Started By
Message
re: The Perfect Playoff System
Posted on 9/3/14 at 4:48 pm to Mulat
Posted on 9/3/14 at 4:48 pm to Mulat
quote:
it is the addition of the 4 At Large that you think is watering down the playoffs, correct?
That is correct.
"At-large" looks like "wildcard" to me which looks like "Undeserving, but we'll give them another chance" which looks like bullshite.
And 12 teams looks like some teams will get a "bye" which looks like copping out, which again looks like bullshite.
All of that overcomplicates an otherwise simple and elegant solution.
ANY system you devise will produce criers. The criers in the system I propose will be losers and not conference champions and that's okay by me. To include a team that didn't win their conference over a team that did just looks like bias and favoritism - which is exactly what we are trying to minimize with a playoff system. Otherwise, why not just go back to the way it was prior to 1990?.
2
Posted on 9/3/14 at 4:59 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
ANY system you devise will produce criers. The criers in the system I propose will be losers and not conference champions and that's okay by me. To include a team that didn't win their conference over a team that did just looks like bias and favoritism - which is exactly what we are trying to minimize with a playoff system. Otherwise, why not just go back to the way it was prior to 1990?.
This helpful, thanks. I think Tiger 2 needs to step in here as I think he may have a different perspective.
My goal was to try and bring the best points of many suggestions and put them into an SEC RANT PLAYOFF Model
Posted on 9/3/14 at 5:09 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
If you take 3 non-power 5 conference champs to go with the big 5, you would have had these to choose from last year:
Rice (10-3...yes, that same Rice that lost by 37 to MIssissippi State. Zero wins vs. ranked opponents.)
La-Lafayette (8-4...including a 20 point loss to, ahem...Arkansas)
Bowling Green (10-3...including a 32 point loss to Indiana. fricking Indiana.)
Fresno State (11-1...but zero games vs. ranked opponents)
Central Florida (11-1...the only team of these five that even merits being in the conversation, and not surprisingly, from one of the old AQ conferences.)
So, once again, why are we discussing these teams in the context of playing for a national championship? Someone explain it to me like I'm a fricking fifth grader. Someone explain to me why these teams should get a seat at the table just because they want one. This isn't fricking NCAA basketball where you only need 6 or 7 players and you can ride one stud's back to an upset.
Here's the thing...the Alabama's and the LSU's of college football get criticized for playing the La-Lafayettes...but now some posters want to actually include those teams in a playoff? I don't think so.
Rice (10-3...yes, that same Rice that lost by 37 to MIssissippi State. Zero wins vs. ranked opponents.)
La-Lafayette (8-4...including a 20 point loss to, ahem...Arkansas)
Bowling Green (10-3...including a 32 point loss to Indiana. fricking Indiana.)
Fresno State (11-1...but zero games vs. ranked opponents)
Central Florida (11-1...the only team of these five that even merits being in the conversation, and not surprisingly, from one of the old AQ conferences.)
So, once again, why are we discussing these teams in the context of playing for a national championship? Someone explain it to me like I'm a fricking fifth grader. Someone explain to me why these teams should get a seat at the table just because they want one. This isn't fricking NCAA basketball where you only need 6 or 7 players and you can ride one stud's back to an upset.
Here's the thing...the Alabama's and the LSU's of college football get criticized for playing the La-Lafayettes...but now some posters want to actually include those teams in a playoff? I don't think so.
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News