Who wins the SECCG? UGA or LSU

[SEC FAN 0]

You have a championship game to determine who is the champion.  That is simple.  You may say it is also the best non-biased way of determining who is "best."  Fair enough.  But in sports and everything else, people have opinions and make their case.  There is no process that definitively determines who is "best."  There is a process for determining who won when it counted.  Everyone wants to win when it counts.  Everyone would like to win the championship. Winning the championship typically states a strong case, but not always. 

As I mentioned before, what if by some strange turn of events, Colorado beats Texas for the Big 12 championship.  Will everyone agree the Buffs are the best?  You and the drunk Colorado fans, maybe.

Take the NCAA basketball tourney.  Teams with losing records have won their conference tourney.  The tourney determines the conference champion, not the regular season.  So do those regular season games ever matter?  In 1985, an 8th seeded AU team won the conference title.  It won when it mattered most.  It was "best" when it mattered most.  Was it without question the best team in the conference?  People had a variety of opinions about that, and as happy as I was with that AU championship, those other opinions folks had about who they thought the best team was didn't offend me in the least.  And I understood their point.

I don't know why this is difficult.  You're comfortable with the equation that the conference champion is the "best" team.  Fine.  Believe that.  It is a belief and nothing more.  But why are you so concerned if someone doesn't see that equation as foolproof?

What does it mean to be a Champion to you? Just a trophy? Just a title?

I think the best teams win when it counts the most. If Colorado beats Texas in the Big 12 Championship then they are the best in the Big 12. I think Kansas State was a better team in 2003 when they beat Oklahoma. (That's why I thought USC should have played in the BCS instead)

A possible reason why basketball teams with inferior record win tournaments. Those inferior teams have more to play for. If they win the tournament they can make the NCAA tournament. If they don't they go home. Whereas if the teams with the better records lose they can still go on. So my theory of the best team wins when it matters the most does not apply to your example of inferior teams winning tournaments. Just out of curiosity, how far did that 8th seeded AU team go in the NCAA tournament?

[lsuj2006 0]

I get what you guys are saying. If LSU blows UGA out (it could happen...doubtful), I would be pissed to hear some UT fan mouth off about being better than us. I could also say the same if I was a UGA fan about AU.

But some of this stuff is very silly crap from AU fans wishing and whining. The two teams playing in the SECCG are the two who deserve it.

[TexasTiger 12,915]

You have a championship game to determine who is the champion.  That is simple.  You may say it is also the best non-biased way of determining who is "best."  Fair enough.  But in sports and everything else, people have opinions and make their case.  There is no process that definitively determines who is "best."  There is a process for determining who won when it counted.  Everyone wants to win when it counts.  Everyone would like to win the championship. Winning the championship typically states a strong case, but not always. 

As I mentioned before, what if by some strange turn of events, Colorado beats Texas for the Big 12 championship.  Will everyone agree the Buffs are the best?  You and the drunk Colorado fans, maybe.

Take the NCAA basketball tourney.  Teams with losing records have won their conference tourney.  The tourney determines the conference champion, not the regular season.  So do those regular season games ever matter?  In 1985, an 8th seeded AU team won the conference title.  It won when it mattered most.  It was "best" when it mattered most.  Was it without question the best team in the conference?  People had a variety of opinions about that, and as happy as I was with that AU championship, those other opinions folks had about who they thought the best team was didn't offend me in the least.  And I understood their point.

I don't know why this is difficult.  You're comfortable with the equation that the conference champion is the "best" team.  Fine.  Believe that.  It is a belief and nothing more.  But why are you so concerned if someone doesn't see that equation as foolproof?

What does it mean to be a Champion to you? Just a trophy? Just a title?

I think the best teams win when it counts the most. If Colorado beats Texas in the Big 12 Championship then they are the best in the Big 12. I think Kansas State was a better team in 2003 when they beat Oklahoma. (That's why I thought USC should have played in the BCS instead)

A possible reason why basketball teams with inferior record win tournaments. Those inferior teams have more to play for. If they win the tournament they can make the NCAA tournament. If they don't they go home. Whereas if the teams with the better records lose they can still go on. So my theory of the best team wins when it matters the most does not apply to your example of inferior teams winning tournaments. Just out of curiosity, how far did that 8th seeded AU team go in the NCAA tournament?

