suc's 3rd National Championship GAME

[TopDaugIn2000]

anyone else catch that before the game?????

[OklahomaTuba]

Its kinda the same thing with Bama. Every time they step on the field, its a national championship game.

[oumartin]

it blows my mind. Its like LSU doesn't even own the Crystal ball.
USC darn sure wasn't playin' for their third nor do they have 7NC let alone 12 as claimed by Keith Jackson.

[KABOOKIE]

I fogot about that year when USC played Michigan for the AP title. Damn that 8-3 Michigan team almost took home the title.

[Big John]

I was surprised when they showed two coaches with 4 championships and another with 1. I'm sure they gave credit to Carroll for 2, so that means they gave credit to USC for 11. That disgust me.

[FirstandGoal]

I wonder if the media will now publicly acknowledge LSU's crystal for '03.

[Soonerfan85]

I wonder if the media will now publicly acknowledge LSU's crystal for '03.


Uh, did you have a brain aneurysm rooting for Texas last night?

The media will forever pimp USC as 2003 National Champions. :mad:

[Big Red Ron]

Uh, did you have a brain aneurysm rooting for Texas last night?

The media will forever pimp USC as 2003 National Champions. :mad:Of course they will because their little poll is more accurate than the combination of polls, computer averages and strenght of schedule is.:rolleyes:

[NickZeppelin]

USC is becoming more and more legend every year. If they lose a game or two still win the PAC 10 and go to the Rose Bowl again then they'll say this is the 4th straight championship game USC has been to.

[BoomerSoonhauer]

I noticed that Homer Jackson was really careful when they showed the highlights of that Phantom Championship to call it THE ASSOCIATED PRESS NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP.

What does that trophy look like??

[Geekboy]

USuck won the AP national title. LSU won THE national title.

Let's see, was Michigan playing for the national title also in that Rose Bowl
against USuck?

[FirstandGoal]

Uh, did you have a brain aneurysm rooting for Texas last night?

The media will forever pimp USC as 2003 National Champions. :mad:


SF85, if you have ever bothered to read any of my other posts you would know that I was one of the few diehards that absolutely, freaking never, ever joined the root for texas/again suc club. Are you the one that gave me anonymous red yesterday for bashing texass?

[Soonerfan85]

SF85, if you have ever bothered to read any of my other posts you would know that I was one of the few diehards that absolutely, freaking never, ever joined the root for texas/again suc club. Are you the one that gave me anonymous red yesterday for bashing texass?


Sorry F&G, but you're search for the negspec villian will have to continue as this morning was the first time I've logged in to/posted on SF.com in weeks.

I wasn't as much implying that YOU in particular pulled for Texas as much as I was implying that a Sooner fan could suffer an aneursym by simply pulling for Texas and that might explain why for a split second or two you thought the national media had regained its collective sanity.

Having said that, I DID pull for Texas to beat USC and don't belive any Sooner fan should have to apologize for doing so in this situation. Nor do I believe those who remained neutral or pulled for USC should feel the need to apologize either. For the life of me I can't see how ANYONE could remain neutral during last night's game.

[sanantoniosooner]

For the life of me I can't see how ANYONE could remain neutral during last night's game.
they can say they did................

[NormanPride]

they can say they did................

Well, I can say I own 12 BMWs, but I don't.







I own 13. :D

[FirstandGoal]

Sorry F&G, but you're search for the negspec villian will have to continue as this morning was the first time I've logged in to/posted on SF.com in weeks.

I wasn't as much implying that YOU in particular pulled for Texas as much as I was implying that a Sooner fan could suffer an aneursym by simply pulling for Texas and that might explain why for a split second or two you thought the national media had regained its collective sanity.

Having said that, I DID pull for Texas to beat USC and don't belive any Sooner fan should have to apologize for doing so in this situation. Nor do I believe those who remained neutral or pulled for USC should feel the need to apologize either. For the life of me I can't see how ANYONE could remain neutral during last night's game.

