how do you see the playoff?
-
thavoice
I get what you are saying.sleeper;1599927 wrote:Except there is no way to prove that the two best teams are from the same conference. Just because the SEC has the biggest media deals and get unsubstantiated high preseason rankings doesn't mean they have the best two teams in the country. The conference champion is the filter; I don't care if the conference champion as deemed by the conference has 4 losses and the team they beat in the championship game now only has 1. You are the not the best team from your conference therefore you cannot be the best team in the country.
In a 4 team playoff, I think the only legit way to do it is take conference champions.
BUT even at that........if you have one loss teams like a michigan state. They lost to Notre Dame. Alabama lost to a team already in the playoff.
We have to kind erase any knowledge of what happened in the bowl games because at the time of when this would be selected those would not have occurred yet.
I couldnt argue though if the 4 team playoff would ahve to come from a conference champ.
I would just be kinda mad and think it was unfair if my said team would lose one game, to a team who went undefeated, but couldnt make the playoff but another team with one loss, to a shittier team, made it because they won their confernce -
wildcats20
Sparty won the B1G.thavoice;1599931 wrote:I get what you are saying.
In a 4 team playoff, I think the only legit way to do it is take conference champions.
BUT even at that........if you have one loss teams like a michigan state. They lost to Notre Dame. Alabama lost to a team already in the playoff.
We have to kind erase any knowledge of what happened in the bowl games because at the time of when this would be selected those would not have occurred yet.
WHEN they go to an 8 team playoff is when they can legitimately take 2 from a conference, and this year Alabama would be in a 4 team. -
sherm03
You are making the same argument that CCrunner has made. That has to make you step back and realize that you can't be right. Losing to a team does not automatically make the winning team better...it makes them better on that day. That's why they are called upsets.sleeper;1599924 wrote:So why even bother playing the game? Just award every team a national championship each year since beating a team doesn't mean you are better. Such flawed logic.
If the goal is to "prove the best team on the field" like so many college football fans claimed to want when the playoff system was implemented, then it should be the four best teams regardless of conference. Winning a conference that isn't as good as other conferences shouldn't automatically guarantee you a place at the table. Performing well throughout the entire season should be what determines it. Not the outcome of one game before the playoffs start. -
thavoice
I realize that.wildcats20;1599934 wrote:Sparty won the B1G.
and as I said, I couldnt argue with the fact of only taking the conference champs for the 4 team playoff.
Hell lets say OSU loses one game to Wisconsin and the badgers were the champs and go undefeated and are in the playoff. Then you have whatever other team out there who lost one game, to a much lesser opponant, but gets the playoff. Buckeye fans would feel their team is better than some other one loss team who loss to a much lesser team but because they won their conference they get the slot.
Hell..I dont even know why I am talking about this. I dont really have a rooting interest in college football -
sherm03
And Sleeper...what happens if the unlikely scenario occurs and you have conference champions from the B1G, ACC, Big 12, Pac 12, and SEC and all the conference champions are undefeated? Each won their conference. Each is undefeated. Each deserves a playoff shot according to you. How do you determine which of those 5 get the 4 spots?
In an 8 team playoff, you are 100% right...the conference champions and then at-large bids to fill the rest of the field. But this isn't an 8 team playoff...it's a 4 team playoff. So it should be all at-large bids to assure the best 4 teams get a chance. -
Heretic
The moment in which a sane person realizes it's time to re-evaluate the entire basis of their argument.sherm03;1599936 wrote:You are making the same argument that CCrunner has made. That has to make you step back and realize that you can't be right. -
thavoice
Easy. Head coaches participate in this:sherm03;1599940 wrote:And Sleeper...what happens if the unlikely scenario occurs and you have conference champions from the B1G, ACC, Big 12, Pac 12, and SEC and all the conference champions are undefeated? Each won their conference. Each is undefeated. Each deserves a playoff shot according to you. How do you determine which of those 5 get the 4 spots?
In an 8 team playoff, you are 100% right...the conference champions and then at-large bids to fill the rest of the field. But this isn't an 8 team playoff...it's a 4 team playoff. So it should be all at-large bids to assure the best 4 teams get a chance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PUEoDYpUyQ -
sleeper
I watched the games as well and think Auburn would lose to every team in the B1G.lakeflyerMike;1599928 wrote:I watched the games, there depth and team speed blows the big 11 away. Why less would Urban be recruiting the same kids from the south that Auburn is. -
sleeper
So you're argument is that every team labeled 'Champion' is not actually the best team in their respective sports but the luckiest team. LOLsherm03;1599936 wrote:You are making the same argument that CCrunner has made. That has to make you step back and realize that you can't be right. Losing to a team does not automatically make the winning team better...it makes them better on that day. That's why they are called upsets.
