Started By
Message
re: SEC Playoff scenario
Posted on 7/5/14 at 11:03 am to sms151t
Posted on 7/5/14 at 11:03 am to sms151t
Nebraska's 2014 Schedule
Fla. Atlantic
McNeese State
@Fresno State
Miami (Fla.)
Illinois
@Michigan State
@Northwestern
Rutgers Purdue
@Wisconsin
Minnesota
@Iowa
That schedule is a joke. Ole Miss would go undefeated
Fla. Atlantic
McNeese State
@Fresno State
Miami (Fla.)
Illinois
@Michigan State
@Northwestern
Rutgers Purdue
@Wisconsin
Minnesota
@Iowa
That schedule is a joke. Ole Miss would go undefeated
This post was edited on 7/5/14 at 11:05 am
1
Posted on 7/5/14 at 11:05 am to LarrytheGolfer
You just proved you have no reason to be in this conversation.
Ole Miss would lose to either Michigan St and/or
Wisconsin and struggle vs Miami
Ole Miss would lose to either Michigan St and/or
Wisconsin and struggle vs Miami
Posted on 7/5/14 at 11:07 am to sms151t
quote:
Ole Miss would lose to either Michigan St and/or
Wisconsin and struggle vs Miami
Posted on 7/5/14 at 11:21 am to LarrytheGolfer
If the playoff was 16 teams then I would be okay with more than one sec team in it, but it's four. This past year was the perfect example of a playoff. The Iron bowl was a quarter final game. Alabama lost. The seccg was a semifinal game. Mizzou lost. Auburn went on to play for the title. Alabama and Mizzou should not be in the field of four based off the fact they couldn't beat auburn already when it mattered.
Posted on 7/5/14 at 11:26 am to LarrytheGolfer
Try this scenario
SEC Champion @ 13-0
Oklahoma @ 12-0
Fla State @ 13-0
Stanford at 12-1, PAC 12 Champs
Ohio State at 12-1, Big 10 Champs
SEC Team at 12-1 or 11-1 having lost only ot SEC Champions
Under the new committee, I can guarantee you thaT the three undefeateds plus either Stanford or Ohio State would be in the playoff.
This new playoff was created to include more different conference teams NOT to include more SEC teams.
SEC Champion @ 13-0
Oklahoma @ 12-0
Fla State @ 13-0
Stanford at 12-1, PAC 12 Champs
Ohio State at 12-1, Big 10 Champs
SEC Team at 12-1 or 11-1 having lost only ot SEC Champions
Under the new committee, I can guarantee you thaT the three undefeateds plus either Stanford or Ohio State would be in the playoff.
This new playoff was created to include more different conference teams NOT to include more SEC teams.
This post was edited on 7/5/14 at 11:27 am
Posted on 7/5/14 at 11:28 am to GeorgeWest
The key words in your post are champions. Champions should be given benefits more than runner-ups, IMO.
Posted on 7/5/14 at 11:30 am to sms151t
quote:
Perfect example was FSU last year, the ACC was awful but they won the BCSNCG. But I guess since they arent in SEC they are horrible.
Oklahoma(not even Big 12 Champs, and lost to tu for crying out loud) absolutely ROCKED Alabama.
Posted on 7/5/14 at 11:32 am to LarrytheGolfer
quote:
LOL yeah, its way stupid to pick the 4 best teams in college football to be in the playoff. It makes way more sense to pick the teams based on fairness.
I'm not saying it's stupid to pick the four best teams, but it's stupid to believe that's why the playoff was started, or to believe that is it's intent. Reading comprehension. They need to teach it in Alabama trailer parks it seems.
Posted on 7/5/14 at 11:33 am to TeLeFaWx
quote:
absolutely ROCKED Alabama
In a game that meant absolutely nothing.
Posted on 7/5/14 at 11:35 am to LarrytheGolfer
quote:
In a game that meant absolutely nothing
The worst excuse ever given.
It's almost as bad as they did not try excuse.
You never played sports at a high level or have been around high level athletes have you?
Posted on 7/5/14 at 11:52 am to sms151t
quote:
Perfect example was FSU last year, the ACC was awful but they won the BCSNCG. But I guess since they arent in SEC they are horrible.
And your logic, such as it is, fails completely here. Had FSU lost the ACC CG by a single point in overtime, you're arguing that they suddenly become a completely different team. I'm certain you're not arguing quantum mechanics here, so it's apparent that you honestly don't see the disconnect between your premise and the way reality actually works. The FSU team that won the BCSNCG was the best team in the country...not because they won a meaningless game against Duke and could therefore add "ACC CHAMPIONS!! frick YEAH!!!" to their record books, but because they, well, were the best team in the country.
