Started By
Message
re: Anyone else think the Playoff will be disastrous?
Posted on 12/8/13 at 5:38 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
Posted on 12/8/13 at 5:38 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
I can understand that coming from an LSU fan, or maybe it should be more obvious: A rematch later on down the road doesn't change anything, they're still the same teams. If you're better, you'll beat 'em twice. If you're not, you'll lose.
Okay, THAT'S IT!!!
I DEMAND a rematch with Ole Miss because I don't think anyone would agree that the results on the field reflected who the best team was. In this case I think it's only fair that LSU get a do-over. If Ole Miss wins, I'll accept it because they would be 2-0. But if LSU wins they will clearly be the better team for having won the last matchup.
am i doing it right?
1
Posted on 12/8/13 at 5:39 pm to molsusports
quote:
In 2006 the conventional wisdom was similarly that tOSU would blow out Florida, Michigan was probably the second best team in teh country but we saw both Michigan and tOSU get destroyed in their bowl games.
I would still argue that Michigan (THAT year, not the next year) ought to have gone to the Top 4. There is just no way to discount that one year a PAC-12, BIG X, ACC or BIG XII team is going to get left out and we're going to have chaos.
Posted on 12/8/13 at 5:41 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
I DEMAND a rematch with Ole Miss because I don't think anyone would agree that the results on the field reflected who the best team was. In this case I think it's only fair that LSU get a do-over. If Ole Miss wins, I'll accept it because they would be 2-0. But if LSU wins they will clearly be the better team for having won the last matchup.
For an inconsequential bowl it might seem like a good argument, but when Alabama came in and won in the fashion they did it's hard to argue who the better team in the country was that night.
Teams play games of 7 and you could always make the argument that if they played games of 11 there might be a different outcome.
I can't see why the second game is less legitimate, other than your team got blown out that time.
Posted on 12/8/13 at 5:42 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
I would still argue that Michigan (THAT year, not the next year) ought to have gone to the Top 4. There is just no way to discount that one year a PAC-12, BIG X, ACC or BIG XII team is going to get left out and we're going to have chaos.
Look, that was the year when 2006 LSU could have beaten anyone in a playoff and they were ranked in the top four of the BCS.
But they lost games they should have won and they didn't deserve it. They (like Michigan) didn't win their conference) and they (like Michigan) didn't deserve a mulligan against the team that won the conference because that would have devalued the regular season result.
Posted on 12/8/13 at 5:42 pm to molsusports
quote:
I thought it was clear I was advocating taking the top four teams in the computer rankings rather than the human opinion polls like the AP, Coaches, or Harris.
Top four teams from conference winners or top four overall teams in regards to computer rankings? If we go strictly by computer rankings I can assure you that Alabama will be #4. If they're not it's scandalous.
Posted on 12/8/13 at 5:45 pm to molsusports
quote:
But they lost games they should have won and they didn't deserve it. They (like Michigan) didn't win their conference) and they (like Michigan) didn't deserve a mulligan against the team that won the conference because that would have devalued the regular season result.
I'm sorry but if Alabama and MSU have one loss years and Alabama shits the bed in the Iron Bowl -- I'm taking Alabama every time. There are plenty of interpolations that you could make in the Bama season that would rank them higher than MSU.
Posted on 12/8/13 at 5:45 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
happens in teh NFL all the time. Some team gets blown out in the first game and wins the second game.
sometimes a team that was blown out several times goes on to win the Super Bowl.
But there is supposed to be more meaning in the regular season in college football and that is why I prefer the sport. Everything else about the NFL is superior (the coaching, the athletes, the television product).
The only thing that makes college football special is the different format that makes games in September, October, and November generally must win games for the better teams in a conference.
sometimes a team that was blown out several times goes on to win the Super Bowl.
But there is supposed to be more meaning in the regular season in college football and that is why I prefer the sport. Everything else about the NFL is superior (the coaching, the athletes, the television product).
The only thing that makes college football special is the different format that makes games in September, October, and November generally must win games for the better teams in a conference.
Posted on 12/8/13 at 5:47 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
I'm sorry but if Alabama and MSU have one loss years and Alabama shits the bed in the Iron Bowl -- I'm taking Alabama every time.
What you've just done is completely invalidated your opinion to anyone who isn't an unreasonable SEC or Alabama homer.
