Congratulations to Matt Leinart - Page 3 - DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate

**glasscollector** · 02-01-2006, 07:38 PM

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.

Your argument was incorrect from the start. It's incorrect now. Unless you change your mind right now, it will continue to be incorrect.

LSU won the BCS national championship 2 years ago. USC was recognized as national champions by various other groups, but that is irrelevant.

**LINETFAD** · 02-01-2006, 07:43 PM

Your argument was incorrect from the start. It's incorrect now. Unless you change your mind right now, it will continue to be incorrect.

LSU won the BCS national championship 2 years ago. USC was recognized as national champions by various other groups, but that is irrelevant.

A split national championship is recognized by the NCAA. I don't know a more official source than that, but if you find one, let me know.

**carline** · 02-01-2006, 08:07 PM

A split national championship is recognized by the NCAA. I don't know a more official source than that, but if you find one, let me know.

Really...this is astonishing to me. I provided you people with a godforsaken link from the NCAA stating that their was a split national championship and you're still denying its existence.

If you won't acknowledge a link from the NCAA, what would you like?

**Pete789** · 02-01-2006, 08:13 PM

Really...this is astonishing to me. I provided you people with a godforsaken link from the NCAA stating that their was a split national championship and you're still denying its existence.

If you won't acknowledge a link from the NCAA, what would you like?

A link saying that the BCS title game doesn't determine the national champion.

**zzarratusstra** · 02-01-2006, 10:15 PM

Really...this is astonishing to me. I provided you people with a godforsaken link from the NCAA stating that their was a split national championship and you're still denying its existence.

If you won't acknowledge a link from the NCAA, what would you like?

That link doesn't say there were two champions. It says two teams held trophies. I dont know if the AP actually gives you a trophy for being #1 in their rankings, but even if so it doesnt give you the championship. It does NOT say there were two champions. All the site is implying is that there was still controversy.

The CHAMPIONSHIP game determines the champions. Your argument would be like saying that the Colts are a split champion this season even if they dont win the Superbowl but the press votes them still #1.

**newpiknicker** · 02-01-2006, 10:23 PM

That link doesn't say there were two champions. It says two teams held trophies. I dont know if the AP actually gives you a trophy for being #1 in their rankings, but even if so it doesnt give you the championship. It does NOT say there were two champions. All the site is implying is that there was still controversy.

The CHAMPIONSHIP game determines the champions. Your argument would be like saying that the Colts are a split champion this season even if they dont win the Superbowl but the press votes them still #1.

Exactly, and going on their argument I am making the Packers the NFL champs

**MackBranon** · 02-01-2006, 11:00 PM

That link doesn't say there were two champions. It says two teams held trophies. I dont know if the AP actually gives you a trophy for being #1 in their rankings, but even if so it doesnt give you the championship. It does NOT say there were two champions. All the site is implying is that there was still controversy.

The CHAMPIONSHIP game determines the champions. Your argument would be like saying that the Colts are a split champion this season even if they dont win the Superbowl but the press votes them still #1.

Please click this link:

http://ncaasports.com/football/mens/history

The NCAA lists two champions, a BCS one and a consensus one.

Then click this one:

http://ncaasports.com/football/mens/...0040101_USC@MI

It's the NCAA recap of the USC bowl game from 2003. It states clearly on more then one occassion that USC had secured themselves a piece of the national championship.

This is where the argument ends.

To argue otherwise is pointless. To argue semantics about the word "trophies" when the AP doesn't have a trophy is pointless.

If the one and only champion were determined in the BCS, why would they list two national titleists over and over and over on the NCAA's official website?

**MariaBeautys** · 02-01-2006, 11:03 PM

The only possible confusion could be on what the point of the BCS is. The point is to get the #1 and #2 teams together in a bowl. If that determines an undisputed champion, so be it.

The fact that the NCAA counts a split national championship proves that.

**Jxmwzgpv** · 02-01-2006, 11:04 PM

Please click this link:

http://ncaasports.com/football/mens/history

The NCAA lists two champions, a BCS one and a consensus one.

Then click this one:

http://ncaasports.com/football/mens/...0040101_USC@MI

It's the NCAA recap of the USC bowl game from 2003. It states clearly on more then one occassion that USC had secured themselves a piece of the national championship.

