Michigan State in the Championship game????
MGLICKER
Posts: 7,995 ✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
Does Michigan St. not have a legitimate claim to the BCS title game?
12 and 1 and knocked off the 24 game undefeated Ohio State. But oooohhhh it is only the Big Ten and not the heralded, coveted, invincible SEC!
Horsefeathers.
0
Comments
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
http://www.unisquare.com/store/brick/
Ralph
<< <i>NO CHANCE ON EARTH and completely NOT deserving. Silliness. >>
Blasphemy! Blasphemy would be a better word than silliness.
<< <i>There is no conference more over-rated year over year in both football and basketball then the Big Whatever they are now >>
Over-rated by whom? Not this crowd.
<< <i>As I said before, I'm not a huge follower, but even I know Michigan State has absolutely no place in a championship game. Talk about homerism. >>
...but, I was saying in another thread that Ohio State (had they won) was a fit as well. No true Michigan or Michigan State fan would ever say that.
I am a PAC 12 guy. Live in Southern AZ, but USC is my team. Well it is my team again now that Lane Kiffen is gone.
<< <i>The playoffs can't get here soon enough. >>
Agree, but that is when the real debates will begin.
<< <i>The playoffs can't get here soon enough. >>
Indeed. But then the debates will be which 1 loss team gets shut out of the playoffs
<< <i>Auburn doesn't deserve to play FSU. They got spanked by LSU and should've lost to Georgia. Mich state is 4 points from being undefeated. >>
Against who? A bunch of teams that are done for the year and aren't going to a bowl game? They beat no one except for a nationally consensus overrated OSU team.
<< <i>Auburn doesn't deserve to play FSU. They got spanked by LSU and should've lost to Georgia. Mich state is 4 points from being undefeated. >>
Good lord you really are clueless. But then we all know that already.
<< <i>
<< <i>Auburn doesn't deserve to play FSU. They got spanked by LSU and should've lost to Georgia. Mich state is 4 points from being undefeated. >>
Against who? A bunch of teams that are done for the year and aren't going to a bowl game? They beat no one except for a nationally consensus overrated OSU team. >>
Are you that stupid? Any team that wins 24 straight games are not overrated. Its ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE to win 24 games in a row IN ANY LEVEL whether it be pee-wee, high school, college or pro.
That is IF YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT SPORTS WHICH YOU CLEARLY DONT.
Are you that stupid? Any team that wins 24 straight games are not overrated. Its ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE to win 24 games in a row IN ANY LEVEL whether it be pee-wee, high school, college or pro.
That is IF YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT SPORTS WHICH YOU CLEARLY DONT. >>
How long did you take to prepare this thoughtful analysis? You must have invested at least 15 seconds in it. You like Michigan State-I get it it. Auburn is in the Championship game, and MSU is not. Life is not always fair. Get over it. Given that the SEC has won seven consecutives BCS champioships, they have earned the tiebreaker.
<< <i>Any team that wins 24 straight games are not overrated. Its ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE to win 24 games in a row IN ANY LEVEL whether it be pee-wee, high school, college or pro. >>
^This.
<< <i>Are you that stupid? Any team that wins 24 straight games are not overrated. Its ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE to win 24 games in a row IN ANY LEVEL whether it be pee-wee, high school, college or pro.
That is IF YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT SPORTS WHICH YOU CLEARLY DONT. >>
How long did you take to prepare this thoughtful analysis? You must have invested at least 15 seconds in it. You like Michigan State-I get it it. Auburn is in the Championship game, and MSU is not. Life is not always fair. Get over it. Given that the SEC has won seven consecutives BCS champioships, they have earned the tiebreaker. >>
They didn't earn anything. Rankings are not supposed to be based from previous years. And the only reason why they have won 7 straight is because Oklahoma state got screwed in 2011.
