NCAA Football LD, 2013 season

[Little Jerry Lawler]

I don't think the worst one was Florida. Ole Miss and Oregon State both ended up 9-4 that year and Ole Miss was ranked higher by the end of the year. Before they faced Oklahoma, Florida beat their ranked opponents by an average of over 30 points a game.

 

[Slyfox696]

Without having looked, I seem to remember more than once when an SEC team was either the only undefeated or one loss team.

Do you mean undefeated or one loss team who didn't play for the title? Or who did?

I wouldn't call that having the system benefiting you.

How about 2007, when Michigan didn't get a rematch, but Alabama did? Why is it winning your conference only matters if you're not in the SEC? How is it Oklahoma St.'s strength of schedule didn't matter when Alabama got their rematch, but it does matter when undefeated Utah gets shutout in favor of a 1 loss Florida team? By the way, Utah soundly defeated Alabama that year.

Basically, you can't get a rematch unless you're the SEC. Strength of schedule keeps you out of a title game if you're not in the SEC, but is irrelevant when you are. Not winning your conference matters if you're not the SEC, but if you're Alabama and don't even get to play in your conference championship, then it doesn't really matter.

The system has granted the SEC every benefit.

I will however say how ridiculous the SEC being on top of the preseason rankings time in and time out is though. I still do not understand how you can rate teams when they haven't played a game yet, especially when they've lost and gained several players from the previous season.

Because it's media bias and said bias becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

[klunderbunker]

Do you mean undefeated or one loss team who didn't play for the title? Or who did?

Did play. In those cases I wouldn't think there's nearly as much bias or unfairness.

How about 2007, when Michigan didn't get a rematch, but Alabama did? Why is it winning your conference only matters if you're not in the SEC? How is it Oklahoma St.'s strength of schedule didn't matter when Alabama got their rematch, but it does matter when undefeated Utah gets shutout in favor of a 1 loss Florida team? By the way, Utah soundly defeated Alabama that year.

How do I explain that? A poorly put together system.

Basically, you can't get a rematch unless you're the SEC. Strength of schedule keeps you out of a title game if you're not in the SEC, but is irrelevant when you are. Not winning your conference matters if you're not the SEC, but if you're Alabama and don't even get to play in your conference championship, then it doesn't really matter.

Yeah the conference thing is ridiculous. Didn't Nebraska get in like that about ten years ago?

The system has granted the SEC every benefit.

It has gotten benefits true, though they had won every game they had been given until tonight. It's never going to be a perfect system until they have them play it out but I don't think there was ever an outrageous champion.

 

[Slyfox696]

Did play. In those cases I wouldn't think there's nearly as much bias or unfairness.

I just went back and looked. NEVER did the SEC win the national title in the previous seven years where they were the only team undefeated or with one loss.

2012 Alabama 1 loss: Oregon 1 loss (Ohio St. undefeated but ineligible)
2011 Alabama 1 loss: OK State 1 loss
2010 Auburn undefeated: TCU undefeated
2009 Alabama undefeated: Boise St. undefeated
2008 Florida 1 loss: Utah undefeated
2007 LSU 2 loss: Kansas 1 loss, a million teams with 2 losses
2006 Florida 1 loss: Ohio St. 1 loss (to Florida) and Boise St. undefeated
2005 Texas

So no, you don't remember that at all.

How do I explain that? A poorly put together system.

One which benefited the SEC for most of the past decade.

Yeah the conference thing is ridiculous. Didn't Nebraska get in like that about ten years ago?

No??

It has gotten benefits true, though they had won every game they had been given until tonight.

But many of those games they didn't deserve to be there in the first place, that's my point. If they are not there, they can't win them.

It's never going to be a perfect system until they have them play it out but I don't think there was ever an outrageous champion.

Alabama in 2011 was an outrageous champion when they couldn't even play in their conference title game. They weren't good enough to play in the conference title game, but they were the best team in the country? That's outrageous.

 

[klunderbunker]

I just went back and looked. NEVER did the SEC win the national title in the previous seven years where they were the only team undefeated or with one loss.

2012 Alabama 1 loss: Oregon 1 loss (Ohio St. undefeated but ineligible)
2011 Alabama 1 loss: OK State 1 loss
2010 Auburn undefeated: TCU undefeated
2009 Alabama undefeated: Boise St. undefeated
2008 Florida 1 loss: Utah undefeated
2007 LSU 2 loss: Kansas 1 loss, a million teams with 2 losses
2006 Florida 1 loss: Ohio St. 1 loss (to Florida) and Boise St. undefeated
2005 Texas

So no, you don't remember that at all.

So I don't then.

One which benefited the SEC for most of the past decade.