The purpose of having a playoff format is to have a playoff that follows rules that are as fair and as objective as possible.
Posted on 12/8/13 at 5:49 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
Top four teams from conference winners or top four overall teams in regards to computer rankings?
refer again to my earlier posts in this thread
it is the conference champs (from any conference) who are ranked the highest in the computer polls.
Posted on 12/8/13 at 5:51 pm to molsusports
quote:
The only thing that makes college football special is the different format that makes games in September, October, and November generally must win games for the better teams in a conference.
I agree with you for the most part -- but that game featuring LSU and Alabama rematch to me was exciting. I find rematches in Bowl Season, especially with rivals to be riveting and I believe that if you separate the conferences where multiple representatives come from (For instance, if Bama played FSU in round one for being #4, and Auburn played MSU/Baylor and they both won) different sides then the game would be draw a lot more hype.
Posted on 12/8/13 at 5:53 pm to molsusports
quote:
refer again to my earlier posts in this thread
it is the conference champs (from any conference) who are ranked the highest in the computer polls.
So an (for hypothetical reasons) 11 - 2, 10 - 3 team from the BIG-XII or PAC-12 would go before an 11 - 1 Bama strictly because they won their shite conference?
Posted on 12/8/13 at 6:03 pm to cattus
quote:
Bama is better than Auburn but lost their shot
Bama is not better than Auburn. I watched the teams play straight up and Alabama finished in second place.
If the two teams played again, would you still believe that Alabama was better? This attitude goes back to the bad old days of the AP poll. Yes, LSU beat Auburn but the losses on LSU's schedule are an obvious disqualifier to claiming that LSU>Auburn.
When you start talking about "the eye test" and "quality losses", you are reaching.
Posted on 12/8/13 at 6:13 pm to BobABooey
quote:
If the two teams played again, would you still believe that Alabama was better?
I have zero doubt that Auburn does -not- want to play Alabama again. Not because they're better, but because they probably wouldn't want to chance that game again. Alabama lost that night, but I think they'd win even if not better if they played 10 times.
Posted on 12/8/13 at 6:29 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
Fair enough but Alabama had their chance with the knowledge that the winner of the game would go to Atlanta and, perhaps, the NCG. They didn't meet the challenge.
Like another poster said, games played during the season should have consequences. From the best evidence available (head to head results), I think Auburn would win 9 out of 10 subsequent matchups.
Like another poster said, games played during the season should have consequences. From the best evidence available (head to head results), I think Auburn would win 9 out of 10 subsequent matchups.
Posted on 12/8/13 at 6:30 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
For an inconsequential bowl it might seem like a good argument, but when Alabama came in and won in the fashion they did it's hard to argue who the better team in the country was that night.
WTF? I'm an LSU fan, I'm talking about the Ole Miss game this year. Why can't we get a mulligan? We're obviously the better team.
quote:
I can't see why the second game is less legitimate
WTF redux?
I can't see why the second game is neccessarily more legitimate.
Posted on 12/8/13 at 6:50 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
WTF? I'm an LSU fan, I'm talking about the Ole Miss game this year. Why can't we get a mulligan? We're obviously the better team.
The game would accomplish nothing? Surely replaying for the National Championship is consequential?
quote:
WTF redux?
I can't see why the second game is neccessarily more legitimate.
They're both relevant and legitimate?
Posted on 12/8/13 at 7:21 pm to BobABooey
quote:
re:I think Auburn would win 9 out of 10 subsequent matchups. E
I am going to respectfully, strongly disagree.
Posted on 12/8/13 at 8:44 pm to Butkus51
quote:
re:I think Auburn would win 9 out of 10 subsequent matchups. E
I am going to respectfully, strongly disagree.
Auburn took it this time, but I don't think any reasonable Auburn fan would want to play Bama again.
Posted on 12/8/13 at 11:06 pm to BobABooey
quote:
Like another poster said, games played during the season should have consequences.
And they do -- a 9 - 3 Alabama won't jump ahead of an 11 - 1 Baylor. But if it's a 12 - 1 Baylor vs. 11 - 1 Alabama -- one played an immensely more difficult schedule and should be rewarded for that. The SEC SOS should have some weight in regards to the Playoff.
Posted on 12/8/13 at 11:57 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
a few years of "committee" picking, and you are going to hate it
Page 8 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News