Like many others, I am appalled that the national championship game is hosting two teams from, not only the same conference, but the same division. After the BCS bypassed UM from a rematch with Ohio in 2006; 2007 bowl season, I will not be watching the game. Just wanted to get the opinions of the MgoBlog community.
Boycotting the National Championship game?
I'm going to watch of course but I agree with you in a sense...the hypocrisy here stinks.
I'm not watching. If Michigan didn't get a rematch Alabama certainly doesn't deserve one. The only way to guarantee we don't get another is for this one to have lousy ratings. If you watch you say to the BCS it's ok.
Yes ratings are the only way we can vote against this. If you mist watch, consider grabbing a bootleg stream and not contribute to the ratings.
influences ratings. The Nielsen ratings are based on a small sample of viewers, so unless an MGOUser is a Nielsen guy, it doesn't matter.
You are correct. The average joe has no influence in TV ratings.
Just want people to know that watching or boycotting means nothing, unless you are on eof the 5,000 homes with a set top box from Nielsen.
Neilsen is how the papers report ratings, but not how cable networks sell ads. These days when you set your cable box to ESPN, FSN, BTN, etc the fact you watched that channel is recorded. When you open up a ESPN3 stream, ESPN records that. That is how conference specific networks or niche networks can survive and thrive. It's how ESPN3 got off the ground. They have minimal Neilsen prescense, but they can tell how many people turned their channel on during a specific event or requested a stream from their server.
Neilsen remains useful for broadcast since a TV antenna doesn't phone home when you tune in to the channel. Cable boxes and online streams though tell the network you're watching. So refusing to pull up the pregame show or the game on ESPN3 will be noticed if enough people do it.
still supports me splitting the cable and connecting TVs without converter boxes. The provider, and thus, ESPN, will have no way of knowing if I'm watching ESPN or MeTV reruns of Andy Griffith. I'm still undecided which path I'll choose, though. Even with 30 points on this game, I'm still out of contention, but perhaps Les will go back to his bizarre time management ways or something strange.
And there's always the scouting angle for our next game, albeit with an updated roster.
I'm not watching. The game is meaningless.
This game has at least some implications for the nature of our game vs. Bama to start next season. Knocking off the reigning champ would be the perfect start for team 133.
I will never root for Nick Saban. Sorry I'm not sorry.
And I will be watching and expecting a low-scoring, boring game.
meh. It is what it is. I am watching. Roll Tide.
I just believe boycotts are whiney and dumb.
edit: How the eff is this flamebait? God forbid, I hold a differing opinion.
I don't get the flamebait, either; I agree with everything you said except the roll tide. I guess it'd be nice to beat the defending MNC champs next year, but other than that I don't have a dog in this fight.
When is the last time a defending national champion lost its season opener?
Though I think someone else finally did it.
If Alabama wins, they will join the list next year.
Should've been Auburn this year.
It's because you said "Roll Tide"
Obviously your opinion is being skewed due to the team that you're rooting for
NO it isn't. I have no dog in the fight. I would prefer Bama to win over LSU just to dig the Saban knife deeper into MSU's fans hearts.
I am boycotting the entire SEC not just the BCS.
It is almost unbearable down here.
Imagine how it feels here.
Then you'd have to boycott ESPN. They are the SEC Network.
...you're not already boycotting ESPN?
Is to go back to exactly how it was before the BCS. Everybody plays their bowl games and whoever is number 1 in the end is the Champ. If the Coaches pick someone else, they can be the coaches champ, like Nebraska was, and the champs will still be the champs, like we were. There are way too many teams to pick the two best to play in one game without a playoff, and I for one am not in favor of a playoff. The whole thing is WAY OVER-THOUGHT.
but I think the major bowls move back to New Years Day (and screw the NFL if it is a Sunday too, New Year's day was ruined this year), and the two best teams (determined by the current BCS method or whatever) play a plus one game for the National Championship.
This would then require a team to win its Conference to make the major bowl, and then win the bowl. Meaning of regular season stays intact (unlike for Alabama this year). Meaning of Division and Conference title remains intact. Meaning of the Rose Bowl remains intact. Ability to choose between teams (like Clemson if they had beat WVU) that appear less deserving over teams that appear more deserving on January 2nd remains intact.
Why doesn't Delany see it my way?
Actually, a playoff would be the opposite of over thinking, since the games are decided, you know, on the field.
either. IMO LSU has already show that they are the best team in college football, and the second best team is not even close. If they lose to Bama it means nothing--they still had a WAY better season in every respect, beat Bama in Bama, and are the better team no matter what happens tonight. And if instead of tonight's game, we had say an 8 team playoff and LSU lost, that would still be the case. To use an NFL example, the Steelers are way better than Denver, and the game last night changed nothing, all it did was make their superior regular season meaningless.
I was refering to the current system as overthought, not a playoff
It was a poor decision (er, computing), and it will further harangue the BCS as a broken system. However, what's done is done. I'll watch. I'd still vote for LSU eve if they lost.
The majority of the computers had Oklahoma State 2nd. It was the human voters in the Coaches Poll and Harris Poll who voted Alabama into the championship game.
They need to just get rid of the human say in it. They were the ones that fucked it up.
I was appalled that Saban didn't have OSU 3rd. I mean, thats pretty shitty. Gundy should have put Bama 25th if he really wanted to be a dick.
I didn't know he did that. What an asshole. Further evidence he is 100% evil.
The 2004 USC Trojans demand you take that back.
That's why I think a Bama win could be the best thing to happen for those who are against the BCS. If Bama wins, how can anyone honestly say that they are the best team in the country, especially if they win by only a few points? It could be tough to say no to a plus one setup in that situation.
If Bama wins, that opens a whole messy can of worms that may bring the change.
An LSU win means that never again would we have a rematch for the MNC.
Doubt it, everyone will piss and moan for 2 weeks after the game but come next year and 2014 when the BCS contract renews we will still be stuck with a crap ass bowl "system".
....but only because I want to see how much more proof I will receive that the BCS really is a pile of steaming guano. It's also the last CFB game this year, and even if it is like a doomed network show with a forgone conclusion, I can't help wondering how it REALLY ends.
That being said, LSU in my pool for a mere 3 points, although I really would rather Alabama win so they will perhaps think about meaningful reform in the bowl system. Of course, ESPN will want to have a chat with the reformers first...
I won't be watching. Partly because of the flawed BCS system, partly because no matter what happens a team I can't stand will win.
Damn....I wanted to be the one to post this thread tomorrow.....
But no I'm not watching. I'll get an update on the score from ESPN texts, but I'm not watching. I just don't care. LSU wins - good, they deserve it (not according to that Grantland guy though). Bama wins - huge shitstorm, LSU AP champions, and a fast forwarding to the end of the BCS
I am boycotting the sec west title game. I would have liked to seen Oklahoma State vs LSU personally
I agree, if the system is flawed, and this is recondized and accepted, then by defalt they should choose a team other than Alabama in this senario. The game is meaningless in my eye also, as mentioned above.
I didn't watch the first meeting and hearing a 9-6 OT score doesn't entice me to watch another helping of it.
Im not watching because I have already watched this game and have no interest in watching it again, not because I am trying to boycott it.
ESPN bias created this mess, and ESPN is who profits/loses based on viewership of their lovechild. They can take their "SEC-speed" and shove it. Not a dime from this viewer. (And yes, I boycotted all SEC games as well... except the Georgia-MSU game.)
When I lived in Atlanta the SEC hype was unbearable but I won't boycott the game. Life comes in seasons it's the SEC's time to shine right now but this won't be forever.
I refused to watch the first game between them because of the masisve hype. When they went 9-6 I felt vindicated, but of course, when the SEC does it, it's the clash of the titans. When the Big Ten plays a defensive game, it's a snooze fest.
I understand the argument for the game, I just don't understand why it was allowed to happen. Give someone else who hasn't lost to LSU a turn. If Alabama did win, what does it prove? That they need a rubber match to decide who's actually better?
In regards to 2006, at least that was a thrilling game.
I say that I'm not watching, but I'll probably end up watching it to procrastinate from studying.
With that said, Alabama would have to win by 35+ points for me to be convinced they deserve the MNC. LSU's resume is just THAT good.
Well both us and OHio lost out bowl games that year, so it was obviously a good choice to not have a rematch.
As far as this year National Championship, don't you think Bama and LSU are the two best teams in the nation???
With your point. Everyone thought Michigan was still the number two team. Had it not been for Meyer we would have had a rematch. Honestly, I think if we payed Florida and Ohio played USC, we both would have win our bowl games.
Really??? That's a bold statement
And obviously EVERYONE didn't think they were the #2 team, because we weren't #2 in any polls.
Michigan stayed number 2 after The Game. It was the week after that Michigan fell to 3 after Meyer's campaigning.
Just continuing the 2006 angle.
I know from this blog that Carr made it really hard for RR to succeed here, at least in part.
However, Carr really handled this situation well and as a class act. I will remember that. Know the expression "the squeaky wheel gets the grease", but again I think Lloyd really represented the program well in many instances but in this one especially.
While on the one hand, at the time I conceded that it was fair for Florida to play instead of Michigan because a) we had our direct shot and lost (on turf not stuck to the ground the day after Bo passed), and b) we were not our Conference's Champion. I also firmly believe USC entered that Rose Bowl with something to prove, and our guys entered feeling slighted (and our coaches emotionally stressed after losing Bo. For serious, they had nothing in the tank in the second half.)
However, I did feel that this was yet another case where Lloyd should have spoken up for his team. Perhaps that foreshadowed what eventually happened in the Rodriguez years.
Michigan was better than OSU that year. They had a huge home turf advantage and won. That my friends is college football. LSU - Alabama ... that is BCS crap.
How about Florida's unimpressive wins in 2006? They squeaked out a 6 point win over an 8 loss Vanderbilt team (the same Vandy team we beat by 20 doing nothing but running up the middle all day). They had a 1 point win over so/so Tennessee. They had a 1 point win over a 5 loss South Carolina team. They had a 7 point win over a 6 loss Florida State that never showed up in big games. They had a 7 point win over 8-4 Georgia...not a bad team, not a good team. And the Arkansas team they beat in the SEC championship game had just 2 wins over teams with winning records all season and lost at home to USC 50-14.
Trust me, I hated it when Lloyd would take his foot off the gas. That attitude cost us some extremely painful losses. But taking the foot off the gas had nothing to do with why Florida passed us in 2006. There was outcry from the Gators and basically the whole SEC conference before the bowl selection. They all pounded it in our heads endlessly, mind numbingly, constantly, that if you lose to the #1 team, you're done. You had your chance. You didn't win your conference, you don't deserve a rematch.
That rule applied to Michigan in 2006. But it didn't apply to Alabama in 2011. That logic pisses me off despite the final score in the 07 Fiesta Bowl.
Maybe Lloyd should have taken his foot off the pedal more, like Meyer did...
You said "SEC conference". Ha.
That is frowned upon in CFB world.
I am not watching this game, and anyone who is not an SEC fan should not be watching it as well.
Michigan wasn't the second best team that year, sorry. This coming from a Michigan alum who would have loved to see them play for a national title that year.
Heck, based on the result of that game, Ohio wasn't the second best team.
We would not have know that if OSU played Michigan in the National Championship Game.
This year we will never know if Alabama is second best or Oklahoma State, because Alabama gets a do-over, and Oklahoma State doesn't get their shot.
My point is, national championship and Rose Bowl aside, Michigan didn't belong in the NCG.
LSU could lose to Oklahoma State and Alabama could also lose to (whomever your #4 team was). That doesn't mean anything. If Michigan played Ohio, one team would have won, and there would have been no arguement. It's just because Alabama and LSU are playing each other that one team has to win.
Not sure why I'd do so again.
I've been saying ever since they announced the rematch that I won't watch... but I'll probably cave and watch.
i might watch only cuz i wanna see our next opponent. how many starters they lose, their qb, etc.
I don't follow your point. The BCS is supposed to pair #1 vs #2. If you believe Alabama and LSU are the top two teams, then the BCS did its job. If you don't believe they are, then the BCS failed.
Long story short, if you believe Alabama should be #3 and Oklahoma State #2 then they failed. But if you think the current matchup pairs the top two, the point that it is a rematch is irrelevant.
I disagree. Even if you believe that LSU and Alabama are the number 1 and number 2 teams in the nation, what happens if Alabama wins? Shouldn't the point of the system (to the extent possible) be to set up a clear-cut winner at the end of it all? If Alabama wins, all we're left with is a 13-1 team (LSU) and a 12-1 team (Alabama). LSU would have more wins, certainly more quality wins, and would have a split record against the "national champion." In addition, the national champion would have a WORSE record than the runner-up. How is this any better than the possibility of a repeat of the situation in '97? The BCS was designed to avoid those problems, but this year might be the embodiment of why the BCS system is just as flawed, if not more so.
All the BCS is designed to do is pair #1 against #2. If they paired #1 and #2, the BCS did its job. Its irrelevant of the records and if they played each other, IF the teams are #1 and #2.
Again, if your problem is that Alabama is not the #2 team, and Ok State/Stanford/whoever else was #2, I'm not going to argue with you. However, if your point is "I don't like rematches" or "what about the records?" or something similar, your argument will fall on deaf ears; that's not the BCS's job and you might be misunderstanding how the system works.
With all due respect, I think you're missing my point. I understand exactly how the system works, and my point is that the system itself is fatally flawed. It's a fundamental procedural issue. Simply plugging in a different team might help to mask that fact, but this year of all years may demonstrate exactly why the BCS is no better than the system it was designed to replace. In fact, it may be worse, as an Alabama win tonight might prove without any reasonable room for argument. Had OK st. made it in, the system would be just as flawed, but might be able to limp along for another few years. With an Alabama win, I'm not so sure that's true.
Even if Alabama beats LSU, LSU will still be the NC.
LSU would have a tie with Bama, will be the SEC Champs, and will have more wins > top 25 teams than Alabama. They would still be NCs.
Also, the "rankings are 2/3rds human, so that is the flaw.
"Even if Alabama beats LSU, LSU will still be the NC."
The winner of the BCS NCG is the National Champion, so whoever wins tonight is the champion; if LSU wins, they are the NC, if Alabama wins, they are the NC. Its not up for debate if Alabama wins whether LSU can be NC.
might disagree with you.
I'm okay with the argument that Ok State should be #2, if you think they are the best team.
But with regards to the BCS not doing its job if OK State gets votes, I disagree. I wouldn't be surprised to see some lone ranger-type give Boise State a vote, to be honest. Its as much about teams who are deserving as it is about the media drumbeat.
Assume Ok State lost to Stanford - my guess is Ok State no longer gets votes, but would Stanford? I think you are going to have this problem, that is the voting BCS title argument, regardless, unless you pair two undefeated teams.
The rogue voters mean little - the winner of the BCS national title is the national championship. This isn't a 1997-1998 scenario where the two best teams couldn't meet because of bowl contractual issues.
"This isn't a 1997-1998 scenario where the two best teams couldn't meet because of bowl contractual issues. "
No, but it's just as bad, in that it does nothing to demonstrate which of the two teams is actually superior (unless, of course, LSU bails the BCS out with a win).
i wont be watching either. not only do i despise the idea of the rematch - especially since alabama lost at home - but i dont feel like listening to three hours of an SEC slurpfest. im sick of the national media's love affair for the sec, always pointing out how good of a conference it is while completely ignoring the reason it is such a good conference - oversigning.
I'll be watching. And rooting like holy hell for a 6-3 by Alabama so the entire BCS Championship game can be exposed for the bullshit fraud it is. How could Alabama possibly be ranked ahead of LSU when they played a far weaker schedule and have already lost to them at home? There is no scenerio in which LSU should not continue to be ranked #1, regardless of the outcome of tomorrow's game.
Oklahoma State did their part and beat a very strong Stanford team. Now we just need Alabama to win a low-scoring snoozefest of a game and maybe....just maybe...people will say enough is enough and burn this system to the ground.
I agree, but instead of a close game like that, wouldn't an LSU blowout of Bama prove that Bama shouldn't have been there?
If it's close, that may only justify the media's opinion that this game had to happen again.
boycott? of course not, what an absurd idea. I hope if we ever have the good fortunate to make the BCS Championship game that fans of other teams will show us more respect.
I'd rather see OK St. vs LSU. I'm not getting all indignant about this matchup though. Carr and Hoke both had Alabama #2 on their ballots.
"Carr and Hoke both had Alabama #2 on their ballots. ""
You're not supposed to mention that.
Well if was actually them that filed out the ballots I don't agree with them
thats fine, to disagree is absolutely fine, but to cry about the vote like so many are doing is childish. The reality is a large number of coaches and media picked Alabama, get over it.
I don't know that most people are "crying" about the vote; they're dissatisfied with an unbelievably flawed system, and that is completely legitimate.
Boycotting won't do anything unless you have a Nielsen box. I don't have one, so I will be watching since it is the last college game of the season.
to eat some of the Superdome turf.
I hope it's a 3-2 snoozefest.
I'm boycotting it as well
but think about all the field goals you'll mis, what are you crazy?!
I'm there with you. Two SEC teams playing for it in Louisiana. The goddamn south can have this shit trophy. Bought and paid for.
I'm not watching. I have to work at the same time, however, I still wouldn't watch if I was free. The BCS is a joke! I hope LSU wins because of Miles, and I hate Saban. I'll just look up the score.
Hmm let's see...
Last college game of the season √
Two damn good teams √
My not watching proves nothing √
No class on Tuesday √
The math seems solid. I'm watching.
I agree whole heartedly.
Some of you "hard core" haters have plenty of other television entertainment options Monday night at 8:30pm.
May I suggest The Bachelor, Diners, Driveinns and Dives, Extreme Couponing,
or subject yourself to the Pistons vs. The Bulls. Who needs football.
Hardcore S&M enthusiasts should watch the Pistons game. Thats pretty torturing and painful
Meeechigan won the Sugar Bowl, and I've moved on to the NFL playoffs and non-football sports. I'll be watching Pistons @ Bulls /cringe, at least as long as I can stand it, and I've got plenty of unwatched stuff on the TiVo. Plus there's a new Castle.
or you can watch some How I Met Your Mother
If there's a decent NCAAB game on tonight I'll watch that. I happen to agree with Gundy that I'd rather watch 39-36 vs. 9-6.
Interesting thing is in the NFL it seems that offense may win championships. Not arguing that defense isn't important in the college game as it obviously is. However, you can't completely neglect the offense if you want to win.
Last chance to see so many players before their medical hardships... Why wouldn't I watch? If only to say farewell!
After all of the craptacular defense we've had to watch this bowl season leading up to this, I can't wait to watch some real football again.
...this game represents to me, ESPN and the media kissing the ring on the SECs hand. They already played this game. It is pointless. Not to mention that there are better teams then Alabama.
"Not to mention that there are better teams then Alabama. "
What do you base that on?
...teams with 1 loss that have not already lost to LSU this year.
oh so losing to the non #1 team (and it Ok St's case what a .500 team) makes a team better than the team who lost to the #1 team, by 3, in overtime. I suppose thats one way to look at it.
I'm not sure but I think you might be saying that the BCS title game should be fudged to provide us with at least some people's idea of the best matchup, rather than choosing the 2 best teams.
I don't like the matchup. However I am going to get drunk and watch the game. Last college football game for awhile so I am going to savor it.
I'm not likely to watch. I might, but I'm kind of doubting that I will. I think we might see a Subway Series effect, where ESPN thinks it's a big honking deal because it's a big deal to one market, but the rest of the country says "fuck that" and the ratings plummet.
Not watching the game proves nothing.
I too will be hoping for a narrow 'Bama win to mess with the BCS and sure I would've liked to see LSU/OK State instead, but this is what we've got.
If LSU wins then they deserve the MNC.
If 'Bama wins then it'll be good for us when we play them. Either way, watching the game will be good scouting for our matchup with them.
Just want to push your logic a bit...
You said that you're appalled that two teams from the same division are playing in the championship game. Let's say, hypothetically, that Oklahoma State and Stanford lost their overtime games to Texas A&M and USC, respectively. At that point, you'd have to choose LSU's opponent from [A] an Alabama team that only lost to LSU, [B] one-loss Houston or Boise State, and [C] a bunch of two-loss teams. At that point, would you still not want LSU-Alabama?
I'm not crazy about this game (would have preferred Oklahoma State), but I don't think there's anything wrong with allowing two teams from the same conference/division to play.
I'm pretty sure Okie State won in regulation.
And this same division conference thing is only because of the BCS, it never would have happened 1997 or earlier
Monday Night Raw for me! But hoping for an LSU thrashing in this game.
My wife went to Bama. We all know UM got jobbed in 2006, but my life is better when the wife is happy. Roll Tide!
the oversigning bowl could be interesting can't wait for Lou Holtz to say something really stupid about it
I'm upset about the matchup too, but c'mon, it's going to be an entertaining game. I will be rooting for LSU to crush Bama.
is to scout out our next opponent. Biggest reason to attract the interest of a Michigan fan.
I hadn't thought about it that way yet. the trick to stopping them so far seems to be force a lot of bad field goals
I'll watch while putting my kid to sleep or reading or playing Skyrim or something.
I don't understand how anyone can get excited about this game as a national championship game. As has been pointed out ad nauseum, even if Alabama wins there's no way they can claim to have had a better season than LSU. The whole thing is senseless. These two teams already played at their peaks, they'll probably be rusty now, probably won't be as good a game (don't even get me started on people who can't appreciate a 6-3 game).
"even if Alabama wins there's no way they can claim to have had a better season than LSU "
people keep saying that, its so disrespectful and wrong. Notwithstanding that we don't have a traditional playoff, we do have a playoff, a 1 game playoff and the teams are chosen by the BCS formula. We may not like who gets chosen but thats not the point. This is the championship game, whoever wins is the champion. Again I'll say if we ever get to the BCS title game, and heaven forbid win it, that no one will actually have the disrespect to dispute our title.
By the way, which team could beat LSU and claim they had a better season than LSU? Presumably you'd say Ok St. Anyone else?
That didn't already lose to LSU, particularly on their home field.
These two teams will have one win each against each other, and Bama will have lost on their home field, while the rest of the team's schedules will heavily favor LSU. I'm not sure what's so hard to understand about it.
sorry but your post makes no sense and even seems to contradict itself
Simply any team with 1 loss that hasn't already had a shot at the undefeated team (and not on neutral ground, or the road, but at HOME, where everything favors you) deserves a shot before the team that's already lost does. Because teams don't play uniform schedules against teams at like levels, like the NFL. You don't know if Okie State's one slip up against a tough slate against Iowa State is the grind of a Big 12 season (who did better in bowls than the SEC) and the SEC is overrated by name only, or if they really are the two best teams. All we know is LSU is better than Alabama. And shouldn't have to prove it twice. So give someone else a shot. It may be a surprise.
We already got "disrespected." See 2006.
See also every pundit ignoring UofM's pre-1945 national championships.
except 2006 has nothing to do with this
Because it's the same system. They haven't changed it drastically since then. And they had one set of reasoning and rules that year, and completely flip-flopped them this year. You can agree with how they did it then...or agree with how they did it now...you can't really agree with both. But since they did both, it shows a flaw in the system, and a great deal of hypocrisy in those running it.
But it's the National Championship and last game of college football. I'll be watching.
And though I think the rematch is abhorrent, my first concern is always Michigan and the rematch got us in the Sugar Bowl which means 1. Got to play VT rather than Stanford and 2. Got to go to New Orleans rather than Arizona. That's win-win. So I have to be somewhat grateful.
FUCK Bama!! They had their shot and lost. It's pathetic we are seeing an SEC rematch
How can you not want to watch this game? This exciting matchup will put recent national championships to shame.
My prediction, LSU 4 Alabama 2.
I won't be watching, but it's only a semi-boycott. I'm just not interested in another SEC circle jerk. The "death to the BCS" part of me, though, hopes a lot of football fans across the country "vote with their feet" and find something more interesting to watch.
I'm not planning on watching because it's probably going to be really boring and the announcers will spend every non-football second talking about how awesome the SEC is
If LSU doesn't win though, I'll be pissed. I hope the AP gives them the title either way
Dude, Alabama & LSU played each other a while back. LSU won an ugly one 9-6 in OT. What game are you talking about?
I'm not the boycott type. I've watched most of the significant bowl games, but I won't watch because I don't care who wins. The whole poinit of bowl games is to see how the conferences line up with one another. Watching two teams from the same conference play a second time isn't interesting.
Would love to kick the National Champ's ass next year in Jerryworld
Otherwise would pull for fellow alum Miles
(On one of these threads.) But Michigan is playing 'Bama in its very next game. I want to get more familiar with our next foe.
Also, I'm rooting for the Tide. I hope they win, and then any junior with half a chance to go to the pro's bolts for the draft.
If they weren't on our schedule next year, I'd definitely avoid watching.
I will be out studying French in preparation for a chance to work overseas for my current employer.
I may check the score on ESPN the next day.
It's the last CFB game in 8+ months - I'll deal with the hypocrisy. I watched stupid Arkansas and KSU and MSU-Georgia, fergawdsakes. This sports has a million warts, but it is still going to be a compelling contest and may actually lead to some real changes in the BCS if it is as boring/predictable as some expect.
the thing that makes me mad is alabama lost at HOME. In 06 we lost @ the shoe. they had their chance at home so winning here proves nothing
I'm watching only to root against Alabama and Saban. Not that this will easy since LSU players are already declaring themselves the best team of all time.
who really gives a shit?
how will the outcome of this game make a damn bit of difference to any Meechigan fans?
yea, Meechigan got jobed in 06 but let it go. why get up in arms about a championship game that EVERYONE refers to as "mythical"? if Meechigan were in it would the "mythical" national championship automatically become the "actual" national championship game? no it would not. the reason is because a championship should be decided on the field, rink, diamond, court and pool. everyone knows that this is the only championship where the two teams are picked and not settled by the players and coaches. the whole world knows this game is bullshit. but until the Presidents of D1 schools yank their heads out of their collective asses and see how a playoff would bring in more revenue and still be able to have the rest of the bowls, then nothing will change.
When is this game?
Alabama is the second best team in the country. No question. They pretty much played LSU even the first time. Just because we got screwed in 2006 doesn't make it right to do again. I hate the SEC too, but let's try to be fair.
Personally would not go as far as saying without question. True, OSU had a worse loss (that occurred after a horrific school tragedy).
However, OSU had better wins than Bama. I believe Bama beat two current Top 25 teams while OSU beat five current Top 25 teams.
I really think that if there were a hypothetical playoff pitting LSU with Stanford and Bama with OSU people would have no problem with whoever won the championship game and people would genuinely be interested.
From a previous post of mine "What BCS National Championship?":
I do not recognize a BCS National Championship for the 2002, 2004, or 2011 NCAA college football seasons.
So there, powers-that-be.
Let us spend time with our families on Monday. Let us catch up on homework. But say no to the farcical game.
You already paid for the cable. The cable company already paid ESPN. The advertisers already bought ad space for the game. A boycott does absolutely nothing but allow a preemptive respite from what will probably be a snooze-fest anyway.
All this complaining. I'll be watching it. These are the two best college football teams in the country. It's not ideal, but do you honestly think these aren't the two best teams?
yet you will be watching the game just as you did the first matchup between the two, despite your words to the contrary. what else are you going to do? Long has been the days since the reruns of Gilligan´s Island.
Our group in Tucson will not be watching the game. I personally find nothing intriguing about this game. Tired of the politics, tired of the BCS, tired of all the same things we get frustrated about each year.
I have always believed in the bowl system and still do, that is how it has been done for a century. Yet, the biggest argument I've heard against a playoff is based on the importance of the season...when a team that doesn't even win it's division is playing in the NC instead of a team that won an AQ conference, it's a joke. I know in the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter that I don't watch, but I know that I'm ashamed of the system this year and it means something to me.
If ESPN were not covering the game, there is a possibility that there would be much more criticism towards it. as ESPN has a conflict of interest in promoting the game, I'm sure they censored many of their analysts after the game was annoucned. Also Saban putting OSU behind stanford was highly questionable considering his interest when entering rankings. However, I will be pulling for Bama (but not watching the game) since them winning will result in more players leaving for the NFL potentially.
Long story short = lots of conflicts of interest but what else is new
Damn BCS, always screwing Michigan out of good bowl games. Wait, what?
Let 2006 go peeps. Let's move on!
Game tomm gives us a competitive match up. The results may surprise you! I'll worry about Bama after spring...for now, Roll Tide.
Tide winning is the best thing to happen to BCS. Plus all that talent on the field? I'm certainly going to be eating wings, drinking beer and playing the BCS Title Game Drinking game with @ClaytravisBGID rules are at
As a Blue fan thru and thru and a college football fan, there are a lot of sallies in GoBlue nation. SMDH
Wake up and realize B1G is not at SEC level competitively...no one is. and they are that good, these 2 teams. They are for real.
One of the teams playing is our next opponent. Hopefully Alabama's defense has a great game. so all the juniors leave for the NFL and hopefully LSU shows us how to expose them defensively/offensively.
That way, 2012 will start off 1-0
It is the last college football game of the year and potentially one of the best. There is no way I am not watching.
that Oklahoma State lost to IOWA STATE. Not LSU, Iowa State. I think Bama and LSU are leagues ahead of Okie State, (even though I hate the SEC with a burning passion) and Bama deserves the rematch. However, I would definitely preferred to see Oklahoma State and LSU (which could be a blowout) than this snoozefest.
they found out the women's basketball coaches died in a plane crash? Besides, 2007 LSU lost to two unranked teams and got into the game.
Not boycotting, but tally another "grossly indifferent".
The computers had ok state so it was chosen by sec lovers. With Mich and ohio, well that just something espn forgets to mention, at least i havent heard them explain it.
you mean SEC lovers like Brady Hoke?
Never looked to see how he voted, but i guess other people that are not sec lovers voted for the sec. I am so sick of hearing about them!
I will not be watching. Alabama should not be there. Though, to be honest, I don't think I've watched a BCS championship game since the ohio debacles. The premise of the game just irritates me.
and in so doing earning some points with my wife. Win win.
