MSYtristar From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 6347 posts, RR: 50 Reply 1, posted (9 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1008 times:
Like it or not, we have TWO national championship teams this year. Sorry USC fans, that's just the way it is. The Tigers took care of business this evening. LSU is just as deserving of the title as USC is, hands down.
Oklahoma....hey, they played hard, but White had a terrible game. The better team won.
B757300 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 4114 posts, RR: 24 Reply 2, posted (9 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1009 times:
It should have been LSU and USC in the Sugar Bowl. OU didn't win the Big 12 and therefore in many peoples' minds, didn't deserve to be in the national title game. Hopefully the predicted change of only conference winners being allowed to play for the national title will be put into effect soon.
Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (9 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1006 times:
. Sorry USC fans, that's just the way it is.
I don't think USC fan is feeling sorry today. They know, as does anyone with any accumen about football, that USC is a far superior team to LSU or OU. It's not even close. The one who should feel sorry is LSU, because they'll forever have a tainted national title, because everyone with any common sense knows the best team didn't even get to compete for this sorry excuse of a "Championship".
The clincher is that the BCS won't even let the coaches vote this year for the champion, because the coaches are smarter than they are. Some system.
LSU is simply the "Champion" of a scam, nothing more.
Oh, and I noticed you didn't even have the never to call LSU the "National Champions", but said "BCS Champion". That proves what I'm taling about.
MSYtristar From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 6347 posts, RR: 50 Reply 5, posted (9 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 991 times:
LSU is not the champion of a scam. If memory serves me correctly, all the coaches voted on using the BCS system. You cannot just change the way it's done by the time the season is over. There were obvious flaws....it should have been LSU and USC in the Sugar Bowl...and hopefully those can be worked out. Oklahoma was lucky even to get an invite to the Sugar Bowl...not even the conference champions for pete's sake!
And how can anyone honestly say that USC is a far superior team than LSU when they have not played? That's a very presumptuous remark. It would be one hell of a game.
Just as much as the USC fans believe that their team is deserving of the title of national champions...LSU fans feel the same way. That's the way it is, like it or not.
Right now, I'm celebrating that my Tigers pulled it though.
Great victory for a CHAMPIONSHIP team, regardless of what the naysayers on the west coast say.
Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (9 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 988 times:
If memory serves me correctly, all the coaches voted on using the BCS system..
If memory serves, a majority of the coaches voted USC #1, and now the BCS won't even let them vote for the #1 team, even knowing how the coaches feel. If memory serves, USC was voted #1 in BOTH major polls, but because the BCS is so fucked up, they didn't make the finals. That's a scam, any way you slice it.
And how can anyone honestly say that USC is a far superior team than LSU when they have not played?
Because I honestly think they are! I went into this thing a month ago doubting that USC was really good, but watching them pound Michigan into the ground, and watching their players, then watching tonights game, convinced me that USC is easily the best team in the nation. That's my honest opinion. And, as a long-time USC-hater, that's not an easy opinion to put out.
Great victory for a CHAMPIONSHIP team, regardless of what the naysayers on the west coast say.
It was a great victory, but the naysayers are in the Midwest, the east, the south, the Rocky Mountain states, the Pacific Northwest.....get my drift? LSU, sadly for them, gets a really tainted title. It's not their fault, mind you, but they're not the best team in the nation.
ConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (9 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 984 times:
I'm in Baton Rouge currently, about a quarter mile from campus. It's friggin C*R*A*Z*Y around here right now. Everyone is in their cars, driving in circles around the campus (we can see the lights clear from here!) and honking like mad! I love it!
Tom in NO From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 7194 posts, RR: 38 Reply 13, posted (9 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 970 times:
LSU didn't make the rules, they simply followed the rules, and took care of their own business. They made plays when they had to, the defense proved it is the class of NCAA Division 1A football. OU's two touchdown drives totalled 34 yeards, and those were after LSU turnovers. LSU could have won by a lot larger margin.
Would I have liked to have seen an LSU-USC matchup, of course I would. USC's offense versus LSU's defense would have been the matchup to beat all matchups.
