There's a few reasons why Alabama should not be in the title game (assuming LSU wins the SEC Championship Game).

1. We've seen LSU v. Alabama already, and it stunk. The game was very boring. You can't convince me that it was just TWO great defenses. Yes, there was some really GOOD defense... but both offenses STUNK. The numerous missed field goals didn't help the quality of the game either.

2. If Bama does make the title game and barely beats LSU... what does that prove? There is still a very strong argument that LSU is the better team. LSU went to Bama, at night and WON. Who cares if Bama wins at a neutral site? I don't think that would prove anything. I don't think LSU vs. Bama would really resolve any issue regarding the best team.

3. OSU v. Michigan; If that rematch didn't happen neither should this. At least their game was entertaining. (Nor do I think we should have any re-match with the current set up)

4. If you can't win your conference, you should be playing for the National Title (in a non-tournament format). With the current set up... the different athletic leagues are pretty much pools. If you can't win your own pool, you don't advance.

Like I said, if Oklahoma and Houston shit the bed and there are no other 1 loss teams, then they can have their circle jerking rematch. Otherwise, bring on someone else, Alabama had their chance.

Fly4Fun;998195 wrote:There's a few reasons why Alabama should not be in the title game (assuming LSU wins the SEC Championship Game).

1. We've seen LSU v. Alabama already, and it stunk. The game was very boring. You can't convince me that it was just TWO great defenses. Yes, there was some really GOOD defense... but both offenses STUNK. The numerous missed field goals didn't help the quality of the game either.

2. If Bama does make the title game and barely beats LSU... what does that prove? There is still a very strong argument that LSU is the better team. LSU went to Bama, at night and WON. Who cares if Bama wins at a neutral site? I don't think that would prove anything. I don't think LSU vs. Bama would really resolve any issue regarding the best team.

3. OSU v. Michigan; If that game didn't neither should this. At least that game was entertaining. (Nor do I think we should have any re-match with the current set up)

4. If you can't win your conference, you should be playing for the National Title (in a non-tournament format). With the current set up... the different athletic leagues are pretty much pools. If you can't win your own pool, you don't advance.

So to paraphrase, you believe Alabama shouldn't be in the title game because you hate the SEC but can't think of a legitimate reason they shouldn't be in.

enigmaax;998212 wrote:So to paraphrase, you believe Alabama shouldn't be in the title game because you hate the SEC but can't think of a legitimate reason they shouldn't be in.

I believe he listed 4 valid reasons and none of them include hating the SEC.

sleeper;998216 wrote:I believe he listed 4 valid reasons and none of them include hating the SEC.

Not one single valid reason.

1. Doesn't matter how much you enjoyed the first game or how much you think the offenses stunk. Oklahoma State's defense that has held two opponents under 20 points is equally awful. Point negated.
2. It isn't a series. The winner of the championship game is the BCS champion. What's unresolved?
3. OSU vs. Michigan 5 years ago has absolutely zero to do with Alabama, Oklahoma State, Houston, or anyone else this season. As I've already pointed out, if you are using past seasons as evidence to pick a team, you'd have to go with the conference that always wins BCS title games over the conference that always loses BCS title games. Or you'd have had to put Cincinnati in the title game a few years ago because previous Big East champs that went undefeated made it a few times.
4. There is no major sport that doesn't offer non-champions to have a shot at the championship and there's nothing that inherently precludes a #2 team in one conference from being the #2 team in the entire country. Conferences are not pools and are not equally balanced and there's never been a pretense of such when conferences were formed.

Fly4Fun;998195 wrote:There's a few reasons why Alabama should not be in the title game (assuming LSU wins the SEC Championship Game).

1. We've seen LSU v. Alabama already, and it stunk. The game was very boring. You can't convince me that it was just TWO great defenses. Yes, there was some really GOOD defense... but both offenses STUNK. The numerous missed field goals didn't help the quality of the game either.

2. If Bama does make the title game and barely beats LSU... what does that prove? There is still a very strong argument that LSU is the better team. LSU went to Bama, at night and WON. Who cares if Bama wins at a neutral site? I don't think that would prove anything. I don't think LSU vs. Bama would really resolve any issue regarding the best team.

3. OSU v. Michigan; If that rematch didn't happen neither should this. At least their game was entertaining. (Nor do I think we should have any re-match with the current set up)

4. If you can't win your conference, you should be playing for the National Title (in a non-tournament format). With the current set up... the different athletic leagues are pretty much pools. If you can't win your own pool, you don't advance.

QQ

enigmaax;998212 wrote:So to paraphrase, you believe Alabama shouldn't be in the title game because you hate the SEC but can't think of a legitimate reason they shouldn't be in.

yup

Way to reiterate what has been argued multiple times already.

I like number 3. Both those teams got beat down that year and were clearly not the best 2 in the country that year. You cannot tell until there is a tournament so why have a rematch?

1) (only reason needed) There's no reason to believe a rematch won't be the same kind of crapfest the first meeting was. The idea of what we want being somehow irrelevant is nonsense. We are the customers, not the teams, not the institutions.

queencitybuckeye;998451 wrote:1) (only reason needed) There's no reason to believe a rematch won't be the same kind of crapfest the first meeting was. The idea of what we want being somehow irrelevant is nonsense. We are the customers, not the teams, not the institutions.

We are the customers? It's not their job to entertain us. Two shitty teams can have a great game, that doesn't mean they are better than LSU and Alabama. The idea of the title game is to try to determine who is the best team, not to try to hold your attention.

I would personally would like to see another team get a shot at the championship but I really don't have a problem with it being a rematch.

xKoToVxSyNdRoMe;998481 wrote:We are the customers? It's not their job to entertain us. Two shitty teams can have a great game, that doesn't mean they are better than LSU and Alabama. The idea of the title game is to try to determine who is the best team, not to try to hold your attention.

I would personally would like to see another team get a shot at the championship but I really don't have a problem with it being a rematch.

yes, we are customers that the NCAA try to please. Thats why you will see teams like Michigan get an at large bid over Boise, because of the bigger fan base.

Pick6;998487 wrote:yes, we are customers that the NCAA try to please. Thats why you will see teams like Michigan get an at large bid over Boise, because of the bigger fan base.

true for other BCS games, not national championship game.