USC

[BCWWF]

I hate to say this, and everybody seems to have forgotten, but LSU was the national champions in 2003. It seems like everybody is forgetting that. Sure, maybe USC should have been there, but they were playing No. 4 Michigan in a different bowl.

I don't know, whenever they are mentioned they are talked about as the two time national champions, but really they weren't National Champion in 2003.

I know this could have gone into the college football thread, but I thought this would be a better place. Basically everybody seems to have forgotten about LSU.

[BCWWF]

By the way, I am one of the people who stands by Oklahoma being in the national championship in 2003. The Big 12 is much more of a test then the Pac-10 any year, and K-State was one hell of a team when they lost to them too. OU was the consensus No. 1 all year and it dominated everybody up until the last two games, but suddenly they were no good anymore because "they didn't even win their conference". It's just the way the NCAA postseason works, but either way OU still should have been in the game.

[PureHatred]

The AP poll has been around a lot longer than the BCS. Many of the college coaches who voted said they made LSU number one because they were contractually obligated to. And there are numerous examples where two teams split the national title; being co-champions still makes them two time defending champions.

Another reason why college football isn;t as good as the NFL; the championship is a myth.

[BCWWF]

I am not saying the USC shouldn't have been in the game, I am simply saying that based on the rules of the NCAA, LSU is the official national champion.

[OssMan]

WEBSTER

[Joey Slugs]

I am not saying the USC shouldn't have been in the game, I am simply saying that based on the rules of the NCAA, LSU is the official national champion.

amen to that.

[The Miz]

No one cares. USC > LSU

[PureHatred]

I am not saying the USC shouldn't have been in the game, I am simply saying that based on the rules of the NCAA, LSU is the official national champion.

Once again, I'd like to point out that the Assoociated Press has long been recognized as the more respected poll, mainly because thw writers will actually watch a game or two instead of just voting for their buddies. As recently as 1997, Michigan and Nebraska split the polls and both teams are recognized as champs. Just because the NCAA sticks its head in the sand and pretends that the BCS has no flaws doesn't mean that the rest of the educated world is going to all of a sudden ignore a poll that was established nearly 70 years ago.

When you have voters determining national championships instead of the players, then this kind of shit happens. USC was co-champion two seasons ago. They were undisputed champs last year. And the reason LSU's overlooked is because 'SC looks like a dynasty.

[BCWWF]

I'm not denying anything you are saying, I am just saying that LSU is recognized as the 2003 National Champions. Even otherwise, you can say that USC deserved a share of the national championship, but you can't call them national champions, because they hold absolutely nothing over LSU.

Thats why I am pointing it out, on tv and in magazines they continue to say can USC win its third national championship, so even if you do consider USC as a co-national champion, it takes a lot away from LSU who actually did win the national championship and by any account deserved to be in that game.

[Rain Man]

Was watching Sport Center I forget who said it but he said that USC could score on ANY NFL team.. I mean he said ANY team.. I think that is bullshit

[BCWWF]

Like Stima34 said last year, only a couple players on USC will ever play in the NFL, which means that every NFL team is considerably stronger and more talented then 95% of USC. Take into account that even if some of their players are eventually really good, right now they wouldn't be.

[PureHatred]

I'm not denying anything you are saying, I am just saying that LSU is recognized as the 2003 National Champions. Even otherwise, you can say that USC deserved a share of the national championship, but you can't call them national champions, because they hold absolutely nothing over LSU.

Thats why I am pointing it out, on tv and in magazines they continue to say can USC win its third national championship, so even if you do consider USC as a co-national champion, it takes a lot away from LSU who actually did win the national championship and by any account deserved to be in that game.

Recognized by who, exactly? LSU was named national champion by the incredibly flawed BCS system and by the coach's poll that I already mentioned is contractually set up so that they HAVE to vote whoever wins the BCS title game as #1. Even though some coaches said if they'd had the option they wouldn't have voted that way.

By the way, you said that USC holds nothing over lSU..does LSU hold anything over USC? Fuck no.

Basically, you're missing the god damned point. The AP named USC the champion. The AP poll has been around forever and has always been a determinant of who the national champion was. There have always been co-champions...and in each case, both teams referred to themselves as champions and both teams were recognized by the members of the media as such. (except SI, because the coaches poll is sponsored by CNN, their sister company, so they are obligated to act like the AP doesn't exist, even though some of its writers ar emembers)

Therefore, people are recognizing the fact that USC is every bit as legit a champion as LSU has a right to claim it is. The onyl difference is that while LSU has looked solid at best in the time since then, USC has become a fucking juggernaut.

[Supreme Olajuwon]

The NCAA does not recognize a National Champion for IA football. The BCS is not run by the NCAA.

