October 25, 2005
Tuberville blasts ESPN, Holtz
Don't expect Auburn head coach Tommy Tuberville to receive a Christmas card from the "Worldwide Leader in Sports" or Lou Holtz this year. Don't expect him to be daydreaming about sliding into a cushy analyst job at ESPN upon retirement, either.
In remarks yesterday at a Montgomery (AL) Quarterback Club luncheon, Tuberville unloaded on the BCS and ESPN:
"It's done," Tuberville said. "The national media, led by ESPN, wants to see Vince Young vs. Matt Leinart in the championship game. It's going to be those two teams unless Texas or USC get upset.
"Last year, they wanted to see the two Heisman Trophy quarterbacks, Jason White and Leinart. After six or seven games, we were out of it."If four teams are undefeated at the end of the season, there should be a playoff. There should've been one last year. But it's decided already. I don't like it."
He wasn't finished:
"ESPN has gotten so much power lately, it's kinda scary," Tuberville said. "And most of their analysts are coaches who haven't won any games. That's why they're there. I think you know who I'm talking about.
"And Lou Holtz gets on there and talks about what a team has to do win that game, and the guy couldn't beat anybody in our conference. These guys will come talk to you and look you straight in the eye and tell you something, then they'll get on the air and say something else."ESPN, I'll tell you, I don't have much to do with them anymore."
Whoa, coach. Tell us how you really feel.
Seriously, Tuberville isn't the only person to lament the power that ESPN has accrued (with its sister network ABC) in recent years within college football and sports in general. And he certainly isn't the first person to take issue with one of ESPN's analysts. Face it, there's a reason why Gerry DiNardo, Lou Holtz, and Terry Bowden are talking into TV microphones rather than coaches' headsets these days.
For the record, Holtz never faced Tuberville and Auburn on the field in his six seasons at South Carolina.
Comments:
bruce said:
posted on October 25, 2005 12:42 PM — 68.212.247.129 — link — abuse?
Your assumptions that a team that is ranked #1 in Preseason Polls and just so happens to go undefeated in the season should play for the National Title is absurd. The first polls in college football should not come until October. We have got to have a playoff for the National Title not some random polls that say these two teams should play. Use the BCS for what it was intended to do rank the top 16 teams and set up a playoff for those teams. Yes have a 16 team playoff and still keep the bowl games for teams that don't qualify for the playoffs. You will still get corporate sponsors for both the playoffs and the bowl games. With playoffs we the fans could celebrate and have what I like to call a National Championship Day. We the fans of college football are the ones that will have to change this inept system of crowning a National Champion. It starts with College football fans contacting College Presidents, Athletic Directors, Alumni’s, Faculty, College Boards, NCAA, Corporate Sponsors, and Students to implement a playoff system and with this system the revenues that would be generated would not only surpass but dwarf what it is earning today. We the fans have got to start asking NO DEMANDING a playoff for crowning our TRUE NATIONAL CHAMPION. So get those emails, letters, blogs sent to everyone that is listed and also add all sports publication and news outlets. We the fans can and must change this inept system because the BCS system for crowning our national champion is what it letters stands for bs
Fan of the Game said:
posted on October 25, 2005 12:59 PM — 12.43.234.14 — link — abuse?
I applaud Coach Tuberville. For all of the blogs and comments I've read, I have yet to see anyone support the BCS. For that matter, most of the people who do comment can't stand the BCS system or ESPN's analysts. I think it's about time that a coach from a prominent football school, like Auburn, took a stand and finally spoke his mind in the same manner as 99% of the people who come here to comment. Like him or hate him, I think almost everyone here can agree with what Coach Tuberville was trying to say. The media has more to do with championships than the teams themselves do. Most people willing to argue with Tuberville's assessment of the media(ESPN) and athe BCS system would be criticizing their own personal opinions stated in previous blogs. Again, I'm not a Tiger fan, but it's good to see a coach reitterate what we have been saying all along.
posted on October 25, 2005 1:04 PM — 168.166.54.11 — link — abuse?Robert Knodell said:
I can see both sides of it, I guess. I mean, it has to gall head coaches to see former fellow coaches--who weren't as successful as they are--sitting in a studio chair and second-guessing their decisions after the fact.
However, fans want analysis and the washed-up coaches probably have as much credibility as anyone else they could get. We can't seriously expect Pete Carroll or Frank Beamer or somebody like that give up successful coaching gigs in their prime to go do TV work. For starters, the pay isn't nearly as good.
Shadow Man said:
posted on October 25, 2005 1:13 PM — 70.152.182.241 — link — abuse?
I'm not a huge fan of Tommy Tubberville, but man I can't help but love what he did. He called out ESPN, the BCS, and Holtz and quite frankly, they had it coming to them.
It's a bit unprofessional, but hey everyone was thinking it, just no one was saying it.
Hippster in KC said:
posted on October 25, 2005 1:16 PM — 12.4.181.2 — link — abuse?
The BCS is no good, but neither was the previous system when the ONLY criteria was sportswriters' personal preferences. The BCS was designed by the big conferences to make a ton of money for big conferences, and it's been very successful at that.
All of us can complain about how our teams were screwed out of a title or a bowl inviation or whatever, but be careful what you wish for. If a playoff is instituted, the ND-USC game wasn't really that big a deal and neither is the upcoming LSU-Alabama game. I think college football rules because of Big Games, and those games are gone if we have a playoff.
On balance it might be better to have a playoff, especially if would lead to teams like Auburn not playing three The Citadels every year, but I don't think any of us want college football to turn into college basketball, in which none of the regular season games matter too much as long as you have a good season.
Nobrainer said:
posted on October 25, 2005 1:30 PM — 128.143.47.10 — link — abuse?
I've gotta agree with a lot of Tommy's points. I dislike human polling because it's too easy for someone to slightly modify their criteria week-to-week to justify putting the team at the top that they want to be there. It also doesn't say much for the BCS formula that it has to be changed every year.
Say what you will about the computers, at least you know each game will be viewed the same way.
I can't stand Holtz. At least when he was still coaching I didn't have to hear him speak.Fan of the SEC said:
posted on October 25, 2005 1:36 PM — 131.46.41.71 — link — abuse?
His comments hold true to me....
Two years in a row, the SEC has posted undefeated seasons and have been denied the opportunity to play for a National Championship.
Two years in a row, the SEC has handily whipped the Big 12 (or should I say, "Big 2, little 10") Conference in Post Season BCS Bowl Games. My question is the same as Tubberville's. When does the SEC get the respect from the media and BCS that it deserves?
In my opinion, a conference that has to play against, and beat LSU, AUBURN, GEORGIA, FLORIDA, TENNESSEE, and ALABAMA year in and year out should get much more schedule respect than that of a team that has to beat Colorado, Texas A&M, Baylor, Kansas, (list of currently unranked teams goes on and on).
Bottom line: The Big 12 has been the "NOID" that has stood in the way of the SEC getting their shot at a title for 2 years in a row. While, amazingly USC has gotten away with having to play neither conference in their post-season, (not to mention they don't even have to play a conference title game like the SEC does or even the Big 12 for that matter)yet gets the most undying respect from the polls or the media. We own the Big 12, our record in the previous 2 years proves it, and it is the SECs turn to have a chance to play for it all.
Fan of the Game said:
posted on October 25, 2005 1:53 PM — 12.43.234.14 — link — abuse?
On the contrary Hippster. Big rivalries will always be big rivalries regardless of a playoff system. Look at the NFL last year. Plug the BCS rankings into the NFL last season and rather than having playoffs just put the No. 1 ranked teams in each division into a title game. You would have Pittsburgh playing Philadelphia for the Championship instead of the eventual champion, New England. Playoffs will definately change college football, but wouldn't it be a change for the better? As long as their are more than 2 undefeated teams you will always have a large contingent screaming "paper champion" of a "popularity contest". The NCAA does it in basketball and baseball, why not in football? Supposedly the toughest of collegiate sports, yet college football isn't played out til the end and a Champion crowned. The longhorns won the National Championship in baseball last year, but wouldn't have even got a shot if the BCS rankings were used determine a Championship game. There are far too many champions at every level in all the top sports, that wouldn't even be there if a BCS system were in place in their respective sport. No one disputes their status as champions, but someone will always dispute the National Champions of college football. It needs to be fixed, and soon.
Fanofthepac said:
posted on October 25, 2005 2:33 PM — 63.87.122.42 — link — abuse?
What on earth are you talking about Fan of the SEC? I seem to recall LSU playing in the BCS title game two years ago (and having one loss - not being undefeated). Recall that there were three one-loss teams that year, with USC getting left out of the mix.
You also mention that USC doesn't have to play a title game. That is because the NCAA DOES NOT ALLOW CONFERENCES WITH FEWER THAN 12 MEMBERS TO HAVE A CHAMPIONSHIP GAME. Other conferences that don't have championship games include the Big 10, Big East, and until this year the ACC.
Somehow the Big 12 champ seems to end up in the BCS title game, regardless of whether or not they win the conference (Oklahoma, Nebraska). This year it is my hope Texas gets left out because the Big 12 has had it too good for too long and they need to know what it's like to be on the outside looking in. And besides, I would love to see USC play a team with no offense like Alabama. See you in Pasadena!
Tiger Bait said:
posted on October 25, 2005 2:48 PM — 68.159.18.156 — link — abuse?
I agree and applaud Tuberville. The SEC is one of the toughest conferences in the nation. We have to beat up on each other every week and have to play a conference championship. If any one team can make it out of the SEC with out a lost then they desirve to play for a Nationl Championship! I dont give a ***edited*** who else is undefeated.
SEC Fan said:
posted on October 25, 2005 3:56 PM — 68.210.169.176 — link — abuse?
Tommy Tuberville is not in the same class as Lou Holtz. Lou made men with his positive faith and class. Lou was hired by ESPN to contribute commentary which he does in a very professional way. Lou's record coaching speaks for itself - as does Tommy's regretful analysis of his peers. On 11/12/05 the Dawgs with Greg Blue and Co will bring this so called coach/leader back to earth. You want respect; Go schedule teams like Holtz did every season and compete.
zippy said:
posted on October 25, 2005 3:59 PM — 172.129.192.206 — link — abuse?
I have to agree with what he said. That takes groin sacks to say. Hahahahhahaah!! He called out Lou "every school i leave goes on probation" Holtz out. But yeah they should cut back the season maybe 1 game and play the bowl games and then have two bowls dedicated to determine the national championships. Then play a national championship after that. You don't need 8 or 16, just four teams and let them settle it.
Weagle said:
posted on October 25, 2005 4:02 PM — 66.0.160.149 — link — abuse?
In all fairness, the SEC's bottom 6 are just as bad right now as the Big 12's bottom teams. Arkansas is one-dimensional; Ole Miss's defense seems to be shaping up, but they have no QB; Vandy is having a benchmark season because they won 4; South Carolina's offense can't produce; KY is already looking at a coaching change and State lost to Houston, fer chrissakes!
If you want to look at a conference that is beating itself up this year, take a look at the Big 10.
tennvolssmokey said:
posted on October 25, 2005 5:48 PM — 66.38.119.86 — link — abuse?
lets get rid of the bowl games and do a playoff system? adapt one from the pros have the 4 top teams from each confrenece play. till we get an undisputed champ! that way no more bcs [b.s.] and no more arguing who got left out of the bcs championship game.and by the way tuberville is right to blast the espn and lou holtz but hey ill still watch cause i like the sports talk better than boring politicsd
PACMan said:
posted on October 25, 2005 5:56 PM — 68.10.109.29 — link — abuse?
While I agree many of the comments above regarding the need for a playoff to avoid giving an undefeated team the shaft, the fact remains that Tubby is a whining blowhard!! Someone had to get the shatf under the current system, and it happened to be the team that beat (3) non Division 1A teams that year...Cry me a river, Tubby! Did you see Pete Carroll cry in public after getting screwed the year before? I felt bad for Auburn's team, but Tuberville oughta be ashamed..
Melissa in NC said:
posted on October 25, 2005 7:34 PM — 68.18.189.144 — link — abuse?
Coach Tuberville had the guts to say what a lot of other coaches I'm sure are feeling. I think more coaches need to jump on the bandwagon and demand a change. There is a reason that EVERY OTHER sport has a playoff, it just makes SENSE.
Bry422 said:
posted on October 25, 2005 7:56 PM — 24.160.218.129 — link — abuse?
PACMAN,
I know Auburn's 2004 non-conference schedule was weak, but it wasn't THAT weak. They played one D-IAA team, not three. I never understood this "strength of schedule" argument, either. Since AU played in the SEC title game, isn't it fair to say that their non-conference schedule should included UT?
Drinky said:
posted on October 25, 2005 8:45 PM — 68.62.114.26 — link — abuse?
The problem with the BCS is that it's still a popularity contest, just like it was 40 years ago. A playoff is not a good idea, for a lot of reasons, but most importantly because it hurts the bowls and the regular season. Why not go back to old bowl system and then have a non-bowl NCAA National Championship Game after the bowls are played (and require every bowl to play on or before January 1), maybe on January 8? It's rare, I think, that there are 3 undefeated teams after the bowls are all played, and if there were, have a four team playoff. Yes, a couple of teams would have very long seasons, but this would protect the bowls and provide a measure of certainty.
Dawgone Fan said:
posted on October 26, 2005 2:04 AM — 69.11.162.218 — link — abuse?
Go Tommy Go! My biggest problem is that these AP voters put teams in the top spots based on their chances of having the best record or going undefeated, not of who actually is the best. Take Cal last year...that chapped my hide something fierce. When is the last time an SEC team started number 1? He AP dudes! Invite us to the party. Please! We've beat your #2 guy the past 2 years, time to up the ante and let us play for all the marbles.
dave austin said:
posted on October 26, 2005 9:46 AM — 72.146.2.82 — link — abuse?
"Col. Reb says:
posted on October 25, 2005 06:32 PM — link
Funny thing just happened on ESPN-Holtz just claimed no SEC team has ever gone 12-0. Short memory. Maybe Tuberville has a point (never thought I'd say that)......????"We are in the same boat. I am die hard Ole Miss and Lord knows that we have no love for that sell-out coach but... he has some good points and I agree with everything he said about ESPN, the BCS, and Lou Holtz.
I used to have respect for ol' Lou (I mean he has coached since they wore leather helmets) but since we have had to listen to him as a so called "expert" I think that we can see why he didn't win in the SEC.
....Shut up Lou and go back to the sidelines...
Thanks Tommy!
Skip said:
posted on October 26, 2005 9:55 AM — 140.180.128.49 — link — abuse?
Maybe if Georgia had put up a better fight against Arkansas voters would be giving them some love. They didn't.
USC 70 - Arkansas 17
UGA 23 - Arkansas 20The issue here, at least this year, isn't the rankings...USC and Texas are the obvious #1 and #2. The BCS only letting two teams play for the title is the problem.
Fan of the Game said:
posted on October 26, 2005 12:25 PM — 12.43.234.14 — link — abuse?
Weagle- You almost got it right. I am a fan of the Big 12, the bottom four teams in the SEC are as bad as the "BOTTOM 9" in the Big 12. Every conference typically has few teams that don't measure up to the rest of the conference. Unfortunately, the Big12 has more than a few this year.
deo in sin city said:
posted on October 26, 2005 12:58 PM — 68.108.117.180 — link — abuse?
Although I agree with all of you, 100%.....
You're all missing the big picture-
Bowl Games bring money to the schools, no matter how small or big it is. A playoff-type scenario would definitely be the best solution for the national title game. Unfortunately, it won't bring in the big bucks for the bowls and during the regular season, the ratings will go down due to the lack of interest until the playoffs. The BCS creates controversy, no matter how much they try to tweak it, the people behind the BCS knows that controversy brings in ratings, and ratings means money for the bcs and it's network affiliates. Unless you're an avid football fan, people will not tune in to watch the games anymore, most likely they'll watch a hourful of highlights and scores. And the networks don't like that, they want you tuned in to see what's next, what's all the big fuss is all about. Most of the people don't understand is that, people that are behind the games are actually the people that televise it. They don't want the die-hard football fans, they know they'll watch football even if it was between RICE and KENT St. What they do want are the fairweather fans, and the bandwagonners, the people who only tune in to the "good parts". i.e. USC/Notre Dame game, major coverage, (NBC got lucky with that one). And I'm telling you right now ABC, FSN, CBS, etc. wished they had the rights to NOTRE Dame games for that one.
To get to the point, BCS=Controversy, Controversy=Ratings, Ratings=$$$$$$ (CHA-CHING).....
How many of you have tuned in to ESPN early in the season or even now, to figure out what the current BCS picture is. As far as I know, most of you probably wouldn't have, if you knew there was a playoff system at the end of the season, most likely you just tune your tv to where your team was playing and just watch them. If they do good, hey your team goes to the playoffs, if it doesn't, most likely you won't watch the playoffs anymore, hypothetically speaking of course. Hey if your alma mater happens to be the bottom of the barrel, would you actually watch them play and see them get spanked every saturday, no, that's disheartening, and a person will not put himself through that year in and year out, the networks know that, the schools know that. Eventually he'll just stop watching until his team starts doing better, e.g. BAYLOR (ticket sales, and coverage is up) meaning more money. The school and networks don't want that, they need revenue.
Anyways, College football needs the BCS for the money it brings for their school, and the networks showing the games needs the ratings and money it brings in during the regular and the bowl season. It's almost like reality t.v. with fewer stupidity (on occasions).
I minored in marketing in SC, I figure that's what I would do as a head executive to maximize the amount ratings and $$$$$ in this whole college football deal.
So as long as "money makes the world go round", and the people that decides these games are pure football enthusiasts and not always thinking about their pockets, most likely your words have "fallen to deaf ears."
FIGHT ON MEN of TROY
SECfan 27 said:
posted on October 26, 2005 2:09 PM — 131.204.33.107 — link — abuse?
It is unfortunate, but I bleieve that Virginia Tech this year will be the Auburn of last year. V. Tech's schedule is way harder than USC's or Texas'and yet they will be excluded from the NCAA championship game if left up to ESPN and the BCS.
Dawgone Fan said:
posted on October 26, 2005 2:39 PM — 69.11.162.218 — link — abuse?
Nice observation Deo. I believe we all know that money makes the world go around though. The major gripe as I've read it is that it is a flawed system for the overt purpose it was designed for (not the covert one of money). How do you fix it? Dunno? I'm too much of a traditionalist to want to do away with bowl games (love being able to watch from mid-December on). Where as I favor a playoff from a logical need of finality, I can see alot of potential deal breakers. Seeding, ranking, etc...there will be just as much controversy (if not more) deciding who gets in and who is on the bubble, etc. My solution is to drop the BCS completely. Why do we need it? I mean WE, not the conferences or school presidents, but we the consumer and we the athelete. There is no validation to it...we are getting the same results (split championships)more frequently than before it was instituted...and now we have 2 more major polls in the mix (Legends and Harris). Finding a way to replace the revenue generated is the only real concern that doing away with the system presents, while it cleans up alot of the mess. I would say the add one game is the best possible way to satisfy the most and upset the least. Talk about going around your elbow to prove a point, but there it is.
PlainsMan said:
posted on October 26, 2005 4:54 PM — 131.204.33.107 — link — abuse?
How in the world was Texas able to bypass USC. I remember hearing last year that it was pretty much imposible to pass an undefeated team ranked ahead of you, or maybe that is just for SEC teams. To be in the Big 12, "Priceless." Real good job ESPN/ BCS--NOT!!!
dawgman said:
posted on October 26, 2005 4:58 PM — 68.1.22.223 — link — abuse?
I am tired of usc always getting so much credit. i watched them play Notre Dame and they are a better team then i though they were. They are not as good as most people give them credit for. I would rather play there schedule then any of the teams in the sec. They play all these teams that are supposed to be so good but all that they are good at is offense let them play georgia, alabama or lsu they would not be able to put up the points that they put up against all of these other crappy defenses
Big Hokie Fan said:
posted on October 26, 2005 5:18 PM — 208.253.77.234 — link — abuse?
ACC, SEC, Big 12, etc...We can argue all day about which conference is better, which teams have a harder schedule, and how much the BCS (well) sucks. That is not going to change one thing.
Is the SEC a difficult conference? Yes. Is the ACC a difficult conference? It sure is shaping up to be that why. Are the Big 12 and PAC 10 difficult conferences? Historically, these two conferences have had big teams and bigger games. Are they any good now? They have a few good teams.
Lets face it though. Until the big teams from each conference face off with one another and are willing to play each other during the regular season (without a playoff) this is all here say and the announcers and commentators for ESPN, ABC, this blog, etc... will normally favor (not always, just a general statement) the historically good teams and conferences. Giving little attention to the up and comers. They look back to their youth; days as a player/coach and remember the old days. Why else would Notre Dame receive the hip they do year after year. In recent history (past 5-10 years) they were not that great. Yet, the second they beat a team that is historically good (not necessarily good this season), nearly every commentators says their back. I am only using Notre Dame because they are the easiest to pick on.
Coach Tuberville has a legitimate complaint. However, I have to say that last year he was robbed a little bit. I do not think however that his team would have beaten last years USC team. USC was a powerhouse last year and has a damn good team this year. USC deserves to be in the top two of the nation. I do believe that Auburn was left out of the Nation Championship game last year, because historically they have not been one the GREAT teams. Auburn has always been a low to mid-conference team and this was reflected in the decisions made by the human pollsters and the media. Just as this year, Virginia Tech will not be in the top 2 (if they win out and so does USC and Texas), because historically Tech has not been as successful as god’s gift to Texas the Longhorns. When I say historically, I’m referring to the last 30-40 years, not recent history.
For example, I will refer you to Miami. They played a horrible game against Florida State and lost. Neither team looked as if they were worth a damn that first game. Yet, Miami is ranked above teams that probably deserve their spot more. I believe Miami belongs in the top 15, but not in the top 10. However, I believe they are where they are because of their history as a top tear team.
Also, before all my SEC friends yell at me about Georgia being ranked 4 and Alabama 5. Alabama did not even start the season off ranked and really did not have that great of a game against Tenn. Georgia? I believe Virginia Tech and Georgia both belong in the #3 ranking at least until one loses or one has a big defining game.
But hey, these are just my opinions.
GO HOKIES
Lee Corso “I may not know what a Hokie is, but I know God is one of them!”Bmaca30 said:
posted on October 26, 2005 6:34 PM — 72.145.168.160 — link — abuse?
ESPN alloted about 10 seconds to Auburn during their preview show this year, almost as an afterthought, perhaps Tuberville was a little miffed. Can't blame him. Applaud him, however, for not bowing to the politically-correct culture that we now live in. Like him or hate him, Tuberville spoke the truth. Tape ESPN's preview show every year before the season starts, then watch it again at the end of the season. You will realize that it is strictly entertainment, nothing more. Everyone ridiculed Auburn for firing Bowden, including ESPN, yet for some reason he never re-entered coaching. Wonder why? Should we look at Dinardo's record? Don't bother.
As for Holtz, he was 7-15 against the SEC in his last 3 years at S. Carolina. I have a lot of respect for the man, but he won games during a different era in college football, playing as an independent with maybe two or three tough games on the schedule every year. Ask Urban Meyer about his impression of the SEC. It is about time the conference that places 30% more players into the NFL than the next closest league to it gets a little respect.
A few facts are missing from the comments below. Not that Auburn's schedule last year has ANYTHING to do with the correctness of what Tuberville said, but they played The Citadel(the ONLY non-1A team Auburn faced, Pacman) as a last-minute replacement for Bowling Green, who backed out at the last minute (They went 9-3 last year). When you play four top 10 teams in a year, unlike USC, Oklahoma, or Texas, you should be allowed a couple of gimmies, if only to try to recover from injuries suffered in those games. USC puts their second string in by the 3rd quarter of the majority of their games, because the PAC-10 typically carries only 2-3 teams ranked in the top 25. Same goes for the Big 12. I am not saying that those two teams are not 1 and 2 this year, but people seem to forget about the effect that injuries have on a team playing in a tough conference. Ask Alabama about that one. Georgia now faces that harsh reality.
Let's decide it on the field, that's all Tuberville is saying. Quit letting the talking heads and the coaches' secretaries (the ones who really fill the poll votes out) decide the National Championship.
thebanq said:
posted on October 26, 2005 7:39 PM — 207.91.15.165 — link — abuse?
to weagle...the SEC has a "bottom 6", the big 12 has a "bottom 11" just stay tuned during the big 12'sdrubbing come bowl time, and dont forget that missou loss to troy state last year, and nebraska lost to southern miss (troy is in alabama in case u didnt know,and half of southern miss'roster hails from bama)
Calcupcake said:
posted on October 26, 2005 7:57 PM — 68.125.132.81 — link — abuse?
Agree wholeheartedly with Tubby re BCS, media, ESPN evil empire, and loser coaches in the booth. Nonetheless, the SEC has always been a beneficiary of the ESPN lovefest: "SEC is the best conference in America...becuase of their lousy offenses, they got to (Right?) have the best defenses in America...blah blah blah..."
That being said, it's not ESPN's fault that the university presidents and commissioners (SEC included) wanted to extend the life of the BCS rather than giving us a playoff. Seriously, if we had a 16-team playoff with guarantees to conference champions, do you think the SEC would be able to have 7-8 of its 12 members in the postseason as the bowl system currently guarantees it? It's also not ESPN's fault that Auburn scheduled UL-M, Citadel, and LaTech.
How I long for the old days of simple bowls, where we had more happy teams and civil debates, and where a 13-0 team would never feel as if the entire season had been washed down the drains.
Bring Back Trev said:
posted on October 27, 2005 12:04 AM — 66.68.146.54 — link — abuse?
Tuberville makes a good point, however, taking on the ESPN will not likely prove to be a winning strategy for him or his team. Lee Corso killed Auburn's chances last year after the SEC championship game by saying that he was going with OU since Auburn had just barely beaten (by 10 points) a weak Tennessee team. That weak Tennessee team destroyed Texas A&M (a team that played OU to the wire) in the Cotton Bowl 38-7.
The discussion of schedule (which is really about teams backing out on Auburn at the last minute) for the 2004 season has nothing to do with which team would have won head to head. Does anyone really believe the team that dominated Tennessee in Knoxville 31-10 or shut down Georgia like no one has done under Mark Richt was going to have any real problem with any of those even 9-3 teams?
Let's face it, Oklahoma was and has been seriously overrated. They were blown out twice in a row in the championship game: first by LSU (score was much closer than the game) and then by USC. Frank Beamer, who faced both said he thougth Auburn's defense would give USC serious trouble. Ironically, like Auburn, Va. Tech will likely get left out this season -- even though they could likely beat Texas.
The reality is that the BCS stands for the "Big 12 Championship Series". OU was not the second best team either of the two previous years! LSU and USC were better two years ago. Auburn and USC were better last year. Texas is likely one of the top four teams this season, but Texas under Mac Brown has only two wins against top 10 teams, where in the same period Auburn and Tubs have 10 wins against top 10 teams.
One needs to decide what the National Championship is all about. Is it a "season" award? or is it the best team at the end of the season, like most other sports.
Until the system changes, there will be Auburns, Penn States, and Virginia Techs.
Either way, blasting the system may make the coach feel better, but it will not further his National Championship aspirations.
I'm sure there were two other things that really upset him: first, Herbstreit called Louisville this year's Auburn; and then the real blow -- the firing of Trev Alberts.
portis said:
posted on October 27, 2005 9:14 AM — 24.140.92.2 — link — abuse?
BRING BACK TREV??? "Texas is likely one of the top four teams this season, but Texas under Mac Brown has only two wins against top 10 teams, where in the same period Auburn and Tubs have 10 wins against top 10 teams."
What does the past have to do with the future?
tigerkitty said:
posted on October 27, 2005 9:58 AM — 68.159.141.248 — link — abuse?
Amen and amen.
If I didn't love Tuberville before, I most definitely do now.
It's high time someone stood up and spoke the truth about ESPN and the BCS. I have never in my life seen so many outraged Alabama fans over how Auburn was treated last year, and while USC might very well have beaten us last year in the championship game, they certainly would NOT have beaten us as bad as they did Oklahoma.
It seems there are just certain teams that draw a lot of bias.
I personally think that sports writers need to start writing about sports and not deciding the outcome of them, and that coaches need to be coaching teams and not placing them.
Let's face it, guys... the SEC is one of the toughest conferences in the nation, so forget LA-Monroe and the Citadel.
USC's schedule has not been exactly powerhouse quality, either. But hey, it's USC. Why do we even bother to play regular season games? Let's just let the Trojans take home the championship every year. Might as well.
My heart bleeds for Alabama and Virginia Tech, because no matter what happens in the next four or five games, they're not gonna have a chance.Yankee in Mobile said:
posted on October 27, 2005 11:37 AM — 128.164.132.33 — link — abuse?
Here's the problem with all of your "SEC is the best" arguments. YOu only cite games against each other. Maisel finally wrote a good article about how the SEC's defenses might be that good because their offenses are that bad. Other than LSU, who is a legitimate albeit undisciplined team, what other team has any sort of marquee win. I'll cite SC's (and I hate SC) win against Arkansas. Do they have a vaunted defense? They held Georgia's offense in check, but not SC's.
Second, I absolutely agree with Tubberville's analysis about ESPN having too much power and the fact that Auburn got screwed. But Lou's not the one to go after. To say that he isn't a good coach because he couldn't win at South Carolina is equivalent to saying that someone should win a nobel prize because they were valedictorian at Ole Miss. There are just inherent obstacles that you can't overcome. Spurrier hasn't won at South Carolina this year. Does that make him a bad coach? If you look at the South Carolina website, Lou has accomplished many firsts there. Lou's history has been to resurrect programs that have been down at the time and make them into powerhouses. Futher, he was 5-3 against SEC teams while at Notre Dame, certainly not overwhelming, but not bad.
I think that Lou brings all kinds of good opinions to the booth. He's far more eloquent than most analysts and at least backs his opinions, unlike Mark May.
I think we'll see next week whether or not the SEC is good. If you want my opinion, I think Notre Dame is going to drop 40 on UT's defense. Then hopefully, Tommy "I make stupid decisions, but I can because I'm the 'Riverboat gambler'" Tuberville will keep quiet
SC DB said:
posted on October 27, 2005 4:02 PM — 128.97.138.17 — link — abuse?
Did USC go to auburn and beat them 23-zip, did USC play Arkansas and beat them by 60 or 70, did USC go to V-tech and win a tough road game? What the hell, hate us or love we do not play a soft schedule stop it. Did we go to the hell hole that is South Bend and beat ND in knee high grass(cheaters, whatever)? Yes. I do not care if SC is #1 or #2, I do not care who we play in the Rose Bowl. We will beat you in your house in our house or in any house,anywhere, any time, bring it on. See them play in real life not TV and you will know what I am talking about. They have the fastest college football team you will ever see. That is what got OU last year in the orange bowl, team speed!
stewasd887 said:
posted on October 27, 2005 5:21 PM — 24.98.197.160 — link — abuse?
Just check out this interview w/ Chris Fowler. It's a bit long (23 min) but in about the 17th minute he backs up what CTT said about ABC/ESPN. Some highlights:
"Those guys (Corso and Herbstreit) root for the teams they pick."
"We say we don't care who wins, but we have our agendas."
"What network's covering the games. Not supposed to factor in, but it does."
"Leinert, Vince...Bush, everybody's gonna be talking about that."
Here's the lank...http://hornsblog.blogspot.com/2005/10/ut-gameday.htmlBmaca30 said:
posted on October 27, 2005 8:14 PM — 66.168.227.168 — link — abuse?
To SC DB:
Congratulations, you beat Auburn when they were #6 in the SEC, and Arkansas, when they were #11 or #12 in the SEC, all while you were #1 in the PAC-10. Play the WINNER of the SEC and you can claim something. Play a no-defense Notre Dame and you have not proven anything.
SEC in the NFL:130
BIG 10 in the NFL: 99
PAC 10 in the NFL: 98THAT IS WHY WE SAY WE ARE THE BEST. MATCH UP SAME-RANKED TEAMS AND WE WILL WIN ALMOST EVERY TIME.
RBM_AU said:
posted on October 27, 2005 9:32 PM — 66.32.200.92 — link — abuse?
While I am an Auburn fan, I'm not a total “homer.”
Just for the record; last year Auburn was scheduled to play Bowling Green . In the spring of '04, Oklahoma approached Bowling Green about playing in Norman . The Athletic Director at BG used to work in the Athletic department at OU. They made a sweetheart deal--which is fine, no one knew how that could affect the BCS.
Auburn even offered BG more money to play at Auburn last year but BG said no. The impact of BG (Div 1 team, decent record) versus the last minute replacement Auburn found (The Citadel, Div 2, not a good record) changed the computer rankings, which otherwise would have placed Auburn at #2 instead of OU.
Granted Auburn chose The Citadel but at the time they found out about Bowling Green , there weren't a lot of teams available that worked with the existing schedule.
Dawgone Fan said:
posted on October 27, 2005 11:03 PM — 69.11.162.13 — link — abuse?
SC DB and Fowler, Corso, and Herbstreet are all dufuses. USC has played exactly how many ranked teams the past 3 years? ewwwwwww! I'm impressed. Try it every week...example...who was the last team to beat USC? CAL!!! and to validate USC's NAt'l Champ...they voted an 8-6 team into the top ten the next year...we see how that worked out. Hmmmm? How many teams Unranked teams has the SEC champ lost to the past two years....none...only one loss...to UF. Hmmmm...Let's see name the coach with the best active winningest pct? Of course P. Carrol...#2? Mark Richt (by one game) and he plays in a real conference...pretty impressive huh? where's the recognition though? Gimme a break!!! There is absolutely no legitamacy to the BCS or the AP polls!
Meredith said:
posted on October 28, 2005 4:54 PM — 66.168.237.107 — link — abuse?
YEAH!! Coach Tubbs! This is why Auburn Fans like me love him. He speaks his mind and stands up for what is right. He has good morals, a kind heart, and not only is he inspired by his players, buy HE inspires HIS players.
mizikeusc said:
posted on October 29, 2005 9:41 AM — 71.104.13.46 — link — abuse?
Hey Tommy maybe you shouldn't play panzies for non conference games. You tried to play USC but got beat both times, and you were shut out by USC in your house. Nobody in the nation wanted to see USC vs Auburn, and face it neither did you. You had a good team last year but you would have gotten whipped just like Oklahoma did. USC all the way again in 05!
Bama fan 122 said:
posted on October 30, 2005 10:28 AM — 68.62.126.174 — link — abuse?
Im an Alabama fan,but hes right SEC is without question tjhe toughest conference in colege football,every1 thinks usc florida state and every bigten team is so good,put them in the sec and there is no way they could go undefeated our defensers would own them.Last year i hate to admit it but Auburn was the best SEC team and they had alot of talent and shouldve been in the NAtional championships,they wouldnt of gottwn blown out.
BAMAFAN9 said:
posted on October 30, 2005 10:42 AM — 68.62.126.174 — link — abuse?
Remember people "Defense wins championships" every coach admits it,thats why SEC would beat USC,and look at the atmosphere of our stadiums SEC has 4 of the top 5 best recruiting schools face it every1 SEC from top to bottom is the best conference.
big12overrated said:
posted on October 30, 2005 3:33 PM — 69.144.28.170 — link — abuse?
I beleive Lou Holtz won a National Championship in '88 with one of the greatest teams ever to play (in that era). Tommy hasn't won much of anything. The SEC is a powerful conference but whinning and crying about it isn't going to change anything. It takes one thing....win.
Urdaddy said:
posted on October 30, 2005 11:24 PM — 68.118.147.14 — link — abuse?
wow! If everyone thinks that SEC is the best conference why don't the coaches (or whoever makes the schedule) schedule one or two of the top teams from each of the other conferences to knock off the competition without having to wait on teams from the same "OVERATED" conferences to do so. I mean really why did they put some many good teams in one same confenrence. They didn't so quite acting like 70% percent of the teams in the SEC are good cause only one or two are per year per conference. I recognize that SEC is good but not that good. I just love college football for what it is and because u play for honor and pride. Not for the coaches and fans who cry cause nobody loves them and cause their conference is treated like the stepchild, live with it live sucks. Atleast u have players in the NFL than any other conference. Enjoy the game.
War Eagle said:
posted on October 31, 2005 12:05 AM — 70.153.254.150 — link — abuse?
Tuberville is right. The rankings are about big money and politics. It has nothing to do with who the best team is. What team from last year can say they went undefeated, beat 4 top 10 opponents, and sent 4 first round draft picks to the NFL? There is only one team that did this and that is Auburn. The BCS definitely got this one wrong.
WAR EAGLE!!
Fred said:
posted on October 31, 2005 10:36 AM — 165.176.19.2 — link — abuse?
Tommy Tubberville did get screwed last year, and would have given USC a run for their money last year...no doubt. Dont blame ESPN for the BS that is the BCS. College presidents are to blame it is in their hands. They are the ones who can, but wont implement a playoff in college football. As for Lou Holtz he may have his faults but he can coach. He is also one heck of a human being. In 1994 I lost my daughter in a car accident, Coach Holtz found out about our loss from a person associated with the school in a conversation.He took the time in the middle of the season to write us a very personal and touching letter that we will remember for the rest of our lives. I have never met the man, but I will always remember what that letter ment to our family.
tim seale said:
posted on October 31, 2005 12:16 PM — 65.197.19.246 — link — abuse?
The fact is, You can argue over and over again about who's conference is stronger and who deserves to play for a title, but the fact is there is only one way. To decide it on the field. I think that is what coach Tuberville is really trying to say. I understand his frustration. To see a USC team two years ago get left out of the title game but win a share of the national championship, (which ESPN and every other media outlet regards as the only national champ from that year)and then when his Auburn team has the same thing happen, they end up with nothing. I can see where he thinks that the system is unfair. ESPN jumped to defend USC in 2003 then jumped at the chance to be critical of Auburn in 2004. And for all the USC fans that have written in, how would you have felt if your team hadn't been "given" a share or the title two years ago.
Havefun said:
posted on October 31, 2005 4:29 PM — 12.2.142.7 — link — abuse?
I agree with Brodie Croyle who said:
"If you go undefeated and you do what Auburn did last year, I don’t know about them but I’d argue until the day I die that we were the best team that played in the year 2005."
Here's why. All of us make good sense on the particular points that each of us choose to focus on (conference strength, NFL players,strength of schedule, etc.). The problem with trying to "think" of who the national champion should be is that there is an infinite number of points that have to be considered. And there's nothing (computer, BCS, etc) or nobody (Holtz, Herbstreet, Corso, coaches) that can consistently predict the outcome of any game between two good teams much more than 50% of the time.
And here's the proof: (1) Check the history of results of the ESPN predictors and computers following national championship games - some right, some wrong.
(2) Were there any upsets? Yes. (i.e. 1992 Alabama 34, Miami 13)
(3)Will there be more? Yes.
(4)Are we going to keep watching? Yes, because even though it's fun to argue our points, we all know in our hearts what Brodie Croyle and all the players know (much better than we do) - nobody knows who will win a national championship game between any two good teams until the game is played.Mark said:
posted on October 31, 2005 6:38 PM — 216.248.172.193 — link — abuse?
I was always and still am an Irish Fan, and when I moved to Auburn in the late 90's I became an Auburn Fan, and when Coach Tuberville came here I was not one of his biggest supporters, but he has shown me that not only is he a great coach, but also a gentleman and a teacher who cares about his players. He showed me more class the way he handled last years' situation than I have seen in sports in general in a very long time.. As far as Lou H. he cost us more national championships with his mouth at Notre Dame than he won, and the ESPN commentators can take a hike. If anyone listened to the LSU/Auburn game Bob Davies would had you believed Auburn got blown out by half time, oh ya, what did he win at Notre Dame.
Henry said:
posted on November 2, 2005 10:36 AM — 143.158.254.227 — link — abuse?
Sorry, Deo.
I am a diehard Gamecock. My fanny is in the chair watching Carolina get pounded for the rest of my life. If I can get a ticket, it's in the stands. There are plenty of people who're going to watch their teams, no matter what, forever. Heck, South Carolina's stadium was at 103% capacity the season they went 0-11, after going 1-10 the year before!
I do agree that the resistance to a playoff system is based on bucks, but one more year of an undefeated team with pretty good qualifications (Va. Tech) on the outside looking in will probably force the issue, and a major overhaul will have to be done, not the "tweaking" that has happened to the BCS (silent "C") over the past few years...
Oh, and I almost forgot:
1. Kudos to Tommy, 'nuff said.
2. I still respect Lou Holtz as a coach, but don't think he's meant to be in front of the camera. I doubt he'll be back next season (thank goodness).
3. I would be much happier if EVERY football game from now until the end of time had only one (1) announcer doing ONLY play by play. I need "color" men someone telling me what the coach/player "should have done" like I need another hole in the head. It insults my intelligence. I rank the color guys right up there with lawyers....Keith said:
posted on November 3, 2005 11:44 AM — 148.100.211.184 — link — abuse?
The problems with ESPN and sports broadcasting go back to one thing, ratings. They don't care about anything but how many viewers they can get, and they think Texas-USC would get the best ratings, so they want everyone to think they're the 2 best teams, which I still question Texas. This can be related to the Red Sox-Yankees, ESPN acts like they're the only 2 teams that play baseball, they serve them to us for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, and why? because they get the best ratings. If ESPN had their way, they would make the sports schedules based on how many viewers they could get, and not on the best matchups.
College Sports Fan said:
posted on November 3, 2005 4:37 PM — 204.149.192.80 — link — abuse?
The BCS should revise its ranking to include a playoff system especially in years where there are several teams that are undefeated. College football fans need only be reminded of the infamous double championship featuring LSU and USC, in order to be motivated to reform the BCS ranking system. It is not the fault of ESPN or any other media network that they pull such heavy influence inside of the BCS. The reason why they are selected and the reason why they’re opinion matters is because they have such heavy influence with so many college fans and because they serve the college sport fan. Check out their mission statement “To serve sports fans anytime anywhere” or just look at the coverage that they give college sports fans of their favorite teams every Saturday.
Bleed Crimson said:
posted on November 6, 2005 12:09 AM — 72.146.26.240 — link — abuse?
First off, Tubby is right. The media overglorifies all the sh***y teams up north and out west. Real football is played in the south, from Texas over to Florida. The Pac-10 should be in div. 2 with the exception of USC. USC would get beaten this year by Alabama, Auburn, and Georgia if they played in a real conference like the SEC. Yes they do have a dynamite offense in the Pac-10, but they struggled against a halfway decent Notre Dame team. Notre Dame wouldn't survive in the SEC. They got out easy with a game against Tennessee (just like USC did with Arkansas). My point: USC doesn't deserve the media attention, Texas i think does, and VT just got beat so Alabama and Texas would be a great National Championship Game, but i would much rather see Alabama's #1 defense hold USC to a shutout in Pasadena in front of everyone who thinks that teams in the Pac 10 are worth a damn.
Oh and as much as it pains me to say this- Auburn was the #1 team in the country last year; but if Alabama had Brodie Croyle and Ray Hudson last year, it would have been one hell of an IRON BOWL (THE BIGGEST RIVALRY IN THE COUNTRY IN THE BIGGEST CONFERENCE IN THE COUNTRY (PERIOD)).Rick said:
posted on November 6, 2005 12:32 AM — 128.118.160.37 — link — abuse?
Here is to USC stumbling against Cal, Fresno, or UCLA and 'Bama's lack of an O catching up to them (I would wish for Texas to lose but there schedule is so weak it's pointless) leaving the BCS in a tight spot with so many one-loss teams.. ofcourse USC would still get the nod.. but then it would be more obvious how blatantly rigged it is because if USC loses than a team like Penn State or Miami would deserve the Rose Bowl birth (granted they both win out)
Bama said:
posted on November 7, 2005 1:50 AM — 68.185.144.83 — link — abuse?
The thing that is funny look at USC or Texas schedule they play decent teams but none like in the SEC I live to see the day when USC rolls into Pasadena and plays ALABAMA the junk about no offense, in order to beat the tide you have to put points on the board and that my friend will not be a easy accomplishment for any team. Auburn was robbed last year, they would have beat USC with there talented offense, they had last year. USC is highly overrated. THEY ARE NOT A CONTENDER FOR THE CHAMPIONSHIP! Should be ALABAMA VS. TEXAS but this will not happen with the system in place now. PAC 10 and big 12 will sit back and say nothing because they are getting theres while the SEC is being screwed . The question we should ask ourselves, when did we let the power of money and greed influence the game we grew up loving. It is no longer pure football, it is corparate BULL S@#T football.
JonnyBoy said:
posted on November 7, 2005 12:08 PM — 148.100.211.94 — link — abuse?
I think you're all overestimating Auburn's play last year. Yes they were a great team, but not USC great. Auburn deserved to play in the title game because OK was extremely overrated, BUT didn't Auburn not exactly dominate against Virginia Tech(i think it was them) in their bowl game. USC is a team like no other...their 2 'close' games this year were both on the road against legitimate teams...as they've shown, I wouldn't have faith in my team even if we were up 4 TD's in the 4th quarter. Texas has a light schedule so they will face USC in the national title game. Bama has a great D - but you have to score something against USC to beat them - which I wouldnt see happening. Miami is good - but their new injuries make a new question. I definitely wish there was a playoff, but I still don't see a team that can take USC.
FanofthePac said:
posted on November 7, 2005 2:28 PM — 63.87.122.42 — link — abuse?
Well Bama I would love to see USC play a no offense Alabama team in the Rose Bowl but it aint gonna happen given the Tide's soft schedule and lack of offense. I mean, non-conference games against Middle Tennessee St., Southern Miss and Utah St. as well as playing conference patsies such as Tennessee, Arkansas, Old Miss and Old Miss St isn't exactly national championship caliber. The Tide will find out what its like to play a team with an offense this week when LSU comes to town, and however many points the Tigers score you can just add about 30 to see what the Trojans would put up on the over-rated Tide defense. Enjoy the Peach Bowl.
deo in sin city said:
posted on November 7, 2005 4:03 PM — 68.108.117.180 — link — abuse?
oh come on bleed crimson......
"Notre Dame got out easy against Tenn, like USC got Arkansas,".........
That just shows your complete ignorance of college football.....
You're so-called dominating defense in SEC just got put out in the national lime-light in the Notre Dame game......
And you're sorry-ass offense didn't even put up any points in the scoreboard.......
Guess what, defense wins championship, but if you're defense is in the whole game because you're offense keep going three and out, you're defense is going to tire out and give way. That just shows you how ignorant and lacking you are of any knowledge about football......
Big Ex....
miami and v. tech game. Both great defenses, but miami's offense drove the ball winning the game. now imagine if you're so-called Bama d- played against my SC offense. yeah in the beginning of the game bama would probably hold down our offense, but after the half with all the adjustments made by pete carroll and the o-coordinators, you're offense still not putting up points, but SC is, because you're defense is tired, because you're offense keeps going 3 and out, and not giving you're defense any rest.....
you understand the logic now...... nuffffffff said.......
FIGHT ON MEN of TROY
Rusty said:
posted on November 7, 2005 5:48 PM — 207.200.116.133 — link — abuse?
Interesting thought to pass on for those of you who dont think Bama would give USC all it can handle....There hasnt been one touchdown DRIVE by an opponent against bama since the 3rd game of the season, and that was south carolina's first posession of the game....the only other touchdown was Ole Miss after we gave them the ball on our 20 yrd line. I understand scoring alot of points is nice, but shutting teams down like that is just as impressive to me as putting up 50, especially when we have played Florida and Tennessee since that time....a team like USC doesnt have an SEC type defense, and Bama may not have a USC type offense, but 20 points scored by USC wouldnt be enough. They wouldnt score any more than that.
Urdaddy said:
posted on November 8, 2005 12:29 AM — 68.118.147.14 — link — abuse?
i do agree that bama has a great defense. But Defense can hold for so long. In the NFL teams with balanced offense and defense (Patriots Eagles Atlanta) win more games than teams with only good defense (RAVENS) and offense (COLTS & CHIEFS). So i think that if we had a playoff system neither team would be national champion. Unless Bush can push his buddy Matty in the endzone another time. Bama wouldn't go anyways cause it will be hard for texas to lose or usc, playing the overated teams who are ranked. Notre Dame, Fresno State, UCLA, who just because they think they are ranked they think they will be tough to beat. WHat exciting matchups.
Yes i know that until usc loses they are number one with the help of preseason polls. But when they do lose (just like VT) please come back usc fans and tells us u still think usc is one of the best teams of all time and how ur offense really couldn't win every game as u thought. Since ur D is not the best or even close. I really have no favorite college football team but i love college football more than the NFL. Sec is the best conference this year, not every year. Just shut up and quit bragging until we have a playoff system u will just have to watch from the side, since the voters and computers don't love the SEC.
Bleed Crimson said:
posted on November 8, 2005 11:19 PM — 72.146.26.240 — link — abuse?
to deo and fanofthesack
Alabama's D would hold USC to under 20 points.
Alabama would find a way to score more by either scoring points on defense or on offense against a weak USC defense that gives up numerous points to the sh**** teams in the sack-10.People seem to forget that we still have the SEC's leading rusher in Kenneth Darby who averages over 100 yards a game against tough SEC run defenses (he would run all over USC). Plus Brodie Croyle is still a great QB even after an off-day against Miss. St.
michael said:
posted on November 9, 2005 3:31 PM — 12.108.236.9 — link — abuse?
Fanofthepac..Florida was supposed to roll into tuscaloosa and whoop bama too...ALabama plays better in good games..Imnot gonna say who would beat who but i guarentee bama vs usc would be a great game....LSU will not win this weekend but it will be a close game..hope to see ya in pasadena..
Bleed Crimson said:
posted on November 9, 2005 7:35 PM — 72.146.26.240 — link — abuse?
fanofthesack
speaking of soft schedules, our non-conference games are about as hard as most of your conference games are.
I wouldn't consider games against stanford, washington, washington state, fresno state (overrated), UCLA (got blown out by Arizona-nuff said), California, Arizona, Arkansas, or Hawaii to be games of national championship quality. Tennessee would beat every one of those teams. The one tough game of the season, you would have lost if pete carroll wouldve wanted instant replay.Oh yeah, and the "over-rated Tide defense" has not allowed a touchdown drive since the 3rd game of the season, including the "incredible Utah spread offense of Urban Meyer" (another offense that the media thought was so great).
Fanofthepac said:
posted on November 10, 2005 9:51 AM — 63.87.122.42 — link — abuse?
Bleed Crimson, Michael
I hate to tell you but Florida doesn't have anywhere near the talent on offense that Utah did last year, so I'm not impressed that Alabama shut them down. Utah was a machine last year and the Florida players are still getting to know the system. This week the one team with half an offense in the SEC will beat Bama like a drum. Prediction: Bama loses to LSU and Auburn and then gets spanked by some Minnesota-type team (again)in one of the minor bowl games.wareagle said:
posted on November 13, 2005 10:32 PM — 68.59.109.33 — link — abuse?
I have to say it. We shouldn't have to argue about who can beat who and then that be it. We need a playoff system. We love the rivalries, tough conference games, and conference championship games, and don't want to see them go away with teams scheduling weaklings to get to the playoffs. But also, I hate to just debate who can beat who without ever having a clue except by our own bias opinions. Top two teams from each conference play in a playoff system with record against non-conference teams and strength of non-conference opponents factoring into a formula that determines home field for each game. I think it would work. Holla.
Bleed Crimson said:
posted on November 13, 2005 10:48 PM — 72.146.1.51 — link — abuse?
First off, anyone that thinks Utah has ever had more talented players than Florida is a complete idiot.
Oh, and as for Bama getting beat like a drum, we lost by three points in overtime.LSU will win the SEC championship and they should go to the rose bowl, even with one loss. Every single year, if you were to put the SEC champs in the national championship game, they would win.
Most years this happens anyways.Erica Cosminsky said:
posted on November 15, 2005 10:07 PM — 68.190.56.108 — link — abuse?
I hate to tell you all but if you decide you aren't going to take a College Football Coach seriously just because of his name, YOU ARE STUPID! I attend AUBURN UNIVERSITY AND I go to church with Tommy, his family and his mother. He "calls" himself Tommy because thats what his deceased father called him.
Auburn's defense may suck this year, and my fiance has a class with John Vaughn who he personally told he had a kicking problem, but last year we deserved something better. Those boys played their hearts out, and they have a team of coaches who devote their lives to helping them be better people, and better football players. Sometimes you have to remember that the whole world isn't about football... maybe that will hit you after Auburn beats Bama Saturday.
And remember Elephant Hunting Season is finally opened so get Let's get our limit this year.
BEAT BAMA!
James said:
posted on November 25, 2005 11:56 PM — 70.177.45.170 — link — abuse?
ESPN continues to prove Tuberville right. Three weeks ago the College Game Day trio rediculed him for exposing the ESPN conspiracy, yet in their very next breath, less than five seconds later they launched into a ten minute hype about USC. Last week the total coverage of the LSU Ole Miss game by the Game Day USC cheerleaders was to say, "In other games, LSU is at Ole Miss, let down alert", and in the same show spent over 28 minutes promoting USC and Reggie Bush. In the Game Day Final show there was absolutely no mention of the LSU win over Ole Miss. In the ESPN "Top Five Plays of the Week", number four was a tackle by Ole Miss, with the voice over being, "Ole Miss puts a hit on LSU". No mention of LSU having won 40 to 3. Of course, as everyone in the room predicted, the number one play was a USC run by Bush. Just as your parent network ABC should change its letters to DNC, you should change your's to USCN. Your lack of integrity in unbiased reporting and manipulation is causing fans of college football to lose any confidence in the credibility of the poles to determine the best team and player in the country. That you have now gone to airing segments that are an out right commercial for Bush, cast suspicion that you are not only bias, but are actually getting paid to promote USC. USC plays an embarrassingly week schedule. Take the national poles for the first week of the season (before the SEC began its annual fratricide), add up the rankings of the top 25 teams USC plays and you get four teams for a total of 76. Add up Florida's top four (they played five)and you get 20. LSU 34 and so forth. USC would only be a number 4 or 5 team in the SEC playing an SEC schedule. The one consolation is in during my travels around the country, the absolute hatred so many people have for USC is not caused by jealousy of their number one ranking, but caused by the constant hype you are peddling. By the way, USC is not going for their third national championship in a row. Two years ago LSU was the National Champion. Your propaganda technique of telling a lie often enough and you can get anyone to believe it, is simply not working and it makes you look really stupid everytime you say it. I know this email won't make a difference to you, but perhaps it will move others to express their distain over your bias and total lack of fairness in reporting college sports.
psu gorilla said:
posted on December 26, 2005 4:36 PM — 67.65.41.2 — link — abuse?
Having gone to a Division II school, all these arguements for and against the BCS and a playoff system are bogus. The fact is the championship should be settled on the field using a playoff. Problem is the university presidents and the bowls do not want to give up their money and their power. Let's face another fact. The current system allows want-to-bes to argue endlessly that they should have gotten a chance to play for number one. The constant blabbing by pundits,like Lou Holtz, sells air space and paper. We love to got back and forth about how if our beloved almamater had played your crummy school we would be the national champs. The year my alamater won the national championship we weren't the best team in the country but we were the best team at that point in the season when it counted. No one will make all the fans,coaches and players happy, but hell life is a compromise. Major college footbal rules with or without a playoff!!
Notre Dame Fan 444 said:
posted on December 27, 2005 10:59 AM — 199.208.239.140 — link — abuse?
If the SEC is such a great conference,why didn't they ever think to invite F$U or Miami to join your conference........Surely you could have replaced Kentucky and Vanderbilt with those two teams. They have top notch, football, baseball, track & Field, it would have been a natural fit. I do feel though that Auburn got the shaft. And everyone talks about USC with a a possible three in a row. The BCS is the final say for the Championship correct ???? USC one win away in 2005, USC won it in 2004 but in 2003 both USC and LSU shared the title and LSU has the BCS trophy in their case !!!!! So who was the Champion in 2003 exactly ???? Just a question.
Ron said:
posted on July 28, 2006 9:53 AM — 67.141.167.220 — link — abuse?
Believe me, if i could watch "good" college football games on stations other than ESPN, i would! Come on CBS, step up!!! Quit playing these key SEC games at 3:30, start at 7:00 at compete head to head with ABC and ESPN. Bottom line, F**K ESPN!!
Mooka said:
posted on July 28, 2006 12:42 PM — 138.163.0.43 — link — abuse?
This is a good post. I couldn't have expressed my feelings any better than what Tub said. I might've been a little easier on Holtz though. Though he really doesn't fit in with the ordinary ESPN crew be/c he is not as cocky. He's a little more humble which is a good thing. I agree Ron. CBS needs to step up their sport network. Stop airing golf all the damn time. I can't think of anything worst to watch on t.v. then golf. Sum it up, less golf--more football.
BearFacts said:
posted on August 20, 2006 5:14 PM — 68.62.204.34 — link — abuse?
Look, as a Crimson Tide fan I absolutely despise that bastard Tommy Tocockyville, but on this particular subject he is right. The BCS and ESPN have a long history of underestimating the SEC and showing bias in favor of other BCS conferences. Here are a just a few facts to support my argument.
Fact: LSU had to share their national title with USC, but the following year USC didn’t have to share theirs with AUBURN. WHY? (Because they screwed the SEC)
Fact: ESPN (and other media) down played the strength of the SEC defenses last year and chalked the low scores up to poor offences. But, in the bowl games (COTTON BOWL in particular) the SEC teams proved them wrong. Alabama in particular took what the media called “one of the NCAA’s best and arguably the best” and held them to 10 points. Alabama’s crap offense hung 13 on them.
Fact: Even before the LSU/Alabama game, the media was already talking about Texas and USC being title game locks. They touted that it wouldn’t matter if Alabama went undefeated or not.
Fact: In 1992 the media openly spoke against Alabama being in the National Title game, no one thought they had a chance and openly put down their schedule strength as a reason for their opinion. Alabama ended up beating the hell out of Miami’s fluff team of powder puffs.
Fact: In 1925 Alabama was the first southern team ever invited to a bowl game (The rose bowl was the only bowl game at the time), no one thought a southern team should be there and no one gave them a chance in hell of winning. But, Alabama ended up winning.
Fact: In 1966 The Bear’s Alabama team was the only team in the championship race that chose to go to a bowl game, they won their bowl game, went undefeated with an 11-0 record, were back to back defending national champs (64-65) and still finished 3 behind Michigan and Notre Dame. Both Michigan and Notre Dame had 9-0-1 records and both refused to play a bowl game.
Fact: An Alabama team member (Langham) signs a “FREAKIN NAPKIN” and the NCAA hands down harsh penalties including (loss of scholarships, no bowl games, no televised games, and a forfeit of 9 games). USC’s Bush clearly violated NCAA rules pertaining to agents and USC doesn’t get penalized at all. Other players were also involved in NCAA violations and no action was taken against them either.I understand most of these facts deal with only one SEC team and that’s my point. If there is this much bias against one SEC team, just think about the SEC as a total. As for the BCS system, blame Fat Phil’s pal, he’s the one that designed the Dumb A$$ system. Of course you expect a Tennessee fan to be an idiot. F.U. Tommy Trailertrashville, but kudos for saying what everyone else was thinking.
Alan Grant said:
posted on September 10, 2006 2:34 PM — 71.28.56.64 — link — abuse?
I wonder if Lou Holtz is convinced that Georgia is a team to beat with the 18 to nothing (Zip, Gooseegg, Double Zero) thumping of his beloved Gamecocks. I hope they gained enough yardage for the Old Goat Coach this week. I hope this shuts up his biased opinions toward South Carolina and Notre Dame, because there are other (and much better)teams playing college football.
Stallings92 said:
posted on September 22, 2006 7:27 AM — 62.253.128.12 — link — abuse?
Bear Facts, I'm also a Tide fan but I couldn't disagree more. I'll use one of your points as to why. There is little doubt in most people's minds that USC and Texas were the best teams in the nation in 2005. Tubbs has no argument here, he's still extremely butt-hurt from 2004 and doesn't have enough composure to keep his whining to himself. In 2004 Auburn did have a legitimate claim to a "share" of the national title. I still think USC would have dominated them on the field. The 2004 "screw job" of Auburn doesn't even compare to that of Alabama in 1966. Atleast USC was completely undefeated in 2004. In 66 The Bear took his screw job in stride, even blaming himself for not promoting Alabama better to the media. Tubbs has a tantrum like a 3 y/o pointing fingers at people who had nothing to do with the outcome of 2004. What did he accomplish? Absolutely nothing. He wasn't some great, brave soul who spoke out against the media for the South, no, instead he acted like a puffy-eyed child who pouted because he didn't get his way. The Bear was content to let his 11-0 record in 66 do the talking for him. If Tubbs had any shred of class he would let his undefeated record do his talking for him in 2004, instead he ruins in by attacking anybody he can think of. IF there was any national disrespect for the South in college football then all Tubbs did was encourage it further by showing the nation that coaches who can go undefeated in the SEC will only display a rediculous, whinning attitude the following season, way to go Tubbs.
Please note that all comments are subject to the Fanblogs Comment Policy.
Hippster in KC said:
posted on October 25, 2005 12:30 PM — 12.4.181.2 — link — abuse?Funny- I thought that Louisiana-Monroe, The Citadel, and Louisiana Tech had something to do with Auburn being left out of the title game last year.
And I'm not sure how many sports writers or computers are taking Lee Corso's opinions when voting in their polls.
He has a point, but I'd take him more seriously if he didn't call himself Tommy.