Where are all the big boys that were thrilled to play Bama again?

To me, that's what it boiled down to. Not that we "wanted" to. Had we played/beat Okie St. or any other team we would've heard it forever from Bama fans.

 

LSU lost in the BCS title game!! Debate over.

 

Immediately after the first Bama game, I thought to myself, "Whew! I'm glad we pulled this out because this is the one team in the country that could beat us." I also commented that I wouldn't want to play them again.

It's exactly what happened, but I wasn't nervous leading up to the game. I would've been if I could've imagined our team playing such uninspired football. I didn't expect it. At worst, I might've seen a close loss--not that blow out.

However, I wanted to play Okie State. Because I felt we'd beat them.

After watching all of the BCS bowls, the BCS definitely paired the two best teams. So, it did its job and it sucks that our gameplan was non-existent.

 

Not that I disagree but this is surprising coming from a huge Basketball fan.

 

Well, let me say, first off, on the day after .... let me re-iterate, that I'm not disputing we got our butts whooped, and should be considered now, the 2nd team in the country. Congrats to Bama. This is our system, and they came out on top in the system.

My "rant" yesterday was merely the frustration of losing, mixed in, with the mutual feeling as the first poster, that a "rematch" was potentially the worse outcome for LSU in this process. After thinking about it more and more obviously, the result is already handed down. LSU lost in the "title" game of the two "best" teams. I'm frustrated that LSU's path was harder than Bama's, and the result taints an otherwise incredible season. BUT, my underlying claim also was that this rematch wasn't a fair result--based upon a few assumptions that admittedly, are NOT part of the process (hence, if enough people b*ch about it, perhaps there will be good change). 1. That SOS should matter (this is in fact, very much a basketball premise... you reward teams that played tougher schedules and doing so should reward you--OK State arguably played a better schedule, but "in the eyes" of voters and media, Bama was somehow better). 2. Crowning a national champion should be about the "body of work" versus who looks good on a certain date. (Again, somewhat a basketball concept but when teams are selected. Admittedly, the concept of March Madness is, it's anyone's ball game once the tourney starts, but in fairness to the hoops format, despite clearly "unequal" playing field getting into the tournament, the winner has to win what... 6 games in a row? Unfortunately, in college football you can't play that many games. Maybe you can get to 2 or 3 games in a row.) 3. It's ironic that in a condensed CFS of 12, 13 games per season, that two teams should play each other and be 1-1, yet someone is deemed better. If "every game" counts, then LSU already proved it was better than Bama--asking them to do it again is "unfair". 4. This demeans the conference championship.

I could go on and on, but it's almost wasted words, unless enough folks fight to change the system. Yes, regardless, if you believe that the "two best" teams were in the game last night and that's the purpose of the BCS game, then the winner wins the NC. Ultimately, what kept coming in my mind was of course, what if LSU had lost, but lost 21-19, or lost by a field goal in overtime? Then EVERYONE would be, like me, magnifying the "flaws" in our system. LSU helped the BCS proponents of course by stinking it up last night.

Another case in point, frankly is the results in rematch games. So how much of that was the players not wanting to play the game, they had nothing else to prove, etc.? It's no secret why historically, the 2nd rank team almost ALWAYS wins. Is that to say that our original process of even ranking the teams is flawed? That makes me even more point to our process is flawed. Of course, then, in fairness, we'd play a 3rd game (like NBA)--someone has to have a winning record against the other.

Ultimately, this experience does make me want a playoff more, but to my point earlier about the "Top 6" model, it is also is not perfect, and unfortunately, "popular vote" and "subjective" voting is always going to be part of the equation. But, I would have been happier of course (and this was one of my points), if Alabama had to beat an Oregon, Stanford, Wisconsin, prior to re-playing LSU, they'd at least be 13-1 instead of 12-1, and have the same winning percentage for their body of work. Admittedly, what works for basketball doesn't quite work for football--but the NFL seems to have it pretty good, and no one complains about that process, because a team has to win 3 or 4 games in a row in a format that's understood and not "voted on".

In any case, again, congrats to Bama. They definitely played better in this game, which was clear. We should of course be happy with a 13-1 season, and a #2 ranking at the end of they year and the SEC Championship, and next year when our schedule is more manageable, perhaps all of my arguments will be moot, and I'll be perfectly happy with the system.

 

The thing is, if we had lost at Bama on Nov. 5th, I truly belive that we would not have played in NC game. Bama and ESPN beat this drum and both got what they wanted.

:geauxtige

 

Couldn't agree with you more. I like the way you think.

:geauxtige

 

I still think we would have because we had the best resume in the country. Bama barely got in over Okie State but we had wins over Oregon and West Virginia to push us through as well.

 

Wildcard - first I was not a proponent of playing Bama again for the NC for the simple fact is that "if Bama won" and they did then as National Champion you now have a team that didn't win either their division or their conference but are National Champs - that does not make any sense to me.

That being said it would not have mattered who we played last night because we were out prepared and out coached!!!! So don't blame the loss on playing a team twice, lay the blame on where it deserves "COACHING." As much as I like Les Miles and believe in what he is doing at LSU "and that was not the case at first" I feel he was totally unprepared for this bowl game, and worse he was not able to adjust during the game. To me that just shows he was out-coached from the get go and that is where the blame lies.

If we did not have the talent to match Bama's talent then that would be one thing, but I don't think that is the case at all. Our kids were given a knife to use in a gun fight and we all know how those end up. Let's not be bitter bitches and cry that we should not have played Bama because the way we played last night we could not have beaten Ok. State or Oregon. So let's have a little class and give Bama their props they deserve it and let's lay the blame on where it lies, not that there was a rematch but because our coaches were totally unprepared in having a game plan stop counter act what Bama was trying to do on offense and defense!!!!

 

I do agree with this logically. Guess I'm still feeling a bit emotional this morning...

:geauxtige