Congratulations to Matt Leinart - Page 2 - DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate

**Siuchingach** · 01-02-2006, 07:31 AM

Alright.....but they didn't.

Yeah and Jesus wasn't an assbirth.

**sanddrareyk** · 01-02-2006, 07:32 AM

Alright.....but they didn't.

You'd figure the NCAA would have been notified of this:

http://www.ncaasports.com/football/mens/story/8975902

2003 Sugar Bowl: Louisiana State 21, Oklahoma 14
What happened: LSU, which lost to Florida on Oct. 11, finished strong to win the SEC title. Oklahoma was dominant all season until losing to Kansas State in the Big 12 championship game.
Controversy: The BCS was supposed to do away with split national champions, but the 2003 season had two teams hoisting trophies. USC was No. 1 in both the media and the coaches' polls but wound up third in the BCS ratings. Oklahoma was so dominant through the regular season that its computer rankings rendered the Big 12 title game irrelevant. At least it didn't matter until the Sooners lost to Kansas State. LSU took over No. 1 in the BCS rankings and OU fell to No. 2, setting up the Sugar Bowl game. USC beat Michigan in the Rose Bowl.

**Misiotoagodia** · 01-02-2006, 07:34 AM

You'd figure the NCAA would have been notified of this:

http://www.ncaasports.com/football/mens/story/8975902

2003 Sugar Bowl: Louisiana State 21, Oklahoma 14
What happened: LSU, which lost to Florida on Oct. 11, finished strong to win the SEC title. Oklahoma was dominant all season until losing to Kansas State in the Big 12 championship game.
Controversy: The BCS was supposed to do away with split national champions, but the 2003 season had two teams hoisting trophies. USC was No. 1 in both the media and the coaches' polls but wound up third in the BCS ratings. Oklahoma was so dominant through the regular season that its computer rankings rendered the Big 12 title game irrelevant. At least it didn't matter until the Sooners lost to Kansas State. LSU took over No. 1 in the BCS rankings and OU fell to No. 2, setting up the Sugar Bowl game. USC beat Michigan in the Rose Bowl.

Hahaha, nice research. I think that's definitive.

**cinggooft** · 01-02-2006, 07:35 AM

Yeah and Jesus wasn't an assbirth.

please be quiet you were wrong to begin with and now you are just making yourself like dumber

I am now leaving to go to bed, may God have mercy on your soul

**repldoinfo** · 01-02-2006, 07:36 AM

please be quiet you were wrong to begin with and now you are just making yourself like dumber

Good job pal, the NCAA recognizes it.

**triardwonvada** · 01-02-2006, 07:49 AM

Good job pal, the NCAA recognizes it.

The NCAA uses the BCS to eliminate such occurance of a split championship. By using such a system, there is only one winner. LSU was that winner. The AP gave USC top honors, but they are just that...the press. They have no bearing on what team is champion. LSU was the national champion while USC was first in the polls. Big difference.

**khjhkfggt** · 01-02-2006, 07:50 AM

The NCAA uses the BCS to eliminate such occurance of a split championship. By using such a system, there is only one winner. LSU was that winner. The AP gave USC top honors, but they are just that...the press. They have no bearing on what team is champion. LSU was the national champion while USC was first in the polls. Big difference.

Um, if the NCAA has it in their record books as two teams sharing the title, there is a difference.

**KeestRast** · 01-02-2006, 07:53 AM

Um, if the NCAA has it in their record books as two teams sharing the title, there is a difference.

The point of that story is that the BCS system didnt eliminate controversy. Nothing more, nothing less. When all division 1-A conferences (like I said before, including the Pac-10 which includes USC) agrees for the time being that the BCS is how the national champion is determined, that is how it will be determined. Polls are an honor of their own, but don't decide the national champions. Only the CHAMPIONSHIP GAME determines that.

**pepBarihepe** · 01-02-2006, 07:55 AM

The point of that story is that the BCS system didnt eliminate controversy. Nothing more, nothing less. When all division 1-A conferences (like I said before, including the Pac-10 which includes USC) agrees for the time being that the BCS is how the national champion is determined, that is how it will be determined. Polls are an honor of their own, but don't decide the national champions. Only the CHAMPIONSHIP GAME determines that.

