2006 - Florida
2007 - LSU
2008 - Florida
2009 - Alabama
2010 - Auburn
2011 - LSU/Alabama
2012 - And counting...
YOU MAD?
2007 - LSU
2008 - Florida
2009 - Alabama
2010 - Auburn
2011 - LSU/Alabama
2012 - And counting...
YOU MAD?
2011/2012 NCAA Football Thread
- Thread starter Jagger69
- Start date
- Status
6 years running......lmao
oh, you were serious about HOUSTON?!!!!?
you clearly have not watched ANY of UH's games this year
oh, you were serious about HOUSTON?!!!!?
you clearly have not watched ANY of UH's games this year
Ok, I was wrong about Oklahoma State jumping Alabama. But boy was it close. And if only a few more voters actually looked at the schedule and not conference affiliation, the Cowboys would be playing LSU.
I can only hope LSU whoops Alabama. I can't imagine a national champion who did not win their conference, and lost to the the same team they just beat AT HOME. If that game had been in Baton Rouge, I would have Alabama at number 2. But they lost AT HOME. SO why should they get another chance at a neutral site? And I'm sick of people saying "Well Alabama is the better team." I don't doubt it. I agree with this. In fact, if they played Okie State, I'd pick Alabama to win it. But that's besides the point. Which team deserves it more, earned it? Oklahoma State has the better resume. The computers say so. It shouldn't bewho we think is the better team. It's who deserved it more based on what they did throughout the season. 3 wins against winning teams is pitiful. If it were based on who we all think is the better team, then I think Oregon and Boise State could beat LSU. But do they deserve the chance to? Hell no.
I can only hope LSU whoops Alabama. I can't imagine a national champion who did not win their conference, and lost to the the same team they just beat AT HOME. If that game had been in Baton Rouge, I would have Alabama at number 2. But they lost AT HOME. SO why should they get another chance at a neutral site? And I'm sick of people saying "Well Alabama is the better team." I don't doubt it. I agree with this. In fact, if they played Okie State, I'd pick Alabama to win it. But that's besides the point. Which team deserves it more, earned it? Oklahoma State has the better resume. The computers say so. It shouldn't bewho we think is the better team. It's who deserved it more based on what they did throughout the season. 3 wins against winning teams is pitiful. If it were based on who we all think is the better team, then I think Oregon and Boise State could beat LSU. But do they deserve the chance to? Hell no.
Well, you sounded so convincing, you know. Cuz you NEEEEEEEVER use sarcasm. It's so unlike you.
Btw UH never deserved a shot at LSU. Their schedule was horrendous.
Oklahoma State lost to who?
Alabama lost to who?
end of story
If Oklahoma State "deserves" to be in the NC, maybe they should've just shown up against a shitty 6-6 team, eh?
and no, going undefeated in C-USA means ****
Alabama lost to who?
end of story
If Oklahoma State "deserves" to be in the NC, maybe they should've just shown up against a shitty 6-6 team, eh?
and no, going undefeated in C-USA means ****
aha. The same thing could be said about Alabama. If they "deserved" to be in the NC, they should have made some fieldgoals, eh? What kind of system allows a team with more wins against quality opponents and a conference championship to be left out of the NC for a team that didn't win their conference and only put up 6 points on LSU when they lost the first time?
Alabama doesn't compare to Ok St when it comes to quality victories, so they fall back on quality losses. haha. That's your argument? Quality losses!!!Bama's loss was more impressive, put them in the NC!
Div 1 football is a joke.
Can someone please explain to me how Michigan deserves a BCS bowl game.
That's a terrible argument. So, using your logic, if Alabama beat LSU but lost to Tennessee, then they wouldn't deserve to be in the national title game because their loss came to a 6-6 team.
They don't, and neither does Virginia Tech. But neither does West Virginia or Clemson. The BCS should just stick to pitting the national title game, and let the bowls figure out the tie-ins like all the rest of the bowls do. Then there's no controversy. It'a ridiculous that Kansas State is ranked 4th in the entire country by the computers but is not in a BCS bowl.
They dont, and this is why i think the BCS should Get their noses out of the $15 million games and just stick to their own championship. The rules got Illinois into the Rose Bowl a few years ago where they were left *********** at USC's hands. The picking for these games should be only in the hands of the bowl committees, they should not be given a list of who they can select for their games. It has really made those games useless in my eyes cause it causes undesirable games like Clemson/West Virginia (2 teams who would NOT be in that game under the old system). They actually belong in second tier bowl games as does Michigan and Va. Tech as well. If the BCS would have no invlovement i would say Boise, Kansas St., Baylor, Arkansas and South Carolina all deserve looks before Michigan, Va. Tech, West Virgina and Clemson do. The potential good news is that the BCS is considering doing what i said, getting their influence out of those games, maybe than the $15 million games will mean something again.
this wouldn't be an issue had Ok State just taken care of business on the field
They didn't. Blame them
Once Alabama dropped the ball in October, the title shot was there for a handful of teams to take. They all failed.
Alabama would beat Ok State. LSU would be Ok State. The 2 best teams are playing.
Michigan is a complete joke. Their offense is like roullette hoping Denard Robinson can pull some slop out of his ass on every snap
They didn't. Blame them
Once Alabama dropped the ball in October, the title shot was there for a handful of teams to take. They all failed.
Alabama would beat Ok State. LSU would be Ok State. The 2 best teams are playing.
Michigan is a complete joke. Their offense is like roullette hoping Denard Robinson can pull some slop out of his ass on every snap
My sentiments exactly. Bama dropped the ball back in October and the number 2 spot was up for grabs. No body stepped up and this allowed Bama to reclaim the number 2 spot weeks later. Why is everyone overlooking the fact that Stanford, Boise, Oregon, Arkansas, and OSU ALL dropped the ball when it was crunch time?
so if we're going to be "fair" and the regular season means everything, then we may as well give LSU the NC now, right?
hold it...not so fasT right down the road from here lies a highschool..that was undefeated..how about them huh huh :1orglaugh
the Big East to add Boise St., great add for that conference. But than, San Diego St. and some weaklings from Conference USA. If thats the best the Big East can do for its survival they better hope Boise wins 20 straight conference titles once they join cause the rest of the conference after that will be pitiful. No way SDSU, SMU or UCF ever gives any SEC team a run for its money, not even Big 10(+2) school.
Strange move for San Diego st. cause now they're in a pickle where they have to find a home for their other sports where they will be taken as seriosly as they were in the Mountain West. Big West has been the primary word on where theyre going, but who even talks about the Big West to start with. WAC is also a possibility but accounts seem to be that the WAC will not take them in.
Strange move for San Diego st. cause now they're in a pickle where they have to find a home for their other sports where they will be taken as seriosly as they were in the Mountain West. Big West has been the primary word on where theyre going, but who even talks about the Big West to start with. WAC is also a possibility but accounts seem to be that the WAC will not take them in.
- Status
