BCS Matchups Leaked: LSU vs. Ohio St for National Title

Holy crap, did anyone just hear June Jones take a dump all over Tim Tebow on ESPN? I've never heard another coach totally call out another player like that. He went on for a few minutes about how Tebow had bad accuracy, is a product of a system, and basically was a mediocre QB.

 

June Jones is a pretty celebrated *******.

 

Big 10 vs Pac 10?

 

I don't care that crap.

 

If Tim Tebow is a system guy, what does that make Colt Brennan?

 

A better system guy

 

And Colt Brennan would have those numbers at a school that doesn't run the spread offense? That's just plain ridiculous. Tebow had a great season an deserves the Heisman, should he win it.

 

my roommate and i just burst out laughing for about 15-20 seconds when june jones made that tebow comment. not that tebow isn't a system quarterback, but brennan is pretty much the definition of a system qb.

since florida isn't a texas tech or hawaii that just passes every single down and ensures 500 yard passing games all over the place, they don't get labeled a system, but urban meyer obviously runs an offense that is going to make a qb look good. it's succeeded everywhere he's gone, made freakin' alex smith a #1 nfl pick, and made ohio state's defense look foolish in the title game last year even with chris leak running it. there's almost no way tebow isn't going to put up big time numbers in that system. it allows him to pile up the rushing yards and TD's like few other offenses would.

now where tebow isn't a full-blown system qb is that he's good no matter what. he can obviously pass and read defenses and be accurate, he can obviously run and do the tough running most qb's can't, he knows when to pull it down and run from the pocket and picks up chunks of yards doing so, and he just plain makes plays the way a true sophomore isn't supposed to do. and the fact he's mastered that system at this stage is also impressive. but there's no doubt he's playing in a dream offense that is well designed and makes it easy for qb's to get numbers and worked well before he came along.

 

as for the bowls, it seems ridiculous for lsu to lose twice as the #1 team and still get another shot, especially when they nearly lost about 4 or 5 extra games on top of the 2 they did lose, but they also have the most impressive list of wins of anyone, with wins over va tech and florida and a few other good teams. with everyone else having two losses, some of them very bad, and so few quality wins, lsu ends up looking like the logical choice i guess. crazy that a 2 loss team could win the championship.

and it sucks that ohio state gets to go despite losing to the only ranked team they played all season. i hate them and they'll probably win, but i hope that sec bowl streak continues and lsu pounds them.

sucks for mizzou to get passed by kansas for essentially beating kansas and having to play a better team.

 

all those games are terrible.

 

I like how Rece asked June to clarify...like he was giving June a chance to backoff his comments and June didn't bite.

Oh man it was hilarious especially after the guys with ballots on set said they voted for Tebow and Tebow had called in.

 

Hawaii is gonna get whooped by Georgia.

 

Signed,

Kliff Kingsbury

 

We heard/ read comments like that quite a bit with Boise State last year.

 

Co-Signed,

Jason White

 

The system did its job at the top. OSU and LSU are the best choices. Ohio State is the only 1 loss big conference champion. Oklahom and USC might very well be the best teams now, and have 2 losses, but their computer rankings are nowhere near the top 3 and they have far fewer quality wins than LSU, fewer top 35 opponents, play in weaker conferences, and worse loses--where as both LSU loses were triple OT loses against top 35 teams. Add LSU has by far the best nonconference win among ANY teams, there total resume is clearly there.

The other great computer ranking team is Va Tech, they have a gripe given they are the #1 computer ranking and LSU is #2 (a close 2), Ohio State is #3. But LSU just destroyed them and they do have 1 more loss than OSU, so at the end of the day, it is undeerstandable.

There is no way to take Georgia over LSU. LSU has a far more impressive overall resume from the same conference and better nonconference win. Georgia also got dismantled by Tenn--it wasn't a close loss..

Not exactly accurate in my recollection. I don't think it mattered who Auburn played, USC and OU were ahead in the human polls from the start of the season, Auburn could have played 3 nonconference games from big conferences (which noone does), been #1 in the computers (I think they were #2, but wouldn't have mattered even if they were #1 in comp), and there was way too big of gap in the human polls. Auburn was dead from the start because they came from nowhere and OU and SC didn't do anything to hurt where they started. Sane would have been for PSU in the UT-SC year had PSU not had the fluke loss versus Michigan (otherwise undefeated).

Don't agree, see above. If anyone was left out who shouldn't, it was VT.

Kentucky is a good team. Probably every bit as good as TTech, Kansas and Mizz--want to call them fluke teams too?

I don't get all the Kansas-Mizzou gripe/hoopla here. Kansas lost an either way game versus Mizzou. Mizzou because of that game got an extra game to prove their worth, and failed miserably offensively and defensively. I understand the small case for Missou over them, but it is small. Futher, at the end of the day, it is only the difference between the Orange and the Cotton.

The one major BCS selection flaw was Illinios over better resume ASU and Boston College. ASU still got the Holiday vs Texas--a very good buzz (recruiting, media) game, better than if they drew Hawaii.

Not a flaw in the BCS selection, but placement. Unfortunate SC, OU, VT and Georgia--the 4 hot teams, don't play each other. WV, Kansas, Ill & Hawaii should have been paired--creating defacto lesser BCS games. As it is there will be solid (OU, VT) strong favorites in every BCS game--not ideal for watchers.

More or less the system did as good as it could have without a playoff (right overall 1-2 from resumes), with overall pretty small gripes (Illionis in as the last selection, not ideal pairing matchup wise in the BCS beyond the NC game, etc)

 

What? An "either way" game? Missouri dominated for a majority of that game... led 21-0 and 28-7 in the second half... and Kansas made the final score respectable by running up a couple of late touchdowns against a prevent defense.

Why should Missouri have to "prove their worth" against Oklahoma -- probably the best team in the country, when healthy -- when Kansas, Arizona State and Boston College did not? Oklahoma proved itself to be a better team than Missouri. Why does that necessarily mean Missouri is inferior to another team that's not Oklahoma? Missouri has a better resume than all three of those teams you listed, as well as a higher ranking than all of them. They also beat Illinois head-to-head.

Anyway, the Orange Bowl said it best:

There it is... punished for being good enough to play an extra game, punished for playing a legitimate non-conference schedule, and punished for playing a legitimate conference schedule that included OU. I don't ever want to see anyone within college football or the bowls complain about the lack of meaningful September games and out-of-conference tests... because they've created a climate where there is little potential benefit and much greater negatives for doing so.

 

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/ncaa/polls/2004/bcs/

Auburn was a distant 3rd in the computers, while OU was 1st. If Auburn had been 1st in the computers, they are likely in over OU just based on the computers. Not only that, but if they had defeated a legit non-conference team that year, they likely get more votes in the final poll as there was big debate as to who was most deserving, and the argument against Auburn was often their OOC schedule. They also struggled in the SEC championship against a Tennessee team playing its 3rd string QB while OU ran over somebody in the B12 championship, so that hurt them in the final polls - but the polls were definitely in flux the week before. Here were the AP & Coaches polls the week before the championship games:

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2004&weekNumber=15&seasonType=2
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankings?seasonYear=2004&weekNumber=15&seasonType=2&pollId=2

OU and Auburn were basically tied and OU gained a few votes after the B12/SEC championship games. In either case, the computers alone would have been enough to flip the outcome, and a legit OOC schedule probably gets Auburn more votes too.