I for one welcome our new SEC overlords

Well, not really. But with LSU #1 and Georgia #2 in the final AP poll (just as I predicted), it's sort of inescapable. The drumbeat of SEC chest-beating will be unavoidable between now and next September. OMG BEST CONFERENCE EVAR!1!!

By the way, LSU was not a unanimous #1 -- second-ranked Georgia got 3 first-place votes, third-ranked USC got 1, and seventh-ranked Kansas got 1 -- but this wasn't even close to being a split championship. (Again, just as I predicted.) LSU finished with 60 first-place votes and 1,620 points overall. Georgia got 1,515 points; USC, 1,500.

Of course, as David mentioned yesterday, I'm sure LSU will graciously refuse to accept the Associated Press championship trophy. ;)

After the Tigers, Bulldogs and Trojans comes a tight battle for #4, which Missouri eked out with 1,347 points -- one more point than #5 Ohio State (1,346) and five more than #6 West Virginia (1,342). A bit further behind is Kansas, one of just two one-loss teams in the nation (the other being #19 Hawaii), with 1,303 points.

Rounding out the AP Top 15: #8 Oklahoma, #9 Virginia Tech, #10 Texas and Boston College (tied), #12 Tennessee, #13 Florida, #14 BYU and #15 Auburn. For those keeping score at home, that's five SEC teams in the Top 15. Please shoot me now. ... Of course, if you look at their records, you'll note that Tennessee, Florida and Auburn are the only four-loss teams ranked above #18, which is further evidence of the Kreutz Theorem ("when [pollsters] rank SEC teams, they automatically subtract a loss from their record"). Heh.

Michigan, if you're wondering, finished #18, the highest-ranked non-SEC four-loss team. Who can honestly say they saw that coming back in September? Oh, and Appalachian State got 5 votes, effectively tying them for 34th place with South Florida. HOT! HOT! HOT!

Anyway, on a more serious note: congratulations to the LSU Tigers! Whatever we may think of the BCS, the Bayou Bengals deserve credit for surviving this most turbulent of college-football seasons and earning, at last, an undisputed national championship... sort of. :) Well done, guys. Way to geaux.

P.S. This is the first time two teams from the same conference have finished the season ranked #1 and #2 in the AP poll since 1971, when the top two were #1 Nebraska and #2 Oklahoma of the Big Eight. (And it didn't stop there. Fellow conference-mate Colorado was #3!)

UPDATE: In the final USA Today coaches poll, USC edged Geogria for the #2 spot, 1,380 points to 1,370, and Ohio State headily beat Missouri for the #4 spot, 1,287 to 1,241, with West Virginia close behind Mizzou at 1,239, and Kansas at 1,217. Unlike in 2003, there were no dissenters from the contractually obligatory coronation of LSU as the #1 team.

UPDATE 2: As long as we're talking rankings, Stewart Mandel has posted his preseason Top 10 for 2008. Of course, much depends on various juniors' stay-or-go-pro decisions. But provisionally, he has Georgia at #1, Ohio State #2, Oklahoma #3, USC #4 and Missouri #5. LSU, which he says "will be hit harder by graduation than any of the other top teams from 2007," is #9.

Comments

[Brian Foster]

Of course, as David mentioned yesterday, I'm sure LSU will graciously refuse to accept the Associated Press championship trophy. ;)

I realize you're mostly kidding, but I'm feeling argumentative today. (What else is new, right?)

To be fair, did LSU actually argue that USC should refuse the trophy? I only recall them saying that the AP trophy was not the "true" or "official" national championship trophy because everyone had agreed on the BCS and not the AP as the mechanism for determining the national champion.

So, having won the "official" championship, it would not be inconsistent for LSU to accept the "unofficial" championship as well, even if they argued then that USC ought not consider themselves co-champions because of the AP award -- USC had no reason not to accept the award, according to LSU; it just didn't make USC co-champions.

By analogy -- when the same player wins the Heisman and the Maxwell, there is no reason for him to decline the Maxwell simply because the Heisman is considered the better accolade. But when different players win the Heisman and the Maxwell, the Maxwell winner cannot credibly claim to be the co-best player in college football, because everyone agrees that that distinction goes to the Heisman winner.

I'm not saying that's a correct argument as applied to BCS/AP championship, just that it's valid -- and more to the point, it does not make LSU inconsistent to accept both awards now.

[Brendan Loy]

You're right, of course, Brian. LSU -- or, more precisely, its fans -- would only be revealed as hypocrites if they were to accept the accolades that would come with winning the AP championship when somebody else wins the BCS title.

Which, of course, they would... accept the accolades, I mean. As any fan or university would. Duh.

But that's not the case here. So I'm not making a serious anti-LSU argument. I'm kidding around, as you said. Just having a little fun.

Anyway, I did mean what I said about congratulating the Tigers. For all my talk about the "mythical" nature of this year's championship, they are a legit title winner under the current system, and I begrudge them nothing in that regard. Moreover, they're a genuinely good team, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if they ended up being the champion even under a better, fairer, more rational system. So, like I said, way to geaux, Tigers.

[Mindsurfer]

Congratulations to Georgia for finishing second. It wasn't fair when Tennessee interfered with their shot at the SEC title game. But, alas, let’s not forget that earlier they also lost to ‘my’ USC - the one in Carolina.

