Miles: Top-ranked SEC team deserves BCS title shot

That's one of the reasons I have come down on au. They probably cost lsu a perfect season granted we win out and au is guility. I felt like cam screwed all the innocent kids he leaves at au out of future bowl games etc. Then came the ga game and I watched the arrogant and dirty play and remember them slammin both jj and jl and I realized fairley was trying to hurt them with the full blessing of the coaching staff.

 

A lot of crazy things have to happen for us to get to the MNC. Is Miles some sort of wizard or magician? Don't know, but do know a lot of crazy things had to happen in 2007 as well, and they did. We shall see if his subtle hints here and there pay off.

 

The media execs would love miles. He is good for ratings. Miles is must see tv. What other coach is talked about as much as miles and his games are exciting and unpredictable. Camera men love to shoot him. What's this crazy azz dude going to do next? They must think. Eat grass? When he talks he sounds like he's smoked too much grass. The sports analyst may not like lsu but the ratings chiefs at the network would foam at the mouth to have the most interesting coach in the world busting the bcs and boosting the ratings. At least that's what I hope.

 

Two conference champions should play each other. If that means Boise and Oregon, so be it.

If it means Oregon and a Big 10 team, so be it.

I'm sorry, I felt the same way in '03 and IMO, the only difference between '03 and '10 is that LSU is involved, therefore, to some, it's OK to be hypocritical. I just can't accept an argument that a team that wasn't good enough to win it's conference should get an opportunity to win a "championship", even if it's kind of a worthless "championship" at this point.

 

Which is one of the many reasons a playoff system is necessary, because the 2 best teams in the country aren't always going to be some conference champion. If a Big East team was one of the teams in contention that would almost be worse than BSU or TCU. As creampuff as some might think their schedules are the entire Big East is a joke and should never be considered until they do something to improve their league.

A moot point obviously since there are no Big East teams in contention, but if they were this yr as has been over the past few yrs, I don't think they have a strong enough conference to actually be considered if they had an undefeated conference champion.

The argument that if should only be conference champions in contention, in this scenerio, is one of the many reasons a playoff system is necessary.

 

Two things wrong with this line of reasoning:

1. Auburn may have cheated. Looks increasingly likely. LSU was undefeated in regulation in 2007. LSU is undefeated vs non-cheating teams in 2010.

2. Should the national champion be the best team in the country? If so, you want the two best teams to play regardless of conference/record. If on the other hand, the NC should go to the team with the best record, even if they play a pitiful schedule and would be stomped by about 10 other teams they never play...then be happy with the current system.

 

The current system is crap and I'm not, in any way, defending it or arguing circular logic. Undefeated in regulation?? What other sport makes these kind of arguments?? The national champion should be the team that wins a sanctioned NCAA tournament. Anything other than that, is kind of questionable. I would expect everybody to argue for LSU, but there is no way to defend thinking OU didn't deserve it in '03 and believe LSU deserves it this year. Sorry, that's the definition of homerism.

If you think Boise is overrated, that's fine. They should be eliminated in the first round of a playoff, not eliminated because of an opinion that they aren't that good.

The point is, in a playoff, there are no arguments. if you beat 3 or 4 other teams to hoist the crystal ball, there is nothing else to say.

 

I don't like the "playoff" scenario. ... and here's why.

You take a team that played cupcakes all year long, has zero injuries, etc ... and they come to the playoff against a team that has fought off Goliaths all year long, and limps into the stadium.

A "National Champion" should be based on the entire year's worth of play, not just a simple tournament. That is what the Bowl System is trying to accomplish. That is why the schedule and the records of the teams you play are considered.

You simply are not lining up apples to apples in space and time with a playoff in college football. In a playoff scenario, you could very well take a team like Boise and turn it into a recruiting super champion, simply because they'd be guaranteed to be in the Playoff every year .... and the entire year's sched would be just eleven practice games against weaker opponents to polish up for the tourney .. entering in with a polished game .. and absolutely no injuries.

 

Some conted by proxy that LSU doesn't belong in the SECCG because they didn't win the West. If LSU played in the East, they would be in the SECCG even if they had still lost to Auburn.

If SC wins the SECCG to become the "conference champion", do you suddenly think they are the best team in the SEC? Would you put them into the NC game over a higer-ranked, one-loss LSU or Auburn?

I like the conference championship game, but the "east vs. west" matchup that we have leaves these kinds of scenarios open. It should be the highest-ranked teams in the conference with the best record battling it out for the championship. Period.

Unfortunately, we don't have that, but I digress. The point is that the conference championship game does not always determine the true "best team in the conference".

 

I agree, East vs. West is old hat. Of course that means we would have played Georgia in the SEC championship game in 07, and we would have known who the best team in the SEC was.

This year it would be a rematch of AU vs. LSU...