UT Football.Is it plausible to believe we can win it all?

#301
#301
BigPapaVol said:
I get the sentiment here and hate to side with KPT on anything, but why institute a rule like champs only when we're trying to identify the best football team via playoff processs.
Click to expand...
so tell me how do you determine who the "best" teams are then?

i've heard "deserving", i've heard 1 loss teams, polls.......what else?
 
#302
#302
jakez4ut said:
thanks for sort of agreeing with me, i guess. but they don't have to go back and look at tie breakers AFTER the SEC title game. they sort of do that prior to the SEC title game, you know, to make sure they have the right two teams in there in the first place. so, unfortunately for you, by the time the SEC title game is over, all the decision process is taken out because (drum roll), there is a final score that tells us this informatin.

ah yes, reality. thanks for coming. IN reality, LSU won the west and FL is in the East. FL should have beaten TN. so like i said, if FL wants to hang up an SECW banner and get rings, fine with me. until then, nice win over LSU, hope you enjoyed your trip to "whatever bowl" in FL on Jan 1, 2002.
Click to expand...

For the last time, I don't freaking care about Florida's absence in the SEC Championship. It's irrelevant to the point I am arguing.
 
#303
#303
kptvol said:
You act like I'm angry with the way history worked out. I understand how these games happened. I watched every UT game and several Florida games in 2001. I was on the field when the Vols trotted off in sad defeat and LSU celebrated the win. It sucked pretty badly. The Tigers won that day and with that game they got their SEC championship. Florida didn't get it.

None of that is relevant to how I feel about 2001 Florida. If you're looking for an SEC contender to take on Miami that year, you look at the Gators. LSU didn't do enough during the regular season -not nearly enough.
Click to expand...
oh, that's been painfully obvious.
 
#304
#304
Vol423 said:
Wow. I was unaware that LSU played for the National Championship in 2001. I guess that is because THEY DIDN'T! Neither LSU nor Florida were worthy of playing for the National Championship in 2001. LSU wasn't worthy because they had 3 losses. Florida wasn't worthy because they weren't the champions of their conference. It's settled. Let's move on.
Click to expand...
This post confuses me. You jump in, make a point, then tell everyone to move on because it's apparently wasting your time. Explain that logic for me.
 
#307
#307
For the life of me, I can't understand how ktpvol can have such a hard time grasping this concept. If you don't win your conference championship, then you shouldn't be eligible for the National Championship Game. You should be eligible for any other BCS bowl, but not the National Championship game. You should have to win your conference to be included in the National Championship Game.
 
#308
#308
kptvol said:
For the last time, I don't freaking care about Florida's absence in the SEC Championship. It's irrelevant to the point I am arguing.
Click to expand...
i could swear that you have been arguing that FL was the most deserving team in the SEC to play for a national title. and that further, since LSU had 3 conf. losses, FL with one loss was more deserving than LSU to play in the SEC title game....
 
#309
#309
BigPapaVol said:
I get the sentiment here and hate to side with KPT on anything, but why institute a rule like champs only when we're trying to identify the best football team via playoff processs.
Click to expand...
IMO conference champs are the only ones that should make the playoffs, make ND and the rest join a conference and make all conferences have a championship game.
 
#310
#310
Why are you saying Florida deserved a shot in 2001?

If you're willing to put them in, why not us?

We beat them at the end of the year, on the road.

After the SEC Title game loss, we still had the same amount of losses, and we had one more win than they.

I'm not saying we should have gotten a chance, because we lost the SEC Title game, I am just not sure what the hype is about '01 Florida.
 
#312
#312
Vol423 said:
For the life of me, I can't understand how ktpvol can have such a hard time grasping this concept. If you don't win your conference championship, then you shouldn't be eligible for the National Championship Game. You should be eligible for any other BCS bowl, but not the National Championship game. You should have to win your conference to be included in the National Championship Game.
Click to expand...

Grasp this concept. A Pittsburgh team than won 8 games doesn't deserve a national championship opportunity more than a Texas team that won 10 or 11.
 
#313
#313
Vol423 said:
For the life of me, I can't understand how ktpvol can have such a hard time grasping this concept. If you don't win your conference championship, then you shouldn't be eligible for the National Championship Game. You should be eligible for any other BCS bowl, but not the National Championship game. You should have to win your conference to be included in the National Championship Game.
Click to expand...
But there is no such rule, so why can't it be debated today? A fluke win by a lesser team on their home turf shouldn't eliminate the best teams if we're talking about a playoff to determine the "best" team.
 
#314
#314
BigPapaVol said:
This post confuses me. You jump in, make a point, then tell everyone to move on because it's apparently wasting your time. Explain that logic for me.
Click to expand...

