One more reason there should not be a human vote allowed in who goes to the BCSNC game. Said he would have Arkansas in the championship game if they beat LSU. Doesn't matter what Bama, Oregon, OK has done and they would deserve it because they beat the top team in the country.

What a maroon!

I heard that too. And all year he's been preaching "body of work." He's crawfishing now and I believe it's due to NOONE knowing how they'll vote and the chaos that will ensue should that happen.

Well, If Arky does beat LSU...they should belong in the debate.

Whoever gets the benefit of beating a really good UGA team in the SECCG will probably go.

Yep, Arkansas has only lost 1 game and that was to the #2 team in the country. If they beat LSU, then they did more than Alabama could. Is Arkansas beats LSU or Oklahoma beats Ok State, the BCS will be a damn mess this year.

Now that's funny...

My opinion...

Bama had their chance and should not be given another one UNLESS there are no undefeated teams left at the end. Arkansas should not be mentioned in the CG because they lost a game by 24 points. Oklahoma lost a game where they were favored by 29.5 points so they shouldn't be mentioned either.

If a one loss Arkansas team beats LSU then I can understand the argument.

You think Houston should be given a shot before Alabama gets a rematch?

I don't think there's anyone who thinks that if OSU and LSU remain undefeated, there's any reason why those two won't meet in New Orleans. Probably wouldn't be the best two teams in the nation, but it's the way the ball bounces sometimes.

It does seem as if some of the media pundits want to punish Bama for being not only in the same conference as LSU, but in the same division.

I don't count Houston any more than I counted Boise.

When did a points minimum or standard get put into effect for teams in the hunt?

What's the standard for a one-loss team to still get in the BCSCG? One point? A touchdown? Ten points?

Let's face it...there's not a good system outside of a playoff for determining who's #1. We can dog the human polls all we want, but the computer polls are just as bad, if not worse. The computer polls strongly favor strong offensive teams over strong defensive teams. One of the computer polls used in determining the BCS actually has South Carolina ranked #3 currently.

Not sure there's a good answer for that Clem, other than to say that WHO you lost to and HOW you lost to them should matter, IMO.

It's nice that you quoted everything except "My opinion".

There's two ways to do it, playoff or rankings. Any combination of the two is trouble.

If we are going by rankings, which we are. Then you can't say Alabama had there chance. That doesn't hold water, if they are number two at the end of the year they should play. They lost to the number one team in OT by a field goal, That adds credence to the argument that they are in fact the second best team.

If Arkansas beats LSU and is number two they should play.

If we were in a playoff, then you would throw all theses polls and rankings out. Alabama would be out because they cant win the SEC.

To me thats fair, but it ain't that way.

Roll Tide

OK ...

"IN YOUR OPINION" when did a points standard get instituted for a one-loss team still in the hunt for a BCSCG berth?

In addition to what coldtrail posted above...does a playoff really determine who the best team in the nation is, or is it simply a measure of who gets hot when?

Does anyone believe that the NY Giants were a better football team than the Patriots a few years back?

I think for the most part we like all like to see it settled on the field. Your right the Super Bowl winner is rarely the best team. But they are the undisputable "Champion". Thats why we love sports. Its the drama, you team or the underdog earning a chance, being the best on that day.

Its not that much of a rush to be "voted" number one. Put it in the players and coaches hands. Computers, AP ranking its just silly

We all bitch a lot about the BCS...but most of the time it puts the 2 best teams in the NC game. Other than 2005...it has gotten it right.

I'm just saying how I'd vote if I had a vote. If a team loses a game where they are favored by double digits I couldn't vote them in the CG. If a team lost a game by double digits I couldn't vote them in. Also, I wouldn't vote for a rematch unless I was sure they were the best 2 teams. Not sure how I'd determine that.

Not sure why you keep asking "when?". I've always felt that way.

