husker_fan Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 I am just amazed how poorly LSU you played. Yes after they scored 24 they were gonna win but they let OSU hang around. I am only dissing LSU this much because this game was essentially a home game. I mean at least Georgia and USC there was no doubt who was gonna win which also played "home" games. Right now all i feel is that: 1. USC would've beaten LSU 2. Georgia would've beaten LSU Should at least be a split nationtal championship with either USC or Georgia but i don't think LSU can be the overwhelming #1 favorite even though that is how it turned out. This season is probably the most fraudulant national champion crowned since the BCS started. Too bad that Kansas didn't play a tougher non-conference schedule or they might have been playing OSU lol. Quote Link to comment
Street Novelist Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 I don't feel LSU could have beat USC or UGA. I would rather have seen SoCal play Georgia for all the marbles. The game yesterday lacked excitement. I just couldn't get into it. Quote Link to comment
Bleeding Husker Red Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 I am just amazed how poorly LSU you played. Yes after they scored 24 they were gonna win but they let OSU hang around. I am only dissing LSU this much because this game was essentially a home game. I mean at least Georgia and USC there was no doubt who was gonna win which also played "home" games. Right now all i feel is that: 1. USC would've beaten LSU 2. Georgia would've beaten LSU Should at least be a split nationtal championship with either USC or Georgia but i don't think LSU can be the overwhelming #1 favorite even though that is how it turned out. This season is probably the most fraudulant national champion crowned since the BCS started. Too bad that Kansas didn't play a tougher non-conference schedule or they might have been playing OSU lol. Maybe they would have, maybe they wouldn't have. I personally think West Virginia could have played better that OSU as well. HOWEVER.... RULES ARE RULES. None of those teams made it under the current rules. Therefore they are NOT in the picture. There is NO split national title. This is the kind of result you would get with a playoff too. Somebody would always start with this 'so and so would have been better...thre should be a split title. business.... It never fails....When will we ever be satisfied? Quote Link to comment
REDSTEEL Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 I am just amazed how poorly LSU you played. Yes after they scored 24 they were gonna win but they let OSU hang around. I am only dissing LSU this much because this game was essentially a home game. I mean at least Georgia and USC there was no doubt who was gonna win which also played "home" games. Right now all i feel is that: 1. USC would've beaten LSU 2. Georgia would've beaten LSU Should at least be a split nationtal championship with either USC or Georgia but i don't think LSU can be the overwhelming #1 favorite even though that is how it turned out. This season is probably the most fraudulant national champion crowned since the BCS started. Too bad that Kansas didn't play a tougher non-conference schedule or they might have been playing OSU lol. USC played a weaker team and Illinois wasn't even in the top 10. It doesn't matter how much LSU beat Ohio St by they still beat the number one team. Sound like a Penn St fan in 1994 when you say that USC should be CO National champs. Just like Penn St had no claim since they beat a Oregon team that was ranked a lot lower then Miami in Miami who was number 3 at the time of the bowl game. By the way if Kansas played a tougher schedule they most likely wouldn't have only lost 1 game. Quote Link to comment
husker_fan Posted January 9, 2008 Author Share Posted January 9, 2008 I am just amazed how poorly LSU you played. Yes after they scored 24 they were gonna win but they let OSU hang around. I am only dissing LSU this much because this game was essentially a home game. I mean at least Georgia and USC there was no doubt who was gonna win which also played "home" games. Right now all i feel is that: 1. USC would've beaten LSU 2. Georgia would've beaten LSU Should at least be a split nationtal championship with either USC or Georgia but i don't think LSU can be the overwhelming #1 favorite even though that is how it turned out. This season is probably the most fraudulant national champion crowned since the BCS started. Too bad that Kansas didn't play a tougher non-conference schedule or they might have been playing OSU lol. USC played a weaker team and Illinois wasn't even in the top 10. It doesn't matter how much LSU beat Ohio St by they still beat the number one team. Sound like a Penn St fan in 1994 when you say that USC should be CO National champs. Just like Penn St had no claim since they beat a Oregon team that was ranked a lot lower then Miami in Miami who was number 3 at the time of the bowl game. By the way if Kansas played a tougher schedule they most likely wouldn't have only lost 1 game. USC played a weaker team?? I seem to remember Illinois BEATING Ohio State, so Illinois couldn't have been weaker. USC, LSU, Georiga all practically played home games. LSU was the only team who had the most