my thoughts this morning on the playoff

#27
#27
SpaceCoastVol said:
Wow. really?
Click to expand...

I'm getting the feeling you are this charged up because it is Alabama that is the beneficiary. Last year in this near-identical situation Penn State got left out. Ohio State fans were using the identical argument Bammers are now. Were you this fired up about it then?

If anything, the fact that there was serious discussion about Ohio State getting in shows their power and an inherent lean towards them. What happened to Ohio State is like Alabama losing to Kentucky by 30 and losing their big OOC game (assume Bama lost to FSU except FSU went on to have a good year). Even if Alabama went on to win the SEC, would they have gotten in with that body of work? Probably not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#28
#28
Vol_Maul said:
You can’t argue it both ways. He made an excellent, and logical, point.
Click to expand...
The conference champion should represent the conference. Period.


And furthermore, LOSING the conference CG shouldn't be punitive like it is now. All those years ago when we were going to the SECCG and losing, the ****ing gators would go to a better bowl. That **** ain't right. I n a weak ass conference like the East, unless you have this years' UGA stats, you are better off NOT to go than to go and get beat. Case in point: Alabubba.
 
#29
#29
05_never_again said:
I'm getting the feeling you are this charged up because it is Alabama that is the beneficiary. Last year in this near-identical situation Penn State got left out. Ohio State fans were using the identical argument Bammers are now. Were you this fired up about it then?

If anything, the fact that there was serious discussion about Ohio State getting in shows their power and an inherent lean towards them. What happened to Ohio State is like Alabama losing to Kentucky by 30 and losing their big OOC game (assume Bama lost to FSU except FSU went on to have a good year). Even if Alabama went on to win the SEC, would they have gotten in with that body of work? Probably not.
Click to expand...
Yes I was, but we didn't have PSU and OSU fans on our board like we do toothless bammers.

OSU didn't belong last year and Bama doesn't belong this year. Bottom line, the process is severely flawed to the point that it ain't any better than it was in 1950. It's still a ****ing joke.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#30
#30
bamawriter said:
Yes, really. You're kind of all over the place on this one.
Click to expand...
How do you figure? I'll state it clearly and slowly so even you can understand it. Conference champions go to the party. Period. Done.

Alabama was handed the trophy on week one with their number 1 ranking. It was theirs to lose, they won that weak azz schedule and got beat when it counted... well, it didn't really count now did it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#32
#32
SpaceCoastVol said:
How do you figure? I'll state it clearly and slowly so even you can understand it. Conference champions go to the party. Period. Done.

Alabama was handed the trophy on week one with their number 1 ranking. It was theirs to lose, they won that weak azz schedule and got beat when it counted... well, it didn't really count now did it?
Click to expand...

Alabama did not get in at the expense of the SEC champion.
 
#35
#35
Knox-a-rue said:
Me and Mike Leach think it should be extended to at least 16 teams, if not 64. Works in B-Ball.
Click to expand...

It at least needs to be 8, consisting of all the power 5 conference winners and 3 at larges. However 16 would perfect! This would allow for some smaller "Cinderella" teams to get in.
 
#36
#36
Brave Volunteer said:
It at least needs to be 8, consisting of all the power 5 conference winners and 3 at larges. However 16 would perfect! This would allow for some smaller "Cinderella" teams to get in.
Click to expand...

any playoff that uses "at-large" is worthless. Might as well give out participation trophies for the season

If you need at larges just to make the bracket work then the bracket is more important than crowning the best team. At that point its a beauty contest not a tourney on the field to determine the best in the country

Using at-large teams doesnt solve anything and in fact makes it even more convoluted. Instead of having one alabama get in you have three teams that didnt win their conference playing for the NC.

If you cant win your division your not in the NC picture

If you cant win your conference your not in the NC picture

Its not that hard to do
 
#37
#37
SpaceCoastVol said:
Yes I was, but we didn't have PSU and OSU fans on our board like we do toothless bammers.

OSU didn't belong last year and Bama doesn't belong this year. Bottom line, the process is severely flawed to the point that it ain't any better than it was in 1950. It's still a ****ing joke.
Click to expand...

Do you think that Ohio St is a better team than Alabama?
 
#39
#39
05_never_again said:
Do you think that Ohio St is a better team than Alabama?
Click to expand...
I have no way of knowing objectively. If the NC is based on who people think is the best team then why not just give them the ****ing trophy and call it a day.

Conference championships mean nothing.
 
#41
#41
GreveHaller said:
any playoff that uses "at-large" is worthless. Might as well give out participation trophies for the season

If you need at larges just to make the bracket work then the bracket is more important than crowning the best team. At that point its a beauty contest not a tourney on the field to determine the best in the country

Using at-large teams doesnt solve anything and in fact makes it even more convoluted. Instead of having one alabama get in you have three teams that didnt win their conference playing for the NC.

If you cant win your division your not in the NC picture

If you cant win your conference your not in the NC picture

Its not that hard to do
Click to expand...

What's the difference between an "at large" team in college or a "wild card" in the NFL, NBA, MLB, or NHL? Every major sport allows for wild card/at large teams in their playoff format.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#42
#42
SpaceCoastVol said:
They finished third..... at best.
Click to expand...

Actually, Bama finished third at worst, depending on the criteria one uses. If one wants to use numerical record, then yes, 7-1 Bama finished behind 8-1 UGA and 7-2 Auburn based upon losing the head-to-head tiebreaker to Auburn. Based upon winning percentage, Alabama (.8750) finished second behind UGA (.8889) and ahead of Auburn (.7778). There is no criteria in which Bama finished worse than third.
 
