Started By
Message
re: Let me get this straight...
Posted on 12/3/14 at 8:59 am to thunderbird1100
Posted on 12/3/14 at 8:59 am to thunderbird1100
So TCU gets in because they played Minnesota?
Seems right.
Seems right.
0
Posted on 12/3/14 at 8:59 am to eatatjoes
In my opinion, the only way to do it is to REQUIRE a conference championship to get in if you insist on keeping 4 teams. You would simply pick the top 4 out of 5 conferences and put their respective champs in.
Now, what I would love to see is an 8 team playoff with 5 conference champs plus 3 at large. That way, there really is a way to "play" for it and it gives the "wild card" teams a chance while rewarding conference champs.
Now, what I would love to see is an 8 team playoff with 5 conference champs plus 3 at large. That way, there really is a way to "play" for it and it gives the "wild card" teams a chance while rewarding conference champs.
Posted on 12/3/14 at 8:59 am to eatatjoes
Indiana proved it was better than Mizzou ON THE FIELD so lets put them in the SEC E Championship game. Mizzou lost their title.
Posted on 12/3/14 at 9:03 am to Farmer1906
[quote]Indiana proved it was better than Mizzou ON THE FIELD so lets put them in the SEC E Championship game. Mizzou lost their title.[/quote
That's stupid and you know it. Baylor and TCU have the same record, in the same conference.
Honestly, as mentioned above the only way to do this is require a conference championship. If that means a "better" team gets left out, oh well. Win your league. The only issue is 5 conferences for 4 spots.
That's stupid and you know it. Baylor and TCU have the same record, in the same conference.
Honestly, as mentioned above the only way to do this is require a conference championship. If that means a "better" team gets left out, oh well. Win your league. The only issue is 5 conferences for 4 spots.
Posted on 12/3/14 at 9:05 am to Farmer1906
Sorry Farmer, just trying to gauge others thoughts on this playoff committee. Do you agree that one of the reasons for a playoff was to satisfy the public's desire to take out the subjectivity and settle things on the field? How does it get more objective than an actual result between two teams that played each other already?
Posted on 12/3/14 at 9:08 am to eatatjoes
I like the BCS where is partial people and part computers but Baylor screwed up and played nobody for the out of conference games. They don't want to reward weak schedules. The computers would have damaged Baylor too.
Posted on 12/3/14 at 9:08 am to eatatjoes
Few more games to be played; including:
Iowa State @ TCU
KSU @ Baylor
Even if both Win, Baylor's SoS will go up & Head to Head Will come into play; but, if the rest of the favorites Win, aOsu will jump them both: 12-1 Champion > 11-1 True Co-Champions (2).
Iowa State @ TCU
KSU @ Baylor
Even if both Win, Baylor's SoS will go up & Head to Head Will come into play; but, if the rest of the favorites Win, aOsu will jump them both: 12-1 Champion > 11-1 True Co-Champions (2).
This post was edited on 12/3/14 at 9:40 am
Posted on 12/3/14 at 9:11 am to eatatjoes
The BCS used a computer program that was transparent, objective, and able to be understood by fans. The committee has no criteria other than how they feel at the moment.
This post was edited on 12/3/14 at 9:12 am
Posted on 12/3/14 at 9:15 am to eatatjoes
I totally agree 100 % 
How on God's Green Earth does TCU get in over Baylor with the same record, playing the same conference schedule, and Baylor wins the head to head? I thought the CFB regular season was a playoff in itself, but apparently not. Also see the below:
Baylor beat OU by 24, and TCU beat OU by 4
Baylor beat Kansas by 46 and TCu beat Kansas by 4. Baylor's only loss is to WVU, who TCU did not blow out by any means. They beat them on a last second FG, when WVU handed them that game by playing conservative. TCU got outplayed in that game for most of it.
How on God's Green Earth does TCU get in over Baylor with the same record, playing the same conference schedule, and Baylor wins the head to head? I thought the CFB regular season was a playoff in itself, but apparently not. Also see the below: Baylor beat OU by 24, and TCU beat OU by 4
Baylor beat Kansas by 46 and TCu beat Kansas by 4. Baylor's only loss is to WVU, who TCU did not blow out by any means. They beat them on a last second FG, when WVU handed them that game by playing conservative. TCU got outplayed in that game for most of it.
