Started By
Message
The Committee did what they had to do.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 11:49 am
Posted on 12/8/24 at 11:49 am
Conference championship games are worth a lot of money….they won’t sacrifice that money.. vs. a strength of schedule debate. I’m good with it. We should have beaten Vandy or Oklahoma.
7
Posted on 12/8/24 at 11:53 am to Legionfield
yep, the format itself is a problem we can all agree on that. Boise State having a bye, Clemson being ranked behind SMU who they just beat, it's a mess. Hope they can get it to the best 12 or 16 teams at some point, but it is what it is now and we can't really complain after losing to fricking vandy. Roll Tide anyways.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 11:55 am to Legionfield
quote:
We should have beaten Vandy or Oklahoma.
The big thing that NOBODY on ESPN really talked about.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 11:59 am to DD_Rolltide
quote:
Hope they can get it to the best 12 or 16 teams at some point,
So it won't ever end......4, 12, 16, how many is enough?
Posted on 12/8/24 at 12:02 pm to Legionfield
The real problem is super-conferences.
To stockpile most of the power programs into 2 conferences makes the schedules very unbalanced for the teams in the conferences and the ones left out of them.
To stockpile most of the power programs into 2 conferences makes the schedules very unbalanced for the teams in the conferences and the ones left out of them.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 12:02 pm to Legionfield
quote:Y'all keep saying this but lost to Vandy and OU.
strength of schedule
Posted on 12/8/24 at 12:05 pm to Legionfield
quote:How about Strength of Losses?
strength of schedule
Posted on 12/8/24 at 12:07 pm to GatorNation4Lyfe
No one can argue SOS unless you win some of the tough ones without losing to the shitty ones.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 12:15 pm to That LSU Guy
quote:
Y'all keep saying this but lost to Vandy and OU.
Hardly anyone is saying those aren't losses that it's fair to criticize. But, to just harp on it like nothing else matters is the same as saying "no Top 25 wins, no playoff".
The bigger point that the16 team SEC, going forward, will be filled with teams that end up 7-5 or 6-6 that would be 8-4 or 9-3 with schedules that didn't include Georgia + Texas + Alabama + LSU etc . . .
If there's not a little more recognition of that the SEC would be much better getting rid of very strong programs and instead adding Purdue, Rutgers and Wake Forest .
This post was edited on 12/8/24 at 12:46 pm
Posted on 12/8/24 at 12:20 pm to wm72
We are headed to a 24 team playoff
Posted on 12/8/24 at 12:22 pm to Legionfield
Rank the final teams 1-12 (including all conference champs, at large teams, runners up) and slot them in the bracket based upon that 1-12 ranking and regardless of the conference championships.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 12:26 pm to wm72
quote:The SEC is by far the toughest conference in CFB. Everybody knows that. If the playoffs was truly about the 12 best teams, than the SEC would get get 8 and the B1G would get 4. But that is not how it works plus what is the fun in that. The SEC like every conference should take their 2 best representative teams into the playoffs and compete with the other conferences. Hopefully the SEC comes out on top. If you’re not the top 2 teams in each conference, you really don’t have a reason to whine.
The bigger point that the16 team SEC, going forward, will be filled with teams that end up 7-5 or 6-6 that would be 8-4 or 9-3 with schedules that didn't include Georgia + Texas + Alabama + LSU etc . . .
I believe Bama, Sc and OM are the top 12 teams in CFB. I think they’ could beat any team in CFB. But they played a regular season and did not come out on top in the SEC and should not represent the SEC in the playoffs. Now if you really want the 12 best teams then get rid of conferences all together.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 12:30 pm to Steelboy84
quote:
So it won't ever end......4, 12, 16, how many is enough?
16 — that’s the number.
It creates a balanced bracket
Only thing left hanging out there are the conference championship games and the chance that losing that game pushes a team out of the playoffs.
If Bama had beaten Vandy or Oklahoma, SMU’s loss in their conference championship would have seen them be jumped by Alabama. That would be a tough pill to swallow for conferences.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 12:33 pm to Legionfield
This is the correct take...
Honestly, I was surprised by how many folks thought Bama would get in...
I thought the writing was on the wall since last week...
Honestly, I was surprised by how many folks thought Bama would get in...
I thought the writing was on the wall since last week...
Posted on 12/8/24 at 12:43 pm to North Dallas Tiger
The only way to eliminate subjectivity is to give each conf winner the top 5 spots, conf championship losers the next 5 spots, then the next best 5 get in and 1 play in game for the 16 vs. 17th team.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 12:45 pm to wm72
quote:
The real problem is super-conferences.
To stockpile most of the power programs into 2 conferences makes the schedules very unbalanced for the teams in the conferences and the ones left out of them.
They need to go back to divisional alignments, even if it's with yearly rotating pods, to get a conference championship with teams tested against equalized schedules. As well as clearly differentiated criteria for tie breakers to determine conference standings.
The committee also needs to adopt, or at least state, what their criterias are.
If it's rewarding cupcake schedules, spell it out. If not, spell that out too.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 12:54 pm to Broz1839
Just like the FCS where you have 8 byes with actual good teams and the shitty conferences line up to at-large B1G and SEC teams to get skulldrug as like a psuedo bye-week with a few actual good games between P4 opponents in the first round. Then the second round is when the playoffs really begin in that format
Posted on 12/8/24 at 12:55 pm to GatorNation4Lyfe
quote:
The SEC like every conference should take their 2 best representative teams into the playoffs
But just that in itself is a huge problem with the super sized conferences.
That was my point about the SEC having done much better to add Wake Forest and Maryland than Texas and Oklahoma.
How do you determine the 2 best teams without SOS of the teams in consideration (and the SOS of their opponents) being the main criteria?
Just for example, Indiana finished ahead of Ohio St in the BIG10 mainly because Ohio St played Oregon. The committee ranked Ohio St higher regardless of that because Ohio St beat Penn St and Indiana and Indiana had no comparable Quality Wins. Is Ohio St the Big Ten's 3rd best team even though they finished 4th or did the committee get it wrong?
Posted on 12/8/24 at 12:57 pm to wm72
quote:blame sankeys dumb arse
To stockpile most of the power programs into 2 conferences makes the schedules very unbalanced for the teams in the conferences and the ones left out of them.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 1:00 pm to Steelboy84
quote:
..4, 12, 16, how many is enough?
4
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News