Assuming LSU goes on to play the Dogs in the SECCG, the Tide will sit idle that week. Oregon plays that week also. Does that impact the decision of Alabama going to BCSCG because they play 1 fewer games?
Not sure if it will, but it should. If Oregon wins out, they should be because 1) their only loss was to No.1 team on a neutral field and 2) they would have won their conference championship game.
Historically playing that "extra" game has benfitted the one(s) playing. It was one reason Pete Caroll moved USC's last game to the same weekend as the conference championships. I doubt many watched USC vs. UCLA instead of two teams playing in a conference championship but it did keep them on the lips. This scenario is a little different since the team in question is from the same conference. This is hilarious that we're more concerned about who we play than we are excited to be there and believing we will win.
It just seems wrong for Bama to get to just sit at home while we play Georgia for the right to play Bama again. Makes no sense.
The SEC Championship game has put the winner in the BCS Championship game many times. LSU cannot be hurt by it in the computers- if we win. It's a HUGE boost.
This. Seems to me you have to win your conference championship, or at least get into the conference championship game. Someone said on another thread, assuming if it goes this way, LSU would have won the SEC West and SEC Championship, plus would have the #1 ranking. Why should Bama be rewarded for sitting at home? :geauxtige
Which is it? Win, or not? "Just getting into" does not compute with what you said in the first part. Shows how effed up our minds become when we don't want something to take place. Your view is tied SPECIFICALLY to Bama and Bama only.
Obviously, you should have to win. Getting in to the conference championship game might get consideration depending on how all the teams are ranked. You know something, who the heck knows!! :rolleye33: :geauxtige