2005 Texas/USC was probably the best matchup ever.

Good thing you're not a voter ;D

What if, just for shizngiggles, LSU had beaten Alabama by 10 or 12 points.

What if Alabama fell to No. 4 or 5 behind some unbeatens. LSU beats Arkansas and remains No. 1 with an unblemished record. They're waiting with boudin and Dixie in hand at the Dome on Jan. 10.

Somehow, the other unbeatens all get beaten. There aren't any unbeatens and all of them lost by anywhere between 8-12 points ... just like Alabama.

Except for one unbeaten ... Toledo. They've played 11 Division 1 teams and one 1-AA team, just like everyone else does. They've beaten everyone from 1 point in a close game to six touchdowns in their biggest blowout. They are the 1984 BYU of today's time.

Who plays LSU?

A 1-loss team that lost by double digits, or the undefeated Toledo team that did everything asked of it by the system?

I thought the 2005 game was pretty good, too.

What if there were 17 undefeated teams? I'd have a headache trying to figure out who to give my imaginary vote to.

But I'll answer the question...

I'd try to find the best one loss team and vote them #2. I'd take Bama, Oklahoma, Oregon, Stanford and Arky out of it because of the reasons I mentioned. Looks like I'd have LSU playing the Clemson/Va Tech winner. I don't even know the scores of their losses. I'm such a bad voter...

Hypothetically, if I had a vote on who the worst imaginary voter is, I'd vote for Brent.

As far as I know Div 1 football is the only sport that doesn't use a playoff of some form to determine the champion. Either an 8 team or 16 team playoff would cover all the teams that have a legitimate claim to be considered. In a 16 team playoff the first matchup could be held at the field of the highest rated team in mid Dec. Then the bowls could take up the matchups with the Sugar, Fiesta, Rose and Orange getting the championship game every 4 years. Bowl games aren't played on New Years day anyway like they use to. New contracts and a lot more money could be made.

I read all the posts in this thread, and I still don't like Craig James.

Brent, unfortunately that's part of the fallacy of the old voting system still used in concert with the BCS computer rankings.

How do you determine the best one-loss team, if there are no undefeateds or only one? By points? Strength of schedule? It's a pretty tough chore, as you noted.

Here's another problem with the voting system: most of the sportswriters who vote are working on Saturdays. They see the polls, see snippets of a game and are trying to keep up with the game in front of them to write about. They may get through in mid-afternoon and then try to go home, or work late at night and get finished after a late game. Or there may be a ranked team playing late on the West Coast while they're driving or at the hotel, and they don't see the game.

They have to go by score and highlights ... neither of which may yield a positive result to the entire game. It was a 10-7 win? Damn! No offense from Powerhouse State! I may need to vote them down ... although it could have been a monstrous defensive struggle and a really good game.

Popularity, unfortunately, also plays a big role ... Coach X is a spazbutt and I don't like him, so I'll vote for Team Y because I know a guy who dates a cheerleader there and they're a good team. It shouldn't be that way and probably 99 percent of the time it's not, but it could be and probably has been a factor at some time.

Aggravating in this day and time to have so many possibilities for a playoff based on wins-losses like in the lower levels, but money and TV ratings overpower that for D-I.

I wouldn't care as long as they keep Napa commercials out of the breaks...

Would you rather play south carolina or uga?

Uga has top sec talent and is peaking at the right time.

Those NAPA and Dairy Queen commercials suck.

Na na na na na napa know how!!!!!!!

I could watch the 5-hour energy commercial on auto-repeat. The brunette is smoking-hot:



...I'm a sucker for brunettes.

They are peaking because of playing the 86th and 111th ranked teams in Total DEF the past two weeks. GA barely beat FLA and Vandy the two weeks prior...both 12th and 22nd respectively. Don't let the smoke and mirrors fool you...they are okay, but not good.

Or better yet....

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA + Automotive...

That's just trying to pick the tallest midget.

Back back back to Jacks Jacks Jacks....ugh.