If the goal is to "prove the best team on the field" like so many college football fans claimed to want when the playoff system was implemented, then it should be the four best teams regardless of conference. Winning a conference that isn't as good as other conferences shouldn't automatically guarantee you a place at the table. Performing well throughout the entire season should be what determines it. Not the outcome of one game before the playoffs start. -
sleeper
It's never happened in the history of college football so your scenario is laughable at best, but if it does happen then I would be okay with subjective measures such as the AP/coaches selecting the representatives.sherm03;1599940 wrote:And Sleeper...what happens if the unlikely scenario occurs and you have conference champions from the B1G, ACC, Big 12, Pac 12, and SEC and all the conference champions are undefeated? Each won their conference. Each is undefeated. Each deserves a playoff shot according to you. How do you determine which of those 5 get the 4 spots?
In an 8 team playoff, you are 100% right...the conference champions and then at-large bids to fill the rest of the field. But this isn't an 8 team playoff...it's a 4 team playoff. So it should be all at-large bids to assure the best 4 teams get a chance. -
sherm03
Didn't say every team. But some...absolutely. There's always at least some luck involved in a team making a run. A few bounces that go the right way, a call or two that could go either way, an opponent who suffers a key injury before the game...sometimes things just have to align the right way for a team to win a championship.sleeper;1599947 wrote:So you're argument is that every team labeled 'Champion' is not actually the best team in their respective sports but the luckiest team. LOL
Look at Notre Dame in 2012. Would you say they were the best team in college football going into the National Championship game? Or did they get lucky in a few of the games to keep their perfect record in tact? -
sleeper
Except luck and other subjective measures are irrelevant because you have a binary unbiased metric called Wins and Losses. If you win you are the better team and that is why they play the game. Can't win your conference? You are not the best team in your conference and therefore cannot be the best in the country. Its not hard.sherm03;1599949 wrote:Didn't say every team. But some...absolutely. There's always at least some luck involved in a team making a run. A few bounces that go the right way, a call or two that could go either way, an opponent who suffers a key injury before the game...sometimes things just have to align the right way for a team to win a championship.
Look at Notre Dame in 2012. Would you say they were the best team in college football going into the National Championship game? Or did they get lucky in a few of the games to keep their perfect record in tact?
But way to avoid my point and try to spin it a different direction. Always a good strategy to deflect when you can't refute a point. -
sherm03
Must be nice to live in a world of flawed logic.sleeper;1599950 wrote:Can't win your conference? You are not the best team in your conference and therefore cannot be the best in the country. -
thavoice
Kinda like the Luckeyes in their last championship season?sherm03;1599949 wrote:Didn't say every team. But some...absolutely. There's always at least some luck involved in a team making a run. A few bounces that go the right way, a call or two that could go either way, an opponent who suffers a key injury before the game...sometimes things just have to align the right way for a team to win a championship.
Look at Notre Dame in 2012. Would you say they were the best team in college football going into the National Championship game? Or did they get lucky in a few of the games to keep their perfect record in tact?
Sure, any given team runs into some good luck, whether it be a call, or being healthy, or other team have some injuries.
But if you run through any of the major conferences in football undefeated you deserve a shot. -
sherm03
Never said they didn't. That was never my argument here. My argument is for the team that is also undefeated in that same conference and loses in the conference championship to that team that goes undefeated. I think that automatically disqualifying that team just because they didn't win the conference is silly. Especially when they may be playing in a conference that is agreed to be better. Why should a 2-loss conference champion from a subpar conference get in over a 1-loss conference runner-up from a superior conference just because they won their conference championship?thavoice;1599953 wrote:Kinda like the Luckeyes in their last championship season?
Sure, any given team runs into some good luck, whether it be a call, or being healthy, or other team have some injuries.
But if you run through any of the major conferences in football undefeated you deserve a shot. -
thavoice
I doubt he is being legit. Fact of the matter is there will be teams with one loss, and they will have to judge and compare the one losses.sherm03;1599952 wrote:Must be nice to live in a world of flawed logic.
In this scenario, which is a 'better' loss? Notre Dame (MSU) or to Auburn? -
thavoice
I believe in a 4 team playoff though you wont see any 2 loss conference champions from a subpar conference get in.sherm03;1599955 wrote:Never said they didn't. That was never my argument here. My argument is for the team that is also undefeated in that same conference and loses in the conference championship to that team that goes undefeated. I think that automatically disqualifying that team just because they didn't win the conference is silly. Especially when they may be playing in a conference that is agreed to be better. Why should a 2-loss conference champion from a subpar conference get in over a 1-loss conference runner-up from a superior conference just because they won their conference championship?