201644[/snapback]

What's it mean to be a "champion.?" Depends. If there's a 5 loss team in one division that slips up and beats an undefeated team in another division that turns the ball over 7 times, I suppose the fans of the 5 loss team would experience some serendipitous exhilaration and have a story to tell their grandkids. But unless they are serious kool aid drinkers or mentally challenged, they won't convince themselves that they're the "best", even if they "deserved" to win.

USC was a "champion" last year that never proved it could beat another team that was also undefeated. I'm sure they enjoyed that experience although they never were able to definitively prove they were the "best" team. How do you definitively conclude that one undefeated team is better than another? Sure they "deserved" to be "champions" because they did what was agreed upon to determine the "champion". LSU deserved to beat AU this year, too, because they did what they needed to do to win. AU wasn't robbed, cheated, etc., and it wasn't a fluke. They got beat. But did I walk away saying LSU was clearly the "best" team? Uh, no. Just as I am sure most of their fans weren't necessarily convinced that AU was the "best" team last year when we won 10-9.

So your theory of conference "championships" don't apply to basketball? Then what does it mean to you to be a "champion?"

BTW, that 1985 AU team responded to the then head coach, Sonny Smith, saying he would resign effective at the end of the season, "whenever that might be." I guess they didn't want to part ways. They lost to UNC in the sweet 16 and the Sonny negotiated a new deal.

[SLAG-91 1,483]

Georgia doesn't have enough offense to win...the wild card is always turnovers, but I think LSU wins this one by about 10. Call it 20-10.

[TexasTiger 12,915]

The two teams playing in the SECCG are the two who deserve it.

201654[/snapback]

You are not reading very closely. I agree that the two teams in the SEC CG are the two who deserve it. The winner deserves to be SEC Champ. The "best" team? Reasonable people can disagree.

[lsuj2006 0]

The two teams playing in the SECCG are the two who deserve it.

201654[/snapback]

You are not reading very closely. I agree that the two teams in the SEC CG are the two who deserve it. The winner deserves to be SEC Champ. The "best" team? Reasonable people can disagree.

201658[/snapback]

Right, but by these standards I an say LSU was better than Auburn last year. I mean, it was only one point. You guys lost by 3 this year.

[TexasTiger 12,915]

The two teams playing in the SECCG are the two who deserve it.

201654[/snapback]

You are not reading very closely. I agree that the two teams in the SEC CG are the two who deserve it. The winner deserves to be SEC Champ. The "best" team? Reasonable people can disagree.

201658[/snapback]

Right, but by these standards I an say LSU was better than Auburn last year. I mean, it was only one point. You guys lost by 3 this year.

201659[/snapback]

Sure you can. And we can each make the case for our respective opinions. That's my point. It doesn't offend me that LSU fans may think they were better than AU last year. I disagree, of course, but that's the nature of sports rivalries.

[SEC FAN 0]

What's it mean to be a "champion.?"  Depends.  If there's a 5 loss team in one division that slips up and beats an undefeated team  in another division that turns the ball over 7 times, I suppose the fans of the 5 loss team would experience some serendipitous exhilaration and have a story to tell their grandkids.  But unless they are serious kool aid drinkers or mentally challenged, they won't convince themselves that they're the "best", even if they "deserved" to win.

USC was a "champion" last year that never proved it could beat another team that was also undefeated.  I'm sure they enjoyed that experience although they never were able to definitively prove they were the "best" team.  How do you definitively conclude that one undefeated team is better than another?  Sure they "deserved"  to be "champions" because they did what was agreed upon to determine the "champion".  LSU deserved to beat AU this year, too, because they did what they needed to do to win.  AU wasn't robbed, cheated, etc., and it wasn't a fluke.  They got beat.  But did I walk away saying LSU was clearly the "best" team?  Uh, no.  Just as I am sure most of their fans weren't necessarily convinced that AU was the "best" team last year when we won 10-9.

So your theory of conference "championships" don't apply to basketball?  Then what does it mean to you to be a "champion?"

BTW, that 1985 AU team responded to the then head coach, Sonny Smith, saying he would resign effective at the end of the season, "whenever that might be."  I guess they didn't want to part ways.  They lost to UNC in the sweet 16 and the Sonny negotiated a new deal.

The national championship in college football is a entirely different story. AU was robbed last year for a chance to play for the national championship so in my opinion, even though USC was awarded the nation championship, it didn't automatically mean they were the best team in the country. So I guess in that sense a champion is not always considered the best. You got me on that one! No one knows who would have won if it was AU vs USC.

I think a champion is the team that wins it's conference. I think a champion on a nation scale is not as clear cut and won't be until there's a playoff system installed.

[SEC FAN 0]

Sure you can.  And we can each make the case for our respective opinions.  That's my point.  It doesn't offend me that LSU fans may think they were better than AU last year.  I disagree, of course, but that's the nature of sports rivalries.

I think AU was better than us last year. They were the SEC Champs and we were not!

[lsuj2006 0]

The two teams playing in the SECCG are the two who deserve it.

201654[/snapback]

You are not reading very closely. I agree that the two teams in the SEC CG are the two who deserve it. The winner deserves to be SEC Champ. The "best" team? Reasonable people can disagree.

201658[/snapback]

Right, but by these standards I an say LSU was better than Auburn last year. I mean, it was only one point. You guys lost by 3 this year.

201659[/snapback]

Sure you can. And we can each make the case for our respective opinions. That's my point. It doesn't offend me that LSU fans may think they were better than AU last year. I disagree, of course, but that's the nature of sports rivalries.

201661[/snapback]

So, say we dominate UGA and that Arkansas game was a fluke. UCLA beats USC and LSU goes to the Rose Bowl. LSU handles Texas and wins another national championship, while AU rolls over it's bowl opponent. Are you still gonna say Auburn is better than LSU?

[TexasTiger 12,915]

The two teams playing in the SECCG are the two who deserve it.

201654[/snapback]

You are not reading very closely. I agree that the two teams in the SEC CG are the two who deserve it. The winner deserves to be SEC Champ. The "best" team? Reasonable people can disagree.

201658[/snapback]

Right, but by these standards I an say LSU was better than Auburn last year. I mean, it was only one point. You guys lost by 3 this year.

201659[/snapback]

Sure you can. And we can each make the case for our respective opinions. That's my point. It doesn't offend me that LSU fans may think they were better than AU last year. I disagree, of course, but that's the nature of sports rivalries.

201661[/snapback]

So, say we dominate UGA and that Arkansas game was a fluke. UCLA beats USC and LSU goes to the Rose Bowl. LSU handles Texas and wins another national championship, while AU rolls over it's bowl opponent. Are you still gonna say Auburn is better than LSU?

201664[/snapback]

I've heard that the Arkansas game was a fluke, but I told those Hog fans to suck it up-- LSU won fair and square.

Well, UCLA will have to beat USC pretty bad to drop them below LSU (after all, you lost to TN

), but say you play Texas for the "championship" and win...after seeing Texas struggle against A&M, I doubt I would think you were better than AU, unless AU flops against whoever, but I would call you National Champs and think you "deserved" it.

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

The two teams playing in the SECCG are the two who deserve it.

201654[/snapback]

You are not reading very closely. I agree that the two teams in the SEC CG are the two who deserve it. The winner deserves to be SEC Champ. The "best" team? Reasonable people can disagree.

201658[/snapback]

Right, but by these standards I an say LSU was better than Auburn last year. I mean, it was only one point. You guys lost by 3 this year.

201659[/snapback]

Sure you can. And we can each make the case for our respective opinions. That's my point. It doesn't offend me that LSU fans may think they were better than AU last year. I disagree, of course, but that's the nature of sports rivalries.

201661[/snapback]

So, say we dominate UGA and that Arkansas game was a fluke. UCLA beats USC and LSU goes to the Rose Bowl. LSU handles Texas and wins another national championship, while AU rolls over it's bowl opponent. Are you still gonna say Auburn is better than LSU?

201664[/snapback]

Now your really reaching, neither Miles or Pellini have ever solved a Mack Brown coached Texas. Brown even spotted him 35 last year. Even a Saban coached LSU lost to us with Chrissy Simms!

Just messing with ya, rarely do I get to use my other school of attendance round here.

