Playoffs in 2014 are all but confirmed

#12
#12
I am tired of hearing stupid arguments like an 8- or 16-team playoff hurting the season. It would actually greatly enhance the season by increasing the number of teams playing meaningful games. 8's a great number, because it would still be difficult to qualify for, when you figure that, under that scenario, a lot of spots would be taken up by league champions. Making the field would go down to the last Saturday for nearly all of the 8 teams. Plus, if they increase to 8 or 16, they would probably play a round on campus, which would make it very important to secure a higher seed.

And, college football being the "greatest regular season in sports" has nothing to do with how the champion is crowned, and everything to do with the simple fact that it's college football. It doesn't matter how crappy the plate is that it's served on. College football will always be hugely successful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#13
#13
If they took 64 out of 120 teams, I'd agree that the regular season was killed. But, at 8 or 16, that's crazy talk.
 
#14
#14
govols120 said:
A. It's better than the current system.
B. It can still develop to an 8 or 16 team playoff in the future.
Click to expand...

No it's not. Do you realize that in the 46 year history of the Super Bowl, the best team in the NFL has only won it 20 times? Getting it right only 43% of the time is a pretty lousy track record for determining a champion. I'm certain the BCS gets it right more often than that, and gets it right more often than any other system in the country.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#15
#15
bleedorange0037 said:
No it's not. Do you realize that in the 46 year history of the Super Bowl, the best team in the NFL has only won it 20 times? Getting it right only 43% of the time is a pretty lousy track record for determining a champion. I'm certain the BCS gets it right more often than that, and gets it right more often than any other system in the country.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the NFL playoffs are an epic failure. I'm surprised the NFL still exists. :eek:lol:
 
#16
#16
Defaultuser said:
Yeah, the NFL playoffs are an epic failure. I'm surprised the NFL still exists. :eek:lol:
Click to expand...

In terms of crowning the best team each year as a champion, yes, 43% could easily be qualified as a epic failure. Just because it's popular with the fans doesn't mean it's a fair, equitable or even good system for determining a champion. I'm just saying that this "pure" system that everyone worships at the feet of does a FAR, FAR worse job of getting the best teams to play for, and subsequently win, championships than the much-reviled BCS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#18
#18
bleedorange0037 said:
In terms of crowning the best team each year as a champion, yes, 43% could easily be qualified as a epic failure. Just because it's popular with the fans doesn't mean it's a fair, equitable or even good system for determining a champion. I'm just saying that this "pure" system that everyone worships at the feet of does a FAR, FAR worse job of getting the best teams to play for, and subsequently win, championships than the much-reviled BCS.
Click to expand...

Who decided this 43 percent and why did you believe it.. Your saying the best team loses 57 percent of the time. How can that be possibly? The "best" teams perform under pressure so there is no way you can empirically say that a loser is better than a winner
 
#19
#19
StoVol said:
Who decided this 43 percent and why did you believe it.. Your saying the best team loses 57 percent of the time. How can that be possibly? The "best" teams perform under pressure so there is no way you can empirically say that a loser is better than a winner
Click to expand...

try some math. 20/46
 
#20
#20
StoVol said:
Who decided this 43 percent and why did you believe it.. Your saying the best team loses 57 percent of the time. How can that be possibly? The "best" teams perform under pressure so there is no way you can empirically say that a loser is better than a winner
Click to expand...

Because it's pretty easy to look up which team had the best record every season and determine whether or not they went on to win the Super Bowl. It's happened exactly 20 out of 46 times, and there is no disputing that fact. That's why I believe it. Surely you aren't going to try and convince me that somehow a 3 or 4 game sample size is more indicative of who is a better team than a 14-16 game sample size.

Also, why should games in January carry more weight that ones that take place in September or October? If the ones in early part of the season have no ultimate bearing on whether a team can win a championship or not, why are they even being played? Just for our amusement? Why should a team be able to suck for weeks on end (that's you 2010 Green Bay Packers) and still win a championship?
 
#22
#22
bleedorange0037 said:
In terms of crowning the best team each year as a champion, yes, 43% could easily be qualified as a epic failure. Just because it's popular with the fans doesn't mean it's a fair, equitable or even good system for determining a champion. I'm just saying that this "pure" system that everyone worships at the feet of does a FAR, FAR worse job of getting the best teams to play for, and subsequently win, championships than the much-reviled BCS.
Click to expand...

The NFL Playoffs, for me, are hands down the most exciting playoffs in pro sports. I disagree that the best team in the regular season missing the SB means the system "got it wrong."

Are you seriously advocating the elimination of the NFL Playoffs in favor of using some kind of voting/computer system to pick two teams for the SB?
 
#23
#23
College football will never have a playoff nearly as large as the NFL, in terms of the % of teams playing in it, so you guys don't have to worry about a mediocre regular season team winning it.

If the NFL reduced its playoffs to make BCS fans happy, it would sharply cut the number of NFL regular season games that matter down the stretch, and that would likely hurt attendance at several stadiums.
 
#24
#24
bleedorange0037 said:
No it's not. Do you realize that in the 46 year history of the Super Bowl, the best team in the NFL has only won it 20 times? Getting it right only 43% of the time is a pretty lousy track record for determining a champion. I'm certain the BCS gets it right more often than that, and gets it right more often than any other system in the country.
Click to expand...

This makes absolutely zero sense. The team that wins the tournament is a much stronger argument as a better team compared to the pre-tournament crowning of favorites. Per your logic they might as well not play the tournament and go with the assumed winner based on majority hope and praise.
 
#25
#25
Yeah, really, why even play a title game? LOL. They should have just handed the title to LSU last year after the SEC title game. That would have gotten it right, instead of the sham of them having to play an extra game and then lose to a team that didn't even win its division.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top