(11-20-2013 10:57 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:55 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:53 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:50 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:47 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Ok State lost to a poor Iowa State.

They also beat better teams than Alabama did that year.

But lost to a vastly inferior team.

So you can beat better teams but that one loss is more important?

WOW.

It was the central factor was it not?

You can't lose to an absolutely crap team and claim to be the best one loss team over the team that lost to the 'best' team in the country. To say otherwise is dumb.

Iowa State was 6-6 that year and went to a bowl. Not a crap team.

(11-20-2013 10:57 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:53 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:50 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:47 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Ok State lost to a poor Iowa State.

They also beat better teams than Alabama did that year.

But lost to a vastly inferior team.

Who lost the home game?

Grasping at straws?

A home loss to #1 is worse than losing to a nobody?

(11-20-2013 10:38 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 07:33 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 12:25 PM)Lurker Above Wrote:  Mizzou wins out and beats Alabama or Auburn in the SEC Championship.

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2013/...aubur.html

The above does not go there, but I will...

If Auburn beats Alabama, then Bama becomes the next to highest ranked 1 loss team.

If FSU and Baylor both lose, and either Auburn wins the SEC or Mizzou does after beating Ole Miss and Texas A&M, then the SEC will have the two highest rated teams.

Just saying...

Also just saying, an Alabama/Auburn rematch in a national championship game would be epic.

Yeah, about as epic as the Alabama and LSU rematch. You SEC people and your SEC tinted glasses are so easy to forget.

It is a National Championship and the fiasco that happened between Alabama and LSU wont be allowed to happen again. The nose dive in the Ratings will make sure of that.

Please explain how the LSU-Alabama title game was a fiasco. Oregon had a chance to be the best one loss team, but lost to #18 USC. Oklahoma State then could have stayed #2, but lost to unranked Iowa State. Stanford could have asserted themselves, but lost to Oregon by 23. Even Boise State had a shot, but lost at home to TCU. IMHO, LSU and Alabama were the two best teams in the country (with a tip of the hat to Oklahoma State) and a rematch was the best way to decide the title. Hardly a fiasco.

Alabama could have earned a spot. But they lost at home, to the team who truly deserved to be there and didn't deserve to have to beat Alabama again.

Oklahoma St. beat more good teams than Alabama. They lost in OT on the road the day after a plane crash killed several fellow athletes from Oklahoma St.

(11-20-2013 11:00 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:57 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:55 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:53 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:50 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  They also beat better teams than Alabama did that year.

But lost to a vastly inferior team.

So you can beat better teams but that one loss is more important?

WOW.

It was the central factor was it not?

You can't lose to an absolutely crap team and claim to be the best one loss team over the team that lost to the 'best' team in the country. To say otherwise is dumb.

Iowa State was 6-6 that year and went to a bowl. Not a crap team.

Grasping at straws round 2.

A poor Iowa State team.

(11-20-2013 10:58 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:52 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:50 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:45 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:40 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I didn't say that. You were the one who is so inconsistent saying Alabmaa shouldn't have gotten in 2011 but then saying that Michigan should have gotten in 2006. You can't have it both ways.

Sounds more to me like you are so desperate to find a team that has been "robbed by SEC bias" that the 2006 Michigan team is the best you can come up with. Laughable really.

I totally agree with you. To me, the only answer that you could possibly have is the 2011 Oklahoma St team. The answers of 2006 Michigan and 2012 Oregon are jokes because neither of them won their conference.

We'll have a 4 team playoff, but I guarantee you in a year like 2011, 2 SEC teams will make the playoff. Just like in 2006 when 2 Big Ten teams would have made the playoff. I just want the 4 best teams. Period.

But is impossible to say that a 2nd place team is better than any other major conference champion. They don't play the same schedule. That is when the bias happens.

2nd place SEC team this year would be a double digit favorite against Ohio State. Hell, 5th or 6th place SEC team would be a favorite against Ohio State.

So. then the other 3 teams are FSU, Oregon and Baylor.

(11-20-2013 10:57 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:53 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:50 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:47 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Ok State lost to a poor Iowa State.

They also beat better teams than Alabama did that year.

But lost to a vastly inferior team.

Who lost the home game?

So you will say just about anything to support your preconceived notion. Then it's now better to lose to an 8th place 6-7 team on the road than to the #2 team in the country?

(11-20-2013 10:45 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:43 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:42 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:38 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:33 AM)stever20 Wrote:  If that's the case then why did YOU say Michigan in 2006? You are just so butthurt about the SEC that you ignored what you are preaching.

