Is the loser of the SECCG

[gomersnerd]

   really number 2 in the SEC? Nope. They just represented the other division in the game. They could have a sorry record and the division be weak (Last year). The winner of the east might be the third best  team in the west. Since they don't play a round robin there can't be a second "legit" second place team.

[mj4president]

Tell us something we don't know. We still beat some good teams to get there. You can't have a "sorry" conference record to make it there.

[DEVICEHIGH]

   really number 2 in the SEC? Nope. They just represented the other division in the game. They could have a sorry record and the division be weak (Last year). The winner of the east might be the third best  team in the west. Since they don't play a round robin there can't be a second "legit" second place team.

I think your stretching to be negative.

[moses_007]

As far as I'm concerned, the loser of the SEC championship game is the No. 2 team in the league. I don't understand why Arkansas didn't get the Sugar Bowl bid instead of LSU last year.  LSU did not even win the Western Division, yet got the BCS bid instead of the Hogs.  It doesn't make sense.

[FootballHog]

Our division was weak last year? We had 3 10+ win teams.

[Tammany Tom]

As far as I'm concerned, the loser of the SEC championship game is the No. 2 team in the league. I don't understand why Arkansas didn't get the Sugar Bowl bid instead of LSU last year.  LSU did not even win the Western Division, yet got the BCS bid instead of the Hogs.  It doesn't make sense.

If you are on a BCS Bowl committee and had a choice between a team (LSU) that is 10-2, ranked #4 in both national polls, has won 6 straight games or a team (Arkansas) that is 10-3, ranked #13, lost their last 2 games (of which one was to the other team at home), which one are you picking?   

With any objectivity at all the answer is quite easy.

[gomersnerd]

Our division was weak last year? We had 3 10+ win teams.

playing the rest of the leagues patsies helped. Check MSU,UM,Vandy,UK  and typical ooc schedule. We could win 10 this year because of the schedule.

[gomersnerd]

    The Sugar Bowl didn't think so.

[HuntinHog421]

What else is new?

[Albert Einswine]

As far as I'm concerned, the loser of the SEC championship game is the No. 2 team in the league. I don't understand why Arkansas didn't get the Sugar Bowl bid instead of LSU last year.  LSU did not even win the Western Division, yet got the BCS bid instead of the Hogs.  It doesn't make sense.

If you are on a BCS Bowl committee and had a choice between a team (LSU) that is 10-2, ranked #4 in both national polls, has won 6 straight games or a team (Arkansas) that is 10-3, ranked #13, lost their last 2 games (of which one was to the other team at home), which one are you picking?  

With any objectivity at all the answer is quite easy.

I agree with you wholeheartedly, Tom.   The pure homers will never get it.  And I mean homers for any team in the country, not just ours.

[Mr. Prozac]

As far as I'm concerned, the loser of the SEC championship game is the No. 2 team in the league. I don't understand why Arkansas didn't get the Sugar Bowl bid instead of LSU last year.  LSU did not even win the Western Division, yet got the BCS bid instead of the Hogs.  It doesn't make sense.

If you are on a BCS Bowl committee and had a choice between a team (LSU) that is 10-2, ranked #4 in both national polls, has won 6 straight games or a team (Arkansas) that is 10-3, ranked #13, lost their last 2 games (of which one was to the other team at home), which one are you picking?  

With any objectivity at all the answer is quite easy.

I completely understand why the Sugar Bowl chose LSU...

What if Arkansas had beaten Florida, though? Arkansas likely would have gone to the Sugar Bowl and one could still argue that LSU was better (if one wanted to argue that). Such is the system we have--it will always provide coaches (Miles) and fans of opposing teams something to debate and argue about.

[Big Papa Satan]

If you are on a BCS Bowl committee and had a choice between a team (LSU) that is 10-2, ranked #4 in both national polls, has won 6 straight games or a team (Arkansas) that is 10-3, ranked #13, lost their last 2 games (of which one was to the other team at home), which one are you picking?   

With any objectivity at all the answer is quite easy.

LSU also finished third in their own division.

No third-place team has any business even sniffing a BCS bowl.

[gohogs]

if we had switched bowls with LSU we would be looking at 11-3 instead of 10-4. that looks a lot better

[Tammany Tom]

If you are on a BCS Bowl committee and had a choice between a team (LSU) that is 10-2, ranked #4 in both national polls, has won 6 straight games or a team (Arkansas) that is 10-3, ranked #13, lost their last 2 games (of which one was to the other team at home), which one are you picking?  

