No, it just allows us to laugh at the BCS and the human bias polls even more. We won the BCS. We are happy and love it. But the system does suck.
Their lofty, unwarranted poll status is what generated such a high BCS ranking. Do you really think that Tennessee is a fair comparison? How badly would we have beat them if, as originally scheduled, we played North Texas and Arizona State at home, then hosted Tennessee on a Saturday night? Please.
If the computers and humans both believe Notre Dame is a top 10 team, why don't y'all? How would you rank teams?
So the computers and the humans are wrong. Start your own poll and get it right then. I don't know what might have happened if this or that. We dominated Tennessee in the first half (no thanks to our offense, really), and were dominated by Tennessee in the second half, in part because our defense hadn't gelled, in part because our coaches made some questionable decisions, and in large part because our offense was lame, something which continued throughout the season.
21 points should have been more than enough to win that game. Our offense was "lame" because our OL and RB injuries made it "lame". Still, when you win 11 games, the offense has to be doing something right.
No its the "smallpox" episode. The doctor goes to Buckwheat's house and finds him in bed shivering. He pulls back the covers to find Buckwheat covered in ice whereupon Mrs. Thomas says : "Doctor, you said to isolate him."
I was one of those not thrilled with our offense this year, but our PPG was not that much different than previous years. 2005 - 29.5 2004 - 28.7 2003 - 33.9 2002 - 24.8 2001 - 30.9 2000 - 26.5 The Miami game showed what we can really do, but we weren't all that far off from our championship years in 2001 and 2003.
It's perception. lsu-i-like (and others) were actually not pleased with margin of victory. Winning isn't enough for some.
