If....!!!!!

[billybud]

Also...Using Eric's methodolgy...Boise before Georgia. That play off has been played.

[Eric]

Also...Using Eric's methodolgy...Boise before Georgia. That play off has been played.

I think Boise State has a better resume than Georgia right now. Georgia hasn't played an appreciably better schedule thus far. Vanderbilt is mediocre, Tennessee is mediocre, Florida is mediocre, Auburn is mediocre, Mississippi State is mediocre. I don't see any overwhelmingly impressive victories and Boise State beat them head to head.

They key to my point is that, all else being equal, I don't want to see rematches. I don't care how close they are. As long as there are other feasible options, rematches (especially intradivision rematches) should be avoided at all costs. If you play Bama and LSU again, the first game was pointless and a complete waste of time. If Alabama wins the national title game against LSU....So what? What conclusions can we draw? They went 1-1 against each other. I would vote LSU #1 in my poll since they beat Alabama on the road, which is more impressive to me than beating them on a neutral field.

I'm not advocating Houston on that schedule per se. I'm saying Houston is preferable to Alabama in this scenario because of the rematch factor. It's not about how good we think the teams are, it's about who is most deserving and I eliminate Alabama out of hand (not the SEC West champs, but they're the best team in the land!).

[Eric]

As Eric says, that game hasd already been played....Bama beat 'em badly...they are out.

Or should be...Bama was barely beaten by LSU in OT...Arkansas was dragged up and down the field by Alabama.....

Or how about this logic: Arkansas beats LSU, gets into the SEC title game, loses to Georgia. Since we're so convinced of the fact that 11-1 LSU and 11-1 Bama are the best teams, let's just go ahead and have two teams in the national title game who didn't even win their division due to the relevant tiebreaker used to solve the three way-tie. Why not? LSU has a better resume than Oklahoma State and Virginia Tech and the same for Alabama. If the resume is all we care about, then so what?

[RazorHawk]

If all the conferences were of equal and the schedules were all very similar, I could agree with what you are saying Eric. But the BCS has a mission to find the best two teams to play for the championship, thus conference strength and schedule strength must be a big part of the equation. It is conceivable that Arkansas could wind up #1 in the BCS and not be the Western Division representative in the SEC championship. All of yesterday's upsets created this scenario. On Thursday it looked like even with an Arkansas win over LSU and an 11-1 finish, that Arkansas would not even be in a BCS bowl game; now, they may wind up in THE BCS Bowl Championship game.

Nebraska one year played for the championship and did not win their conference.

Do you remember when Nebraska, Oklahoma and Colorado wound up ranked 1,2,3 in the final polls. All in the Big Eight conference. Of course there wasn't a BCS championship game, but had there been, there would have been a rematch.

[Eric]

Right, it has obviously happened in the past. Nebraska and Oklahoma didn't win their conferences yet they still managed to play for the title. I don't have to like it though

I don't think the SEC is otherworldy-good this season. There is a lot of strength at the top. Florida, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt, Tennessee, and Auburn aren't challenges for anybody this season. Ole Miss and Kentucky are awful. You could say this about any conference really, and that would make my point. All I'm asking for is for different teams to have a shot. There's no sense in having a rematch when the game has been played and you haven't exhausted all possibilities.

[billybud]

I have no problem with having teams in the title game who are 11-1 in the SEC and didn't win their division.

That is semantics for someone who is looking for an out when looking at the "best teams".

If you have a problem with two 11-1 SEC teams from the west playing for it this year, you surely must have a problem with Boise who doesn't have a division to win and has a lesser resume.

But, Hokies like your thinking. Put in a much weaker VT, who did win their division rather than a 11-1 LSU or Bama. nutty, I think!

[RazorHawk]

I want the best two teams to play. For a while it looked like a rematch of Oregon and LSU was a very possible game. I too, would prefer to not have a rematch, but if the best two teams are determined, they should play, not substitute a team that is not one of the top two, so to not have a rematch.

Kind of like having a rematch in for a conference championship. If both teams win their division, then they play, even if they played earlier in the year.

[Eric]

That is semantics for someone who is looking for an out when looking at the "best teams".

And that is the issue I take with your line of thinking. I know it's the BCS' "job" to sort out the two "best" teams. And while it is all a matter of interpretation, this is the kind of thinking that had people crowing for a Michigan/OSU rematch. I wanted the rematch in 2006, but you can guess why . I was being extremely biased, but my reasoning was that Michigan lost on the road by 3, so it was basically a draw. I think that's more justifiable than this situation.