Last year despite LSU losing three games and Auburn going undefeated LSU fans still said they were better. So why not claim Auburn better at this point in the season, or at a neutral site, or if it was at home, or whatever else fans say lol.

[SKCAUB 0]

It's simple, really. LS_Who wins because, "the West is the Best, baby...get here and we'll see the rest"....

[War Eagle 96 10]

Miles has his good games and his bad games.  He caught the breaks this season with who he did this with this year.  Though he did pull the usual choke with Tenn.

Take the last two games, they would have lost to Alabama and Auburn if they played them like they did Ark, or the first half of Alabama. LSU put together their most complete game against us.

LSU has excellent talent, Miles just has a tendency to go hot and cold as a coach.  My sister went to OSU and I saw alot of their games, I've seen him do it more than once.  Perhaps this might be the season that gets him through that.

Thats why I said he would have to adjust, due to his hot cold streaks.  He wouldn't be able to play lights out one week and then flounder the next. I was wrong and he got away with it this year, and alot of that had to do with the talent he had.

201514[/snapback]

better season record (regular season and SEC) than any other team in the SEC West

201569[/snapback]

Your SEC record isn't any better than ours.

[mcgufcm 4,101]

just some quick shots at stuff i've read in here:

1. even the most famous new england patriots fan in the world (bill simmons) has said that the pats just got hot in 2001. they were the best team in the playoffs, but not by any means, the best team in the league. he also says that in no way cheapens their championship.

2. uga has just as much if not more offense than lsu as evidenced by the fact that uga is 2nd in the sec in total offense (behind auburn) and 3rd in the sec in scoring offense (behind auburn and lsu). just for everyone's info lsu is 2nd in scoring defense (13.5) and uga is going to finish 3rd (14.6) auburn will finish 4th (14.7). this is going to be a really tight game unless one team turns the ball over a lot or brandon coutu's head explodes which is all that hasn't happened to kickers against lsu yet.

3. auburn fans are making an apples to apples comparison by saying a team that finished 7-1 in conference is playing better than another team that finished 7-1 in conference. lsu fans claiming they were better in 2004 are making the claim that a 6-2 team is better than an 9-0 team... little harder to make your case without sounding crazy.

4. even if usc lost by 40 lsu wouldn't play in the rose bowl. it's that pesky thing about penn state being ranked third in the bcs. after your struggles with 4-7 arkansas, you'll be lucky to hold onto 3rd in the polls.

5. conference title games don't always give you the best team. they give you the champion. no one can ever take a title away. but folks can debate who the best team was. for example, the ncaa tournament when villanova beat georgetown. no historian claims they were the best team. no historian discounts their championship. it was a great upset that was probably 1 in 100 odds. a lot like colorado/texas this year. texas is the best team in the big 12 hands down. colorado may be the champion. those two are not mutually exclusive.

6. i'll be pulling for uga b/c i don't like lsu and i don't dislike uga. do their fans annoy me? yeah, but even if they win this game, we beat them in their house. so deep down, they'll know who daddy is.

[EllisHugh 0]

Thanksgiving night, ESPN's Kirk Herbstreit called Auburn the best football team in the Southeastern Conference. Herbstreit said Auburn would be in the SEC Championship Game had it not been 1-for-6 on field goals in a 20-17 loss to LSU.

Former coaches working for ESPN said the same not long ago, and the theme is gaining popularity in Alabama, the SEC and around the horn nationally.

Note to Kirk, Lee Corso, Jim Donnan, Lou Holtz and the boys: Do you suppose if Auburn were really the best team in the SEC, it would have scored more points against LSU? Do you not remember LSU missing two field goals and dropping two passes in the end zone in the same game?

Do you know you can't cherry-pick your what-ifs to build a case based upon what-if?

LSU defeated Auburn 20-17 in overtime Oct. 22 in Baton Rouge. Kirk, if you missed it, I'm sure you can find a copy of the videotape. The game was on ESPN.

On a windy night in Tiger Stadium, Auburn's John Vaughn missed five field goals, four in regulation. His 39-yarder that hit the left upright in overtime could have tied the score, forcing another overtime, but it fell back into the end zone.

LSU's Chris Jackson missed a 38-yard field goal. Teammate Colt David missed a 28-yarder. A wide-open Dwayne Bowe dropped a fourth-quarter pass in the end zone. Early Doucet dropped one in the end zone before Jackson's game-winning 30-yard field goal.

