LSU/Alabama rematch for the National Championship.

[phillybear 366]

I think because there is NO playoff, a rematch is kInda weak..Let Oky state have a shot, Bama did already and didn't win. Why do they get another shot?

 

There is a clear pro-SEC media bias brainwashing going on, perpetrated by ESPN, CBS, and anybody else that carries those conference games.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Ok, I'll bite, even though you have yet to comment or find a way to argue away the glaring lose to ISU by Ok St.

 

You use the Florida team as a detriment to Alabama,

 

You used Florida as a quality win for Alabama, yet called Iowa State a bad team.

 

They were both 6-6 on the season, Sport.

[phillybear 366]

If Alabama beats LSU, then you could make a case that LSU deserves a split title for beating Alabama earlier. Further, you could make a case that the winner of Oklahoma st and Stanford deserves a split title for the body of their work.

 

So, I'll looking at an Alabama-LSU-OklahomaSt national fake champion this year.

[Jarvis Basnight 119]

Oh goody. We get to see another 6-3 barnburner in the Backwoods Bowl. More crappy QB play. Can't wait.

[R8RMick 242]

The only thing I enjoy about college football these days is NFL draft day, when the kids go into the pros.

[Stewburtx8 67]

The biggest problem with this has nothing to do with Alabama vs. OSU in reference to whom is the better team. It comes simply down to opportunities. Alabama has had an opportunity to beat LSU, and they failed. OSU has not had that chance. In a system without a playoff, then theoretically "every week is a playoff game." Okay, then. The Alabama-LSU question was answered. Unless we're going to a best-of-3 setup.

 

How stupid of a setup is this? How beautiful will it be if Alabama wins on some fluky play, are foisted on us as National Champions, and everyone is forced to ask themselves why the win in January was a better measuring stick than the earlier game between the two, when we are told that "every week is a playoff game," and that's the selling point.

 

FlGatorguy - love to get your thought on that, since you believe that EVERY WEEK COUNTS THE SAME. Clearly flawed assessment, just like the BCS and those who run it.

 

 

Well said. I agree completely. Not to mention that part of the BCS standings are compiled using SIX computer systems. Of these six computer systems, only ONE of the formulas is known by the public or even the NCAA. Which means that the data for the five others is not even checked for accuracy by the NCAA. Those computer systems could theoretically manipulate the data/formulas anyway they want, and the NCAA, fans, and media would have no idea. The system is a complete joke.

[phillybear 366]

The BCS title game: non SEC teams need not ever apply.

 

What a mediocre conference. They had 4 or 5 teams with winning records, and the rest stunk.

[p00h 85]

lulz

 

 

http://a3.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/382957_1511919764882_1441020209_31269227_1682053618_n.jpg

[Dan 66]

lulz

 

 

http://a3.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/382957_1511919764882_1441020209_31269227_1682053618_n.jpg

 

 

Brilliant.

[VinegarStrokes 0]

Alabama will beat any other NCAA team not named LSU 9 out of 10 times. I do not understand the whining of how it is unfair. You are either being a homer for your teams conference or you can not recognize talent.

 

I hate LSU, Alabama and all other SEC schools with a passion (I am an ACC fan ). But really please tell me WHO can beat Alabama besides LSU, and be honest no homer answers allowed.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

But really please tell me WHO can beat Alabama besides LSU, and be honest no homer answers allowed.

The question is who can beat LSU. Alabama already gave us their answer, time to let someone else have a shot.

[Dan 66]

Alabama will beat any other NCAA team not named LSU 9 out of 10 times. I do not understand the whining of how it is unfair. You are either being a homer for your teams conference or you can not recognize talent.

 

I hate LSU, Alabama and all other SEC schools with a passion (I am an ACC fan ). But really please tell me WHO can beat Alabama besides LSU, and be honest no homer answers allowed.

 

Well, not to be too tongue-in-cheek, but I guess we'll never know, will we?

 

Why don't you answer this, though: Who is the National Champion if Alabama wins a squeaker? And why?

[VinegarStrokes 0]

The question is who can beat LSU. Alabama already gave us their answer, time to let someone else have a shot.

Did you even watch the previous game?

[Jarvis Basnight 119]

Did you even watch the previous game?

Yeah, I did. And I don't want to see it again.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Yeah, I did. And I don't want to see it again.