Sorry to overract then, but the thought of any Sooner rooting for texass yesterday really chapped my ***, and I certainly was not in that camp.
I will admit that I was rooting for suc the whole time, even when it was painfully obvious texass was the better team last night.
However, I am more of a glass half full person, so I am trying to look at what few positives there are from this situation.

1. It was funny as hell to see suc meltdown and whinehart lose it on national t.v
2. The "streak" panic ends (like they would have reached it anyway)
3. We now will get a chance to beat the defending NC's next year
4. Programs like Kansas now have a longer winning streak than suc:D :D
5. No Herr until August
6. In a few days when all the dust settles, Sooners will again be united on the topic of texass

[Jason White's Third Knee]

USuck won the AP national title. LSU won THE National Championship.




Fixed.

[Jason White's Third Knee]

Sorry to overract then, but the thought of any Sooner rooting for texass yesterday really chapped my ***

You know, they make creams to help with that.







1. It was funny as hell to see suc meltdown and whinehart lose it on national t.v
2. The "streak" panic ends (like they would have reached it anyway)
3. We now will get a chance to beat the defending NC's next year
4. Programs like Kansas now have a longer winning streak than suc:D :D
5. No Herr until August
6. In a few days when all the dust settles, Sooners will again be united on the topic of texass


Can I get an Amen?

[SoDakSooner]

Only the media(and I suppose USC) was touting the game as a chance at a 3 peat. Just trying to up the ratings. I figure since the NCAA is the power in charge of college football they set the rules. NCAA site does not recognize anyone but LSU as the 2003 National Champ.

[TopDaugIn2000]

I was surprised when they showed two coaches with 4 championships and another with 1. I'm sure they gave credit to Carroll for 2, so that means they gave credit to USC for 11. That disgust me.

oh yeah, I LOVED that moment :rolleyes:

[JLB]

How come the segment during the game said USC has 12 NT.WTF,is that true.

[Big Red Ron]

Well, I can say I own 12 BMWs, but I don't.







I own 13. :DBMW...pffttt:texan:

[Big Red Ron]

How come the segment during the game said USC has 12 NT.WTF,is that true.If I'm remembering correctly they have six AP/UPI national championships. The rest are Bama/Mich style.

[Big John]

I noticed that Homer Jackson was really careful when they showed the highlights of that Phantom Championship to call it THE ASSOCIATED PRESS NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP.

What does that trophy look like??
It looks like this
http://home.comcast.net/~peterfarina/images/poop.jpg

[Sooner24]

I guess since we only won the AP National Title in 1974 we better only claim 6 from now on.

[oumartin]

WRONG. the AP was recognized up until the BCS became the end all for NC.

[Mjcpr]

I guess since we only won the AP National Title in 1974 we better only claim 6 from now on.

If in 1974 they had a national championship game planned at the end of the season for the two teams atop the standings determined by an agreed-upon system and we weren't in it, then no we probably shouldn't count it.

[Big Red Ron]

I guess since we only won the AP National Title in 1974 we better only claim 6 from now on.Winning the AP is like winning the Daily Oklahoman National Championship. The BCS IS the system. The AP's vote used to be 1/6 of the formula but now that they have been replaced by the Harris poll, It is virtually meaningless.

[OUTromBoNado]

Well, I can say I own 12 BMWs, but I don't.







I own 13. :D

LIAR!!!!

You forget. I know where you live. I know for a fact you don't have 13. You have 12.333....repeating, of course. That rounds down, fool.:eddie:

[Sooner24]

If we won an AP title and someone else won the BCS we would claim it in a heartbeat.

[OUTromBoNado]

Yeah, but it feel wrong...at least to me. Half-championships are kinda like kissing your own sister.

[FirstandGoal]

If we won an AP title and someone else won the BCS we would claim it in a heartbeat.


