Who did USC lose to again???

[Nickelback]

Oh yeah, that's right, California. . .

OU lost to Kansas State (who beat Cal) and LSU has the best quality loss IMO by losing to Florida.

USC can cry all they want but they lost to the most inferior team of the three. Should never have lost to Cal. . .

Although I think this finally gets rid of the BCS which will be great, the right teams are still gonna play for it in the end.

Looks like we get to see Michigan and USC play after all eh Scott?!?! I can't wait to see the line for this one and will take Michigan without question if the line is 7 or higher. . .

 

[Sun Tzu]

We can debate this one in circles. LSU lost at home which to me is worst of all. LSU was a DD fav against a 3-3 Florida coming off a miracle win at Kentucky with a frosh QB in his 2nd start and LSU scored all of 7 points. I would hardly call it a "quality loss"

 

[Mr Hockey]

We look at the whole season & if you do look at that, there is no debating which of the 3 games was the worst loss as far as who the opponent was.

 

[Sun Tzu]

Mr Hockey I again disagree. A home loss is inexcusable for a team claiming a stake in a title. Is Cal the worst of the 3 teams, probably. Of course they didnt rout USC, like KState and Florida did to OU and LSU

 

[Mr Hockey]

The whole system allegedly goes by the whole season & regardless of where the game was played at, LSU lost to a top 20 team, as did Oklahoma while USC lost to a team that is unranked & has one less loss then Florida & Kansas State combined.

The two deserving teams at this point are LSU & USC since of the three USC lost the earliest & why shouldn't Oklahoma get penalized for losing this late when teams like Tennessee, Kansas State, Texas, etc in the past have.

LSU should be #1 over these two schools. They play in a better conference, have beaten more ranked teams, & beat a good Georgia team by a combined score of 51-23 & the Bulldogs were ranked in the top 10 both times.

LSU & USC are playing the best football to end the season.

 

[gman2]

like sun tzu said, lsu did not lose to a top 20 team.

 

[Sun Tzu]

Not to be nitpicky but you cant say "what the whole system is based upon" and then look at a point differential or a team beating another team twiice- those dont count in the "system". As it shows, rational minds can genuinely disagree which is how it should be - unless they actually decide it on the field.

 

[Mr Hockey]

Well even if you throw out the combined score factor. The system claims to look at the whole season & looking at the whole season Florida is a top 15 team. They are #14 in the BCS going into Saturday while Cal is nowhere to be found. USC's loss was to an inferior opponent to LSU's based on a whole season & those are the facts. Even with all of that USC deserves to play in the title game just because of pass history where teams who lost late got screwed most times.

 

[DELLMONT]

I think we all can at least agree there should be at least some sort of a 4 or 8 team playoff...
by the way LSU looks like the best team in my mind and I hate everything about that state. Whether USC or OU play LSU I don't care but I'm still not sold on USC. I don't care about a team beating up on sad competition (PAC-10).

i THINK if LSU plays in sugar they will win who ever they play, unless you've experienced that atmosphere you couldn't possibly understand the advantage they will get by playing in the big N.O.



-DELLMONT

 

[DELLMONT]

Even with all of that USC deserves to play in the title game just because of pass history

WOW, THIS FORUM NEVER CEASES TO AMAZE ME...



-DELLMONT

 

[Mr Hockey]

What is your complaint Dell?

My past history comment isn't based on tradition but what has usually happened to teams when they lost this late in the season. They usually lost their shot at the title.

Oh by the way when you have the time, look at this button on your keyboard, it is the CAPS LOCK button.

 

[Sun Tzu]

Should there be a playoff -sure. But we will have some of the same problems. You are never going to have a clear cut 4 or 8. And these conferences to me are a real issue. Ohio State didnt even win their conference last year (at least to me). Only the ACC and Big Least actually play all of their conference foes. Only some conferences have title games, which generally tend to hurt those conferences (Texas, Neb, KStae, and no perhaps OU have all lost Natl title shots in just 6 Big 12 title games), often these title games are rematches, etc. And if there are 8, they will almost for sure have to let in the shit conferences. Not to mention when there is a playoff you can be sure there wont be good non-conference scheduling any longer.

Also, notice what is being done in future schedules to offset the "late-loss" issues. it is all but decided that Miami-Fla St will open every season for the ACC. Other conferences are discussing the same thing.

 

[DELLMONT]

TRUE, but no one DESERVES to play in the title game because of PAST history. It should be the best two teams right now...and thats lsu & usc(i guess). Lsu will win big if thats the match up.



-DELLMONT

 

[mjalam]

LSU would not destroy USC....no way...it would be a good competitive game

 

[Sun Tzu]

Mr Hockey if the whole system claims to look at the whole season it doesnt matter when a team loses or who is playing best "at then end of the season" , does it? Isnt that again a bit inconsistent?

 

[Mr Hockey]

TRUE, but no one DESERVES to play in the title game because of PAST history. It should be the best two teams right now...and thats lsu & usc(i guess). Lsu will win big if thats the match up.



-DELLMONT

Did you miss my point? I think LSU & USC are playing the best football right now.

 

[DELLMONT]

They don't necessarily have to let the "shit conferences" in the 4 or even 8 team playoff, also non-conf scheduling can still have quality match-up if you use a bsc type of system to choose those four or eight teams. I think usc, lsu, ou, and michigan would be a nice playoff. We also wouldn't have to deal with all the current BS...

-DELLMONT

 

[Mr Hockey]

Mr Hockey if the whole system claims to look at the whole season it doesnt matter when a team loses or who is playing best "at then end of the season" , does it? Isnt that again a bit inconsistent?

I personally think the system is stupid & should be determined on the field.

My comments on when teams lost too who & who they lost too are just based on the reality of the system that is in place right now.

Of all the 3 teams USC's loss clearly was the worst based on the season but based on the other side of the coin, their loss was at the best time.

The above statement just proves how ridiculous this system is but that is how it has played out over the last few years. It has usually been about who you lost too & especially when you lost too them.

 

[DELLMONT]

Even with all of that USC deserves to play in the title game just because of pass history

WOW, THIS FORUM NEVER CEASES TO AMAZE ME...



-DELLMONT

 

[gardenweasel]

bcs aside...from a neutral fan`s perspective..

bcs aside...from a neutral fan`s perspective..

this type of loss coming this late in the season,be it fair or unfair,will tarnish the championship game if oklahoma goes....

like it or not,timing is very important ....for perception if nothing else....

strictly speaking as a fan,i`d be very excited about seeing a usc/lsu match-up......i`ve been around more than a couple forums and believe me,the lsu/usc debate is raging everywhere...
....

this was a devastating loss for oklahoma....everything was on the line...forget the spread....all they had to do was win...and they failed miserably....

i`d like to see the 2 teams that finished their seasons like champions play....the bloom came off the rose for oklahoma tonight...

i`d really look forward to seeing usc/lsu.....

i