Mulva;1002012 wrote:Because if we're discussing the former, it means that every deserving team got a shot. Which is what should be happening. I really don't give a **** if your undeserving team was less undeserving than another undeserving team. That's like Seth Greenberg crying about Virginia Tech not making the NCAA tournament. If your resume isn't good enough to earn a 12-seed, you need to shut the hell up.

The issue is determining which teams are deserving and what number is appropriate. I don't think 2 teams is enough to do that. I don't think a +1 is the answer either. But that's a different discussion entirely.

Eh, it is rare that another team who did everything they could is left out. We aren't going to change our minds, but I just don't think you can crybaby if you lost to a team like Iowa State. To me, the less teams you have, the more selective the process, the less room for error. And if you've errored, you can easily be dismissed as undeserving.

From your angle, you just assume that Oklahoma State is the only one who is deserving because they were the closest. If Oklahoma State is so clearly deserving after losing to 6-6 team, why is there no outrage for Stanford, Boise State, or Houston who all lost to 10-2/11-2 teams? Everybody aside from LSU has had its flaws exposed in some way, so no one is entitled to the spot. Alabama was just deemed to be the least "undeserving" team.

VT in the BCS, while good for Clemson (extra $$$$$ for the ACC) is complete bullshit. They played nobody OOC and got reamed by us twice. The system sucks, but we might as well capitalize on it while we can.

Mulva;1002039 wrote:If Stanford would beat LSU and Alabama in back to back weeks to win a championship on the field, then who am I to say they were undeserving of being there in the first place.

Yeah, that is a good point. There's another dynamic to it that I don't have time to go into right now, but that kind of limited expansion does make more sense the way you put it than even 8 teams.

enigmaax;1002044 wrote:Eh, it is rare that another team who did everything they could is left out. We aren't going to change our minds, but I just don't think you can crybaby if you lost to a team like Iowa State. To me, the less teams you have, the more selective the process, the less room for error. And if you've errored, you can easily be dismissed as undeserving.

From your angle, you just assume that Oklahoma State is the only one who is deserving because they were the closest. If Oklahoma State is so clearly deserving after losing to 6-6 team, why is there no outrage for Stanford, Boise State, or Houston who all lost to 10-2/11-2 teams? Everybody aside from LSU has had its flaws exposed in some way, so no one is entitled to the spot. Alabama was just deemed to be the least "undeserving" team.

Though the argument is only likely to be revered by those who regularly watch Lifetime an OWN, the fact that Okie State played the day of hearing about the plane crash that killed a coach and a few others seems to be overlooked. I'm not saying they should be in it because of it but rather as an possible explanation for such a poor showing against a 6-6 team.

ytownfootball;1002063 wrote:Though the argument is only likely to be revered by those who regularly watch Lifetime an OWN, the fact that Okie State played the day of hearing about the plane crash that killed a coach and a few others seems to be overlooked. I'm not saying they should be in it because of it but rather as an possible explanation for such a poor showing against a 6-6 team.

Bama's kicker was thinking about the tornado during the LSU game which is why he missed the FGs. Boom, wipe that loss away.

karen lotz;1002079 wrote:Bama's kicker was thinking about the tornado during the LSU game which is why he missed the FGs. Boom, wipe that loss away.

Perhaps you missed the part where I said I'm not saying they should be in it because of it but rather as an possible explanation for such a poor showing against a 6-6 team.

:rolleyes:

ytownfootball;1002083 wrote:Perhaps you missed the part where I said I'm not saying they should be in it because of it but rather as an possible explanation for such a poor showing against a 6-6 team.

:rolleyes:

I know. I gave a possible explanation for Bama's loss.

karen lotz;1002092 wrote:I know. I gave a possible explanation for Bama's loss.

Oh...well shit! Then why didn't you say so in your post...or were you just being "that guy" as usual?

at any rate my bad

Seriously karen do you ever post something that isnt an argument against something someone says? Give it a fuckin rest man..

karen lotz;1002092 wrote:I know. I gave a possible explanation for Bama's loss.

The tornadoes in Alabama happened in April way before the season started. The Okla St plane crash happened the same day the football team played huge difference.

Skyhook79;1002186 wrote:The tornadoes in Alabama happened in April way before the season started. The Okla St plane crash happened the same day the football team played huge difference.

The town is still destroyed. Players probably saw the destruction on the way into the stadium the night of the LSU game. Had to be weighing heavy on their minds.

Plus it didn't seem to impact how Oklahoma State built up a 24-7 lead or whatever it was, did it?

ytownfootball;1002063 wrote:Though the argument is only likely to be revered by those who regularly watch Lifetime an OWN, the fact that Okie State played the day of hearing about the plane crash that killed a coach and a few others seems to be overlooked. I'm not saying they should be in it because of it but rather as an possible explanation for such a poor showing against a 6-6 team.

Yeah, I've seen people latching onto that to try and explain Ok State's loss away. Certainly was a sad event for which we can all have compassion. I don't know how close any of the football players were to the women's basketball coaches that it would personally affect them. But even if there's something to that, here's a thought.

You know what a champion does? Overcomes adversity. The teams they write books and movies about are teams that win against overwhelming odds, not teams that whine after a loss and blame it on someone's death. Loyola Marymount lost its best player - leading scorer and rebounder - and made its best run in school history (basketball). Brett Favre threw for like 900 yards in the game after his dad died. Colorado had its QB die back in the late 80s and it launched them to the greatest success in school history (undefeated regular season the very next year, national championship 2 years after he died).

Not to mention that if someone is going to argue that, they've got to explain why all those bad feelings that prevented them from playing up to par didn't hit them until about 10 minutes left in the 3rd quarter - right before their 24-7 lead started slipping away.