A Win’s a Win!

LSU did not look very good tonight. They had 14 penalties for 149 yards, and Matt Flynn threw three interceptions, two of which led to Alabama scores. It was ugly, but a win’s a win. We’ll take it any way we can get it.


  • D. Taylor Benton

    again, I am happy to pull for LSU. great game. they definitely deserve the big Deuce spot in the BCS. Like every Saturday evening comment I have given.
    How bout them NOLES!?!?!? i know they’re no LSU THIS season, but downing Bama, then BC at BC, next week going after the Hokies. I think if they keep it up they won’t be to bad off this season.
    again, shout out to LSU! Geaux Tigers.

  • Jason

    I don’t know how anyone can say any team is deserving of a BCS no. 2 ranking because I don’t understand any of the logic that goes into ranking anyone. When a Michigan team with two losses (one of which is to a Div I-AA school) is ranked ahead of UConn (1 loss team in the Big East–a 1pt loss at that), Texas (2 losses, but conference losses–one of them a “Top 5” team, and an undefeated Hawaii team (while not playing in a major conference still beat all the also-rans on their schedule), then rankings mean absolutely nothing.

  • D.J. Williams

    Amen, Jason.

    Just another glimpse into the lunacy of the BCS. Why is Michigan ranked high? Because their name is “Michigan” and they got their losses out of the way early in the season rather than late (because losses in November indicate a worse team than losses in September?).

    Playoffs, people!

  • Michael


    It all comes down to who you play and beat.

    this is Hawaii’s schedule and results:

    Northern Colorado Won 63-6
    Sep 8 @Louisiana Tech Won 45-44
    Sep 15 @UNLV Won 49-14
    Sep 23 Charleston Southern Won 66-10
    Sep 29 @Idaho Won 48-20
    Oct 7 Utah St. Won 52-37
    Oct 12 @San Jose St. Won 42-35
    Oct 28 New Mexico St. Won 50-13

    to think this team is better than any of the 12 teams in the SEC outside of Ole Miss is laughable.

    likewise here is the schedule Kansas has endured:
    Sep 1 C. Michigan Won 52-7
    Sep 8 Southeastern Louisiana Won 62-0
    Sep 15 Toledo Won 45-13
    Sep 22 Fla. International Won 55-3
    Oct 6 @Kansas St. Won 30-24
    Oct 13 Baylor Won 58-10
    Oct 20 @Colorado Won 19-14
    Oct 27 @Texas A&M Won 19-11
    Nov 3 Nebraska Won 76-39

    and then here is who UConn has played

    Sep 1 @Duke Won 45-14
    Sep 8 Maine Won 38-0
    Sep 15 Temple Won 22-17
    Sep 22 @Pittsburgh Won 34-14
    Sep 29 Akron Won 44-10
    Oct 13 @Virginia Lost 16-17
    Oct 19 Louisville Won 21-17
    Oct 27 South Florida Won 22-15
    Nov 3 Rutgers Won 38-19

    based on schedule the only two teams that have a legitimate claim at #2 in my opinion are LSU and Oregon.

    any of the 3 Big 12 Contenders (OU, Kansas, Missouri) claim me become legitimate if they win out.

    LSU has beaten
    *Mississippi State (not as easy as in the past as they have beaten both Auburn and Kentucky)
    *Virginia Tech
    *South Carolina

    while only lost is a double overtime thriller on the road to Kentucky

    Oregon has knocked off
    AZ State

    while there only loss was a squeaker at home to Cal.

    Anyone with half a brain can see we need a playoff, but since we do not have one. At this moment LSU is the clear #2 with Oregon close behind. (even though I feel that LSU, Oregon, and OU are all better than Ohio State.

  • Jason


    I appreciate your research and passion, but you both a) didn’t read my post and b) proved my point for me.

    I’ll address b) first. You state it all comes down to who you play and beat. But in the BCS it doesn’t, it comes down to how you ‘feel’ because ultimately you don’t play and beat everyone.
    If it came down to who you played and beat, then Michigan wouldn’t be ranked ahead of Hawaii, Texas or UConn because Michigan played and didn’t beat a I-AA school. Since the system is obviosly not based on who you play and beat, then there is no reason to discuss who LSU has beaten and in turn what they have a legitimate claim at (in your opinion).

    I’m sure many 0U fans thought it laughable that Boise State was better than any of the Big XII teams outside of Baylor, but Boise won. Your argument against Hawaii is not based on anything except your feeling.

    In response to part a) I never said Hawaii was better than any team in the SEC. I said they should be ranked ahead of Michigan. I then expanded upon that premise to state that no one can claim anything relative to the rankings. BCS means Bogus Championship Series.

    Lastly, LSU’s claim can become legitimate if they win out. So I don’t see how there is a clear #2.


  • Michael


    no. 1 the SEC is not the Big 12.

    and at least Michigan even though they lost to App St. has played and beaten ranked schools, unlike Hawaii and Kanss. Michigan should not be ranked as high as they are but I will say again LSU deserves to be where they are.