With any objectivity at all the answer is quite easy.

LSU also finished third in their own division.

No third-place team has any business even sniffing a BCS bowl.

Whatever.

Arkansas had every opportunity to win their way into a BCS Bowl game. All Arkansas had to do was either beat LSU at home or beat Florida. Just win one of them. When the chips were laid out on the table, Arkansas couldn't get it done.

It was spelled out very clearly to the LSU administration and coaching staff: Beat Arkansas and you get a BCS Bowl game. Lose and you get Dallas. LSU got it done.

FYI: SEC West titles are pretty much meaningless if you don't win the Championship game.

What did it get LSU in 2005?

Answer: An invitation to the Peach Bowl. Both Auburn and Alabama got invitations to more prestigious bowls (Cap One and Cotton) even though LSU beat both.

[THHAWG]

They chose LSU because LSU was the better (as demonstrated by beating Arkansas on the road).  LSU then went on win a major bowl game in dominant fashion.  When is the last time Arkansas made it to a major bowl and then actually played a solid game?

[gomersnerd]

Reason number 1 - $$$$$


More LSU fans would go

[Orion]

 the tiggers went to the suger bowl for one reason money. has nothing to do with anything else. Its not the teams its the fans and tigger fans put their money where there mouth is we dont. we just set back and blow hot air.

[jabohog]

As far as I'm concerned, the loser of the SEC championship game is the No. 2 team in the league. I don't understand why Arkansas didn't get the Sugar Bowl bid instead of LSU last year.  LSU did not even win the Western Division, yet got the BCS bid instead of the Hogs.  It doesn't make sense.

Amen, brother. I have sung that song but it is on deaf ears. Our media has never brought that up. It was the same way when we went to the MCB to play Minn. Arkansas should just be glad to be here, and our coach echos that tune. So do most of our fans.

[jabohog]

the tiggers went to the suger bowl for one reason money. has nothing to do with anything else. Its not the teams its the fans and tigger fans put their money where there mouth is we dont. we just set back and blow hot air.

YOur so full of crap you smell like a Christmas turkey. LSU fans show up, but the Sugar bowl was worried like hell that they wouldn't come and spend the money on hotels, etc. because they could turn around a drive home. Hog fans on the other hand would come and stay and check out the sites. Don't believe that, prove me wrong guber.

[moses_007]

They chose LSU because LSU was the better (as demonstrated by beating Arkansas on the road).  LSU then went on win a major bowl game in dominant fashion.  When is the last time Arkansas made it to a major bowl and then actually played a solid game?

It was the 2000 Cotton Bowl...we beat the crap out of Texas.

[Orion]

I live in louisiana moron and they had a school called Notre Dame to sell out Hotels, and LSU fans put their money where their mouth is . Arkansas fans couldn't even sellout the Cap bowl in Florida maybe you have heard of it one of the best tourist sites in america

[Tammany Tom]

As far as I'm concerned, the loser of the SEC championship game is the No. 2 team in the league. I don't understand why Arkansas didn't get the Sugar Bowl bid instead of LSU last year.  LSU did not even win the Western Division, yet got the BCS bid instead of the Hogs.  It doesn't make sense.

Amen, brother. I have sung that song but it is on deaf ears. Our media has never brought that up. It was the same way when we went to the MCB to play Minn. Arkansas should just be glad to be here, and our coach echos that tune. So do most of our fans.

Some of you guys just don't get it. Winning a division gets you one thing and one thing only. The opportunity to play for the SEC Championship. Nothing more, Nothing less.

It's all about the SEC Championship. Win it and you get all the accolades of being the SEC Champion. You get the SEC Championship Trophy and you get an automatic berth into a BCS Bowl game. Your fanbase gets bragging rights for a full year as being the best team in the southeast.

Lose the Championship game and it gets you nothing. Division Titles are meaningless if you lose in the Championship game.

Case in point:

2001: LSU beats #2 ranked Tennessee

If Tennessee had won then they would have been playing for the National Championship in the Rose Bowl against Miami. However, they lost and they ended up playing in the Cap One Bowl and Florida gets a BCS Bowl invitation to play in the Orange Bowl even though Tennessee won the SEC East.