[JT 137]

Alabama will beat any other NCAA team not named LSU 9 out of 10 times. I do not understand the whining of how it is unfair. You are either being a homer for your teams conference or you can not recognize talent.

 

I hate LSU, Alabama and all other SEC schools with a passion (I am an ACC fan ). But really please tell me WHO can beat Alabama besides LSU, and be honest no homer answers allowed.

 

Possibly many teams with an NFL caliber QB. Alabama faced exactly none this season, and they won't against LSU the second time either.

 

But specifically, I believe Oklahoma State can. Far more sophisticated poffense than anyone in the SEC runs successfully. Arguably the best WR in the nation. NFL caliber QB. Opportunistic defense (led NCAA in takeaways) that is ranked poorly, in large part because they're on the field so much. That offense scores quickly and often.

 

No excuses. A loss is a loss. And OSU lost a conference road game the night after members of their athletic department were killed in a plane crash. Guys were literally prepping to board their plane when they got the news. They appeared flat from the start against an Iowa State team that went 6-6 against what is consistently ranked as a Top 10 strength of schedule, playing their biggest game of the year on a Friday night. The game went to double OT. Watching it and tyhe body languages of both teams, I thought the OSU coaching staff made a big mistake by not going for two and the win in the first OT. It seemed apparent to me that there was nothing for them to gain by the game going any longer than necessary.

 

Alabama lost a home game in which they failed to score a TD and missed 4 of 6 FG attempts.

 

They're both losses. No excuses.

 

Even the most staunch BCSPN supporter has to acknowledge that it's a make believe system, based 2/3 on human opionion. There are only two teams anyone has in the discussion for the spot opposite LSU...and one of them has already lost to the Tigers.

[VinegarStrokes 0]

Well, not to be too tongue-in-cheek, but I guess we'll never know, will we?

 

Why don't you answer this, though: Who is the National Champion if Alabama wins a squeaker? And why?

Alabama. Because they won the "Championship" game.

 

If you watched the previous game you would have seen that either team could have won. It was a tough defensive battle with some bad QBing from both teams. I would bet money that they put on a better show this time around and it will be an exciting game both offensively and defensivly.

 

I can not believe I am defending SEC schools here, but I believe that they got this one right. I am not sure, and really could care less, but I would be shocked if there has been any SEC team to lose in any championship game in the modern college football era. They have no minimum educational standards for enrollment in their schools, which allows the talent pool to be bigger.

[NE-TheGoodLife 0]

Alabama. Because they won the "Championship" game.

 

If you watched the previous game you would have seen that either team could have won. It was a tough defensive battle with some bad QBing from both teams. I would bet money that they put on a better show this time around and it will be an exciting game both offensively and defensivly.

 

I can not believe I am defending SEC schools here, but I believe that they got this one right. I am not sure, and really could care less, but I would be shocked if there has been any SEC team to lose in any championship game in the modern college football era. They have no minimum educational standards for enrollment in their schools, which allows the talent pool to be bigger.

 

 

I would be interested in knowing your definition of the "Modern College Football Era". I am making an assumption (bad thing to do) you mean since the inception of the BCS setup?

[Dan 66]

Alabama. Because they won the "Championship" game.

 

If you watched the previous game you would have seen that either team could have won. It was a tough defensive battle with some bad QBing from both teams. I would bet money that they put on a better show this time around and it will be an exciting game both offensively and defensivly.

 

I can not believe I am defending SEC schools here, but I believe that they got this one right. I am not sure, and really could care less, but I would be shocked if there has been any SEC team to lose in any championship game in the modern college football era. They have no minimum educational standards for enrollment in their schools, which allows the talent pool to be bigger.

 

So, what you're saying is that the regular season is NOT a playoff every week, as the BCS people say it is.

 

Therefore, the loss by OSU to Iowa State shouldn't be counted so heavily against them, and they have an argument to suggest that they might be good enough to beat Alabama and/or LSU.

 

Unfortunately for you and your circular reasoning, which is unavoidable when one finds himself, even unwillingly, defending the BCS, you cannot prove that.

 

And as I said . . . none of us will get to find out.

[Flgatorguy87 160]

You used Florida as a quality win for Alabama, yet called Iowa State a bad team.

 

They were both 6-6 on the season, Sport.

 

.....actually, the very first rebuttal I offered, was using the exact same "flawed" judgement that all of you have piled on me about. I never said the first word about which wins were quality. I merely pointed out that one of the original posters had missed some of the teams that were ranked when Bama beat them, which is exactly what the original poster used to measure Ok St. Its using apples to apples, I didn't say I liked the apples.

 

.....also Alabama trashed Florida who is a bad team...exactly what a good team does to a bad team. Ok St. lost to a bad team...which isn't what a good team does to a bad team. Sport

 

All of you have gotten so worked up about this, but you have to understand, THIS IS THE BCS. I never said that I liked it, but I am just arguing that Alabama should be in this game using the BCS system. If you don't like that, then argue that you don't like the BCS. Don't shoot the messenger. Alabama did everything this season except beat LSU, but they played them better than anybody else on the season, and should have won the game.

 

Ok St. played excellent ball all year, but they lost to a bad team at the end of the year. If we have learned anything about the BCS it is that if you loose a game at the end of the year, your going to pay for it. Why is nobody arguing for any of the other 1 loss teams. There are numerous teams out there that have one loss, yet only the Ok St. fans are found bitching about things. Here is a thought, if you won the game that you were suppose to you wouldn't be in this situation.

 

One more point, SEC commish Mike Slive actually started a petition for a playoff system...guess who voted against it. THE BIG 12!! You Big 12 people only care about being fair this year, because normally you aren't the ones getting screwed..its the Boise States or the Utahs, but now you take offense. Nothing is changing until we get a playoff system, so stop bitching.

[ttmm 0]

The question is who can beat LSU. Alabama already gave us their answer, time to let someone else have a shot.

 

This is the best argument IMO. No rematches!!! Any 1 loss teams that has already lost to LSU (at home) should not be considered to play them again in the title game.

 

If Bama beats LSU in a close game on a neutral field, then the "season series" will be tied 1-1. At that point, LSU's win at Bama looks better than Bama's win on the neutal field IMO. LSU would still be #1. Let someone else have a shot!!!

[Recliner Pilot 61]

.....actually, the very first rebuttal I offered, was using the exact same "flawed" judgement that all of you have piled on me about. I never said the first word about which wins were quality. I merely pointed out that one of the original posters had missed some of the teams that were ranked when Bama beat them, which is exactly what the original poster used to measure Ok St. Its using apples to apples, I didn't say I liked the apples.

 

.....also Alabama trashed Florida who is a bad team...exactly what a good team does to a bad team. Ok St. lost to a bad team...which isn't what a good team does to a bad team. Sport

 

All of you have gotten so worked up about this, but you have to understand, THIS IS THE BCS. I never said that I liked it, but I am just arguing that Alabama should be in this game using the BCS system. If you don't like that, then argue that you don't like the BCS. Don't shoot the messenger. Alabama did everything this season except beat LSU, but they played them better than anybody else on the season, and should have won the game.

 

Ok St. played excellent ball all year, but they lost to a bad team at the end of the year. If we have learned anything about the BCS it is that if you loose a game at the end of the year, your going to pay for it. Why is nobody arguing for any of the other 1 loss teams. There are numerous teams out there that have one loss, yet only the Ok St. fans are found bitching about things. Here is a thought, if you won the game that you were suppose to you wouldn't be in this situation.

 

One more point, SEC commish Mike Slive actually started a petition for a playoff system...guess who voted against it. THE BIG 12!! You Big 12 people only care about being fair this year, because normally you aren't the ones getting screwed..its the Boise States or the Utahs, but now you take offense. Nothing is changing until we get a playoff system, so stop bitching.

 

I'm not an OK State fan. I just don't think a team who can't win their division of their conference should get a second chance playing the #1 team for all the marbles. Too many ways this ends up with a big ? on who is the actual Champion. Let LSU and OK State play and the winner would be undisputed.

[NE-TheGoodLife 0]

I'm not an OK State fan. I just don't think a team who can't win their division of their conference should get a second chance playing the #1 team for all the marbles. Too many ways this ends up with a big ? on who is the actual Champion. Let LSU and OK State play and the winner would be undisputed.

