Started By
Message
re: Delany: If you don't win your division, you can't win it all...
Posted on 5/10/12 at 3:52 pm to Buckeye06
Posted on 5/10/12 at 3:52 pm to Buckeye06
@Buckeye06
You've just validated everyone's argument with the whole VCU statement!!!
Which is why Delaney's proposal sucks
Just b/c you win your conference doesn't mean you are one of the 4/5/6 best teams!!!!!
If UConn wins the crappy Big East, should they be given an automatic bid to go to the playoffs over say a 1-loss LSU or Bama or OU or USC???
HELL NO!!!
His proposal does not make sense.
You've just validated everyone's argument with the whole VCU statement!!!
Which is why Delaney's proposal sucks
Just b/c you win your conference doesn't mean you are one of the 4/5/6 best teams!!!!!
If UConn wins the crappy Big East, should they be given an automatic bid to go to the playoffs over say a 1-loss LSU or Bama or OU or USC???
HELL NO!!!
His proposal does not make sense.
0
Posted on 5/10/12 at 4:03 pm to Buckeye06
Buckeye06 
quote:The problem is that even when teams in the Big 10 or Big 12 win there conference they are still usually ranked outside of the top 6 or 7. Listen the fans want to see the 2 best teams play for the CC just because your conference sucks and doesn't play big boy football it's not our fault get over it.
I don't see why this proposal is a problem. Win your conference, have a shot. Don't win your conference, try again next year
Posted on 5/10/12 at 4:07 pm to Buckeye06
Buckeye06 this is the SEC RANT not the Panty Waste Big10 Cry Board!!
Posted on 5/10/12 at 4:10 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:
Here's another thing: Delaney wants to talk about the possibility of "wild cards", but under his plan, all participants, including any conference champions, are "wild cards" because they have to rely on voters and computers to put them in the postseason. If the playoff was going to be made up of EVERY conference champion, then there might be a case to include ONLY conference champions...it would be completely objective. But by holding on to voters and computers to decide which participants get in the playoffs, it's foolish to say that the champion of an inferior conference should get in over a non-champion in superior conference.
Very good point there. I agree.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 4:21 pm to JPLSU1981
BS. Take 2011 Bama 1 loss and undefeated LSU. Now consider a 10-2 OSU ranked lower then Bama or a S E C, but OSU or a Michigan wins the Big 10 no way do I agree they get in over a higher ranked 1 loss team. No integrity to the process if that is what happens.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 5:29 pm to JPLSU1981
Everyone but bama should be ok with this
Posted on 5/10/12 at 5:39 pm to polarbehr
quote:
Everyone but bama should be ok with this
I think its more the bama fans being outspoken because I am guessing they think it's an attack on them. There is good and bad about both systems. You will see most fan bases split in some percentage, with some leaning one way more than the other. It just the vast majority of bama fans are severely opposed to the conference champion.
Personally I am torn. I see both sides. One way is more decisive but still leaves doubt and the conference champion format keeps college tradition alive with the bowl principles about playing other conferences.
This post was edited on 5/10/12 at 5:43 pm
Posted on 5/10/12 at 5:42 pm to polarbehr
quote:
Everyone but bama should be ok with this
Hate to disappoint you but I've seen several national sports writers and columnists calling for top 4 teams in playoffs regardless of conference championships
Posted on 5/10/12 at 6:06 pm to Legend13
quote:
The problem is that even when teams in the Big 10 or Big 12 win there conference they are still usually ranked outside of the top 6 or 7. Listen the fans want to see the 2 best teams play for the CC just because your conference sucks and doesn't play big boy football it's not our fault get over it
2010 Michigan St was winner of the Big Ten. What did a 3 loss Bama team do to them in a non BCS game? Yet Buckeye and Delaney, would have had them playing for the NC.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 6:09 pm to Alahunter
FACT: It should be the 4 best teams, regardless of conference or conference title. HOWEVER, if you don't win your conference, you can't go if the conference champion doesn't go.
FACT: We will cry and bitch if this ever means that two Big 10 or Big 12 (or whatever they're fricking calling themselves) go in lieu of an SEC team.