2002: Georgia beats Arkansas

If Arkansas had won, they would have been SEC Champions and would have played in the Sugar Bowl. They lost and ended up in the Music City Bowl. Auburn gets Cap One Bowl and LSU gets Cotton Bowl even though Arkansas won the SEC West and beat both LSU and Auburn.

2004: Auburn beats Tennessee

Tennessee gets Cotton Bowl and Florida gets the more prestigious Cap One bowl even though Tennessee won the SEC East.

2005: Georgia beats LSU

LSU gets a Peach Bowl invitation and Auburn and Alabama get invitations to more prestigious bowls even though LSU won the SEC West and beat both Auburn and Alabama during the year.

2006: Florida beats Arkansas

LSU gets BCS Bowl berth in Sugar Bowl and Arkansas gets Cap One invitation.


As you Hog fans can clearly see: There is no conspiracy against you. As demonstrated above, several teams have won their division and got lessor bowls than teams within their own division.

[Fatty McGee]

That's why mega conferences where you don't play all your conference opponents and have rematches in "championship" games are stupid.  Good for collecting $$, bad for the game.

[moses_007]

As far as I'm concerned, the loser of the SEC championship game is the No. 2 team in the league. I don't understand why Arkansas didn't get the Sugar Bowl bid instead of LSU last year.  LSU did not even win the Western Division, yet got the BCS bid instead of the Hogs.  It doesn't make sense.

Amen, brother. I have sung that song but it is on deaf ears. Our media has never brought that up. It was the same way when we went to the MCB to play Minn. Arkansas should just be glad to be here, and our coach echos that tune. So do most of our fans.

Some of you guys just don't get it. Winning a division gets you one thing and one thing only. The opportunity to play for the SEC Championship. Nothing more, Nothing less.

It's all about the SEC Championship. Win it and you get all the accolades of being the SEC Champion. You get the SEC Championship Trophy and you get an automatic berth into a BCS Bowl game. Your fanbase gets bragging rights for a full year as being the best team in the southeast.

Lose the Championship game and it gets you nothing. Division Titles are meaningless if you lose in the Championship game.

Case in point:

2001: LSU beats #2 ranked Tennessee

If Tennessee had won then they would have been playing for the National Championship in the Rose Bowl against Miami. However, they lost and they ended up playing in the Cap One Bowl and Florida gets a BCS Bowl invitation to play in the Orange Bowl even though Tennessee won the SEC East.

2002: Georgia beats Arkansas

If Arkansas had won, they would have been SEC Champions and would have played in the Sugar Bowl. They lost and ended up in the Music City Bowl. Auburn gets Cap One Bowl and LSU gets Cotton Bowl even though Arkansas won the SEC West and beat both LSU and Auburn.

2004: Auburn beats Tennessee

Tennessee gets Cotton Bowl and Florida gets the more prestigious Cap One bowl even though Tennessee won the SEC East.

2005: Georgia beats LSU

LSU gets a Peach Bowl invitation and Auburn and Alabama get invitations to more prestigious bowls even though LSU won the SEC West and beat both Auburn and Alabama during the year.

2006: Florida beats Arkansas

LSU gets BCS Bowl berth in Sugar Bowl and Arkansas gets Cap One invitation.


As you Hog fans can clearly see: There is no conspiracy against you. As demonstrated above, several teams have won their division and got lessor bowls than teams within their own division.

Good post.  I suppose it is clear that losing the SEC championship game gets you nowhere.

[gomersnerd]

It gets you a nice ring

[Tammany Tom]

I'm not saying we should have went in lieu of LSU but to not even acknowlege Ivan's point is being a tad bit hypocritical, given that you just told us about being homers.  I agree that Arkansas shouldn't have went but it's hard to say a team that finishes 3rd in their division should go as well. 

Where in one of my posts did I tell you that you were homers? You obviously read someone else's post and mistook it for one of mine.

I don't know how much clearer I could have been in the post that he responded to. If that post doesn't make sense to you guys, then quite frankly I just don't know what to say. 

If you are on a BCS Bowl committee and had a choice between a team (LSU) that is 10-2, ranked #4 in both national polls, has won 6 straight games or a team (Arkansas) that is 10-3, ranked #13, lost their last 2 games (of which one was to the other team at home), which one are you picking?  

With any objectivity at all the answer is quite easy.

