I knew I should have went with my back up plan........

It's a good thing Alabama has 2 kickers, allowing each one to specialize at what they don't do well. This was not a very well played game.

I still think Bama is the better team after seeing this one, but both of them are very beatable because they just don't have very strong QB play. Both teams have guys who are competent enough to manage a game, but not good enough to go out and make the plays to win one.

If either defense has a letdown game (not very likely) they'll be in trouble.

Hb31187;959825 wrote:On defense definitely

FIFY

Hb31187;959838 wrote:Those 2 teams do not even come close to matching OSU/MIchigans offense that year. Besides Richardson, honestly hwo many position players do you think will be playing on sundays from this game on offense?

How many from the 06 game? Henne doesn't count.

David Pollack just said Bama is the 2nd most complete team in the country behind LSU

lulz, how can you watch that game and call them a complete team? THEY HAVE NO OFFENSE HOW CAN THEY BE A COMPLETE TEAM

SportsAndLady;959868 wrote:David Pollack just said Bama is the 2nd most complete team in the country behind LSU

lulz, how can you watch that game and call them a complete team? THEY HAVE NO OFFENSE HOW CAN THEY BE A COMPLETE TEAM

Name 1 more complete team than either one of those teams.

j_crazy;959866 wrote:How many from the 06 game? Henne doesn't count.

Ginn, Beanie, Manningham, Breaston, Robo, Gonzo, Hartline, is Pittman in the NFL?

j_crazy;959866 wrote:How many from the 06 game? Henne doesn't count.

Henne
Manningham
Breaston
Beanie
Ginn
Robiskie
Hartline
Gonzalez
Ballard.


Thats not counting Pittman And Hart who got some PT for a few years and Smith who had a few starts but is no longer in the NFL

karen lotz;959871 wrote:Name 1 more complete team than either one of those teams.

I just don't see how you can claim a team is complete after scoring 6 points lol

cats gone wild;959830 wrote:You have seen in the first 8 games what type of offenses these teams have. Smoked ORE, WVU, PSU, AUB etc. Maybe its just that these teams defenses are unreal?

The defenses are top notch but I don't know if I feel like they are so good they can't possibly exist. Also, if we are using past games as a benchmark to determine the all time greatness of 'bama and LSU then I feel like its worth mentioning that the mighty WVU was slain by the exact same point margin LSU managed by another powerhouse team, the Syracuse Orange. Also Penn State, another offensive juggernaut, put up two more than what LSU managed against 'bama then went on to produce 14 points against Temple and 10 against Illinois while covering up a sex scandal that would make a Catholic priest blush.

SportsAndLady;959879 wrote:I just don't see how you can claim a team is complete after scoring 6 points lol

The opponent had something to do with that. If you can say with such certainty that they aren't a complete team, then you should be able to rattle off at least 1 team, right? I'm not a huge SEC fan in general, but its pretty easy to see that those were the two best teams in the country.

karen lotz;959871 wrote:Name 1 more complete team than either one of those teams.

Stanford

I was just gonna say, Stanford

No one's defense touches Bama or LSU's, but a good amount of teams have good defenses and competent offenses.

Skyhook79;959894 wrote:Stanford

Andrew Luck is good, that's pretty much it.

Boise State.

Yeah, I said it.

How is it "easy to tell" that these are the best 2 teams in the nation? Good defense or not...both offenses were painfully vanilla and they both clearly leaned on their defense heavily.

Mulva;959903 wrote:Boise State.

Yeah, I said it.

haha I was going to suggest them and even had it typed in but deleted it.

Hb31187;959905 wrote:How is it "easy to tell" that these are the best 2 teams in the nation? Good defense or not...both offenses were painfully vanilla and they both clearly leaned on their defense heavily.

I don't understand that either...neither of these teams showed they were clearly the 2 best teams in the country.

I wouldn't be surprised if neither of these two teams play in the title game

Here's the thing. Put Alabama out there against Oklahoma State's defense and Richardson goes crazy, the offensive line would flat out dominate and McCarron would actually be able to put up quality numbers. He could easily have 250 yards, 2 TD's and have a respectable percentage. That's the difference. How many BCS games have we seen this exactly?

Matt Flynn was an awful QB in the SEC, he was one of the worst 4 in the league the year LSU won the title but against Ohio State, who was a very good defense, he looked better than normal. Both of these offenses would not look nearly as pathetic against someone like Oklahoma State. There would be a far better chance the defenses would look closer to as dominant though.

Hypothetical world A

Team ranked #1 plays team ranked #5 and wins. Team ranked #2 plays team ranked #9 and wins. They both stay ranked #1 and #2, respectively.

Hypothetical world B

Team ranked #1 plays team ranked #2. Team ranked #1 wins. #2 now ranked #4.

In what universe does that make sense?

You've already ranked them #2. The fact that they are, or are not, playing the team ranked #1 should have no bearing on where you rank them. If the argument is that 'you want other teams to have a shot' it seems to be an argument for a playoff where more 'last man standing' type games can and will take place. By design, rather than by chance.

Agree with your assessment. However, it has become the "nature of the polls" to drop teams who lose, regardless of who, where or how they lose. The question isn't whether Bama will drop, it's "how far?" I think we all know the reasonable answer, and it's what you said, to #4. IMO, this is fair, and while I don't think either Stanford or Oklahoma State are better than Alabama (and I'd guarantee you Bama would be at least a 4-point favorite in Vegas over either), they are justifiably be ranked ahead of them until either or both lose.

Now, if both Oklahoma State and Stanford lose, and Alabama wins out, they will finish #2. Their 1-loss resume would be better than any other 1-loss team. Would look like this...assuming OU beats OSU, Oregon beats Stanford and they all finish with 1-loss.

Alabama - 1 loss against #1 (LSU by 3) and unbeaten
Oregon - 1 loss against #1 (LSU by 20) and unbeaten
Stanford - 1 loss against #3 (Oregon at home)
Oklahoma State - 1 loss against #4 (Oklahoma at home)
Oklahoma - 1 loss against unranked (Texas Tech at home)

Essentially, that's how you could rank the 1-loss teams, and if the "nature of the polls" didn't apply and just slot the team who has the least-recent loss as #2, a rematch would be more than justified.

A lot of football to play however...

Forget good defense, this is just bad offense. You know the media would be making fun of B1G schools if they had put up this snoozer, but since its the SEC you won't hear much. Both of these teams are overrated, and I can't wait for Stanford or Okla State to put a whooping on either of these teams.

If there's a rematch no one would watch. I certainly wish I could have gotten back the 3 hours I wasted watching these average at best teams.

Objectively, I don't see either OSU or Stanford rolling LSU...it's not going to happen. If something shocking happens, it would be that LSU would actually look like a quality offense against Oklahoma State's defense. Okie State's defense is porous, so they better plan on putting up 40+ to beat LSU.

I'm not sure how anyone could watch that game and come away convinced that those were the best two teams in the country. Both offenses are average at best. QB play is below average. Two great teams, but far from definitively the best two teams in the country. Not a very well played game.

Here's to hoping there is no rematch.