Congrats to USC ... BUT....

[BuckStocksHere]

I congratulate you on tearing apart Oklahoma. Didn't think you would win let alone put the hurt on them. After they fumbled that kickoff and you went in for 6 on the next play from what...4 yards out.... it was over. I never thought they would cave like they did.

So congratulations on your 1/2 of the national championship AGAIN.

What? huh you ask? lemme explain....

I didn't care about last year giving USC a title, in my minds they were not the champions. LSU earned it. They won the BCS title game....period. USC won the Rose ...hooray... nice victory but you didn't play in the title game and I don't give you credit for it. So you have not won back to back titles in my eyes.

UNLESS..... you want me to give you 1/2 that title from last year...then I will be required to give Auburn 1/2 the title this year..... why? You won the BCS title game this year and you deserve the national championship..Auburn does not. They may have gotten robbed, or screwed, but you guys played in the title game and they did not. You won. You are champions this year. But based off of last y ear.....as you whined about your 1/2.... I will be forced to proclaim Auburn national champions this year as well. A split. They are undefeated. They play in the SEC. You won your half last year and didn't play in the title game... so Auburn can have their half for not playing in it this year.

You either have ONE or two halves. Take your pick. I say one...cause if you aren't in the BCS title game... you don't get jack.

So congrats USC you won it in convincing fashion.... but not last year. How can you win the national championship if you don't even play in the game!?

And damn, oklahoma...what the heck happened? how do you implode like that? geez.

 

[coxew]

USC was voted #1 by the AP going into the bowls last year and remained so after destroying scUM. Auburn was voted #3 by the AP this year going into the bowls and only moved up to #2. There is no disputing who the champion is this year, IMO.

 

[Thump]

USC was voted #1 by the AP going into the bowls last year and remained so after destroying scUM. Auburn was voted #3 by the AP this year going into the bowls and only moved up to #2. There is no disputing who the champion is this year, IMO.

I totally agree.

 

[buckeyegrad]

I just think it is sad that the media gets to decide who the national champion is...last year being the perfect example. Who really cares if USC was the media's national champions last year? I know I didn't.

I will never understand those who oppose the idea of a playoff system, which would take the decision away from the media. If for no other reason, I would think everyone would support the change. Unless some of you out there actually trust the media.....

 

[exhawg]

USC looked like they could beat the Browns last night. I think Auburn would have given them a better game than OU, but they still would have lost. I'm amazed that OU is still ranked 3rd after that choke job.

 

[FKAGobucks877]

Actually, I completely agree with Buckstockshere on this. The BCS is supposed to annoint the national champion, and if USC disputes their award from last year, then I think Auburn should get half this year. To be honest, I'm of the opinion that USC is the NC this year, and LSU was last year...period. There should be no splits, or halves, or anything else. USC, however, wants their cake, and they want to eat it as well. They can't have it both ways. I know the AP had USC number one last year, but the only reason Auburn wasn't ranked higher this year is because they started out lower....with USC being the media darlings that they are, how exactly was Auburn supposed to jump them in the polls? Auburn played in the toughest conference (by far - bar none), they played an "extra" conference championship game, they won their bowl game...they did absolutely everything they could have. In contrast, USC played in an extremely weak conference, struggled and barely won several games (Cal, Stanford, VaTech), and had no conference championship game. I'm not saying that USC isn't the NC, or that they don't deserve to be....but they either share it this year, or they weren't "co-champions" last year.

Now, before you get all up in arms about this, I do understand that USC was the co-national champion last year because they were first in the AP poll...I just think that's crock of shit. The whole purpose of the BCS was to eliminate co-champs...therefore, USC was not a champ last year.

 

[BuckStocksHere]

USC was voted #1 by the AP going into the bowls last year and remained so after destroying scUM. Auburn was voted #3 by the AP this year going into the bowls and only moved up to #2. There is no disputing who the champion is this year, IMO.

I agree there is no disputing this year just as I thought there was no disputing last year. The AP vote is PART OF the greater picture of the BCS so it is taken into account. They didn't make it in last year and they did this year. They didn't win the game last year because they weren't in it...and they did win it this year.

I agree there is no disputing who the champ is based on the BCS criteria. I just don't want USC to have the best of both worlds. When its convenience for them, they don't have to be in the BCS game but still want to claim to be champ...well if that is so.... Auburn should have those same rights. Hell they went undefeated...

 

[coxew]

Actually, I completely agree with Buckstockshere on this. The BCS is supposed to annoint the national champion, and if USC disputes their award from last year, then I think Auburn should get half this year. To be honest, I'm of the opinion that USC is the NC this year, and LSU was last year...period. There should be no splits, or halves, or anything else. USC, however, wants their cake, and they want to eat it as well. They can't have it both ways. I know the AP had USC number one last year, but the only reason Auburn wasn't ranked higher this year is because they started out lower....with USC being the media darlings that they are, how exactly was Auburn supposed to jump them in the polls? Auburn played in the toughest conference (by far - bar none), they played an "extra" conference championship game, they won their bowl game...they did absolutely everything they could have. In contrast, USC played in an extremely weak conference, struggled and barely won several games (Cal, Stanford, VaTech), and had no conference championship game. I'm not saying that USC isn't the NC, or that they don't deserve to be....but they either share it this year, or they weren't "co-champions" last year.

Now, before you get all up in arms about this, I do understand that USC was the co-national champion last year because they were first in the AP poll...I just think that's crock of shit. The whole purpose of the BCS was to eliminate co-champs...therefore, USC was not a champ last year.

