"Jim Tressel is a better coach than Pete Carroll"

Tressel outshines Carroll in college football's location nation - CBSSports.com

"Jim Tressel is a better coach than Pete Carroll."

"He's the perfect fit for USC because he knows how to attract future NFL talent. Does he know how to coach it, how to maximize it? No. He does not.


Everybody's picking on Pete these days ! Poor Charlie Brown. Writer makes some good points.

 

There is one glaring error in that article. Petey has only 1 NC. He does have an AP Championship in addition to his BCS title, but that's the equivalent of a Recruiting Championship.

 

There's one question that these statements always make me want to ask, so I'm going to.

When Auburn was held out of the NC game, if they would have been the AP national champion, would you have still said that the SEC didn't win a NC that year?

How about 03? If LSU had been left out of the game and the split was reversed, with someone else winning the BCS game and LSU winning the AP; would LSU fans disavow that AP championship?

No offense intended by the question, I just wondered if things would be the same if you were on the opposite side of the ball?

 

Unlike the Trojans, we understand that in order to 'win' something, you must first play for it. Auburn was 'awarded' an NC in 2004 by, what was it, Golf Digest I think, much like USC was awarded an NC by the AP in 2003. USC has entitlement issues, which are most likely fueled by decades of continued success. They were used to 'winning' championships, despite never having officially played for one. . .on both the conference and national level.

 

Except they have, twice in this decade, same as LSU. If you're saying that no one ever played for one before the BCS, then any NC before the BCS should be disavowed.

But what comes down to it is this. LSU has won two NC games this decade. If lets say this season the unthinkable happened and LSU was awarded a NC by the Associated Press (which by the way, has been awarding National Championships since 1936 via poll vote) but didn't get the chance to play in the BCS NC game, would every tiger fan universally say on this forum "Give it to someone else, we don't want it"? Or would you be celebrating LSU as the only team to win 3 NCs in the 2000s?

 

I personally don't give a rat's a$$ what the AP does. We agreed on the BCS and have played 11 games thus far. Many SEC fans thought the days of winning championships was finished as nobody expected a SEC team to go undefeated due to the strength and depth of the conference.

Instead the SEC got even tougher and has gone 5-0 (3 teams) in BCS Championship games. Like we said before...you can hold up the AP trophy as much as you want but had you attempted to cash your ticket at a Vegas casino claiming USC won the championship, they would've laughed and escorted you out the door.

Petey Carroll showed absolutely NO class by claiming the title and saying the LSU/Oklahoma game didn't have any importance because his Condoms were already the champs.

The system still needs to be replaced with a playoff but until then, it's better than the old West Coast / East Coast bias both hating the SEC for being so superior.

Until the other conferences catch up, I think the SEC champ should be crowned National Champion and everybody else should play for #2. The two teams with the prettiest uniforms should be in the Rose Bowl parade and subsequent so-called "football" game. :grin:

 

USC is in a media rich location and will win popularity contests voted by the media. LSU actually had to go win it on the field. USC, like Auburn, didn't make the cut for the championship game.

 

Right. Except for the fact that they won once and lost once, giving them a grand total of one national championship in this decade. Where's the problem?

No, that's what you're saying. It's just that before the BCS, the NC was awarded. Now, it's played for. If Michigan wins the Rose Bowl that year, do you think anyone would be claiming that they won the NC? That's whay playing for the championship is. You win, you're the champ. You lose, you're not. You don't play, you're not. See?

And? It was a broken system that put 'smaller' teams at a disadvantage and commonly resulted in controversy. You can yell that the sky is green for 60 years, doesn't make it true.

I understood the question the first time. It wasn't particularly cryptic.

Now, let me ask you a question. Let's say that your hypothetical situation had occured. Do you think the media would be so steadfastly claiming that national championship for LSU? This is entirely rhetorical, of course, because there's no way in hell that they would.

 

If they could do it for Miami in 91, I don't see why LSU, which has won two BCS titles this decade would be left out.

Now let me ask you this question. When LSU won the title in 2003, do you feel you played the other best team in the country?

And you're right, if you shouted that the sky is green for 60 years it wouldn't make it true. But considering that the BCS has had enough controversy over its time, does that really make it better? No, it makes it what we have, and prior to the BCS, we had the Coaches Poll (which didn't start till the 50's) and the AP poll. I certainly did not say give us the BCS as a fix, just as you never said that the AP should be used.