If VT beats Clemson...

[ryalaman]

But then why do we have a national championship? We already have the fucking SEC championship. Let's not play the damn thing twice.

Does anything say that only conference champs should be allowed to play for the national title? If they want that rule, then they should make it. LSU and Alabama are the 2 best teams in college football. With the rules we have now, those are the 2 that should be playing for the national title.

I'd also argue that finishing 2nd in the SEC West (especially in the way that Alabama has) is far more impressive than winning the ACC, but that really shouldn't matter since its pretty obvious that VT is nowhere near the 2nd best team in the nation.

 

[Eagles_Legendz]

It really depends on how you look at things. If your goal is to have the two best teams play, and you've made the determination that its LSU/Alabama, you have to put them in the game. If you are looking at it from the perspective of "lets give someone a shot to beat LSU who hasn't had one already" then you put in someone who isn't Alabama.

I'm in the camp that you look at a team's body of work and decide whether they're one of the two best teams in the country. If they are, they're in the game.

You can make a case for OSU, not really for Stanford or VT. I disagree with the case for OSU (saying it is 'better' essentially to lose to Iowa State than LSU), but that's it. If OSU loses to OU, people are going to be really straining to find someone other than Alabama to put in the game.

 

[silk]

Seriously? The argument is simple: Alabama already played LSU, and lost. To name them a national champion after going 1-1 against the other team with a claim to the title is repugnant to the idea of championships. A playoff system is obviously best, but in lieu of that, you need new blood in the title game to give as many teams a shot at LSU as possible. Alabama had their shot and blew it.

This.

 

[BillBrasky]

Assuming that the Pokes win next weekend, OSU and Bama both have one loss in OT. The Cowboys loss is to Iowa State, the Tide's loss was to LSU.

That is the only objective way to look at it.

 

[TexasDeac10]

Assuming that the Pokes win next weekend, OSU and Bama both have one loss in OT. The Cowboys loss is to Iowa State, the Tide's loss was to LSU.

That is the only objective way to look at it.

But Oklahoma State's was on the road, and Alabama's at home. I agree that Alabama's loss looks less bad, but it's not exactly apples to apples.

 

[Eagles_Legendz]

Iowa State on the moon is a million times worse than LSU in Tuscaloosa.

Regardless, like I said, it comes down to people in two camps: one is saying the two best teams should play regardless of circumstances. The other is saying other circumstances (winning your conference, no rematch etc) should be factors taken into consideration.

 

[WFU21]

Seriously? The argument is simple: Alabama already played LSU, and lost. To name them a national champion after going 1-1 against the other team with a claim to the title is repugnant to the idea of championships. A playoff system is obviously best, but in lieu of that, you need new blood in the title game to give as many teams a shot at LSU as possible. Alabama had their shot and blew it.

true story

 

[nomadic]

I would put Stanford in before va tech, but we are getting LSU and Bama. Even if LSU loses we are probably going to get LSU and Bama.

 

[Wakeforest22890]

Seriously? The argument is simple: Alabama already played LSU, and lost. To name them a national champion after going 1-1 against the other team with a claim to the title is repugnant to the idea of championships. A playoff system is obviously best, but in lieu of that, you need new blood in the title game to give as many teams a shot at LSU as possible. Alabama had their shot and blew it.

Yep

 

[BillBrasky]

So where do you Winston guys wanna watch the Tide win their 14th National Championship on Jan. 9th?

 

[Dented]

I hope Clemson beats VT so that the ACC can undeservedly get two BCS bowl bids.

 

[TexasDeac10]

I hope Clemson beats VT so that the ACC can undeservedly get two BCS bowl bids.

Meh, I'm hoping Clemson loses just so they have a shot to lose their last 4 games of the season and come away with absolutely nothing.

 

[BillBrasky]

If VT loses I dont see them getting an at-large spot

 

[DiegoTiger]

Meh, I'm hoping Clemson loses just so they have a shot to lose their last 4 games of the season and come away with absolutely nothing.

Ha, well if we lose out then we are that much closer to Buzz Swinney being shown the door. Do you really want that?!?!?

 

[WIDTTF]

Another point tangentially related to this is that if the rematch happens (like everyone knows it will), the first game was essentially meaningless. Isn't the "relevance of the regular season" one of the most popular arguments against the playoff system? If we get the rematch, I don't ever want to hear that argument again for the BCS.

The way I see it, Alabama had its shot when it lost to LSU. That was round 1 of the BCS Championship this year. Same for Oregon (as much as I'd like to see that game again). That being said, I still don't see VT getting in. OK St. and Stanford (assuming they win out) should have first shot.

 

[Eagles_Legendz]

Its still an argument to play in the game versus an argument to play a team. I think you have a really hard time arguing a team like Stanford deserves to play in the championship more than Alabama, so it has to bank on the fact that its LSU itself in the game.

Body of work/best team argument versus no rematch argument. You can't even use the win your own conference argument with Stanford.

 

[Shorty]

I hope Clemson beats VT so that the ACC can undeservedly get two BCS bowl bids.

This is actually the only chance we have of avoiding Shreveport at this point. If Clemson wins and VT somehow gets an at large BCS bid, FLST would go to Atlanta. We'd go to Charlotte or Nashville.

 

[WRS]

Seriously? The argument is simple: Alabama already played LSU, and lost. To name them a national champion after going 1-1 against the other team with a claim to the title is repugnant to the idea of championships. A playoff system is obviously best, but in lieu of that, you need new blood in the title game to give as many teams a shot at LSU as possible. Alabama had their shot and blew it.

Ok State had their shot too and lost to fucking Iowa State.

 

[Shorty]

Ok State had their shot too and lost to fucking Iowa State.

Shouldn't that be Iowa fucking State?

 

[KidA23]

I think it should be the two best teams period and that accordingly, LSU and Alabama should play again. At the same time though, if Alabama were to win the rematch, it would seem ridiculous not to award both schools a share of a split BCS championship. No way can you let the teams go 1-1 vs. each other and give sole possession of the "title" to one or the other, IMHO.