You guys put way too much emphasis on winning the division. Like I have pointed out in my other posts: Winning a division is meaningless if you lose the championship game.

BCS bowls, much less the Cap One, Cotton, and Outback Bowls could care less about how a team finished in their division. What they do care about is the team's overall record, the team's national rank, how the team is currently playing, and probably most importantly how well the team's fanbase will travel to that particular bowl game.

LSU had a better record, beat Arkansas head to head, and was considered a better team by everyone in the country by virtue of being ranked in all 3 major polls #4 in the country to Arkansas' #13 rank after the SEC Championship game. LSU had won 6 straight and Arkansas had lost 2 straight.

One more point I would like to make: The Rose Bowl was all set to invite LSU to play Michigan until UCLA upset USC sending USC to the Rose and Florida to the BCS Championship game. LSU had pre-sold over 45,000 tickets to the Rose Bowl game. So, all you people that think that LSU got the BCS bowl berth strickly by being a home state school you are sorely mistaken.

[moses_007]

It gets you a nice ring

Who wants rings?  I want championship trophies.

[Albert Einswine]

They chose LSU because LSU was the better (as demonstrated by beating Arkansas on the road).  LSU then went on win a major bowl game in dominant fashion.  When is the last time Arkansas made it to a major bowl and then actually played a solid game?

It was the 2000 Cotton Bowl...we beat the crap out of Texas.

He said "Major Bowl".  The Cotton doesn't qualify.

[SoTexHog]

As far as I'm concerned, the loser of the SEC championship game is the No. 2 team in the league. I don't understand why Arkansas didn't get the Sugar Bowl bid instead of LSU last year.  LSU did not even win the Western Division, yet got the BCS bid instead of the Hogs.  It doesn't make sense.

If you are on a BCS Bowl committee and had a choice between a team (LSU) that is 10-2, ranked #4 in both national polls, has won 6 straight games or a team (Arkansas) that is 10-3, ranked #13, lost their last 2 games (of which one was to the other team at home), which one are you picking?  

With any objectivity at all the answer is quite easy.

not to mention the game is in Nawlins

[hogfan064]

Funny thing is that although LSU played in the Sugar Bowl and we played in the Capital One Bowl.  We by far played the better team in our bowl. 

[BW]

Quick question and it is a total thread de-railer, but after watching these threads the last couple of days, by some peoples logic on here, do the Cardinals deserve rings if they win the NL Central and then the National league all together? so the Cards with 9 NL Central titles is like Arkansas winning the west? {Flame suit on}

BW

[hogsanity]

This argument just shows the problems with all of the leagues that have title games but unbalanced schedules.  The BCS needs to adopt rules, imo, that only CONF CHAM game teams are elig for BCS bowls.  Lets nor forget, we had a BCS title game contender on at least one occasion that did not even win their division, and thats just wrong. 

As for the LSU/AR deal.  LSU lost early, and was higher in the BCS rankings at the time of selections.  It was pretty comoon knowledge that whoever lost the SECCg would get left out of the BCS. 

[War Warthog]

   really number 2 in the SEC? Nope. They just represented the other division in the game. They could have a sorry record and the division be weak (Last year). The winner of the east might be the third best  team in the west. Since they don't play a round robin there can't be a second "legit" second place team.

I sincerely doubt any of us thought Mississippi State was #2 when we tied for the SECW (still got a ring, BTW) and they went to the SECCG.

[311Hog]

"You guys put way too much emphasis on winning the division. Like I have pointed out in my other posts: Winning a division is meaningless if you lose the championship game. "



Thanks Tammany i been saying this for years.

[FAABrad]

Just for clarification LSU actually tied for second in the SEC West but would have lost a fictitious tiebreaker due to losing to Auburn head to head.

[gohawgsgo]

Winning the West is not meaningless.  It is not winning the SEC though.  If you win the West, that's a good year.  If you win the SEC, that's a great year.  I'm sorry but LSU, Auburn and Alabama reside in the West.  So winning it isn't meaningless.

[moses_007]

They chose LSU because LSU was the better (as demonstrated by beating Arkansas on the road).  LSU then went on win a major bowl game in dominant fashion.  When is the last time Arkansas made it to a major bowl and then actually played a solid game?

It was the 2000 Cotton Bowl...we beat the crap out of Texas.

He said "Major Bowl".  The Cotton doesn't qualify.

The Cotton Bowl was one of the original major bowls, along with the Rose, Orange and Sugar bowls.  I can remember the days when all the other bowls were second-rate.

[311Hog]

They chose LSU because LSU was the better (as demonstrated by beating Arkansas on the road).  LSU then went on win a major bowl game in dominant fashion.  When is the last time Arkansas made it to a major bowl and then actually played a solid game?

It was the 2000 Cotton Bowl...we beat the crap out of Texas.

He said "Major Bowl".  The Cotton doesn't qualify.

The Cotton Bowl was one of the original major bowls, along with the Rose, Orange and Sugar bowls.  I can remember the days when all the other bowls were second-rate.

And those days are gone.

[Rolex]

Boy, Nutt was definitely shaking that "2nd Place" ring in their face at the SEC meeting last week. You think Urban Meyer shook the "1st Place" ring as well as the National Championship Ring in their face. Probably not...he has integrity and class. And by the way, a BCS bowl in his second year. GO FIGURE!

[Tammany Tom]

I think you're still missing my point.  I don't disagree that LSU shouldn't have went.  I'm quite aware of the history that goes against the division champ who loses in Atlanta.  Several teams have got hosed.  But, just because something has happened for years doesn't make it right.

First. There is nothing right about the bowl system. Never has been, Never will be. Just like life isn't fair, the bowl system is not fair. It amazes me that there are still college football fans out there that get perplexed every year by teams that get selected to go to one bowl over another team. Bowl games are all about economics. I know someone on the Sugar Bowl committee and I have listened to all the politics that go into play for years now. The actual selections are far more rigid now for BCS Bowls than in the past, but there is still plenty of political manuevering going on from a lot of different factions.

Second. The SEC Schedules are not fair. Period. The SEC has done what the NFL does and that is to try their best at ensuring some paritiy by making the best programs play each other as permanent opponents from each division. LSU's permanent east opponent is Florida, Auburn's permanent east opponent is Georgia, and Alabama's permanent opponent is Tennesee. This ensures that the best play the best and the MS State's and Ole Misses of the world get to have Kentucky and Vandy on their schedule every year.

Third. In the SEC, it's all about winning the SEC Championship. Winning your division gives you the right to play for it, which is all the reward needed for winning your division. That in itself is plenty, don't you think? All I ask for every year from my team is to be a legitimate contender for the SEC Championship. We play this game, especially in this conference, to win championships.

Fourth. Winning a division and losing the championship game in no way, shape, or form makes you the second best team in the conference and you should not be recognized as such. What do people want? A gold star. With the lopsided conference schedules and year's where 2, if not 3, of the best teams in the conference could very well be from the same division, there is no reason why anyone should consider a division champion and Championship game loser as the 2nd best team in the conference. Why that is so important to anyone baffles the hell out of me. I was pissed that we lost to Georgia in 2005 and weren't champions. After losing that game, I really didn't care what bowl game we played in. It was completely irrelevant. All I cared about was winning our bowl game and finishing in the Top Ten in the national rankings. We did and things fell into place and we ended up in the Top Five.

[Fatty McGee]

The only sports that come close to determining who the best team is are pro hockey and pro basketball. 

Since you can't have 7 game series in college football, we need to drop the pretense that the national championship will ever be anything more than a guess anyway.  Instead, let's do our best to reward sustained excellence by dropping the championship games, going back to 10 team conferences, and using the conference bowl tie-ins. 

If it results in a shared national championship once every decade, so be it. 

[Albert Einswine]

They chose LSU because LSU was the better (as demonstrated by beating Arkansas on the road).  LSU then went on win a major bowl game in dominant fashion.  When is the last time Arkansas made it to a major bowl and then actually played a solid game?

It was the 2000 Cotton Bowl...we beat the crap out of Texas.

He said "Major Bowl".  The Cotton doesn't qualify.

The Cotton Bowl was one of the original major bowls, along with the Rose, Orange and Sugar bowls.  I can remember the days when all the other bowls were second-rate.

I remember when the Cotton Bowl was a major bowl.  It hasn't realistically been a major bowl since before the dissolution of the SWC.  It certainly hasn't been a major bowl since the advent of the BCS.

It was a 2nd tier bowl when we beat Texas in '00.  No major bowl would have invited a 7-4 team.

