Started By
Message
re: Anyone else think the Playoff will be disastrous?
Posted on 12/9/13 at 12:06 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
Posted on 12/9/13 at 12:06 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:Why should they have to?
Auburn took it this time, but I don't think any reasonable Auburn fan would want to play Bama again.
It was already decided...on the field....head-to-head.
Isn't that why you folks wanted a playoff? So that it can be decided on the field...head-to-head?
So, it was decided on the field....head-to-head. And now you want a do-over? If you aren't satisfied with the results of a head-to-head game, then what's the point of playing it in the first place?
Even if you have your do-over, what happens if the team that lost the first time, wins this time? Then what? Shouldn't they have to play one more time since each has one win against the other?
And one more thing, when in this country did it become the preference to reward failure?
1
Posted on 12/9/13 at 12:11 am to CSATiger
quote:That's always been my point. I heard bitching and moaning for years over having a "committee" choose who plays for the NC.
a few years of "committee" picking, and you are going to hate it
Now those same people are ecstatic over, beginning next year, having a "committee" choose who plays for the NC.
This post was edited on 12/9/13 at 12:12 am
Posted on 12/9/13 at 12:11 am to TX Tiger
quote:
It was already decided...on the field....head-to-head.
Rematches happen, it sucks because some teams get shutout without much of a flick of the wrist when they won before but it sucks.
It doesn't appear to me that anyone outside of the LSU/Auburn fanbase wants this to be possible but the fact is -- the top four based on a reasonable algorithm should play in the Playoff.
To forgo other teams on something like ''well they didn't win their championship'' is absurd and frankly, a bit stupid. MSU is not better than Alabama, nor is Baylor and neither of those teams should go before Alabama.
Posted on 12/9/13 at 12:12 am to CSATiger
quote:
a few years of "committee" picking, and you are going to hate it
I've been thinking that it sounds like it's literally the exact same thing as the BCS -- except now we'll call it the committee and they'll do anything in their power to keep the legitimate top 4 teams from playing if there's money to be made.
Posted on 12/9/13 at 12:19 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:I have never seen a rematch on anyone's schedule.
It was already decided...on the field....head-to-head.
Rematches happen,
quote:No, no they shouldn't.
but the fact is -- the top four based on a reasonable algorithm should play in the Playoff.
Posted on 12/9/13 at 12:34 am to TX Tiger
quote:
No, no they shouldn't.
What a substantive argument! I give up!
Posted on 12/9/13 at 12:35 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:Why would anyone assume that the business of college football would be different than any other business?
they'll do anything in their power to keep the legitimate top 4 teams from playing if there's money to be made.
Posted on 12/9/13 at 12:37 am to TX Tiger
quote:
Why would anyone assume that the business of college football would be different than any other business?
Yeah, no one has -ever- advocated for fair play.
2smrt4me
Posted on 12/9/13 at 12:41 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:Not a consideration in the business of making money.....unfortunately.
fair play
Posted on 12/9/13 at 12:43 am to TX Tiger
quote:
Not a consideration in the business of making money.....unfortunately.
Where did I say it would? I simply observed and stated correctly that instead of two SEC teams (no matter how deserving the second is) they'll opt for another school.
Posted on 12/9/13 at 12:45 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
How do you know MSU and Alabama wouldn't be a close game that could go either way? They've played completely different schedules.
Posted on 12/9/13 at 12:47 am to TigerCruise
quote:
How do you know MSU and Alabama wouldn't be a close game that could go either way? They've played completely different schedules
No you're right, the SEC West is hardly comparable with the Big X.
Posted on 12/9/13 at 12:47 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
The commitee will make it a disaster.
Posted on 12/9/13 at 12:49 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:I was agreeing with you (adding on to your comment).
Not a consideration in the business of making money.....unfortunately. Where did I say it would?
quote:I disagree with this. I think the opposite will happen. We'll see more and more rematches. And when they expand to 8 and 16 teams, rematches will be the norm and "Games of the Century" will become nothing more than "Ho Hum, we'll get 'em back in the playoffs" games.
I simply observed and stated correctly that instead of two SEC teams (no matter how deserving the second is) they'll opt for another school.
I don't see that as a positive.
Posted on 12/9/13 at 12:52 am to TX Tiger
quote:
And when they expand to 8 and 16 teams
Honestly, I think this is possible with FCS but because the majority of them have no NFL career ahead of them.
In IA, there are way too much potential for injury to have 16 - 18 game seasons or more.
I do not think we will see two teams from the SEC in the Playoff unless there are some -special- circumstances. Other teams have more losses, an SEC CG with two undefeated SEC teams, something along those lines.
Posted on 12/9/13 at 12:55 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
No you're right, the SEC West is hardly comparable with the Big X.
Team A - Beat an undefeated #2 team and won its conference.
Team B - Lost to a one-loss #2 team and didn't even win its division. It's best win was against a team that lost to Ole Miss.
Which is the better team?
Posted on 12/9/13 at 12:59 am to TX Tiger
quote:
Team A - Beat an undefeated #2 team and won its conference.
Team B - Lost to a one-loss #2 team and didn't even win its division. It's best win was against a team that lost to Ole Miss.
Which is the better team?
If you adjust for Team A's schedule: Ole Miss, Texas A&M, Auburn, LSU.
And measure against Team B's schedule: Lost to Notre Dame (8 - 4) and has two signature wins...
Yeah, Goin' with Bama. Sue me.
Posted on 12/9/13 at 1:04 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
Why this system is terrible, you're comparing two teams that have played two completely different opponents and are somehow unbiased and 100% objectively are going to make a judgement about which is better? It's just a bad equation for success and is why we get such terrible BCS match ups. Playoff will at least give you a championship game worth watching.
This post was edited on 12/9/13 at 1:05 am
Posted on 12/9/13 at 1:07 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:If you're going to argue Bama's strength of schedule then it's pointless to carry on this conversation.
Team A - Beat an undefeated #2 team and won its conference. Team B - Lost to a one-loss #2 team and didn't even win its division. It's best win was against a team that lost to Ole Miss. Which is the better team?
If you adjust for Team A's schedule: Ole Miss, Texas A&M, Auburn, LSU. And measure against Team B's schedule: Lost to Notre Dame (8 - 4) and has two signature wins... Yeah, Goin' with Bama. Sue me.
Posted on 12/9/13 at 1:09 am to TX Tiger
quote:
If you're going to argue Bama's strength of schedule then it's pointless to carry on this conversation
So you're going to use SOS as a basis for saying which team is better (Team B beat an unbeaten, yada yada yada) and then throw a fit when I refute it by saying:
Which team is it better to lose to: 12 - 1 Auburn or 8 - 4 Notre Dame?
Seriously, which is a worse loss in your humble opinion?
Page 9 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News