Posted on 12/3/14 at 9:17 am to eatatjoes
The committee is retarded and a really bad idea. I do not see any scenario where the Presidents let the committee exist for the life of the contract.
Posted on 12/3/14 at 9:22 am to stat19
Thought the committee is already scheduled for future changes?
Posted on 12/3/14 at 9:32 am to Sancho Panza
I don't doubt one bit that they may be sending a message to Baylor to "beef up your OOC schedule", but it only adds to the unprofessionalism of the entire thing. Besides, and I may be wrong, wouldn't Baylor's OOC schedule for 2014 have been created before this CFP was announced? Again, I could be wrong on that.
Posted on 12/3/14 at 9:34 am to Sancho Panza
TCU plays Iowa St
Posted on 12/3/14 at 9:36 am to eatatjoes
The whole point of the committee is to prevent the SEC from getting 2 teams into the final 4, with the secondary objective of keeping the B1G involved. How many times in the last 10 years have 2 SEC teams been in the top 4 final BCS rankings? And why do you think OSU is still lurking at #5 when they have the worst loss of any of the top contenders.
I practically guarantee you if OSU beats Wisconsin in the B1G Cripple Fight the narrative will quickly change to, "See? They righted the ship after only one week with their 3rd string QB! Just think how tough they'll be with a few weeks' practice???"
I practically guarantee you if OSU beats Wisconsin in the B1G Cripple Fight the narrative will quickly change to, "See? They righted the ship after only one week with their 3rd string QB! Just think how tough they'll be with a few weeks' practice???"
Posted on 12/3/14 at 9:37 am to eatatjoes
The whole purpose of the "playoff" is/was to generate more TV revenue for ESPN. Two things follow from that:
1. More "controversy" generates more interest and more ratings, both for the games and for the idiotic weekly ratings show.
2. Which matchups will generate more viewers/ratings becomes a serious driver in deciding which teams get in. Big-name teams with big fanbases will get preference over better teams that don't draw as well.
Only way the playoff really works is to go full NFL: create 8 (or 16 or whatever)conferences that are at least roughly equal and enforce scheduling so that everyone has roughly the same SOS.
I would rather just go back to the damn polls. Those arguments were more entertaining.
1. More "controversy" generates more interest and more ratings, both for the games and for the idiotic weekly ratings show.
2. Which matchups will generate more viewers/ratings becomes a serious driver in deciding which teams get in. Big-name teams with big fanbases will get preference over better teams that don't draw as well.
Only way the playoff really works is to go full NFL: create 8 (or 16 or whatever)conferences that are at least roughly equal and enforce scheduling so that everyone has roughly the same SOS.
I would rather just go back to the damn polls. Those arguments were more entertaining.
Posted on 12/3/14 at 9:39 am to Tuscaloosa
quote:Me fricking too, bruh.
I thought leaving the BCS in place and just taking the top 4 teams made the most sense.
Posted on 12/3/14 at 9:39 am to eatatjoes
quote:
Sorry Farmer, just trying to gauge others thoughts on this playoff committee. Do you agree that one of the reasons for a playoff was to satisfy the public's desire to take out the subjectivity and settle things on the field? How does it get more objective than an actual result between two teams that played each other already?
That one game only makes up 1/12 or ~8% of the entire season. The WVU game also made up 1/12 of the entire season. TCU went 1-0 & BU went 0-1. To me the head to head matters little when you factor in common opponents where TCU has the edge. From there you look at non common opponents and a win over Minny tops a win over Buffalo. I'm am perfectly fine with TCU getting in. Teams should not be rewarded for scheduling Northwestern St, Buffalo and SMU.
Posted on 12/3/14 at 9:40 am to Tuscaloosa
quote:
just taking the top 4 teams made the most sense.
taking WHAT top 4 teams? you mean the top 4 in a poll like the AP which is just a vote by a committee of sports writers?
lol, do you even have a fuking clue what you are talking about, the ignorance of gumps is an ever changing bar.
Posted on 12/3/14 at 9:40 am to JesusQuintana
I stand corrected.
Posted on 12/3/14 at 9:42 am to SoFla Tideroller
quote:
And why do you think OSU is still lurking at #5 when they have the worst loss of any of the top contenders.
$$$$$
Ohio St in the playoffs means higher ratings.
Page 2 of 4
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News