difficult time putting their opponent away. I not only said USC but also said Georgia. You also forget that since a lot of bowls have traditional tie-ins they will always want that. Bowl match ups there is nothing you can really do about it. Just like in 1997 if we hadn't played such a highly ranked team i would guarantee you Nebraska would have never won a share of the national championship. I'm sure Michigan at that time would have loved to play a higher ranked opponent than Washington State. But the bowls got the match ups they wanted. You know for certain that this year's Kansas team couldn't beat Texas or Oklahoma?? Just because Oklahoma beat Missouri does not mean Oklahoma would have automatically beaten Kansas. Teams always play another team different. Also this year should have taught you that the ranking didn't really mean much either. Quote Link to comment
REDSTEEL Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 I am just amazed how poorly LSU you played. Yes after they scored 24 they were gonna win but they let OSU hang around. I am only dissing LSU this much because this game was essentially a home game. I mean at least Georgia and USC there was no doubt who was gonna win which also played "home" games. Right now all i feel is that: 1. USC would've beaten LSU 2. Georgia would've beaten LSU Should at least be a split nationtal championship with either USC or Georgia but i don't think LSU can be the overwhelming #1 favorite even though that is how it turned out. This season is probably the most fraudulant national champion crowned since the BCS started. Too bad that Kansas didn't play a tougher non-conference schedule or they might have been playing OSU lol. USC played a weaker team and Illinois wasn't even in the top 10. It doesn't matter how much LSU beat Ohio St by they still beat the number one team. Sound like a Penn St fan in 1994 when you say that USC should be CO National champs. Just like Penn St had no claim since they beat a Oregon team that was ranked a lot lower then Miami in Miami who was number 3 at the time of the bowl game. By the way if Kansas played a tougher schedule they most likely wouldn't have only lost 1 game. USC played a weaker team?? I seem to remember Illinois BEATING Ohio State, so Illinois couldn't have been weaker. USC, LSU, Georiga all practically played home games. LSU was the only team who had the most difficult time putting their opponent away. I not only said USC but also said Georgia. You also forget that since a lot of bowls have traditional tie-ins they will always want that. Bowl match ups there is nothing you can really do about it. Just like in 1997 if we hadn't played such a highly ranked team i would guarantee you Nebraska would have never won a share of the national championship. I'm sure Michigan at that time would have loved to play a higher ranked opponent than Washington State. But the bowls got the match ups they wanted. You know for certain that this year's Kansas team couldn't beat Texas or Oklahoma?? Just because Oklahoma beat Missouri does not mean Oklahoma would have automatically beaten Kansas. Teams always play another team different. Also this year should have taught you that the ranking didn't really mean much either. I remember Stanford beating USC with a second string QB but that does'nt mean that they were better then them. You kind of contradict yourself saying the reason Nebraska won part of the NC in 1997 is because of playing a higher ranked team, but then disgard the fact that LSU played the number one team. Just remember if Oregon QB doesn't get injured USC doesn't even win the Pac Ten title. Georgia has a complaint but not sure how big of one since they had the same amount of loses to LSU whic won the SEC. Quote Link to comment
husker_fan Posted January 9, 2008 Author Share Posted January 9, 2008 I am just amazed how poorly LSU you played. Yes after they scored 24 they were gonna win but they let OSU hang around. I am only dissing LSU this much because this game was essentially a home game. I mean at least Georgia and USC there was no doubt who was gonna win which also played "home" games. Right now all i feel is that: 1. USC would've beaten LSU 2. Georgia would've beaten LSU Should at least be a split nationtal championship with either USC or Georgia but i don't think LSU can be the overwhelming #1 favorite even though that is how it turned out. This season is probably the most fraudulant national champion crowned since the BCS started. Too bad that Kansas didn't play a tougher non-conference schedule or they might have been playing OSU lol. USC played a weaker team and Illinois wasn't even in the top 10. It doesn't matter how much LSU beat Ohio St by they still beat the number one team. Sound like a Penn St fan in 1994 when you say that USC should be CO National champs. Just like Penn St had no claim since they beat a Oregon team that was ranked a lot lower then Miami in Miami who was number 3 at the time of the bowl game. By the way if Kansas played a tougher schedule they most likely wouldn't have only lost 1 game. USC played a weaker team?? I seem to remember Illinois BEATING Ohio State, so Illinois couldn't have been weaker. USC, LSU, Georiga all practically played home games. LSU was the only team who had the most difficult time putting their