Views
588
Comments
130
  • November 09, 2009 11:59 PM ET

The BCS Strikes Again!

BSchwartz07 (128-27-6) vs JoePa's Avenger (3-2-0)
19
Votes
14
Votes
19
Votes
14
Votes


After losing to Alabama by 2 scores the LSU Tigers moved UP from 9 to 8 in the BCS???

Are you kidding me?

-The only win LSU has had against a ranked team was against Georgia, who is 5-4 overall and nowhere near the top 25 right now. Leaving them with ZERO wins against ranked teams.

-Sure their two losses came from great teams, but in both games they lost by MULTIPLE scores, so it was not like they lost on a last second play. Plus "quality losses" is NOT a factor in rankings.

- Their wins come from opponents with a combined record of 29-36

-The only winning teams they have beaten are 7-3 Louisiana-Lafayette (if you want to count that), 7-3 Auburn, and 5-4 Georgia. So, the whole argument of a hard schedule is out the window.

-Claiming that they play in the Super Tough SEC really does not fly either since there are only 3 ranked teams in the SEC, puts them tied with the Mountain West Conference, behind the ACC, Big East, Big 10 (all with 4) and the Pac 10 (with 5)

So after all of that, how is it that LSU is moving UP in the BCS with a loss? The system is already a joke, but this is out of control!


Aight yo, I know this is not going to be the popular opinion, saying the BCS has its merits and all, but I think I can make kind of an argument. I'll break it down for ya. Of course I also believe Penn State is still the cream of the crop in the Big 10!

Ok here we go.

LSU is ranked 8th in the BCS. Aight. They have two loses. #1 Florida and #2 Alabama. Based on this alone, 8 being lower than 1 and 2, LSU could be ranked this high in the BCS.

Below LSU in BCS:

#9 USC - Lost to Washington who in turn lost to LSU, UCLA, Stanford, Notre Dame, Arizona State, and Oregon. USC also lost to Oregon who lost to Stanford and Bosie State.

#10 Iowa - Lost to Northwestern, who lost to Syracuse, Minnesota, Penn State (yeah boy), and Michigan State.

#11 Ohio State - Lost to USC, who lost to Washington and Oregon. Also lost to Purdue, who in turn lost to Northern Illinois, Oregon, Notre Dame, Northwestern, Minnesota, and Wisconcin.

#12 Pitt - Lost to North Carolina State, who in turn lost to almost everyone, including Duke.

So by this logic, LSU, who has lost to two top ranked, undefeated teams, is ranked higher than teams that have lost to teams that lost to crap team


Ok, here is what is wrong with your theory, ANYBODY CAN LOSE A GAME.

So why reward a team for a quality loss?

By your theory Tennesee should be ranked higher than LSU, since they played Florida and Bama closer (LSU, lost to Bama by 11, Florida by 10) (Tenn lost to Florida by 10 and Bama by 2), right?

Teams should be ranked on what they have accomplished, and in the case of LSU that is NOTHING!

-Pittsburgh has a win over a top 25 team and only 1 loss on the season, yet they are ranked #12

-USC has taken down 3 top 25 teams this year (with two more ranked teams left to LSU with 0)

-Sure Iowa lost, but they have a win over Penn State and Wisconsin (both ranked) and have 1 loss to LSU having 2, and their loss was by a single possession

-Even Ohio State has wins over 2 ranked squads and their 3 point loss to #3 in the country looks better than a 11 point loss, right?

-I could go on, but the point here is that outside of LSU every team has proven themselves ON THE FIELD, while LSU lives by the idea that the SEC is good, are you kidding me?

Show me what LSU has done ON THE FIELD to deserve their ranking? And tell me why they move up with a loss?


Wrong, according to my logic LSU should be ranked above Tennessee because because A) the Vols have more losses and B) they lost to a horrible UCLA side. Not really sure how you think my logic puts Tennessee over LSU?

LSU has accomplished nothing? They are 7-2 in the conference that has won the last three national championships. They posted wins against Washington, who beat USC, Georgia, who was ranked in the top 25 before their loss to LSU, and Auburn who was initially ranked at 5-0 and has some decent, if not spectacular wins. Not LSU's fault the SEC has been average against itself this season.

