- 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
The Worst Part About These Teams Getting In
Posted on 12/21/24 at 12:57 pm
Posted on 12/21/24 at 12:57 pm
I know a lot of us hate Bama at all costs. But I really think the biggest shame about Indiana and SMU and Boise ASU getting in with their super soft schedules is that as a college football fan we just get robbed of some really interesting and fun matchups.
Imagine Ole Miss on the road at Notre Dame yesterday. Could have been so fun. Or South Carolina or Bama at Penn State right now. Instead we get these snooze fests of teams that are totally outmatched.
Imagine Ole Miss on the road at Notre Dame yesterday. Could have been so fun. Or South Carolina or Bama at Penn State right now. Instead we get these snooze fests of teams that are totally outmatched.
15
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:00 pm to SpeedRacer89
quote:
ASU
I’ll watch to see how Skattebo does on a bigger stage.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:01 pm to SpeedRacer89
If it fricks Bama and Ole Miss I’m totally fine with it. Rather some shite team gets blown out than they win a natty.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:02 pm to SpeedRacer89
Of course there shouldn't be a 12 team playoff to begin with. But given that there are, the problem is not the fact that SMU got in or Indiana got in or Boise State got in. The problem is that Alabama lost to 2 unranked teams. To quote the late Al Davis, "just win, baby".
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:02 pm to BobABooey
quote:
I’ll watch to see how Skattebo does on a bigger stage.
Fair. I think most likely Texas will work them but we'll see. But, I will say I think them getting a bye is so dumb
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:04 pm to SpeedRacer89
Ole Miss would be in if they didn’t lose embarrassingly to Kentucky, who went 1-7 in SEC play.
Alabama would be in if they didn’t lose embarrassingly to Oklahoma, who went 2-6 in SEC play, and noted powerhouse Vanderbilt, who lost to the mighty Georgia State.
Stop brand watching and worry about what teams won their games. Those SEC teams aren’t in because they lost the bottom of the barrel teams in their conference. OU and Kentucky were the worst teams in the SEC this year.
You want in? Win.
Alabama would be in if they didn’t lose embarrassingly to Oklahoma, who went 2-6 in SEC play, and noted powerhouse Vanderbilt, who lost to the mighty Georgia State.
Stop brand watching and worry about what teams won their games. Those SEC teams aren’t in because they lost the bottom of the barrel teams in their conference. OU and Kentucky were the worst teams in the SEC this year.
You want in? Win.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:05 pm to NotaStarGazer
quote:
Of course there shouldn't be a 12 team playoff to begin with. But given that there are, the problem is not the fact that SMU got in or Indiana got in or Boise State got in. The problem is that Alabama lost to 2 unranked teams. To quote the late Al Davis, "just win, baby".
They also beat Georgia. But, even if you want to take out Bama. Do you really think SMU Indiana and Boise State are more deserving than South Carolina or Ole Miss? I'm pretty sure none of them beat a ranked team all year.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:07 pm to fightingtigers98
quote:
Ole Miss would be in if they didn’t lose embarrassingly to Kentucky, who went 1-7 in SEC play.
Alabama would be in if they didn’t lose embarrassingly to Oklahoma, who went 2-6 in SEC play, and noted powerhouse Vanderbilt, who lost to the mighty Georgia State.
Stop brand watching and worry about what teams won their games. Those SEC teams aren’t in because they lost the bottom of the barrel teams in their conference. OU and Kentucky were the worst teams in the SEC this year.
You want in? Win.
Okay so just to clarify, you don't have to have any good wins to get in. You just need to not lose to anyone bad? Is this what you want the standard to be?
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:08 pm to fightingtigers98
quote:This. Either the regular season has weight or it doesn’t. I feel bad for SC because they got screwed out of a win against us and should be 10-2, but nobody feels bad for Bama or Ole Miss with those horrible losses.
Ole Miss would be in if they didn’t lose embarrassingly to Kentucky, who went 1-7 in SEC play. Alabama would be in if they didn’t lose embarrassingly to Oklahoma, who went 2-6 in SEC play, and noted powerhouse Vanderbilt, who lost to the mighty Georgia State.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:16 pm to SpeedRacer89
The only thing you have to do is win.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:19 pm to red sox fan 13
quote:
This. Either the regular season has weight or it doesn’t. I feel bad for SC because they got screwed out of a win against us and should be 10-2, but nobody feels bad for Bama or Ole Miss with those horrible losses.