That said, I am much more impressed with the season LSU had, considering the number of ranked teams they beat, and the fact that the SEC is a much tougher conference to play in, and the fact that they had to win an SEC championship game.
Props to USC on the season they had, but when it comes right down to it (whether some people see it as tainted or not, personally I don't), the most important piece of hardware from the 2003 NCAA football season was handed to Nick Saban on the floor of the Superdome this evening.
Tom at MSY
"The criminal ineptitude makes you furious"-Bruce Springsteen, after seeing firsthand the damage from Hurricane Katrina
Tbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7011 posts, RR: 27 Reply 15, posted (9 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 964 times:
Being from SoCal, I'm a big USC fan. I really think while the score doesn't show it, USC really dominated against Michigan and clearly showed why they are the number one team. That being said, I really wanted to see them go up against the LSU defense, as that team played an impressive game today. They totally shut down OU, and the only points OU got was on the blocked punt and off the late interception. Otherwise, they were totally dominated by LSU.
If there's anything wrong with the BCS, is that we the fans got robbed of a tremendous game between LSU and USC. The Rose and Sugar bowls were only decent games this year, dominated by LSU and USC, but a meeting between the two in the Sugar Bowl would have been great.
Congrats to both teams on the national championship.
Garnetpalmetto From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5314 posts, RR: 53 Reply 17, posted (9 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 955 times:
Congrats to the Bayou Bengals! After they Cajun-fried my poor Gamecocks (33-7...I still hurt from that reaming) I figured that this team had it wired together tight and could make it to the Sugar Bowl. Thanks for not letting me down, guys! Here's hoping that some of that bowl money y'all now have to share with the rest of the SEC goes to buying USC a better coaching staff
South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
Jcs17 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 8065 posts, RR: 41 Reply 19, posted (9 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 948 times:
Well, at least this gives us a break from the New Orleans users rattling incessently about their airport being "underserved."
As a Texan (well, sort of), its nice to see Oklahomo fall flat on its face--just like they did in the Big 12 championship. However, its good to see USC win the title, I'd rather see them win it than LSU.
MD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8475 posts, RR: 13 Reply 20, posted (9 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 942 times:
I was tepidly rooting for LSU to win over OU because they are in the SEC and I definately don't think that Oklahoma deserved to be playing in the Sugar Bowl, BUT to say that USC could run circles around LSU, that LSU is not of USC's caliber, or that they're far superior, that's wrong.
Just because they beat your archrival doesn't make them THE absolute best. The Tigers have support for their program every bit as much as a school like Ohio State does. And hey, if you're calling what I believe will be LSU's co-national championship tainted, do I need to remind you of Ohio State last year? Yeah, they really "deserved" that national "championship" GIVEN to them by the ref.
And let it be on the record that I am NOT a fan of LSU and I definately do not appreciate having bottles thrown at my band. There have been only two places where I've ever experienced that, one of them was Vaught-Hemingway and the other was Tiger Stadium.
Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 22, posted (9 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 926 times:
USC just does not really impress me. The victory over Michigan...what was it 28-14? Not too great overall for a #1 team.
ROTFLMAO!! What game were YOU watching!! Nine quarterback sacks; stuffing one of the best runners in the country; moving the ball at will on Michigan's vaunted defense. The score wasn't indicitave of how dominant and how badly USC beat UM. That's just sophistry by an LSU fan to try to justify this asterisk of a title. Nice try, but USC beats LSU 9 out of 10 times this year, friend.
At least we don't have another Michigan/Nebraska co-championship...god, that was awful!
No, we have USC/LSU Co-Champions.
And honestly, I don't think Oklahoma is as good as Michigan. They've been exposed the last two games as terribly over-rated, and the Heisman Trophy winner is far from who the media thinks he is-there's no way that guy deserved the Heisman, none at all.
Anyway, this one will go down as a "Championship" tarnished by the stupidity of the BCS, not by anything LSU did. But had they gone up against a real offense like USC, they'd be hurting today.