Started By
Message
re: Delany: If you don't win your division, you can't win it all...
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:17 pm to ThaKaptin
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:17 pm to ThaKaptin
quote:
Rose Bowl, more often than not, included what the general opinion was to be the 2 best teams in the country
Except in 16,17,18,19,21,22,23,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35
Looks like more offten than not to me from 1916 to 1936
1
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:17 pm to Indfanfromcol
quote:
But why would we even have a championship game then if it was just going to put the best 4 teams.
The Big 12 doesn't anymore. Bob Stoops has gone on record saying he didn't ever want one again. How is it fair their champion could qualify over 5 conferences that have an extra conference championship game?
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:17 pm to Alahunter
quote:
Alahunter
Agreed
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:18 pm to NYCAuburn
We get it. You don't want to recognize Bama claiming NC's for their 10-0 Rose Bowl win seasons in the 20's thru 30's.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:20 pm to Alahunter
quote:
We get it. You don't want to recognize Bama claiming NC's for their 10-0 Rose Bowl win seasons in the 20's thru 30's.
I never once said that hunter. but go ahead and assume if you want.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:20 pm to 10888bge
It pisses me off, other conferences are dumbing down their competition and schedules, and then change the format, to give them a spot where they haven't earned.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:20 pm to Alahunter
I think the BIG12 is in great position now. Big TV contract to split with only ten teams. OU and/or UT have an easy path to tournament each year they have a decent team.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:21 pm to bona fide
I'm actually pulling for the big12 to do well, F all these conferences for going big.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:21 pm to NYCAuburn
Everyone is discussing today's BCS and you're doing everything you can to discredit Bama's Rose Bowl wins 90 years ago. Give it a rest.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:22 pm to 10888bge
quote:
The MNC was crowned by a bunch of old farts with delusions of historic grandeur.
It hasn't improved much. Coaches who only care about tow teams, theirs and the opponent next week, having a GA fill out the form. This poll should have been aborted immediately 60 years ago. An individual chooses what is important in their opinion, gives hierarchical weights to the variables, again according to their opinion. Putting it into a concocted mathematical formula. Not sure why this is called a 'computer ranking'...perhaps to give it an air of authority it should not have. The Harris group isn't much better than coaches poll and less informed than AP.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:23 pm to bona fide
quote:
I think the BIG12 is in great position now. Big TV contract to split with only ten teams. OU and/or UT have an easy path to tournament each year they have a decent team.
Exactly. You're going to have Okie and/or TX in a playoff every year, because they only really have each other for tough competition now. Heck.. maybe both in a playoff, since they could win their divisions every year and only lose to each other. Play early in the season, so the loss won't be as felt at the end of the year.... it's ridiculous.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:23 pm to Alahunter
quote:
you're doing everything you can to discredit Bama's Rose Bowl wins 90 years ago. Give it a rest.
Again would you like to show where I did this? Or do you just like to make blanket statements as well?
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:25 pm to Alahunter
quote:
We get it. You don't want to recognize Bama claiming NC's for their 10-0 Rose Bowl win seasons in the 20's thru 30's.
Nahh, but those NC's are in partwhy the BCS was started. To much conflict on who the NC should be, although not on all occasions.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:29 pm to 10888bge
Those were all pre AP and UPI poll awards. The main conflict after those and the reason the Bowl Coalition formed, was to get the 2 highest ranked teams playing, so you didn't determine a champion by 1 vs 6 and 2 vs 10 and 6 ending up Champ based on 1 and 2 losing. The Pac and Big 12 refused to comply by staying in the Rose Bowl and finally eased into the current BCS that we have now. A playoff is going to hurt alot more than people think, imo. Until all the conferences are equal in size, number of teams and championship formats.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:31 pm to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
quote:
It hasn't improved much. Coaches who only care about tow teams, theirs and the opponent next week, having a GA fill out the form. This poll should have been aborted immediately 60 years ago. An individual chooses what is important in their opinion, gives hierarchical weights to the variables, again according to their opinion. Putting it into a concocted mathematical formula. Not sure why this is called a 'computer ranking'...perhaps to give it an air of authority it should not have. The Harris group isn't much better than coaches poll and less informed than AP.
I am of the opinion that polls should have never been allowed in the BCS ranking system. That being said it is still better than having a NC decided strictly by polls. Seeing as how the BCS wanted to appease the pollsters they decided to let them have their say and now they are bitching because their opinion put LSU and BAMA in the NCG.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:35 pm to 10888bge
It is my opinion that the BCS system is theabsolute perfect system for CFB. There is no other scenario that can improve CFB, imo.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:36 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
Again would you like to show where I did this? Or do you just like to make blanket statements as well?
We dont have to, its obvious to everyone in this thread.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:36 pm to Alahunter
Alahunter, you are also correct, but even then the number 1's & 2's were decided on opinion. Yes there were undefeated teams and they were good/great teams. But there was no way to determine how strong that teams schedule was, mathematical formula. Think about The Ohio state v. LSU. LSU 2 losses and i think Ohio no losses. Look how that turned out. I will always take quantifiable numbers over qualified opinion.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:37 pm to Alahunter
IMO, the SEC is going to continue its dominance. It doesnt matter how many teams they allow us to have in the playoff. SEC is still going to skull frick all the weak arse teams in every other conference and there aint a damn thing Delaney can do about it.
I think it might have the opposite effect that Delaney intends. There will be more attention paid to the SECCG because that will be the de facto national championship game. We might also see the SEC drop the division format like they did in basketball, in order to assure that the best two teams are in the SECCG.
regardless, SEC staaaacked, airbody else fuuuuucked
I think it might have the opposite effect that Delaney intends. There will be more attention paid to the SECCG because that will be the de facto national championship game. We might also see the SEC drop the division format like they did in basketball, in order to assure that the best two teams are in the SECCG.
regardless, SEC staaaacked, airbody else fuuuuucked
Posted on 5/10/12 at 12:38 pm to Govt Tide
quote:
The problem is that Alabama would not be in under the caveat Delany added about having to win your division. I'm not sure why people are missing that subtle change. If he was advocating that higher ranked at large teams that didn't win their conference go ahead of conference winners not ranked in the Top 6 then I agree that's a very fair compromise. The problem is that he just tried to sneak the "win your division" argument in there which would have excluded both Alabama and Stanford in favor of Wisconsin because they'd be the next highest conference winner because nobody else ranked in the Top 6 either won their conference or even won their division (see Alabama and Stanford. Boise State may have been eligible for the 4th spot even though they didn't win their conference due to semantics of them not being in a division within their conference.
The having to win your conference and be in the Top 6 is actually a pretty good setup. The have to win your division basically cancels out that very caveat because in almost every case this situation will involve a 1 loss team in the same division as one of the BCS playoff participants. It won't ever involve teams from separate divisions because those teams would always end up playing each other in a conference championship game. Incredibly sneaky move by Delany and he's a moron if he thinks Slive and others are stupid enough to fall for that rule.
Wisconsin was #10 so even under his plan they wouldn't have gotten in. Yes, they don't want 2 SEC teams in (Bama would have been the second one). It will be a compromise and not just the top 4 because the SEC is going to be strong for decades to come especially if we get the 55-70 million that was rumored for the the tv contract
Page 10 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News