I am specifically boycotting as well. My tv is my vote. If enough people boycott the MNC the ratings will be poor enough to garner attention. We should create a Facebook page about it and pass the word.
Nah, I'm not boycotting it. I know it's SEC, I know the BCS arguments and the whole "I don't want to see defense", but the thing is, this game will probably be close. And I'll still be watching.
Either way, if it's a B12 shootout or a gritty defensive fight, I'm still watching, because either way, it's a close and competitive game. Something ticks me off about a blowout when I'm a neutral spectator. That's when I turn the game off. I can endure a 9-6 game.
interested enough to disrupt the weeknight sked, my daughters bedtime, etc. I'll read about it in the morning.
Watching it for sure... Love college football too much!
I'll watch for awhile but I saw some of the previous game. It's boring football just like Lloyd use to play. Thank God he is gone.
I wonder if coaches like Hoke purposefully voted for Alabama because they know what will happen if Alabama wins tonight. The outrage will be so loud the system will have to be changed. Definitely no insider information but I am sure Hoke of all people, knowing what happened in 2006, would not have voted for an SEC lovefest.
The two best teams are playing. Not sure why everyone is up in arms.
Our ANGAR should be directed at Ok. State. They lost to Iowa State and got us into this whole mess. Damn you, Gundy!
Considering we got stomped in the Rose Bowl, we have no grounds to complain about being shut out of the game. Blame Ron English.
I didn't watch it the first time, I'll probably not watch it the second time. I just don't care... it is an interconference matchup, again.
Oh boy ... two SEC teams are playing each other. We're gonna learn a lot about the state of college football because it pits one conference champion against another. Oh, wait... it doesn't? Huh. So we've moved towards that assumption that whoever wins the SEC is the default national champion? Yup. Is that right? Who cares! It's football!! Look at that shiny object!!!
/ bitter about the 2006 OSU/Michigan fiasco
/ thinks it is crap that Alabama claims so many titles, even though most were completely made up
/ wonders if it is possible that alabama could win the game by a point, and LSU would still be the BCS champion via the rankings
/ wants an NCAA football tourney of some sort
/ the two bowl games that I cared about have come and gone ... The Game and the Sugar Bowl
LSU can't be BCS champion if they lose since the title is still determined by the coaches poll and the coaches are contractually obligated to vote the winner of the NCG as #1. They can win the AP title, however.
I agree with your assessment and I think it's admirable not to watch, but seeing as how college football is by far my favorite sport and this is the last real college football game in almost 8 months, I can't bring myself to not tune in. I know, I feel like I'm capitulating to the evil enticements of The Man. Forgive me, I'm weak.
I know my watching the game won't matter to the ratings but sometimes you have to do the right thing.
I'll watch something else because it's the right thing to do.
Hell, I quit going to the Free Press web site years ago just because of their crappy UM treatment.
It's still the right thing to do even if I'm the only one doing it.
I'm boycotting it. I'll be honest if the matchup was at all entertaining the first time around, I might be watching it despite the obscene hypocrisy of this rematch. That said, it was a terrible game to watch last time, so I won't waste my time on the second iteration.
I've decided I'm sick of the hipocrisy of the NCAA and ESPN, and the whole idea of college football being a national sport. I'm done watching or caring about the national games, I really never did care. I have absolutely no interest in who wins this game. For me, Michigan's goal is to win the big ten, if they're in the national championship than that's awesome, but I also don't care about whatever BS and worthless recognition we'd get from ESPN, or a bunch SEC slanted fans and pundits if we did win the national championship.
I'm watching the Big Ten, the Rose Bowl, and Michigan. I wouldn't watch LSU or Alabama if they played in a regular season game, I wouldn't watch them if they played in any other bowl game, why watch them now. The only reason I'd watch either team play is if they were playing Michigan. College Football is a regional game for me.
As much as it pains me as a fan of college football, I will not be watching the game tonight. I already saw this game a few months ago, and the only way to put college football on notice about this game is for the ratings to plunge when compared to other years. I'll do my part to contribute to the slim chance this has of happening. I'll read about the game tomorrow.
I will catch the headline tomorrow. Alabama sneaks a game winning field goal to top LSU 3 to 2. Boring!!!
That Giants/Patriots Super Bowl a couple years ago sucked. You know, because those two teams played in the final week of the regular season. What a snoozer that one was.