I wasn't making Kent State out to be a quality opponent. They were not this year. However, they are a Division I school and have been one for a long time.
I'd never call Kent State a quality win. Didn't mean to infer they are in any way and my wording must have been poor. I agree about Illinois and the Rose Bowl but they are there and I'm hopeful that they'll put up a pretty good fight against USC. They gave Missouri all they could handle with Juice knocked out of the game early. Thanks for the compliment about my posts. I may hang around after the game (win or lose of course). Ya'll are a great bunch and represent LSU well.
This year is a anomaly, when you play Nebraska and ND in the same year, that usually isn't considered a "easy" schedule.
The computers said VTech and LSU were the best 2 teams in the country, and it was by a significant margin (.960, .950, .900, respectively) The voters decided VTech didn't deserve to move all the way up like LSU did (Vtech was ahead of LSU in the BCS going into the last weekend). The wins on that very last weekend were very similiar (in fact VTech could argue their win was slightly more impressive and against a slighter better opponent in their CG). I still contend the voters hosed VTech that last weekend. No respect at all was given to them.
Yeah, that's the first thing that jumped out at me as well. They author obviously has a personal problem with Ohio State and/or the Big Ten.
But, then, who did OSU play this season? OSU set up patsies like Youngstown State, Akron, and Kent State for its out of conference games. And, then played in the weakest Big Ten conference in years- a conference so bad that a Michigan team that had lost to Appalachia State and gotten destroyed by Oregon was still able to reel off eight consecutive wins in the Big Ten. OSU lost to a Illnois team that only looks good because it played in one of the worst Big Ten conferences evah. If OSU had played a decent schedule, it would have finished with at least four losses. What really hurt SC is that it lost to a healthy Oregon, which probably would be playing for a NC until its QB went down. Look at the way Oregon basically thrashed Michigan, one of the better teams in the Big Ten. Just look at the way OSU got demolished last year in the NC, and its clear that it doesn't belong in this year's NC game either. To be a great team, you've got to beat the best. And, OSU is clearly not the best available team.
That was the the most obvious bias in the author's "analysis." His whole point was that Oklahoma deserved to be in the NC over Ohio State because Oklahoma beat two final BCS Top 25 teams (#19 Texas and #6 Missouri), while Ohio State only beat one final BCS Top 25 team (#18 Wisconsin). But he just left out the whole fact that Ohio State's ONLY loss was to a final BCS Top 25 team (#13 Illinois), while Oklahoma lost to TWO teams that weren't final BCS Top 25 teams. Also, the author only considered final BCS Top 25 teams, but the final BCS poll ranked at least 35 teams, including #32 Michigan and #33 Penn State, both teams that Ohio State beat. The author just conveniently left that out. If you look at how many final BCS Top 35 teams that Oklahoma beat, they only beat two, while Ohio State beat three. More evidence of the author's bias was how he wrote that Ohio State's "win over Akron was not particularly impressive," and yet he failed to mention that Oklahoma only beat a 3-9 Iowa State team by a score of 17-7. Oklahoma had 316 yards, Iowa State had 269. As for that Ohio State 20-2 win over Akron that was "not particularly impressive" to the author, Ohio State had 363 yards, Akron had 69. Ohio State had 18 first downs, Akron had 3. Akron punted the ball 14 times in that game. How much more dominant did Ohio State have to be to be "particularly impressive"? But my favorite was how the author made such a big deal of how Ohio State "scheduled a 1-AA team (Youngstown State)" and how "Kent State almost qualifies as a second 1-AA team on [OSU's] schedule." Then, when he is talking about Oklahoma, the author makes a big deal out of how Oklahoma "did not play any 1-AA teams." What about North Texas? They went 2-10 this year. What about Utah State? They went 2-10 this year. What about Baylor? They went 3-9 this year. What about Iowa State? They went 3-9 this year. What about Tulsa? Sure, they had a winning record, but they still lost to UTEP and got demolished not once, but twice by UCF (23-44 and 25-44). Point is, the only thing that the author communicated to me in his "analysis" is that he has some sort of irrational prejudice against Ohio State and/or the Big Ten. I assume he is still angry that Ohio State was ranked #1 all last year and that all the talking heads were talking about a Michigan vs. Ohio State rematch for the NC last year.
So who do you think are the two best teams in the country that should be playing for the national championship?
This is an extremely intelligent post, and further evidence of the quality of fans that LSU is blessed to have. :thumb:
