Skip to main content

Could we have another all-SEC BCS title game? Unfortunately, the answer to that is yes.

I don't think I'm alone in saying I'm growing tired of the SEC in college football. It seems that most every year, the conference appears to get over-hyped in the pre-season, yet finds a way to get a team to the national championship - winning the past six.

Last year was the worst-case scenario, as the national championship game was between two SEC teams that had already played in the regular season. LSU won the regular-season match-up, the SEC Championship, and then was paired with a team they had already beaten, who didn't even qualify for the conference title game in Alabama. As seems to be typical, the loser of the first game won the rematch, and Alabama did just that en route to being crowned champs one again.

Before last Saturday, it appeared as if no SEC team would find its name listed in the BCS title game. With Kansas State ranked #1, Oregon #2, and Notre Dame #3, two of the three teams would need to fall for an SEC team to have a legitimate chance of winning a seventh consecutive title for the conference. On Saturday night, Kansas State got blasted by unranked Baylor and Oregon fell in overtime to Stanford. Come Sunday night, while Notre Dame was ranked #1 in the BCS, the 2 through 4 spots were all occupied by SEC teams - Alabama at #2, Georgia at #3, and Florida at #4. Oregon fell to #5 and Kansas State to #6.

Unfortunately for me and so many other college football fans whom have grown tired of the SEC, there is now a decent chance of a second consecutive all-SEC BCS title game and even a chance of it being a rematch. Of course, top-ranked Notre Dame would have to lose this coming weekend for that to be possible. Given the fact they're playing at the Coliseum against an angry USC squad, that could very well happen. If Notre Dame loses, then all hell could break loose. If Notre Dame wins, then we'll at least know one team who will be playing in the national championship game. If they lose, though, we could be looking at 5-6 one-loss teams battling it out for the top two spots in the BCS poll.

In addition to Notre Dame playing USC this weekend, Alabama will face Auburn, Georgia will play Georgia Tech, Florida will take on Florida State, and Oregon will play Oregon State. Kansas State will have to play Texas the following week. Alabama will play Georgia in the SEC title game. Oregon could possibly face UCLA in the Pac-12 title game, but Stanford would need to fall to those same Bruins in their regular season finale.

If Notre Dame loses, that'll drop them to 11-1 on the season and out of the number one spot in the BCS. The loser of the SEC title game between Alabama and Georgia will drop one team from potentially playing in the BCS title. So long as the winner of the SEC title game wins this weekend and Florida defeats Florida State, we could very well see a BCS Championship game that features Alabama/Georgia and Florida. While Alabama and Florida have yet to face one another this season, Georgia already beat Florida by the final score of 17-9.

In an even more chaotic scenario, let's say Notre Dame falls to USC, Florida loses to Florida State, Oregon beats Oregon State, Alabama beats Auburn, Georgia defeats Georgia Tech, Stanford beats UCLA, and Kansas State defeats Texas. Following the SEC title game, we'd wind up with four one-loss teams: Alabama/Georgia, Oregon, Notre Dame, and Kansas State. The winner of the SEC title game would basically be a shoo-in, but who that second team would be is anyone's guess.

If we want to get even more crazy, and Georgia Tech upsets Georgia, before Georgia upsets Alabama, to go along with Notre Dame falling to USC, Stanford defeating UCLA, and Florida beating Florida State, we could wind up with a national championship that featured two teams that didn't win their conference championship game - Oregon vs. Florida.

Whatever happens in the coming couple weeks, I'll really be pulling for one of two things to happen - that either Notre Dame defeats USC or Florida State beats Florida. If either of those two things happen, we will not see a second straight all-SEC BCS title game.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/bcs

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"