Jump to content

HOW they voted! in AP poll!


Tigermike

Recommended Posts

Here are the Southern writers who did not rank AU in top two:

Paul Gattis-Huntsville Times-Huntsville, AL

Rick Bozich-The Courier Journal-Louisville, KY

Ted Lewis-Time Picayune-New Orleans, LA

Joe Person-The State-Columbia, SC

Bob Thomas-Florida Times Union

Michael Wallace-Clarion Ledger-Jackson, MS

These guys can all kiss my orange and blue a**, especially the jerk from Huntsville who wouldn't even vote for his in-state team.

LINK

Link to comment
Share on other sites





is there any rational explanation as to why the coaches don't want their votes made public?

127102[/snapback]

Yes there is, coaches on the Left coast are voting CAL high at the expense of other teams. In order to try to get TWO PAC10 teams in BCS Bowls.

The same in the Southwest, with Texas being propped up by only one loss to OK.

There could also be some petty SEC coaches NOT voting AUBURN #1 or #2. The SEC coaches preach year in and year out that the SEC is the toughest conference in the nation. If they really believe that, they should vote that way. But from what I have been hearing (from a sports writer friend of mine) some SEC coaches are not only petty but very vindictive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, this may be considered treasonous by some, but...

I don't think anyone should vote for a team just because they happen to be geographically close, or located in the same conference/state. If these guys genuinely feel that Auburn is the 3rd best team in the country, that's the way they should vote. If they start voting merely because of geography, then they are no better than those PAC-10 or Northern voters that we claim are biased. [Of course, they then must be prepared to catch flack from someone for voting their conscience, but I catch plenty of flack for voting liberal in Alabama, yet I stand by my beliefs.]

Conversely, however, they should not be voting against Auburn because of some personal agenda rather than our performance on the field.

To be honest---although my heart and my loyalties tell me Auburn should be #1, we'll never really know unless there is some sort of playoff among the top 3 or 4 teams. I would be hard pressed to honestly and objectively pick between Auburn, USC, and Oklahoma without seeing them all play head to head

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't it make sense for Auburn vs. Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl and USC vs. Utah in the Rose Bowl. Then the week after the winner of those two play in the Orange Bowl. That way the bowls are protected. The BCS gets to work. AND there is a more representative National Champion.

Or is that just too easy and logical to think about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't it make sense for Auburn vs. Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl and USC vs. Utah in the Rose Bowl.  Then the week after the winner of those two play in the Orange Bowl.  That way the bowls are protected.  The BCS gets to work.  AND there is a more representative National Champion.

Or is that just too easy and logical to think about?

127123[/snapback]

Of course it makes sense! However, when we're talking "ease and logic" vs. "turf wars and entrenched powers-that-be", ease and logic almost always lose out. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't it make sense for Auburn vs. Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl and USC vs. Utah in the Rose Bowl.  Then the week after the winner of those two play in the Orange Bowl.  That way the bowls are protected.  The BCS gets to work.  AND there is a more representative National Champion.

Or is that just too easy and logical to think about?

127123[/snapback]

Then the two in the Orange bowl would get more money. Nobody wants to get get "short changed".

At least that has bee their argument in the past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

on sunday, nov. 28th, an oregonian sports columinsts made a good point that bcs officials should follow about deciding the fate of a playoff system.

watch 9 or 10 year kids play a game of hand ball! these kids go through 1 by 1 until a undisputed champion is crowned. the winner stays on the court waiting for another opponent while the looser watches or goes home. they play until a champion is crowned! there are no kids with 1 or 2 losses competing for the championship. there are no judstications for the big kid to keep playing once they loose. amazing what adults can learn from kids.

he described the bcs officials with 7 words: dense, greedy, dopey, dumb, glutonous, stubborn and foolish.

war damn eagle! kick em' in the butt big blue!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't it make sense for Auburn vs. Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl and USC vs. Utah in the Rose Bowl.  Then the week after the winner of those two play in the Orange Bowl.  That way the bowls are protected.  The BCS gets to work.  AND there is a more representative National Champion.

Or is that just too easy and logical to think about?

127123[/snapback]

Then the two in the Orange bowl would get more money. Nobody wants to get get "short changed".

At least that has bee their argument in the past.

127155[/snapback]

A game like that could generate a huge amount of money. Why not pay the two teams a regular bowl payment and disperse the rest to teams that didn't even make it to a bowl?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard on radio Sports talk show that the coaches are so competitive that they will not give any edge on recruiting to AU or any other SEC team. Houston Nutt (Arkansas) is the only one I have heard who stated publicly that he will vote AU No. 1 if they win in Atlanta.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...