Started By
Message
re: The Big 10 Has Been Inquiring About the CFP Selection Format
Posted on 1/7/19 at 3:15 pm to ItchyandScratchy
Posted on 1/7/19 at 3:15 pm to ItchyandScratchy
quote:
Rose Bowl "championship"
0
Posted on 1/7/19 at 3:15 pm to Cheese Grits
quote:
Harvard MBA for the upper Goldman crowd.
Those are the guys that go right to M&A
Atleast NW gets you on the HY Desk.
Posted on 1/7/19 at 3:16 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
Wrong, we also have divisions in CFB.
Which, also, are not the same as divisions in the NFL. A division title in the NFL guarantees you a playoff birth. A division title in college football essentially means nothing in that context
quote:
The difference is that there are more than just two conferences in CFB.
exactly...
quote:
CFB has more than two conferences, and doesn't use wildcards to determine conference champions - as neither did the NFL back in the day - those are really the only differences.
pretty substantial differences, but I love how you are discounting how substantial. One guarantees you a spot in the championship game/series. One may not even get you a bid in a major bowl. But almost the same right?
quote:
This is only "obtuse" to those who lack understanding.
Everyone fully understands what each are. Instead of acknowledging that conferences in the NFL and college aren't the same nor do conference champions come with the same result, you have decided to argue semantics for pages and pages. But if this is the hill you wish to die on to declare some sort of moronic victory, then by all means.
quote:
It is important to me because I'm a proponent of a tournament of champions for the CFP, conference champions, just like they do at the pro level.
That's great and all, but wholly irrelevant to what's being discussed
Posted on 1/7/19 at 3:16 pm to Cheese Grits
quote:
When was the last time the Rose Bowl game mattered in determining the Natty?
We're talking about a shot at the *championship of a four team invitational playoff versus winning the greatest postseason event in the history of the sport.
Rose Bowl > Orange Bowl
Rose Bowl > Cotton Bowl
Posted on 1/7/19 at 3:17 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
the greatest postseason event in the history of the sport
Posted on 1/7/19 at 3:19 pm to I Bleed Garnet
Ah, well, frick you then
Posted on 1/7/19 at 3:22 pm to I Bleed Garnet
I dunno, I knew one of the primary partners when they went public and he was a Harvard guy. In the early days it was the Choate pipeline kids and their like who still seem to control lots of the wealth in the USA. Small gene pool and quite inbred but still in control after all these generations.
Posted on 1/7/19 at 3:24 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
No, we are discussing the Rose Bowl you just won and are crowing about.
The one nobody really cares about anymore because it has PAC vs B1G.
The one nobody really cares about anymore because it has PAC vs B1G.
Posted on 1/7/19 at 3:27 pm to EarlyCuyler3
Meh. Everyone knows the Birmingham Bowl championship is the best.
:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/9866511/460995178.jpg.jpg)
This post was edited on 1/7/19 at 3:28 pm
Posted on 1/7/19 at 4:03 pm to lsufball19
quote:
A division title in the NFL guarantees you a playoff birth.
It guarantees you a shot at the conference title, just like CFB. There's no real playoff in CFB, just a post-season invitational.
quote:
pretty substantial differences, but I love how you are discounting how substantial.
A quantitative difference isn't substantial, a qualitative difference is. As far as wild cards, for most of its history, the NFL didn't use wildcards.
quote:
One guarantees you a spot in the championship game
A division championship guarantees you a shot at the conference championship game at all levels.
quote:
But almost the same right?
Yes, almost. The CFP has been around for a very short period of time, and everyone is expecting it to change soon.
quote:
if this is the hill you wish to die on...
...get ready, because your hill is changing. I'm thinking it's going to look a lot like mine.
quote:
some sort of moronic victory
What's moronic is the format of the CFB post season. It's painfully obvious. What's required is a shot by more conference champions at the title. It will look similar to pro post-seasons, except that instead of just two conferences represented, there will be 6 or 8.
quote:
quote:
I'm a proponent of a tournament of champions for the CFP
That's great and all, but wholly irrelevant to what's being discussed
You mean the CFP selection format isn't being discussed in a thread about the CFP selection format?
Go figure.
Posted on 1/7/19 at 4:13 pm to Cheese Grits
quote:
No, we are discussing the Rose Bowl
And the "Natty."
quote:
When was the last time the Rose Bowl game mattered in determining the Natty?
quote:
Natty
See...
Posted on 1/7/19 at 4:14 pm to AUCE05
As someone who has never had CFB in my favorite sport category; having a committee to choose your playoff teams is hilarious
...........................................................