They didn't earn anything. Rankings are not supposed to be based from previous years. And the only reason why they have won 7 straight is because Oklahoma state got screwed in 2011. >>
How did they screwed? They lost a game, and Alabama lost a game. OSU lost in OT to a 6-6 team. Alabama lost in OT to a 13-0 team.
Always buying Bobby Cox inserts. PM me.
<< <i>OK state got screwed in 2011? I would love to hear this explanation. >>
OK St lost to an unranked team. Bama lost to #1 team by a field goal in overtime.
<< <i>OK state got screwed in 2011? I would love to hear this explanation. >>
OK State had a stronger schedule than Alabama and actually won their conference. Their one loss was on the road during a week in which their entire campus was in turmoil. Alabama lost at home in a putrid display of offensive football (by both teams). So, because it benefited the SEC team this time, we got the rematch that everyone was so much against in 2006. Remember the arguments then? "Michigan didn't win their conference, Florida did" and so on. Didn't matter than Michigan's loss to #1 was on the road where Alabama's was at home. Didn't matter than Michigan crushed their lone common opponent (Vandy) and Florida didn't - and that Vandy said Michigan was better. Nope, none of that mattered when 2011 rolled around. In the end, you had a conference champion with the same record against a stronger schedule passed over for a team that didn't win their conference.
THAT is how OK State got screwed.
<< <i>
<< <i>OK state got screwed in 2011? I would love to hear this explanation. >>
OK State had a stronger schedule than Alabama and actually won their conference. Their one loss was on the road during a week in which their entire campus was in turmoil. Alabama lost at home in a putrid display of offensive football (by both teams). So, because it benefited the SEC team this time, we got the rematch that everyone was so much against in 2006. Remember the arguments then? "Michigan didn't win their conference, Florida did" and so on. Didn't matter than Michigan's loss to #1 was on the road where Alabama's was at home. Didn't matter than Michigan crushed their lone common opponent (Vandy) and Florida didn't - and that Vandy said Michigan was better. Nope, none of that mattered when 2011 rolled around. In the end, you had a conference champion with the same record against a stronger schedule passed over for a team that didn't win their conference.
THAT is how OK State got screwed. >>
Don't you just love facts.
Now, if Tuscaloosa had suffered anywhere near the turmoil unleashed on the Oklahoma campus, I would say they deserved the spot in the BCS Championship game.
However, since life was all lollipops and rose petals in T-town in 2011, I say the crystal should be shipped out west to the deserving Sooners!
<< <i>I like the argument that The Oklahoma loss came during a week when their campus was in turmoil. Very valid point, campus tranquility is a major component of the Harris Poll.
Now, if Tuscaloosa had suffered anywhere near the turmoil unleashed on the Oklahoma campus, I would say they deserved the spot in the BCS Championship game.
However, since life was all lollipops and rose petals in T-town in 2011, I say the crystal should be shipped out west to the deserving Sooners! >>
Even I detect the sarcasm in that one. Nicely done.
Always buying Bobby Cox inserts. PM me.
<< <i>
<< <i>I like the argument that The Oklahoma loss came during a week when their campus was in turmoil. Very valid point, campus tranquility is a major component of the Harris Poll.
Now, if Tuscaloosa had suffered anywhere near the turmoil unleashed on the Oklahoma campus, I would say they deserved the spot in the BCS Championship game.
However, since life was all lollipops and rose petals in T-town in 2011, I say the crystal should be shipped out west to the deserving Sooners! >>
Even I detect the sarcasm in that one. Nicely done. >>
April 27, 2011 a day that will never be forgotten. Coming from a Tuscaloosa resident and eyewitness to this tragedy. Also don't forget OK st had a 30 year old quarterback.