FACT: We will cry and bitch if this ever means that two Big 10 or Big 12 (or whatever they're fricking calling themselves) go in lieu of an SEC team.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 6:18 pm to Stanky Legg
Zags makes sense. All conferences are not created equally. This equality for the masses is bullshite. Life isn't fair,and in some instances your best isn't good enough. Quit trying to force feed the teets of mediocrity into the mouthes of the masses.
This post was edited on 5/10/12 at 6:19 pm
Posted on 5/11/12 at 2:29 pm to JPLSU1981
Under Delaneys system, Bama or LSU could join some pussy conference like the ACC or Big East and be a conference champion every year and easily make the 4 team playoff.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 3:02 pm to northalabamacracker
wow - that proposal is awful. that actually causes more controversy than we have right now.
winning the big 10 doesn't guarantee that you are one of the best 4 teams in the nation.
winning the big 10 doesn't guarantee that you are one of the best 4 teams in the nation.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 3:08 pm to Stanky Legg
quote:
FACT: We will cry and bitch if this ever means that two Big 10 or Big 12 (or whatever they're fricking calling themselves) go in lieu of an SEC team.
Exactly
The logic from SEC fans in general has been extremely myopic. Yes, the best team in the country has been from the SEC in the last half dozen years - but which SEC teams were deprived of their shot to dethrone that SEC champ?
We consider SEC teams to be unbeatable but teams like Miami and Southern Cal were also considered unbeatable last decade - and those opinions were also shown to be false.
Let's say there's another year like the Big 12 had a few years ago where the top three teams only have one loss and only to each other... then you have maybe an undefeated PAC or Big 10 team floating around.
Do you think SEC fans would really be ok with their 2 loss SEC champ being left out of the picture? Absolutely not in general IMO - in general they would argue it was the schedule strength that knocked down their team in the polls and they deserved a shot at those teams.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 3:15 pm to molsusports
quote:
Let's say there's another year like the Big 12 had a few years ago where the top three teams only have one loss and only to each other... then you have maybe an undefeated PAC or Big 10 team floating around.
Do you think SEC fans would really be ok with their 2 loss SEC champ being left out of the picture? Absolutely not in general IMO - in general they would argue it was the schedule strength that knocked down their team in the polls and they deserved a shot at those teams.
That would be a helluva lot more palatable, than a team like 2010 Michigan St going over a one loss SEC team because they lost to an undefeated SEC team in their division.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 3:23 pm to Alahunter
quote:
That would be a helluva lot more palatable, than a team like 2010 Michigan St going over a one loss SEC team because they lost to an undefeated SEC team in their division.
2010 Big 10 before the bowls had:
one loss Ohio State, one loss Michigan State, one loss Wisconsin
depending on the voter's whims those types of teams could crowd out a 1 or 2 loss SEC champ some years - if you limit the number of participants from a conference this becomes less of an issue.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 3:28 pm to Legend13
quote:
The problem is that even when teams in the Big 10 or Big 12 win there conference they are still usually ranked outside of the top 6 or 7
This statement is completely incorrect.
In 14 years of BCS play the Big Ten has had a team in the top 6 14 times.
The Big 12 has had 11 in 14 years.
The SEC has had 17 in 14 years.
The PAC 12 has 11.
No other conference is in the discussion for numbers represented.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 3:29 pm to molsusports
Like I've said before, if the top 4 teams in the country happen to be in the Pac 12 then those are the 4 teams I think should play for the national championship.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 3:30 pm to Alahunter
quote:
That would be a helluva lot more palatable, than a team like 2010 Michigan St going over a one loss SEC team because they lost to an undefeated SEC team in their division.
Michigan State got a pass on playing the best team in the Big Ten in 2010. They weren't good.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 3:32 pm to molsusports
quote:
depending on the voter's whims those types of teams could crowd out a 1 or 2 loss SEC champ some years - if you limit the number of participants from a conference this becomes less of an issue.
I could handle a 1 loss Big Ten edging a 2 loss SEC champ if it came to it. However, a weak one loss Big Ten over a one loss team like Bama or Lsu last year, not winning their division, would be worse. And that is what the proposal would do.
Page 13 of 16
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News