- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: If you can't win your conference, can you win the nation?
Posted on 11/18/11 at 9:56 am to TexasTiger1185
Posted on 11/18/11 at 9:56 am to TexasTiger1185
quote:
You are trying to argue for fairness. which doesn't exist.
I thought that's why the whole argument in the OP DOES exist. I thought fairness is the reason to make a rule like that. I'm just arguing that there shouldn't be a blanket rule.
But I do agree with the end of your post, which is why I think that if you have 1 loss and you're battling it out (on paper) with other 1-loss teams, then don't whine when you don't get in....
And the conference championships do still have a bearing - just not as much of a bearing when your conference has multiple national championship caliber teams. But that's fundamentally backwards. As is Alabama being able to get in without having to play an extra game. But then again, Alabama needs help, it's not like they're in already.
0
Posted on 11/18/11 at 10:10 am to TexasTiger1185
quote:
but you are talking about playoffs. college football does not have a designed playoff system. If there was one, then I would not complain about a team who didn't win their division winning the NC, because they would have had to earn it on a harder road through the playoffs.
i can't say i disagree with you, but the BCS is the closest we have to a playoff system. with over 100 teams competing for the title, not all conferences are created equal. I would gladly support a playoff system but i do NOT think it should be gauranteed entry for conference champions. The current BCS formula rewards teams for playing stronger opponents. People often talk about a playoff system for conference champions. If that were to happen, then the Boises and TCUs of college football would do nothing but continue to play a shitty schedule and coast to a playoff system that SEC schools have to fight for.
tl;dr - i see you point, but unless conferences were more balanced in college football, basing things on conference championships isn't a fair requirement.
Posted on 11/18/11 at 10:13 am to TexasTiger1185
The rules for being eligible should include the following:
o Conf Champs should be unambiguous. Conf with CGs provide this. I don't care if a conf has a CG or not, but those that do not may or may not have an unambiguous champ. When they don't, they should have a playoff instead of using tie-breakers (They can use tie-breakers to determine who participates).
o You are not eligible to participate unless your conf champ participates.
Note that I'm not against rematches in gen, but with only two teams going to the playoff, then the non-champ needs to clearly be the best choice. While we think we know who is best, we really don't know who would win. Others conf champs deserve a shot before a non-champ gets a rematch. But if every significant team has 2 losses and the non-champ only one...rematch on.
So if we were to lose the SEC CG, I agree we shouldn't be able to advance, but those aren't the rules today. So if we lose and the system puts us there---game on.
o Conf Champs should be unambiguous. Conf with CGs provide this. I don't care if a conf has a CG or not, but those that do not may or may not have an unambiguous champ. When they don't, they should have a playoff instead of using tie-breakers (They can use tie-breakers to determine who participates).
o You are not eligible to participate unless your conf champ participates.
Note that I'm not against rematches in gen, but with only two teams going to the playoff, then the non-champ needs to clearly be the best choice. While we think we know who is best, we really don't know who would win. Others conf champs deserve a shot before a non-champ gets a rematch. But if every significant team has 2 losses and the non-champ only one...rematch on.
So if we were to lose the SEC CG, I agree we shouldn't be able to advance, but those aren't the rules today. So if we lose and the system puts us there---game on.
Posted on 11/18/11 at 10:15 am to LsuTool
quote:
quote:
If a team does not compete in their conference championship, can they honestly go on to the national championship and claim victory over the country?
bama will have no problem doing this.
Bama has no problem claiming victory even of they don't even go to the NC game
Posted on 11/18/11 at 10:15 am to novabill
quote:
Has a team made the playoffs in the pros as a wild card and went on to win the championship?
yes and that is why we want a playoff for the BCS.
its not happening. Big ten and Pac12 have vetoed a playoff because they have the Rose bowl pumping money for them and they dont trust that the championship playoff would reward them as well.
Posted on 11/18/11 at 10:25 am to ottothewise
Simple Answer to a stupid question : Ask Oklahoma in 2003 what happened to let them lose thier conference and not only compete in the national championshiop game, but enter the NCG still ranked #1.
This post was edited on 11/18/11 at 10:26 am
Posted on 11/18/11 at 10:47 am to TexasTiger1185
There's no.rule against it. Nebraska and Oklahoma have both played for it, including 2003 OU who you should be familiar with.
Posted on 11/18/11 at 10:58 am to TexasTiger1185
The two best teams should meet at the end of the year to determine a national champion. If the two best teams come out of the same conference then naturally one of them won't be a conference champion.
Posted on 11/18/11 at 11:33 am to ashy larry
quote:
I think so. It is acceptable in every other sport and on every other level.
That's not a valid argument.
In major league baseball, they played for years without even a championship game. The team with the best record at the end of the season was declared the champion.
Even after the World Series started, MLB didn't have 'wild-card' teams until 1994.
'Wild-cards' are for children who can't keep track of the odds in poker, and for TV networks to make more money off of the post season.
I can't stand the idea of wild cards in sports, there is no logical, competitive reason for them.
Posted on 11/18/11 at 11:36 am to TexasTiger1185
quote:
That would only be an ok rule if every conference has a championship game.
Xactly!
Posted on 11/18/11 at 11:37 am to TexasTiger1185
Nebraska and Oklahoma say you can damn sure try!
Posted on 11/18/11 at 12:52 pm to wilfont
quote:
The two best teams should meet at the end of the year to determine a national champion. If the two best teams come out of the same conference then naturally one of them won't be a conference champion.
This is the point that always gets lost in this argument (here and anywhere else it is discussed). I can see that some will say that if you're not the best in your conference/division how can you be the best in the land. But in Bama's case this year, there is a legitimate argument that the two best teams are in the same division of the same conference. Only one can win. Does that mean that #2 in the division is not better than every other team in the nation just because they didn't win the division and conference? Absolutely not.
The championship game is designed to pit the top 2 teams in CFB. Most of the time, I think it is a valid argument that if you don't win your conference, you're not one of the top 2 teams in the country. In the case outline above (which may or may not be the case right now) the second best team may not win their conference if they were beat out by the best team.
Posted on 11/18/11 at 1:21 pm to TexasTiger1185
quote:
consider themselves the best team in the country?
You're under the delusion that winning a championship means you're the best team in the country. As far as I can tell, no sport at any level has a system for deciding who the best team is. Just because LSU beat Bama doesn't mean they have a better team.
People need to get over this notion that Championship = Best.
Posted on 11/18/11 at 1:43 pm to TexasTiger1185
quote:
If a team does not compete in their conference championship, can they honestly go on to the national championship and claim victory over the country?
If a team loses their conference championship, can they honestly compete in the national championship and consider themselves the best team in the country?
If a team were to do this then all the other contenders must have warts as well
So the answer is probably "very rarely, but possibly"
Posted on 11/18/11 at 1:45 pm to TexasTiger1185
Happens in every other sport so yes, why do people say this for NCAAF I'll never know.
Posted on 11/18/11 at 1:46 pm to The Mick
quote:
If you can't win your conference, can you win the nation
College baseball - yes
College basketball - yes
NBA - yes
NFL - yes
MLB - yes
Simple answer to OP, yes.
Posted on 11/18/11 at 1:46 pm to TexasTiger1185
tl;dr
but there is no rule against playing in the BCSCG if you don't win your conference.
Honestly it should be the best 2 teams in the country playing. Conference, or even division, should not matter.
There should be a rematch IMO, bc Bama>>>everyone else. Voters won't let it happen tho.
but there is no rule against playing in the BCSCG if you don't win your conference.
Honestly it should be the best 2 teams in the country playing. Conference, or even division, should not matter.
There should be a rematch IMO, bc Bama>>>everyone else. Voters won't let it happen tho.
This post was edited on 11/18/11 at 1:48 pm
Posted on 11/18/11 at 1:47 pm to The Mick
quote:
Just because LSU beat Bama doesn't mean they have a better team.
The 2008 Patriots know exactly what you mean.
Posted on 11/18/11 at 2:07 pm to LSUJuice
quote:
But OK or OK-St will not have to win their conference in the same way as the SEC champion. They don't have to go through that extra game. So why should a potential SEC representative be penalized?
They would still be conference champs, though.
Posted on 11/18/11 at 2:18 pm to Honkus
quote:
There should be a rematch IMO, bc Bama>>>everyone else. Voters won't let it happen tho.
Based off what? Bamas quality wins? Over who? Florida? Penn St?
They'll have a win over a top-15 team (IF LSU beats Arkansas).. and that is it. Every other contender has played a more difficult schedule.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News