Started By
Message
re: 247's Josh Pate with a hot take on a potential 8-team College Football Playoff
Posted on 3/11/21 at 7:19 am to 285exp
Posted on 3/11/21 at 7:19 am to 285exp
quote:
Right now, the only team that gets any advantage in the seeding is #1 gets to choose the semifinal site,
BAMA didn't get that this season. They were sent to Texas as Clemson got to New Orleans. This really hasn't been the playoff committee's finest year.
1
Posted on 3/11/21 at 7:33 am to RollTide1987
Go back to the old bowl structure. Pick top 4 after bowl season is over.
Posted on 3/11/21 at 7:44 am to bamameister
quote:
BAMA didn't get that this season. They were sent to Texas as Clemson got to New Orleans. This really hasn't been the playoff committee's finest year.
If the Rose Bowl had been played in Pasadena that might be an issue, but having to play a few hours west of New Orleans in return for an extra 13000 fans being allowed to attend seems a no brainer. It’s not like we’ve had a poor record in Arlington, and if Saban had pitched a fit I suspect we could have played in the Sugar Bowl in front of 3000 fans.
2020 wasn’t a regular year, to say the least.
Posted on 3/11/21 at 7:56 am to 285exp
quote:
If the Rose Bowl had been played in Pasadena that might be an issue, but having to play a few hours west of New Orleans in return for an extra 13000 fans being allowed to attend seems a no brainer. It’s not like we’ve had a poor record in Arlington, and if Saban had pitched a fit I suspect we could have played in the Sugar Bowl in front of 3000 fans.
Coach Saban would figure out where his advantage was as fast as any of us. The way I got this from the Chairman on the final 4 show was, "they thought." The law of the land since 2014 is the committee runs it by the #1 seed and he makes the call. Coach Saban could have decided on Jerry World, but let him say it. There was no reason for "they thought" in the discussion.
Posted on 3/11/21 at 8:01 am to diddlydawg7
quote:
This year it would have been:
#1 Alabama vs #8 Oregon
#2 Clemson vs #7 Cincinnati
#3 Ohio State vs #6 Oklahoma
#4 Notre Dame vs #5 Texas A&M
So even more non-competitive games?
Posted on 3/11/21 at 8:02 am to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
I never thought I would say this, but the Power 5 is really a Power 4 + 1 and the PAC 12 is the +1.
Power 2 +3
Just because Clemson is really good doesn't mean the ACC is. The ACC, Big 12, and Pac-12 are all horrendous as top-to-bottom conferences. Only the SEC and B1G are consistently good conferences across the board.
Posted on 3/11/21 at 8:06 am to VADawg
quote:
AQ is shitty.
Then what's the point of conferences?
As soon as conferences are even somewhat close to equal, I'd be in favor of AQ.
Winning the Pac-12, though, should not be considered equal to winning the SEC. Not even close. There have been numerous years where the #4 and #5 SEC teams could have run through the Pac-12.
Also, why would teams bother with good OOC opponents with AQ?
Current system: Alabama vs Miami - good OOC game
AQ system: Alabama vs Miami - worthless game that just gives a greater chance for injury
You adopt an AQ system, say goodbye to good OOC games.
This post was edited on 3/11/21 at 8:19 am
Posted on 3/11/21 at 8:10 am to bigDgator
quote:
Who gives a frick? Why are Bama fans skuurt?
Why are Florida fans even weighing in? When was the last time Florida was relevant on the national title scene?
Posted on 3/11/21 at 8:41 am to skrayper
quote:
Also, why would teams bother with good OOC opponents with AQ?
Because there wouldn't be a penalty for losing. A better team would better prepare you for conference play than playing (insert FCS, Sun Belt, etc. team). Would also bring you more money than having to pay a cupcake $1.5M to take an arse beating.
This post was edited on 3/11/21 at 8:42 am
Posted on 3/11/21 at 9:00 am to skrayper
quote:
So even more non-competitive games?
Looks like more competitive games
Posted on 3/11/21 at 9:13 am to djsdawg
I am in favor of going back to my childhood format. Conference winner in the attached bowl. Let everyone argue who is real champ. If a poll picks you, you get their trophy. College sports is nowhere near the same animal as then.
Posted on 3/11/21 at 9:35 am to diddlydawg7
quote:
AQ is shity.
Winning your conference should mean something.
There is absolutely zero logic to that unless all conferences are roughly equal. Right now, the Pac 12 is arguably little better than the American.
The only logical rationale for giving the Pac-12 an AQ is to grow interest on the West Coast.
When it comes to expansion, there are two certainties:
1. Even if you expand the playoffs to 16, there are at least 80 teams that will never sniff the playoffs in our lifetimes. Never. Hell, expand it to 32. Vandy, Wake Forest, and UConn are still never getting in.
2. The more you expand, the greater the likelihood that Alabama will never be left out, for the foreseeable future.
I can't wait for the first year of the 8 team expansion and for a 10-2 Alabama to limp in at the 8 seed and win the whole thing. Heads all over the college football landscape would explode.
Posted on 3/11/21 at 10:04 am to pvilleguru
quote:
Because there wouldn't be a penalty for losing. A better team would better prepare you for conference play than playing (insert FCS, Sun Belt, etc. team). Would also bring you more money than having to pay a cupcake $1.5M to take an arse beating.
The penalty for playing the game is a greater chance of injury. Good teams stay in the game longer, meaning starters stay in longer, not to mention higher caliber athletes hit harder and faster.
Those penalties would rapidly offset any "better prep" you get.
As far as money, that's debatable. Play a home and home series means you're losing out on a home game every other season.
Posted on 3/11/21 at 10:08 am to djsdawg
quote:
Looks like more competitive games
Alabama vs Oregon would be a massive blowout.
Clemson would annihilate Cincinatti.
Texas A&M vs Notre Dame is probably the only "good" game.
That Oklahoma / Ohio State game has potential, but honestly OU was less likely a "great" team than a lucky one - Florida was at, what, 1/3rd their offensive power if THAT? They lost to KSU and struggled to beat Iowa State. If OSU is at their Clemson-game level strength, they slaughter Oklahoma.
Posted on 3/11/21 at 10:25 am to skrayper
quote:
The penalty for playing the game is a greater chance of injury. Good teams stay in the game longer, meaning starters stay in longer, not to mention higher caliber athletes hit harder and faster.
No one is forcing coaches to use their starters all game. Better teams will also have better technique, resulting in safer tackles.
Posted on 3/11/21 at 10:32 am to pvilleguru
We've already seen that the playoff gives teams more room to handle a loss, thus resulting in teams scheduling more big OOC games. Making OOC games mean less would just increase the willingness of teams to schedule even more big OOC games.
Posted on 3/11/21 at 11:23 am to pvilleguru
quote:
Better teams will also have better technique, resulting in safer tackles.
Good teams still get targeting penalties, so no.
Also, the better teams have athletes who are bigger, faster, stronger, and hit with more velocity. There's nothing safe about that.
And there's absolutely nothing safe for the offensive player no matter how "safe" the tackle is for the defender.
Tell us what was inherently unsafe about the play on which Waddle was lost for the season. It was pretty much just a routine tackle on a routine return. How about the play where Devonta was put out of the Ohio State game? What was unsafe about that?
I know you've watched enough Bama football over the years to be smarter than this.
This post was edited on 3/11/21 at 11:27 am
Posted on 3/11/21 at 11:47 am to BamaGradinTn
Did I say anywhere that there would be no more injuries?
Posted on 3/11/21 at 12:52 pm to pvilleguru
quote:
We've already seen that the playoff gives teams more room to handle a loss, thus resulting in teams scheduling more big OOC games. Making OOC games mean less would just increase the willingness of teams to schedule even more big OOC games.
OOC win/loss is irrelevant with AQ. OOC games are just there for fans, and serve no purpose
Posted on 3/11/21 at 2:51 pm to pvilleguru
quote:
We've already seen that the playoff gives teams more room to handle a loss, thus resulting in teams scheduling more big OOC games. Making OOC games mean less would just increase the willingness of teams to schedule even more big OOC games
Really? Ive seen the opposite.
Hell... clemson and notre dame cancelled games to make "fewer losses" the priority. The big10 changed conference rules to fit a team in with fewer games played (avoiding losses).
The playoff concept today is even more imperative to avoid losses.
Playoff teams are not ranked by the number of quality wins that they rack up.
They are ranked by number of losses first. And then separated by strength of schedule.
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News