#43
#43
SpaceCoastVol said:
This year is the straw that broke the camel's back.
Click to expand...

Why? Based upon your own argument, last year was way more problematic than this year. tOSU didn't win their division or conference, just like Bama. However, tOSU got in over their conference champ, a team that beat them head-to-head.

The fact that you seem notably more upset about this year's selection would suggest (and I would suspect) that you're more upset about Bama getting in than you are about the actual circumstances.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#44
#44
SpaceCoastVol said:
I have no way of knowing objectively. If the NC is based on who people think is the best team then why not just give them the ****ing trophy and call it a day.

Conference championships mean nothing.
Click to expand...

I beg to differ. The only reason Ohio St was even talked about as potentially getting in is because they won the Big 10.

Ohio St screwed themselves by losing to a mediocre conference opponent by 30. Say you had Alabama lose to Kentucky by 30 and also lost to FSU at home, but still won the SECCG. Then say you had Ohio St being a division loser because they lost to say, Penn State, but that was their only loss. Ohio St would get in over Alabama.

In the playoff, the conference titles do mean something. If a team wins their conference title and has a good enough resume, they are in without debate. If they have a questionable resume and then win their conference title, then all of a sudden letting them in the playoff doesn't seem as questionable. The playoff never explicitly or implicitly claimed that winning a P5 conference title guaranteed automatic entry.
 
#45
#45
bamawriter said:
Why? Based upon your own argument, last year was way more problematic than this year. tOSU didn't win their division or conference, just like Bama. However, tOSU got in over their conference champ, a team that beat them head-to-head.

That fact that you seem notably more upset about this year's selection would suggest (and I would suspect) that you're more upset about Bama getting in than you are about the actual circumstances.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. Last year's decision was far more controversial than this year's. Ohio St had a weaker case, IMO, for getting in last year than they did this year.

The takeaway from all of this is that a single "bad loss," in our out of conference, can torpedo your chances. It torpedoed Penn St last year and Ohio St this year.
 
#46
#46
05_never_again said:
The takeaway from all of this is that a single "bad loss," in our out of conference, can torpedo your chances. It torpedoed Penn St last year and Ohio St this year.
Click to expand...

I don't know that a single bad loss ends your chances. Both tOSU this year and PSU last year had a bad loss on top of another loss. It's obviously speculative, but I think both of those teams would have made the playoff if the blowouts were their only losses.
 
#47
#47
MyBloodRunnethOrange said:
What's the difference between an "at large" team in college or a "wild card" in the NFL, NBA, MLB, or NHL? Every major sport allows for wild card/at large teams in their playoff format.
Click to expand...

every major sport has

1. a significantly lower number of participants so evaluation of team to team is much easier

2. with the exception of the NFL, they all have best of formats instead of one and done formats

You're trying to look at an orange and say its an apple
 
#48
#48
bamawriter said:
I don't know that a single bad loss ends your chances. Both tOSU this year and PSU last year had a bad loss on top of another loss. It's obviously speculative, but I think both of those teams would have made the playoff if the blowouts were their only losses.
Click to expand...

It isn't the loss to a good team that gets you, even if it is a blowout. It's one of those "inexcusable" losses, which could be a loss to any weak team or a blowout loss to a mediocre team.

Last year, that loss for Penn St was Pitt. This year, that loss for Ohio St was Iowa.

Another debatable point is how exactly to you decide how bad a loss is or how good a win is? If you lose early in the year to a then-highly ranked team but that team finishes 6-6, was it a good win? I think people are predisposed to remember the ranking of the team at the time you beat or lost to them, rather than how they ended up finishing. I remember in 2015 Stanford had a great year and won the Pac 12, but they had a season-opening upset loss to Northwestern. It was repeatedly referred to all year as a "bad loss" and strongly held against them all year in terms of playoff rankings, despite Northwestern finishing the regular season at 10-2.
 
#49
#49
05_never_again said:
It isn't the loss to a good team that gets you, even if it is a blowout. It's one of those "inexcusable" losses, which could be a loss to any weak team or a blowout loss to a mediocre team.

Last year, that loss for Penn St was Pitt. This year, that loss for Ohio St was Iowa.

Another debatable point is how exactly to you decide how bad a loss is or how good a win is? If you lose early in the year to a then-highly ranked team but that team finishes 6-6, was it a good win? I think people are predisposed to remember the ranking of the team at the time you beat or lost to them, rather than how they ended up finishing. I remember in 2015 Stanford had a great year and won the Pac 12, but they had a season-opening upset loss to Northwestern. It was repeatedly referred to all year as a "bad loss" and strongly held against them all year in terms of playoff rankings, despite Northwestern finishing the regular season at 10-2.
Click to expand...
You hit on a problem in your last paragraph. Why are teams ranked going in to the season. It sets a bias which affects the whole enchilada.
 
#50
#50
bamawriter said:
Actually, Bama finished third at worst, depending on the criteria one uses. If one wants to use numerical record, then yes, 7-1 Bama finished behind 8-1 UGA and 7-2 Auburn based upon losing the head-to-head tiebreaker to Auburn. Based upon winning percentage, Alabama (.8750) finished second behind UGA (.8889) and ahead of Auburn (.7778). There is no criteria in which Bama finished worse than third.
Click to expand...
Oh so now you want to use winning percentages? Look at UCF. Oh that's right, Bama would automatically and undoubtedly wipe the floor with them so in that case the metric can be ignored.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top