The thing is, no one has annoited Auburn as a champion of anything so how can they get a share of the title. USC WAS voted #1 last year by the AP. I'm sure if we were in the same boat last year we would be claiming a share as well.

Until there is a playoff system or a fifth game to decide who the true champ is there is going to be controversy. The thing I really don't like about the BCS is that the conference champion automatically gets a spot. Why would the top four bowls not take the top eight teams? A team like Pitt does not deserve to be playing in a BCS game just because they won the worst conference since the inception of the BCS over a one loss Cal team (before their choke job).

 

[buckzip]

USC is the champion.
If the shoe was on the other foot, and we destroyed the #2 team in the country, we would be the first ones saying, "see nobody gives OSU respect"

I hate USC too, but they are the best team out there.
Perhaps Auburn would have givent hem a better game than OU, but I doubt they would have beaten them.

 

[lowkarma]

The whole co champion situation is crap, bottom line the AP is part of the bcs rankings so it shouldnt override it. There is a game set to be for the NC every year and that games decision should be final, if being un defeated and winning a bcs bowl game gives you the right to be co champion then USC doesnt even have a whole championship, the only have a half and a third. Regardless of if they could even dream of being good enough or not, Utah was undefeated with a bcs win. The system might not be perfect but its what we have so we should use it the best we can, prove you should be there or take a seat and come out next year and make a statement.

 

[FKAGobucks877]

The thing is, no one has annoited Auburn as a champion of anything so how can they get a share of the title. USC WAS voted #1 last year by the AP. I'm sure if we were in the same boat last year we would be claiming a share as well.

Until there is a playoff system or a fifth game to decide who the true champ is there is going to be controversy. The thing I really don't like about the BCS is that the conference champion automatically gets a spot. Why would the top four bowls not take the top eight teams? A team like Pitt does not deserve to be playing in a BCS game just because they won the worst conference since the inception of the BCS over a one loss Cal team (before their choke job).

Yeah, I pretty much agree. Like I said above, I know the basis for your argument that USC was co-champs last year...I just think that the BCS determines the champ, not the AP poll. So, in my book, USC was NOT even a partial champ in 2003.

 

[methomps]

The whole purpose of the BCS was to eliminate co-champs...therefore, USC was not a champ last year.

Just because it is supposed to be one way does not make it so. My alarm clock is supposed to wake me up at 6:30am so I don't miss class. It doesn't, but I can't reverse-engineer reality and say "the whole purpose of my alarm clock is to eliminate tardiness...therefore, I am not late." I can tell myself that, but the fact is that the sun is out, the clock reads 9, and I'm late.

The BCS was supposed to eliminate co-champs. Doesn't mean we should confuse reality with 'what should be'. We won the AP title last year. Auburn (as much as I feel for their situation) didn't win it this year. In a way that sucks because they went undefeated and had a hell of a year. In the same way it sucks that many people don't recognize USC's 32 title just because the AP wasn't around back then.

You may discount our AP title, but I guarantee you that your opinion is far from universal. You are certainly entitled to it, but I am confident that the AP (and our 2003 title) will survive the BCS. If it doesn't, it won't be the first time a USC title got lost in the shuffle just because college football's MNC selection process is turbulent.

 

[BuckStocksHere]

Since you like to speak in reality terms...

The reality is this: You start each year striving to play in the BCS NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP game... That is the goal. The ultimate. Noone talks about winning anything else...they want to be the national champs and that is done through the BCS. Keep in mind the AP is part of that process. Your little piece of the pie isn't equal to or greater than

You guys failed. No, you didn't lose it... you didn't even PLAY in it. How can you claim to be the champ when you didn't even play in the title game?!?!?

but hey - whatever lets you guys sleep at night.

 

[methomps]

Since you like to speak in reality terms...

The reality is this: You start each year striving to play in the BCS NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP game... That is the goal. The ultimate. Noone talks about winning anything else...they want to be the national champs and that is done through the BCS.

Perhaps, but the reality is that not everyone can reach that goal even going undefeated. Auburn and Utah both went undefeated, but they didn't even make the BCS championship game (Utah wasn't even close). The BCS will be changing its process again (this is what, 5 times in 7 years?). You certainly put a lot of faith in a system that is so fickle that it just seems to be making things up as it goes.

Nobody ever sets their sights on a split title, but that doesn't mean we haven't had several in cfb. 1954. Did Ohio State say "let's go split with UCLA"? No, obviously not.

Keep in mind the AP is part of that process. Your little piece of the pie isn't equal to or greater than

No, not really. The AP has disassociated from the BCS. Perhaps they sense it going down. Nobody is saying that the AP title is any bigger than the coaches'. I'm not trying to say we're 3-quarters champs from 2003.

You guys failed. No, you didn't lose it... you didn't even PLAY in it. How can you claim to be the champ when you didn't even play in the title game?!?!?

We were the #1 team going into the bowls, we won (beating #4 Michigan), and the AP crowned us champions. The coaches' would've too except for a contractual, made-for-TV obligation to the BCS.

As for this 'title game', my position is close to this quote:

"But what the colleges have failed to realize in this equation is that 'the big game' isn't really the big game just because you apply the label of a championship game. 'The big game' becomes truly large only when the whole American sporting public knows that everyone else has been eliminated and the two most deserving teams in America are left standing as they fight it out. Last season, the game purportedly tagged as the 'BCS championship game' didn't have the full support of the American people, who put just as much of an emotional investment into the Rose Bowl as they did into the Sugar Bowl."

-Matt Zemek, CFN