BCS???

[vaultmd]

I read like the first three lines and saw that you wrote a book on the subject. but if you think ou had the softest schedule of the three I dont have to argue anymore everyone who sees that comment will know how intelligent that is. The bcs is based alot on schedule strength and that is why USC was in the rose instead of the sugar. AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
weres my help?

I can understand why an OU fan wouldn't read the post. The truth must really hurt.

The fact is, I didn't have to work very hard to make my point. The Big 12 bowl teams made the point emphatically all by themselves.

Good luck to both teams tonight.

[achtungpv]

why would any of you think that usc deserves the title more than LSU or OU? face it the were in the rose bowl opposed to the sugar bowl because they played a soft shedule! they beat michigan who is as consistent as K-State, this is so stupid you guys will share a title because "you" guys vote yourself AP national champs good job on avoiding any good teams and catching a Michigan team off their game. no doubt you guys should be champs head down.

The reality is that Oklahoma played the softest schedule of the three teams and when one takes into account LSU's sickening nonconference schedule, that's saying a lot. OU played a soft nonconference schedule and then they played in a weak conference. The whole Big 12 has one win ALL SEASON over out of conference top 25 teams, and it was over #22 Utah. To put things in perspective, Notre Dame, in a disasterous year, all by itself has more wins over top 25 nonconference teams than they WHOLE BIG 12!! Now I know that every game Notre Dame plays is a nonconference game, but I'm sure everyone gets the point.

Now that Big 12 Conference teams have to play good out of conference teams, we get to see how the conference stacks up with the rest of the country, and it isn't pretty. The Big 12 is 2-5 in bowl play. OU's opponents are also 2-5 in bowl play. The two wins were against UCLA and Navy (no disrespect intended for Navy). So one can no longer use the circular argument that: 1) The teams in the Big 12 are better because they play in a better conference; and 2) the Big 12 Conference is a better conference because they have better teams. The Big 12 bowl teams as a group have proven that they are NOT better teams and that the Big 12 is NOT a strong conference this year. In contrast, USC's opponents are 5-1 in bowl games. The one loser, UCLA, also counts as a loss for OU's opponents in bowl games.

I'm not saying that that's always true about the Big 12 - two or three years ago, it was the Pac 10 that got its head handed to it during bowl season by losing something like 5 of 7 games.

And for your information it's not "us" guys voting. It's the majority of AP sports writers and the majority of D-I coaches who agree that USC has had the best season, because the majority of them have actually seen the games. They saw how OU got manhandled by KSU and gave up. And they all knew that the score would have been 42-7 had KSU had not run the clock out when the ball was on OU's 5 yard line. That just does not happen with championship teams. If they kept fighting, like Michigan does, maybe the pollsters would have felt differently.

Pete Carroll does not participate in the coaches' poll anyway.

The worst thing that has happened in all this didn't happen to USC - it happened to LSU. They must be feeling that they have to beat OU by 28 just to be considered to be even as good as Kansas State, which lost it's bowl game; and that wouldn't have happened if the computers had accounted for all the Big 12 teams padding their schedules with weak out of conference opponents at home.

Geez Wilson, I got a headache reading this. However, you make a convincing argument. I would follow you blindly into the sun.

[mcminkz05]

well, lets see LSU win tonight and settle the OU part of the mess. LSU sharing with USC wouldnt be quite as bad.

[vaultmd]

well, lets see LSU win tonight and settle the OU part of the mess. LSU sharing with USC wouldnt be quite as bad.

Yeah, I agree. I'll bet that despite all the bluster, that both sides are content to tell everyone they would have kicked the other team's butt and then take their trophy home and celebrate. As a lot of people have been saying, ten years from now no one from either school is going to remember that it was a split championship.

[mcminkz05]

And LSU WINS!, finishing any arguments about OU being beter then USC. Now as for LSU and USC, LSU played pretty impressivly, and their D was spectacular. USC played well too, but i dont know they oucld ahve dominated Ou the way LSu did....

[vaultmd]

Congratulations again to LSU.

But . . . all they did was prove that they aren't even beat Oklahoma as badly as KSU. And we all know what the Big 10 runner up did to KSU.

Joking aside, LSU versus USC would have been a great game and it was the one everyone wanted to see. It probably would have come down to whether Steve Smith (#3 receiver for USC) was ready to be a star or not, because I think LSU would have had a good chance to shut down both Williams AND Colbert with the speed and talent they have on defense. Notice that most of White's completions were low throws because that's the only place he could put the ball where the defender couldn't get to it. But if they use their resources to shut down Smith, then I doubt if they would have had anyone to chase Reggie Bush around, and he's almost as good a playmaker as Williams.

On defense, I don't think they need to worry about Mauck beating them. They could let the turf monster tackle Mauck, like the Sooners did LOL

[mcminkz05]

Id have to go w ith LSU there, That defense could shut USC down if they played like they did against OU. I just want to know how this team lost to Florida..

[vaultmd]

Geez Wilson, I got a headache reading this. However, you make a convincing argument. I would follow you blindly into the sun.

The real issue is whether you would follow me to the bar in Reno!