in the season.)

Ames didn't decide the NC anymore than Oregon's game in Eugene against Southern Cal.

onthestrip
01-10-2012, 11:06 PM
Using the above logic of "what if..." the Cowboys would be ranked somewhere around 7th or 8th had that Stanford kicker made one of his two field goals. But he didn't.

Again, only the first field goal attempt was a potential game winner. The second one was just to get 3 points on their possession in overtime.

Thunder
01-11-2012, 12:44 AM
Again, only the first field goal attempt was a potential game winner. The second one was just to get 3 points on their possession in overtime.

No need to say again. Mike knows this. What Mike was saying, Stanford could have won with the first kick or had a chance to win with the second kick. The first kick was most important, but the second kick was also very important during OT to stay in the game.

Sheetkeecker
01-11-2012, 05:34 AM
That is exactly the reason I refused to watch the game. I watched American Pickers instead.


The ratings people have been in a turmoil ever since this loss of viewership.

Bill Robertson
01-11-2012, 06:08 AM
Maybe this will be a nail in the coffin of the current system. This would have been a great year for the +1 format. Have OSU vs. LSU and Bama vs. Stanford. The winner plays for the championship the next week. The argument for the tradition of the bowls being the reason not to have some sort of playoff is ridiculous. The tradition of the bowls is already gone. You used to get up on New Years day and watch the 5 or 6 major bowls from 10 AM to late evening. That was tradition. Now you have the major bowls spread out over a week and mixed with who-cares bowls. A couple of the major bowls didn't look anywhere near full attendance wise either.

venture
01-11-2012, 12:25 PM
Maybe this will be a nail in the coffin of the current system. This would have been a great year for the +1 format. Have OSU vs. LSU and Bama vs. Stanford. The winner plays for the championship the next week. The argument for the tradition of the bowls being the reason not to have some sort of playoff is ridiculous. The tradition of the bowls is already gone. You used to get up on New Years day and watch the 5 or 6 major bowls from 10 AM to late evening. That was tradition. Now you have the major bowls spread out over a week and mixed with who-cares bowls. A couple of the major bowls didn't look anywhere near full attendance wise either.

You would think they could still find a money machine in a hybrid setup. Take 8 or 16 teams and do a playoff. Then at the same time still permit the exhibition bowl games for schools not involved in the championship series. The championship play off can start with the first round (or two with 16 teams) can be at the higher ranked team's home stadium. Then the semifinals and championship game would then be in a rotating host city every year. This wouldn't be any different than what you have now with the Sugar Bowl a week before the BCS title game.

Of course the issue becomes what teams do the other big bowls get like the Rose Bowl. They are going to want their Big Ten/Pac 12 match up. However would they even settle for taking a someone other than the conference champion? Yes they have several times, but never have been all that happy with it.

So play this out with this year's setup...

16-team playoff would have been:

Round 1: Michigan @ LSU, Wisconsin @ Alabama, Georgia @ Oklahoma State, Michigan State @ Stanford, South Carolina @ Virginia Tech, Kansas State @ Houston, Oklahoma @ Boise State (*chuckle*), and Oregon @ Arkansas. Organize them in a bracket like the basketball playoffs and say in Round 2 we get something like this with all the top ranked teams winning...

Round 2: Virginia Tech @ LSU, Boise State @ OSU , Houston @ Stanford , Arkansas @ Alabama.

Round 3: Oklahoma State vs. LSU , Stanford vs. Alabama all at say this year would have been New Orleans.

Title Game: LSU (if they actually could score) vs. Alabama (if they could stop Stanford).

It would produce a lot of big name match ups and would and pull most issues out of the equation on a fair system. Teams like Boise State and Houston still get their chance to play. It would seem like a win win, but it'll come down to ABC willing to cough up more money for it. Or a combined ABC/Fox/CBS bid to make it work.

dankrutka
01-11-2012, 02:18 PM
My plan:
8 team playoff with homefield for the first round (16 teams is too many). Use BCS rankings for seeding. Conference champions from SEC, Big 12, Big 10, Pac 12, and ACC have automatic bids and the three highest ranked other teams by the BCS earn at large selections. Teams from the same conference can't play each other in first round so the lower ranked team will drop a spot unless they are the last seed. Regular season will have to be capped at 11 games. That way the championship game teams will likely play 15 total games. It's a lot, but only two teams do it with a bye week prior to the championship. Here's how my plan would have worked this year:

1. LSU
8. Clemson

4. Stanford
5. Arkansas

3. Oklahoma State
6. Oregon

2. Alabama
7. Wisconsin

Tell me this wouldn't have been awesome! There would have been some controversy. For example, Arkansas (a 3rd SEC team) squeaking in to the last at large spot over Boise State, but the arguments are so much less imporatant than just arguing who is the 2nd best team for a championship game. If you couldn't position your team higher than 6th than you don't have much of an argument.

venture
01-11-2012, 04:10 PM
Honestly, I would completely do away with automatic bids. It is one of the major flaws in the systems now. Sorry, no one can argue a #15 Clemson from a conference that isn't all that strong getting an automatic bid over Boise State or Kansas State. Much like the basketball thing...you have your conference championship and then everyone is tossed in the pot for the national title run.

I'm not against an 8 team playoff, I just think 16 would do better and offer more opportunity to teams from current non-AQ conferences to get in. I also don't buy the argument that it would create too many games in a season or dilute the field. The FCS has been at 16-teams (though 20 now) since 1986 with little issue. Now we could go with their format completely and it would be even more fair for everyone.

You could go with 20 teams...11 conference champs and 9 at-large teams based on BCS ranking. I would then order them by their overall BCS score and seed from there.