For the head-to-head argument. It did not matter in 1993 when FSU was given the crown over ND, both
finished 11-1.
So, for people to keep bringing that up is irrelevant as it relates to college football which has a history of siding with opinion and eyetest over head-to-head.
Replies to: For the head-to-head argument. It did not matter in 1993 when FSU was given the crown over ND, both
It was doubled up again in 2000.
Florida State lost to Miami and Miami lost to Washington. All 3 had a single loss.
Florida State was ranked #2 and played Oklahoma for the title.
Good add.
(no message)
You lost me at 1993.
(no message)
Modern times have taught us a lot about having short attention spans :)
(no message)
That was over 30 years ago.
(no message)
Correct: "college football which has a history of siding with opinion". Read don't scan.
(no message)
Another example: 2003 KSU beats Oklahoma in Big12 Championship. Oklahoma still goes to BCS a major
point of contention that year.
"Kansas State defeated Oklahoma in the 2003 Big 12 Championship game, a game that Oklahoma was expected to win easily as the undefeated, number-one ranked team in the nation.
Despite this significant 35-7 upset loss, Oklahoma only dropped to #2 in the BCS rankings and still went on to the BCS National Championship game (the Sugar Bowl), which they lost to LSU. This outcome was a major point of contention and highlighted the flaws in the early BCS system."
Alabama twice, similar controversies in 2011 and 2017. Not head to head but being included when not
Qualifying. The major point here is subjectivities (likely revenue) decide the outcomes more than the games. Because of TV revenue which now drives NIL.
"Yes, Alabama was at the center of similar controversies on a few occasions during both the BCS and College Football Playoff (CFP) eras. The most notable instance was in the 2011 season, where they made it to the National Championship game without winning their conference.
Alabama's Controversial National Championship Appearances
2011 Season (BCS Era): This is the scenario most similar to the 2003 Oklahoma situation you described.
Alabama finished the regular season with one loss, a 9-6 overtime defeat to LSU in a regular-season matchup.
LSU went on to win the SEC West and played in the SEC Championship game, while Alabama was left out of their own conference title game.
Due to other top teams losing late in the season (most notably Oklahoma State), Alabama moved up to #2 in the BCS rankings, setting up a controversial rematch with undefeated #1 LSU for the BCS National Championship.
Alabama won the rematch 21-0, which led to significant national debate about a non-conference champion playing for the title over a one-loss Big 12 champion Oklahoma State team.
2017 Season (CFP Era): This occurred during the CFP era, but the principle of being selected without winning the conference still applied.
Alabama finished the regular season with one loss to Auburn, which kept them out of the SEC Championship game.
Auburn then lost the SEC Championship game to Georgia, giving Auburn two losses.
The CFP selection committee chose one-loss Alabama as the #4 seed for the playoff over undefeated UCF (who declared themselves national champions in protest).
Alabama went on to win the CFP National Championship that year by defeating Clemson in the semi-final and then SEC rival Georgia in the final.
These situations, along with others, were major factors in the eventual expansion from the BCS to the four-team playoff, and now the upcoming 12-team playoff, to reduce controversy over which teams are "left out" of the national championship picture. "
True, except no one... outside of us...cares about 1993 and the underlying story...
(no message)
No one ever cares about a past national champion or number 2.
(no message)
Consent Management