- 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: Those Of You Celebrating The Bama Loss: If This Was 2014, They Are In
Posted on 12/1/13 at 9:06 am to EZE Tiger Fan
Posted on 12/1/13 at 9:06 am to EZE Tiger Fan
quote:Yes you can.
You can't have major "elite" programs like Bama playing these types of schedules and being rewarded for losing games and not even winning their division, much less their conference.
1
Posted on 12/1/13 at 9:07 am to Tiger Phil
quote:
The national championship in football should not be to reward the "best team". If that were the case, we should have had a chance to play for it in 2001, 2006, etc. It's to reward the team with the BEST SEASON.
Yes. To reward the totally subjective "best team", we would've prob had a Mich-OSU rematch in 2006, and USC-UGA in 2007.
Posted on 12/1/13 at 9:09 am to Holden Caulfield
with no undefeated sec team this year, appears that sec eats its own. I think if any of these one loss sec teams played OSU schedule they would be undefeated as well.
Posted on 12/1/13 at 9:11 am to ballscaster
quote:
Yes you can.
Well, then get ready to see a lot of teams wise up and not play tough OOC games.
For example, if LSU were smart, they would follow the "Bama model" and cancel Wisconsin right now, just as Bama cancelled Michigan State, and play some FCS team in its place.
I can already picture LSU fans bowing at Saban's alter after he beats Ga State if LSU loses that same weekend to a top 10 OOC team on the road or at a neutral site.
This is the type of garbage we will get as CFB fans. (Note I said CFB fans, not LSU fans).
Posted on 12/1/13 at 9:14 am to EZE Tiger Fan
Posted on 12/1/13 at 9:15 am to EZE Tiger Fan
Teams will try to get into the top 4, yes.
Posted on 12/1/13 at 9:15 am to LSURussian
quote:
So your point is a 4 team playoff is worse for college football than the BCS system?
The point is that it's not better.
The idea of picking an "objective" national champion is, and always as been, a fool's errand.
Posted on 12/1/13 at 9:19 am to ballscaster
quote:
Teams will try to get into the top 4, yes.
Exactly.
I just feel strongly that it will water down the regular season big time.
There are going to be many more WTF Saturdays where there will only be one, maybe two decent games like we saw twice this year.
Posted on 12/1/13 at 9:23 am to EZE Tiger Fan
quote:Right. The no. 2 BCS team (Bama) lost to the no. 1 BCS team (LSU). By three points. In overtime.
I remember Bama LOSING AT HOME in November to one of them in 2011
quote:Right. The no. 2 BCS team lost at home to the no. 9 BCS team. By five points.
I remember them LOSING AT HOME in November in 2012 to a top 10 team
You are going to hurt yourself trying to contort some argument as to why they didn't deserve to be in the BCS game. They played in a system everyone agreed to, and came out on top. By far. But by all means, continue to worry more about what Bama did and didn't do.
Posted on 12/1/13 at 9:26 am to Ice Cold
quote:
Right. The no. 2 BCS team (Bama) lost to the no. 1 BCS team (LSU). By three points. In overtime.
And again, they were rewarded for losing with a terrible schedule. There are a few other programs this would happen for as well. That is the point of the OP...
quote:
Right. The no. 2 BCS team lost at home to the no. 9 BCS team. By five points.
And again, had their primary competition, aTm and LSU, played Bama's mediocre schedule that year, one of those two teams would have benefited.
That is the point of the OP.
quote:
You are going to hurt yourself trying to contort some argument as to why they didn't deserve to be in the BCS game.
If only that were the point of the OP....
quote:
They played in a system everyone agreed to, and came out on top.
Finally, a point made in the OP.
quote:
But by all means, continue to worry more about what Bama did and didn't do.
And sort of the point of the OP. Getting warmer.
Posted on 12/1/13 at 9:28 am to TrueTiger
quote:
4 is like the worst of both worlds, 16 is a good all around number
A single eliminstion playoff is not a good system to determine best teams in football, and the error compounds greatly the more rounds you add. So no, 16 is not the best number. Unless your goal is to make the regular season irrelevant and remove all excitement out of upset losses.
Posted on 12/1/13 at 9:28 am to EZE Tiger Fan
quote:Is your obsession with Bama, and what they might or might not obtain in some future hypothetical scenario. No, I understand your OP completely.
the point of the OP.
