SEC Logic

• WebFire

  sleeper;1004000 wrote:No one voted Wisconsin or MSU into the B1G game. #logicfail

  So then why play the game at all? Just give the trophy to MSU. Whether you are voted in or forced in really makes no difference.
• WebFire

  Question...if Alabama was in another conference but their schedule the same, with 1 loss to LSU, would you still feel the same? Or are you hung up the SEC thing?
• enigmaax

  Skyhook79;1003992 wrote:1 team, Okla St, won the best conference in the country, the other team, Alabama, didn't even make it to the 2nd best conference championship game. 1 team already had a shot at LSU at home and lost. The NC should not depend on 1 team having to beat another team twice while the other team only has to win once.

  Whether you like it or not, the NCAA doesn't rank conferences as a method for determining who deserves to be in the title game. I don't care if the Big XII is the best or the SEC is the worst, the task is to rank teams and put the top two ranked teams against each other. There are many angles convered in the process that balances any individual biases (all regions are represented with voters, multiple computers, etc.). "Winning the best conference in the country," even if it were true, would not mean you are automatically ranked in the top two teams in the country. And sorry to say, when you lose to a team that generally gets beat by 25 or so points to lesser competition, you've put yourself in a position to be questioned.
  
  Conference championship games are a joke too. Michigan State got screwed by its own conference. There's nothing good about college football, that's why none of us are watching or talking about it.
• enigmaax

  sleeper;1004000 wrote:No one voted Wisconsin or MSU into the B1G game. #logicfail

  Who cares? We already knew who was better. MSU beat Wisconsin once and had one less loss than Wisconsin in the overall standings. Why did that extra game suddenly make Wisconsin better or "champion"?
• WebFire

  enigmaax;1004016 wrote:
  Conference championship games are a joke too. Michigan State got screwed by its own conference. There's nothing good about college football, that's why none of us are watching or talking about it.

  I agree, and I actually prefer conferences with no divisions and no championship games. It leads to this type of problem.
• Skyhook79

  

  WebFire;1004014 wrote:Question...if Alabama was in another conference but their schedule the same, with 1 loss to LSU, would you still feel the same? Or are you hung up the SEC thing?

  Trick question. Alabama wouldn't schedule a tough team like LSU for an ooc game.
• fan_from_texas

  There's a difference between "best" and "most deserving." Say a team is 6-6, but they play a brutal schedule. They may be a "better" team than a 12-0 team playing a cupcake schedule (inasmuch as they'd beat them head-to-head). The 6-6 is better; the 12-0 team is more deserving.
  
  Is the point of the BCS championship to crown the best team or the most deserving? LSU currently looks like both the best and the most deserving. The #2 slot isn't as clear.
• enigmaax

  Skyhook79;1004023 wrote:Trick question. Alabama wouldn't schedule a tough team like LSU for an ooc game.

  Yes because Alabama has to go to the worst BCS conference around to find a creampuff for its "B1G" OOC game.
• sleeper

  

  enigmaax;1004020 wrote:Who cares? We already knew who was better. MSU beat Wisconsin once and had one less loss than Wisconsin in the overall standings. Why did that extra game suddenly make Wisconsin better or "champion"?

  Because they all don't play similar schedules. There's no way to say MSU played a tougher schedule than Wisconsin and would have had a shot at the championship with Wisconsins schedule. This is why LSU needs to play OK ST so we know who is better.
• sleeper

  

  fan_from_texas;1004025 wrote:There's a difference between "best" and "most deserving." Say a team is 6-6, but they play a brutal schedule. They may be a "better" team than a 12-0 team playing a cupcake schedule (inasmuch as they'd beat them head-to-head). The 6-6 is better; the 12-0 team is more deserving.
  
  Is the point of the BCS championship to crown the best team or the most deserving? LSU currently looks like both the best and the most deserving. The #2 slot isn't as clear.

  If I'm reading this correctly, I believe I have received a FFT stamp of approval.
• Skyhook79

  

  enigmaax;1004016 wrote:Whether you like it or not, the NCAA doesn't rank conferences as a method for determining who deserves to be in the title game. I don't care if the Big XII is the best or the SEC is the worst, the task is to rank teams and put the top two ranked teams against each other.

  Sure they do thats why Boise St, Utah or TCU will never got a shot at the NC even when they are undefeated. The NCAA determined that those conf were not worthy of particpating in their system. The NCAA had to finally allow them to have a chance at a BCS Bowl because they would have been sued if they didn't but they will never allow them to be in the NC game. Thats why those teams are moving to different BCS conferences.
• enigmaax

  sleeper;1004027 wrote:Because they all don't play similar schedules. There's no way to say MSU played a tougher schedule than Wisconsin and would have had a shot at the championship with Wisconsins schedule. This is why LSU needs to play OK ST so we know who is better.

  Then they really needed a 4 team conference playoff, since Wisconsin, Penn State, and Michigan were all 6-2. What a terrible conference.
• enigmaax

  Skyhook79;1004032 wrote:Sure they do thats why Boise St, Utah or TCU will never got a shot at the NC even when they are undefeated. The NCAA determined that those conf were not worthy of particpating in their system. The NCAA had to finally allow them to have a chance at a BCS Bowl because they would have been sued if they didn't but they will never allow them to be in the NC game. Thats why those teams are moving to different BCS conferences.

