USC Trojans

[Guest Deebo]

I'll make this simple.

 

I don't believe Oklahoma belongs in the National Title game.

 

Therefore...

 

if Oklahoma wins...they are #2 to me.

 

If LSU wins...there's a split in my mind because the top 2 teams (in my mind, the coach's mind and the writer's minds) didn't get to play each other.

 

If LSU does win...the BCS will have been a disaster.  They'll end up with the same top 2 teams that everyone else had BEFORE the bowls...and the Bowls attempt to crown a national champion will have been wasted.

If you don't think OU belongs then you are more ignorant than I thought.

OU had the best season out of all 3 teams. Yes they lost in there last game and they lost pretty badly. But everyone else lost to. Oklahoma had the toughest schedule and played the best football out of all 3 teams. Oklahoma's players won the most awards because they were the best players in the country.

If you think OU doesn't belong then you really are biased.

You guys are hopeless.

Yes all 3 teams lost, the difference is USC and LSU won their conferences. It is simply unfathomable to me that a team(Oklahoma) can NOT win their own conference title, yet win the National Title. USC played a VERY tough schedule in a Pac-10 conference that is proving how good it really is this bowl season (California beating Va Tech, Washington State beating Texas). I would contest that overall, Oklahoma played the weakest schedule of the 3 teams.

 

Second of all.. fuck individual awards. Everyone knows that Derrick Strait and Tommie Harris didn't deserve the awards they got, and a lot of people will tell you Jason White didn't deserve the Heisman. And that's not OU-Hate, it's just the fact that Larry Fitzgerald is a better player.

[Damaramu 0]

I'll make this simple.

 

I don't believe Oklahoma belongs in the National Title game.

 

Therefore...

 

if Oklahoma wins...they are #2 to me.

 

If LSU wins...there's a split in my mind because the top 2 teams (in my mind, the coach's mind and the writer's minds) didn't get to play each other.

 

If LSU does win...the BCS will have been a disaster.  They'll end up with the same top 2 teams that everyone else had BEFORE the bowls...and the Bowls attempt to crown a national champion will have been wasted.

If you don't think OU belongs then you are more ignorant than I thought.

OU had the best season out of all 3 teams. Yes they lost in there last game and they lost pretty badly. But everyone else lost to. Oklahoma had the toughest schedule and played the best football out of all 3 teams. Oklahoma's players won the most awards because they were the best players in the country.

If you think OU doesn't belong then you really are biased.

You guys are hopeless.

Yes all 3 teams lost, the difference is USC and LSU won their conferences. It is simply unfathomable to me that a team(Oklahoma) can NOT win their own conference title, yet win the National Title. USC played a VERY tough schedule in a Pac-10 conference that is proving how good it really is this bowl season (California beating Va Tech, Washington State beating Texas). I would contest that overall, Oklahoma played the weakest schedule of the 3 teams.

 

Second of all.. fuck individual awards. Everyone knows that Derrick Strait and Tommie Harris didn't deserve the awards they got, and a lot of people will tell you Jason White didn't deserve the Heisman. And that's not OU-Hate, it's just the fact that Larry Fitzgerald is a better player.

First of all OU had the toughest schedule out of the 3.

Second of all they posted better numbers and played better football than the other 2 teams as HarleyQuinn pointed out in another thread.

[Guest Deebo]

They had the toughest schedule based on the Computer's SOS, which doesn't factor in only who you play, but also the records of your opponents other opponents, and their other opponents, etc. It's a long complicated process that is bullshit in the end.

[Damaramu 0]

They had the toughest schedule based on the Computer's SOS, which doesn't factor in only who you play, but also the records of your opponents other opponents, and their other opponents, etc. It's a long complicated process that is bullshit in the end.

But just looking at it OU still played better teams. Read what HarleyQuinn posted. They played the same number of ranked teams as LSU and both have the same 2-1 record. Meanwhile USC only played 1 ranked team.