This is where the argument ends.

To argue otherwise is pointless. To argue semantics about the word "trophies" when the AP doesn't have a trophy is pointless.

If the one and only champion were determined in the BCS, why would they list two national titleists over and over and over on the NCAA's official website?

Why over and over again? Because the BCS is only 7 years old.

**Mboxmaja** · 02-01-2006, 11:06 PM

The only possible confusion could be on what the point of the BCS is. The point is to get the #1 and #2 teams together in a bowl. If that determines an undisputed champion, so be it.

The fact that the NCAA counts a split national championship proves that.

Read the article you linked to. The voters in the polls are obligated to vote for the winner of the BCS championship game. It says it right in there.

In the first link, there is only one consensus national champion since the BCS was implemented. That is USC. Were there no national champions in those other 7 years? Or, is the winner of the BCS championship game (which was recognized each year) the actual champion?

**Jeaxatoem** · 02-01-2006, 11:07 PM

Why over and over again? Because the BCS is only 7 years old.

More semantics...

I was referring to the fact that USC was mentioned several times on several different times as splitting the national title, not that it has occurred several times.

**PilotJargon** · 02-01-2006, 11:09 PM

Read the article you linked to. The voters in the polls are obligated to vote for the winner of the BCS championship game. It says it right in there.

In the first link, there is only one consensus national champion since the BCS was implemented. That is USC. Were there no national champions in those other 7 years? Or, is the winner of the BCS championship game (which was recognized each year) the actual champion?

Because the definition of "consensus" is something along the lines of popular vote. 2003 was the only year there was a difference between the BCS and the "consensus".

EDIT: definition of consensus

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=consensus

**Pznrrmaf** · 02-01-2006, 11:10 PM

The only possible confusion could be on what the point of the BCS is. The point is to get the #1 and #2 teams together in a bowl. If that determines an undisputed champion, so be it.

The fact that the NCAA counts a split national championship proves that.

This same listing also shows 4 teams as national champions during one season. Not all of them are relevent as true national champs. In the current system the NCAA rewards ONE champion. The AP also awards their own champion, but that does not make them actual national champs. This site simply lists all factions that reward teams with this honor. As far as the NCAA is actually concerned though there is only one national champion per season.

**Grennios** · 02-01-2006, 11:11 PM

This same listing also shows 4 teams as national champions during one season. Not all of them are relevent as true national champs. In the current system the NCAA rewards ONE champion. The AP also awards their own champion, but that does not make them actual national champs. This site simply lists all factions that reward teams with this honor. As far as the NCAA is actually concerned though there is only one national champion per season.

Yeah, back in the 40s and 50s it was a clusterfuck.

This has nothing to do with 2006, where only 2 entities determine a champion.

**Nundduedola** · 02-01-2006, 11:12 PM

Because the definition of "consensus" is something along the lines of popular vote. 2003 was the only year there was a difference between the BCS and the "consensus".

EDIT: definition of consensus

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=consensus

I know what consensus means. That's my point. Everyone agreed that they were the best team. However, the BCS is supposed to dictate the national champion. I really don't care if nobody agrees with the results of the BCS. It's the rules.

**DghtRdc** · 02-01-2006, 11:14 PM

As far as the NCAA is actually concerned though there is only one national champion per season.

It is truly astonishing to me that I can link a story (actually, two) for you from the NCAA's own website acknowledging USC gaining a share of the title and you and pit can still tell me that the NCAA doesn't acknowledge it.

Me: George likes vanilla ice cream.

You: No he doesn't.

Me: Let me get George over here. George - do you like vanilla ice cream?

George: Yes, I like vanilla ice cream.

You: No, George doesn't like vanilla ice cream.

Me: Awesome, I'm going to go hang myself.

**Hftqdxpm** · 02-01-2006, 11:16 PM

I know what consensus means. That's my point. Everyone agreed that they were the best team. However, the BCS is supposed to dictate the national champion. I really don't care if nobody agrees with the results of the BCS. It's the rules.

This is exactly what I addressed in post #48. You have the point of the BCS wrong. They just want to get a #1 and a #2 together and give them a trophy. It's a piece of the puzzle. The be all, end all would not be an organization with representatives from only the 6 major conferences.

