Page 23 of 40 FirstFirst ...
13
21
22
23
24
25
33
... LastLast
  1. #441
    if OSU gets into the playoffs then what's the point of having a BIG Ten conference? or BIG Ten championship game?

    to sell popcorn and soda?

  2. #442
    Quote Originally Posted by Blur4stuff View Post
    if OSU gets into the playoffs then what's the point of having a BIG Ten conference? or BIG Ten championship game?

    to sell popcorn and soda?
    I don't have an issue with them getting in as well, but as you mention if they and Michigan were to get in over Penn State, or Ohio State gets in but not Penn State ( this all assumes Penn State wins) then if your Penn State you are making that exact argument. What is the point of conferences, let alone championships if they don't mean a thing.

    I'm hoping it happens, because I think it would force the NCAA to go to 8 teams with champion tie in instead of 4 like they should have.

  3. #443
    Quote Originally Posted by Sibut View Post
    Agreed. And I think one thing that we've seen in all this (imho) is that if you're going to have a conference championship, you should just have the top 2 teams in the conference play in it.
    Absolutely. This North/South/East/West side of a conference is malarky. It needs to be the top 2 teams. 10 team conferences, you play EVERYONE every damn year, then top 2 play against each other. In the event of a tie, overall record/head to head etc gets applied.

    Right this second, their are two 8-1 in conference teams in the Big 10, boom, there you go. Ohio vs Penn: 2. Get it done. This is some bullshit that the two best teams in the conference don't even get to play in the conference championship game, yet both could potentially end up in the playoff?

    This is why 8 teams makes it "easier" but also a structure where a conference champion really is the champ and gains access needs to be put in place.
    Quote Originally Posted by THE Bigzoman View Post
    Meant Wetback. That's what the guy from Home Depot called it anyway.
    ==================================
    If you say pls because it is shorter than please,
    I'll say no because it is shorter than yes.
    ==================================

  4. #444
    The Insane draynay's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    18,798
    Quote Originally Posted by Armourboy View Post
    What double standard?
    The one that disregards out of conference losses, if Penn State wants to be in the top four, maybe they should've won the games they needed to outside the Big 10.

  5. #445
    I'm a numbers guy. Look at the final stats vs AP poll (for now):

    ---team--- ---win%--- ---notable win ranks--- --loss ranks---
    Alabama -- 100 -- #10,#18,#21,(#15) -- n/a
    Clemson -- 92.3 -- #12,#16,#18,(#19) -- #24
    *Colorado -- 84.6 -- #17,(#4) -- #5,#10
    Ohio State -- 91.6 -- #5,#6,#7,#23 -- #8
    Michigan -- 83.3 -- #6,#8 -- #2,#22
    **Penn State -- 84.6 -- #2,#22,(#6) -- #5,#24
    *Washington -- 92.3 -- #17,(#9) -- #10
    **Wisconsin -- 84.6 -- #21,#22,(#8) -- #5,#2
    * / ** mutually exclusive based on championship win (assumed in win%)

    To me Colorado likely wont be there even with a win, and Michigan shouldn't really be a contender anymore (barely, but shouldn't barring wild weekend). Alabama (duh), Clemson assuming win, Ohio State likely from record/notable wins/only loss to ranked, and a debate between Penn State/Wisconsin and Washington if win (i'd give to the former in most scenarios due to strength of schedules/loss to ranked, moreso Penn State than Wisconsin).

  6. #446
    The Lightbringer
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    3,566
    I don't like the 8 team playoff everyone is throwing around, you would devalue these final games like OSU vs. Michigan and the conf. title games. OSU vs. Michigan would basically be second stringers playing because they game would be 100% meaningless, since both are guaranteed to finish in the top 8 regardless the outcome and since all the games are played on neutral fields, finishing with the higher seed is also basically worthless. In fact, it would actually have been in Michigan's best interest to purposefully lose to OSU so that they don't have to play in the B1G Title game and risk a 3rd loss. That's a really shitty playoff system.

    I think the system is fine as is, and actually works out great this year. If Washington beats Colorado then deserve to be in, if they lose than it will be Michigan, who deserve it more than Wisconsin or Penn St.

  7. #447
    So Michigan with 3 top 25 wins, a loss to a top 5, a loss to a top 25 and WORSE record (10-2) "deserves it more" than Penn State with 3 top 25 wins, a loss to a top 5, a loss to a top 25 and BETTER record (11-2) [assuming win]? The only possible argument you can make for that is head-to-head which breaks down as soon as you get into the viscous who-beat-who circle of OSU/MU/PSU, and that's ignoring other factors like you know winning their freakin conference. Its really not hard math...