That may be your point (and a good one), but there were two champions that year, which you and swami were flipping out about.

**sharpyure** · 02-01-2006, 08:00 AM

That may be your point (and a good one), but there were two champions that year, which you and swami were flipping out about.

No one is flipping out about it. But the specifics of the current NCAA division 1-A system is that the BCS determines a single and undisputed champion. Until they change the system (which hopefully they will, to a playoff system) that is how the champion is determined. The press can hype something all they want (after all, it IS their poll that they are going by) but swami and I are simply stating the current rules of the system.

**OixKKcj1** · 02-01-2006, 08:02 AM

No one is flipping out about it. But the specifics of the current NCAA division 1-A system is that the BCS determines a single and undisputed champion. Until they change the system (which hopefully they will, to a playoff system) that is how the champion is determined. The press can hype something all they want (after all, it IS their poll that they are going by) but swami and I are simply stating the current rules of the system.

"please be quiet you were wrong to begin with and now you are just making yourself like dumber"

I think that qualifies as either overreacting or flipping out.

**scemHeish** · 02-01-2006, 08:04 AM

"please be quiet you were wrong to begin with and now you are just making yourself like dumber"

I think that qualifies as either overreacting or flipping out.

Fair enough. Alright, well I wasn't flipping out.

**Avoireeideree** · 02-01-2006, 08:06 AM

Fair enough. Alright, well I wasn't flipping out.

You're right, I was just responding in general.

**casinobonusese** · 02-01-2006, 03:50 PM

Way to go Matt...I'm sure you've enjoyed your last 4 years in beautiful sunny Southern California, winning every game for 3 straight years, 2-3 national championships, playing with a lineup that looks like a pro team, then spending your free time banging underwear models and any turbo hotty co-ed within arm's reach.

As the #2 pick, you may now report for duty in what equates to the lost city of Atlantis where dead bodies were floating around as recently as a couple of months ago, where you will have no real home stadium, and a completely clueless owner and front office.

No, you can't stay for a 5th year.

While the organization may not be top notch, there is a lot of offensive talent on that team. If Leinart does end up in New Orleans he would have the pieces around him to be successful right away. There are worse places for a QB to end up.

**WebDocMan** · 02-01-2006, 03:52 PM

That may be your point (and a good one), but there were two champions that year, which you and swami were flipping out about.

YES LSU and USC split it even know LSU should have not shared the title.

**CurtisTH** · 02-01-2006, 05:12 PM

You're right, I was just responding in general.

Hey I wasnt flipping out about it I was just stating that saying stuff like Jesus being assborn is just making you sound dumber, it isnt helping your cause on the argument

**Accor$314** · 02-01-2006, 07:13 PM

No one is flipping out about it. But the specifics of the current NCAA division 1-A system is that the BCS determines a single and undisputed champion. Until they change the system (which hopefully they will, to a playoff system) that is how the champion is determined. The press can hype something all they want (after all, it IS their poll that they are going by) but swami and I are simply stating the current rules of the system.

You really need to click that link I provided. They're both listed their as champions, one for the BCS, one for the AP. This isn't a fan site, it's the freakin' NCAA. They acknowledge co-national champs.

**Zdmlscid** · 02-01-2006, 07:17 PM

Hey I wasnt flipping out about it I was just stating that saying stuff like Jesus being assborn is just making you sound dumber, it isnt helping your cause on the argument

My argument was correct from the start. I threw in a joke because it was ridiculous how fervently you were professing yourself as being correct. If you're going to act like an ass, at least have your information straight.

**Paiblyelaxy** · 02-01-2006, 07:33 PM

Hahaha, nice research. I think that's definitive.

There's nothing definitive about that at all. It just states that there were 2 national champs in the public's eye.

**Borzopayn** · 02-01-2006, 07:36 PM

You really need to click that link I provided. They're both listed their as champions, one for the BCS, one for the AP. This isn't a fan site, it's the freakin' NCAA. They acknowledge co-national champs.

Yeah, but until the AP determines the national champion again, they didn't win the championship that counted.

01-02-2006, 07:31 AM	#21
Siuchingach Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 416 Senior Member	Alright.....but they didn't. Yeah and Jesus wasn't an assbirth. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

01-02-2006, 07:32 AM	#22
sanddrareyk Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 464 Senior Member	Alright.....but they didn't. You'd figure the NCAA would have been notified of this: http://www.ncaasports.com/football/mens/story/8975902 2003 Sugar Bowl: Louisiana State 21, Oklahoma 14 What happened: LSU, which lost to Florida on Oct. 11, finished strong to win the SEC title. Oklahoma was dominant all season until losing to Kansas State in the Big 12 championship game. Controversy: The BCS was supposed to do away with split national champions, but the 2003 season had two teams hoisting trophies. USC was No. 1 in both the media and the coaches' polls but wound up third in the BCS ratings. Oklahoma was so dominant through the regular season that its computer rankings rendered the Big 12 title game irrelevant. At least it didn't matter until the Sooners lost to Kansas State. LSU took over No. 1 in the BCS rankings and OU fell to No. 2, setting up the Sugar Bowl game. USC beat Michigan in the Rose Bowl. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

01-02-2006, 07:34 AM	#23
Misiotoagodia Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 610 Senior Member	You'd figure the NCAA would have been notified of this: http://www.ncaasports.com/football/mens/story/8975902 2003 Sugar Bowl: Louisiana State 21, Oklahoma 14 What happened: LSU, which lost to Florida on Oct. 11, finished strong to win the SEC title. Oklahoma was dominant all season until losing to Kansas State in the Big 12 championship game. Controversy: The BCS was supposed to do away with split national champions, but the 2003 season had two teams hoisting trophies. USC was No. 1 in both the media and the coaches' polls but wound up third in the BCS ratings. Oklahoma was so dominant through the regular season that its computer rankings rendered the Big 12 title game irrelevant. At least it didn't matter until the Sooners lost to Kansas State. LSU took over No. 1 in the BCS rankings and OU fell to No. 2, setting up the Sugar Bowl game. USC beat Michigan in the Rose Bowl. Hahaha, nice research. I think that's definitive. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

01-02-2006, 07:35 AM	#24
cinggooft Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 484 Senior Member	Yeah and Jesus wasn't an assbirth. please be quiet you were wrong to begin with and now you are just making yourself like dumber I am now leaving to go to bed, may God have mercy on your soul Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

01-02-2006, 07:36 AM	#25
repldoinfo Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 569 Senior Member	please be quiet you were wrong to begin with and now you are just making yourself like dumber Good job pal, the NCAA recognizes it. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

01-02-2006, 07:49 AM	#26
triardwonvada Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 448 Senior Member	Good job pal, the NCAA recognizes it. The NCAA uses the BCS to eliminate such occurance of a split championship. By using such a system, there is only one winner. LSU was that winner. The AP gave USC top honors, but they are just that...the press. They have no bearing on what team is champion. LSU was the national champion while USC was first in the polls. Big difference. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

01-02-2006, 07:50 AM	#27
khjhkfggt Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 396 Senior Member	The NCAA uses the BCS to eliminate such occurance of a split championship. By using such a system, there is only one winner. LSU was that winner. The AP gave USC top honors, but they are just that...the press. They have no bearing on what team is champion. LSU was the national champion while USC was first in the polls. Big difference. Um, if the NCAA has it in their record books as two teams sharing the title, there is a difference. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

01-02-2006, 07:53 AM	#28
KeestRast Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 455 Senior Member	Um, if the NCAA has it in their record books as two teams sharing the title, there is a difference. The point of that story is that the BCS system didnt eliminate controversy. Nothing more, nothing less. When all division 1-A conferences (like I said before, including the Pac-10 which includes USC) agrees for the time being that the BCS is how the national champion is determined, that is how it will be determined. Polls are an honor of their own, but don't decide the national champions. Only the CHAMPIONSHIP GAME determines that. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

01-02-2006, 07:55 AM	#29
pepBarihepe Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 487 Senior Member	The point of that story is that the BCS system didnt eliminate controversy. Nothing more, nothing less. When all division 1-A conferences (like I said before, including the Pac-10 which includes USC) agrees for the time being that the BCS is how the national champion is determined, that is how it will be determined. Polls are an honor of their own, but don't decide the national champions. Only the CHAMPIONSHIP GAME determines that. That may be your point (and a good one), but there were two champions that year, which you and swami were flipping out about. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 08:00 AM	#30
sharpyure Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 552 Senior Member	That may be your point (and a good one), but there were two champions that year, which you and swami were flipping out about. No one is flipping out about it. But the specifics of the current NCAA division 1-A system is that the BCS determines a single and undisputed champion. Until they change the system (which hopefully they will, to a playoff system) that is how the champion is determined. The press can hype something all they want (after all, it IS their poll that they are going by) but swami and I are simply stating the current rules of the system. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 08:02 AM	#31
OixKKcj1 Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 393 Senior Member	No one is flipping out about it. But the specifics of the current NCAA division 1-A system is that the BCS determines a single and undisputed champion. Until they change the system (which hopefully they will, to a playoff system) that is how the champion is determined. The press can hype something all they want (after all, it IS their poll that they are going by) but swami and I are simply stating the current rules of the system. "please be quiet you were wrong to begin with and now you are just making yourself like dumber" I think that qualifies as either overreacting or flipping out. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 08:04 AM	#32
scemHeish Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 442 Senior Member	"please be quiet you were wrong to begin with and now you are just making yourself like dumber" I think that qualifies as either overreacting or flipping out. Fair enough. Alright, well I wasn't flipping out. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 08:06 AM	#33
Avoireeideree Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 505 Senior Member	Fair enough. Alright, well I wasn't flipping out. You're right, I was just responding in general. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 03:50 PM	#34
casinobonusese Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 435 Senior Member	Way to go Matt...I'm sure you've enjoyed your last 4 years in beautiful sunny Southern California, winning every game for 3 straight years, 2-3 national championships, playing with a lineup that looks like a pro team, then spending your free time banging underwear models and any turbo hotty co-ed within arm's reach. As the #2 pick, you may now report for duty in what equates to the lost city of Atlantis where dead bodies were floating around as recently as a couple of months ago, where you will have no real home stadium, and a completely clueless owner and front office. No, you can't stay for a 5th year. While the organization may not be top notch, there is a lot of offensive talent on that team. If Leinart does end up in New Orleans he would have the pieces around him to be successful right away. There are worse places for a QB to end up. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 03:52 PM	#35
WebDocMan Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 513 Senior Member	That may be your point (and a good one), but there were two champions that year, which you and swami were flipping out about. YES LSU and USC split it even know LSU should have not shared the title. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

02-01-2006, 05:12 PM	#36
CurtisTH Join Date Nov 2005 Posts 391 Senior Member	You're right, I was just responding in general. Hey I wasnt flipping out about it I was just stating that saying stuff like Jesus being assborn is just making you sound dumber, it isnt helping your cause on the argument Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 07:13 PM	#37
Accor$314 Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 422 Senior Member	No one is flipping out about it. But the specifics of the current NCAA division 1-A system is that the BCS determines a single and undisputed champion. Until they change the system (which hopefully they will, to a playoff system) that is how the champion is determined. The press can hype something all they want (after all, it IS their poll that they are going by) but swami and I are simply stating the current rules of the system. You really need to click that link I provided. They're both listed their as champions, one for the BCS, one for the AP. This isn't a fan site, it's the freakin' NCAA. They acknowledge co-national champs. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 07:17 PM	#38
Zdmlscid Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 384 Senior Member	Hey I wasnt flipping out about it I was just stating that saying stuff like Jesus being assborn is just making you sound dumber, it isnt helping your cause on the argument My argument was correct from the start. I threw in a joke because it was ridiculous how fervently you were professing yourself as being correct. If you're going to act like an ass, at least have your information straight. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 07:33 PM	#39
Paiblyelaxy Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 417 Senior Member	Hahaha, nice research. I think that's definitive. There's nothing definitive about that at all. It just states that there were 2 national champs in the public's eye. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 07:36 PM	#40
Borzopayn Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 452 Senior Member	You really need to click that link I provided. They're both listed their as champions, one for the BCS, one for the AP. This isn't a fan site, it's the freakin' NCAA. They acknowledge co-national champs. Yeah, but until the AP determines the national champion again, they didn't win the championship that counted. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote