DuckSouth.com

camlock wrote:

Greenhead22 wrote:LSU and Auburn both went into the bowl games as the #3 ranked team in the BCS, so why should they be able to win those bowls and bump up to #1 when USC had it all the time.

If USC wins it again this season, they can rightfully claim to be the 3 time defending national champion because they will finish #1 in the BCS 3 yrs in a row even though they didn't "play" in the BCS pre-selected championship bowl game.

USC DID NOT finish #1 in BCS 3 years in a row...they finished #1 last year and #3 in BCS in 03...they finished #1 in AP last 2 years....

Your right, they didn't finish #1 in the BCS 3 years in a row.....because we haven't finished year 3 yet buddy.

Fact of the matter is this....LSU didn't want any of USC in '03, and Auburn didn't wany any of USC in '04. The only reason that LSU is wanting to claim a NC is because they had to play to play #2 ranked OK instead of USC getting to do so...saying that USC got off easy by play #4 ranked Virginia Tech.........plus anytime a school gets to claim a co-something or another, they are gonna do it. Either way, the SEC will always get screwed in the BCS format because they will always have to play in the sugar bowl, which is only selected to be the BCS Championship Game once every 4 yrs if they aren't ranked #1 in the BCS going into the bowl games.

mshunter77 wrote:well i don't see any problem with them claiming 3 titles, there where many different tings going on back then far as claiming titles, and there where many split championships that you did not list, just like alabama claims 12 national championships

To be honest if you look at the NC framework, Bama can honestly claim 17 National Championships if they wanted to go to the extreme about it.

The only time the SEC rep plays in the Sugar bowl automatically is on off NC years, and it isn't auto anyway, it's understand...USC got screwed b/c Oklahoma and LSU got a BSC kick from playing a conference championship game and USC was down to #3 on selection Sunday(which brought about the playing the same opponent crap not counting ie. - LSU Georgia in 03)! Which is why they played VT instead of playing NC game....Auburn went undefeated on a bad year and never could eclipse the other two who stayed ahead of them in the rankings...Though by most accounts Auburn shoulda been ranked higher due to a tougher schedule...

But despite all that the AP voter voted differently than the BCS rankings finished, and probably rightfully so, but that doesn't change the fact that BCS is the accepted system amoung the schools. They all accept it until it bites them, then they discredit it, until it benefits them again...

Now we all see why the AP pulled out of the BCS formatting process..........cuz they know it's a joke also. Just like when the BCS first came out, it ranked a 50 pt blowout win over a rinky dink higher than a 3 pt win over an equal quality opponent.

Greenhead22 wrote:Now we all see why the AP pulled out of the BCS formatting process..........cuz they know it's a joke also. Just like when the BCS first came out, it ranked a 50 pt blowout win over a rinky dink higher than a 3 pt win over an equal quality opponent.

Nobody is argueing the the BCS is crap! The AP is probably more right, but when you say Ole Miss can't claim this or Bama can't claim that....well it goes on today and we can see how it screws people...You are argueing for USC, and they got the same arguement Ole Miss did way back then so why imply that 50 years ago it wasn't as valid an arguement as it is today???? Because you don't want to admit anything pro Ole Miss, and your left out without a dog in the fight!

I think Auburn got screwed, but I didn't think they were claiming a National Titles last year...........But State has won 9 Titles in Football......the Sweet potatoe Festival Poll in Vardaman keep voting us National Champs

How is the USC and UM arguement the same, because it's not? Everytime USC's titles get questioned they finished #1 in the nation......Ole Miss didn't in the 3 yrs they are claiming. By UM standards USC can claim the 2002 NC since they were the concensus pick in the rating systems, so after this season they could claim to be the 4 time defending national champions. See it goes on and on. Does UM have any National Championship trophies in their trophy room? Answer: No Did UM have any NC rings made up the 3 yrs they are claiming? Answer: No

This topic pertains to UM and UM only anyway ......and how they can claim 3 national championship when I've yet to see anyone prove me wrong on this.

plain and simple we need a playoff system to fix all of this, because a team should not be left out of the national championship game just because they started the year ranked behind other teams, (auburn last year, and possibly Virginia Tech, Georgia or Alabama this year)

I am not even going to try and argue this crap. 22 is just trying to start some crap. However if I am not mistake MSU has a banner hung in the Hump where they tied for the SEC yet they still hung the banner. So putting that on Arkie and UM about tying is garbage.

1990 SEC Champions

Tied LSU that season for the championship, but since we smoked them twice(Shaq was playing), that made us the sec champs.

Ole miss does have rings for the 59 season cause my uncle was on it not sure if it says nat champs but ill see.

lots of different polls have been used so i'm sure their citing some poll.. i will say this in um's defense.. i'm absoulty certain that their was a voting bisas against the south... especailly mississippi

well I don't necessarily agree or disagree with them, I don't know if it were biased votes or what, I wasn't born, BUT if the NCAA documents it and every other school in the country claims a NC whenever a credible source proclaims it with or without a set system (BCS)...why can't Ole Miss???

I am offended by this thread please lock it mr. moderator!

mudsucker wrote:I am offended by this thread please lock it mr. moderator!

are you talkin about me ?? the other moderator is involved in this debate