 

 

I will also bring this up even though it obviously was not included in this year's decision. I mentioned before that Nebraska went and played Miami in 2001 (screwed up the year before) when they did not even play in the Big 12 championship. After that there was rule implemented that you had to win your conference or conference championship game to be eligible to play for the title. What happened to this? Did they not want to include this since that screws up the what probably will be a bigger draw to the game and tv ratings between LSU and Bama? I am not coming out and saying this is because of $ but it sure stinks of it.

 

I also think it will be a good game, but would have liked to see OSU get their chance. They just do not have the "BIG Name" to warrant the nod from the decision makers. Yes I know the BCS numbers showed Bama, so we will have to deal with it.

[JT 137]

I will also bring this up even though it obviously was not included in this year's decision. I mentioned before that Nebraska went and played Miami in 2001 (screwed up the year before) when they did not even play in the Big 12 championship. After that there was rule implemented that you had to win your conference or conference championship game to be eligible to play for the title. What happened to this? Did they not want to include this since that screws up the what probably will be a bigger draw to the game and tv ratings between LSU and Bama? I am not coming out and saying this is because of $ but it sure stinks of it.

 

I also think it will be a good game, but would have liked to see OSU get their chance. They just do not have the "BIG Name" to warrant the nod from the decision makers. Yes I know the BCS numbers showed Bama, so we will have to deal with it.

 

They changed that rule in 2008, ironically the same year ESPN signed their 15 year contract with the SEC.

 

I would argue that we do have a choice rather than dealing with it. The BCSPN sucked off the Big 10 for years until their performance in big games affected tv ratings. They then dropped them quicker than you can say "last year's Make Believe champ from the SEC paid their quarterback".

 

Don't watch. Money is what drive the bus.

[NE-TheGoodLife 0]

They changed that rule in 2008, ironically the same year ESPN signed their 15 year contract with the SEC.

 

I would argue that we do have a choice rather than dealing with it. The BCSPN sucked off the Big 10 for years until their performance in big games affected tv ratings. They then dropped them quicker than you can say "last year's Make Believe champ from the SEC paid their quarterback".

 

Don't watch. Money is what drive the bus.

 

 

I also believe that is the case just don't want to totally believe it. Since the rule was put into place, why are they not following their own system then? Plus nobody is even talking about it. This just puts another blackeye on the whole system.

[Dan 66]

They changed that rule in 2008, ironically the same year ESPN signed their 15 year contract with the SEC.

 

I would argue that we do have a choice rather than dealing with it. The BCSPN sucked off the Big 10 for years until their performance in big games affected tv ratings. They then dropped them quicker than you can say "last year's Make Believe champ from the SEC paid their quarterback".

 

Don't watch. Money is what drive the bus.

 

This.

[Greedo 13]

Until there is a playoff NCAA football will be a joke without a true national champion.

 

Very true. I also wonder how the 3rd best team (at best) in the Big 10 gets to go to a BCS bowl over multiple teams far more deserving, including the Spartans, who manhandled them. This system blows.

 

I agree with this. LSU and Alabama are the two best teams.

 

Because you say so? I say OK State, Stanford, Oregon, Boise State could all win. We'll never know who's better, thanks to the crooks at the NCAA.

 

 

dudes, without a playoff, these arguments will go on in a circular fashion till the end of time.

 

True.

 

The eyeball test has Oklahoma St vs. Boise St in the championship game. But the ESPN rigged rules won't allow that.

 

Just think - a few feet on a kick, and Boise St. is undefeated. I wonder if the SEC slob-knockers would have voted in Alabama anyway.

 

You used Florida as a quality win for Alabama, yet called Iowa State a bad team.

 

They were both 6-6 on the season, Sport.

 

Can we agree that two teams with the same record aren't necessarily equally good?

 

Alabama will beat any other NCAA team not named LSU 9 out of 10 times.

 

I hate LSU, Alabama and all other SEC schools with a passion (I am an ACC fan ). But really please tell me WHO can beat Alabama besides LSU, and be honest no homer answers allowed.

 

Boise State is undefeated in BCS bowls, and has beaten Oregon, Georgia, and Va Tech in recent years. How many supposed good teams did Boise have to beat until people accept them?

 

Boise, Stanford, OK St, and Oregon could all beat Alabama, and personally I'd make Oregon a favorite over Alabama. I might throw USC in there too, though they're banned.

[Greedo 13]

BTW - in a blind poll, just using strength of schedule, on CBS sports, something like 4 to 1 people picked OK st over Alabama.

