Started By
Message
Do we, or do we not, want the 12 best teams in the Playoffs?
Posted on 12/21/24 at 12:46 pm
Posted on 12/21/24 at 12:46 pm
It really comes down to that….the automatics bids will always ruin the Playoffs. That being said, the 3 SEC teams who went 9-3 deserve what they got. All 3 had horrible losses.
ETA: I f'd up the OP. Only Ole Miss lost to Kentucky.
ETA: I f'd up the OP. Only Ole Miss lost to Kentucky.
This post was edited on 12/21/24 at 1:08 pm
19
Posted on 12/21/24 at 12:47 pm to themetalreb
I just want good games between teams who earned their way in. We just didn’t get that this year. Maybe 8 teams is enough.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 12:48 pm to themetalreb
quote:
2 of them lost to lowly Kentucky
Impressive, given that Kentucky only has one SEC win
Posted on 12/21/24 at 12:48 pm to themetalreb
BCS was great
4 teams was good
12 is an abomination
4 teams was good
12 is an abomination
Posted on 12/21/24 at 12:52 pm to themetalreb
No we do not.
Automatic bids, OVER TIME, will help other conferences recruit and improve themselves years from now.
In the 90’s - If ACC teams had their way, the basketball tourney would be 8 ACC teams and 2 at large bids.
That would be stupid and not good for the sport.
Everyone needs to calm down in “year one” of the expansion. The evaluation of this product will occur over the next decade. I expect the playoff to expand further and have more home games.
And as I have said over and over - stop losing 25% of your games and crying about “not getting a bid” to the playoffs.
Automatic bids, OVER TIME, will help other conferences recruit and improve themselves years from now.
In the 90’s - If ACC teams had their way, the basketball tourney would be 8 ACC teams and 2 at large bids.
That would be stupid and not good for the sport.
Everyone needs to calm down in “year one” of the expansion. The evaluation of this product will occur over the next decade. I expect the playoff to expand further and have more home games.
And as I have said over and over - stop losing 25% of your games and crying about “not getting a bid” to the playoffs.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 12:52 pm to themetalreb
The committee very obviously caved to media pressure this go around
Posted on 12/21/24 at 12:53 pm to themetalreb
I prefer the 12 most deserving teams.
The reality is the 12 "best" teams can probably just be taken from the talent composite rankings to start the season.
There were only 13 teams over the 50% "blue chip ratio" to start the season. No team below 50% ever won a national title since we started ranking recruits.
In reality those are the 13 best teams. We don't even need games if you want to use "best" as your measure. They're the only ones with any shot.
The reality is the 12 "best" teams can probably just be taken from the talent composite rankings to start the season.
There were only 13 teams over the 50% "blue chip ratio" to start the season. No team below 50% ever won a national title since we started ranking recruits.
In reality those are the 13 best teams. We don't even need games if you want to use "best" as your measure. They're the only ones with any shot.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 12:55 pm to SECdragonmaster
quote:
Automatic bids, OVER TIME, will help other conferences recruit and improve themselves years from now.
bullshite. So give the Sun Belt an auto bid, because OVER TIME, yada yada yada fricking bullshite.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 12:56 pm to themetalreb
We don’t want 9-3 teams in.
We don’t want weak SOS 11-1 teams in.
We don’t want weak SOS 11-1 teams in.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 12:56 pm to DawginSC
quote:
I prefer the 12 most deserving teams.
bullshite. Your definition of "most deserving" may not be the same as someone else's. Rank the teams, take the top 12 regardless of conference. End of fricking story.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 12:57 pm to djsdawg
quote:
We don’t want 9-3 teams in.
We don’t want weak SOS 11-1 teams in.
This year you couldn't have both of these desires.
The committee went with weaker SOS teams with better records over 9-3 teams.
I'm cool with that choice given the options.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 12:58 pm to themetalreb
No, it should just be 4 max, and it should always be based on merit. AQ is bullshite.
The playoffs were not broken and did not need to be "fixed".
The playoffs were not broken and did not need to be "fixed".
This post was edited on 12/21/24 at 12:59 pm
Posted on 12/21/24 at 12:58 pm to DawginSC
quote:
This year you couldn't have both of these desires.
I know. 12 is way too many
Posted on 12/21/24 at 12:59 pm to themetalreb
We do but the committee does not.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 12:59 pm to SEC Doctor
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:01 pm to DawginSC
quote:
This year you couldn't have both of these desires.
The committee went with weaker SOS teams with better records over 9-3 teams.
I'm cool with that choice given the options.
It's going to be every year because you are trying to get 12 teams. Just because you add the label "playoff team", it's not like some Disney fairy comes around and makes the team better.
These are the same teams/games people have been watching in bowl games for years. These types of teams will be making it in every year.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:02 pm to CBandits82
quote:No, but it was better than this.
BCS was great
quote:4 was good. Years like last year having it be a 6 team format with 3-6 and 4-5 playing would have been perfect.
4 teams was good
I think 6 is a number it gets pretty hard to argue #7 or worse deserved in.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:03 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:
bullshite. Your definition of "most deserving" may not be the same as someone else's. Rank the teams, take the top 12 regardless of conference. End of fricking story.
The problem is what does "best" mean?
The reality is that even if Bama had lost to UGA and SC... I still think they're one of the 12 teams who is most able to win a 12 team playoff.
Why?
Talent. They have a crapload of it. Just because it's not coached as well as it used to be doesn't mean it's not there. But even though Bama at 7-5 might still be one of the 12 most likely teams two win out of a 12 team bracket in the playoff... they wouldn't DESERVE it.
Rankings aren't about who we think would win in a matchup. They're about which teams have done the most to deserve their ranking during the season.
Is Bama better than SMU? Yes.
Does Bama deserve a playoff spot over SMU? No. Losing to OU and Vandy counts toward what they deserve. Not losing to scrubs is part of "deserving" a spot.
Bama lost to two scrubs. SMU's worst loss was #17 in the final playoff rankings.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:04 pm to themetalreb
You guys don’t deserve to be there. Other not deserving ppl being in isn’t a good argument. Need to knock it down to six teams. Give big champ and sec champ auto bye. And let the next best four conference champs play each other for the last two spots
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:08 pm to 3down10
quote:
The playoffs were not broken and did not need to be "fixed".
You're just pissed that alabama can't pay players and stock talent with the tacit approval of the NCAA while they went after anyone else who tried the same.
Poor you
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News