What’s with all the whining

Yeah, yeah, I get that Georgia expected to go up in the BCS and I, like most, have no real clue how the things works, but it does seem to me that Georgia lost to Tennessee, LSU beat Tennessee for the Conference, so LSU should have had a better shot at the championship.

Now, I realize that there is no rule about having to win the conference to get to the championship, but it makes sense to me.

Can we all just agree that we should scrap the BCS and do a December equivalent of March Madness?

32 comments

  1. EAVDad says:

    I agree with you Erick, although I think no matter what system you have there will be controversy. At some point you’ll need some sort of rankings to determine who will be in an 8 team playoff. If it was the BCS, for instance, this year, the top 8 teams would not include Hawaii, the ONLY unbeaten team.

    I agree with you. A playoff format would be better. But it wouldn’t be without controversy.

  2. rugby_fan says:

    27 years is a hell of a dry spell. UGA fans are just antsy.

    There are only four or five other teams who have gone longer without a national championship since WWII.

  3. Icarus says:

    What are we up to in March Maddness, 65 teams? And there’s still controversy.

    College football is special for what it is. A playoff, while it would solve some of the current issues, would change the nature of the game.

    Arguing about it is part of the fun. Sometimes your team comes out on top, sometimes not. Life goes on.

    And Rugby, 27 years is a long time. You’ll know that in about 16 more years. Bowden might even bring JoPa out of retirement around then to help him out.

  4. Jmac says:

    The problem isn’t that Tennessee beat Georgia and LSU beat Tennessee (since that’s negated by Georgia beating Kentucky who beat LSU), but rather the fact that the rules changed at the end.

    Georgia was No. 4 in the rankings when two of the top four teams lost, had been repeatedly told that they were one of the two best teams in the nation and would play for the title if those teams lost … and then, all of a sudden, folks argued they shouldn’t go because they didn’t win the conference title (the same folks, it must be noted, who argued for Michigan last year when they didn’t win their conference title), despite the fact the rules don’t state that.

    Listen, I really don’t mind missing the title game. Had Tony Wilson caught just one of the two passes he dropped in the end zone against South Carolina, we’re not having this discussion … but he didn’t, and I can understand why LSU is there (though it should be Oklahoma).

    The worst thing is that LSU, Georgia, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Virginia Tech, Southern Cal, etc. and etc. all have legitimate claims to the title game. And rather than force head coaches to be politicians, why not let them have an eight-team playoff that settles this thing once and for all?

    I’m more bitter about the Rose Bowl. Illinois? I know it’s tradition and all, but come on …

  5. JRM2016 says:

    Ohio State is once again benefiting from not having to compete in a Conference Championship game. Does anyone out there remember way back in January what happened in the last “National Championship” game?

    Florida played Ohio State, much to the chagrin of Michigan fans. Florida whupped the Buckeyes, 41-14. If you are like much of the sports media elite and many college coaches and don’t remember the details of that massacre, please click over there: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16532477/.

    In 2003, USC fans whined about the fact they were on the outside looking in at LSU playing Oklahoma. LSU, much like Florida last year, was said to be “unworthy” of playing the Sooners. LSU won 21-14.

    In 2004, Auburn (13-0) was shut out of the BCS title game to allow USC back in (much to the bleating national sports press horde) to play Oklahoma. Sooners lost again, but unfortunately we don’t know what Auburn would have done to either team.

    The Pac 10 and the Big Ten are the bane of 1-A football. They are standing in the way of a true national playoff due to their Rose Bowl obsession. They also are quite frankly, year in and year out, pretty shaky football conferences. I only wish UGA could have played USC in the Rose Bowl to rip the ridiculous facade the national media has placed on that program over the last decade.

    Fortunately, I will have the great pleasure of watching the Buckeyes dismembered on national television. I wonder if that will do anything to quell the national media’s obsession with THE Ohio State University.

    USC lost to Stanford, Stanford! And is considered one of the best teams in the country. What would people be saying about LSU going to the BCS if they had lost to Ole Miss or Vandy?

    Meanwhile, Ohio State is so great that they got their clock cleaned by the Ron Zook led Fighting Illini.

    In this year’s flawed system, if Georgia wasn’t going to get a shot at LSU, then why not Oklahoma. Oklahoma won their Conference, in a title game (unlike the Buckeyes) and they BEAT THE NUMBER ONE TEAM IN THE COUNTRY, according to the sports media pukes anyway. What else could they do to be #1–they beat #1, they are Big XII champions and played an additional game. Ugh.

    I-AA has a great system that I-A should look at closely. I enjoyed immensely as an undergraduate at Furman the playoffs and can only imagine the national spectacle we would have with a real tournament. It could be 16 teams and that would definitely cover the waterfront in terms of best teams in the country.

    Meanwhile, I will continue to bemoan this horrible system that is perpetuated by the unmitigated greed of college presidents and the refusal of the Pac 10 and the Big Ten to actually compete with the rest of the country.

    Ugh.

  6. Carpe Forem says:

    Yes, settle it on the feild.

    I agree that UGA probably did not earn a chance at the big dance. But a UGA v. VT or UGA v. SC or UGA v. OK , all would have been a better draw.

    All the current match ups pretty much suck.

    UGA v. Hawaii— UGA v. any other major conference winner would have been better.