And it's obvious that TV folks and the conference commissioners disagree with you. They know a season like 2011, no one would take serious if Alabama isn't included.

Because the SEC bias prevented Michigan from making it but aided Alabama. Seems pretty obvious bias there.

BTW, thanks for agreeing with me that Alabama had no business playing LSU.

Michigan wasn't conference champions. You are sayign that trumps all. Means Michigan had no business playing in the title game according to you. You can't flip something to just suit your arguement.

So it's ok for the SEC but not the B1G?

You were asked:
So who was robbed of a chance to play for a title so that an SEC team could play for the title over the last 7 years?

You answered Michigan 2006

So, you are saying it's ok for the Big Ten, but not for the SEC.

I have never said that there was a problem with anyone.

Michigan shouldn't have gone, but they had a better argument than Alabama. They lost by 3 on the road. Alabama lost at home.

(11-20-2013 11:01 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:00 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:57 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:55 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:53 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  But lost to a vastly inferior team.

So you can beat better teams but that one loss is more important?

WOW.

It was the central factor was it not?

You can't lose to an absolutely crap team and claim to be the best one loss team over the team that lost to the 'best' team in the country. To say otherwise is dumb.

Iowa State was 6-6 that year and went to a bowl. Not a crap team.

Grasping at straws round 2.

A poor Iowa State team.

Whatever you think will justify your team getting in.

(11-20-2013 11:03 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:01 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:00 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:57 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:55 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  So you can beat better teams but that one loss is more important?

WOW.

It was the central factor was it not?

You can't lose to an absolutely crap team and claim to be the best one loss team over the team that lost to the 'best' team in the country. To say otherwise is dumb.

Iowa State was 6-6 that year and went to a bowl. Not a crap team.

Grasping at straws round 2.

A poor Iowa State team.

Whatever you think will justify your team getting in.

A point?

Alabama justified itself by crushing LSU.

quote='Zombiewoof' pid='10038342' dateline='1384963336']

(11-20-2013 10:57 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:53 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:50 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:47 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Ok State lost to a poor Iowa State.

They also beat better teams than Alabama did that year.

But lost to a vastly inferior team.

Who lost the home game?

So you will say just about anything to support your preconceived notion. Then it's now better to lose to an 8th place 6-7 team on the road than to the #2 team in the country?
[/quote]

(11-20-2013 11:02 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:45 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:43 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:42 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:38 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  Because the SEC bias prevented Michigan from making it but aided Alabama. Seems pretty obvious bias there.

BTW, thanks for agreeing with me that Alabama had no business playing LSU.

Michigan wasn't conference champions. You are sayign that trumps all. Means Michigan had no business playing in the title game according to you. You can't flip something to just suit your arguement.

So it's ok for the SEC but not the B1G?

You were asked:
So who was robbed of a chance to play for a title so that an SEC team could play for the title over the last 7 years?

You answered Michigan 2006

So, you are saying it's ok for the Big Ten, but not for the SEC.

I have never said that there was a problem with anyone.

Michigan shouldn't have gone, but they had a better argument than Alabama. They lost by 3 on the road. Alabama lost at home.

That's a silly argument.

A home loss to #1 is worse than an away loss to a 6-6 conference bottom feeder?

If Alabama had lost to Kentucky or Miss State then I'd here with you but as it is you just come off butthurt and desperate to justify your opinion.

(11-20-2013 11:04 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:03 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:01 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:00 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:57 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  It was the central factor was it not?

You can't lose to an absolutely crap team and claim to be the best one loss team over the team that lost to the 'best' team in the country. To say otherwise is dumb.

Iowa State was 6-6 that year and went to a bowl. Not a crap team.

Grasping at straws round 2.

A poor Iowa State team.

Whatever you think will justify your team getting in.

A point?

Alabama justified itself by crushing LSU.

So they were 1-1 versus each other. Who is really the champion? Can we do best of 3?

(11-20-2013 11:06 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:04 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:03 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:01 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:00 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  Iowa State was 6-6 that year and went to a bowl. Not a crap team.

Grasping at straws round 2.

A poor Iowa State team.

Whatever you think will justify your team getting in.

A point?

Alabama justified itself by crushing LSU.

So they were 1-1 versus each other. Who is really the champion? Can we do best of 3?

I would have been cool with that.

6-9 and then 21-0.

(11-20-2013 11:05 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:02 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:45 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:43 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:42 AM)stever20 Wrote:  Michigan wasn't conference champions. You are sayign that trumps all. Means Michigan had no business playing in the title game according to you. You can't flip something to just suit your arguement.

So it's ok for the SEC but not the B1G?