Michigan had their shot against Ohio State, and they failed. Nobody should have been comparing resumes between Florida and Michigan and declare, "Michigan has the better resume, therefore they ought to play for the championship." Florida should have been the next in line to take on Ohio State because Michigan had their opportunity as a function of their schedule.

[Eric]

Kind of like having a rematch in for a conference championship. If both teams win their division, then they play, even if they played earlier in the year.

I don't like this, but it is a casualty of the size of the conferences. Since you don't play everybody in the other division, it's there as a check for when teams who may not play each other could each have a claim for the conference title.

[billybud]

That is semantics for someone who is looking for an out when looking at the "best teams".

And that is the issue I take with your line of thinking. I know it's the BCS' "job" to sort out the two "best" teams. And while it is all a matter of interpretation, this is the kind of thinking that had people crowing for a Michigan/OSU rematch. I wanted the rematch in 2006, but you can guess why . I was being extremely biased, but my reasoning was that Michigan lost on the road by 3, so it was basically a draw. I think that's more justifiable than this situation.

Michigan had their shot against Ohio State, and they failed. Nobody should have been comparing resumes between Florida and Michigan and declare, "Michigan has the better resume, therefore they ought to play for the championship." Florida should have been the next in line to take on Ohio State because Michigan had their opportunity as a function of their schedule.

I did not want Michigan back then, because I did not think they were one of the two best teams. I am not particularly biased in terms of conference...but I have, since joining this site, steadily maintained that the body of work must mean something.

Wins must have value. Often, a loss is only the function of playing a very tough schedule. When you play a bunch of good teams, the odds on losing a game are much higher than if you, like Houston, do not play a top 30 team.

[donovan]

If there is an analogy, and I am not sure there is. What is best...to be the Heavyweight Boxing champ or the welterweight...whatever the heck that is...a great mystery throughout the ages.....Most think the Heavyweight. But in fact, the flyweight is not going to beat the heavyweight.

So in football you have weight divisions...so quit trying to lump them. The Houstons and Boises are aberrations in a given time frame. Get the top 30 Heavy weights and round up some middle weights and bantamweights..hmmm...they would all be in the West....and do that.

[GoBoilers]

No excuses now Hawg fans. Win out and you WILL be National Champs.

[Derek]

Also...Using Eric's methodolgy...Boise before Georgia. That play off has been played.

I think Boise State has a better resume than Georgia right now. Georgia hasn't played an appreciably better schedule thus far. Vanderbilt is mediocre, Tennessee is mediocre, Florida is mediocre, Auburn is mediocre, Mississippi State is mediocre. I don't see any overwhelmingly impressive victories and Boise State beat them head to head.

They key to my point is that, all else being equal, I don't want to see rematches. I don't care how close they are. As long as there are other feasible options, rematches (especially intradivision rematches) should be avoided at all costs. If you play Bama and LSU again, the first game was pointless and a complete waste of time. If Alabama wins the national title game against LSU....So what? What conclusions can we draw? They went 1-1 against each other. I would vote LSU #1 in my poll since they beat Alabama on the road, which is more impressive to me than beating them on a neutral field.

I'm not advocating Houston on that schedule per se. I'm saying Houston is preferable to Alabama in this scenario because of the rematch factor. It's not about how good we think the teams are, it's about who is most deserving and I eliminate Alabama out of hand (not the SEC West champs, but they're the best team in the land!).

Houston is preferable to Alabama because that's what the made up rules say.

You think I'm bad now, wait until the "put Alabama in the game" drumbeat really get's going.

[Dossenator]

Well, on the ESPN BCS Countdown show tonight all the talkng heads agreed that if Arkansas beats LSU then Ark will play in the BCS NC game. I too do not want a rematch...but I am a Hog fan and want them to have a shot to win the NC. Go Hogs!!!!

[Derek]

Well, on the ESPN BCS Countdown show tonight all the talkng heads agreed that if Arkansas beats LSU then Ark will play in the BCS NC game. I too do not want a rematch...but I am a Hog fan and want them to have a shot to win the NC. Go Hogs!!!!

Hence the double standard. I do not agree with this one iota....and this has nothing to do with whether I like Arkansas or not.

They do NOT need to go to the NCG UNLESS THE WIN THE SEC.

That's the mantra that we heard up and down the TV channels in 2007. And I will not recognize or support an Arkansas or Alabama NC unless they win the SEC. NO exceptions.