Let's discuss causality. Winning a conference championship was evidence of their quality, but that doesn't mean their quality was predicated upon doing so. It's a fairly obvious fallacy, but a depressingly large number of people fall for it. By requiring a conference championship as a criterion, you're actually doing the exact opposite of working toward a better system. You're adding an additional, non-substantive challenge, which is the very definition weakening the process. If a team wins Conference X with 3 losses while another sees their undefeated record go away in a loss in the conference championship of Conference Y, your criterion is easy to apply. What if, on the other hand, you weren't told the nature of the respective conference championship games? Let's say they just gave you the schedule in random order and told you to pick the worthy play-off contender? Aghast, you say, "How can I pick unless I know who won their conference?!?" They reply, "I thought you were picking the best teams. How does the title alter their resume?" What's your reply? How, indeed, does winning one game -- that might not even be your toughest game -- have a greater actual effect on a team's resume than another given game?
Posted on 7/5/14 at 11:53 am to LarrytheGolfer
quote:
In a game that meant absolutely nothing.
How was it meaningless?
Posted on 7/5/14 at 11:54 am to Socratics
quote:
There are 3 SEC teams with a single loss at the end of the season. Auburn, Mizzou and Alabama
Stopped reading there.
Posted on 7/5/14 at 12:00 pm to geauxnavybeatbama
quote:
This past year was the perfect example of a playoff. The Iron bowl was a quarter final game. Alabama lost. The seccg was a semifinal game. Mizzou lost. Auburn went on to play for the title. Alabama and Mizzou should not be in the field of four based off the fact they couldn't beat auburn already when it mattered.
Sorry, but your logic simply isn't logical. If that had been the quarterfinal and semifinal games, Auburn probably would not have have played them. The fact that they could not beat the second best team in the country does not mean they should not have been there. By your logic we should only have #1 verses #2. That would take us right back to the BCS.
Posted on 7/5/14 at 12:01 pm to LarrytheGolfer
quote:
quote:
absolutely ROCKED Alabama
In a game that meant absolutely nothing.
It did to Alabama.
Posted on 7/5/14 at 12:04 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
Ok, but let's say Auburn, and Georgia play for the SEC championship, and Auburn wins by 3 on a last second field goal. South Carolina loses by 1 to Georgia during the regular season and beats everybody else handily. Georgia has ONLY the loss in the SECCG, South Carolina has only the loss to Georgia by 1 and Auburn loses to South Carolina (their only loss)and Georgia during the regular season.
Still think Auburn should be the team to go?
Venues are going to play a major role in determining these things this year, so your scenario is an interesting one.
Based upon your scenario, SCAR would have lost at home by 1. Auburn would have lost at home and SCAR would have beaten them handedly.
SCAR and Auburn would go. UGA would have to stay home ... late losses hurt the most. Ironically, UGA having gone undefeated during the regular season helps SCAR's SOS and power rating despite the loss early in the season.
Posted on 7/5/14 at 12:05 pm to LarrytheGolfer
quote:
In a game that meant absolutely nothing.
In what way does a Sugar Bowl, especially one against a blue blood, mean nothing? Have you never counted bowl wins as part of college football's prestige? If so, that's stupid as shite.
Posted on 7/5/14 at 12:06 pm to randomways
Okay to answer question about winning conference Championships...You are the "best" team in a group of 8 to 12 teams.
Conference games are tougher to win as are rivalry games than an OOC game, as the teams know each other better than home and home etc
The system you are looking for is a playoff and best way to determine a entry to a playoff is each team to have the same criteria...and right now the best way is a conference championship. Which will take winning up 8 to 9 conference games with generally only 1 loss max. But if you want to look for a computer system, it is bias just as the humans programming the computer is.
The goal of this playoff is to crown a National Champion not determine who the best team, that is what you are not getting. Miami was the best team in 86 but did not win NC, and I can provide more examples. So you are wrong, IMO to think we are trying to find the best team.
Conference games are tougher to win as are rivalry games than an OOC game, as the teams know each other better than home and home etc
The system you are looking for is a playoff and best way to determine a entry to a playoff is each team to have the same criteria...and right now the best way is a conference championship. Which will take winning up 8 to 9 conference games with generally only 1 loss max. But if you want to look for a computer system, it is bias just as the humans programming the computer is.
The goal of this playoff is to crown a National Champion not determine who the best team, that is what you are not getting. Miami was the best team in 86 but did not win NC, and I can provide more examples. So you are wrong, IMO to think we are trying to find the best team.
This post was edited on 7/5/14 at 12:07 pm
Posted on 7/5/14 at 12:08 pm to sms151t
quote:
No I thought LSU and oSu were the two best teams.
Seriously? I mean in the first Alabama vs. LSU game Alabama missed 2 or 3 field goals because their FG Kicker had an off night. In the rematch, they proved they were a better team than they showed. (Nothing against LSU, they had a GREART team) I don't think any other team in the country could have beaten Alabama or LSU that year.
Posted on 7/5/14 at 12:09 pm to DawgsLife
We will never know if oSu could have, because they did not get a chance. As I said earlier, rematches prove nothing. I pointed out why I state this also.
I am in now way saying Alabama does not deserve the NC, but I just think they got a break in a rematch.
I am in now way saying Alabama does not deserve the NC, but I just think they got a break in a rematch.
This post was edited on 7/5/14 at 12:10 pm
Page 3 of 6
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News