Pitt lost to a bad, bad, bad NC State team. Pitt is good, but not good enough to win games they SHOULD win.

USC has been upset twice this year. Pitt once, Iowa once. LSU has not been upset once this season. You make that sound so easy, yet the other big squads you mention have embarrasing losses.

Ohio State's schedule is based on a loss to USC and (gulp) Purdue, and wins against average Big 10 competition. How is this better than LSU?

Again, I'm not saying I'm arguing the easy side here. I'm just doing the best I can with the logic I have.


To clear up your confusion, the reason your logic makes Tennesee better than LSU is that you are fighting for quality losses. Again, anyone can lose a game, so a "quality loss" is just plain silly.

Now, you also mention past national titles, while I agree that the SEC has a fantastic history, even come up huge in big games in recent history.... But that is what it is HISTORY! In 2009 the SEC has 3 ranked teams. So, Florida's 2008 national title by no means makes Auburn or
Georgia a tough team in 2009.

Back to my origional point here, LSU should not be moving up in the polls with a loss, they have zero quality WINS, and lost by multiple scores. Any other team in the country would have dropped with that loss, but due to SEC bias and past national championships this team gets some sort of unfair advantage. Anybody can lose a game, why reward a team for that?


I don't see it as rewarding a team for a "good" loss, I see it more as penalizing said team less. I think something similar happened during LSU's 2007 National Championship season. Although LSU was a two loss team, both losses happened in triple overtime. Granted, a loss is a loss, but when you get into the stages of a triple overtime situation, it becomes much more of a crap shoot than a true determination of the better team. I think this scenario reduces the impact of the loss.

The same goes for losing two games to the top two teams in the nation, both undefeated. If LSU is to be criticized for it's "weak" schedule and lack of "quality" wins, then TCU is maybe a top 25 team, but certainly not top 5, based on two lackluster wins against those two ACC crap farms known as Clemson and UVA.

Also, you didn't explain my confusion at all. Obviously I'm not suggesting the rankings are purely done by rating quality of losses. Other factors like wins and strenght of schedule come into play. That's why you are oversimplifying my argument and twisting the logic. Again, I'm not saying the BCS is awesome, I'm simply trying to explain one logical take on a question that you posted.

Comments (130) Add A Comment

November 10, 2009  12:03 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

It's ****, needs revision, playoff system, etc.

November 10, 2009  12:09 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

i'm all for a playoff, but if the polls are this flawed what is the point?

November 10, 2009  12:27 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Not that this makes any sense.

LSU did beat Washington who beat USC, and crazily that matters in the BCS so if USC and LSU both have 2 loses it makes perfect sense to have them ranked higher than USC & OSU (who lost to USC).

It's all gobbly goop.

November 10, 2009  01:41 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

But by that theory Oregon beat USC, so why are they at 13 with 2 losses while USC sits at 9 with the same amount of losses?

Or Miami, who has a quality win over #7 GT is ranked all the way back at 14?

November 10, 2009  02:31 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

BCS IS SHYTE

ACCEPT IT.

November 10, 2009  04:23 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

BSchwartz07, congratulations on writing the award winning paper!

November 10, 2009  07:25 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Life is flawed, BS.

November 10, 2009  08:22 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Agree BS.

Hey BS is your middle initial C?

November 10, 2009  08:45 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Not sure I can find much of an angle on this one BS. Or at least not one I can type with a straight face.

November 10, 2009  08:49 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

You should write a crappier first argument to sucker someone in. Making too much sense starts you at a disadvantage.

November 10, 2009  09:05 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

SEC teams should be given the benefit of the doubt in ranking. they win against SEC teams, the toughest teams in the country which should make their wins count more. and they lose to SEC teams, the toughest teams in the country, so their losses should count less. 2-loss LSU should be like #2 behind 1a Florida and 1b Alabama....

November 10, 2009  09:13 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

is someone suppose to defend the BCS ranking system here? that is not going to happen.