Hmm......sounds like OU and LSU had a tougher schedule than USC. Not to mention OU won there games more impressively than both of the other teams. And OU was playing tougher teams than USC but were still winning better.....hmm........

And USC didn't even have to play a conference title. They got there's by virtue of having the best record. If the Big XII didn't make you earn it by winning a title game then OU would've won one to. Plus OU and LSU played 1 more game than USC.

Hmm........I'd say we have the correct national title game.

[Guest Deebo]

The Conference Title argument is mute. You can't just throw out Oklahoma's loss by saying it was as conference title game that USC didn't have to play. If it wasn't for their SOS boost after winning the SEC championship game, it would be USC-Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl. So at the end of it all, one of the teams didn't deserve to be in it, but it sure wasn't USC.

[Damaramu 0]

The Conference Title argument is mute. You can't just throw out Oklahoma's loss by saying it was as conference title game that USC didn't have to play. If it wasn't for their SOS boost after winning the SEC championship game, it would be USC-Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl. So at the end of it all, one of the teams didn't deserve to be in it, but it sure wasn't USC.

Actually in the end it would seem that all 3 teams deserve to be in it.

But in the end it'll come down to the win/loss record.

The loser of the OU/LSU game goes 12-2 meanwhile the winner of that game and USC goes 13-1 and 12-1 respectively. Making them the 2 best.

[ANKLELOCK 0]

The fact of the matter is that Michigan is the best team any 3 of them has played and USC mauled them.

[HarleyQuinn 0]

The fact of the matter is that Michigan is the best team any 3 of them has played and USC mauled them.

What? Fact of the matter is that when LSU & Oklahoma square off, they will be facing each other, #2 vs #3 and they are BOTH better then Michigan so your idea just went out the window. If LSU mauls Oklahoma or vice versa, then will they be called the National Champion? Just because a team mauled THE #4 team, means jack when you have #2 AND #3 facing each other.

[Damaramu 0]

Yeah if OU beats LSU then they just beat the best team that the 3 of them faced and vice versa.

Basically Anklelock you are jumping to giant conclusions. You are saying that USC is the best and that they won there game in the most convincing fashion and had the best bowl performance out of the 3.......BEFORE the other 2 have even played!!! How can you even justify what you are saying!? How can you even believe what you are saying!?

[ANKLELOCK 0]

I meant to this point guys, chill. Neither team can claim they beat better teams than USC until one beats the other. As of right now, USC has the most impressive single win of all 3 teams in question.

[Damaramu 0]

I meant to this point guys, chill. Neither team can claim they beat better teams than USC until one beats the other. As of right now, USC has the most impressive single win of all 3 teams in question.

And OU has the most impressive single season of all teams in question.

And I'd say that win over Texas was a lot more impressive.

[ANKLELOCK 0]

OU does NOT have the most impressive season, Dama.

 

They........did.....not.....win....their........own.....conference.

 

And you keep referring to the Texas game. Dama, Texas is not very good. Did you watch the Holiday Bowl?

[Damaramu 0]

OU does NOT have the most impressive season, Dama.

 

They........did.....not.....win....their........own.....conference.

 

And you keep referring to the Texas game. Dama, Texas is not very good. Did you watch the Holiday Bowl?

Yes but I also saw there ranking and season.

Oh and......yes......OU.......did........have......the........most........impressiv

e........season.

HarleyQuinn posted the numbers. They had the most impressive wins.

They remained undefeated the longest. If they were in any other conference they would've won it because they had a better record. They beat more quality opponents than USC did. They lost to a ranked team in a game that USC didn't have to play.

So yes.....they had the most impressive season.

Hell just looking at there numbers they had the most impressive season.

 

And if you want to get technical then the K-State game could be considered post season making OU have the most impressive season period.