[Brendan Loy]

Yeah, stupid Tennessee, beating Georgia 35-14. :)

I know what you mean, though. It's amazing to think that if Tennessee had lost any of the SEC games it won -- including the overtime win over South Carolina, the one-point win over Vanderbilt, or the quadruple-overtime win over Kentucky -- and/or if the Vols had beaten LSU in the SEC title game, either or both of those results would have completely changed the eventual national-championship picture... even though, at the time they were played, none of those games seemed remotely relevant to the national-title picture (well, except for those of us who were actually bothering to indulge in the ridiculous fantasy that Pitt might beat West Virginia).

The Vols had a very, very consequential season for a team that never cracked the Top 10.

[Sandy Underpants]

I don't remember LSU officials claiming the AP championship was irrelevant. Their dorky fans did because USC gets all the recognition for being the 2003 National Champions while the LSU fans are jumping up and down waving their arms saying, "It won't be a real 3-pete". I'd say like the 2003 season, everyone will quickly forget this 2007 championship as well. LSU are the masters of asterisk championships.

*defeated a team that didn't win their conference and was on a losing streak.

**defeated the worst conference champion and became the first 2 loss BCS champion ever.

[roux]

We would love to have a shot at USC and I know they were trying to work out something for the 2004 season. Let's do a game in Tiger Stadium and then one out at USC and settle this once and for all.

Geaux Tigers!!!

[David K.]

To be fair, did LSU actually argue that USC should refuse the trophy? I only recall them saying that the AP trophy was not the "true" or "official" national championship trophy because everyone had agreed on the BCS and not the AP as the mechanism for determining the national champion.

So, having won the "official" championship, it would not be inconsistent for LSU to accept the "unofficial" championship as well, even if they argued then that USC ought not consider themselves co-champions because of the AP award -- USC had no reason not to accept the award, according to LSU; it just didn't make USC co-champions.

By analogy -- when the same player wins the Heisman and the Maxwell, there is no reason for him to decline the Maxwell simply because the Heisman is considered the better accolade. But when different players win the Heisman and the Maxwell, the Maxwell winner cannot credibly claim to be the co-best player in college football, because everyone agrees that that distinction goes to the Heisman winner.

Yeah except the thing is everyone DOESN'T agree that the BCS is the undisputed national champion decider. There are a number of organizations that present national championship trophies in college football, but in recent decades two have been accepted as definitive. The Coaches and the AP. Both became part of the BCS but the AP never agreed to automatically award its trophy to the BCS winner, and since everyone outside of Louisiana seemed to still accept it it is incredibly self servicing and childish when you have just won one of two trophies indicating you are a champion to try and say "they aren't REALLY champions, they are fakes!". Its the AP NATIONAL CHAMPION trophy, by refusing to acknowledge its validity then, they are hypocrites now for accepting it as anything more than a paper weight.

[Brian Foster]

Yeah except the thing is everyone DOESN'T agree that the BCS is the undisputed national champion decider.

You might very well be correct here, David K, which is why I was sure to say this:

"I'm not saying that's a correct argument as applied to BCS/AP championship, just that it's valid -- and more to the point, it does not make LSU inconsistent to accept both awards now."

And that's why you're wrong to say that "by refusing to acknowledge its validity then, they are hypocrites now for accepting it as anything more than a paper weight." As I pointed out, LSU did not refuse to acknowledge the validity of the AP award -- only the significance or meaning of the award, i.e. whether it entitled USC to co-championship status or not. Again, I did not say LSU was correct in its view; I said only that it was not an invalid argument.

And again, the more important point here is that unless LSU is claiming that they won two national championships because they won both the BCS and AP award, they are being neither hypocritical nor inconsistent by accepting the AP award in addition to the BCS. See my Heisman/Maxwell analogy. So long as they consider the BCS to be the "true" national championship and the AP to be just another award they received for being a damn good football team, they are being perfectly consistent with their previous position.

[Joe]

When are all of you going to catch up with reality and realize that the AP poll means absolutely nothing. Auburn was the 2004 Golf Digest national champions...does that mean that they get to claim "co champion"? No, and yes I realize that the AP is more respected than Golf Digest, but the principle is the same. I hate the BCS and I'm not an LSU fan, but THE BCS IS THE SYSTEM WE ARE CURRENTLY USING. THE BCS AND ONLY THE BCS CHAMPION IS THE NATIONAL CHAMPION. There is no such thing as "co champion" anymore. That is the entire reason for the BCS.

http://www.onepeat.com
"Shouldn't a dynasty win more than one championship?"

[Brendan Loy]

Joe,

You are incorrect, as I've explained about a thousand times on this blog. Your argument has no logical basis whatsoever. The Associated Press, the longest established and most widely respected championship-awarding poll, deliberately decided to retain its independence rather than committing to award its trophy to the BCS in 1998. For that reason, the possibility of a split championship has always been contemplated as a possibility, from the very beginning of the BCS. The "system we are currently using" specifically allows for this possibility. Only the coaches poll, not the AP poll, is tied to the BCS, and thus only one of the two widely recognized college football national championships is BCS-based. The notion that the Associated Press championship somehow stopped "counting" in 1998 is facially ludicrous. You may not be an LSU fan, but you've bought their propaganda hook, line and sinker. Your argument has absolutely no merit.