• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

2009 Polls - Regular and Pre-Season

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Gatorubet;1565241; said:
It's not a fucking controversy. It's a contract. USC agreed by virtue of its participation in the BCS system that it would honor the BCSCG winner as having won the "National Title". Having those asswipes call the AP the National Title is a joke and an admission that its contractural word means squat.

They won the AP title. Kudos. It is not a "national title" , anymore than my pick of USC - the Gatorubet Poll/Title - would have conferred The National Title on a USC Team that was not in the BCSCG.

Otherwise Auburn has a National Title too. They don't, no matter how much Tubberville paid to have rings made.
Click to expand...
It doesn't seem that those "asswipes" talk about having that national title nearly as much as fans of other schools talk about them not having a national title. And, as far as I know, USC has never denied LSU won the Sugar Bowl and claimed the coaches trophy in 2003/04.

As the BCS itself states, it's not an entity, it's an event. That event arranges a game where #1 plays #2. USC does not deny that the BCS #1 played the BCS #2. While the coaches are obligated to give all their first place votes to the winner of that game, other organizations are free to select national champions as they see fit.

Again, CPC was handed a trophy engraved with the words, "The Associated Press College Football National Champion." Is he supposed to decline accepting the trophy? The AP title isn't any less prestigious now than it was 73 years ago (or however long it has been, I'm sure BB73 can correct me on that). AP football titles are still recognized by the NCAA and all universities other than Louisiana State.

Also, I don't understand your point about Auburn. They were not voted #1 by any major service and are not recognized by the NCAA as having claimed any share of the 2004/05 title.
 
Upvote 0
Woody1968;1565248; said:
I disagree, and I think if the AP voted us #1 after the regular season, you would too.
Click to expand...

I'd like to believe I have more personal integrity than that. The BCS CG is the CG and all who signed the contract are bound to honor the decision(s) rendered. I will still, in my heart, believe that at the end of the regular 2006 season the Buckeyes were the best team in football.
 
Upvote 0
Dryden;1565263; said:
It doesn't seem that those "asswipes" talk about having that national title nearly as much as fans of other schools talk about them not having a national title. And, as far as I know, USC has never denied LSU won the Sugar Bowl and claimed the coaches trophy in 2003/04.

As the BCS itself states, it's not an entity, it's an event. That event arranges a game where #1 plays #2. USC does not deny that the BCS #1 played the BCS #2. While the coaches are obligated to give all their first place votes to the winner of that game, other organizations are free to select national champions as they see fit.

Again, CPC was handed a trophy engraved with the words, "The Associated Press College Football National Champion." Is he supposed to decline accepting the trophy? The AP title isn't any less prestigious now than it was 73 years ago (or however long it has been, I'm sure BB73 can correct me on that). AP football titles are still recognized by the NCAA and all universities other than Louisiana State.

Also, I don't understand your point about Auburn. They were not voted #1 by any major service and are not recognized by the NCAA as having claimed any share of the 2004/05 title.
Click to expand...

Let me see if I've got this straight. If #1 plays #2 and losses, then #3 is #1...
 
Upvote 0
cincibuck;1565410; said:
Let me see if I've got this straight. If #1 plays #2 and losses, then #3 is #1...
Click to expand...

If numbers 1, 2, and 3, are equal, you could make the argument.

The AP poll not being bound is a good thing. It would have been nice if they would have voted Auburn #1 the year they went undefeated (where was the SEC bias that year???) or if they would have voted us #1 in 1997 where both Florida and the Bucks lost to their rivals and won their bowl games. Florida had the benefit of replaying their rival, but we beat an undefeated Arizona State, which was a pretty good team. Most everyone thought scUM was better than Nebraska in 1997-1998. In that case, it was the coaches poll that everyone said was irrelevant.

The fact is, the only polls that matter are the ones that come at the end of the season before the bowls (to determine who gets a piece of the BCS pie), and the ones that come out after the bowls. Who cares if cincy is ranked #1 midway through the season? Polls are fun for debate, but at this point, it is more important to play the games. Nobody is painting any endzones in pasadena just yet.
 
Upvote 0
It would not have been nice if they voted Auburn in 2004. Auburn should have manned up and played a legit OOC if they wanted to be considered. We rip on Boise State, and rightfully so... it's the same for Auburn so far as I'm concerned. Auburn's 04 schedule was 66th in the nation. USC and OU both played top 25 schedules. The right two teams were there that night.

It was 1996, btw, not 1997. The final vote would have been in the year 1997, though, so I figure that's what you meant.
 
Upvote 0
Buckeyeskickbuttocks;1565423; said:
It was 1996, btw, not 1997. The final vote would have been in the year 1997, though, so I figure that's what you meant.
Click to expand...

Yes, I mean after the bowls in 1997, the 1996 season. Quite frankly, I believe that team was the best that we have fielded in the past 20 years.
 
Upvote 0
Woody1968;1565420; said:
If numbers 1, 2, and 3, are equal, you could make the argument.

The AP poll not being bound is a good thing. It would have been nice if they would have voted Auburn #1 the year they went undefeated (where was the SEC bias that year???)
Click to expand...


Why? You want to 1 or 2 earn it. Playing the schedule the Tigers/Plainsmen/War Eagles played you took the chance that your SOS score would do you in.

Same probelm I have with Boise State at #5 and all for a win over Oregon and then games with the 12 dwarfs.

Snow White could only do seven and she had more talent.
 
Upvote 0
Dryden;1565263; said:
It doesn't seem that those "asswipes" talk about having that national title nearly as much as fans of other schools talk about them not having a national title. And, as far as I know, USC has never denied LSU won the Sugar Bowl and claimed the coaches trophy in 2003/04.
Click to expand...
Dry - when they started that "Threepeat" shit it was a repudiation of the respective nature and value of the two different titles, with a distinctive difference: one is a title that has as much worth as any of the other umpty squat polls, and the other is a title that is the contractually agreed upon mechanism of choosing that year's champion.

The threepeat crap infers - hell it downright proclaims that the two are of equal and indistinguishable merit. That is not so.
 
Upvote 0
F82316.jpg
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top