[Albert Einswine]

First. There is nothing right about the bowl system. Never has been, Never will be. Just like life isn't fair, the bowl system is not fair. It amazes me that there are still college football fans out there that get perplexed every year by teams that get selected to go to one bowl over another team. Bowl games are all about economics. I know someone on the Sugar Bowl committee and I have listened to all the politics that go into play for years now. The actual selections are far more rigid now for BCS Bowls than in the past, but there is still plenty of political manuevering going on from a lot of different factions.

Second. The SEC Schedules are not fair. Period. The SEC has done what the NFL does and that is to try their best at ensuring some paritiy by making the best programs play each other as permanent opponents from each division. LSU's permanent east opponent is Florida, Auburn's permanent east opponent is Georgia, and Alabama's permanent opponent is Tennesee. This ensures that the best play the best and the MS State's and Ole Misses of the world get to have Kentucky and Vandy on their schedule every year.

Third. In the SEC, it's all about winning the SEC Championship. Winning your division gives you the right to play for it, which is all the reward needed for winning your division. That in itself is plenty, don't you think? All I ask for every year from my team is to be a legitimate contender for the SEC Championship. We play this game, especially in this conference, to win championships.

Fourth. Winning a division and losing the championship game in no way, shape, or form makes you the second best team in the conference and you should not be recognized as such. What do people want? A gold star. With the lopsided conference schedules and year's where 2, if not 3, of the best teams in the conference could very well be from the same division, there is no reason why anyone should consider a division champion and Championship game loser as the 2nd best team in the conference. Why that is so important to anyone baffles the hell out of me. I was pissed that we lost to Georgia in 2005 and weren't champions. After losing that game, I really didn't care what bowl game we played in. It was completely irrelevant. All I cared about was winning our bowl game and finishing in the Top Ten in the national rankings. We did and things fell into place and we ended up in the Top Five.

Solid, solid post Tom.  What you need to understand is that here in the Cult of Nutt it's alright to lose in the SEC Championship game because you can still call yourself champions for winning the Division.  It appears to be pervasive within our fan base.  It's definitely pervasive within our athletic administration.

Somehow I don't see it flying at LSU, Tenn, Georgia, Florida, etc...

[hogsanity]

First. There is nothing right about the bowl system. Never has been, Never will be. Just like life isn't fair, the bowl system is not fair. It amazes me that there are still college football fans out there that get perplexed every year by teams that get selected to go to one bowl over another team. Bowl games are all about economics. I know someone on the Sugar Bowl committee and I have listened to all the politics that go into play for years now. The actual selections are far more rigid now for BCS Bowls than in the past, but there is still plenty of political manuevering going on from a lot of different factions.

Second. The SEC Schedules are not fair. Period. The SEC has done what the NFL does and that is to try their best at ensuring some paritiy by making the best programs play each other as permanent opponents from each division. LSU's permanent east opponent is Florida, Auburn's permanent east opponent is Georgia, and Alabama's permanent opponent is Tennesee. This ensures that the best play the best and the MS State's and Ole Misses of the world get to have Kentucky and Vandy on their schedule every year.

Third. In the SEC, it's all about winning the SEC Championship. Winning your division gives you the right to play for it, which is all the reward needed for winning your division. That in itself is plenty, don't you think? All I ask for every year from my team is to be a legitimate contender for the SEC Championship. We play this game, especially in this conference, to win championships.

Fourth. Winning a division and losing the championship game in no way, shape, or form makes you the second best team in the conference and you should not be recognized as such. What do people want? A gold star. With the lopsided conference schedules and year's where 2, if not 3, of the best teams in the conference could very well be from the same division, there is no reason why anyone should consider a division champion and Championship game loser as the 2nd best team in the conference. Why that is so important to anyone baffles the hell out of me. I was pissed that we lost to Georgia in 2005 and weren't champions. After losing that game, I really didn't care what bowl game we played in. It was completely irrelevant. All I cared about was winning our bowl game and finishing in the Top Ten in the national rankings. We did and things fell into place and we ended up in the Top Five.

Solid, solid post Tom.  What you need to understand is that here in the Cult of Nutt it's alright to lose in the SEC Championship game because you can still call yourself champions for winning the Division.  It appears to be pervasive within our fan base.  It's definitely pervasive within our athletic administration.

Somehow I don't see it flying at LSU, Tenn, Georgia, Florida, etc...

Winning the division is not the be all end all, just ask any Braves fan, but you still have to win it first to get a shot at the SECCG.  The accomplishment of getting to the title game should not be diminished.  The failure, for a 3rd time in the programs tenure in the SEC, to win the SECCG is what should be taken to task. 

Whether you like it or not, those players went out and won 10 games in a row.  They did what they had to do to win the division.  Should they get a ring for that?  I dont know.  Are they the first team to get a ring for the division?  From everything i have read, no they are not. 

Winning your division in the SEC, either e or w, is hard.

[Albert Einswine]

First. There is nothing right about the bowl system. Never has been, Never will be. Just like life isn't fair, the bowl system is not fair. It amazes me that there are still college football fans out there that get perplexed every year by teams that get selected to go to one bowl over another team. Bowl games are all about economics. I know someone on the Sugar Bowl committee and I have listened to all the politics that go into play for years now. The actual selections are far more rigid now for BCS Bowls than in the past, but there is still plenty of political manuevering going on from a lot of different factions.

Second. The SEC Schedules are not fair. Period. The SEC has done what the NFL does and that is to try their best at ensuring some paritiy by making the best programs play each other as permanent opponents from each division. LSU's permanent east opponent is Florida, Auburn's permanent east opponent is Georgia, and Alabama's permanent opponent is Tennesee. This ensures that the best play the best and the MS State's and Ole Misses of the world get to have Kentucky and Vandy on their schedule every year.

Third. In the SEC, it's all about winning the SEC Championship. Winning your division gives you the right to play for it, which is all the reward needed for winning your division. That in itself is plenty, don't you think? All I ask for every year from my team is to be a legitimate contender for the SEC Championship. We play this game, especially in this conference, to win championships.

Fourth. Winning a division and losing the championship game in no way, shape, or form makes you the second best team in the conference and you should not be recognized as such. What do people want? A gold star. With the lopsided conference schedules and year's where 2, if not 3, of the best teams in the conference could very well be from the same division, there is no reason why anyone should consider a division champion and Championship game loser as the 2nd best team in the conference. Why that is so important to anyone baffles the hell out of me. I was pissed that we lost to Georgia in 2005 and weren't champions. After losing that game, I really didn't care what bowl game we played in. It was completely irrelevant. All I cared about was winning our bowl game and finishing in the Top Ten in the national rankings. We did and things fell into place and we ended up in the Top Five.

Solid, solid post Tom.  What you need to understand is that here in the Cult of Nutt it's alright to lose in the SEC Championship game because you can still call yourself champions for winning the Division.  It appears to be pervasive within our fan base.  It's definitely pervasive within our athletic administration.

Somehow I don't see it flying at LSU, Tenn, Georgia, Florida, etc...

Winning the division is not the be all end all, just ask any Braves fan, but you still have to win it first to get a shot at the SECCG.  The accomplishment of getting to the title game should not be diminished.  The failure, for a 3rd time in the programs tenure in the SEC, to win the SECCG is what should be taken to task. 

Whether you like it or not, those players went out and won 10 games in a row.  They did what they had to do to win the division.  Should they get a ring for that?  I dont know.  Are they the first team to get a ring for the division?  From everything i have read, no they are not. 

Winning your division in the SEC, either e or w, is hard.

I never said it wasn't hard or that it wasn't noteworthy.  I like it that the players won 10 games in a row last year.  It was hard to watch how it crumbled after that.

All I'm saying is that it appears foolish the way one faction of the base wants to trumpet winning the division but never acknowledge we lost the championship.  It must look especially foolish to outsiders.  I imagine Urban Meyer must have been a little embarrassed for Houston after the ring flashing display.

I understand why LSU got selected to go to the Sugar Bowl.  After we lost 2 straight games, one of them being to LSU at home, we weren't a very attractive option with 3 losses vs. their 2.

Our boys had vindicated themselves reeling off 10 straight after the USC debacle, but after losing back to back games to LSU and Florida we lost a great deal of legitimacy in the minds of pollsters, pundits and BCS Bowl committee members.

It was a very good season.  It could have been great.  I wish our coach and many of our fans would stop strutting about like the cock of the walk because we won the division.  It's a nice accomplishment, but as you stated, it serves only to give you the right to play for a championship.

And as a fan, I am tired of not getting over the hump in the SECCG.  I'm also tired of tanking in bowl games and that goes well beyond Houston Nutt.  We've always had a piss poor bowl record.