[Carolinablue27 0]

There is a clear pro-SEC media bias brainwashing going on, perpetrated by ESPN, CBS, and anybody else that carries those conference games.

 

It's not an SEC bias, its an Alabama bias. No other team in SEC or NCAA could ever get a second chance like this. The media loves Alabama, what other schools can add 5 national championships to their name in one year and have everyone except it?

 

I hope OSU destroys Stanford.

[VinegarStrokes 0]

So, what you're saying is that the regular season is NOT a playoff every week, as the BCS people say it is.

 

Therefore, the loss by OSU to Iowa State shouldn't be counted so heavily against them, and they have an argument to suggest that they might be good enough to beat Alabama and/or LSU.

 

Unfortunately for you and your circular reasoning, which is unavoidable when one finds himself, even unwillingly, defending the BCS, you cannot prove that.

 

And as I said . . . none of us will get to find out.

Go back and read my words if you want to know what I said, do not try to decipher what I said and then spin it.

 

All I am trying to say is that I think that they got the Champonship game right. If you were saying Boise and Kansas St. got screwed, I would agree.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

 

Can we agree that two teams with the same record aren't necessarily equally good?

 

 

Agreed. But I was responding to a post saying Alabama's win over Florida was a win against a quality team, but Iowa State was a bad team. They were both 6-6. I don't know where the earlier poster got his strength of schedule rankings, but Iowa State played 7 top 25 teams, Florida played 5 top 25 teams. Does that mean Iowa State is better than Florida? Maybe, maybe not. But his description holds no water.

[Dan 66]

Go back and read my words if you want to know what I said, do not try to decipher what I said and then spin it.

 

All I am trying to say is that I think that they got the Champonship game right. If you were saying Boise and Kansas St. got screwed, I would agree.

 

I know what you were saying. The unfortunate thing is, though . . . they did NOT get it right. So much subjectivity in a system landing a 2nd place conference team in the National Championship points out the flaws in the system, and any defense of that system is flawed. They didn't get it right because there is no substantive, objective information by which to prove that Alabama is the only team in the country that has a chance to beat LSU, despite the fact that they have already shown that they could not.

 

Yes, I spun your words a little for the sake of the multiple persons trying to rationalize this matchup as justifiable by any reasonable measure. Forgive me . . a little anyway. But it's an embarrassment to everything that is claimed about the BCS.

[VinegarStrokes 0]

I am not defending the BCS system, but I do believe that Alabama is the second best team in the country. The fact that it brings up so much controversy by allowing two SEC teams to play in the champonship game may bring us that much closer to a playoff system. I sure hope so. I would love to see the top 8-10 teams in a playoff format and the rest of the winners go to a bowl game.

[Dan 66]

I am not defending the BCS system, but I do believe that Alabama is the second best team in the country. The fact that it brings up so much controversy by allowing two SEC teams to play in the champonship game may bring us that much closer to a playoff system. I sure hope so. I would love to see the top 8-10 teams in a playoff format and the rest of the winners go to a bowl game.

 

I can agree with this . . except for Alabama being the #2.

 

But hey! Maybe I'll start watching college football again consistently if they actually start making sense of this. So we hope toward the same end. . . .

 

[giraldi02 476]

I side with the argument that Alabama already had their opportunity. I also am of the belief that limiting the national title game to two teams from the same conference is ludicrous. I have more problems with some of the OTHER teams that are in a BCS bowl. Clemson, West Virginia, Michigan?!?!?

 

 

Where's Boise State? Aren't they the 8th ranked team in the country? Oh, that's right. ESPN doesn't like them

[R8RMick 242]

I am not defending the BCS system, but I do believe that Alabama is the second best team in the country. The fact that it brings up so much controversy by allowing two SEC teams to play in the champonship game may bring us that much closer to a playoff system. I sure hope so. I would love to see the top 8-10 teams in a playoff format and the rest of the winners go to a bowl game.

 

 

For as much as I detest NCAA Division I college football right now, I think if a legitimate and well thought out playoff system were inacted the sport would be bigger than the NFL. Seriously.

 

You're close, but to squelch any whining and argument you really need a 16 team bracket. This makes 15 total games, and with some deft planning you can get all of them on TV at different times. The first week obviously would be difficult, but possible, with eight games. Having each game as it's own exclusive program is key. Of course, the fact the NFL starts playing games on Saturday in December creates a problem.