[BCWWF]

The BCS is what determines the national champion. I'm not saying its right, but the national championship is determined by the BCS national title game, whichever it is that year. LSU legitimately won that game against the team rated No. 1 from week 1 to like week 13 or something. USC won the Rose Bowl, which pitts the top Pac-10 and Big 10 teams together, and they won the AP Poll, but they weren't the official national champions.

The BCS had a legit national title game (legit in that both teams had the right to be there, USC probably did too), and LSU was the national champions. I don't think its fair to call USC national champions for that year, because they technically weren't. They finished atop a poll (albiet yes, the most accurate one), but they only won the Rose Bowl. So you can say that they were co-national champions maybe, but to call them national champions because they beat Michigan and won the AP poll is inaccurate.

[Supreme Olajuwon]

No, that's not right at all. The BCS #1 is not the official champion. There is no official champion. There are only opinion polls.

[BCWWF]

That comment misrepresents something as Fox News would while trying to sway somebody who doesn't know whats going on.

The BCS isn't just an opinion poll, it's the system used to determine the top eight and ultimately top team in NCAA football. And in determining that they don't simply conduct a poll, they play out a National Championship game.

Yes, the NCAA doesn't officially crown a national champion, but the conferences hired the BCS to do that. The BCS crowns the national champion, the other polls are just opinion. It isn't just some random group who ranks things like the AP, they actually conduct the game, and they have the two best teams in the nation. There have been years when there is controversy, but the BCS championship game is the national championship.

[Supreme Olajuwon]

How is the BCS anything but an opinion poll? USC and LSU never played each other and yet the BCS somehow knew that LSU was better even though they had the same record. You can't have something official without facts and college football has no facts about that kind of stuff.

[BCWWF]

It is an opinion poll, the almighty opinion poll. It might not be fair every year, but the BCS champion is the national champion.

[Supreme Olajuwon]

Yes, just like the AP champion is the national champion. The NCAA is the only body that can declare an official champion and they don't because nobody knows who the best team is. Every IA football national championship is mythical which is basically the reason there is even this debate to begin with.

[BCWWF]

Except the AP doesn't conduct a national championship game, they vote on the results of the BCS national championship game. The BCS is made up of all the major conferences, Big 10, Big 12, ACC, SEC, Pac-10, Big East, etc. It's not just some random group of people voting, it is the system that combines all of the other polls with other things to determine the two best teams in the nation, and the conferences support the system. So the NCAA doesn't say "official national champion", but the conferences do.

All the AP Poll does is help the BCS choose the top two teams in the nation.

[Supreme Olajuwon]

Yes and all of that is based on opinion. There is no official national champion. It's a fact. That's why you're the only person in America who doesn't think there were co-National Champions in 2003.

[BCWWF]

I didn't say there weren't co-national champions, I said that LSU was the national champion, you can make a case that USC was too, but USC was not the national champion. There is an official national champion, but because there were three worthy teams that year USC got the short end of the stick. I made this topic to say that it is unfair to LSU when they refer to USC as the national champion in 2003, because they didn't play in the national championship game that is sponsored by the Big 10, the Big 12, the SEC, the Pac 10, the Big East, and the ACC.

[Supreme Olajuwon]

No one said LSU wasn't the National Champion in 2003.

[The Outlaw]

Auburn was The People's National Champion last year.

And they had to cheat to get that!

[PureHatred]

No one said LSU wasn't the National Champion in 2003.

Exactly. All the people saying that USC was champion are right. They aren't saying LSU didn't win the title, they are just honoring the fact that the AP poll has almiost always been a part of college football. For example:

1990 Colordo Coaches Georgia Tech AP
1991 Washingotn Coahches Miami AP
1997 Nebraska Coaches Michigan AP

Hell, you could even argue that it was more legit than the coaches poll. Which I have in this very thread.

As a matter of fact, the reason the AP is no longer a part of the BCS is because the writers efused to automatically vote the BCS champion as number one, pointing out how screwed up the computer results could be and the fact that the BCS has changed its formul every year because every year something seems to screw up. the fact that "non-major" conference are basically ignored within the system is just one example.

Arguing that the AP is just an "opinion poll" when the BCS is calculated so that almost 2/3 of the score are the coaches poll and that bullshit "experts panel" made up of former players and heisman winners is a crock of shit.

The BCS is terribly flawed and saying that its more legit than the AP is ridiculous. If you're trying to say that you feel sorry or something because LSU has been ignored....fine. but the reason they've been ignored is because they won a disputed title over an overrated Oklahoma team while USC has destroyed everything in its path for like the last two years. What they did last year legitimized the AP poll the year before; while LSU's performance made the BCS game seem like a fluke

I don't even like 'SC. But if they win out again this year they are going to go down as the first three-peat champion in college history and that what everyone will remembe and acknowledge while all this whining you're doing will be a footnote that only you and other LSU fans will give two-shits about.

[The Outlaw]

LOL calm down PureHatred

[BCWWF]

Your whole theory is based on the AP writers being completely honorable in the way they voted. Do you think that the way things worked out didn't affect how they thought? Do you think that this system that they hate disagreeing with them didn't cause any animosity?

You can't be serious. Oklahoma dominated every opponent they played in the Big 12 until the final game, when they finally faltered against a K-State team that was top-10 worthy. LSU only lost one game all year in the SEC, the toughest college conference there is. USC played in the Pac 10, and thats what ultimately killed them in the BCS. Oklahoma dominated Big 12 opponents more then USC dominated Pac 10 opponents. Even if you disagree that OU should have been No. 2 and think USC should have, LSU manhandled them in the final game. Michigan wasn't bad by any means, but they weren't Oklahoma. To not vote for LSU after that season and that final game is either really loyal to USC or else really spiteful against the BCS. It's not perfect, but the AP poll isn't either.

[PureHatred]

It's not perfect, but the AP poll isn't either.

Exactly. Which is why both are still legit national title claims.

[BCWWF]

The whole point is that the BCS was designed by the conferences to determine the national champion. The AP Poll is a random poll conducted by AP writers as their opinion on who the best team in the nation is. The BCS is the system in place, the AP is an opinion poll. If ESPN.com ranks the Colts No. 1 on their power rankings but they lose in the conference finals to the Patriots, it doesn't mean they are the best team.

[VonErich Lives]

Thats why I am pointing it out, on tv and in magazines they continue to say can USC win its third national championship, so even if you do consider USC as a co-national champion, it takes a lot away from LSU who actually did win the national championship and by any account deserved to be in that game.


WTF? How does considering them "Co" take away?

[BCWWF]

That comment is more extreme then I meant it, but in my opinion LSU is getting the short end of the stick because AP writers don't like the BCS. They fully deserved to be in that game and they dominated it.

[VonErich Lives]

That comment is more extreme then I meant it, but in my opinion LSU is getting the short end of the stick because AP writers don't like the BCS. They fully deserved to be in that game and they dominated it.

I don't think they're getting the short end, but USC won last year and does have a chance to "3 peat" so to speak.

[PureHatred]

The whole point is that the BCS was designed by the conferences to determine the national champion. The AP Poll is a random poll conducted by AP writers as their opinion on who the best team in the nation is. The BCS is the system in place, the AP is an opinion poll. If ESPN.com ranks the Colts No. 1 on their power rankings but they lose in the conference finals to the Patriots, it doesn't mean they are the best team.

Stupid comparison. At no point in time has the ESPN power rankings been used to determine a championship. While for the last 70 years, the AP poll was the College title.

An the AP didn't vote USC #1 because of some bias against the BCS. USC was #1 in the AP two weeks before the final BCS rankings came out. Oklahoma was in the game because the computer rankings had them so far ahead going into the game with Kansas State that a win didn't matter. I believe that had to do with the margarin of victory part of the equation.

And the next year, they eliminated margarin of victory and made it mandatory that the team in the BCS title game had to win its conference outright. So even the BCS admitted it screwed up.

Your whole argument is basically shit. Everyone in the free world knows that the BCS system is hugely flawed. And everyone accepted the fact that the title was split. Co-championships in college football happen all the time. Get over it.

[PureHatred]

That comment is more extreme then I meant it, but in my opinion LSU is getting the short end of the stick because AP writers don't like the BCS. They fully deserved to be in that game and they dominated it.

Oklahoma didn't belong in that game. Who cares if LSU dominated. The BCS even changed the rules so that a team like that year's Oklahoma squad wouldn't get in there again.

[PureHatred]

I would just like to mention that ABC just listed a graphic listing all the recent teams that have won national titles with one loss. Both LSU and USC were listed.

[VonErich Lives]

Also, BCWWF, I think you may be confusing the "BCS Trophy" and the "National Champion". There really isn't a true "National Champion" it's an assumed title based on polls.

However, there is a "BCS Champion" which is what LSU won and USC didn't get a shot at.