**sarasmid** · 02-01-2006, 11:18 PM

It is truly astonishing to me that I can link a story (actually, two) for you from the NCAA's own website acknowledging USC gaining a share of the title and you and pit can still tell me that the NCAA doesn't acknowledge it.

Me: George likes vanilla ice cream.

You: No he doesn't.

Me: Let me get George over here. George - do you like vanilla ice cream?

George: Yes, I like vanilla ice cream.

You: No, George doesn't like vanilla ice cream.

Me: Awesome, I'm going to go hang myself.

There are lots of college polls. If 6 of these nationally listed polls come to different conclusions with the number 1 team are all 6 national champs? No. The team that won the national championship game is the national champions. Simply because the NCAA lists who the AP has as THEIR national champions does not make them NCAA champs. Its simply showing historical data and since the AP poll is a respected faction they deem it necessary to list that.

I dont know how one can not understand that the winner of the championship game is THE champion.

**DoctorNelsonOnten** · 02-01-2006, 11:19 PM

This is exactly what I addressed in post #48. You have the point of the BCS wrong. They just want to get a #1 and a #2 together and give them a trophy. It's a piece of the puzzle. The be all, end all would not be an organization with representatives from only the 6 major conferences.

To which I replied the voters are obligated to vote the winner of the BCS championship game the national champion. That's a direct quote from your article.

However, I really don't care. I was just arguing for the sake of argument.

Here's another link to support the worst strong safety in coverage in the NFL:

http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/bcs_explained.html

**Dwencejed** · 02-01-2006, 11:22 PM

There are lots of college polls. If 6 of these nationally listed polls come to different conclusions with the number 1 team are all 6 national champs? No. The team that won the national championship game is the national champions. Simply because the NCAA lists who the AP has as THEIR national champions does not make them NCAA champs. Its simply showing historical data and since the AP poll is a respected faction they deem it necessary to list that.

I dont know how one can not understand that the winner of the championship game is THE champion.

Neat.

The NCAA disagrees with you and unfortunately, their incompetent asses are who's in charge.

02-01-2006, 07:38 PM	#41
glasscollector Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 525 Senior Member	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. Your argument was incorrect from the start. It's incorrect now. Unless you change your mind right now, it will continue to be incorrect. LSU won the BCS national championship 2 years ago. USC was recognized as national champions by various other groups, but that is irrelevant. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 07:43 PM	#42
LINETFAD Join Date Nov 2005 Posts 426 Senior Member	Your argument was incorrect from the start. It's incorrect now. Unless you change your mind right now, it will continue to be incorrect. LSU won the BCS national championship 2 years ago. USC was recognized as national champions by various other groups, but that is irrelevant. A split national championship is recognized by the NCAA. I don't know a more official source than that, but if you find one, let me know. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 08:07 PM	#43
carline Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 341 Senior Member	A split national championship is recognized by the NCAA. I don't know a more official source than that, but if you find one, let me know. Really...this is astonishing to me. I provided you people with a godforsaken link from the NCAA stating that their was a split national championship and you're still denying its existence. If you won't acknowledge a link from the NCAA, what would you like? Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 08:13 PM	#44
Pete789 Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 536 Senior Member	Really...this is astonishing to me. I provided you people with a godforsaken link from the NCAA stating that their was a split national championship and you're still denying its existence. If you won't acknowledge a link from the NCAA, what would you like? A link saying that the BCS title game doesn't determine the national champion. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 10:15 PM	#45
zzarratusstra Join Date Nov 2005 Posts 459 Senior Member	Really...this is astonishing to me. I provided you people with a godforsaken link from the NCAA stating that their was a split national championship and you're still denying its existence. If you won't acknowledge a link from the NCAA, what would you like? That link doesn't say there were two champions. It says two teams held trophies. I dont know if the AP actually gives you a trophy for being #1 in their rankings, but even if so it doesnt give you the championship. It does NOT say there were two champions. All the site is implying is that there was still controversy. The CHAMPIONSHIP game determines the champions. Your argument would be like saying that the Colts are a split champion this season even if they dont win the Superbowl but the press votes them still #1. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 10:23 PM	#46
newpiknicker Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 460 Senior Member	That link doesn't say there were two champions. It says two teams held trophies. I dont know if the AP actually gives you a trophy for being #1 in their rankings, but even if so it doesnt give you the championship. It does NOT say there were two champions. All the site is implying is that there was still controversy. The CHAMPIONSHIP game determines the champions. Your argument would be like saying that the Colts are a split champion this season even if they dont win the Superbowl but the press votes them still #1. Exactly, and going on their argument I am making the Packers the NFL champs Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 11:00 PM	#47
MackBranon Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 421 Senior Member	That link doesn't say there were two champions. It says two teams held trophies. I dont know if the AP actually gives you a trophy for being #1 in their rankings, but even if so it doesnt give you the championship. It does NOT say there were two champions. All the site is implying is that there was still controversy. The CHAMPIONSHIP game determines the champions. Your argument would be like saying that the Colts are a split champion this season even if they dont win the Superbowl but the press votes them still #1. Please click this link: http://ncaasports.com/football/mens/history The NCAA lists two champions, a BCS one and a consensus one. Then click this one: http://ncaasports.com/football/mens/...0040101_USC@MI It's the NCAA recap of the USC bowl game from 2003. It states clearly on more then one occassion that USC had secured themselves a piece of the national championship. This is where the argument ends. To argue otherwise is pointless. To argue semantics about the word "trophies" when the AP doesn't have a trophy is pointless. If the one and only champion were determined in the BCS, why would they list two national titleists over and over and over on the NCAA's official website? Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 11:03 PM	#48
MariaBeautys Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 359 Senior Member	The only possible confusion could be on what the point of the BCS is. The point is to get the #1 and #2 teams together in a bowl. If that determines an undisputed champion, so be it. The fact that the NCAA counts a split national championship proves that. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 11:04 PM	#49
Jxmwzgpv Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 434 Senior Member	Please click this link: http://ncaasports.com/football/mens/history The NCAA lists two champions, a BCS one and a consensus one. Then click this one: http://ncaasports.com/football/mens/...0040101_USC@MI It's the NCAA recap of the USC bowl game from 2003. It states clearly on more then one occassion that USC had secured themselves a piece of the national championship. This is where the argument ends. To argue otherwise is pointless. To argue semantics about the word "trophies" when the AP doesn't have a trophy is pointless. If the one and only champion were determined in the BCS, why would they list two national titleists over and over and over on the NCAA's official website? Why over and over again? Because the BCS is only 7 years old. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 11:06 PM	#50
Mboxmaja Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 510 Senior Member	The only possible confusion could be on what the point of the BCS is. The point is to get the #1 and #2 teams together in a bowl. If that determines an undisputed champion, so be it. The fact that the NCAA counts a split national championship proves that. Read the article you linked to. The voters in the polls are obligated to vote for the winner of the BCS championship game. It says it right in there. In the first link, there is only one consensus national champion since the BCS was implemented. That is USC. Were there no national champions in those other 7 years? Or, is the winner of the BCS championship game (which was recognized each year) the actual champion? Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 11:07 PM	#51
Jeaxatoem Join Date Nov 2005 Posts 546 Senior Member	Why over and over again? Because the BCS is only 7 years old. More semantics... I was referring to the fact that USC was mentioned several times on several different times as splitting the national title, not that it has occurred several times. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 11:09 PM	#52
PilotJargon Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 344 Senior Member	Read the article you linked to. The voters in the polls are obligated to vote for the winner of the BCS championship game. It says it right in there. In the first link, there is only one consensus national champion since the BCS was implemented. That is USC. Were there no national champions in those other 7 years? Or, is the winner of the BCS championship game (which was recognized each year) the actual champion? Because the definition of "consensus" is something along the lines of popular vote. 2003 was the only year there was a difference between the BCS and the "consensus". EDIT: definition of consensus http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=consensus Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 11:10 PM	#53
Pznrrmaf Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 361 Senior Member	The only possible confusion could be on what the point of the BCS is. The point is to get the #1 and #2 teams together in a bowl. If that determines an undisputed champion, so be it. The fact that the NCAA counts a split national championship proves that. This same listing also shows 4 teams as national champions during one season. Not all of them are relevent as true national champs. In the current system the NCAA rewards ONE champion. The AP also awards their own champion, but that does not make them actual national champs. This site simply lists all factions that reward teams with this honor. As far as the NCAA is actually concerned though there is only one national champion per season. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 11:11 PM	#54
Grennios Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 522 Senior Member	This same listing also shows 4 teams as national champions during one season. Not all of them are relevent as true national champs. In the current system the NCAA rewards ONE champion. The AP also awards their own champion, but that does not make them actual national champs. This site simply lists all factions that reward teams with this honor. As far as the NCAA is actually concerned though there is only one national champion per season. Yeah, back in the 40s and 50s it was a clusterfuck. This has nothing to do with 2006, where only 2 entities determine a champion. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 11:12 PM	#55
Nundduedola Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 609 Senior Member	Because the definition of "consensus" is something along the lines of popular vote. 2003 was the only year there was a difference between the BCS and the "consensus". EDIT: definition of consensus http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=consensus I know what consensus means. That's my point. Everyone agreed that they were the best team. However, the BCS is supposed to dictate the national champion. I really don't care if nobody agrees with the results of the BCS. It's the rules. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests)