  8. #448
    Moderator Crissi's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    The Moon
    Posts
    32,144
    Quote Originally Posted by Stommped View Post
    I don't like the 8 team playoff everyone is throwing around, you would devalue these final games like OSU vs. Michigan and the conf. title games. OSU vs. Michigan would basically be second stringers playing because they game would be 100% meaningless, since both are guaranteed to finish in the top 8 regardless the outcome and since all the games are played on neutral fields, finishing with the higher seed is also basically worthless. In fact, it would actually have been in Michigan's best interest to purposefully lose to OSU so that they don't have to play in the B1G Title game and risk a 3rd loss. That's a really shitty playoff system.

    I think the system is fine as is, and actually works out great this year. If Washington beats Colorado then deserve to be in, if they lose than it will be Michigan, who deserve it more than Wisconsin or Penn St.
    It doesnt really devalue anything. It actually neds up preventing this exact situation form happening. I mena, we can put the conference winners as top seeds if that's the problem. This situation is infinitely worse for a playoff long term an expanding it would be, and is MUCH more vulnerable to human subjective interpretation.

    Its certainly worse than the NFL's system.

  9. #449
    Quote Originally Posted by draynay View Post
    If the point of the college playoff was to put the conference champions in then they would do that and not fuss with all this ranking stuff. They don't do that, that isn't what the system is set up to do nor should people expect or demand it.
    Well, the point of having the whole conference champion thing is to determine who the "best" team in each conference is. The teams that didn't win their conferences proved, on the field, that they are not the "best" team in their conference. That honor goes to the WINNER. If you're not the "best" team in your conference (by virtue of winning it), then you have no claim whatsoever to being the "best" team in the country and you don't belong in the playoff.

  10. #450
    Fluffy Kitten Pendulous's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Treno
    Posts
    19,498
    Quote Originally Posted by chipwood View Post
    Well, the point of having the whole conference champion thing is to determine who the "best" team in each conference is. The teams that didn't win their conferences proved, on the field, that they are not the "best" team in their conference. That honor goes to the WINNER. If you're not the "best" team in your conference (by virtue of winning it), then you have no claim whatsoever to being the "best" team in the country and you don't belong in the playoff.
    I remember one year Georgia Tech made the ACC title game, and they didn't even have a .500 record. A team like that has no place in the playoffs. The point of the playoffs is to determine the best four teams in the country. Too many times has that potentially been two teams in the same conference. Alabama and LSU. Michigan and Ohio State. It happens. If Michigan and Ohio State are legitimately the second and third best teams in the country (the fact they went into two overtimes kinda helps prove that), then they are among the four best teams in the country, and therefore belong in the playoffs.

  11. #451
    The Lightbringer
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    3,566
    Quote Originally Posted by Crissi View Post
    It doesnt really devalue anything. It actually neds up preventing this exact situation form happening. I mena, we can put the conference winners as top seeds if that's the problem. This situation is infinitely worse for a playoff long term an expanding it would be, and is MUCH more vulnerable to human subjective interpretation.

    Its certainly worse than the NFL's system.
    How does it not devalue anything? The phenomenal OSU-Mich game we got last weekend would have been completely pointless. As I said Mich would have been way better off just forfeiting the game so they don't play in the title game, OSU wouldn't have any reason to risk any starters to injury. Last year the Big Ten Title game between #4 and #5 at the time, also would have been completely pointless, so why even play the game? Sure this can happen with the 4 team playoff as well, but it's far less likely.

  12. #452
    Moderator Crissi's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    The Moon
    Posts
    32,144
    Quote Originally Posted by Stommped View Post
    How does it not devalue anything? The phenomenal OSU-Mich game we got last weekend would have been completely pointless. As I said Mich would have been way better off just forfeiting the game so they don't play in the title game, OSU wouldn't have any reason to risk any starters to injury. Last year the Big Ten Title game between #4 and #5 at the time, also would have been completely pointless, so why even play the game? Sure this can happen with the 4 team playoff as well, but it's far less likely.
    Because winning your region isn't anything special, so the 2 best teams arent going to always face each other in the conference. If the goal of the playoffs is to have the BEST teams face off, then an 8 team playoff allows that to happen. A 4 team playoff is far too subjective, and vulnerable to the kind of shenanigans thats currently happening.

    They need to round robin this shit if they want more accuracy in Conf Champs if you want to keep the 4 team playoff, which means either cutting down OOC games or cutting down all conferences to 10. Which is far more complicated than simply adding 4 more teams. Theres not a significant difference (most of the time) between teams 4 and 5, as opposed to 8 and 9.

  13. #453
    The Insane draynay's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    18,798
    Quote Originally Posted by Stommped View Post
    How does it not devalue anything? The phenomenal OSU-Mich game we got last weekend would have been completely pointless.
    But that just isn't reality, coaches get fired for losing that game, the playoff system doesn't eliminate rivalry games. Even though I agree with you about not wanting an 8 team field, this hyperbole is beyond ludicrous.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Crissi View Post
    A 4 team playoff is far too subjective, and vulnerable to the kind of shenanigans thats currently happening.
    Two teams was too subjective, four teams is too subjective, where does it stop? I have zero faith that eight would be better, it would probably be worse, every team 9-15 would be arguing they should be ranked higher and that they got shafted.