..so I guess you're not a college basketball or baseball fan then....what are you a fan of?
...........................................................
..so I guess you're not a college basketball or baseball fan then....what are you a fan of?
This post was edited on 1/7/19 at 4:15 pm
Posted on 1/7/19 at 4:30 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
I clearly delineated the separation of the Rose Bowl into 2 distinct games
A) Rose Bowl as a B1G vs PAC matchup (and the one OSU just won)
B) Rose Bowl with other teams (Like USC vs Utx)
Cleary the game Bucknuts just won had no bearing on the 4 teams in the CFP and was not watched by most outside of OH with any real interest. Part of the reason we even have the BCS and then the CFP is that the Rose Bowl (as a B1G vs PAC game) was fast losing interest to upstarts like the Fiesta who had an actual #1 vs #2 matchup. As for that type relevance you might have to go back to 2004 #1 USC vs #4 UM but LSU got half of that MNC by winning the BCS that year. Before that you have to go back to the game in 1980 that Buckets lost and lost their claim for that MNC.
2 meaningful games since 1980 means almost 40 years of B1G vs PAC Rose Bowls that meant little compared to the Rose Bowls in the 50's, 60's, and 70's.
A) Rose Bowl as a B1G vs PAC matchup (and the one OSU just won)
B) Rose Bowl with other teams (Like USC vs Utx)
Cleary the game Bucknuts just won had no bearing on the 4 teams in the CFP and was not watched by most outside of OH with any real interest. Part of the reason we even have the BCS and then the CFP is that the Rose Bowl (as a B1G vs PAC game) was fast losing interest to upstarts like the Fiesta who had an actual #1 vs #2 matchup. As for that type relevance you might have to go back to 2004 #1 USC vs #4 UM but LSU got half of that MNC by winning the BCS that year. Before that you have to go back to the game in 1980 that Buckets lost and lost their claim for that MNC.
2 meaningful games since 1980 means almost 40 years of B1G vs PAC Rose Bowls that meant little compared to the Rose Bowls in the 50's, 60's, and 70's.
Posted on 1/7/19 at 4:44 pm to CU_Tigers4life
Conference champs matching up is the best case scenarip
Posted on 1/7/19 at 4:46 pm to bmy
quote:
bmy
Nobody asked you
Posted on 1/7/19 at 4:51 pm to Cheese Grits
quote:
I clearly delineated the separation of the Rose Bowl into 2 distinct games
That's nice.
quote:
was not watched by most outside of OH with any real interest
K.
ESPN Begins 2019 with Record-Setting Viewership for The Rose Bowl Game Presented by Northwestern Mutual and Allstate Sugar Bowl
Seems like it did OK, despite not being a playoff game.
But sure, they call it The Granddaddy of Them All because no one cares.
Posted on 1/7/19 at 5:00 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
This is about putting the four biggest names in that they are able to "reasonably" justify.
Yup.
Posted on 1/7/19 at 5:00 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
That's nice.
Interesting deflection
NYD6 is a new system so setting a record is easier when you have only a few game history.
quote:
The Granddaddy of Them All because no one cares.
A) Nobody cares in the sense it has no bearing on the CFP.
B) In a decade folks will remember tonight's CFP but unless they are UW or OSU fans they won't remember this years Rose Bowl. It is still the "Grandaddy" because grandad is still alive to watch. Once the Boomers (and the heyday in their demographic) die off it will become a shell of its former self.
Posted on 1/7/19 at 5:26 pm to Cheese Grits
quote:
Interesting deflection
Nothing I quoted needed to be refuted. It was irrelevant to what you replied to.
quote:
NYD6 is a new system so setting a record is easier when you have only a few game history.
Cool story. You're the one talking about the Rose Bowl as it relates to the playoff. Makes sense to use numbers from the playoff era.
quote:
A) Nobody cares in the sense it has no bearing on the CFP.
Sure it does. People will work it into any discussion involving Ohio State.
Seriously,
at pretending that past results don't affect the playoff. quote:
It is still the "Grandaddy" because grandad is still alive to watch. Once the Boomers (and the heyday in their demographic) die off it will become a shell of its former self.
The first Rose Bowl was played in 1902. Grandad is long gone.
Posted on 1/7/19 at 5:30 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
The first Rose Bowl was played in 1902. Grandad is long gone.
Not really. Before 46' it was an open bowl, after WWII it was the B1G vs PAC. Grandaddy in this sense means the sweet spot is those post war Boomers who are indeed grandparents now. Focusing on the B1G vs PAC matchup it will decline as the Boomer viewers expire.
Page 10 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News