Question about this whole Backing in Thing

buckeye_in_sc · Post by **buckeye_in_sc** » Thu Nov 29, 2007 8:36 pm

Ok this got me thinking...WVU and MIZZOU lost early enough and slowly moved up as other teams lost...wouldn't that be considered backing in?

OSU considered backing in? I mean I know LSU and insert SEC team here should be playing for the MNC every year...but didn't LSU back back in when OSU went down and then stepped on their dick?

Didn't UF basically back in when USC lost to UCLA last year? The consensus was that USC had they won out last year would be playing OSU...

just some thoughts....don't have a tizzy MIZZOU fan...just throwing it out there...how you can say one team is backing and others are not...is preposterous...

Sky · Post by **Sky** » Thu Nov 29, 2007 8:55 pm

I call horseshit on that one. In fact, we should scrap the whole BCS thing and play an 8 team playoff with the top 8 SEC teams only. The rest of us should just sit back and watch in awwwwwwwwwww.

M Club · Post by **M Club** » Thu Nov 29, 2007 8:57 pm

backing in means losing the last game before the championship, or something like that. the last team to have backed into the national championship was oklahoma. that's off the top of my head, but nebraska did so as well when they got butt hammered against miami. florida didn't back into anything last year so much as they took advantage of usc's loos, nor did lsu back into the #1 ranking after osu's loss considering they'd been winning games in the meantime.

no one will back in this year unless kansas all of a sudden becomes an option in a sea of two-loss teams.

buckeye_in_sc · Post by **buckeye_in_sc** » Thu Nov 29, 2007 9:02 pm

^^^^^^^^^^

good points perhaps it's just the rednecks down here who feel that like most of us that the National Championship has already been decided and it is being played this weekend between LSU and Tenn

then perhaps just the term that is being thrown around...even the national media is using the term rather liberally...just some thoughts

M Club · Post by **M Club** » Thu Nov 29, 2007 9:08 pm

i also think there's a difference between backing-in and losing momentum. if i remember correctly, and i wasn't around for this, michigan was accused of backing into the big 10 title in 04 since they lost that last game to osu. but they didn't considering the championship was theirs even before kickoff, so they didn't HAVE to win to be big 10 champs.

Shine · Post by **Shine** » Thu Nov 29, 2007 9:23 pm

Believe the Heupel wrote:Backing in means:
1. You lost your last game.

Oklahoma lost their last game of the 02/03 campaign.

Believe the Heupel wrote: Oklahoma didn't back in to the 2003 National Title game.

Did you give Jon your password??

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Thu Nov 29, 2007 9:26 pm

"Backing in" means your wife is such a beast ('sup Rumple) that in order to accomplish your marital duties, you strap a dildo to your ass, and "back in."

Shine · Post by **Shine** » Thu Nov 29, 2007 9:37 pm

Believe the Heupel wrote: Let me ask you: if New England loses the last game of this NFL season, did they back in to the playoffs?

So you want to compare apples to rocket ships, eh.

Let me ask you this, do more than 2 teams make the NFL playoffs??

If New England were to lose the AFC championship game and still play in the Super Bowl you might be onto something. As it is you're just on something.

MiketheangrydrunkenCUfan · Fri Nov 30, 2007 1:03 am

I don't think you necessarily need to have lost your last game to "back in" to the BCS title game. When people talk about OSU backing in, they're basically referring to the fact that OSU was ranked something like 5th when their season ended and their fate was/is out of their hands. I think it'd be fair to say that OSU backed into the title game if 3 or more teams ahead of them lost in the final couple weeks of the season, but that doesn't mean they don't belong there. Backing in doesn't make them unworthy of playing for the MNC. They just happened to finish their season earlier than everyone else.

By that definition, I guess BtH is right about OU not "backing in" in 03, since they didn't have to rely on anyone ahead of them to lose, despite losing themselves. But I don't think anyone but the most myopic Soonerfans would argue that they deserved to be there that year.

In short, backing in isn't necessarily synonymous with being unworthy. I think the confusion between the two terms goes back to Nebraska in 01, when they both backed in and had absolutely no business being there.

Danimal · Post by **Danimal** » Fri Nov 30, 2007 1:23 am

Believe the Heupel wrote:Backing in means:

1. You lost your last game.
2. Someone else had the lead going into their last game and because they lost, you got in anyhow.

Oklahoma didn't back in to the 2003 National Title game. The BCS experts all agreed before the 2003 Big 12 title that OU would be in whether they won or lost-that's no more backing in than if New England were to lose their last game this year.

tOSU isn't backing in to shit. They won their last game. Had they lost it, they wouldn't be in the national title discussion at all.

Nebraska in 2001 is a perfect example of backing in.

We were the definition of backing-in. Of course your team is one of the reasons we did it. We'd have been better-off if you, Tenn, or Texas hadn't screwed the pooch. Coming off the CU-game the last thing we needed was to run into that Miami buzzsaw. One less pooch-screwing would have landed us in the Sugar against a very beatable Illinois-team, a one-loss season, and top5 finish. Ya we did get to play for it all, but the psyche of the program was damaged by back-to-back ugly losses.