    This is what people in my office came up with:

    West V. v. Hawaii— Fiesta
    Kansas v. Illinois — Orange
    VT v. Ohio —- Sugar
    USC v. UGA — Rose
    LSU v. OK — Championship

    Some, I’m sure could be switched around (UGA to Sugar and Ohio to Rose), but you have to admit these games would have been better to watch.

  7. CobbGOPer says:

    Yeah, the Rose Bowl upsets me more, or even the freakin Orange Bowl. Forget about tradition, the Rose Bowl is a BCS bowl now, so they should take the best game they can get and invite whatever teams will give them that game.

    How they can say that a 3-loss Illinois team gives them the best matchup with USC, I’ll never know.

    How the Orange Bowl can say that a Kansas team that played NOBODY all year and was 0-1 against BCS top 25 teams should be in against VaTech is just wrong.

    We got screwed. I agree that we probably shouldn’t have gone to the title game (promises and rules to the contrary aside), but at the very least we should be playing VATECH in the Orange Bowl, or more appropriately we should be playing USC in the Rose Bowl.

  8. JRM2016 says:

    I forgot to mention that the whole Kansas phenomenon was also ridiculous, thanks for pointing that out.

    I wish Carpe Forem was running the BCS…

  9. Jmac says:

    Well in 16 years it will be 43 years for UGA.

    You’re taking that’Richt to Georgia’ thing kinda hard aren’t you rugby? Dude, it’s been seven years now.

  10. jsm says:

    I agree that USC v. Ugag would have been a great game to watch–much better than the flogging that Illinois is going to take. The dawgs deserved to play in the Rose Bowl. They’re going to NO because of greater tourism revenue.

    Also, Mizzou got screwed… bad. I’d be marching on Slive’s office if I were from there.

    I’m not excited about many of the bowl matchups. At least the local bowl (Chick-fil-A) is a good matchup. Clemson and Auburn should be an exciting shootout. I’m also interested to see if Michigan brings it against Tebow & friends.

  11. Doug Deal says:

    jsm,

    Georgia is going to N.O. because the BCS rules send them there. The Rose bowl had no real options that were palatable (ASU played USC in the same conference, Kansas and Missouri aren’t exactly big names in football, and no one wanted Hawaii, but someone had to take them).

    The Sugar bowl had the right to veto any pick from the SEC since they lost LSU, the host team. The Rose could pick anyone else that wasn’t hosting a bowl, or in the SEC in the top 14 BCS standings.

    That left 5 choices. (ASU, Illinois, Kansas, Missouri, Boston College). They made the right choice. If the Rose could have taken Georgia, they would have.

  12. Doug Deal says:

    jsm,

    Only when one of the teams in the championship are from the SEC.

    If Oklahoma was in there instead of LSU, the Rose would have had to ask the Fiesta or whatever bowl they play in for permission to take Missouri.

  13. Jen says:

    jsm,

    Sugar would have needed to release Georgia from playing in order to for the Rose to pick them.

    If UT had won the SECCG, I think Georgia probably would have wound up in the Orange / Fiesta because Rose didn’t have the balls to pick outside the Big-10.

  14. Mike-El says:

    rugby, I’m having sweaty-palm-inducing flashbacks to the 2001 Music City Bowl. How we spent a month complaining that Boston College didn’t belong on the same field with us.

  15. CobbGOPer says:

    “They screwed themselves out of contention. ”

    No argument there. I pray every day for Steve Spurrier to suffer a fiery death, so he’ll no longer plague the University of Georgia.

  16. shep1975 says:

    Really, I don’t mind the current system, though I would perfer a playoff system. What erks me is the fact that all Saturday night on ESPN, the talking heads of washed up players and coaches sat there an repeated like parrots that the media could now get the “national title game [they] wanted two weeks ago.”

    It made me sick that this was all about what the media wanted . Throw in ESPN’s bogus story about LSU’s coach going to Michigan to gin up buzz about the program and they got the result they wanted.

    What makes me not completely upset about the situation is the fact that if we had beaten South Carolina, we may very well be heading to New Orleans for a Jan 8 game rather than a Jan 1 game.

    It gives me high hopes for next year. With games at LSU, AZ State, and Auburn and hosting Tennessee and Alabama (plus the usual pilgrimage to Jax), if we can go 13-0 or even 12-1, they should just give us the title outright.

  17. Doug Deal says:

    Rugby,

    Since he is a Georgia fan, you have to convert that into real numbers that the rest of us use.

    If it is a normal season, there would be the 1-2 inevtiable games “blown by the refs”. 1-2 games that they “should have won except for luck by x team”, and 1-2 “we were just looking past x opponent for y opponent” excuses.

    So, that could very easily turn a 6-6 season into 11-1, and of course if given the chance they would win the SEC title, so that makes it 12-1.

    Bulldog math makes sense after a while.

  18. Doug Deal says:

    Rugby,

    I forgot to add, Georgia is also undefeated in hypothetical games.

    For example, this year, the Dawgs(sic) would have beaten LSU easily in the SEC CG, and have already practically beaten Hawaii, and would have beaten USC, Virginia Tech and Ohio State if they had to face them.

    So, all tallied, they are 14-2 this year.

  19. liberator says:

    It makes sense only if you are an LSU Diehard. Georgia was robbed by the Katrina Symphathy vote plain and simple.

  20. TPSoCal says:

    I think we can all agree that the Florida Gators are the best team and will dominate next season!

    My god I love Florida!

  21. Donkey Kong says:

    TPSoCal,

    How did you guys fare in Jax this year?

    You guys got beat pretty bad to be the “best team.”

Comments are closed.