Started By
Message
re: If you can't win your division or conference, you can't be "National" Champion
Posted on 11/28/17 at 9:35 am to TizzyT4theUofA
Posted on 11/28/17 at 9:35 am to TizzyT4theUofA
quote:
Having an at large team win the National Championship contradicts your belief that a team that doesn't win their division or conference can't be a National Champion.
It would ONLY be legitimate if the playoff was expanded to include all of the major conferences and multiple at-large teams. With a 4 team playoff, it is not legitimate.
0
Posted on 11/28/17 at 9:37 am to TideWarrior
quote:
If so have it but your hatred for UA and Saban should not be your motivator.
I was saying this way back when Nebraska got in the BCS Title Game after not winning their division. I've never changed my mind.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 9:41 am to tiger chaser
Well that's settled then. Finebaum commercial > playoff committee.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 9:43 am to BrerTiger
quote:
Bull shite. You will change your mind once the shoe is on LSU's foot.
My opinion won't change.
If they win their division and conference, they should play for the title if they are one of the top 4 teams. If they can't win their division or conference, how can they possibly be one of the top 4 teams?
How can the 3rd place finisher in the SEC be in the top 4 teams in the country? It only makes sense if Auburn and Georgia BOTH get in and everyone else is so bad that Alabama could sneak in as a 3rd place team.
Okay. If Auburn and Georgia BOTH get in to the playoff, then you can legitimately consider Alabama as a 3rd option too. Otherwise, you're penalizing one of the top 2 teams in the SEC for playing each other in the championship game. That is ludicrous.
Georgia is 11-1 and only lost to Auburn who beat the dog out of Alabama and only lost to Clemson and LSU. If Georgia loses to Auburn again, they will STILL have a better argument for the playoff than Alabama does.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 9:44 am to AlaTiger
If Georgia loses to Auburn this week, they will STILL have a better argument for the playoff than Alabama does.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 9:49 am to AlaTiger
quote:
How can the 3rd place finisher in the SEC be in the top 4 teams in the country?
No matter what happens on Saturday, Bama will finish 2nd in the SEC. And since there is no way Bama gets in as the sole SEC team, it seems like everything will fit neatly into your argument.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 9:49 am to AlaTiger
The 2011 NC is the perpetual motion machine of melts. Time passes and you expect it to slow down and eventually subside, but it never does. It just keeps on going and going and going, on and on forever, endlessly.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 9:50 am to AlaTiger
If you get blown out by 2 crappy teams, you shouldn't be eligible to become "National" Champion. Given this premise, if Ohio St. wins the Big10 Championship, who would you put in the playoffs to replace them.
I would add that I have no problem with 2 loss Auburn getting into the playoffs; they lost in a close contest at the beginning of the season to last year's NC, Clemson, and lost to a ranked LSU in Death Valley.
I would add that I have no problem with 2 loss Auburn getting into the playoffs; they lost in a close contest at the beginning of the season to last year's NC, Clemson, and lost to a ranked LSU in Death Valley.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 9:52 am to TruBlu4AU
quote:
You're creating the logical fallacy of false dilemma here.
Teams who aren't the best team in their conference have no right to claiming to be the best team in college football.
Which one of us is creating a logical fallacy?
Conference championships are far from an exact science. You're suggesting a 5 loss team should get in over a 1 loss team, just because the 5 loss team won one division and then defeated the champion from the other division.
I'm not going to get into your butthurt over 2011 specifically. The fact is, conference champions may not be the best teams.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 9:53 am to AlaTiger
quote:
If they can't win their division or conference, how can they possibly be one of the top 4 teams?
So it's completely impossible to have two of the top four teams be from the same division or the same conference???
I know I'll never persuade you and that's fine. I just want you to answer the question.
To me, it's laughable that losing to a lesser team is okay many years but losing to the eventual division champ is unforgivable.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 9:55 am to AlaTiger
In a PLAYOFF structure, conference titles are not a requisite to being included. See the six non division winners (ie wildcard teams) that have won the Super Bowl in the NFL playoffs.
If they wanted conference championships to be a requirement in order to make playoffs, they'd have done that. OSU getting in playoffs last year without winning conference lets you know they don't care.
Conference titles are phenomenal for alumni, fans, and regional conference pride. They aren't a requirement for inclusion into CFB Playoffs. You don't have to like it, but that's the way it is.
until it's your team one day
If they wanted conference championships to be a requirement in order to make playoffs, they'd have done that. OSU getting in playoffs last year without winning conference lets you know they don't care.
