- 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
Posted on 12/16/13 at 11:53 am to EZE Tiger Fan
My guess is the committee would let in two SEC teams in that scenario, but make them play in the first round
Posted on 12/16/13 at 12:04 pm to MattLSU
quote:Baylor's marquee win is better than Bama's marquee win. You can say Bama's loss was better, but Baylor lost to #11 in BCS, very respectable.
I highly doubt the committee would put Baylor in over Saban and Bama, they'd instantly lose credibility.
Baylor won their conference......Bama didn't even win their division.
Posted on 12/16/13 at 12:22 pm to dante
Their marquee win? Oklahama? Please tell me you're not talking about Oklahoma.
Posted on 12/16/13 at 12:24 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
$ > credibility
??? WTF are you talking about? Yeah, the television money the Baylor Bearcats would draw over the Alabama Crimson Tide. Hilarious.
??? WTF are you talking about? Yeah, the television money the Baylor Bearcats would draw over the Alabama Crimson Tide. Hilarious.
Posted on 12/16/13 at 12:46 pm to MattLSU
quote:
I highly doubt the committee would put Baylor in over Saban and Bama, they'd instantly lose credibility.
This year the top ranked conference champs were FSU, Auburn, Michigan State, Baylor, UCF, and Stanford.
The four conference champs ranked highest of those were FSU, Auburn, MSU, and Stanford (although Baylor and UCF only had one loss for the year Stanford had a win against a top ten team and two more against top 15 teams). Popular programs left out will create controversy by people who don't like those results but the defense against that is to make more clear the committee's criteria for admission.
Right now it sounds like the committee will heavily emphasize winning your conference as a criteria for entering the four team field. If there are to be specific boundaries for making exceptions for either lower ranked teams with better records or higher ranked teams who did not win their conference I hope the committee will make precisely clear what those will be so the playoff doesn't rapidly become a joke.
Posted on 12/16/13 at 12:49 pm to MattLSU
quote:BCS has Oklahoma ranked 11 and LSU ranked 16.
Please tell me you're not talking about Oklahoma
Posted on 12/16/13 at 12:51 pm to dante
quote:
Please tell me you're not talking about Oklahoma.
BCS has Oklahoma ranked 11 and LSU ranked 16.
Posted on 12/16/13 at 12:51 pm to MattLSU
quote:
??? WTF are you talking about?
Look at it this way:
For the sake of argument, switch Baylor and MSU. The top 4 would be:
FSU
Auburn
Alabama
Baylor
Now put on a 4-team playoff with those teams and see what kind of national draw that tournament would get.
Now consider a 4 team playoff with:
FSU
Auburn
MSU
Stanford
Which playoff scenario do you think would make more money nationally?
Posted on 12/16/13 at 12:52 pm to Datbayoubengal
quote:
would be 9 wins or would be great with 9 wins this season
the problem is that it's not about LSU football any more to most folks...it's about how LSU football measures up to bama football
Posted on 12/16/13 at 12:55 pm to MattLSU
I still have not found a single mock 4 team playoff for 2013 that doesn't have Alabama in it. Not seeing where you coming up with this concept of favoring conference winners to the point of being blind. That would make more sense if it were a computer system(even though Bama would beat Baylor in the computers). There isn't a single human poll that has Baylor ranked ahead of Bama, I don't think most intelligent football fans think Baylor is the better team.
Usa Today 4 team mock playoff
Dennis Dodd 4 team mock playoff
NFL.com 4 team mock playoff
TeamSpeedKills 4 team mock playoff
Obviously these mocks aren't done by committee members, I'm just saying if the committees overwhelming preference for conference winners was so publicized you'd think it would be reflected in these write-ups.
First Task for Panel in New Playoff System: Easing Suspicions of Bias
Usa Today 4 team mock playoff
Dennis Dodd 4 team mock playoff
NFL.com 4 team mock playoff
TeamSpeedKills 4 team mock playoff
Obviously these mocks aren't done by committee members, I'm just saying if the committees overwhelming preference for conference winners was so publicized you'd think it would be reflected in these write-ups.
First Task for Panel in New Playoff System: Easing Suspicions of Bias
quote:
There will be no limit on the number of teams chosen from one conference, which could lead to a Southeastern Conference-dominated playoff. The SEC set a record this week with eight teams in the top 25 of the Associated Press poll, including three in the top 10.
Posted on 12/16/13 at 12:55 pm to MattLSU
quote:
I highly doubt the committee would put Baylor in over Saban and Bama, they'd instantly lose credibility.
I don't know man. I'm curious for this year, if Duke pulled of the miracle, how much love Baylor and MSU would have gotten. 4 teams with the current finish? A FSU/MSU/Baylor/AU selection wouldn't be shocking, would it?
