Started By
Message
re: Nice, as if the economy isn't enough, they're gonna screw up
Posted on 3/26/09 at 1:48 pm to LSUtigahs28
Posted on 3/26/09 at 1:48 pm to LSUtigahs28
quote:
With a playoff you get teams that don't deserve the championship winning it.(Fresno St., NY Giants, and almost Arizona Cardinals)
The NY Giants didn't deserve their Superbowl after going on the road for 3 straight games against top competition then beating an 18-0 New England squad at a neutral site? That is a messed up line of thinking...
There's a reason EVERY OTHER DIVISION of CFB has a playoff, it's the right way to determine a champion. Basketball...baseball...
quote:
The BCS has gotten it right every year
I guess that's why there's so much controversy basically every year.
This post was edited on 3/26/09 at 1:49 pm
1
Posted on 3/26/09 at 1:51 pm to LSUtigahs28
quote:
To devalue the regular season? Good argument.
This is always a dumb argument. Not everyone gets into the NFL playoffs, therefore you still have to be GOOD to get in. It's several times harder to get into a CFB playoff. For instance IAA has like what, 100-110 teams and only has 16 make it? That's not exactly "devaluing the regular season" taking the Top 16 of 100+ teams.
Posted on 3/26/09 at 1:53 pm to thunderbird1100
quote:
The NY Giants didn't deserve their Superbowl after going on the road for 3 straight games against top competition then beating an 18-0 New England squad at a neutral site? That is a messed up line of thinking...
Look at this in a blind comparison
18-1
vs.
13-6
Which is better?
quote:
There's a reason EVERY OTHER DIVISION of CFB has a playoff, it's the right way to determine a champion. Basketball...baseball...
A lot of people voted for Obama, doesn't mean it was right.
quote:
I guess that's why there's so much controversy basically every year.
Controversy doesn't mean they got it wrong.
When did they get it wrong. The only possible argument is Auburn>OU in 04.
Posted on 3/26/09 at 1:57 pm to thunderbird1100
quote:
Not everyone gets into the NFL playoffs, therefore you still have to be GOOD to get in.
10-6 =/= Good
quote:
For instance IAA has like what, 100-110 teams and only has 16 make it?
If you ignore the fact that the disparity between #17 and #110 is much much much much much much greater than between #7 and #16 in the AFC.
Face reality every year in 1-AA there is a group of 30 or so schools that are really in the race. The rest are just there to fill schedules.
Same for most other college athletics. So in effect you have basically the same probability of making if not better.
Posted on 3/26/09 at 1:58 pm to LSUtigahs28
quote:
Look at this in a blind comparison
18-1
vs.
13-6
Which is better?
It's not a blind comparison. It was a playoff which is win or go home and the Giants won fair and square. The way it's supposed to be determined.
quote:
A lot of people voted for Obama, doesn't mean it was right.
Great refute. EVERY other sport (that it's logical to have a playoff) they have playoff in, even every other division of CFB. The only reason the BCS is even alive is for ONE purpose - $$$$$$$$$...it does not determine a true champion, a "champion" that is not even recognized by the NCAA as the Champion. The only sport the NCAA does not recognize the champion of.
quote:
Controversy doesn't mean they got it wrong.
Pretty sure it means the system sucks, which it does. there is no logical argument in many years for taking the 2 teams that they did. 2008, 2007, 2006, 2004 all recently were very controversial. All years a playoff could of EASILY solved the major problems of "picking" the "2 best" teams in CFB to play a defacto 1 game playoff for the title.
Posted on 3/26/09 at 2:03 pm to LSUtigahs28
quote:
10-6 =/= Good
It's the NFL, the talent level is spread out very evenly unlike CFB. You still have dangerous teams who have lost multiple games. The NYG were clearly a VERY GOOD team going on the road 3 striahgt times to beat good teams then beating an undefeated team at a neutral site for all the marbles.
quote:
If you ignore the fact that the disparity between #17 and #110 is much much much much much much greater than between #7 and #16 in the AFC.
My point was in CFB it's MUCH harder to get into the playoffs meaning the "devaluing reg. season" argument is pretty worthless at this level.
quote:
Face reality every year in 1-AA there is a group of 30 or so schools that are really in the race. The rest are just there to fill schedules.
So a new upcoming team or a previous bad team can never have a chance? Is that what you're saying?
I mean Boise State clearly never could beat a team like Oklahoma after moving up to the IA level just 10 years previously...oh wait.
That is just another bad line of thinking by you. New teams emerge, but that's not even the main argument for a playoff. The main argument for a playoff is to settle things as much as possible on the field rather than through computers, biased humans and trying to cherry pick the 2 "best" teams out of 120.
This post was edited on 3/26/09 at 2:07 pm
Posted on 3/26/09 at 2:07 pm to thunderbird1100
quote:
The way it's supposed to be determined.
By who?
The Pats had the better season.
quote:
it does not determine a true champion
It determines a truer champ than March Madness(Which is totally created for the money/hype) or the Baseball playoff which produced such as wonderful and deserving champ this past year...... oh wait.
quote:
that is not even recognized by the NCAA as the Champion. The only sport the NCAA does not recognize the champion of.
This has to do with history not the current day reality.
quote:
Pretty sure it means the system sucks
Why? There's controversy with March Madness so it must suck too?
quote:
there is no logical argument in many years for taking the 2 teams that they did. 2008, 2007, 2006, 2004
2008 - UF is obvious. OU won the Big XII. So if you wanna bitch go complain about the Big XII's tie breaker(Which other CCG conferences don't use)
2007 - Who deserved it more? Va. Tech was next in line, are you going to make that argument? USC? Stanford UGA? Didn't win their division.
2006 - What are you arguing here? tOSU was undefeated no way they shouldn't have gotten a shot. USC lost to a shitty UCLA team the last game they played. Are you going to argue Michigan deserved ANOTHER shot at tOSU? Are you fricking kidding me?
2004 - Again the only possible argument. Hindsight is 20/20 now, but at the time they had a choice between Auburn coming out of a down SEC and relatively unkown or USC/OU which had been dominant teams with excellent players.
Overall their picks every year make sense.
quote:
All years a playoff could of EASILY solved the major problems of "picking" the "2 best" teams in CFB to play a defacto 1 game playoff for the title.
Which is how it should be. As I so succinctly pointed out above none of the other teams deserved a shot in the controversial years except maybe maybe AU 04.
Posted on 3/26/09 at 2:13 pm to thunderbird1100
quote:
It's the NFL, the talent level is spread out very evenly unlike CFB. You still have dangerous teams who have lost multiple games.
Which is why the Pats were able to go 16-0 that season..... makes a ton of fricking sense.
quote:
The NYG were clearly a VERY GOOD team going on the road 3 striahgt times to beat good teams then beating an undefeated team at a neutral site for all the marbles.
Yet they still lost 6x more games than the Patriots including a loss to the Pats at home...... but lets just pretend those never happened?
quote:
My point was in CFB it's MUCH harder to get into the playoffs meaning the "devaluing reg. season" argument is pretty worthless at this level.
No not really. Because of the talent drop off there are effectively 30ish teams that actually have a shot at the playoff.
quote:
So a new upcoming team or a previous bad team can never have a chance? Is that what you're saying?
No. You simply don't understand the logic.
A team can work themselves into that pool of 30ish, but overall its absurd to claim teams #35-119 would have a snowballs chance in hell at the playoffs.
quote:
I mean Boise State clearly never could beat a team like Oklahoma after moving up to the IA level just 10 years previously...oh wait.
Again fail
quote:
The main argument for a playoff is to settle things as much as possible on the field
Which you do..... by having to be excellent in the regular season to earn a shot.
Posted on 3/26/09 at 2:18 pm to LSUtigahs28
quote:
By who?
The Pats had the better season.
By everyone in sports but apparently DIA CFB.
The Pats didn't win wheen it mattered most. If a 12-0 teams lost to a 11-2 team in the BCS NCG...would you still crown the 12-0 team the champ since they "had the better season"? Bad argument...
quote:
It determines a truer champ than March Madness
This is such a terrible argument. You'd be in the VERY small minority on this one.
quote:
This has to do with history not the current day reality.
It has to do with the fact without a playoff the NCAA won't recognize it...because the system is defunct and dumb.
quote:
There's controversy with March Madness so it must suck too?
Yeah, there's such a huge uprising about March Madness being changed from a playoff like the BCS is to playoff
Let me know when you join reality...
quote:
2008 - UF is obvious. OU won the Big XII. So if you wanna bitch go complain about the Big XII's tie breaker(Which other CCG conferences don't use)
Undefeated Utah (who bitchslapped Alabama), 1-loss Texas, 1-loss USC...all had arguments. Sorry, they did not logically pick the 2 right teams, because there was no way to actually accomplish that.
quote:
2007 - Who deserved it more? Va. Tech was next in line, are you going to make that argument? USC? Stanford UGA? Didn't win their division.
There was a bunch of 2 loss teams with arguments. There was also once again an undefeated mid-major. another year the BCS didn't get it right...like almost every year.
quote:
2006 - What are you arguing here? tOSU was undefeated no way they shouldn't have gotten a shot. USC lost to a shitty UCLA team the last game they played. Are you going to argue Michigan deserved ANOTHER shot at tOSU? Are you fricking kidding me?
Once again an undefeated mid-major and several 1-loss teams with arguments. Another year they couldn't just "pick out" what THEY thought to be the 2 best teams.
quote:
2004 - Again the only possible argument. Hindsight is 20/20 now, but at the time they had a choice between Auburn coming out of a down SEC and relatively unkown or USC/OU which had been dominant teams with excellent players.
It was a travesty that year. An undefeated team from the SEC didn't even get to play for a national title. That's when you know the system fricking sucks.
quote:
Overall their picks every year make sense.
If you want to ignore all the other teams who had very good arguments.
quote:
Which is how it should be.
No it shouldn't and is why there's so much controversy surrounding it right now with the MAJORITY of people wanting a playoff. It's impossible almost every year to say who the 2 best teams are. You cannot logically pick them out every year out of 120 teams.
quote:
As I so succinctly pointed out above none of the other teams deserved a shot in the controversial years
You didn't prove anything. They all had their arguments and rightfully so. They all got screwed over for not being able to play for a National Title in a playoff system like EVERYONE else does.
Posted on 3/26/09 at 2:31 pm to thunderbird1100
quote:
The Pats didn't win wheen it mattered most. If a 12-0 teams lost to a 11-2 team in the BCS NCG...would you still crown the 12-0 team the champ since they "had the better season"? Bad argument...
Did the two teams play each other previously?
Did one have 6x the losses of the other?
quote:
This is such a terrible argument. You'd be in the VERY small minority on this one.
Why?
Lets take teams, ship them to new arenas, force them to play teams on short notice, and at times they aren't used to. Yeah that system isn't designed to create upsets at all
Villanova 85 is game, set, match.
quote:
It has to do with the fact without a playoff the NCAA won't recognize it...because the system is defunct and dumb.
It has to do with the fact that for years and years and years there often multiple champs every year.
quote:
Yeah, there's such a huge uprising about March Madness being changed from a playoff like the BCS is to playoff
Let me know when you join reality...
Let me know when you learn to respond to what I actually wrote.
There is controversy around March Madness and according to your logic it therefore sucks.
NEXT
quote:
Undefeated Utah (who bitchslapped Alabama), 1-loss Texas, 1-loss USC...all had arguments. Sorry, they did not logically pick the 2 right teams, because there was no way to actually accomplish that.
1 - loss Texas had no argument because of the Big XII's incompetence.
USC had a worse record than either of the other two.
Again The Big XII's shitty tiebreaker isn't the BCS's fault.
quote:
There was a bunch of 2 loss teams with arguments
Such as
Va Tech?
USC?
UGA?
Come on. Now you are SFPing.
quote:
Once again an undefeated mid-major and several 1-loss teams with arguments. Another year they couldn't just "pick out" what THEY thought to be the 2 best teams.
Michigan had an argument? :rotflmao:
quote:
An undefeated team from the SEC didn't even get to play for a national title.
Take off the SEC glasses of 06-07-08. The SEC was down that year. Period. The SEC has no godgiven right to have a team in the BCSCG. We have deserved it these past few years, but it won't always be that way.
The midmajors can suck my balls. None of them deserved a shot.
quote:
If you want to ignore all the other teams who had much worse arguments.
Fixed
quote:
You didn't prove anything. They all had their arguments and rightfully so. They all got screwed over for not being able to play for a National Title in a playoff system like EVERYONE else does.
Why didn't Auburn get to play in NCAA tournament this year? They had a really good argument too.
The argument can be extended on and on. There's always going to be a last guy left out who had an argument.
Doesn't change the fact that the BCS is better as I've clearly showed. Now go play with the rantards where you might actually have a chance of winning an argument.
Page 3 of 3
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News