I honestly wouldn't. That would be pathetic

[Sooner24]

So because OU was ranked 3rd in BOTH polls two years ago and the still got to the BCS title game that doesn't matter? :rolleyes:

The BCS is a joke. The only thing the BCS is good for is in years like this where there are only two undefeated teams.

[sanantoniosooner]

So because OU was ranked 3rd in BOTH polls two years ago and the still got to the BCS title game that doesn't matter? :rolleyes:

The BCS is a joke. The only thing the BCS is good for is in years like this where there are only two undefeated teams.
well said and honest.

[Big Red Ron]

So because OU was ranked 3rd in BOTH polls two years ago and the still got to the BCS title game that doesn't matter? :rolleyes:

The BCS is a joke. The only thing the BCS is good for is in years like this where there are only two undefeated teams.the bcs is far superior to leaving your fate entirely to a bunch of fat, rich white guys who mostly never played the game.

Th AP is worthless now.

[Sooner24]

the bcs is far superior to leaving your fate entirely to a bunch of fat, rich white guys who mostly never played the game.

Th AP is worthless now.


Saying the BCS is far superior to the AP poll is like saying an Edsel is far superior to a Pinto. :rolleyes:

[Big Red Ron]

Saying the BCS is far superior to the AP poll is like saying an Edsel is far superior to a Pinto. :rolleyes:Well of course if you remove the possibility of a play off you might see it thatr way. However, before the BCS was created USC and UT wouldn't haved played. And a bunch of biased sport writers would decide who was champion. I prefer what we have to what we had. Oklahoma would have had many more National Championship opportunities than we had, if this was always the system.

[FirstandGoal]

Saying the BCS is far superior to the AP poll is like saying an Edsel is far superior to a Pinto. :rolleyes:

Except for the fact that all D1 schools have agreed that the BCS is how the NC is decided.
The media is another story

[JLB]

It looks like this
http://home.comcast.net/~peterfarina/images/poop.jpg

No,it really looks like this.....

1782

[Stoop Dawg]

Well of course if you remove the possibility of a play off you might see it thatr way. However, before the BCS was created USC and UT wouldn't haved played. And a bunch of biased sport writers would decide who was champion. I prefer what we have to what we had. Oklahoma would have had many more National Championship opportunities than we had, if this was always the system.

Exactly. Pre-BCS would have two undefeated teams. Anyone who thinks the AP alone is better than the the BCS is a fool.

[Stoop Dawg]

So because OU was ranked 3rd in BOTH polls two years ago and the still got to the BCS title game that doesn't matter?

So the fact that the rules for competing in the NC game were clearly explained *before* the season started and the system was followed throughout the season doesn't matter? :rolleyes:

See, the human polls are PART of the process. They are not THE process - for obvious reasons.

[Sooner24]

Since the AP has been around a lot longer then the BCS and the BCS has gotten it right just a couple of times as too who should be playing in the championship game, or who should even be in the BCS games, I say it's just about a wash.

That includes the teams that have been screwed out of BCS games, Oregon this year, K-State in 98, Cal last year. We should have been playing Miami in 2001. Nebraska should not have been the 2002 Championship game. LSU and USC should have played two years ago. and so on and so on. Like I said earlier the only time the BSC is going to get it right is when you have a year like this one. The AP poll is as credible as the BCS when half the time they don't even get the matchups right for the title. :rolleyes:

[Sooner24]

Oh I forgot last year when you have three undefeated teams. It's as flawed a system as the old poll system anyway you look at it.

[sanantoniosooner]

Oh I forgot last year when you have three undefeated teams. It's as flawed a system as the old poll system anyway you look at it.
4 undefeated team.......Utah got zero respect.

[Sooner24]

Well of course if you remove the possibility of a play off you might see it thatr way. However, before the BCS was created USC and UT wouldn't haved played. And a bunch of biased sport writers would decide who was champion. I prefer what we have to what we had. Oklahoma would have had many more National Championship opportunities than we had, if this was always the system.


Forget the 1985 title then because Penn State would have played Miami and not us. There's another title we don't have. Now we are down to 5. :eek:

[Sooner24]

4 undefeated team.......Utah got zero respect.


They were so disrespected I even forgot them. :P

[sanantoniosooner]

Forget the 1985 title then because Penn State would have played Miami and not us. There's another title we don't have. Now we are down to 5. :eek:
dang.

spek if it will let me.

[Sooner24]

The BCS is so messed up that Colorado almost got into the championship game with two loses in 2001.

[FirstandGoal]

The BCS is so messed up that Colorado almost got into the championship game with two loses in 2001.


:eek: :eek: I forgot about that!!!

Seriously though, I am not a fan of the BCS, its just that I see it as the only alternative at this point in time.
We've all seen how accurate "popular opinon" was this year

[Sooner24]

Nebraska plays for the National title in the 2001 season after getting punked 62-36. They not only did not win their conference they didn't even play in the confernce championship game.

[Sooner24]

FSU plays for the title in the 2000 season even though they lost to Miami who was BCSed out of a chance to play for the title.

[sanantoniosooner]

Nebraska plays for the National title in the 2001 season after getting punked 62-36. They not only did not win their conference they didn't even play in the confernce championship game.
there's one year we'll skip..........:O

[sanantoniosooner]

FSU plays for the title in the 2000 season even though they lost to Miami who was BCSed out of a chance to play for the title.
because they lost to a one loss Washington...........

BCS sucks.

[Stoop Dawg]

How many years did the undisputed #1 play the undisputed #2 and create an undisputed NC under the AP poll and old bowl system? Did it *ever* happen? I can't recall when it did, if it did.

[soonerjoker]

folks seem to forget that before bcs, ther was also upi. they counted as much as ap.

[sanantoniosooner]

folks seem to forget that before bcs, ther was also upi. they counted as much as ap.
duh......

Hence split championships.

[MI Sooner]

What some people can't seem to comprehend when complaining about teams that played or almost played for the BCS title, is that you have you can only judge a team unqualified if there's a better alternative.

The fact that people complain about Nebraska playing for the title after getting spanked (by Colorado), and people complain about Coloardo almost getting in the same year shows how asinine most of these arguments are. Both teams (and Oregon - weak schedule) had flaws. Some years, you have to pick among a bunch of flawed teams. The BCS has a predetermined formula (agreed to by those subject to it) for choosing amongst those teams. You can argue that Oregon/Auburn/USC/Miami should have gotten in, but it's like arguing that Jeff Gordon should have been NASCAR points champ. They didn't have the lowest/highest point total according to the predetermined system.

As for the consensus #1 (USC) in the polls not getting in two years ago. The computers were included for a reason, to place a check on biased humans. We were a consensus #1 in the computer polls. Why wouldn't we have as much right to complain if we were left out? If we were left out, could we claim the Jeff Sagarin NC?

[Lydell_Carr]

http://www.bobanddan.net/images/One-Pete.jpg

Nuff Said

[TopDaugIn2000]

HAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Sooner24]

What some people can't seem to comprehend when complaining about teams that played or almost played for the BCS title, is that you have you can only judge a team unqualified if there's a better alternative.

The fact that people complain about Nebraska playing for the title after getting spanked (by Colorado), and people complain about Coloardo almost getting in the same year shows how asinine most of these arguments are. Both teams (and Oregon - weak schedule) had flaws. Some years, you have to pick among a bunch of flawed teams. The BCS has a predetermined formula (agreed to by those subject to it) for choosing amongst those teams. You can argue that Oregon/Auburn/USC/Miami should have gotten in, but it's like arguing that Jeff Gordon should have been NASCAR points champ. They didn't have the lowest/highest point total according to the predetermined system.

As for the consensus #1 (USC) in the polls not getting in two years ago. The computers were included for a reason, to place a check on biased humans. We were a consensus #1 in the computer polls. Why wouldn't we have as much right to complain if we were left out? If we were left out, could we claim the Jeff Sagarin NC?