02-01-2006, 11:14 PM	#56
DghtRdc Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 517 Senior Member	As far as the NCAA is actually concerned though there is only one national champion per season. It is truly astonishing to me that I can link a story (actually, two) for you from the NCAA's own website acknowledging USC gaining a share of the title and you and pit can still tell me that the NCAA doesn't acknowledge it. Me: George likes vanilla ice cream. You: No he doesn't. Me: Let me get George over here. George - do you like vanilla ice cream? George: Yes, I like vanilla ice cream. You: No, George doesn't like vanilla ice cream. Me: Awesome, I'm going to go hang myself. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 11:16 PM	#57
Hftqdxpm Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 450 Senior Member	I know what consensus means. That's my point. Everyone agreed that they were the best team. However, the BCS is supposed to dictate the national champion. I really don't care if nobody agrees with the results of the BCS. It's the rules. This is exactly what I addressed in post #48. You have the point of the BCS wrong. They just want to get a #1 and a #2 together and give them a trophy. It's a piece of the puzzle. The be all, end all would not be an organization with representatives from only the 6 major conferences. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 11:18 PM	#58
sarasmid Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 445 Senior Member	It is truly astonishing to me that I can link a story (actually, two) for you from the NCAA's own website acknowledging USC gaining a share of the title and you and pit can still tell me that the NCAA doesn't acknowledge it. Me: George likes vanilla ice cream. You: No he doesn't. Me: Let me get George over here. George - do you like vanilla ice cream? George: Yes, I like vanilla ice cream. You: No, George doesn't like vanilla ice cream. Me: Awesome, I'm going to go hang myself. There are lots of college polls. If 6 of these nationally listed polls come to different conclusions with the number 1 team are all 6 national champs? No. The team that won the national championship game is the national champions. Simply because the NCAA lists who the AP has as THEIR national champions does not make them NCAA champs. Its simply showing historical data and since the AP poll is a respected faction they deem it necessary to list that. I dont know how one can not understand that the winner of the championship game is THE champion. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 11:19 PM	#59
DoctorNelsonOnten Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 392 Senior Member	This is exactly what I addressed in post #48. You have the point of the BCS wrong. They just want to get a #1 and a #2 together and give them a trophy. It's a piece of the puzzle. The be all, end all would not be an organization with representatives from only the 6 major conferences. To which I replied the voters are obligated to vote the winner of the BCS championship game the national champion. That's a direct quote from your article. However, I really don't care. I was just arguing for the sake of argument. Here's another link to support the worst strong safety in coverage in the NFL: http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/bcs_explained.html Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

02-01-2006, 11:22 PM	#60
Dwencejed Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 474 Senior Member	There are lots of college polls. If 6 of these nationally listed polls come to different conclusions with the number 1 team are all 6 national champs? No. The team that won the national championship game is the national champions. Simply because the NCAA lists who the AP has as THEIR national champions does not make them NCAA champs. Its simply showing historical data and since the AP poll is a respected faction they deem it necessary to list that. I dont know how one can not understand that the winner of the championship game is THE champion. Neat. The NCAA disagrees with you and unfortunately, their incompetent asses are who's in charge. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote