Started By
Message
re: Lane Kiffin Whining At His Post-Game Presser
Posted on 1/3/25 at 1:50 pm to lsufball19
Posted on 1/3/25 at 1:50 pm to lsufball19
quote:
All you really accomplish there is subbing SMU for Miami and Tennessee for Ole Miss. The seeding doesn't even change a ton either. This poll also shows that the 4 teams in the semis were all in the top 6 of this poll. Seems like things didn't work out horribly.
That's just because the system is shitty. Aside from the fact 12 teams is too much, the entire format stinks.
Clemson, Boise St, Arizona St and so on had NO business being in the playoffs. It's hard enough to get 12 good teams, and they want to start throwing in really bad teams because of "AQ" status making it even worse.
This post was edited on 1/3/25 at 1:52 pm
2
Posted on 1/3/25 at 1:58 pm to 3down10
quote:
Clemson, Boise St, Arizona St and so on had NO business being in the playoffs. It's hard enough to get 12 good teams, and they want to start throwing in really bad teams because of "AQ" status making it even worse.
Arizona St was a really bad team? They seemed to look pretty good to me Saturday
Boise couldn't get out of their own way with missed FGs and costly penalties but they were plenty competitive with Penn St. They don't miss easy FGs, it's a 1 score game in the 4th quarter. Clemson/Texas was a 1 score game in the 4th quarter despite Texas jumping out to a big lead early.
But, in your opinion, Alabama should have gotten in because of on obscure computer poll you think is more fair. This is an Alabama team that has three embarrassing losses this year. at what point should losses matter?
If they're going to do a playoff, of 12 or even 16 teams, P4 conference champs should absolutely get a bid. I don't think that's even a problem for most people. I don't think they should get a 1st round bye just for winning a conference, but they should get a bid.
quote:
That's just because the system is shitty. Aside from the fact 12 teams is too much, the entire format stinks.
Well this poll you brought up almost predicted the actual final 4 of this apparent shitty system, so maybe it's not as shitty as you're making it out to be
This post was edited on 1/3/25 at 2:01 pm
Posted on 1/3/25 at 2:05 pm to lsufball19
It isn't complicated.
The teams in the leagues will be up or down and vary each year, but if you win all the games on your schedule, you are in with this 12-team playoff.
He's right though, it's hard to get a team up for every single game. That is what differentiated Saban from others. You can have all the ponies, like Lane did, but if you can't get your team to play at peak level, you will drop a game or two... or three.
Just win the games on your schedule.
The teams in the leagues will be up or down and vary each year, but if you win all the games on your schedule, you are in with this 12-team playoff.
He's right though, it's hard to get a team up for every single game. That is what differentiated Saban from others. You can have all the ponies, like Lane did, but if you can't get your team to play at peak level, you will drop a game or two... or three.
Just win the games on your schedule.
Posted on 1/3/25 at 2:14 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Arizona St was a really bad team? They seemed to look pretty good to me Saturday
Boise couldn't get out of their own way with missed FGs and costly penalties but they were plenty competitive with Penn St. They don't miss easy FGs, it's a 1 score game in the 4th quarter. Clemson/Texas was a 1 score game in the 4th quarter despite Texas jumping out to a big lead early.
But, in your opinion, Alabama should have gotten in because of on obscure computer poll you think is more fair. This is an Alabama team that has three embarrassing losses this year. at what point should losses matter?
If they're going to do a playoff, of 12 or even 16 teams, P4 conference champs should absolutely get a bid. I don't think that's even a problem for most people. I don't think they should get a 1st round bye just for winning a conference, but they should get a bid.
I don't think there should be more than 4 team playoffs. I was just answering your question about BCS computers and pointing out there are others that are more accurate.
But if you want to take the 12 best teams, then Alabama is one of them and you can sit around making retarded arguments all you want. It won't by my fault you lack the intelligence to understand it's top12, not top4. Those losses are why Alabama was #11 and not #1.
quote:
Well this poll you brought up almost predicted the actual final 4 of this apparent shitty system, so maybe it's not as shitty as you're making it out to be
I showed power rankings only. I was just answering the question about the BCS computers and showing that newer computer models are more accurate.
Posted on 1/3/25 at 2:21 pm to DreadHead
quote:
He's right though, it's hard to get a team up for every single game. That is what differentiated Saban from others. You can have all the ponies, like Lane did, but if you can't get your team to play at peak level, you will drop a game or two... or three.
Just win the games on your schedule.
Here is my thing. No one has room to complain of getting left out of a playoff if they lose 2 or more regular season games. Maybe they do have a better argument than another team with 2 or 3 losses but, still, no room to complain. Win your games and leave no doubt.
But I knew this would happen. People complained about the BCS because of random years like 2004 or 2007 or 2011 when, in reality, the BCS got the best team right almost every year without question. Then people complained about 4 team playoffs because maybe the #5 team felt shafted and had as good of a resume as the #4 team. Surely no one would bitch about getting shafted in a 12 team playoff. Have no fear, that's now happening too. Previously people seemed to agree that, generally speaking, no more than 6 at most teams were capable of winning a national title any given year. Now we have teams outside the top 12 pissed they're not in. It's madness. It won't matter how many teams are added or what system is used to select teams. There will always be people chirping that the system didn't get it right and that something needs to change.
My idea? Create a new football league with 48 total teams. Sorry about all the P4 teams not a part of it.
6 divisions of 8 teams each. Two conferences of 3 divisions. You play each team in your own division and two games against 2 teams of the remaining 3 divisions in your conference every year. Division champs all get a bid. 6 wild card teams get a bid based on record, not a poll. See where I'm going with this? Do it like the NFL does if you want a playoff. Tie-breakers can be determined the same way the NFL does tie-breakers
I know that will never happen (I think), but there is simply no way to have a "fair" and unflawed system with as many FBS football programs as they are where common opponents and commonalities with SOS across the landscape are far and few between
This post was edited on 1/3/25 at 2:22 pm
Posted on 1/3/25 at 2:28 pm to 3down10
quote:
But if you want to take the 12 best teams, then Alabama is one of them and you can sit around making retarded arguments all you want. It won't by my fault you lack the intelligence to understand it's top12, not top4. Those losses are why Alabama was #11 and not #1.
Alabama is #17 in the ESPN SOR metric. Is that just an unintelligent computer poll? Alabama isn't universally a top 12 team in every computer metric. In your opinion, Alabama is a top 12 team. It's fine for you to think that, but plenty of people don't agree with that. Everyone who doesn't share your opinion isn't just stupid. That's also a pretty terrible way to try to argue a point
Posted on 1/3/25 at 2:39 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Alabama is #17 in the ESPN SOR metric. Is that just an unintelligent computer poll? Alabama isn't universally a top 12 team in every computer metric. In your opinion, Alabama is a top 12 team. It's fine for you to think that, but plenty of people don't agree with that. Everyone who doesn't share your opinion isn't just stupid. That's also a pretty terrible way to try to argue a point
Of course the only thing the LSU fan gives a shite about is where Alabama is ranked in it.
And if the ESPN SoR is based on FPI, then yes it's trash. FPI isn't a comptuer poll, it's influenced by humans.
The SP+ metric that ESPN has behind a paywall is much better and is 1/2 of the F+ metric I quoted.
Furthermore, SoR is a season rank based on wins and losses. Once again, I am showing you POWER RANKINGS and I even went so far as to explain HOW they were different and that Alabama would NOT be ranked that high in season rankings.
But all you can see is "OMG Alabama". It's damn ridiculous that out of all that you could only focus on Alabama being in the top10. It's 100% fricking stupid and deserve every bit of it for your post.
Posted on 1/3/25 at 2:42 pm to 3down10
quote:
Of course the only thing the LSU fan gives a shite about is where Alabama is ranked in it.
I was responding to your own post that said Alabama was a top 12 best team and if I didn't agree I was dumb. You brought up Alabama, not me, but ok
quote:
But all you can see is "OMG Alabama". It's damn ridiculous that out of all that you could only focus on Alabama being in the top10. It's 100% fricking stupid and deserve every bit of it for your post.
yeah it's crazy i would respond about Alabama to a post about...Alabama. My bad
Posted on 1/3/25 at 2:47 pm to Bearded
Those teams had one bad loss. Ole Miss had multiple
Posted on 1/3/25 at 2:51 pm to lsufball19
quote:
I was responding to your own post that said Alabama was a top 12 best team and if I didn't agree I was dumb. You brought up Alabama, not me, but ok
The committee had them #11. They didn't make it because of AQ. Even if they did make it the fact remains the format is stupid and 12 is too many teams. Where Alabama is ranked is beside the point.
quote:
yeah it's crazy i would respond about Alabama to a post about...Alabama. My bad
You took it that direction. I literally only replied to show there are better metrics available than the BCS computers.
Posted on 1/3/25 at 2:57 pm to lsufball19
I agree Alabama and Ole Miss lost one to many games to bad teams to get in. SC had the best argument outside head to head but their game vs Clemson was very even and could had gone either way. Why would anyone think they or anyone else would had done any better than the other teams who made it. SMU is probably the only one who should had been left out but they were ranked to high when they played a close game losing in the ACC championship so it was hard to drop them so far. The other issue the committee probably struggled with was who between Bama, Ole Miss and SC to take , so SMU was probably in their mind the safest pick and argument.
Posted on 1/3/25 at 3:00 pm to 3down10
quote:
You took it that direction.
No I didn't. The majority of this thread I mostly talked about Ole Miss when I spoke of a specific team because this thread was started about Ole Miss. I also responded directly to posts about other teams like Arizona St. You interjected Alabama, I responded to it. Nothing more, nothing less
quote:
I literally only replied to show there are better metrics available than the BCS computers.
And I literally only mentioned Alabama specifically because you specifically started arguing about them
People on here really need to chill out on the "lol you only said that because you're a fan of ________(insert ream)" or you can't have an opinion on a topic because your team sucks. You want to get into how a retarded argument starts , well there you go.
This post was edited on 1/3/25 at 3:03 pm
Posted on 1/3/25 at 3:06 pm to 3down10
quote:
Arizona St and so on had NO business being in the playoffs.
The AP preseason #4 SEC runner up needed an overturned targeting call and a 4th and long in overtime to beat a team projected last in the Big 12.
This post was edited on 1/3/25 at 3:07 pm
Posted on 1/3/25 at 3:09 pm to Mizz-SEC
SEC football is going soft by all the whining coaches they have now. Way too many coaches want to whine about why they lost or were robbed instead of fielding a team that can overcome all that stuff. It's a conference of self appointed victim mentality on the football field.
Just coach your best team to suit up and then go out and bloody the opponents nose. The SEC culture is becoming the downfall of the SEC dominance.
Just coach your best team to suit up and then go out and bloody the opponents nose. The SEC culture is becoming the downfall of the SEC dominance.
This post was edited on 1/3/25 at 3:12 pm
Posted on 1/3/25 at 3:21 pm to BlitzBAMAbkitz
quote:
SC had the best argument outside head to head but their game vs Clemson was very even and could had gone either way. Why would anyone think they or anyone else would had done any better than the other teams who made it.
The Mizzou game could have gone either way too. We lost so there's no bitch with 3 L's.
SC had a chance to underline their case to make the playoffs, but then lost to Bert. Case closed.
Posted on 1/3/25 at 4:16 pm to CR4090
Never ask a Rebel directions to the SEC Championship game 
Posted on 1/3/25 at 4:18 pm to Saskwatch
quote:
Is Texas average?
Above average compared to everyone but UGA.
Posted on 1/3/25 at 5:23 pm to lsufball19
I would do a super simple points system for wins and losses Ex...if you beat a 2 win team you get 2 points, beat a 4 win team you get .4 points, 8 win team you get 8 points
.I'd also points system for losses also..if you lose to a 10 win team you lose -3 points...but if you lose to a 2 win Kentucky team you lose 10 points
-last thing would be a multiplier assigned to D2 teams, Power 4 conf teams, and the other conf teams.
Ole miss win vs 6 win firman team. 6 points for the win x multiplier (.50) since they are D2..that's good for 3 points
Ole miss loss vs 8 loss KY team -8 points x .25 = -2 points.
No hidden formulas or metrics or offense success or any of that crap.
.I'd also points system for losses also..if you lose to a 10 win team you lose -3 points...but if you lose to a 2 win Kentucky team you lose 10 points
-last thing would be a multiplier assigned to D2 teams, Power 4 conf teams, and the other conf teams.
Ole miss win vs 6 win firman team. 6 points for the win x multiplier (.50) since they are D2..that's good for 3 points
Ole miss loss vs 8 loss KY team -8 points x .25 = -2 points.
No hidden formulas or metrics or offense success or any of that crap.
Posted on 1/3/25 at 5:26 pm to teamjackson
quote:
I would party with Lane's daughter
Ftfy
Posted on 1/3/25 at 5:37 pm to Jeepin_Josh
quote:
Jeepin_Josh
I think the problem therein lies all 10 win teams aren’t created equally. For instance, Ohio went 10-3 in the regular season. Ole Miss also went 10-3. Should wins over each team be weighed equally
The larger issue is FBS football has too many teams with no nearly enough common opponents across conferences to ever have any system that everyone would be satisfied with
This post was edited on 1/3/25 at 5:40 pm
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News