opponent away. I not only said USC but also said Georgia. You also forget that since a lot of bowls have traditional tie-ins they will always want that. Bowl match ups there is nothing you can really do about it. Just like in 1997 if we hadn't played such a highly ranked team i would guarantee you Nebraska would have never won a share of the national championship. I'm sure Michigan at that time would have loved to play a higher ranked opponent than Washington State. But the bowls got the match ups they wanted. You know for certain that this year's Kansas team couldn't beat Texas or Oklahoma?? Just because Oklahoma beat Missouri does not mean Oklahoma would have automatically beaten Kansas. Teams always play another team different. Also this year should have taught you that the ranking didn't really mean much either. I remember Stanford beating USC with a second string QB but that does'nt mean that they were better then them. You kind of contradict yourself saying the reason Nebraska won part of the NC in 1997 is because of playing a higher ranked team, but then disgard the fact that LSU played the number one team. Just remember if Oregon QB doesn't get injured USC doesn't even win the Pac Ten title. Georgia has a complaint but not sure how big of one since they had the same amount of loses to LSU whic won the SEC. Yes but we didn't have the BCS system in 1996 season so #1 and #2 didn't have to meet. Since now the coaches must vote a certain way doesn't mean that that is what they feel. Yes i remember Stanford beating USC but i was pointing out to say that i don't think the difference between Ohio State and Illinois is that much. You said Illinois was a weaker team to which i don't think they are compared to Ohio State. Also just remember if John David Booty doesn't get hurt they don't lose to Stanford or Oregon. In fact if USC team wasn't depleted because of injuries they would have another national championship. Quote Link to comment
HANC Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 This is why I love college football...... I would LOVE to see a play-off format........but just by this discussion alone, is why a lot of people do not want one...... we could not and will not have a topic like this when the NFL season is over........ Personally, from all that happened toward the end of the season, I would have liked to see USC and West Virgina play......... I know WV lost to Pitt....but Pitt sucked and rodriquez let his team fall asleep, already ordering NC shirts...... the way the bowls played out, this match up would have been awesome...... I think Georgia is very, very good, and Mark Richt is my favortie college coach (other than NU's)....and I bC didn't count.......but face it.....Hawaii was shown to be the fraud they are....it is easy to beat teams when they travel to Hawaii, and only have 3 days there.....jet lag, attractions, etc....... Hawaii was on the mainland for long enough to overcome travel excuses...... if they would play more top-notch teams on the mainland, they would be 50-50...... I want a playoff, but aren't these discussions fun..... Quote Link to comment
Bleeding Husker Red Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 At some point people are just going to have to accept that you can't play every team against every team in one year. Even if you did that it wouldn't be a perfect system because teams have ups and downs. Even a playoff would suffer from that problem. We need to decide on one system and settle on it. This constant contoversy about 'so and so should have gotten a chance' is destroying the enjoyment of the sport to me. I swear I'm about to take up golf and never watch football again because of it. Quote Link to comment
REDSTEEL Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 This is why I love college football...... I would LOVE to see a play-off format........but just by this discussion alone, is why a lot of people do not want one...... we could not and will not have a topic like this when the NFL season is over........ Personally, from all that happened toward the end of the season, I would have liked to see USC and West Virgina play......... I know WV lost to Pitt....but Pitt sucked and rodriquez let his team fall asleep, already ordering NC shirts...... the way the bowls played out, this match up would have been awesome...... I think Georgia is very, very good, and Mark Richt is my favortie college coach (other than NU's)....and I bC didn't count.......but face it.....Hawaii was shown to be the fraud they are....it is easy to beat teams when they travel to Hawaii, and only have 3 days there.....jet lag, attractions, etc....... Hawaii was on the mainland for long enough to overcome travel excuses...... if they would play more top-notch teams on the mainland, they would be 50-50...... I want a playoff, but aren't these discussions fun..... Why is it Nebraska back in 94 had no problem beating teams even when they had to use the third string qb but it ok for USC to use it as excuse for their losing? (Don't bothr trying to convince me that Stanford 07 was better then Kansas 94.) USC had no no more claim then 5 other teams and boohooing about having a hurt QB is a joke. They are supposed to have better backups then most teams starters. Quote Link to comment