I've followed this thread for hours, and have posted several times. Kptvol wants to reduce the selection of teams for the National Championship Game to a beauty pageant. I’m sure that he’s probably a big proponent for a playoff system, so things can be settled on the field. If that is the case, he should look at what he’s proposing. Things have been settled on the field. A conference champion has been determined by playing the game on the field. Now he wants to ignore that fact and say that another team is better.
 
#316
#316
jakez4ut said:
i could swear that you have been arguing that FL was the most deserving team in the SEC to play for a national title. and that further, since LSU had 3 conf. losses, FL with one loss was more deserving than LSU to play in the SEC title game....
Click to expand...

I said that you could argue that Florida is more worthy of the SEC game. I don't really care about that though. That's was an afterthought. For the 10,000th time the issue I have is with your idea that only conference champions deserve a shot at the title. In 2001, Florida deserved a shot more than LSU.
 
#317
#317
XtennesseeX said:
Why are you saying Florida deserved a shot in 2001?

If you're willing to put them in, why not us?

We beat them at the end of the year, on the road.

After the SEC Title game loss, we still had the same amount of losses, and we had one more win than they.

I'm not saying we should have gotten a chance, because we lost the SEC Title game, I am just not sure what the hype is about '01 Florida.
Click to expand...

UF didn't deserve a shot that year, but if push came to shove, I'd give them a shot before I would LSU. Conference Champions aren't the only deserving contenders. That's my point.
 
#318
#318
Vol423 said:
I've followed this thread for hours, and have posted several times. Kptvol wants to reduce the selection of teams for the National Championship Game to a beauty pageant. I’m sure that he’s probably a big proponent for a playoff system, so things can be settled on the field. If that is the case, he should look at what he’s proposing. Things have been settled on the field. A conference champion has been determined by playing the game on the field. Now he wants to ignore that fact and say that another team is better.
Click to expand...
but why tell others to move on. You're welcome to stop following the thread. In fact, if it bothers you so much, yet you've been following it for hours, I'm not sure that anything I say here might actually register.

So, nevermind.
 
#320
#320
kptvol said:
Grasp this concept. A Pittsburgh team than won 8 games doesn't deserve a national championship opportunity more than a Texas team that won 10 or 11.
Click to expand...

Grasp this concept: NOBODY has EVER been invited to play in the National Championship Game with 8 Losses. Your scenario is pointless because it's totally delusional. Given this scenario the winner of another conference would play for the National Title. Get a clue!
 
#321
#321
BigPapaVol said:
But there is no such rule, so why can't it be debated today? A fluke win by a lesser team on their home turf shouldn't eliminate the best teams if we're talking about a playoff to determine the "best" team.
Click to expand...
see, that's where i get lost.

are we going to redefine wins now?

good win, bad win, fluke win?

then do math, and see who is better?

whatever happened to "you play to win the game"

this is the same mentality that has given us the scoreless, winless little league game. No one wants to lose, so the rule is, no losses, we simply wont' keep score.
 
#322
#322
Vol423 said:
I've followed this thread for hours, and have posted several times. Kptvol wants to reduce the selection of teams for the National Championship Game to a beauty pageant. I’m sure that he’s probably a big proponent for a playoff system, so things can be settled on the field. If that is the case, he should look at what he’s proposing. Things have been settled on the field. A conference champion has been determined by playing the game on the field. Now he wants to ignore that fact and say that another team is better.
Click to expand...

I'm not at all a fan of a playoff system. In fact, I've been arguing is support of the current system.
 
#323
#323
jakez4ut said:
see, that's where i get lost.

are we going to redefine wins now?

good win, bad win, fluke win?

then do math, and see who is better?

whatever happened to "you play to win the game"
Click to expand...

If you want to determine who is better between LSU and UF in 2001, it isn't hard. One team had more wins and won the head-to-head matchup.
 
#324
#324
Vol423 said:
Grasp this concept: NOBODY has EVER been invited to play in the National Championship Game with 8 Losses. Your scenario is pointless because it's totally delusional. Given this scenario the winner of another conference would play for the National Title. Get a clue!
Click to expand...
Michigan won a NC by beating frickin' Wazzu in the turd bowl. Anything's possible with the NC2A
 
#325
#325
jakez4ut said:
see, that's where i get lost.

are we going to redefine wins now?

good win, bad win, fluke win?

then do math, and see who is better?

whatever happened to "you play to win the game"

this is the same mentality that has given us the scoreless, winless little league game. No one wants to lose, so the rule is, no losses, we simply wont' keep score.
Click to expand...

Let's revoke UT's National Championship in 1998. Is there anyone here that even wants to try to argue that UT didn't have some fluke wins in 1998?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top