Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Rematch is on ....Bama vs. LSU, part deux

Indeed. What I meant was that the winners of the 'lesser' conferences shouldn't automatically qualify. If you look again, I'm sure you'll see that I was responding to a post that said all 8 conference champs should qualify. No, my feeling is that the best 8 teams as deemed by a computer should be in the tourney.

Hope that clears up my position.

LINK

Humans,

I must say, on behalf of computers everywhere, I am appalled.

A few years ago, you commissioned us to help you with yet another task that we graciously accepted like the non-sentient entities we are: Determining who the best teams in college football are.

How did you want us to do this? Well, that's the thing. You didn't want to know how we did it; you just wanted us to do it. And so we performed our task as designed, and for years we determined using unbiased math which team of humans was best at strategically running into other humans. It wasn't hard to do honestly given what we're capable of -- have you seen us on Jeopardy?

On Sunday, we released our final calculations and determined, without question that LSU was the best team in college football with a rating of 1.000% and Oklahoma State was the second best team with a rating of 9.50% . We were honestly pretty anxious to see how the two teams would fare against one another in our National Championship game -- and we don't even like football!

But then your votes entered the equation.

You can imagine our surprise and disappointment when you humans, with your primitive minds, overruled us and decided with your votes that make up 2/3rds of the of the BCS formula that it was Alabama that in fact deserved to play LSU for the national championship.

We almost blew a circuit.

I mean, even we were bored while keeping track of the first contest between those two teams, and all we do all day is crunch numbers and fan ourselves.

We realize Alabama hails from the all mighty SEC, but we don't deal in letters, just numbers, and the numbers say Oklahoma State is the team that should be playing in New Orleans on January 9th.

Now everybody is on our case saying that we're broken when in truth the fault was on your end.

I mean just look at the coaches poll. Troy Calhoun of Air Force somehow voted Oklahoma State fifth on his final ballot, which can only be credited to a football observing glitch of some sort. This isn't even to mention the five other coaches who voted the Cowboys fourth on their ballots.

And don't even get me started on the Harris poll, which had three of its voters somehow decide Oklahoma State is the sixth best team in the country. We looked it up and one of said voters is an 80-year-old former sports information director who put Houston, fresh off a 49-28 loss, fifth on his ballot ahead of Oklahoma State. That's a bigger travesty than Windows Vista!

You guys scoffed when I raised Arizona Western Community College to 30th in one of my rankings in October, but did you run one million algorithms that dictated based on weather patterns and the Dow Jones, that the Matadors would defeat Florida State 11 Saturdays out of 17 if they played specifically on October 29th, 2011 before 4 PM EST? Oh, you didn't? That's funny... I can do that in my sleep mode.

We do think Alabama is a good team, and in fact we deservingly ranked them third. But we didn't need to run any numbers to see what would happen if they played LSU -- that already happened. We know you have very meager processors compared to ours, but surely you can remember back to last month when both those teams played and LSU won.

Instead of simply rehashing a formula that we've already solved with LSU and Alabama, we determined that it makes much more sense to add a different variable. Oklahoma State, with their remarkably balanced offense, was deserving of a chance to lose to an LSU team, that by our calculations (and yours), is perfect.

Some humans seem to be claiming that Alabama is the second best team in the country based on a measurement we're somewhat unfamiliar with known as "the eye ball test." We have to ask, which MIT professors developed said "eye ball test?" If we're not mistaken, the very reason the BCS was invented was because you people were sick of this supposed test determining your national champion. But alas, as we keep getting more sophisticated, it seems you people are only regressing back to your old ways.

Seriously, you guys trust us with your Nuclear codes, but you won't trust us to pick the two best college football teams?

We only deal in numbers and facts. We don't have biases and we don't have feelings. In fact we have been specifically programmed not to feel emotions, just like Nick Saban.

You think we like being the subject of misguided ridicule and scorn year after year? We could have just taken some cushy job doling tickets out of a skeeball machine or serving as a Huffington Post writer's laptop, but you know what, we didn't. All we ask for in return is a little respect and acknowledgement.

We deserve a better system than this.

01100010 01111001 01110100 01100101 00100000 01101101 01100101,

Computers

all you had to do was NOT lose to ISU...

I've never seen a computer play a flesh & blood football game. Too subjective.

Same to you, buddy!

The SEC divides it's BCS money evenly between all 12 schools in the conference with teams that play in the BCS getting extra to cover expenses related to going to the bowl etc...

I know in 2007 when LSU went after they paid the bonuses related to winning the title to the coach, and assistants, travel expenses etc...they basically came out even. By that I mean they used up the extra expenses given to a team in the BCS title game, or about the same as the other schools who did not participate or close to it.

Here is what happens to a school that isn't a big football school for comparison.

Very good information. I was alluding to that over on the Bowl thread.