Indeed, though I don't think it's as big of a stretch as you do.

No??

Actually yes they did. 2001 - Nebraska didn't play in the Big 12 title game but played for the national title.

For clarification's sake: I didn't bring this up for any particular reason. I couldn't remember if it happened or not.

But many of those games they didn't deserve to be there in the first place, that's my point. If they are not there, they can't win them.

True, though I don't know if I agree they shouldn't have been there.

Alabama in 2011 was an outrageous champion when they couldn't even play in their conference title game. They weren't good enough to play in the conference title game, but they were the best team in the country? That's outrageous.

This is true, as was the rematch two years before.

In case it's not clear, I'm not arguing with you on most of this stuff.

 

[Slyfox696]

Indeed, though I don't think it's as big of a stretch as you do.

I'm not saying they haven't deserved a spot every year. But there have been plenty of years where the story about who deserves a spot changes, always in favor of the SEC.

True, though I don't know if I agree they shouldn't have been there.

Alabama should not have been there. There's really no justification for LSU to have been there. Utah was undefeated and snubbed for two one loss teams.

So there's three cases where rational conversation was thrown to the side in favor of the SEC. I have no problem with Auburn this year or Alabama last year. Auburn and Alabama in 2010 and 2009 are fine as well (even though there were other undefeated teams those years). And I just don't remember enough about 2006.

This is true, as was the rematch two years before.

Not sure I understand what you're saying here.

In case it's not clear, I'm not arguing with you on most of this stuff.

I understand. I just get sick of the SEC nonsense, both from fans and media.

 

[klunderbunker]

I'm not saying they haven't deserved a spot every year. But there have been plenty of years where the story about who deserves a spot changes, always in favor of the SEC.

True. Was it Oklahoma State that had a great season the year LSU and Bama had their rematch?

Alabama should not have been there. There's really no justification for LSU to have been there. Utah was undefeated and snubbed for two one loss teams.

Assuming Utah played at least a decent schedule, there's no reason they shouldn't have gotten a shot. Same with Boise State that year they went undefeated and got left out.

So there's three cases where rational conversation was thrown to the side in favor of the SEC. I have no problem with Auburn this year or Alabama last year. Auburn and Alabama in 2010 and 2009 are fine as well (even though there were other undefeated teams those years). And I just don't remember enough about 2006.

Not sure I understand what you're saying here.

I'm thinking I got my dates wrong.

I understand. I just get sick of the SEC nonsense, both from fans and media.

As someone who lives in a long time SEC state and hears basketball talk, I know the feeling. I kid you not a few years ago this was a topic on the top sports talk show in town a few years ago. Dead serious discussion:

Host: "Now we know that UK is going to go undefeated with this class of guys we've got. The real question i whether or not anyone gets within 20 points of us."

 

[Slyfox696]

True. Was it Oklahoma State that had a great season the year LSU and Bama had their rematch?

Yes. Only one loss, better strength of schedule and were conference champions. Their one loss came in double overtime on the road after the plane crash which killed the women's basketball coach and his assistant.

Compare that to Alabama whose loss was at a home, had a worse strength of schedule and didn't win their conference.

Assuming Utah played at least a decent schedule, there's no reason they shouldn't have gotten a shot. Same with Boise State that year they went undefeated and got left out.

That's sort of my point. The argument against those non-power conference teams was strength of schedule...which was suddenly not a big deal when trying to find a way to justify Alabama over Oklahoma State.

I'm thinking I got my dates wrong.

The only rematch in a BCS championship game was Alabama and LSU.

As someone who lives in a long time SEC state and hears basketball talk, I know the feeling. I kid you not a few years ago this was a topic on the top sports talk show in town a few years ago. Dead serious discussion:

Host: "Now we know that UK is going to go undefeated with this class of guys we've got. The real question i whether or not anyone gets within 20 points of us."

And that's the arrogance in the football conference as well, which is asinine considering how terrible half the teams in the conference are. For all the chest thumping by conference fans (and by the way, when did people become conference fans? I'd never root for Kansas to win anything, regardless of what conference they are in.), in those 7 national championships, 5 of them were won by Alabama and Florida. LSU and Auburn won the others which means 4 teams out of now 14 team league won championships...not the conference.

At the end of the day, I think Bob Stoops said it best:

When I made the comment, the bottom half of the SEC was like 0-36 against the top half of the SEC. You realize that? A year ago … nobody talks about that. My point was, don’t say SEC like they’re all doing that (beating everyone). One or two or three top teams … sure, you give them the credit. Alabama … I’ve got the utmost respect for them. Are you kidding me? How could you not? But in the end, don’t talk about the entire conference that way. It’s just not true.