 

You keep the current conferences and their respective tourneys, let them play out, and let the BCS system seed the teams 1 through 16. The conference tourneys weigh into the seeding, as does strength of schedule, opponent, etc.

 

You take the top four seeded teams and give them first round home games against the bottom seeded teams. This not only gives schools an incentive to finish in the top four, but also finish OUT OF the bottom four. So in the first week the topseeded schools have games on their campuses, and the other four games go to say... the Peach Bowl in Atlanta, the Holiday Bowl in San Diego, the Alamo Bowl in San Antonio etc.

 

Second round set of four games, the semi-finals, would all be played at neutral sites. Maybe the Cotton Bowl in Dallas, or whatever bowls out of the Rose, Fiesta, Sugar, and Orange that don't make the third round of two games, and the final game. The last game, the National Championship game, is played four weeks after the playoffs kickoff, on New Years Day.

 

This can be done, it would be hard on the students and alumni, making last minute travel plans. Obviously the greedy f*cks in the respective conferences and universities who pocket big BCS cash would not approve. And again, the NFL plays Saturday football in December. But I feel the above format would place college football on a higher plane than any other sport. But until then, the BCS remains just a glorified exhibition tournament, with an overhyped final game which is played a week after new years day and lasts till midnight.

[JT 137]

I am not defending the BCS system, but I do believe that Alabama is the second best team in the country. The fact that it brings up so much controversy by allowing two SEC teams to play in the champonship game may bring us that much closer to a playoff system. I sure hope so. I would love to see the top 8-10 teams in a playoff format and the rest of the winners go to a bowl game.

 

Won't happen anytime soon.

 

The cartel conferences that control the BCSPN have already taken steps to perpetuate this fraud by advocating conference realignment. Add a few teams, make four super conferences that make it appear they they're trying to be inclusive. In reality, it just locks out the undesirables for another decade or so.

 

Christ, what could be easier...if we're to buy into this system...than 1 vs 2, 3 vs 4, 5 vs 6, etc in the BCS games? But it doesn't happen because they have to reward the cartel conferences for voting the right way and keeping the fix in. Houston's loss cost their conference $17 million dollars. That's a lot of incentive.

 

How about a Final Four this week? The top 4 don't play for another month. 1 vs 4, 2 vs 3, winners play Jan 9. The season used to be maxed out at 10 games, then 12, now 13 including bowls. So four teams playing one more game each would be such a problem?

 

There's no rational reason. None. Why would they change anything? The sheep will take what's proferred. You'll watch the joke of a title game. Billions of dollars will continue to be split among the same group of athletic departments, along with the ADs and presidents of the (non-profit) bowls. The rich will get richer, the voters will continue to do what's best for their financial interests, and the same crap fest will unfold next year.

 

I love the competition of college football, but at some point I'll have to abandon it entirely. The Saturdays are great, but the system is no less fixed than WWE.

[Dan 66]

 

Having each game as it's own exclusive program is key. Of course, the fact the NFL starts playing games on Saturday in December creates a problem.

 

The NFL starts playing games on Saturdays because College Football is not on. I'm sure that something would get worked out on that end if it were the final stumbling block.

[phillybear 366]

NCAA Football: Playoffs? We don't need no stinkin' playoffs.

NCAA Football: Boise St who?

NCAA Football: Death penalty for an athlete getting a tattoo.

NCAA Football: Hey, you there. Stop smiling. Stop it this instant. *Tweet* 15 yard penalty, ejected from game.

NCAA Football: Pay the football players? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...OH, I think I just soiled myself.

NCAA Football: Yes, WE control the Illuminati.

NCAA Football: We touch kids with more gusto than the Catholics.

NCAA Football: Hey, I'm Greg Marmalard, president of SEC House. Meet my friends, LSU, Alabama, Auburn, Arkansas, Georgia...And over there is....Boise St....and TCU....and Utah....and Cincinnati...and Jugdish, Mohammet, Lonny...and Oklahoma St just got here..

-Um, We already met.

-Super! Then you'll have lots to talk about.

[DanXIII 8]

 

 

Strength of schedule: OSU #10, LSU #16, Alabama #38

 

 

Anyone know the source for this?