Started By
Message
Playoff system would favor conference champs
Posted on 5/3/12 at 11:10 pm
Posted on 5/3/12 at 11:10 pm
LINK
You don't win your conference you don't play for the National Championship. Plain and simple. Independents can go suck a fat one.
You don't win your conference you don't play for the National Championship. Plain and simple. Independents can go suck a fat one.
9
Posted on 5/3/12 at 11:13 pm to LSUTil_iDie
21-0
Posted on 5/3/12 at 11:14 pm to LSUTil_iDie
quote:
Plain and simple
This should have already been in place. People are pissed that the 3rd best team in the SEC won the natty. I am happy about a playoff. Should have been that way all along.
Posted on 5/3/12 at 11:15 pm to brucevilanch
quote:
21-0
9-6
Posted on 5/3/12 at 11:17 pm to LSUTil_iDie
4 best teams. Plain and simple
Posted on 5/3/12 at 11:23 pm to sarc
quote:
4 best teams.
No it should be "Win your conference or GTFO." If you're not the best in your conference then why should you be allowed to play for the Natty? Plus it gives non-AQ teams a chance to prove themselves.
This post was edited on 5/3/12 at 11:25 pm
Posted on 5/3/12 at 11:27 pm to LSUTil_iDie
If you're not one of the 4 best teams in the country, why should you be in a 4 team playoff?
If UGA had managed to squeak out a victory in the SECCG last year, you're saying LSU should not have played for the NC even if they were still the #1 ranked team in the country after the loss? That makes a lot of sense.
If UGA had managed to squeak out a victory in the SECCG last year, you're saying LSU should not have played for the NC even if they were still the #1 ranked team in the country after the loss? That makes a lot of sense.
This post was edited on 5/3/12 at 11:39 pm
Posted on 5/3/12 at 11:28 pm to LSUTil_iDie
quote:
You don't win your conference you don't play for the National Championship.
:kige:
Posted on 5/3/12 at 11:31 pm to LSUTil_iDie
Posted on 5/3/12 at 11:41 pm to brucevilanch
Alabama would have still been in the 4 team playoff with those rules in place, FYI.
Posted on 5/4/12 at 12:12 am to sarc
quote:
4 best teams. Plain and simple
Other conference would never go for it because this year it would be 2 sec teams, 1 Big 12 team and 1 PAC 12 team that wasn't the Champ (Stanford was ranked higher than Oregon). Conference champs are the only choice.
Posted on 5/4/12 at 12:17 am to LSUTil_iDie
This is to prevent the SEC from placing 2 teams in the playoffs.
Posted on 5/4/12 at 12:19 am to LSUTil_iDie
quote:
If you're not the best in your conference
Alabama was, obviously
Posted on 5/4/12 at 12:22 am to LOYALBAMA
quote:
This is to prevent the SEC from placing 2 teams in the playoffs.
If it's only 4 teams than the SEC shouldn't have 2
Posted on 5/4/12 at 12:30 am to big Tiger 1885
quote:
Other conference would never go for it because this year it would be 2 sec teams, 1 Big 12 team and 1 PAC 12 team that wasn't the Champ (Stanford was ranked higher than Oregon). Conference champs are the only choice
Under the latest B1G proposal, last year we would've had 2 SEC teams, 1 Big 12 team, and 1 PAC 12 team. Same make-up except for Oregon instead of Stanford. Pretty much the same thing.
Four best teams is still at least a possibility. Conference champs only appears to be dead. Some sort of compromise is probably most likely.
Posted on 5/4/12 at 12:34 am to big Tiger 1885
Using JUST the top 4 in the BCS standings would have given a conference multiple bids several years:
2011: SEC-2
2010: Pac 10-2
2008: Big 12 and SEC-2
2006: B1G and SEC- 2
2005: B1G-2
2004: Big 12-2
2001: Big 12-2
They're going to be mad when they "rule" themselves out of a chance for multiple teams.
2011: SEC-2
2010: Pac 10-2
2008: Big 12 and SEC-2
2006: B1G and SEC- 2
2005: B1G-2
2004: Big 12-2
2001: Big 12-2
They're going to be mad when they "rule" themselves out of a chance for multiple teams.
Posted on 5/4/12 at 12:36 am to sarc
quote:
Four best teams is still at least a possibility. Conference champs only appears to be dead. Some sort of compromise is probably most likely.
Last I saw it was Conference champs if they were in the top 6. then they would look at at larges
Posted on 5/4/12 at 12:40 am to big Tiger 1885
quote:
Last I saw it was Conference champs if they were in the top 6. then they would look at at larges
That's what I meant by a compromise. And all we know is that Delaney favors that proposal. Slive said yesterday he still favors best 4 teams.
Posted on 5/4/12 at 12:44 am to attheua
quote:
Alabama was, obviously
Obviously? You went 1-1 against LSU and didn't win the conference. So I wouldn't say "obviously" at all. The system is clearly fricked and far from obvious. If Oklahoma State doesn't lose to Iowa State midway through the season, all of a sudden LSU is "obviously" the best team in the conference.
This post was edited on 5/4/12 at 12:45 am
Posted on 5/4/12 at 12:44 am to sarc
quote:
Slive said yesterday he still favors best 4 teams.
As much of badass as Slive is. I bet they Delany plan goes. I just can't see a conference just saying hey lets make my championship meaningless
Page 1 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News