Started By
Message
re: Delany: If you don't win your division, you can't win it all...
Posted on 5/10/12 at 9:57 am to Govt Tide
Posted on 5/10/12 at 9:57 am to Govt Tide
I just think it's a little ironic that the Rose Bowl tie in was created as a way of excluding southern teams from the perceived national championship in the 20's, after Alabama and other southern teams started dominating.
Now it appears they are trying to stop the momentum again.
Now it appears they are trying to stop the momentum again.
2
Posted on 5/10/12 at 9:59 am to JPLSU1981
quote:
His actual proposal is pretty simple....Top 4 conference champions are in the playoff as long as they are in the top6. If all four spots aren't filled, then the highest ranked non champion(s) will fill the remaining slots.
IF that is his proposal then that is a very reasonable compromise. I'm doubtful he is going to give in on non-division winners being eligible though. My fear is that SEC haters are going to be willfully ignorant enough to see how his compromise is really no compromise at all. It will primarily neuter the SEC and the Big 12 to a lesser extent.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 10:00 am to stapuffmarshy
quote:
the 4 best conference champs fool
let a committee select them
it's not that fricking hard
Doesn't mean it's the 4 best teams. Watch the NFL if you want to see a 6 loss team win it all.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 10:02 am to Bellabama
That is exactly what is happening. This is the third time Bama has won the NC and people have decided to change how it can be won.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 10:10 am to sarc
Lsu fans are reacting like this because we have been boned twice by teams not winning there conference then going to te NC.
But in 03 at least we got half the title
But in 03 at least we got half the title
Posted on 5/10/12 at 10:10 am to Govt Tide
Yeah, I just think the "don't win your division" was just a comment that was played up....I don't think that is part of the actual proposal.
I hate Delany FWIW, but I do like his proposal on this.
Delany's proposal is a nice compromise....Some preferential treatment is given to conference champions, but at the same time you still allow non champions to make it and you also exclude "weak" conference champions from making it (for example, Wisconsin last year at #10 would have been ineligible)
I hate Delany FWIW, but I do like his proposal on this.
Delany's proposal is a nice compromise....Some preferential treatment is given to conference champions, but at the same time you still allow non champions to make it and you also exclude "weak" conference champions from making it (for example, Wisconsin last year at #10 would have been ineligible)
Posted on 5/10/12 at 10:10 am to Alahunter
quote:
Doesn't mean it's the 4 best teams. Watch the NFL if you want to see a 6 loss team win it all.
Watch CFB if you want to see a non champion win it all as well
Posted on 5/10/12 at 10:13 am to Alahunter
quote:
That is exactly what is happening. This is the third time Bama has won the NC and people have decided to change how it can be won.
Luckily for Bama, they won a couple of titles because of the changes implemented before the title season.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 10:14 am to Dire Wolf
This isn't a flame, but on the flip side of that, at least in 2007, there was a good Georgia team and LSU rested on the conference championship laurels.
It's a straw argument to me, because there is an assumption that the conference title is more entitled, when, as the rules for the BCS go, they actually went to the trouble of excluding that as a requirement.
I can see how LSU would want a conference champion caveat, but there will be a point at which I think they will be the team that gets in on the non conference championship model. I'd hope so. If the situation had been reversed last year, I would have wanted the same matchup.
It's a straw argument to me, because there is an assumption that the conference title is more entitled, when, as the rules for the BCS go, they actually went to the trouble of excluding that as a requirement.
I can see how LSU would want a conference champion caveat, but there will be a point at which I think they will be the team that gets in on the non conference championship model. I'd hope so. If the situation had been reversed last year, I would have wanted the same matchup.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 10:15 am to stapuffmarshy
quote:
Watch CFB if you want to see a non champion win it all as well
You mean.. watch THE champion, right? Because if they win, they are the Champion.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 10:16 am to stapuffmarshy
quote:
Watch CFB if you want to see a non champion win it all as well
1 loss =/= 6 loss
And the majority of the country, at least the people that know enough about what they are talking about to get paid to talk about it, said Alabama was the best team in the country all year, even after September. Your posts reek of jealousy and butthurt.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 10:16 am to Bellabama
quote:
If the situation had been reversed last year, I would have wanted the same matchup.
Same here and said before the matchup. I said it would have sucked to have to play them again, but they would deserve to be in it.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 10:17 am to stapuffmarshy
quote:
Watch CFB if you want to see a non champion win it all as well
Maybe prior to the BCS Championship game. But as far as I can tell, every year a champion has won the championship, except the year USC's was stripped.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 10:20 am to Bellabama
quote:
every year a champion has won the championship
been living under a rock for 6 months or so huh?
If you can't win a championship in your conference shouldn't be in a playoff
I feel that way no matter who wins the conference
Posted on 5/10/12 at 10:20 am to Bellabama
I don't disagree with yo but you have I see it from our view, since 2003 lsu fans have been strongly behind the you have to win your conference argument. We are not going to change just because bama fans think other wise.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 10:23 am to Bellabama
quote:
I just think it's a little ironic that the Rose Bowl tie in was created as a way of excluding southern teams from the perceived national championship in the 20's, after Alabama and other southern teams started dominating.
Wait a minute, not sure if I am reading this correctly, I have seen this mentioned numerous times.
Are you guys saying that the Rose Bowl back in the day(20's, etc...) decided the NC?
Posted on 5/10/12 at 10:26 am to Dire Wolf
quote:
I don't disagree with yo but you have I see it from our view, since 2003 lsu fans have been strongly behind the you have to win your conference argument. We are not going to change just because bama fans think other wise.
Going forward with f the playoff system being proposed, a conf. champ stipulation can only hurt LSU. Under no circumstance will it benefit LSU.
This post was edited on 5/10/12 at 10:28 am
Posted on 5/10/12 at 10:28 am to stapuffmarshy
quote:
been living under a rock for 6 months or so huh?
If you can't win a championship in your conference shouldn't be in a playoff
I feel that way no matter who wins the conference
Then you are a fricking idiot and know nothing about college football.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 10:29 am to ThaKaptin
quote:
ThaKaptin
go drink some drano dude
Posted on 5/10/12 at 10:29 am to NYCAuburn
quote:
Are you guys saying that the Rose Bowl back in the day(20's, etc...) decided the NC?
It was in most cases, considered the defacto national championship, since there were no other ways of crowning one back then. Especially if the winner was undefeated.
Page 5 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News