You were asked:
So who was robbed of a chance to play for a title so that an SEC team could play for the title over the last 7 years?

You answered Michigan 2006

So, you are saying it's ok for the Big Ten, but not for the SEC.

I have never said that there was a problem with anyone.

Michigan shouldn't have gone, but they had a better argument than Alabama. They lost by 3 on the road. Alabama lost at home.

That's a silly argument.

A home loss to #1 is worse than an away loss to a 6-6 conference bottom feeder?

If Alabama had lost to Kentucky or Miss State then I'd here with you but as it is you just come off butthurt and desperate to justify your opinion.

So we discount all the quality wins for Oklahoma St?

bottom line, a team like Alabama in 2011(or Michigan 2006) will be in the 4 team playoff now almost every single time. A year like this probably would be the only exception- just keep in mind how rare a year like this is if we wind up with 4 undefeated teams like Alabama, FSU, Baylor, and Ohio St.

(11-20-2013 11:07 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:05 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:02 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:45 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:43 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  So it's ok for the SEC but not the B1G?

You were asked:
So who was robbed of a chance to play for a title so that an SEC team could play for the title over the last 7 years?

You answered Michigan 2006

So, you are saying it's ok for the Big Ten, but not for the SEC.

I have never said that there was a problem with anyone.

Michigan shouldn't have gone, but they had a better argument than Alabama. They lost by 3 on the road. Alabama lost at home.

That's a silly argument.

A home loss to #1 is worse than an away loss to a 6-6 conference bottom feeder?

If Alabama had lost to Kentucky or Miss State then I'd here with you but as it is you just come off butthurt and desperate to justify your opinion.

So we discount all the quality wins for Oklahoma St?

Not at all. Losing to poor teams at bad times have ruined a lot of tram's chances over the years. It's just the reality.

(11-20-2013 11:01 AM)bullet Wrote:  Alabama could have earned a spot. But they lost at home, to the team who truly deserved to be there and didn't deserve to have to beat Alabama again.

Oklahoma St. beat more good teams than Alabama. They lost in OT on the road the day after a plane crash killed several fellow athletes from Oklahoma St.

The Sagarin computer ratings calculated Alabama's 2011 strength of schedule to be the fifteenth most difficult. Alabama didn't allow a single FBS team to score more than 14 points the entire season. Teams regularly scored 24+ against OSU. I disagree with your premise.

(11-20-2013 11:02 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:57 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:53 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:50 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 10:47 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Ok State lost to a poor Iowa State.

They also beat better teams than Alabama did that year.

But lost to a vastly inferior team.

Who lost the home game?

So you will say just about anything to support your preconceived notion. Then it's now better to lose to an 8th place 6-7 team on the road than to the #2 team in the country?

That year Tulsa lost to Houston, Oklahoma St., Boise and Oklahoma, all of whom were in the top 7 and unbeaten when they played them and well into the season. Anyone can lose a game. Its who you beat who is more important.

If you want to use that argument, Texas, Oklahoma and Texas Tech only lost to each other in 2008. Florida lost to 7-4 Ole Miss at home, a team, who at the time, had already lost to Wake Forest and Vanderbilt.

(11-20-2013 11:10 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:01 AM)bullet Wrote:  Alabama could have earned a spot. But they lost at home, to the team who truly deserved to be there and didn't deserve to have to beat Alabama again.

Oklahoma St. beat more good teams than Alabama. They lost in OT on the road the day after a plane crash killed several fellow athletes from Oklahoma St.

The Sagarin computer ratings calculated Alabama's 2011 strength of schedule to be the fifteenth most difficult. Alabama didn't allow a single FBS team to score more than 14 points the entire season. Teams regularly scored 24+ against OSU. I disagree with your premise.

I'm pretty sure the computers had OSU ahead prior to the bowl games.

(11-20-2013 11:18 AM)S11 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:10 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:01 AM)bullet Wrote:  Alabama could have earned a spot. But they lost at home, to the team who truly deserved to be there and didn't deserve to have to beat Alabama again.

Oklahoma St. beat more good teams than Alabama. They lost in OT on the road the day after a plane crash killed several fellow athletes from Oklahoma St.

The Sagarin computer ratings calculated Alabama's 2011 strength of schedule to be the fifteenth most difficult. Alabama didn't allow a single FBS team to score more than 14 points the entire season. Teams regularly scored 24+ against OSU. I disagree with your premise.

I'm pretty sure the computers had OSU ahead prior to the bowl games.

OSU was ahead in the computers 2.25 to 2.75. Like 4 to 2 like OSU more. If it had been 5 to 1, it would have come down to just a few votes.