Let's play the increasingly popular game of what-if. What if nobody missed a kick or dropped an uncontested pass in the end zone?

Auburn left 12 points on the field during regulation: Vaughn's four missed field goals.

LSU left 13 points on the field during regulation: Jackson's and David's missed field goals, Bowe's dropped touchdown pass and the ensuing PAT.

If you don't assume LSU would have made its PAT, let's call it a tie. We go to overtime.

LSU's Doucet let a touchdown pass bounce off his hands. Vaughn missed a field goal.

Give each guy the best possible outcome and LSU still wins by three points.

Auburn is one of the best football teams in the country. You can make a strong case for Auburn being the best team in the SEC at this moment.

Just don't make half a case, guys, picking and choosing the facts that best suit your case.

If Auburn were the best team against LSU, why did Auburn have to settle for field-goal attempts of 41, 26, 54, 37, 49 and 39 yards instead of scoring touchdowns? Maybe it's because only three teams in the country are harder to score against than LSU, based on today's NCAA statistical rankings.

Last year Auburn defeated LSU 10-9 on a do-over PAT by Vaughn after he missed the first try. He got a second chance because of a penalty that wasn't called again all season.

LSU's Ryan Gaudet missed a PAT in that game. Not only do I not recall an ESPN analyst or a columnist calling Auburn lucky to be undefeated last season, I remember ESPN talking heads saying Auburn didn't play a close game all season.

LSU will play Saturday against Georgia for a third SEC championship in five seasons. A what-if you won't hear elsewhere: Take away a last-minute one-point loss to Arkansas in 2002 and the one-point loss to Auburn last season and LSU would be playing in its fifth consecutive SEC Championship Game and, perhaps, for five titles in five years.

Honestly, it's tiring to hear LSU fans complain about a lack of respect from the national media, but it's hard to argue with them about an LSU-was-lucky-to-beat-Auburn campaign that's based on selective memory and woulda, shoulda, coulda a la carte.

The apparent premise of the campaign: Auburn's mistakes were bad luck; LSU's mistakes showed why it's not as good as Auburn, which "outplayed" LSU.

This type of half-baked take reveals why opinion poisons college football when opinions are major part of a formula that decides who plays for the national championship.

The experts say LSU's 30-27 overtime loss to Tennessee is the worst defeat of the one-loss teams because Tennessee finished with a losing record. Some of those same experts ranked Tennessee among the top three teams in the nation before the season.

If that disparity doesn't illustrate the fallacy of opinions and why championships should be settled on the field, I don't know what would.

What I do know is there is at least one SEC coach who would agree with me.

Last month an Alabama newspaper wrote that he "spoke out sharply against ESPN and the influence it wields on the college game. He said the opinions ESPN hosts and analysts put out on the airwaves each week tend to shape the opinions of fans and media people around the country."

The coach was Tommy Tuberville, coach of the Auburn Tigers.

[mcgufcm 4,101]

champions are decided on the field. opinions have nothing to do with whether or not lsu can become sec champs. that doesn't change the fact that watching both teams play down the stretch, no rational human being could think lsu is playing better. hell we played the same team in consecutive weeks and the outcomes speak for themselves. we dominated alabama. you guys went to overtime. and our game was the more emotionally charged game.

and unless i'm mistaken one of the missed lsu field goals came after bowe dropped that pass did it not? if so, you can't have 10 points for that drive. which would mean, if you really wanna play the what-if game, that best case lsu lost 10 points in regulation... making auburn a winner in the "best case scenario" game at a score of 29-27.

and i don't give a crap what herby or corso says. i'm just watching games with my own two eyes. we dominated arkansas on the road. you squeaked by at home. we dominated alabama. you squeaked by. we squeaked by uga on the road. i'm eager to see what you do at a neutral site.

[EllisHugh 0]

champions are decided on the field. opinions have nothing to do with whether or not lsu can become sec champs. that doesn't change the fact that watching both teams play down the stretch, no rational human being could think lsu is playing better. hell we played the same team in consecutive weeks and the outcomes speak for themselves. we dominated alabama. you guys went to overtime. and our game was the more emotionally charged game.

201704[/snapback]

down the stretch? how does 8 consecutive wins to end the season sound? surely, you must admit that is a better stretch than 4 consecutive wins to end the season.

as for the 'bama game, it was No. 3 'bama versus No. 5 LSU. i would disagree and say that that game was more emotionally charged. if you can honestly say that the outcome of the auburn/'bama game wasn't influenced by the loss handed to 'bama the week before then you really don't watch football. 'bama was so deflated after the lsu loss that it was auburn's game for the taking.

by your analogy georgia is playing better football than auburn because they beat georgia tech and auburn lost to georgia tech.

[TexasTiger 12,915]

Thanksgiving night, ESPN's Kirk Herbstreit called Auburn the best football team in the Southeastern Conference. Herbstreit said Auburn would be in the SEC Championship Game had it not been 1-for-6 on field goals in a 20-17 loss to LSU.

201698[/snapback]

What's the big deal? Auburn might have been in the game had it not been for 1-6 field goals against LSU. Missing opportunities is part of football. That doesn't mean LSU was lucky and it doesn't mean LSU doesn't deserve to be there.

And aren't you saying essentially the same thing as Herbstreit:

You can make a strong case for Auburn being the best team in the SEC at this moment.

I think AU is the best in the SEC right now. LSU did what it takes to get to the SEC CG. Congratulations. Your boys earned it. Now relax and enjoy it.

[TexasTiger 12,915]

by your analogy georgia is playing better football than auburn because they beat georgia tech and auburn lost to georgia tech.

201708[/snapback]

Analogies and logic clearly aren't your strong suit. "Is" is present tense. Georgia "is" playing better football than AU "was" on opening day. Happy?

[mcgufcm 4,101]

most people refer to "the stretch" as the end of something. think horse racing where i believe the term originates. if a horse is leading the entire race, that has no input on his performance "down the home stretch." so your point about winning 8 in a row means nothing in the analysis of how teams were playing "down the stretch." think of the season as a beginning, middle, and end. we're only looking at the end.

auburn is playing better than lsu down the stretch. that's all i'm saying.

if you think alabama/lsu was more emotional than the iron bowl then you really don't watch football.

and georgia is playing very well right now. auburn is playing better. i'd love to get georgia tech right now almost as much as i'd love to get you guys.

[vatz22au 142]

Geeze, all this bickering....

Someone throw a pack of corndogs at the crowd

[EllisHugh 0]

most people refer to "the stretch" as the end of something. think horse racing where i believe the term originates. if a horse is leading the entire race, that has no input on his performance "down the home stretch." so your point about winning 8 in a row means nothing in the analysis of how teams were playing "down the stretch." think of the season as a beginning, middle, and end. we're only looking at the end.

And, looking at the end LSU is still leading...they stumbled out of the gates in the 2nd game (Tennessee - 2-1 in September), led in the middle (5-0 in October) and still lead in the end (3-0 in November). How can you say otherwise when down the stretch 'bama stumbled (LSU and Auburn), Georgia stumbled (Florida and 'bama) and Auburn stumbled (LSU)? I believe the results (record & SEC division championship) prove who is leading "down the home stretch".

[AuNuma1 1]

Enjoy this season corndogs...with that Big 12 coach you have, you won't be contending for much else from here on out. You'll see what I'm talking about as soon as Saban's boys leave after this year.

[EllisHugh 0]

Enjoy this season corndogs...with that Big 12 coach you have, you won't be contending for much else from here on out.  You'll see what I'm talking about as soon as Saban's boys leave after this year. 

201751[/snapback]

LSU loses 21 seniors and most notably offensive line and defensive line and has road games next year at Tennessee, Auburn and Florida. I see LSU losing at least 2 games next year much the same way as Auburn this year with the loss of its offensive backfield and some key defensive guys. That being said, it appears that LSU is putting together a decent recruiting class (currently #4).

As for LSU not contending, well, only Auburn could dream of LSU's recent success (2000-present). One good season for Auburn (2004) doesn't necessarily qualify Auburn as an elite SEC program whereas if LSU wins the SECCG next weekend that would make 3 out of the last 5 and only Florida (1993-96) has done better since the inception of the SECCG in 1992.

Oh, that Big 12 coach of LSUs...he did beat Auburn this year!