Started By
Message
0
Posted on 12/22/24 at 10:20 am to YStar
quote:
Yeah like WHO they played idiot.
The wind and losses have to matter.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 10:20 am to YStar
quote:
Yeah like WHO they played idiot.
I touched a nerve baw?
Posted on 12/22/24 at 10:23 am to Diego Ricardo
quote:
The Big Ten was a good conference this year but Indiana to play almost none of the good teams and lost badly to the one they did.
Tennessee wasn’t questioned getting in as a two loss SEC team and they just got boat raced by the big 10.
Who is Tennessee’s best win?
A shitty Bama team?
Posted on 12/22/24 at 10:25 am to Meatball
Instead of expanding to 16 just have play in games for the last two spots.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 10:39 am to Lgrnwd
quote:
You are devaluing the regular season way to much if you start doing that
Devaluing the regular season can be applied to not rewarding wins over quality teams just as easily as not punishing extra losses though.
Basketball and Baseball both make choices with a lot more weight on quality wins.
This year could have been a particularly difficult one where numerous teams that really are the 8-12 best teams all lost an extra game they shouldn't and teams that are really more in the 20-25 range had extraordinarily easy schedules.
However, with the inbalance the super SEC / BIG has created that may be a new trend and it's best for the committee to make a change toward the Basketball/Baseball models to pressure conferences/teams schedule hard games by rewarding quality wins.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 11:10 am to 1putt
quote:
SMU would have beaten OSU
boy you done went and lost yo cotton pickin' mind
Posted on 12/22/24 at 11:18 am to ljhog
Why is Kiffin so eager for us to watch him lose once more? We’ve already witnessed his defeats. South Carolina might have a complaint, but they too have come up short. Let’s allow the teams with the fewest losses demonstrate their worth. I’m interested in seeing what Boise State can do. I suspected SMU was a long shot, and now we have confirmation.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 11:19 am to Meatball
FSU deserved to be in it last year, Georgia results be damned. I'll die on that hill
Posted on 12/22/24 at 11:20 am to Meatball
You can't put 3 loss teams in over undefeated teams just because their name. Bama fans argued the whole Saban era they could only beat who they played. The small teams have to have a chance to show they can beat the big boys or they need to be put in a separate division.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 11:22 am to Meatball
quote:
It was obvious that SMU and Indiana weren’t one of the best 12 teams in the country but everyone kept saying that they deserved to be there.
SMU and Indiana kept it closer than Tennessee (who only beat 2 teams with a winning record all year)
Posted on 12/22/24 at 11:23 am to Meatball
quote:
Should playoff committee focus on what teams are the best rather than the most deserving
They should use advanced metrics to rank teams
Posted on 12/22/24 at 11:28 am to Meatball
No.
The reality is that you can pick the best teams just by looking at talent ranking and ignoring most results.
Bama has a shite-load of talent. Even if they had lost to UGA and SC and finished 7-5, they still are one of the 10 most likely teams to come out of a 12 team playoff simply due to their talent level. They'd be favored over all but about 6-7 teams in college football.
But they wouldn't deserve a spot. If you remove the point of the games, then the sport dies. It HAS to be deserving so the result of the games matters.
The reality is that you can pick the best teams just by looking at talent ranking and ignoring most results.
Bama has a shite-load of talent. Even if they had lost to UGA and SC and finished 7-5, they still are one of the 10 most likely teams to come out of a 12 team playoff simply due to their talent level. They'd be favored over all but about 6-7 teams in college football.
But they wouldn't deserve a spot. If you remove the point of the games, then the sport dies. It HAS to be deserving so the result of the games matters.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 11:29 am to Meatball
Idk but the seeding is dumb, and the blowouts aren’t good for ratings so change will come
Posted on 12/22/24 at 11:38 am to TexasOnTop
quote:Ohio State would probably have beaten anyone who won in the first round by 14 plus.
SMU and Indiana kept it closer than Tennessee (who only beat 2 teams with a winning record all year)
They were in a bad mood with probably the best starting 22 in the sport.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 11:38 am to Diego Ricardo
quote:
I think the CFP should be top 12 seeded by rank with no AQs which means I think Alabama would be the 11-seed going to 6-seed Ohio State and getting dismantled just like Tennessee did. However 7-seed Tennessee would have gotten 10-seed SMU at Neyland and been more likely to win.
This right here is what has been so damn hard for the mental midgets on this board to comprehend, hence you haven’t received a response or even a troll in over two hours.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 11:40 am to llfshoals
quote:
Ohio State would probably have beaten anyone who won in the first round by 14 plus.
They beat Indiana by less than they beat Tennessee.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 11:44 am to TexasOnTop
quote:They blew out both teams. You’re quibbling by how much?
quote:Ohio State would probably have beaten anyone who won in the first round by 14 plus. They beat Indiana by less than they beat Tennessee.
Guaranteed Indiana didn’t talk shite before the game. They knew better.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 11:47 am to llfshoals
quote:
Guaranteed Indiana didn’t talk shite before the game. They knew better.
Cignetti talked shite all year
Posted on 12/22/24 at 12:02 pm to djsdawg
Or you could use the eye test to go with the teams that are playing the best football.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News