Tornado
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>OK state got screwed in 2011? I would love to hear this explanation. >>
OK State had a stronger schedule than Alabama and actually won their conference. Their one loss was on the road during a week in which their entire campus was in turmoil. Alabama lost at home in a putrid display of offensive football (by both teams). So, because it benefited the SEC team this time, we got the rematch that everyone was so much against in 2006. Remember the arguments then? "Michigan didn't win their conference, Florida did" and so on. Didn't matter than Michigan's loss to #1 was on the road where Alabama's was at home. Didn't matter than Michigan crushed their lone common opponent (Vandy) and Florida didn't - and that Vandy said Michigan was better. Nope, none of that mattered when 2011 rolled around. In the end, you had a conference champion with the same record against a stronger schedule passed over for a team that didn't win their conference.
THAT is how OK State got screwed. >>
Don't you just love facts. >>
When soundgard is the only one that agrees with you, that's when you know you're wrong.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>OK state got screwed in 2011? I would love to hear this explanation. >>
OK State had a stronger schedule than Alabama and actually won their conference. Their one loss was on the road during a week in which their entire campus was in turmoil. Alabama lost at home in a putrid display of offensive football (by both teams). So, because it benefited the SEC team this time, we got the rematch that everyone was so much against in 2006. Remember the arguments then? "Michigan didn't win their conference, Florida did" and so on. Didn't matter than Michigan's loss to #1 was on the road where Alabama's was at home. Didn't matter than Michigan crushed their lone common opponent (Vandy) and Florida didn't - and that Vandy said Michigan was better. Nope, none of that mattered when 2011 rolled around. In the end, you had a conference champion with the same record against a stronger schedule passed over for a team that didn't win their conference.
THAT is how OK State got screwed. >>
Don't you just love facts. >>
When soundgard is the only one that agrees with you, that's when you know you're wrong. >>
Says the guy who keeps agreeing with himself
Both teams had tough schedules. You can spin it all you like, but the fact remains that Alabama lost to a really good team, and OSU lost to a .500 team.
I checked-OSU came from 17 down at the half to beat a 7-6 Texas A&M team by 1. They scored late at home to come from behind to beat a decent Kansas State team.. They won their bowl game in OT. OTOH, Alabama's closest game (other than the loss) was a 16 point win at Penn State.
<< <i>Right the folks at ESPN are never wrong LOL. >>
I know a guy who had a cousin who visited the ESPN studios about that same time and even the cousin said Ok State got screwed.
Yes, OkSt had a worse loss. They also had the better win. And didn't finish third in their conference to go with the stronger overall schedule.
<< <i>Funny - that link with final SOS rankings includes five such rankings - three of which list Oklahoma State ahead of Alabama. So even your own link agrees with me.
Yes, OkSt had a worse loss. They also had the better win. And didn't finish third in their conference to go with the stronger overall schedule. >>
Yep and OSU's loss was is 3 OT's on the road while Alabama lost at home. OSU beat more ranked teams.
Yep and OSU's loss was is 3 OT's on the road while Alabama lost at home. OSU beat more ranked teams. >>
OSU lost to more unranked teams. Both teams played competititve schedules. OSU had 4 close games (including the bowl game), and lost to a bad team. Alabama lost the only close game it played. Both teams had fine seasons. IMO Alabama deserved its spot. You think it should be OSU even though it lost to a bad team and struggled in three other games. The two played roughly equivalent schedules. Alabama thrashed the # 2 and # 4 teams. OSU beat #5 in OT, and struggled against an unranked team (in addition to the one that beat them) and a team ranked in the mid- teens. The voters agreed with me. In no way did OSU get screwed.
<< <i>OSU lost to more unranked teams. Both teams played competititve schedules. OSU had 4 close games (including the bowl game), and lost to a bad team. Alabama lost the only close game it played. Both teams had fine seasons. IMO Alabama deserved its spot. You think it should be OSU even though it lost to a bad team and struggled in three other games. The two played roughly equivalent schedules. Alabama thrashed the # 2 and # 4 teams. OSU beat #5 in OT, and struggled against an unranked team (in addition to the one that beat them) and a team ranked in the mid- teens. The voters agreed with me. In no way did OSU get screwed. >>
+1
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." Dr. Seuss
- a 7-point win over a Kansas State team that went 10-3
- a 1-point win on the road against Texas A&M, who ended up 7-6 but was 2-0 (against bad teams) at the time of the game
- the aforementioned 3OT loss to Iowa State
Their other 9 games were won by an average of 31 points.