You and I are closer in thinking on this than we are with sleeper -
sherm03
Teams that would disagree with this:sleeper;1599950 wrote:Can't win your conference? You are not the best team in your conference and therefore cannot be the best in the country. Its not hard.
1980 Oakland Raiders
1998 Denver Broncos
2000 Baltimore Ravens
2005 Pittsburgh Steelers
2007 New York Giants
2010 Green Bay Packers
1997 and 2003 Florida Marlins
2002 LA Angels
2004 Boston Red Sox
2011 St. Louis Cardinals
And a shit load of NCAA basketball teams -
sleeper
You're questioning the very fundamental concept of sports called winning and losing. Sorry reality doesn't fit your world of 'ifs ands or buts', you win or lose, there is no other option.sherm03;1599952 wrote:Must be nice to live in a world of flawed logic. -
sleeper
Pro football has a different method of determining their champion as does baseball. This is an apple's and oranges comparison. For example, in pro football you control your own destiny by winning your conference thus granting you the opportunity to play for a championship. There is no subjectivity involved; its binary based on the performance of the season. That is the same system I want for college football but you apparently want to live in a world where media contracts and influence along with subjective bullshit determines who and who isn't the best team in the country. Time to grow up.sherm03;1599959 wrote:Teams that would disagree with this:
1980 Oakland Raiders
1998 Denver Broncos
2000 Baltimore Ravens
2005 Pittsburgh Steelers
2007 New York Giants
2010 Green Bay Packers
1997 and 2003 Florida Marlins
2002 LA Angels
2004 Boston Red Sox
2011 St. Louis Cardinals
And a shit load of NCAA basketball teams -
thavoice
I wouldnt go throwing professional sports into this. Doesnt make for a compelling argument.sherm03;1599959 wrote:Teams that would disagree with this:
1980 Oakland Raiders
1998 Denver Broncos
2000 Baltimore Ravens
2005 Pittsburgh Steelers
2007 New York Giants
2010 Green Bay Packers
1997 and 2003 Florida Marlins
2002 LA Angels
2004 Boston Red Sox
2011 St. Louis Cardinals
And a shit load of NCAA basketball teams
We all know that when there are playoffs involved, it is the teams who are playing the best at taht time that win the championship. Sometimes they are the same team as who performed the best in the regular season.
By all accounts, if we wanted to take the whole season, the "full body of work" into consideration and make it mean everything, we should just have two teams play in a championship game based on the regular season.
We all see how we loved that in CFB.
I admit it would be easier to do in the pros as they play head to head all the time and you can get a more realistic view at whom the two best teams in the regular season are, and in college that is very difficule -
sleeper
Also no matter the system ND is never going to win anything. I'd advocate ND being automatically granted a playoff berth every year so I can watch them get blown out like they have for the past 20 years.
-
sherm03
No...I'm questioning your flawed logic of "better/worse" and how Team A can be automatically less deserving because they lost in a conference championship game to Team B, but Team C is deserving because they beat Team D in a different conference championship game.sleeper;1599960 wrote:You're questioning the very fundamental concept of sports called winning and losing. Sorry reality doesn't fit your world of 'ifs ands or buts', you win or lose, there is no other option.
It is apples to oranges because in pro football and pro baseball there are enough places in the playoffs to account for the fact that the two best teams can come from the same conference. In a 4 team playoff, there is not enough spaces...so you have to account for the fact that the best teams can be from the same conference somehow. The only way to do that would be to make them 4 at-large bids.sleeper;1599966 wrote:Pro football has a different method of determining their champion as does baseball. This is an apple's and oranges comparison. For example, in pro football you control your own destiny by winning your conference thus granting you the opportunity to play for a championship. There is no subjectivity involved; its binary based on the performance of the season. That is the same system I want for college football but you apparently want to live in a world where media contracts and influence along with subjective bullshit determines who and who isn't the best team in the country. Time to grow up.
I'm not the one living in some skewed world here. I live in a world where anyone can beat anyone on a given day. And unless you are playing a series of games to account for fluke wins, sometimes the team that is better loses. -
thavoice
They need to get into a conference. I think that would cure their ills.sleeper;1599970 wrote:Also no matter the system ND is never going to win anything. I'd advocate ND being automatically granted a playoff berth every year so I can watch them get blown out like they have for the past 20 years.
Schedule 4 NC games, mostly at home, and sprinkle in a legit team every once in awhile. Then play the predetermined league schedule that also includes a few pansies, every so often get the easy end of the stick on the rotating of the league games where you miss on some good teams and get the tough ones at home.... -
ernest_t_bass
I will like the playoff system when all 5 major conference champions get an automatic bid to the playoff. Until that happens, this "system" will always (ALWAYS) be flawed. The least amount of teams I'd go with is 6, but I'd prefer 8.