My Response to Oklahoma State Cowboys Fans
by Darth Saban on Dec 5, 2011 3:16 AM CST
Email
PrintI had originally begun typing this as a comment over at www.cowboysrideforfree.com in their thread responding to the BCS Selection, but under these circumstances it didn't feel right going over there and posting this on their site. So, I decided to come over here, speak my mind, and invite any Oklahoma State fans (I'm sure there are a few coming over here, just as several of us went over there) to come in and share some of their opinions.
CT4, just keep on moving. My posts aren't for you.
As an initial matter, I would just point out that some of the more ridiculous comments in that OSU thread are posted by a Cowboys fan who is also an Auburnite. He, too, is welcome to post here, but I'd ask us to all ensure that we follow RBR policy.
Cowboys, you have an outstanding football team, of whom you are justifiably very proud. The dismantling of the Oklahoma Sooners was thorough and impressive.
As has been expressed elsewhere, I regret that a very good Oklahoma State (as well as a very good Stanford team) got left out with our current system. However, only one 1-loss team was going to the National Championship Game, and three were going to get left out. 42/59 voters in the Coaches' Poll felt like OSU was #3 or lower. In fact, even among voters not in the SEC or Big 12, Oklahoma State got 13 second-place votes, 31 third-place votes, 3 fourth-place votes, and 1 fifth-place vote. These are coaches we're talking about, not sportswriters or ESPN talking heads. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/story/2011-final-coaches-ballots/51647436/1
Auburn went undefeated in 2004, but didn't get invited to the BCS National Championship Game. (This was actually the impetus behind Mike Slive pushing the plus-one, which only the ACC supported - the Big 12 opposed.) Penn State was undefeated and untied in 1994, but Nebraska was the National Champion. FSU and Notre Dame both had one loss in 1993 (pre-BCS), with Notre Dame winning the head-to-head, but losing to Boston College, yet FSU was the polls' as National Champions. Hell, Alabama was back-to-back defending National Champions in 1964 and 1965, and went undefeated and untied in 1966, but Notre Dame and Michigan State (who played each other to a tie) were co-champs.
Sometimes it's hard to know why people vote the way they do. Again, as has been pointed out elsewhere, Mike Slive (SEC Commissioner) has tried to implement a plus-one system that would have had LSU playing Stanford, and Alabama playing Oklahoma State, with the winner playing for all the marbles. The Big Ten, Big 12, and Pac-10 all opposed this plan. http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7317611/interim-big-12-commissioner-chuck-neinas-pushes-plus-one-playoff-model. http://espn.go.com/college-football/preview11/story/_/id/6842618/college-football-preview-jim-delany-mike-slive-form-one-great-rivalries.
“Even though we could construct barriers at this time, we felt like there could be easily an erosion of that, more pressure to add more teams with an ability to get to the national championship game as we went over time,” then-Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe explained at the time.
With regards to the fact that Alabama did not win our conference, but are still playing for the National Championship, we should remember that this has happened twice before, with both other teams coming from the Big 12. I'm sure you all remember, but the 2001 Cornhuskers were crushed 36-62 by then #14 Colorado in the last game of the regular season, didn't win their division, and then (much like Alabama this year) sat out the conference championship game on their way to the BCS National Championship Game. In 2003, Oklahoma lost 7-35 to then #12 Kansas State in the Big 12 Championship Game, on their way to the National Championship Game.
I wonder how the rolls would have been reversed had 2008 turned out slightly different. Remember when Oklahoma, Texas, and Texas Tech all ended in the three-way tie in the Big 12 South? That wasn't as close as this year, but had a couple of things gone differently, we would have had a Big 12 BCSNCG rematch: http://www.bcsguru.com/2008_bcs_standings.htm. Interestingly, right after this season the Mountain West Conference proposed an eight-team playoff.
Interesting Fact: The name of the conference is the "Big 12 Conference." One OSU fan made a snarky comment explaining that XII was a Roman numeral for twelve. I'm sure that fan would be interested to note that although their logo does, in fact, include the Roman numerals "XII," the banner on that logo bears "Big 12 Conference" and the registered trademark name of the conference is the "Big 12 Conference." Don't take my word for it - take theirs:
When referring to the Big 12 Conference, please remember the conference name (which is a registered trademark) should be listed as follows:
Big 12
The following should NOT be used in text when referencing the Big 12:
Big XII
Big Twelve
http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10410&KEY=&ATCLID=1514841
FanPosts are just that; posts created by the fans. They are in no way indicative of the opinions of SBN and the authors of Roll Bama Roll.
46 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I won't complain.
Simply because we get another shot at LSU… but… if this doesn’t scream playoff, I don’t know what does. Roll Tide!
"...because you've got your mind right, and that's the way we like it." Nick Saban
I'll ask again
So you don’t think that Bama and LSU are the best two teams? Do you feel OSU or Stanford (or someone else) should be playing LSU? Just curious…
The only reason you would want a playoff if the BCS formula gets it WRONG. I’m sure there is a year (or two) where the two best teams didn’t battle for the NC, but it generally gets it right.
I’ll also go back to my previous statement…
College football is the greatest sport in the world. Let’s f*c* it up with a playoff so that other teams that don’t deserve a shot can win the NC instead!! That’ll be great!
And no offense to OSU, I agree, they have a great team and will probably beat another team from a conference where defense is a dirty word. But watching both teams play Bama is clearly a better team overall and there one loss was a forced loss (O/T) to the #1 undefeated team in the nation.
I was against a rematch when we lost, but due to the fact that no one else is undefeated (or has a loss similar to Bama’s) this is the only way in should have ended up.
Attempting to remove humor from posts since August 30, 2011
I think that Bama is only marginally more deserving than OSU
and their relative merits haven’t truely been decided on the field. That’s why I think there should be a +1, so that it can be settled on the field.
God bless our Dark Lord.
I've said before
that I wouldn’t ‘mind’ a +1, but only if needed. There is an argument this year that the #2, 3, and 4 teams are ‘close enough’ to play it out in a +1.
The issue I have is that it would expand in a few years once Pandora has her box opened. It’s guaranteed… Then you’ll have to watch Boise and Kansas State get a chance to injure or luck their way into the NC game. Then CFB will go the way of all the other sports into suckville.
Attempting to remove humor from posts since August 30, 2011
And get off his lawn!
'There are two pains in life. There is the pain of discipline and the pain of disappointment. If you can handle the pain of discipline, then you'll never have to deal with the pain of disappointment,'- Nick Saban
Only if needed?
When does that get decided? I hope you don’t propose deciding on an ad hoc basis based on events. No offense, but that’s a terrible idea. There have to be rules that are made in advance of the heated moments when the arguments are flying and the passions are boiling.
I would think you can write a rule for it
Along the lines of…
If the #3 team is from a BCS conference and has equal to or less than the same number of losses as the #2 team, then a +1 format is to be used, etc…
So it covers years like 2004 when there are 3 undeafeted teams and this year when there are 2 (ok, maybe 3) 1-loss teams that are vying for the NC.
But if there are only 2 undefeated teams left from BCS conferences, then why in the Lord’s good name do you want to have a playoff just for playoffs’ sake?
Attempting to remove humor from posts since August 30, 2011
That
OR…. just play #2 vs #3 and let the #1 wait for the winner.
My main point here was that you can put a rule together so that you don’t end up with what glen was saying. He’s right, you need to take emotion out of this scenario and let the formula determine the result.
But having a playoff just to have a playoff is a horrible idea for CFB, IMO.
Attempting to remove humor from posts since August 30, 2011
I totally agree with some form of a playoff...
however what most of the haters fail to realize is that the only purpose of the BCS is to put the top 2 teams in the NC game. It has nowhere in their rules or guidelines that a team participating in the NC game has to win their division, their conference or whatever.