So let's put to bed this idea that Oklahoma State somehow struggled through to their 11-1 regular season record.
In the final BCS regular season standings, Alabama had 2 opponents in the top 16. They were 1-1 against those 2. OkSt had 3 opponents and was 3-0 against them.
What it really boils down to is this: do you consider who a team loses to more important than who they beat? If losses are super-important to you, you pick Alabama*. If wins are more important, you pick Oklahoma State. Personally, I think the stronger schedule for OkSt, the fact that they won their conference and that their loss was on the road gives them a better case than Alabama.
* - I should mention here that every argument I heard in 2011 in favor of Alabama was exactly the opposite of what was heard regarding Michigan in 2006. In 2006, everyone was against Michigan because they didn't win their conference and "we don't want a rematch". When 2011 rolled around, despite Michigan having a BETTER case than Bama (Michigan's loss was on the road to #1, Bama's loss was at home to #2, Michigan actually beat a common opponent by a larger margin than Florida), suddenly those arguments didn't matter.
Lets look at your facts re OSU:
1. They came from behind to beat an unranked (in the final rankings) A&M by one. The fact that TA&M was 2-0 at the time is irrelevant.
2. Kansas State was a decent team, but only two of their wins were by more than 7. They beat Eastern Kentucky 10-7.
3. Alabama had two games against two teams in the top 16. True, but both those teams were in the top 4, and Alabama beat the crap out of both of them.
4. OSU played nobody who finished in the top ten until the bowl game.
5. Slice it and dice it any way want, but OSU lost to a .500 team. Alabama lost to the team that finished #2 in the nation.
6. You made your case, but you lost.
7. Alabama won the BCS, and flags fly forever.
<< <i>OkSt had 3 regular season games that weren't dominant victories:
- a 7-point win over a Kansas State team that went 10-3
- a 1-point win on the road against Texas A&M, who ended up 7-6 but was 2-0 (against bad teams) at the time of the game
- the aforementioned 3OT loss to Iowa State
Their other 9 games were won by an average of 31 points.
So let's put to bed this idea that Oklahoma State somehow struggled through to their 11-1 regular season record.
In the final BCS regular season standings, Alabama had 2 opponents in the top 16. They were 1-1 against those 2. OkSt had 3 opponents and was 3-0 against them.
What it really boils down to is this: do you consider who a team loses to more important than who they beat? If losses are super-important to you, you pick Alabama*. If wins are more important, you pick Oklahoma State. Personally, I think the stronger schedule for OkSt, the fact that they won their conference and that their loss was on the road gives them a better case than Alabama.
* - I should mention here that every argument I heard in 2011 in favor of Alabama was exactly the opposite of what was heard regarding Michigan in 2006. In 2006, everyone was against Michigan because they didn't win their conference and "we don't want a rematch". When 2011 rolled around, despite Michigan having a BETTER case than Bama (Michigan's loss was on the road to #1, Bama's loss was at home to #2, Michigan actually beat a common opponent by a larger margin than Florida), suddenly those arguments didn't matter. >>
+1
Alabama may have the BCS flag, but everyone knows the BCS is irrelevant. That's why they are getting abolished.
1. It is not a given that OSU had the stronger schedule.
2. Fortunately for Alabama, the voters did not share your opinion.
3. Your argument re the loss on the road might carry some weight had that loss not been to a POS team.
4. OSU would not have won its conference had either UA or LSU been in there.
5. Few, if any, people outside Stillwater think OSU was a better team than Alabama. I bet you do not really believe it.
6. Alabama won the BCS. The If you accept that, you might sleep better at night. This was a non-issue at the time, and remains one today.
7. I suggest you put up a sign in the stadium that says you were national champs. Alabama has claimed a bunch of phoney titles, you can do the same.
<< <i>
5. Few, if any, people outside Stillwater think OSU was a better team than Alabama. I bet you do not really believe it.
>>
Actually you couldn't be more wrong. The 2011 BCS championship game where LSU got smoked was the reason they decided to give the BCS the boot. The people spoke with their vote by not watching the game. It drew low ratings because most fans believed OSU should've been playing.
<< <i>I believe that the BCS championsip game in 06 proved conclusively that a rematch was not warranted. >>
I actually agree with you on this point. I think that the right team won the title in 2006.
<< <i>1. They came from behind to beat an unranked (in the final rankings) A&M by one. The fact that TA&M was 2-0 at the time is irrelevant. >>
A win's a win.
<< <i>2. Kansas State was a decent team, but only two of their wins were by more than 7. They beat Eastern Kentucky 10-7. >>
10 wins in either the #1 or #2 conference is still 10 wins.
<< <i>3. Alabama had two games against two teams in the top 16. True, but both those teams were in the top 4, and Alabama beat the crap out of both of them. >>
You don't get to use the BCS title game to bolster your support for Alabama playing in the game. The rankings I used were the final regular season ones. Alabama's opponents were ranked #1 and #6 and they were 1-1 against them.
<< <i>4. OSU played nobody who finished in the top ten until the bowl game. >>
In the regular season rankings that the BCS title selection is based on, K-State was ranked #8. Oklahoma State beat them.
<< <i>5. Slice it and dice it any way want, but OSU lost to a .500 team. Alabama lost to the team that finished #2 in the nation. >>
True.
<< <i>6. You made your case, but you lost. >>
That's a matter of conjecture
<< <i>7. Alabama won the BCS, and flags fly forever. >>
True
FWIW, I'm not from Stillwater and have never been to Oklahoma.
<< <i>1. It is not a given that OSU had the stronger schedule. >>
The majority of SOS rankings put OSU ahead of Alabama so, yeah, it's a given.
<< <i>2. Fortunately for Alabama, the voters did not share your opinion. >>
I would argue that this reflects an inherent bias: A) in favor of the SEC;
<< <i>3. Your argument re the loss on the road might carry some weight had that loss not been to a POS team. >>
This has some merit to it.
<< <i>4. OSU would not have won its conference had either UA or LSU been in there. >>
Speaking of conjecture...
<< <i>5. Few, if any, people outside Stillwater think OSU was a better team than Alabama. I bet you do not really believe it. >>
Dunno. Hard to say. What I do know is that Alabama finished 3rd in their own conference. I do think that OkSt was better than LSU.
<< <i>6. Alabama won the BCS. The If you accept that, you might sleep better at night. This was a non-issue at the time, and remains one today. >>
Well, it was a matter of quite a bit of discussion back then.
<< <i>7. I suggest you put up a sign in the stadium that says you were national champs. Alabama has claimed a bunch of phoney titles, you can do the same. >>
What stadium?
FWIW, Oklahoma State was awarded at least two national championships in 2011: CFB Data Warehouse National Championships for 2011
No, I don't think those 2 titles for OkSt in 2011 carry any weight
What I'd like to hear is an argument in favor of Alabama that doesn't negate the argument in favor of Florida in 2006 AND also doesn't take into account the results of any bowl games. Just base it on the data available at the time of the BCS selection and then make your case.
Again, I will say that the right team won the title in 2006. I don't think that's the case for 2011.
<< <i>
FWIW, Oklahoma State was awarded at least two national championships in 2011: CFB Data Warehouse National Championships for 2011
>>
Cool site. Interesting that a lot of outlets like sagerin and the new York times picked Penn state over Nebraska in 1994.