Why are so many schools claiming B.S. football "titles"?

This thread is getting even more retarded.

example:

2003:
LSU: "We played by your rules, and We won the Championship. The BCS said so and we have a trophy to prove it."

USC: "We played by the rules, but we didn't get into the championship game. Oh well, We Claim the championship, and by god, if we say were the champions, we ARE the champions. And oh yeah, no one can contest this or copy us because we are USC and big media crybabies"

then...

2004:
Auburn: "We played by the rules. We didnt play in the championship game. But we will claim the championship regardless just like USC did last year! oh yeah, were getting rings made too."

USC: "No, you can't do that. You arent USC. The media isnt in love with you like the are us. The BCS said we are the champions."

Auburn: "no youre not."

USC: "Yes we are!"

Auburn: "No youre not, we are."

ect ect... you get the point.... why are these two teams acting like freaking soap opera queens denying that they came in second place?

Are they taught THAT bad of sportsmanship to basically say:

"I know we didnt really win, but we are claiming it anyway?"

What confuses me is that people consider USC 2003 champions still..?

Why? because they said so (and the media backed them up)

Why didnt it work for auburn this year?

Because the media didnt say so.


A fair and truthful view of the last two years.

If you disagree, please provide a valid counterpoint...

 

I doubt that.

 

In actuality you lost that game. That makes no sense. Even if the refs didnt make that call the game would have gone to overtime.

 

Nope, it's already been decided...

LSU - 15
Auburn - 12


LSU wins. We claimed it.

 

I agree with you there.

 

Im so very glad.

The truth shall set you free.

 

Well hell it happens in politics why not in sports.

Hey maybe Russia will go back and ssy the one the gold at lake placid.

 

I don't disagree with the fact that, by the system that was "approved" or "agreed upon", Auburn is not National Champs.

The BIG thing that I disagree with in this thread is people that claim they know what would have happened if Auburn and USC had played or LSU and Auburn had gone to OT.(ie, "USC would have won big! Look what they did to OU!" or "LSU would have won in OT, 15-12!"). The fact is, ya don't know, so don't try to convince me that you do. If Auburn had been in the Orange Bowl and USC had played like they did, yes, they PROBABLY would have won. But you can't say it for a certainty.

I am not here to flame and this is my last post on this subject. I have stated my opinion on the rings and I will leave it at that. I don't agree with a lot of things the school and the athletic department do, but it will never diminish my love for Auburn.

War Eagle.

 

Well.....

Some just don't get it.

Some have posted the comparison that USC was recognized as a "champion"
in 2003 by the some in the media and therefore Auburn has a right to claim a title in 2004.

In fact, the point is that USC was never the true champion in 2003 and Auburn will never be the true champion in 2004.

The BCS was, is, and will be the championship that teams play to win each year until there is another AGREE UPON SYSTEM which may take its' place.
Any other so-called "championship" is B.S. and that includes USC's so-called
"championship" in 2003.

You can't play all season long adhering to rules designed to reach a specific championship game and then when you don't get to the championship game claim that you won a "championship" by playing another team which also didn't qualify to play for the title either. BCS #3 played BCS #4 and claims to be "champions".

This same concept also applies to Auburn in 2004.

Some in this thread have made comments regarding LSU
hanging a banner for "winning" a SEC West title in basketball. Well, I don't agree with that either. Hanging banners for non-accomplishments means
nothing and is simply an attempt to find something positive to pat yourself on the back for after a mediocre season. It's weak, and that applies to LSU just as much as anyone else. However, it isn't in the same league as Auburn
trying to claim a NC for Football and actually making rings for a truly
mythical title.

Finally, for you Aubies who try to compare LSU in 2003 to Auburn in 2004 and try to intimate that LSU would have acted like Auburn. I disagree.
Nick Saban stated clearly that he would abide by the BCS system whether LSU was in the BCS Title Game or not. Auburn would not be claiming this B.S. title if it wasn't for Tubby's antics. It all stems from how a coach conducts himself.

In any event, it is irrelevant because LSU actually PLAYED in the Championship Game in 2003 and LSU also actually WON THE CHAMPIONSHIP.
Comparisons are therefore pointless.