Conference titles are phenomenal for alumni, fans, and regional conference pride. They aren't a requirement for inclusion into CFB Playoffs. You don't have to like it, but that's the way it is.
quote:
I don't care if you're 11-1 and everyone else in the country has 2-3 losses.
until it's your team one day
Posted on 11/28/17 at 9:55 am to AlaTiger
It should be the best four teams regardless. The problem is there doesn't seem to be a good/fair/reliable method of determining the best four. The best four teams when? Midseason Alabama was undisputed, so was Oklahoma. Today they are playing bumper cars with each other. The body of work definition doesn't really seem to hold up. When you lose doesn't seem to hold up. I am an Auburn fan and admit to wearing orange and blue goggles, but they may be the best team right now, maybe Oklahoma is better, but its close. If Auburn loses Saturday, they are out and rightfully so. Assume though that Clemson wins, and Auburn loses. Auburn will have beaten two number ones, lost a close game to a current number one, lost a (?) game to a current top 5 and lost to a current top 15 team. That's probably still a better resume than most, but they will be out. Its kind of a mess, but it is what we have, so we deal with it.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 9:56 am to Teague
quote:
You're suggesting a 5 loss team should get in over a 1 loss team, just because the 5 loss team won one division and then defeated the champion from the other division.
To be fair, this is a total strawman.
Nobody, including the OP, is arguing that a team like 2001 LSU should've been playing for the title.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 9:56 am to AlaTiger
quote:
If you can't win your division or conference, how can you claim a "National" championship?
Notre Dame should never be considered then. And I'm okay with that.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 10:01 am to TruBlu4AU
quote:
Alabama did not deserve to play for the championship in 2011. Oklahoma St. did. Just because the people in charge looked past that in 2011 doesn't make it right. Oklahoma St. played the tougher schedule in 2011. They won their conference in 2011 while Bama did not. AND, their loss was better. They lost on the road by a field goal. Alabama lost at home by a field goal. Furthermore, the non-biased BCS computer ranking agrees with me. Alabama simply got in because of the bogus non-defensible "eye test" crap. Have a look.
Oklahoma State lost to a 4 touchdown underdog in Week 12. Bama maintained their #2 ranking for the last several weeks of the season. You people literally reimagine things. Furthermore, I’d say that “bogus non-defensible” eye test crap turned out to work pretty well, as we kicked the ever loving dog shite out of LSU and proved to the world what everyone already knew.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 10:03 am to AlaTiger
quote:
It's really simple.....If you can't win your division or conference, how can you claim a "National" championship?
Selection Committee Protocol
Read the selection committee protocol. The committee is supposed to select the four best teams. Nice things like championships, head to head, strength of schedule, common opponents are intended to be tie-breakers between similar teams. Rewarding conference champs and only conference champs was never the intention.
We are left with the same dilemma we had with the BCS because the system does not have enough spots for all deserving teams. An 8 team playoff would at least allow all P5 champions as well as 3 at-large teams.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 10:03 am to BrerTiger
quote:
Nobody, including the OP, is arguing that a team like 2001 LSU should've been playing for the title.
Perhaps not, but he is essentially arguing that Ohio State, who lost by 31 points to an unranked team in November, and also already lost by 14 at home to another playoff contending team is more deserving than Alabama, just because they won the right games to be able to win their conference. And that’s a damn joke.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 10:04 am to BrerTiger
quote:
To be fair, this is a total strawman.
No it isn't.
It's exactly what he's saying. I'm only pointing out the extreme circumstance to shine light on the stupidity of it.
What does a conference championship tell you about a team, really? Not much. There have been some pretty bad conference champions. So, why would it be part of the criteria of determining who should play for a NC?
Posted on 11/28/17 at 10:05 am to TruBlu4AU
quote:
AND, their loss was better.
You have all lost your goddamn minds in your Bama hatred. I don't even care if Bama gets left out of the playoff, most Bama fans are at peace with the situation. But this shite above, and the OP's stance that Saban has changed his mind on all this, are pure lies and bullshite.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 10:11 am to BrerTiger
quote:
Why should Bama be penalized so severely because their one loss is to the West champ instead of Ole Miss or A&M? Or because the conference had a down year and FSU laid a highly unusual egg?
Exactly. The standings in the SEC west are two teams at 7-1 and one at 6-2. Had just one game gone differently, we might have had 3 teams at 7-1. Head to head is not the first tiebreaker in that scenario. You could have had LSU beating MSU and their only conference loss to Bama. Too many variables to outright say if you can't win your division you shouldn't be in a playoff.
Page 2 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News