November 10, 2009  09:13 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

or at the least as Ram said, not with a straight face... someone could try, but they would be lieing to themselves and everyone on Fan Nation.

November 10, 2009  09:18 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

The best you will get out of this TD is a blog in which we all agree with you. I totally agree with you on all accounts.

November 10, 2009  09:24 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE
QUOTE(#13):
Originally posted 09:13 AM ET  11.10 by Rawkstar

or at the least as Ram said, not with a straight face... someone could try, but they would be lieing to themselves and everyone on Fan Nation.

Well, I mean, you could argue that it's the voters who are the problem and not the BCS per se. For some reason LSU moved up in the USA today poll. But the voters are a component of the BCS so that's just mincing words.

November 10, 2009  09:51 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE
QUOTE(#11):
Originally posted 09:05 AM ET  11.10 by DaydreamBilliever

SEC teams should be given the benefit of the doubt in ranking. they win against SEC teams, the toughest teams in the country which should make their wins count more. and they lose to SEC teams, the toughest teams in the country, so their losses should count less. 2-loss LSU should be like #2 behind 1a Florida and 1b Alabama....

agreed.

November 10, 2009  09:55 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Also, LSU's BCS ranking is completely useless since they cannot play in a BCS bowl this season. The winner of the SEC Championship game between Florida-Bama will play for the national championship. The loser is headed to the Sugar Bowl. With a two team limit per conference, LSU is frozen out, even if they were the third best team in the nation.

November 10, 2009  10:12 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE
QUOTE(#15):
Originally posted 09:24 AM ET  11.10 by The Ram

Well, I mean, you could argue that it's the voters who are the problem and not the BCS per se. For some reason LSU moved up in the USA today poll. But the voters are a component of the BCS so that's just mincing words.

Or you could argue that LSU deserved to move up despite the loss. Iowa and Oregon ahead lost. PSU probably would have jumped them with a win but lost instead.

The one spot jump does not happen independently.

November 10, 2009  10:41 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE
QUOTE(#2):
Originally posted 12:09 AM ET  11.10 by BSchwartz07

i'm all for a playoff, but if the polls are this flawed what is the point?

Oregon is ranked below USC.

Yay!

 
November 10, 2009  10:42 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE
QUOTE(#11):
Originally posted 09:05 AM ET  11.10 by DaydreamBilliever

SEC teams should be given the benefit of the doubt in ranking. they win against SEC teams, the toughest teams in the country which should make their wins count more. and they lose to SEC teams, the toughest teams in the country, so their losses should count less. 2-loss LSU should be like #2 behind 1a Florida and 1b Alabama....

This right here is exactly why we get crappy polls.

Preconceived assumptions lead to biased decisions.

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Leaderboard

  Fan W L T Win %
1 YODA 51 3 2 92.9%
2 Hyped78 189 19 4 90.1%
3 FoosBall 118 12 3 89.8%
4 [The] Coach 130 21 7 84.5%
5 Argos: Lets Go Packers! 46 7 4 84.2%
6 Southern Discomfort 42 7 3 83.7%
7 BBK - Now it's all football 51 9 6 81.8%
8 BSchwar... 128 27 6 81.4%
9 BobbyOr... 46 10 3 80.5%
10 rstowe 315 79 20 78.5%

The Si.com Cover Hub Go to the Cover Hub

Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Bills owner wanted Gruden
    Views
    62759
    Comments
    393
  2. 2
    Parcells to Browns?
    Views
    39878
    Comments
    271
  3. 3
    FSU to offer Bowden compromise?
    Views
    5630
    Comments
    120
  4. 4
    Why Knicks passed on Iverson
    Views
    31941
    Comments
    112
  5. 5
    Raiders players happy with new QB
    Views
    12966
    Comments
    99

Message Boards

  1. NCAAF > General NCAAF

    2009's most disappointing team
    Views
    805
    Replies
    29

  2. NCAAF > LSU Tigers

    Les Miles FIRE HIM
    Views
    334
    Replies
    33

  3. NCAAF > General NCAAF

    Did Uga VII commit suicide?
    Views
    211
    Replies
    8

Blogs