UT Football.Is it plausible to believe we can win it all?

[Vol423]

Kptvol appears to be in favor of elimination of the two-division system within the conference. Of course, then you have a massive scheduling problem.

 

[tvolsfan]

Okay. I'm drawing a blank on the second time then. The first time was Nebraska receiving the beating of a lifetime against Miami. Who was the second team and in what year?

Oklahoma LSU.

LSU won 21-14, but I don't think it was as close as it looked. LSU was up 21-0 fairly late I believe.

 

[tvolsfan]

As for conference championships, everyone should have them, or no one should have them. I would rather not have them, or if you have them, determine BCS teams or playoff teams if you want to go by that, first.

 

[kptvol]

oops......look what i found.:birgits_giggle:

National title. Florida would have deserved a shot at the national title. Good grief. Do you not realize what we spent an hour debating?

 

[kptvol]

This has already proved to be the only correct answer, as the only time a non-conference champion was included in the National Championship Game, they received one of the greatest bowl game beat downs of all time.

BZZZ. That isn't proof. Any team in the nation would have been completely destroyed by USC or Miami.

 

[kptvol]

Kptvol appears to be in favor of elimination of the two-division system within the conference. Of course, then you have a massive scheduling problem.

I'm not saying that. I simply think that partly because of it, you have to consider contenders other than the conference champs.

 

[jakez4ut]

As for conference championships, everyone should have them, or no one should have them. I would rather not have them, or if you have them, determine BCS teams or playoff teams if you want to go by that, first.

very concise.

 

[jakez4ut]

National title. Florida would have deserved a shot at the national title. Good grief. Do you not realize what we spent an hour debating?

yes, i think i said the same thing about 40 times. and each time you broke it down yet another way to fit your arguement.

and i still don't know why.

 

[kptvol]

As for conference championships, everyone should have them, or no one should have them. I would rather not have them, or if you have them, determine BCS teams or playoff teams if you want to go by that, first.

That makes sense. As I'm sure you realize, though, it would inevitably result in a team or two getting the nod that didn't win its conference.

 

[jakez4ut]

BZZZ. That isn't proof. Any team in the nation would have been completely destroyed by USC or Miami.

we'll never know now will we......(though i do agree, that no one would have beaten Miami in 01)

 

[jakez4ut]

That makes sense. As I'm sure you realize, though, it would inevitably result in a team or two getting the nod that didn't win its conference.

why am i not surprised....

 

[kptvol]

yes, i think i said the same thing about 40 times. and each time you broke it down yet another way to fit your arguement.

and i still don't know why.

I think it is an example of a team that didn't win its conference that would have deserved a shot at the national title moreso than the conference champ. Thus, I think it is a good counter argument to your idea that only conference champs should be considered. Apparently that is pretty high level thinking.

 

[tvolsfan]

That makes sense. As I'm sure you realize, though, it would inevitably result in a team or two getting the nod that didn't win its conference.

I know. I don't see that as a requirement. And if the NCAA felt the need to get a conference champ in, make it the regular season champ, so at the very least it doesn't come down to one game.

 

[jakez4ut]

I know. I don't see that as a requirement. And if the NCAA felt the need to get a conference champ in, make it the regular season champ, so at the very least it doesn't come down to one game.

so maybe they should make the BCS title a best out of 3 series??? Good Lord folks.

 

[XtennesseeX]

BZZZ. That isn't proof. Any team in the nation would have been completely destroyed by USC or Miami.

True.

I believe, Oregon could have gave a better game to Miami in 2001, and Auburn could have gave a better game to USC in 2004, but I still think the result would have been the same.

 

[jakez4ut]

I think it is an example of a team that didn't win its conference that would have deserved a shot at the national title moreso than the conference champ. Thus, I think it is a good counter argument to your idea that only conference champs should be considered. Apparently that is pretty high level thinking.

key word: Would have.

next.

 

[tvolsfan]

so maybe they should make the BCS title a best out of 3 series??? Good Lord folks.

If you have made it to the BCS title, you have had an outstanding regular season.

 

[jakez4ut]

I think it is an example of a team that didn't win its conference that would have deserved a shot at the national title moreso than the conference champ. Thus, I think it is a good counter argument to your idea that only conference champs should be considered. Apparently that is pretty high level thinking.

i still don't get it.

define "deserved".

 

[tvolsfan]

True.

I believe, Oregon could have gave a better game to Miami in 2001, and Auburn could have gave a better game to USC in 2004, but I still think the result would have been the same.

2004, Maybe, 2001, no. Well, I guess if you mean it would have taken Miami a little into the third to reach 34-0, then maybe.

 

[jakez4ut]

If you have made it to the BCS title, you have had an outstanding regular season.

define Outsanding?

 

[tvolsfan]

There hasn't been one championship finalist with more than 1 loss. I would say one loss is outstanding.

 

[kptvol]

key word: Would have.

next.

So, you argued with me about something you didn't understand for about an hour? That makes about as much sense as your dismissing a situation purely because it's theoretical.

 

[kptvol]

i still don't get it.

define "deserved".

If you think the nation would be satisfied seeing a 9-3 team getting a shot at the national title, I think you'd be wrong. No one wants to see that. A 9-3 season is unspectacular. UT pulled that off last year. Florida accomplished more throughout the season. They deserved a shot more.

 

[jakez4ut]

So, you argued with me about something you didn't understand for about an hour? That makes about as much sense as your dismissing a situation purely because it's theoretical.

no, you've just done a poor job of making your point. you have rambled on about deserving and best for all this time, yet have made no clear or decisive point that allows me to understand what you are talking about.

again, you have been dealing with intangibles, "would have" this, "could have" that. this team deserves this or that.

but i have yet to see anything that allows me to say "good point".

 

[jakez4ut]

If you think the nation would be satisfied seeing a 9-3 team getting a shot at the national title, I think you'd be wrong. No one wants to see that. A 9-3 season is unspectacular. UT pulled that off last year. Florida accomplished more throughout the season. They deserved a shot more.

i never mentioned a record.

and again, "i think, you think". blah, blah, blah.

and as for last year, what's your point? FL won the SEC, played for the NT and won. so, yes, they "deserved" what they got. i don't recall stating otherwise.