[BCWWF]

The BCS trophy is what the conferences agreed upon, and it serves as a national championship. It's not official, but thats what its there for. You guys are talking about it like its just some random game that doesn't hold any significance. While I admit it is flawed, I don't think the AP poll is perfect either, and I don't think the BCS title game was wrong that year. I consider LSU to be the true national champions that year, if you want to give USC the benefit of the doubt and call them co-champions thats alright, but I think it takes away from LSU and what they did, its like saying "OK you beat the team who was No. 1 all season, but that doesn't mean anything because the AP writers feel USC beating No. 4 is a bigger feat." I still can't believe they didn't figure out a way to get those two teams to play each other, they would have made more money with that game then any in college football I presume. But as it stands, I believe that LSU is the national champions and USC is the co-champions with an *

[VonErich Lives]

It doesn't take anything away from LSU, but you shouldn't take anything away from USC either.

Also, which poll recently told the BCS it didn't want to be used for part of their system?

[PureHatred]

The AP. They refused to automatically vote whoever wins the BCS game as the #1 team nbecause the ypointed out that the system is badly flawed and constantly changing.

[PureHatred]

I consider LSU to be the true national champions that year..., i

Based on your arguments, thats basically worthless, because you're somewhat of an idiot. You can't even get your head around the idea that being called a co-champion doesn't take away anything from LSU since its happened so often in college football.

Also...

The BCS trophy is what the conferences agreed upon, and it serves as a national championship. It's not official, but thats what its there for.

Two huge flaws in that statement:

1) The AP poll was considered the national championship for 70 years. How many times have I said this? It didn't just lose all credibility as soon as the head of a handful of conferences got together to invent a championship.

2) One of the BCS' biggest flaws is that it only incorporates the members of its own conferences. Remember the first few years, the Pac-10 wasn't even included. And no mid-major conference is guaranteed any consideration. So again, just a bunch of major conference leaders getting together to guarantee themselves the most money possible form their bowl games and the TV revenue they generate. How many times have they juggled match-ups arouind to make them more attractive to CBS? The BCS was created to generate revenue; you act like the title game is some sacred event.

LSU beat an overrated Oklahmoma team that wasn't even able to win its own conference. I would say that USC absolutely demolishing a Michigan team that won the Big 10 ( a much tougher conference than the Big 12) is easily as worthy of being a title game.

I'm still not sure what you're arguing though. You are in the vast minority in thinking that LSU winning the BCS game that year somehow makes them a more legit champion than USC. It's maybe you, and the other LSU fans.

[BCWWF]

1. I didn't respond to the AP being used for 70 years because that doesn't prove anything.

2. The Big 10 is a deeper conference then the Big 10, but the Big 12 has much better teams. Texas, Kansas State, Nebraska, and Oklahoma were all better then probably 9 or 10 or the Big 10 teams. Even your beloved AP Poll had Oklahoma better then Michigan, I don't see how you can take that away from them. They dominated the whole season and lost to a K-State team that was better then the Cal team USC lost to.

[PureHatred]

1. I didn't respond to the AP being used for 70 years because that doesn't prove anything.

2. The Big 10 is a deeper conference then the Big 10, but the Big 12 has much better teams. Texas, Kansas State, Nebraska, and Oklahoma were all better then probably 9 or 10 or the Big 10 teams. Even your beloved AP Poll had Oklahoma better then Michigan, I don't see how you can take that away from them. They dominated the whole season and lost to a K-State team that was better then the Cal team USC lost to.

1. You're arguing the legitimacy of the BCS over the AP. The AP poll was the national championship for the greater part of the last century. If you look up who won the national title in ..say..1954..then that team would be the one that was named #1 in the AP poll. How is that not relevant?

2. A team that doesn't win its conference shouldn't be playing for the national title. Period. Even the BCS figured out that stupid loophole because they changed it not even a month after the season ended. And even then I'm not saying LSU wasn't a deserving champion or whatever. I'm saying that USC has just a legit a reason to call themselves national champions.

You're saying that they should have some stupid * or that their title is meaningless because they didn't win the BCS game which is utter bullshit. Right now, the way college football is set up, the BCS system carries no more weight than the previous bowl system. Under those rules, there have been 10 split national champions, four since 199o alone.

How you can argue that the 2002 championship won by LSU is somehow more sacred than the 1990 title won by Georgia Tech or the 1997 title won by Nebraska because it was mandated by a BCS system that has proven to be flawed and had to be re-calibrated every year in its existence is totally and completely beyond me. You just seem to have a hard-on against the fact that USC is getting so much national coverage for its three-peat attempt.

[Supreme Olajuwon]

psst

http://www.ncaa.org/champadmin/ia_football_past_champs.html

[BCWWF]

Thanks for pointing out something that has already been established what, in every post of this thread? Nobody is saying that the NCAA doesn't hold an official national championship, but thanks.

[Supreme Olajuwon]

Orrrrrrrrrrrrrr we're seeing that there are many "National Championships" that are awarded every year and that you're actually just insane. So no, thank you.