Posted on 12/16/13 at 1:07 pm to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
I like the four team playoff but the only change I would make is you have win your conference to get in. I think its totally unfair for team who doesn't have to play in a conference championship game to get in. Not only do you get an extra week of rest, the teams playing in the championship games also risk losing players to injury.
Posted on 12/16/13 at 1:09 pm to dante
Ok, so you were talking about Oklahama. We're on tigerdroppings and you're telling me you're more impressed with Baylor beating Oklahoma than what Bama did to LSU. Got it.
I personally think LSU would tear apart Oklahama..but those BCS rankings are hard to argue with. It is the fricking Big 12. I think that's the point. Let's put it this way...list the number of teams in the SEC that you think would have a shot at beating Baylor.
Now list the number of Big 12 teams you'd give a shot at beating Alabama.
Check that..how many SEC teams would you give a shot/rank capable of wining the Big 12. So that whole conference champ thing goes up in smoke when you're comparing the Big 12 with the SEC, it's not an apples to apples comparison, all conferences aren't created equal..so why even go there?
I personally think LSU would tear apart Oklahama..but those BCS rankings are hard to argue with. It is the fricking Big 12. I think that's the point. Let's put it this way...list the number of teams in the SEC that you think would have a shot at beating Baylor.
Now list the number of Big 12 teams you'd give a shot at beating Alabama.
Check that..how many SEC teams would you give a shot/rank capable of wining the Big 12. So that whole conference champ thing goes up in smoke when you're comparing the Big 12 with the SEC, it's not an apples to apples comparison, all conferences aren't created equal..so why even go there?
Posted on 12/16/13 at 1:11 pm to MattLSU
LINK
When you look at those listed criteria that makes it a long shot for an at large who didn't win their conference to make the field.
1) Win/loss records are unlikely to help at large teams that don't win their conference; their W/L records are similar generally (MSU, UCF, Baylor, and Alabama have the same records this year).
2) Strength of schedule won't help teams like Alabama unless they start scheduling more aggressively out of conference. Note they have one win against a team in teh top 20 of the BCS in LSU whereas conference champs like Baylor, MSU, and Stanford may have better quality wins on their schedules (again, I refer you to the BCS rankings of teams like OU, tOSU, Oregon, ASU, and UCLA compared to Bama's best team beaten in LSU)
3) Head to head results - another way of saying win your conference. If you lost those games against teams you should have beaten to win your conference you are going to have an uphill battle to an at large berth.
4) Winning your conference - By definition this will not favor at large bids.
quote:
The championship game will be managed by the conferences and will not be branded as a bowl game. The presidents also announced the creation of a selection committee that will rank the teams to play in the playoff, "giving all the teams an equal opportunity to participate." The committee will consider win-loss record, strength of schedule, head-to-head results and whether a team is a conference champion.
When you look at those listed criteria that makes it a long shot for an at large who didn't win their conference to make the field.
1) Win/loss records are unlikely to help at large teams that don't win their conference; their W/L records are similar generally (MSU, UCF, Baylor, and Alabama have the same records this year).
2) Strength of schedule won't help teams like Alabama unless they start scheduling more aggressively out of conference. Note they have one win against a team in teh top 20 of the BCS in LSU whereas conference champs like Baylor, MSU, and Stanford may have better quality wins on their schedules (again, I refer you to the BCS rankings of teams like OU, tOSU, Oregon, ASU, and UCLA compared to Bama's best team beaten in LSU)
3) Head to head results - another way of saying win your conference. If you lost those games against teams you should have beaten to win your conference you are going to have an uphill battle to an at large berth.
4) Winning your conference - By definition this will not favor at large bids.
Posted on 12/16/13 at 1:13 pm to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
The fundamental flaw with the BCS, 4-team playoff, etc appraoches is that thay all miss the ultimate goal: which team has demonstrated its superiority over the most number of other teams. This is not the same as matching the "two best teams" in a final game.
Since the number of teams precludes a round-robin schedule there will always be a measure of subjectivity interjected. Likewise, best 2 of 3, etc are not doable due to the nature of the sport. But these are mitigated by the approach given above.
For example, in 2011, we demonstrated our superiority over the Pac-10 (via Oregon), Big East (via WVU), and the SEC. What wasn't demonstrated was the Big-12 and Big-10. That's why we should've played OkieState.
Until the ultimate goal is corrected the amount of disagreement will continue.
Since the number of teams precludes a round-robin schedule there will always be a measure of subjectivity interjected. Likewise, best 2 of 3, etc are not doable due to the nature of the sport. But these are mitigated by the approach given above.
For example, in 2011, we demonstrated our superiority over the Pac-10 (via Oregon), Big East (via WVU), and the SEC. What wasn't demonstrated was the Big-12 and Big-10. That's why we should've played OkieState.
Until the ultimate goal is corrected the amount of disagreement will continue.
Posted on 12/16/13 at 1:14 pm to MattLSU
quote:Can we agree this all came about because of the LSU-Bama rematch?
Not seeing where you coming up with this concept of favoring conference winners to the point of being blind
They cannot publicly say the play-off was created to help the other BCS conferences and hurt the SEC, but they are doing away with the computer polls and human polls to determine the 4 teams for a reason. It gives them flexibility on who they pick.
You are using the "eye-test" method for determining the 4 best teams....The BCS formula can pick the 4 best teams......BUT, they need and want flexibility. I think the only years the SEC gets more than 1 team in, is if multiple conferences have 2 loss champions.
Why is Bama more deserving than MSU or Baylor? All have 1 loss, actually Baylor and MSU both have better wins than Bama. Both won their conference. Bama didn't even win their division. Why is Bama entitled?
Posted on 12/16/13 at 1:23 pm to MattLSU
quote:
I personally think LSU would tear apart Oklahoma
Unfortunately that counts for about as much as me thinking LSU was going to tear apart Ole Miss...
..Zero.
This post was edited on 12/16/13 at 1:24 pm
Posted on 12/16/13 at 1:25 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
I personally think LSU would tear apart Oklahoma
the LSU team that played Auburn or Texas A&M would. The LSU team that played Ole Miss would get its lunch money taken
Posted on 12/16/13 at 2:08 pm to molsusports
The "narrative" drives everything in college football, and the "narrative" would insist on including Alabama.
The main achievement of the BCS was to get conference champions who would be otherwise committed to different bowls to be able to play each other. The inclusion of the Rose Bowl and their commitments from the Pac10 and BigTen were the last hold out from the Bowl Alliance that preceded the BCS.
Each year, the talking heads have latched onto the "narrative" regarding who should have been in the BCSNCG. Every time the BCS "worked as it's supposed to", it was because the resulting matchup had the AP #1 vs #2. So, when Auburn got screwed in 2004 or Oklahoma State got screwed in 2011, the talking heads doing the analysis kept repeating the phrase "the BCS got it right". But when AP#1 USCw got left out in 2003, the talking heads screamed long enough for the AP to eventually pull it's participation in the BCS.
(To be fair, Reese Davis of ESPN carried a lot of water for Okie State in 2011 before the SECCG weekend, but by the time the Bedlam game was being played, the crawl on the bottom during the game was announcing it was going to be LSU & Bama.)
You can bet that the same dynamic will exist with the playoffs. In the years that the committee picks the top 4 in the AP poll, the system will have "worked". Any year that a top 4 team is left out, the lower ranked team that made it will be discussed as the "controversial pick", even if they were a conference champion with the same record.
We complain a lot about message boards being "echo chambers", but we never seem to notice that the talking head guys on TV are just as much an echo chamber. After all, it's a bad idea to get into an argument with a guy that owns a microphone or buys ink by the barrel.
GEAUX TIGERS
The main achievement of the BCS was to get conference champions who would be otherwise committed to different bowls to be able to play each other. The inclusion of the Rose Bowl and their commitments from the Pac10 and BigTen were the last hold out from the Bowl Alliance that preceded the BCS.
Each year, the talking heads have latched onto the "narrative" regarding who should have been in the BCSNCG. Every time the BCS "worked as it's supposed to", it was because the resulting matchup had the AP #1 vs #2. So, when Auburn got screwed in 2004 or Oklahoma State got screwed in 2011, the talking heads doing the analysis kept repeating the phrase "the BCS got it right". But when AP#1 USCw got left out in 2003, the talking heads screamed long enough for the AP to eventually pull it's participation in the BCS.
(To be fair, Reese Davis of ESPN carried a lot of water for Okie State in 2011 before the SECCG weekend, but by the time the Bedlam game was being played, the crawl on the bottom during the game was announcing it was going to be LSU & Bama.)
You can bet that the same dynamic will exist with the playoffs. In the years that the committee picks the top 4 in the AP poll, the system will have "worked". Any year that a top 4 team is left out, the lower ranked team that made it will be discussed as the "controversial pick", even if they were a conference champion with the same record.
We complain a lot about message boards being "echo chambers", but we never seem to notice that the talking head guys on TV are just as much an echo chamber. After all, it's a bad idea to get into an argument with a guy that owns a microphone or buys ink by the barrel.
GEAUX TIGERS
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News