That's some pretty flawed logic considering that every week Gordon competes against all 42 of his peers and college football teams don't play every team in the same season.

What is asinine are people saying just because you don't have "The Crystal Ball" you don't have anything. I hope one of these years we end up with an AP title and not a BSC title just to see how many people will not claim a championship. I know the University of Oklahoma will and even put it up on the stadium for everyone to see. I bet they won't even put an asterisk by it either.

[Stoop Dawg]

The BCS has a predetermined formula (agreed to by those subject to it) for choosing amongst those teams. You can argue that Oregon/Auburn/USC/Miami should have gotten in, but it's like arguing that Jeff Gordon should have been NASCAR points champ. They didn't have the lowest/highest point total according to the predetermined system.

That pretty much sums it up. A flawed objective system is better than a flawed subjective system. At least everyone knows the rules before they start. People can (and do) argue that the objective system needs to be changed, and it is changed - almost every year. But to argue that a purely subjective system is somehow better is just crazy.

[Sooner24]

That pretty much sums it up. A flawed objective system is better than a flawed subjective system. At least everyone knows the rules before they start. People can (and do) argue that the objective system needs to be changed, and it is changed - almost every year. But to argue that a purely subjective system is somehow better is just crazy.

Yeah like the computers aren't influenced by the person programing them. Bad data in bad data out. :rolleyes:

[Stoop Dawg]

Yeah like the computers aren't influenced by the person programing them. Bad data in bad data out. :rolleyes:

No, they're not. Unless the programmers are changing the calculations mid-way through they year. :rolleyes:

And I believe all of the algorithms are public. If you find some bias in one of them, you should notify the BCS immediately. I'm sure they would love to hear about it. Let us know what you find too. :rolleyes:

[RiddlerOK]

4. Programs like Kansas now have a longer winning streak than suc:D :D

Don't forget Baylor. :)


5. No Herr until August

C'mon. Has he been a bad boy again?

[MI Sooner]

Sooner24,

I agree that the AP Championship isn't nothing. It means a group of people who follow football as part of their profession thought you were the best team. I'm sure Auburn or Utah would love to be able to say that about 2004.

What I really wonder is why the BCS uses computer rankings at all. I'm one of the few people I know of who thinks they should be a factor. It seems like most everyone else would rather just use the polls to pick the final two, or only use the computer rankings to break a tie.

Just out of curiousity, how do Oklahoma high school teams qualify for the football playoffs? I'd bet they use a "computer" (Win% and SOS) formula. If so, do people complain about who makes the high school playoffs? The BCS is nothing more than a two team playoff. If they go to an 8 team playoff, I hope they use a similar selection process, rather than establish a commitee of biased ADs, a la NCAA hoops. If they ever do this, I'd love to see the reaction of the people running the AP poll, because you know they'd want to be a part of the selection process.

[sanantoniosooner]

Just out of curiousity, how do Oklahoma high school teams qualify for the football playoffs? I'd bet they use a "computer" (Win% and SOS) formula. If so, do people complain about who makes the high school playoffs? The BCS is nothing more than a two team playoff. If they go to an 8 team playoff, I hope they use a similar selection process, rather than establish a commitee of biased ADs, a la NCAA hoops. If they ever do this, I'd love to see the reaction of the people running the AP poll, because you know they'd want to be a part of the selection process.
You'd bet/If so..............hard to argue with that.

[Sooner24]

No, they're not. Unless the programmers are changing the calculations mid-way through they year. :rolleyes:

And I believe all of the algorithms are public. If you find some bias in one of them, you should notify the BCS immediately. I'm sure they would love to hear about it. Let us know what you find too. :rolleyes:

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/abcsports/BCSStandings?week=7

I'm not sure you can comprehend this but check out a team like TCU. They got a 14, 14, 15, 1, 5, 14. The bigger the number the better. How can four computers be so far off high or two so far off low? Gee maybe I should call the BCS people. :rolleyes:

[Stoop Dawg]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/abcsports/BCSStandings?week=7

I'm not sure you can comprehend this but check out a team like TCU. They got a 14, 14, 15, 1, 5, 14. The bigger the number the better. How can four computers be so far off high or two so far off low? Gee maybe I should call the BCS people. :rolleyes:

I'll type slowly so you can understand. They use different algorithms. The fact that they are different doesn't make them biased. If you need help with the definition of the word biased just let me know. I'm here to help.

[Stoop Dawg]

Of further interest, the computers picked UT #1 before the Rose Bowl. Who ended up being more accurate?

(For those with impaired reading comprehension, that's a rhetorical question)

[sanantoniosooner]

I'll type slowly so you can understand. They use different algorithms. The fact that they are different doesn't make them biased. If you need help with the definition of the word biased just let me know. I'm here to help.
They are not biased in the sense that they favor one team over another.

They are biased in the sense that they weigh data however the public cries out

Running scores up a problem..........take out that factor. Now it doesn't matter if you barely win or win by a lot. The formula changes nearly every year and it sucks that you might miss the big game because of how an opponent of an opponent performs. The system assures 1 VS 2. It doesn't assure that it's the right 1 or 2.

this year was clear cut, but last year we had 4 undefeated teams and the year before that we had several 1 loss teams.

[Stoop Dawg]

They are not biased in the sense that they favor one team over another.

They are biased in the sense that they weigh data however the public cries out

Running scores up a problem..........take out that factor. Now it doesn't matter if you barely win or win by a lot. The formula changes nearly every year and it sucks that you might miss the big game because of how an opponent of an opponent performs. The system assures 1 VS 2. It doesn't assure that it's the right 1 or 2.

Thanks for at least posting a sane statement. You are correct that the algorithms have been modified to try to take out some perceived injustices. Margin of victory being one of the big ones. However, my claim isn't that the BCS is perfect - far from it. In fact, I'd like to see it abolished in favor of a play off.

My claim is that it's better than the old AP + bowl system. Whatever flaws may be found in the computer polls, they are there on week 1 and there at the end of the season. Everyone knows that strength of schedule is a factor, so when Auburn scheduled The Citadel they sealed their own fate. If you put the entire system in the hands of the coaches and sportswriters, it's just a free-for-all. As far as I know, there are no rules for voting at all.

[sanantoniosooner]

yeah, but when you schedule washington.......you have no idea what you'll get in a few years. And you have no control over who they schedule.

[Stoop Dawg]

yeah, but when you schedule washington.......you have no idea what you'll get in a few years. And you have no control over who they schedule.

Which is why you shouldn't schedule Washington! ;)

Good points, and I agree. But it's still better than the old system.

[noose7699]

Well, I can say I own 12 BMWs, but I don't.







I own 13. :D

ONLY 13?? ;)

But do they have all the gadgets that 007 has on his???!!!

If not, then don't brag.. :D

[Sooner24]

I'll type slowly so you can understand. They use different algorithms. The fact that they are different doesn't make them biased. If you need help with the definition of the word biased just let me know. I'm here to help.


LET ME TYPE REALLY BIG FOR YOU SO MAYBE YOU CAN UNDERSTAND. I DON'T CARE IF THEY USE ALGORITHMS OR BIORHYTHMS JUST BECAUSE IT COMES OUT OF A COMPUTER DOESN'T MAKE IT A BETTER SYSTEM.

[Jason White's Third Knee]

LET ME TYPE REALLY BIG FOR YOU SO MAYBE YOU CAN UNDERSTAND. I DON'T CARE IF THEY USE ALGORITHMS OR BIORHYTHMS JUST BECAUSE IT COMES OUT OF A COMPUTER DOESN'T MAKE IT A BETTER SYSTEM.

BUT COMPUTERS CAN CHECK FOR PROPER PUNCTUATION.