[ANKLELOCK 0]

Dama, the reason your arguments mean nothing and are generally ignored is because you are biased. I am totally unbiased and bps is totally unbiased and the way we and just about every, sports writer, sportscaster, COACH, and fan, USC is the #1 team in the nation. They are in both polls, they are to every human out there. Except biased OU/LSU fans, of course.

[HarleyQuinn 0]

So just because we pull out facts and reasons to support Oklahoma as the BETTER team then USC, we're suddenly biased? Personally, I could care less about all 3 teams and how they finish(I support Boston College and that's it, heh) but there really is no denying that Oklahoma was the best team this season to this point based on the facts given.

[Damaramu 0]

Dama, the reason your arguments mean nothing and are generally ignored is because you are biased. I am totally unbiased and bps is totally unbiased and the way we and just about every, sports writer, sportscaster, COACH, and fan, USC is the #1 team in the nation. They are in both polls, they are to every human out there. Except biased OU/LSU fans, of course.

You've proven you're biased against OU on many occasions.

Gee......my arguments seem to be correct in this situation.

OU did have the most impressive season. Plain and simple cut and dried.

 

You and BPS both seem to have a bias against OU.

The media has a bias against the BCS(good reason to) and they've picked OU as there whipping boy for this argument. You'd have to be biased if you yelled "USC is #1 no matter what! They played the best football!" before the Sugar Bowl is even played. Because fact is they did put on a very impressive game last night. But looking at the season they were the weakest team of the 3 and they played the weakest team. It's pretty safe to say that USC on their best day couldn't be OU or LSU. And it's been said before by the media, who's poll you hold so dearly, "Pete Carol is happy! He gets to go for the national title and he doesn't have to go through OU or LSU!" plus I've heard many people say that OU and LSU have gotten the bum deal b/c they have to play one another which will be a more difficult challenge than facing USC.

Out of the 3 teams USC posted the weakest numbers and was not as impressive. Plus they lost to an unranked team.

 

You are just as biased against them as I am for them buddy. Because aside from "They couldn't win their conference" which I have destroyed you cannot come up with a good argument as to why OU is such a bad team.

And when I do make an argument that you can't respond to you come up with a flamebait. You've lost....

[ANKLELOCK 0]

Well Harley, im sure Dama is glad you feel that way. But a team that got BLOWN OUT and DIDNT WIN THEIR CONFERENCE doesn't deserve to even be given a second look as far as National Championships go.

[ANKLELOCK 0]

Its safe to say USC on their best day couldn't beat OU or LSU.

 

WOW

 

I can't wait to see what the other guys think when they see this post. This is great stuff.

[HarleyQuinn 0]

USC would've been forced to play 9-3 Washington State in "their" conference title game if they had one. Oklahoma played Kansas State who were 11-3...much better record then Washington State and a much better team. You really can't compare the conference title game to any of USC's season games because USC didn't have to play a conference title game. Also they got blown out by the currently ranked #8 team so it's not THAT bad. You make it out to be an unranked Ivy League school like Harvard blew them out. Also just b/c they didn't win the conference title doesn't mean they weren't the best in the conference. They still had a better record then conference winner K-State

[ANKLELOCK 0]

KState isn't necessarily better than Wazu. KSU lost to Texas. Wazu beat Texas. KSU is getting it handed to them right now.

[HarleyQuinn 0]

Based on Rankings and record, K-State was better. You can't compare one game for every team cause then what would the need for records be?

[Damaramu 0]

Its safe to say USC on their best day couldn't beat OU or LSU.

 

WOW

 

I can't wait to see what the other guys think when they see this post. This is great stuff.

See there you go with your flamebaiting. You know your beat so you gotta pull something like that at. You've proven that you are biased against OU and you don't know what you're talking about. You hadn't even seen USC play till last night.

I've seen all 3 of these teams play this season. And looking at the numbers. You know based on how they have consistently played ALL season OU and LSU are BETTER TEAMS THAN USC. They play better football, post more points, and don't allow themselves to be scored on as much.

Besides.......OU lost in there conference title game yes but once again a game that USC didn't have to play...USC got there title by way of having the best record. If OU was a Pac-10 team then they would've won the conference as well. But they had to earn it by playing the second best team in the conference.

Make a good argument. Make an argument aside from them losing the conference title. Because we've destroyed that argument but it's all you can come up with. Aside from that you CANNOT come up with a good reason why OU is the worst team of the 3 and doesn't deserve a share at the national title.

Come up with it now. Otherwise you've lost.

[Damaramu 0]

KState isn't necessarily better than Wazu. KSU lost to Texas. Wazu beat Texas. KSU is getting it handed to them right now.

Yeah K-State lost to Texas. OU blew Texas out. Your point?

[HarleyQuinn 0]

To pull the same trick on you...USC lost to California by 3! Arizona beat California by 28, does that make Arizona the better team? No...same goes for what you just said. It just can't be compared

[Damaramu 0]

To pull the same trick on you...USC lost to California by 3! Arizona beat California by 28, does that make Arizona the better team? No...same goes for what you just said. It just can't be compared

He's proven he has a bias nor can he come up with a good argument about why OU doesn't belong there aside from the conference game.

However Bored I know disagrees with me but he knows what he's talking about unlike ANKLELOCK. So let's see if he can come up with an argument why OU shouldn't be there and are a the worst of the 3 ASIDE from that one game.

[Bored 0]

Dama ya see you actually have valid points but your execution is horrendous. You just whine and whine and whine non-stop and have been doing it for a month now so no one takes you seriously. In all honesty you shouldn't be taken seriously because I remember during the season in the college football thread that you mentioned being a newbie to the sport so I don't think your exactly the most knowledgeable person on the subject.

[Guest Deebo]

USC would've been forced to play 9-3 Washington State in "their" conference title game if they had one. Oklahoma played Kansas State who were 11-3...much better record then Washington State and a much better team. You really can't compare the conference title game to any of USC's season games because USC didn't have to play a conference title game. Also they got blown out by the currently ranked #8 team so it's not THAT bad. You make it out to be an unranked Ivy League school like Harvard blew them out. Also just b/c they didn't win the conference title doesn't mean they weren't the best in the conference. They still had a better record then conference winner K-State

K-State was only 10-3 heading into the Big 12 championship, and considering the weak ass schedule they play, that record is a bit overrated.

 

It is just my opinion that you should not be in the National Championship if you don't win your conference, or if you play a division 1-aa team(LSU). Whatever the case, USC should be in it, but I cant figure out who shouldn't from LSU and Oklahoma.

[ANKLELOCK 0]

Dama is just a whiner. Thats it. I don't see Teke184 on here whining how LSU's loss to Florida was a fluke. Just be humble and accept it when your team simply isn't the best. People will respect you more.

[Damaramu 0]

Dama ya see you actually have valid points but your execution is horrendous. You just whine and whine and whine non-stop and have been doing it for a month now so no one takes you seriously. In all honesty you shouldn't be taken seriously because I remember during the season in the college football thread that you mentioned being a newbie to the sport so I don't think your exactly the most knowledgeable person on the subject.

But you just admitted the points were valid and good. So someone try to find a way to respond to them rather than just bringing up that one game. Yes I am a newbie but I saw the season and I saw how good OU did in relation to USC. So why doesn't someone look at my points and answer me. Aside from that one game why is OU a bad team? Why is USC a better team than LSU and OU? I mean both teams posted better numbers and both teams scored more points and both teams allowed less yards and points scored on them. Both teams lost to a ranked team.

If that one game negates OU's entire season then why doesn't USC and LSU's losses negate there whole season.

Yes OU got beat bad but they lost to a ranked team...USC didn't.

[HarleyQuinn 0]

Yeah...thus my backing him up with some knowledge