I completely agree that the regular season should have weight but it just feels like a lot of people think that having a super soft schedule and having one less loss is better than having a really difficult schedule and having one more loss and more impressive wins and I just disagree. I think SMU or Indiana or ASU or Boise would do worse with Bama and Ole Miss’s schedules than Bama and Ole Miss did. Again I know regular season should matter. I just think strength of schedule should also matter. I saw the outcome of these first two games coming a million miles away. Bama SMU and Ole Miss would all be favored over SMU and Indiana on neutral fields.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:21 pm to SpeedRacer89
Texas and Tennessee each played 6 of the bottom 7 teams in the SEC standings.
The playoff is just about having the SEC schedule. UGA is an exception
The playoff is just about having the SEC schedule. UGA is an exception
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:22 pm to SpeedRacer89
(no message)
This post was edited on 3/9/25 at 1:46 pm
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:23 pm to SpeedRacer89
None of the teams you mentioned deserve to play for the national championship.
They all deserve good bowl games. But not a chance to play for a national championship. This is proof that this format is crap.
They all deserve good bowl games. But not a chance to play for a national championship. This is proof that this format is crap.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:24 pm to SpeedRacer89
quote:
having one less loss is better than having a really difficult schedule and having one more loss
But Ole Miss and Bama have TWO more losses than the “small brand teams”: IU, ASU, Boise.
Likewise, SMU finished the regular season with 1 loss. Bama, SC, and Ole Miss had 3. SMU shouldn’t be punished for playing an extra game.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:25 pm to SpeedRacer89
quote:
Do you really think SMU Indiana and Boise State are more deserving than South Carolina or Ole Miss? I'm pretty sure none of them beat a ranked team all year.
My first sentence was there shouldn't be a 12 team playoff to begin with. Once again, I'm not an "eyes person" as to subjective rating. Just show it on the football field in the final score. The biggest whining came from Alabama fans whereas their team lost to two unranked teams in Vandy and OU that LSU had absolutely no problem beating. Add in the narrow win that Alabama had vs S Carolina and the massive comeback that Georgia had to almost beat them (both games in Alabama I might add), and it really doesn't matter to me WHICH also-ran made the expanded playoffs.
Your complaint is analogous of getting a speeding ticket and telling the officer but others were speeding more than me so why don't they get a ticket. The bottom line is neither Alabama, Ole Miss, or South Carolina played good enough to get in a playoff system..
This post was edited on 12/21/24 at 1:26 pm
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:26 pm to bluestem75
quote:
But Ole Miss and Bama have TWO more losses than the “small brand teams”: IU, ASU, Boise. Likewise, SMU finished the regular season with 1 loss. Bama, SC, and Ole Miss had 3. SMU shouldn’t be punished for playing an extra game.
How do you think SMU would do with any of those teams schedules?
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:28 pm to SpeedRacer89
The format is so flawed. In any tournament setting, your top ranked/seeded teams get the byes. There's no way that Boise or ASU should have byes.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:32 pm to SpeedRacer89
quote:
Okay so just to clarify, you don't have to have any good wins to get in. You just need to not lose to anyone bad? Is this what you want the standard to be?
Both are considered. A better example would be the NCAA basketball tournament. For decades, the three factors that matter most are "good wins", "bad losses", and strength of schedule. So yeah, you shouldn't lose to bad teams...Alabama lost to 2 of them.
Posted on 12/21/24 at 1:34 pm to NotaStarGazer
quote:
Once again, I'm not an "eyes person" as to subjective rating.
I’m not trying to be an eyes person. I’m trying to be a common sense person. A team who plays the best teams in the country is probably gonna drop a game or two more than a team that plays a bunch of crap teams. I mean have you watched college football the last 15 years?
This is nothing new with these teams. You have to punish them for playing no one and losing when they do play anyone decent. Indiana got dominated, SMU got dominated, and Boise and ASU most likely will too. And the three SEC teams would’ve had a much better chance of winning their first game and making a run. Everyone knows this deep down including yourself. And the only reason they have more losses than these other teams is because of their much more difficult schedules.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News