  There was no conference ranking supplied that dictated those choices. People watched games, made determinations of quality (both of teams and of their opponents), weighed wins/losses of each team against other teams' wins/losses, fed results into computer formulas, and came out with a ranking that supplied the top two teams for the NC game.
• WebFire

  Skyhook79;1004023 wrote:Trick question. Alabama wouldn't schedule a tough team like LSU for an ooc game.

  Don't skirt around the question.
• sleeper

  

  enigmaax;1004035 wrote:Then they really needed a 4 team conference playoff, since Wisconsin, Penn State, and Michigan were all 6-2. What a terrible conference.

  You do realize that you're only making my point stronger by solidify that nothing in CFB matters if the coaches vote Alabama #2. The circular logic used by SEC fans is an embarrassment to the Universities they represent. Enjoy!
• Skyhook79

  

  enigmaax;1004038 wrote:There was no conference ranking supplied that dictated those choices. People watched games, made determinations of quality (both of teams and of their opponents), weighed wins/losses of each team against other teams' wins/losses, fed results into computer formulas, and came out with a ranking that supplied the top two teams for the NC game.

  Yeah...ok:rolleyes:
• fan_from_texas

  sleeper;1004029 wrote:If I'm reading this correctly, I believe I have received a FFT stamp of approval.

  Yes, a tentative stamp. I mean, if the point of the national championship game is to get the two "best" teams (not the two most deserving), then Alabama could be there even if they went 0-12, as long as they were actually the second best and just had some really nasty breaks.
• lhslep134

  

  SportsAndLady;1003999 wrote:That's lhslep logic, which may be worse than SEC logic...because he's a law student and knows all!

  
  I don't say anything on this thread and you still find a way to cry about my post. Get over yourself dude. You sound like a jealous little bitch.
• sleeper

  

  fan_from_texas;1004073 wrote:Yes, a tentative stamp. I mean, if the point of the national championship game is to get the two "best" teams (not the two most deserving), then Alabama could be there even if they went 0-12, as long as they were actually the second best and just had some really nasty breaks.

  Then we agree. If the goal is to get the two best teams, it does not matter what OK ST or Alabama did during the regular season. The reality is, you are suppose to place the two most deserving teams in the NCG.
  
  I'm also amazed that one of the people I called out for a stamp of approval understands and follows the logic that I have laid out.
• Iliketurtles

  

  WebFire;1004014 wrote:Question...if Alabama was in another conference but their schedule the same, with 1 loss to LSU, would you still feel the same? Or are you hung up the SEC thing?

  If Alabama was in any other conference they would have more then one loss. The SEC is overrated.
  
  #sleeperlogic
• sleeper

  

  Con Alma did not follow my logic. In reality, he probably gets it but decided to go all Jesus on me and post some gibberish babble.
• lhslep134

  

  sleeper;1004027 wrote:Because they all don't play similar schedules. There's no way to say MSU played a tougher schedule than Wisconsin and would have had a shot at the championship with Wisconsins schedule. This is why LSU needs to play OK ST so we know who is better.

  That's a valid point, I just disagree because Alabama was necessarily eliminated from NC championship contention until OSU, Stanford, and Oregon all lost.
  
  If you have any reason to bitch, it's that Alabama losing earlier than OSU helped them, which really shouldn't be the case. All things being equal, OSU should deserve the chance to beat LSU because they won their conference and IMO you really should have to win your conference to be eligible for the NC game.
  
  Then again, this isn't the first time we've had a team that didn't win their conference playing for the national championship.
  
  I will agree with you sleeper that it isn't logical for Alabama to be playing in the national championship. And for the record, I'd much rather see OSU play LSU, even though I think OSU's offense would be exposed like other Big 12 teams in a big time bowl game against a great defense.
• sleeper

  

  lhslep134;1004097 wrote:That's a valid point, I just disagree because Alabama was necessarily eliminated from NC championship contention until OSU, Stanford, and Oregon all lost.
  
  If you have any reason to bitch, it's that Alabama losing earlier than OSU helped them, which really shouldn't be the case. All things being equal, OSU should deserve the chance to beat LSU because they won their conference and IMO you really should have to win your conference to be eligible for the NC game.
  
  Then again, this isn't the first time we've had a team that didn't win their conference playing for the national championship.

  Bingo. That is why this game is a fraud and I encourage everyone to derive all attention elsewhere so this fraud never happens again.
• enigmaax

  sleeper;1004102 wrote:Bingo. That is why this game is a fraud and I encourage everyone to derive all attention elsewhere so this fraud never happens again.

  Hey let us know how your un-occupy movement works out.
• sleeper

  

  enigmaax;1004117 wrote:Hey let us know how your un-occupy movement works out.

  Let me know how long the unemployment line is. You're a Florida grad right? I can never keep the bandwagonners vs the real fans straight since we haven't heard anything regarding Florida since Urban dumped you for a hotter wife and Tebow went to play for the hapless Broncos.