Most of the “Bama doesn’t deserve it”, or “no re-match” shouters are doing it solely out of an emotional response.
ROLL TIDE ROLL…now let’s go win #14!!!!!
I pointed this out to my son earlier today.
There is plenty of precedence for teams playing for the NC without a division or conference title. My son and brother are both LSU fans (they can’t help it… they live in Louisiana) and I have a lot of respect for them (son, brother and Tigers). In fact, they are my second favorite team. But both of them are so tied in knots over this and burning with “we already beat them once” fever that I’m afraid their heads will explode when the Tide rolls into N.O. and Bama walks away with the BCS Title. Yes… I said WHEN, not IF. ROLL TIDE ROLL!!
I was putting up Christmas lights
and forgot all about the ESPN BCS show and suddenly remembered. I listened to Herbstreit explain the plus one and out of all the playoff scenarios I think this one would really work . This year I don’t really give a shit because WE ARE IN BABY!!!!!!!!!
Let's see how it plays out...
You don’t get change until more than one of the bigger conferences gets the shaft.
This is about money people – plain and simple. Now for the first time in my life the Big 12, Pac 12 and Big 10 all get shut out of the big game. I’ll bet the +1 has more legs now than ever before.
The conferences were already sick of the SEC dominance and now their worst nightmare has come true. LOVE IT!
Talent can only get you so far. Give me a player who has less talent, but the heart of a champion and the will to succeed.
Really hope in the Meltdown thread
That OTS just posts AUKingOState’s idiot comments for Okie State. Man, how bad must his life suck that one of his teams didn’t get the bid and his other team is little brother?
"When you have confidence, you can have a lot of fun. And when you have fun, you can do amazing things." - Joe Namath
They might have won this year,
but both of his teams are little brother.
"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." - George Carlin
by Slice of Life on Dec 5, 2011 8:48 AM CST up reply actions
I am sure that
we as Alabama fans may be doing some whining ourselves if the shoe was on the other foot. But it isn’t and I think the BCS definitely got it right. I’ve been over to their site and read all the reasons why they think they should have gone and I feel sorry for them…..NOT.
I don't think I would have 'whined'
…because we should have won when we played LSU, but didn’t. Therefore, we had to rely on other teams winning and losing in the right order for things to work out. If we had won against LSU, we would have controlled our own destiny. When you lose, that’s the price you pay.
BTW, this is why the regular season MATTERS. A playoff removes the importance of the LSU/Bama game on Nov 5.
Attempting to remove humor from posts since August 30, 2011
With a +1, the loss on 11/5 could've easily knocked us out of contention if other teams had kept winning.
God bless our Dark Lord.
Highly doubtful
since we were #3 afterward.
'There are two pains in life. There is the pain of discipline and the pain of disappointment. If you can handle the pain of discipline, then you'll never have to deal with the pain of disappointment,'- Nick Saban
Hell, we COULD HAVE been hit by a meteor.
'There are two pains in life. There is the pain of discipline and the pain of disappointment. If you can handle the pain of discipline, then you'll never have to deal with the pain of disappointment,'- Nick Saban
I could be sporting a pair of testicles, yet claim to be your grandma.
That made no sense, disregard.
I guess I'll have to stick with my promise to buy myself an early 80s Cadillac Seville now that Alabama is headed to the BCSNCG!!!!
Here are the rankings as of 11/6.
LSU and OSU were above us. Stanford probably would’ve passed us if they had won out. Boise might have passed us if they had been able to kick a field goal vs TCU (maybe). And if Arkansas could’ve beaten LSU, who knows what might’ve happened. Point is LSU/Bama would still have been a monumentally important game. You don’t lose and just assume that you’re still going to make a 4-team playoff.
And besides, many people are already saying that that game has been devalued under the current system, due to the rematch. So what are we arguing about?
God bless our Dark Lord.
Computers would still kill Boise in the end.
Arkansas beating LSU would really be the only scenario that would have knocked us out. And, like I told the LSU folks, the first one ended up being for the SEC. This one will be for the BCS.
'There are two pains in life. There is the pain of discipline and the pain of disappointment. If you can handle the pain of discipline, then you'll never have to deal with the pain of disappointment,'- Nick Saban
Playoffs hurt the Big 12 and other conferences.
If you look back starting in 2007, it is very likely that every national championship game except for last year would have been two SEC teams:
2007: Georgia – LSU
2008 Bama – Florida in a rematch
2009 Bama – Florida in a rematch
2010 Who knows, cause it was screwed up anyway.
2011 Bama-LSU
No wonder the Big 12 is against a +1. Mack Brown, tOSU and USC would much rather take their chances with swaying the voters than actually having to play-in. It just worked out against the conference this year. If OSU light wants to be pissed, they should direct the blame at their Texas overlords instead of us.
This
But the more riled their fans get, the less they will be focused on that truth. Plus, because it is the way it is, the system helps the big names there more than Okie St. Texas and USC will get the benefit of the doubt if there is anyway for the poll voters to give it to them. Okie St, not so much.
by Steven Mitchell on Dec 5, 2011 10:41 AM CST up reply actions
In 2008...
I think Oklahoma – Texas would have been at least as likely as Florida – Alabama.
Thirteen.
At least A&M saw where the future was heading.
They will enjoy cashing those SEC paychecks.
RBR resident Dogcaller.
OSU needs to come to grips.
They got left out because they lost to a bad Iowa St. team- PERIOD. If Bama had been left out it would be becasue we lost to LSU- PERIOD.
The only time a team gets a bad deal is if they are undefeated and still get left out as in AU in 2004 (kinda glad that got a bad deal.) Otherwise every team controls it’s own destiny on Sept. 1.
By the way I’d be in favor of a “provisional plus 1” which kicks in IF more than 2 teams are undefeated at the end of the regular season. Not counting the little boys like Houston or Boise at the end of the final game there should be no more than 1 undefeated team (or no undefeated teams.) Thus no one really has a reason to argue about a popularity contest. If Vandy never loses a game next year they should end up #1. That is why every game counts.
If Auburn was in New Mexico and we never played them I would still hate them and their dumb coach and their cheating players.
I don't see a logical way to draw that distinction, and I don't think you should reward a team just for being undefeated
if they haven’t tried to play anybody. A provisional +1 is crazy talk, IMO. The game structure needs to be set in advance.
God bless our Dark Lord.
A provisional +1 would work
It’s not something that would come into play every year, but for those years where there’s no clear #2 or 3 or more undefeated teams at the top, why not give 4 (and only 4) teams with a legit claim a chance. The schedules will never be equal, so let’s not use that as an excuse.
'Bama fan since birth, Niners Faithful & Hawks fan since '86, Braves fan since '90
It's the sport of kings, better than diamond rings....football.
Roll Tide Roll!
Go NIners!
Who decides what's clear cut?
I don’t think you should make that decision on the fly nor try to set up some convoluted rule to decide. You should just plan to have a certain number of games in advance and eliminate that part of the guesswork.
God bless our Dark Lord.
When Bama's number 3 or 4, obviously...
'There are two pains in life. There is the pain of discipline and the pain of disappointment. If you can handle the pain of discipline, then you'll never have to deal with the pain of disappointment,'- Nick Saban
Fuck Oklahoma State.
They had the opportunity in their hands and blew it. We lost, they slipped in front of us and all they had to do was win their games. They can blame whoever they want…the BCS…the coaches…whatever. All they had to do is win against a shitty team and win out and they didn’t. They opened the door for us, and we took advantage of it. So, in short – FUCK. OKLAHOMA. STATE.
ROLL TIDE ROLL!!!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
