Archive

BCS commissioners reach consensus on 4-team playoff

  • Al Bundy
    WebFire;1208838 wrote:So Miami should be 2002 champs. And OSU 2006 champs.
    Do you understand that OSU and Miami were in different conferences?
  • sleeper
    It'll be an 8 team playoff tied to conference championships in a few years anyway. No one is going to want to watch 2 SEC teams in the playoffs every year(also wouldn't surprise me to see 3 in the same year). The NCAA better look long and hard at the ratings for last year's championship game; because that's what the rest of the country thinks of the fraudulent game.
  • slcoach
    Al Bundy;1208866 wrote:Do you understand that OSU and Miami were in different conferences?
    Do you not comprehend what he is saying? Your argument is why are we worrying about the #4 team? The #1 team is all that matters. He is saying that if that is the only thing that matters, then just scrap the playoffs and bowls and name the champ via polls.
  • slcoach
    sleeper;1208867 wrote:It'll be an 8 team playoff tied to conference championships in a few years anyway. No one is going to want to watch 2 SEC teams in the playoffs every year(also wouldn't surprise me to see 3 in the same year). The NCAA better look long and hard at the ratings for last year's championship game; because that's what the rest of the country thinks of the fraudulent game.
    I agree that it will be 8 soon. But if you end up with 3 SEC teams and 5 conference winners, and the SEC teams win it on the field, people will watch.
  • Sonofanump
    slcoach;1208855 wrote:Damn that gets me pumped about a playoff.....:laugh::laugh::laugh:
    Your never going to happen season of perfect upsets gets you pumped about a playoff? :laugh:
  • slcoach
    Sonofanump;1208887 wrote:Your never going to happen season of perfect upsets gets you pumped about a playoff? :laugh:
    .

    Is this English?
  • Sonofanump
    slcoach;1208895 wrote:.

    Is this English?
    Sorry English professor, did not know this was a semantics argument. Hope this is better for you to understand.

    Your “never going to happen” season of “perfect upsets” gets you pumped about a playoff?
  • Al Bundy
    slcoach;1208880 wrote:Do you not comprehend what he is saying? Your argument is why are we worrying about the #4 team? The #1 team is all that matters. He is saying that if that is the only thing that matters, then just scrap the playoffs and bowls and name the champ via polls.
    You have much more faith in the polls than I do. I would rather determine it on the field. Conference champs have been determined on the field. The voting polls are just a popularity contest.
  • Sykotyk
    slcoach;1208880 wrote:Do you not comprehend what he is saying? Your argument is why are we worrying about the #4 team? The #1 team is all that matters. He is saying that if that is the only thing that matters, then just scrap the playoffs and bowls and name the champ via polls.
    The process to determine the 'champion' is a season-long process. It doesn't just start the second week of December. Alabama had their chance last year when they played LSU in the regular season game in an attempt to win their division. They failed. LSU won it. They moved on. Alabama, no matter how good, lost. The season is a playoff. IN EVERY LEAGUE where not all teams qualify for the playoffs.


    Alabama knew the setup when they started play. To get to the SEC title game, they had to win their division. To win it last year, they had to be better than five other teams who they played head-to-head. No polls, ratings, etc. They came in second. We know that as an irrefutable fact. They were, at best, second to LSU. The problem is how certain people were that Alabama was better than OSU, Oregon, etc. I mean, if you anoint LSU as the best, and Alabama's only loss was to 'The Best', then obviously their loss is better than any other loss by a one-loss team. It smacks in the face of credibility. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. We will never know of OSU could've beaten LSU. Or even Alabama. They never got a chance to play. Alabama did get a chance to play. One chance. They lost.

    The season is a playoff. Every game factors into you advancing or not to the 'next round'. Alabama lost in the first round, the 12-game regular season. LSU made it to the second round (conference title game) and third round (title game). They should've been able to play another team making that same sort of advancement. Instead, Alabama got to take a round off and play them again.

    Usually getting time off while other teams are playing is reserved to the best team in the form of a bye. Not a losing team getting a rematch with the team that beat them.
  • karen lotz
    Oklahoma State's loss didn't eliminate them from the playoff?
  • Con_Alma
    Sykotyk;1208936 wrote:The process to determine the 'champion' is a season-long process...
    I completely agree.
  • Sonofanump
    karen lotz;1208940 wrote:Oklahoma State's loss didn't eliminate them from the playoff?
    Only if it eliminated them from participating in a CC game.
  • Sonofanump
    Sykotyk;1208936 wrote:The process to determine the 'champion' is a season-long process.
    Good post.
  • karen lotz
    Sonofanump;1208952 wrote:Only if it eliminated them from participating in a CC game.

    They didn't play a CC game. Eliminated.
  • Sonofanump
    They did not have one. They were not eliminated from it, it just did not exist.
  • Sonofanump
    I would force all teams that would like to be part of this four team playoff to make it to a CC. Therefore Big12 would need to have one.
  • sleeper
    slcoach;1208884 wrote:I agree that it will be 8 soon. But if you end up with 3 SEC teams and 5 conference winners, and the SEC teams win it on the field, people will watch.
    SEC teams won't win anything once a playoff starts. They are getting by on perception alone.
  • slcoach
    Sykotyk;1208936 wrote:The process to determine the 'champion' is a season-long process. It doesn't just start the second week of December. Alabama had their chance last year when they played LSU in the regular season game in an attempt to win their division. They failed. LSU won it. They moved on. Alabama, no matter how good, lost. The season is a playoff. IN EVERY LEAGUE where not all teams qualify for the playoffs.


    Alabama knew the setup when they started play. To get to the SEC title game, they had to win their division. To win it last year, they had to be better than five other teams who they played head-to-head. No polls, ratings, etc. They came in second. We know that as an irrefutable fact. They were, at best, second to LSU. The problem is how certain people were that Alabama was better than OSU, Oregon, etc. I mean, if you anoint LSU as the best, and Alabama's only loss was to 'The Best', then obviously their loss is better than any other loss by a one-loss team. It smacks in the face of credibility. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. We will never know of OSU could've beaten LSU. Or even Alabama. They never got a chance to play. Alabama did get a chance to play. One chance. They lost.

    The season is a playoff. Every game factors into you advancing or not to the 'next round'. Alabama lost in the first round, the 12-game regular season. LSU made it to the second round (conference title game) and third round (title game). They should've been able to play another team making that same sort of advancement. Instead, Alabama got to take a round off and play them again.

    Usually getting time off while other teams are playing is reserved to the best team in the form of a bye. Not a losing team getting a rematch with the team that beat them.
    Wisconsin lost in the regular season....TWICE!!! But under your system, they get another chance because they won a conference title.

    So, basically you are saying that since we don't know for sure that Bama was better than Okie State, the Cowboys should have gotten a chance, right? So, we also don't know that West Virginia was better than Bama, so they should have gotten a chance as well.

    The argument that the season is a playoff is bullshit if a 6-6 UCLA teams wins a PAC-12 title game and gets a chance over a 1 loss Big 10, SEC, and or Big 12 team.
  • slcoach
    Sonofanump;1208916 wrote:Sorry English professor, did not know this was a semantics argument. Hope this is better for you to understand.

    Your “never going to happen” season of “perfect upsets” gets you pumped about a playoff?
    You are awesome with sarcasm!!!
  • slcoach
    sleeper;1208977 wrote:SEC teams won't win anything once a playoff starts. They are getting by on perception alone.
    I know that slamming the SEC is your thing around here, but give it a rest. The top of the SEC is winning every year and beating everyone else.
  • sleeper
    slcoach;1209025 wrote:I know that slamming the SEC is your thing around here, but give it a rest. The top of the SEC is winning every year and beating everyone else.
    Luckily, the SEC is still 3rd in Titles in college football history. Also, pretty easy to win every year when your two teams are fraudulently pitted against each other in the title game. Alabama and LSU would both lose by 2 TDs to OKST last year; but instead we got fraud.
  • WebFire
    You still have to perform in the regular season to get into a playoff, whether 2, 4 or 8 teams. That will never change. The whole "the regular season will mean nothing with a playoff" argument is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.
  • WebFire
    Al Bundy;1208931 wrote:You have much more faith in the polls than I do. I would rather determine it on the field. Conference champs have been determined on the field. The voting polls are just a popularity contest.
    So which is it? Only #1 matters and #4 doesn't, or you want it settled on the field? To say both is a contradiction.
  • Al Bundy
    WebFire;1209075 wrote:So which is it? Only #1 matters and #4 doesn't, or you want it settled on the field? To say both is a contradiction.
    I have always said I want it settled on the field. You want to keep putting a team back in the tournament after they have not won their conference. Having teams from the same conference just play each other over and over doesn't determine a champion. Conference champs are determined on the field. You have much more faith in the polls than I do.
  • WebFire
    Al Bundy;1209085 wrote:I have always said I want it settled on the field. You want to keep putting a team back in the tournament after they have not won their conference. Having teams from the same conference just play each other over and over doesn't determine a champion. Conference champs are determined on the field. You have much more faith in the polls than I do.
    Putting crappy conference champs in the tournament doesn't determine a champ either. You have more faith in humans than I do.