I know we have said this over and over, but if any voter from the AP can truthfully answer yes to this question, then they prove their own faults and need for change. If LSU was ranked 8th and USC 16th before the season, would LSU be #1 right now? A loss to Cal on Sept. 27th would have pushed a USC team that may not have even been in the top 10 (they only played an 1-2 Auburn team, BYU, and Hawaii) back to around 16th or 17th if they were lucky. LSU's loss may have put them back to 10, Still ahead of USC. Look at the progression of USC's schedule. They played nobody that would warrant a big move upward after their loss. Washington St. only ranked opponent 5 games after loss. HERE THIS AP - YOU CROWNED A PSEUDO NATIONAL CHAMPION BECAUSE OF AN UNSOUND PRESEASON POLL. IT IS YOU THAT NEEDS CHANGE, NOT THE BCS.
Go one step further. LSU defeated UGA and UGA fell 6 or 7 spots in the AP and the teams were ranked fairly close at the time. A 13 or 14th ranked KSU defeats #1 OU and OU falls 2 spots to #3. If OU falls down a little further, then it is USC and LSU in the BCS NCG and all this is moot. The AP, because of media bias and inconsistency in its voting standards, did themselves in and created this fiasco. They should blame themselves for this. Won't happen though.
It's going to take the media to bring these faults to the public as a scandal. But there inlies the problem. Who supplies the media with its information, you guessed it. Who's going to bite the hand that feeds it. It's one of the biggest scandals in the sporting world. Worse than pete rose.
They probably would have jumped a bunch of spots for beating Auburn. Remember, they were National Champs then.
UGA fell behind the undefeateds and some teams that also had one loss. Oklahoma which had just sufferred their first loss, no matter how severe or to whom, fell as far as they could without going below teams that had two or more losses! I agree that the AP voting is biased. But, I don't think it is that inconsistent. You rarely, if ever see teams fall in the rankings if they win, and you rarely, if ever, see teams get dropped below teams that have more losses! It's the way it's always been. There was no way that the voters were going to drop Oklahoma below the teams with two losses. And, as I believe most college football fans would agree, they should not have. Oklahoma was very impressive over the entire regular season. So they had one bad game. It happens. You don't drop a team like that below teams with more losses because of it. It's the way the polls work. Oklahoma remains ranked even above K State, even though K State just killed them, because K State had more losses. It doesn't make sense, from the standpoint of comparing Team A against Team B, but that's how the rankings work and have always worked. One thing for sure about the polls/rankings is that they are very consistent in that regard. The BCS was designed to take these sorts of things into account. One of the things it accounts for (by ignoring it) is WHEN you lose, because WHEN a team loses has an affect on where they end up being ranked by the voters in the polls. Had OK lost it's first game rather than its last, it would have been ranked # 1 by the voters. This is what the BCS was designed to do, and it did it by having OK # 1 in the final BCS tabulations. Is it, necessarily, a GOOD system for matching up teams for the MNC game? Heck no! IMO, it borders on ridiculous. On second, thought, it doesn't border on ridiculous, it is over the line of ridiculous. But, did it put the two most deserving teams into the MNC game based on how it is designed? Probably so. Did USC deserve the shot MORE than OK? NO, absolutely NOT! Did they deserve the shot AS MUCH as OK? Yes, absolutely they DID! Did they deserve it more than LSU? NO, absolutely they did NOT! Did they deserve the shot AS MUCH as LSU? Yes, absolutely they DID! Would USC have beaten LSU in the Sugar Bowl? WHO KNOWS! I would like the Tigers' chances in the game, though. LSU could have competed very well with SC. Games between closely matched teams can go either way and can turn on the bounce of the ball and other very small things. I am very much enjoying this championship, split or not! Still, it would have been nice to see one more game with LSU and USC going at it. That would do away with all of the talk in the media and elsewhere along the lines of: "USC is clearly the best team in the country... they would easily handle LSU... blah, blah, blah..." NO ONE KNOWS!!! If they don't play on the field, it is all conjecture! And, playing on a video game may be fun, but that's all it is - just silly. So, USC, gets to claim a share of the national title. So be it. We are still national champions and won the game that was set up based on the stupid system in place that allows for the split national championship to happen. I, for one, am NOT worrying about USC claiming a share of the title. Though I feel it is unfortunate to have happened and I'd like to see LSU be considered the undisputed kings of college football for 2003, I am still just as happy with what we have. I guarantee that every single LSU fan who reads this forum, including those complaining about USC claiming a share, putting them down, etc., would be screaming if the roles were reversed. If LSU just beat Michigan in the Rose Bowl and were voted AP #1, and USC beat OK in the Sugar and got the BCS championship, we would all stake our claim to the national championship. That is no different from what USC is doing. Remember how close the BCS results were? I think if Notre Dame had beaten Syracuse, we'd all be writing about how we were screwed. What if that had happened and USC beat Ok in the Sugar??? They would be the only # 1 and LSU would have finished #2 in both polls with their bowl victory! How lousy would that have been? And so, think about this and then see if you can say that USC should now be #2 in both polls!!! I am, have always been, and will always be, a HUGE LSU fan. I am also a great fan of college football in general. I have never liked USC and don't like them today. I don't mind seeing them lose. But, my purple and gold tinted glasses do not prevent me from seeing this situation logically and understanding the whole concept of the split college football national titles of 2003-2004! There. I just had to get that off of my chest. Okay, I feel better. GEAUX TIGERS! I'm DAMNED PROUD OF WHAT THE TIGERS ACCOMPLISHED THIS YEAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't have a problem with USC and their fans proclaiming themselves champions. You are correct. If the roles were reversed we would be doing the same thing. What I have a BIG problem with is the supposedly objective media going way over the line in dismissing LSU as being, at the very least, USC's equal.
My take on this is that the BCS was the agreed upon formula for choosing the 2 teams that would compete for the NC before and during the season. The AP poll and USC are both members of that system, therefore subject to the rules of that system. According to that system, and based upon the season as a whole, LSU and OU were the two teams that qualified. It doesn't matter what the rankings were in one or two polls at the end of the season or what teams were playing best or whatever. Based on the system as a whole, again LSU-Ou were the teams qualified. LSU won that game on the field. You don't change the rules in the middle of the game to suit your whims and wishes. You follow the rules set up going in. According to the rules of the system, LSU is THE National Champion! No debate, no controversy. If the AP doesn't want to follow the rules, then they shouldn't be a part of choosing the participants. They should take their poll and keep it separate and then they can do whatever they want. But if they are going to be part of the system, then they should be expected to follow the rules. GEAUX TIGERS!!! LSU, THE TRUE 2003 NATIONAL CHAMPS!!!!!!! :geaux: :helmet: :lsug: :helmet: :geaux:
The AP Poll never agreed to abide by the BCS system. Sure, the AP Poll was included in the BCS formula, but that doesn't require them to vote for the winner. Just like the NY Times computer poll was included in the BCS, they weren't required to make the winner No 1 in their poll, and they didn't. Like it or not, the AP and Coaches Poll have been the two recognized polls for determining college football national champions for years ... and this year is no exception! Now, if USC was honest, they would admit that the BCS Champion is the desired championship by all schools when the season starts. However, USC don't control the AP Poll and the voters were hell bent on having a split championship. USC is taking whatever they can get!
The system is out of control, or is it so out of control that is smooth as glass. I have to compare it to the Orleans Parish School System. While students are failing out left and right, everybody's getting paid in the ranks. There are so many people and companies making money that nobody wants a change. It's not even about the kids anymore. The bowls don't want even a hint of a change, because their pockets are fat. The AP pretty much rules the media, so we know where they are in the money chain. If they wanted a tourny, there would be one. If the past has taught us anything it is that any person or committee can be swayed, bribed, run-off, or just plain biased. The upper echelon of college football can bitch about the system all day long, but at night they are counting their money. USC in the Rose Bowl, California, LSU in the Sugar, Louisiana. Networks reporting controversy. It was perfect for everyone involved, except the football teams. Why did Nebraska play instead of Oregon? Easy, who the hell is Oregon, it's a classic Nebraska vs. Miami. Ratings my friend, money. Take it to the bank.
