Why Oklahoma State is more deserving of a title shot than Bama

[ralaw]

The reason nobody wants a rematch is because it proves nothing. If Alabama wins, it means a split between the two teams, both with one loss overall, yet Bama gets the title because they won last. Awesome.

Just get someone else in there. Anyone.

As for "who is the best one loss team", unfortunately we will never know. Every other league on the planet decides these things on the field.

In college football why is this the case?

In the NFL we see rematches, yet no one complains. During New Englands undeafeted season they played the Giants late in the season and won....they later met in the Super Bowl and the Giants won. As fans do we say that series is even? No, we say the Giants were the Super Bowl champ.

Why can't the same be said for college football? As mentioned due to conference championships Michigan and Ohio State are going to meet twice a year and so could USC and Oregon. Rematches are just a part of ahtletics........we accept it in the NFL, but not in college football? It could even happen in college basketball. Why should college football be so different?

 

[ZoneBlitz]

In college football why is this the case?

In the NFL we see rematches, yet no one complains. During New Englands undeafeted season they played the Giants late in the season and won....they later met in the Super Bowl and the Giants won. As fans do we say that series is even? No, we say the Giants were the Super Bowl champ.

Why can't the same be said for college football? As mentioned due to conference championships Michigan and Ohio State are going to meet twice a year and so could USC and Oregon. Rematches are just a part of ahtletics........we accept it in the NFL, but not in college football? It could even happen in college basketball. Why should college football be so different?

Exactly.

 

[FirstTimer]

In college football why is this the case?

Because the point of the regular season in college football is supposed to be a sort of playoff for lack of a better term. You need to use the regualr season to widdle 120 teams down to two. Rematches just make no sense if you want to treat the regular season like a quasi-playoff, and if you are trying to narrow down the teams we have already seen Bama vs LSU. We've seen the result. LSU won. There's another incredibly deserving 1 loss team out there that we haven't seen lose to LSU yet.

 

[Nevermind]

In college football why is this the case?

In the NFL we see rematches, yet no one complains. During New Englands undeafeted season they played the Giants late in the season and won....they later met in the Super Bowl and the Giants won. As fans do we say that series is even? No, we say the Giants were the Super Bowl champ.

Why can't the same be said for college football? As mentioned due to conference championships Michigan and Ohio State are going to meet twice a year and so could USC and Oregon. Rematches are just a part of ahtletics........we accept it in the NFL, but not in college football? It could even happen in college basketball. Why should college football be so different?

I think that it is because the giants and patriots had to go through other top teams in their conference via playoffs. If college football had playoffs I think everyone would be more accepting of a rematch because both teams played their way there by beating the top teams in the nation.

 

[NAHSTE]

In college football why is this the case?

In the NFL we see rematches, yet no one complains. During New Englands undeafeted season they played the Giants late in the season and won....they later met in the Super Bowl and the Giants won. As fans do we say that series is even? No, we say the Giants were the Super Bowl champ.

Why can't the same be said for college football? As mentioned due to conference championships Michigan and Ohio State are going to meet twice a year and so could USC and Oregon. Rematches are just a part of ahtletics........we accept it in the NFL, but not in college football? It could even happen in college basketball. Why should college football be so different?

There are only 32 teams, 16 games + four playoff rounds. Rematches are inevitable and unavoidable.

We are talking about a sport with 120 teams that only play 12 game regular seasons and a 1 game post season. No way should two teams who played in the regular season also play in the post season, at least not the national championship.

 

[DSpydr84]

Because the point of the regular season in college football is supposed to be a sort of playoff for lack of a better term. You need to use the regualr season to widdle 120 teams down to two. Rematches just make no sense if you want to treat the regular season like a quasi-playoff, and if you are trying to narrow down the teams we have already seen Bama vs LSU. We've seen the result. LSU won. There's another incredibly deserving 1 loss team out there that we haven't seen lose to LSU yet.

If we are going to hold everyone to the standard that the regular season is like a post-season, then it should be Houston and LSU.

If not, we have to look at it a different way.

 

[FirstTimer]

I think its simply a matter of perspective, sort of a glass half full vs half empty. Do you judge a 1 loss team by their one loss, or by the games they won.

If its by their loss, the negative, or pessimistic point of view, than its clearly Alabama.

On the other side the positive optimist looks at who the teams beat and goes with Ok st.

On other thing to think about is how we are usually rembered more for our mistakes than we are for our accomplishments.

I disagree with this.. alot. If that were true in 2006 Michigan would have gotten a rematch against OSU.

 

[FirstTimer]

If we are going to hold everyone to the standard that the regular season is like a post-season, then it should be Houston and LSU.

Ok. Fine.

:kanye:

 

[ralaw]

Anti-rematch guys say it has to do with the scale of college footbal and the keeping the "importance of th regular season"l, but what if the two best teams in the country play in the same conference? Is the team that lost just SOL? IMO creating a "no rematch rule" only makes the eventual NC less significant and the NC game basically becomes just another meaningless bowl game.

Who do you guys think should be in the NC if Okle St. loses? Why not just take LSU and Houston (weak matchup)? At some point you just have to accept the idea of rematches.

 

[NAHSTE]

Anti-rematch guys say it has to do with the scale of college footbal and the keeping the "importance of th regular season"l, but what if the two best teams in the country play in the same conference? Is the team that lost just SOL?

Basically, yes. Don't lose, don't be SOL. Exact reason why that game on November 5 was billed as The Game of the Century. The stakes were as high as they could be, and Bama knew it going in. Retroactively, we've removed the stakes from that game.

 

[FirstTimer]

Anti-rematch guys say it has to do with the scale of college football, but what if the two best teams in the country play in the same conference?

Ok. But how can you say for sure Alabama>OK St?

We already know LSU>Bama based on on the field results.

Seeing Bama vs LSU again really doesn't serve much of a purpose at this point. In fact, it serves no purpose.

Is the team that lost just SOL? IMO creating a "no rematch rule" only makes the eventual NC less significant and the NC game basically becomes just another meaningless bowl game.

:nono:

IMO the NC becomes utterly meaningless if you have an obviously deserving one loss team(Ok St) passed over to see a rematch of a game we have already seen and the rematch either proves what we originally thought based on the pervious result, or ends up in a split of the series, when there are other really deserving teams that should have had a shot. The regular season in college football is supposed to narrow the field. Throwing Bama in vs LSU again when they already had a shot against them basically renders the original game meaningless...which is laughable given the "Game of the Century" tag.

Alabama is a good. LSU is good. IMO they haven't lapped the field of some other teams like Ok St etc. Ok St is more than deserving of a shot that Alabam already had..and failed at.

Who do you guys think should be in the NC if Okle St. loses? At some point you just have to accept the idea of rematches.

I'd be all for the Houston LSU matchup. Fuck it. Two undefeated teams.

 

[NAHSTE]

Oh well, at least when LSU beats Alabama again, and Oklahoma State wins their bowl game 45-21, we can definitively say that we know nothing definitively.

 

[ZoneBlitz]

Ok. But how can you say for sure Alabama>OK St?

We already know LSU>Bama based on on the field results..

In that case, Iowa State > Oklahoma State based on on the field results.

 

[ralaw]

Lets not forget the "Game of the Century" hype was created by the media, so it probably shouldn't be used as justification against a rematch in this discussion.

 

[FirstTimer]

I think at this point it might be all moot.

LSU vs Bama seems like a foregone conclusion at this point regardless of what happens this weekend.

Which makes: The Game of the Century, and the #1 and #3 ranked teams' games during the last week of the season meaningless. What a fucking joke.

 

[FirstTimer]

In that case, Iowa State > Oklahoma State based on on the field results.

Ok. And LSU>Bama based on on the field results.

And Ole Miss>2009 Florida NC's.!

We already know the outcome.

Houston vs LSU!

:kanye:

 

[ralaw]

Oh well, at least when LSU beats Alabama again, and Oklahoma State wins their bowl game 45-21, we can definitively say that we know nothing definitively.

Without a playoff we no nothing regardless of who plays LSU.

 

[DSpydr84]

Oh well, at least when LSU beats Alabama again, and Oklahoma State wins their bowl game 45-21, we can definitively say that we know nothing definitively.

That's just it: Everyone is afraid to put Houston against LSU because it might be a blowout. But who's to say LSU wouldn't blow out Ok St? Or Alabama?

There's just no fair way to do it. If Bama goes in, somebody got robbed and they didn't win their conference. If Ok St goes in, how are they more deserving than an undefeated Houston. If Houston goes in, how would Virginia Tech do with that schedule.

Nobody can justify anything. All I know is Houston won every game they played, Alabama lost one game in OT against the #1 team in the land, Oklahoma St will (potentially) be the highest ranked one-loss team and winners of their conference, and Virginia Tech (in a rematch against Clemson) could wipe away their one-loss and prove their worth.

But does that really solve anything?

 

[ralaw]

LSU versus Houston would be lame.

However, if your justification against Alabama is the upholding the importance of the regular season, than Okie St. shouldn't be in the discussion either. You should be fighting hard for Houstonlol.

 

[NAHSTE]

Lets not forget the "Game of the Century" hype was created by the media, so it probably shouldn't be used as justification against a rematch in this discussion.

No, not saying that. I am saying that the reason that game drew so much media hype was because of the national title implications. The implications dictated the hype, not the other way around.

We knew that whoever won that game would probably go on to win the national title game. We just didn't know that whoever lost would get a free pass for no reason whatsoever.

Alabama has three wins over teams with winning records this season and lost their biggest test AT HOME ... Why again have they proven they deserve a rematch? Or even that they are the 2nd best team?