scooter1369;2056671; said:
If Bama had lost to Miss St, they'd have two losses and we wouldn't be discussing this.
Convert it to LSU losing on the road to 'Bama and 'Bama losing against Miss. St. late and I'll still stand by the zero love assessment for a BCS title nod.
And, it would still not result in a 'Bama vs. LSU BCS title game.
Diego-Bucks;2056673; said:
Its not the only elephant in the room. You want to turn it into a black-white issue when it isn't.
Alabama loses at home to LSU; emphasis AT HOME. How is a neutral site game going to change this fact? If 'Bama wins in a title game that literally means that the previous match-up didn't matter? How's that for the old NCAA Football mantra that the regular season is essentially a playoff?
OK State loses on the road. Furthermore it happened immediately after hearing some emotional news on the death of OK State's women's basketball coach someone I'm certain many of the were close with and others knew very well.
Further further, OK State has beaten 7 winning teams compared with Alabama beating 3.
I really don't think I'm trying to turn this into a black-and-white issue. Think of it more so that I take the Cowboys loss to the Cyclones as the key deciding issue, against which all others pale.
Regarding some of your points - not taken ad seriam.
OK State lost on the road to a team they should have drilled. The women's basketball coach death is sad, but it shouldn't have those players on the football team coughing up a turkey.
I'll grant you that the Cowboys beat 7 teams with a winning record to 'Bama's 3, how that happened and why is as much a discussion on SOS and the inherent weekly beat-downs that happen in the SEC, in a year where one division is significantly better than the other, as anything else. In the end though, isn't that more an argument in favor of placing the whole thing back into the hands of the computers?
On the issue of a neutral site game versus the in season at home game. I'd say that as LSU beat 'Bama on their turf you'd expect them to be more heavily favored to beat the same team on neutral turf. What does that prove? That LSU was the better team (should that prove out). What if the result is reversed? That 'Bama was the better team on the day.
The above I'd note is one of the reasons frequently offered in favor of TSUN not replaying tOSU in '06.
What is marginally different this time around is that TSUN's only loss came on the last game of the season, against a strong opponent. By contrast, the Cowboys loss came earlier and against a far inferior opponent. It is in that sense that the entire season as a playoff argument actually applies. It matters to whom you lose, it matters when you do the losing.
Oh, and further, further if you like - the notion that Oklahoma State's conference title win counts massively in the scales (Mandel leans on this) matters only if you believe that you must win the conference title to get into that final game.
Which makes sense if there is another opponent, in another conference, with a more than comparable record - which we'd have, even more than have, if Oklahoma State had beaten Iowa State. But, they didn't manage that feat so the Cowboys are on the outs.
For the record, I don't like the outcome. The replay of 'Bama and LSU is certainly less interesting than a game between an undefeated Oklahoma State and LSU would have been.
I can't have that though. What I can have is the sense to see why Oklahoma State doesn't get sufficient votes to leap over 'Bama - something which the Cowboys most prominent and monied booster cannot see.