husker_fan Posted January 10, 2008 Author Share Posted January 10, 2008 This is why I love college football...... I would LOVE to see a play-off format........but just by this discussion alone, is why a lot of people do not want one...... we could not and will not have a topic like this when the NFL season is over........ Personally, from all that happened toward the end of the season, I would have liked to see USC and West Virgina play......... I know WV lost to Pitt....but Pitt sucked and rodriquez let his team fall asleep, already ordering NC shirts...... the way the bowls played out, this match up would have been awesome...... I think Georgia is very, very good, and Mark Richt is my favortie college coach (other than NU's)....and I bC didn't count.......but face it.....Hawaii was shown to be the fraud they are....it is easy to beat teams when they travel to Hawaii, and only have 3 days there.....jet lag, attractions, etc....... Hawaii was on the mainland for long enough to overcome travel excuses...... if they would play more top-notch teams on the mainland, they would be 50-50...... I want a playoff, but aren't these discussions fun..... Why is it Nebraska back in 94 had no problem beating teams even when they had to use the third string qb but it ok for USC to use it as excuse for their losing? (Don't bothr trying to convince me that Stanford 07 was better then Kansas 94.) USC had no no more claim then 5 other teams and boohooing about having a hurt QB is a joke. They are supposed to have better backups then most teams starters. I'm wondering why in the hell you then you made the claim if Dixon didn't get hurt Oregon wouldn't have lost another game??? You do know you are comparing two completely different systems and eras right? Yeah you are right when your main qb goes out your 2nd and 3rd string should play just as good. Just because USC is suppose to have better backups than most team starters doesn't mean they do. Quote Link to comment
REDSTEEL Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 This is why I love college football...... I would LOVE to see a play-off format........but just by this discussion alone, is why a lot of people do not want one...... we could not and will not have a topic like this when the NFL season is over........ Personally, from all that happened toward the end of the season, I would have liked to see USC and West Virgina play......... I know WV lost to Pitt....but Pitt sucked and rodriquez let his team fall asleep, already ordering NC shirts...... the way the bowls played out, this match up would have been awesome...... I think Georgia is very, very good, and Mark Richt is my favortie college coach (other than NU's)....and I bC didn't count.......but face it.....Hawaii was shown to be the fraud they are....it is easy to beat teams when they travel to Hawaii, and only have 3 days there.....jet lag, attractions, etc....... Hawaii was on the mainland for long enough to overcome travel excuses...... if they would play more top-notch teams on the mainland, they would be 50-50...... I want a playoff, but aren't these discussions fun..... Why is it Nebraska back in 94 had no problem beating teams even when they had to use the third string qb but it ok for USC to use it as excuse for their losing? (Don't bothr trying to convince me that Stanford 07 was better then Kansas 94.) USC had no no more claim then 5 other teams and boohooing about having a hurt QB is a joke. They are supposed to have better backups then most teams starters. I'm wondering why in the hell you then you made the claim if Dixon didn't get hurt Oregon wouldn't have lost another game??? You do know you are comparing two completely different systems and eras right? Yeah you are right when your main qb goes out your 2nd and 3rd string should play just as good. Just because USC is suppose to have better backups than most team starters doesn't mean they do. I never made the claim that Oregon was in the same echelon of Nebraska 94 or supposedly USC of this decade so their backups wouldn't be as capable but USC with all their all Americans are. By the way Stanford was using their backup in the USC game so how does USC claim of having a injured QB even legitimate for their loss? Quote Link to comment
T_O_Bull Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 I don't feel LSU could have beat USC or UGA. I would rather have seen SoCal play Georgia for all the marbles. The game yesterday lacked excitement. I just couldn't get into it. Reasons for not being able to get into this game: 1. You really didn't care about either team. 2. It was on a Monday night and your wife wanted to watch something else. 3. The NFL playoffs had already started and your inner self felt college football had ended the previous week. 4. It is very possible that the 2 best teams weren't playing. 5. The Big Ten is really the Big Myth. 6. LSU had two losses. 7. The game was not being played on New Years Day. 8. You had nobody to watch it with. 9. There wasn't a table filled with great food and drink. 10. The only snacks were a week old and stale. 11. Instead of a cold 12 pack of your favorite you had 3 lone soldiers left by friends who had drank the last of your favorite. 12. You had to work the next day. 13. The BCS is a load of dung. >>>T_O_B Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.