  14. #454
    Moderator Crissi's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    The Moon
    Posts
    32,144
    Well then, I vote we get rid of it period and just crown Baka the champion every year, if expanding or staying is pointless

  15. #455
    The Insane draynay's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    18,798
    People will complain no matter what, I don't see any solutions to that, so why bother changing anything? Especially when we're only in year 3 of a new system people were clamoring for.

  16. #456
    Any type of real playoff format just would not work in college football, which is why it took so long to get rid of the BCS system. Only way to get a legitimate playoffs would be for every conference to have all the teams play each other with the best record in each go to it. That would result in the seasons being too long without conference realignment and elimination of non-conference games. Even then, until they can come up with a format that does not include any rankings (everything that has any influence from voters is heavily flawed), no change will be an improvement.

  17. #457
    The Lightbringer
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    3,566
    Quote Originally Posted by draynay View Post
    But that just isn't reality, coaches get fired for losing that game, the playoff system doesn't eliminate rivalry games. Even though I agree with you about not wanting an 8 team field, this hyperbole is beyond ludicrous.
    Yeah but that's how it is now because we've never had those games be so meaningless before. The overall point is, with 8 teams suddenly you are going to have multiple teams from multiple conferences, and then when those top teams ultimately play each other in the final weeks, either title game or rivalry game, there's no justification for playing your starters huge minutes and risking injury. I think any sane fan base would rather guarantee their stars be healthy for the playoffs than to grit out a win against their rival.

    Then you start having fairness issues, i.e. say Washington was undefeated, and they were going to be in regardless, so Browning sits the second half and Colorado wins. This bumps up Colorado from 9 into the playoffs over a team like Oklahoma or something. If they were going to do 8 teams and think you would actually have to reward teams ranked higher and the first round would have to be home games for the higher seed.

    I've always said I like 4, but I wouldn't be opposed to 6 either. I think the top 2 teams receiving byes would be enough incentive to prevent what I described above and also allows one team from each power conference in the rare event that there is a powerhouse team from each conference.

  18. #458
    The Alabama-Auburn game was about as close to meaningless as it gets, and I didn't see Saban pulling his starters out. I'm sorry but those rivalry games at this point are going to mean something whether they actually mean anything or not. Those teams have been playing for decades. Fan bases would never forgive a coaching staff at Ohio State or Michigan for throwing that game, no matter what benefit it would provide. In fact I'm pretty sure the quickest way for Nick Saban to get his ass run out of Alabama would be to throw a game to Auburn. Those people might burn his house down.

    I simply don't buy the argument that 8 teams makes the season meaningless.

  19. #459
    The Insane draynay's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    18,798
    Quote Originally Posted by Armourboy View Post
    In fact I'm pretty sure the quickest way for Nick Saban to get his ass run out of Alabama would be to throw a game to Auburn. Those people might burn his house down.
    They'd certainly poison all his trees.

  20. #460
    The Lightbringer
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    3,566
    Quote Originally Posted by Armourboy View Post
    The Alabama-Auburn game was about as close to meaningless as it gets, and I didn't see Saban pulling his starters out. I'm sorry but those rivalry games at this point are going to mean something whether they actually mean anything or not. Those teams have been playing for decades. Fan bases would never forgive a coaching staff at Ohio State or Michigan for throwing that game, no matter what benefit it would provide. In fact I'm pretty sure the quickest way for Nick Saban to get his ass run out of Alabama would be to throw a game to Auburn. Those people might burn his house down.

    I simply don't buy the argument that 8 teams makes the season meaningless.
    Except it wasn't meaningless... for either team? If Alabama lost that game and then lost to Florida, there would be a pretty decent chance they wouldn't be in the playoffs. I.e. they hadn't officially clinched anything yet. Auburn was playing for the best bowl possible. Now this upcoming game against Florida is fairly meaningless in terms of the CFP for Bama, but I imagine Saban won't do anything weird. Main reason is, conference titles are still something that's recognized and goes down in the record books, plus they have a month off after the game, so there should be plenty of time to heal up any aches and pains.

    You guys are only visualizing what it's been like in the past, not what it would be like in a hypothetical world where OSU and Mich already clinched top 8 spots. I mean we are all sports fans here, are you trying to tell me we can't grasp the concept that risking injury in a game is not worth it to get the 3 seed instead of the 5 seed in a playoffs where the games are on neutral sites?

    Now the rivalries aren't as intense in the NFL, but teams who have clinched their seed rest their starters all the time in the final week of the season. Back in the Bears 06 superbowl year, they played the Packers (perhaps the biggest rivalry in the history of the NFL) in the last game in the season when they had the 1 seed all locked up and barely even showed up. Starters didn't play in the 2nd half and they destroyed us. It varies from coach to coach, but to assume that sort of thing wouldn't start happening in college football just because they reallly realllly want to beat Michigan is beyond silly.
    Last edited by Stommped; 2016-11-29 at 07:59 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •