Conflict of interest anybody?
1. A lot more voters with SEC ties than B12 ties
2. ESPN/ABC keeps pushing the propaganda that Okla St just doesn't deserve a shot at LSU like Alabama deserves a second shot.
I copied part of the article linked here below:
-------
For me, if the man behind the curtain at ESPN calls out LSU vs. Bama on Sunday, the college football season is over, and LSU is your national champion. I’m not obligated to vote for the winner of the “invite only†one-game of a crappy BCS system, like the “coaches†are in the “Coaches" Poll.
Why would I vote Bama over LSU if they win? In that scenario the teams are 1-1, with LSU 13-1 to Bama’s 12-1, the Tigers will have won both the SEC and SEC West crowns, will have more wins than Bama, more wins against ranked opponents by far, more wins against teams with winning records, more wins against top three opponents, more wins against conference champions (Oregon and WVU to Bama’s zero), AND WILL HAVE BEATEN THE TIDE IN THEIR OWN STADIUM.
Tell me again why Bama would be the champion?
One side note – if you’re wondering why nearly every voice at ESPN is united in proposing the single argument that there IS no argument on who should be playing LSU… If you’re wondering how a network that usually encourages us to debate every possible nuance of CFB has now for two weeks been unified in selling us a single message, I remind you of this little ditty:
The Entertainment and Sports Programming Network recently paid $2.25 billion, that’s with a B, for broadcasting rights to the SEC for 15 years…AND ESPN now owns the broadcasting rights for our sports’ BCS Championship game as well.
Yes, ESPN has its fingers in nearly every conference, but nothing to the scale it has invested with the SEC. That’s a lot of motivation to support the LSU/Bama brands…in a neck-and-neck situation, especially. Somebody bang a gavel and keep it in the family.