  • micah

    Jason, the BCS is simply a calculation of rankings, many of them being computer (calculated) rankings, and several of them being polls in which media members and coaches (or their assistants) vote on the teams. To my knowledge, no poll has any specific order to how it works. I will assume (partly since this is how I would vote) that voters judge teams based on past performance and future expectations.

    It is fair to say that Michigan has been poor in the past performance category, but they match up quite well in the future expectations category. Kansas, which has done well in past performance, doesn’t match up well in future expectation. I don’t expect Kansas to beat either Missouri or Oklahoma (both very good teams if you’ve watched them, and Sam Bradford is already one of the best, if not the best, quarterbacks in the country). Since we don’t know the future, and since the past itself is useless in predicting the future, we can only rank teams through personal and arbitary methods or by using thorough statistical calculations.

    There must be some reasonable way to assess and rank teams. I suggest you rank teams based on how you think they would fare if they all played the same schedule. This of course, is quite subjective, but still a reasonable approach.

    It is reasonable to say that Hawaii’s 8 wins aren’t any more significant than Florida’s if you think a) Florida also be 8-0 if they played Hawaii’s schedule or b) Hawaii would not have fared as well or better than 6-3 facing Florida’s schedule.

    These things won’t happen, however, so we must either use useless stats (like total wins regardless without respect to opponent) or make subjective judgments (like whether a team can or will defeat another team in a given matchup). And certainly, should Kansas defeat Missouri and Oklahoma then they will have proven their case one of the few great teams in college football. But until that happens, or unless you think they will win these games, for you to rank them higher simply because they have more wins has no merit. I can’t say I understand that logic.

    Is there a better way to rank teams?

  • micah

    Or we could all use Sagarin’s rankings, which conflict mightily with themselves depending on which method you choose (ELO-Chess, which is essentially total record, and Predictor, which is record adjusted for margin of victory, are his two models). But the point is this: is there a better way to rank teams, or rather, what is the best way to rank teams?

  • Jason


    It is very contradictory to in one post list out all the teams Hawaii, Kansas, UConn and LSU have beaten and then to say that the past is useless in predicting the future. You are basing your opinion that LSU is #2 based on what they have done in the past. If they had 3 losses in the past would you still think they were #2 because of what you thought they could do in the future??

    What statistical calculations could be used that don’t depend on past results?

    How can I rank teams based on how they would fare if they played the same schedule if a) the past doesn’t predict the future and b) I don’t know the future?

    If Florida had played the same schedule that Hawaii has played up to this point, and Florida was 8-0, I have no doubts that Florida would be #2 at a minimum. If Nebraska was 8-0 while playing Kansas’ schedule, they would be #2. It’s about name recognition, not being the best. And name recognition comes from PAST results. It happens every year, see Notre Dame’s ridiculously high preseason rankings every year.

    So no matter how high you think LSU should be ranked, you are basing it on the fact that you THINK they will win the games ahead on the schedule. So if you don’t understand the logic, stop using it 😉

    I’m not exactly asking for a better way to rank teams, just apply the same standard to everyone, and don’t be biased. That’s all 🙂


  • Don

    Everone has their IF… You play your games and that’s it. If LSU runs the table they Should play in the big game… I say Michigan beats ohio state and LSU plays Oregon for the big one… As a MIchigan fan I think Oregon who killes MU should get the shot.. LSU and Oregon seems like a great game… Go Blue… Why is everyone worried about Michigan being ranked 12.. Even if they run the table where do they end up 6th? After #2 what’s the difference?

  • micah

    But I’ll discuss his points as well, if you wish. In the meantime I’m just trying to provide a basis for discussion from your original comments:

    I don’t know how anyone can say any team is deserving of a BCS no. 2 ranking because I don’t understand any of the logic that goes into ranking anyone… then rankings mean absolutely nothing.

    If you truly believe that then you shouldn’t care who is ranked where. But it seems that you do, since you are quick to defend against the biases of LSU fans. And I do try to present my case in an unbiased fashion though I do feel emotion and have preferences, whatever my wife might say.

    I maintain there must be some reasonable way to assess and rank teams. I suggest you rank teams based on how you think they would fare if they all played the same schedule. This of course, is quite subjective, but still a reasonable approach.

    Familiarity plays some role in rankings for sure, but that doesn’t make rankings invalid, though you seem to suggest such. But let’s get off away from this if all you prefer to do is break apart what others say without offering helpful discussion. Here then is something else you can break apart: my top 8 (I can’t distinguish much 9-16 and 5-8 is a difficult mix as well).

    1. LSU
    2. Oklahoma
    3. Oregon
    4. Ohio State
    5. West Virginia
    6. Missouri
    7. Boston College
    8. Southern California

  • Daniel

    I hope that Ohio State just loses and spares us the trouble of watching them get demolished in the championship.

    If KU wins out, they deserve a place in the BCS championship, but I don’t think that they’ll get past OU.

    So if OSU and KU wind up losing, then an Oregon and LSU final looks good.

Comment here. Please use FIRST and LAST name.