Posted on 12/1/13 at 9:32 am to Ice Cold
quote:
Is your obsession with Bama, and what they might or might not obtain in some future hypothetical scenario.
Ok. Just for fun, replace Bama with another "elite" program under similar circumstances. Just a few years ago, it was USC.
So, take the same scenarios in 2006, 2007, and probably 2008, you would most likely have USC in the final four, despite losing big Nov games to UCLA, Oregon and Oregon state.
Before USC it was the Big 12 teams benefiting: Nebraska, Oklahoma..
Do you get it yet? Bama just happens to be the current big-name media pet.
This post was edited on 12/1/13 at 9:34 am
Posted on 12/1/13 at 9:37 am to EZE Tiger Fan
Why not take the winners of the Super 5-6 confrerences with 2 at large reperesentatives, and make it a real 8 team playoff! this way you take away most subjectivity out of college football!
Posted on 12/1/13 at 9:37 am to Cold Cous Cous
quote:
The idea of picking an "objective" national champion is, and always as been, a fool's errand.
agree, and the narrative has moved around some lately. 2011 the media (and Saban) really hammered the "2 best teams" concept home. Last year Notre Dame clearly wasn't one of the "2 best teams". Part of the greatness of college football has been that these late games are basically elimination games. I really fear a committee trying to decide who the "4 best teams" are.
Posted on 12/1/13 at 9:37 am to EZE Tiger Fan
quote:Well, you started two threads on two separate boards about Bama. Not about USC, Nebraska, or Oklahoma. So no, I don't now accept that your issue is with shortcomings of either the BCS or the forthcoming playoff system. (As an aside, I assume you would have the same issues if LSU benefited from such a system, which they have.)
Do you get it yet?
Every year is different. Every schedule is different. Teams evolve during the season, and a perceived strong schedule turns out not to be, and vice versa. But they all play in the system(s), which determines the outcome. I choose not to get worked up about it.
Posted on 12/1/13 at 9:59 am to Ice Cold
Relax. Alabama is one of the top four teams in the country, if not the best. They deserve whatever they get.
How do you think the game would've gone on a neutral field, or in Tuscaloosa?
Get real. They were playing their rival, away, and lost on a freak play with one second left. That's how hard it is to beat Saban. We oughta know.
How do you think the game would've gone on a neutral field, or in Tuscaloosa?
Get real. They were playing their rival, away, and lost on a freak play with one second left. That's how hard it is to beat Saban. We oughta know.
Posted on 12/1/13 at 10:03 am to Jesus Prejean
quote:
How do you think the game would've gone on a neutral field, or in Tuscaloosa?
LOL.
LOL.
LOL.
Bama has lost the last two years prior to 2013 in Tuscaloosa.
quote:
That's how hard it is to beat Saban.
Ahh. A Saban lover. Never mind. See the 7-5 November thread.
Posted on 12/1/13 at 10:14 am to EZE Tiger Fan
Completely agree with EZE Tiger Fan.
Its just not likely for a team to win more than 2/3 of its losable games (meaning games against teams of the same caliber or slightly lower). For teams that are consistently in the Top 10, there is absolutely no reason to add any losable games to the schedule outside of regular season conference games. This means games against top-tier OOC opponents or conference championship games.
The SECCG just doesn't make sense anymore. There is essentially no scenario where the best team in the SEC would benefit from playing in the SECCG.
- If both teams are in the top 4: Injury risks and fatigue due to additional game. Loser is most likely out, winner is still in...possible that a non-division winner can sneak in. At best, SEC gets same number of teams in that it was going to before the game.
- If one team is top-4: Injury risks and fatigue due to additional game. If top team wins, no change except that other team has additional loss. If underdog wins, top team knocked out (No SEC teams in top 4), or no change, or underdog takes spot, or non-division winner takes a top 4 spot. Slight chance of getting an additional team in.
- If neither team is top-4: Win could move a team in. But very unlikely that no participants in the SECCG will be top-4. Good for SEC; but extremely unlikely to ever be applicable.
Essentially, the SECCG will be an additional game that has zero upside for the best team in the SEC and almost zero chance of increasing the likelihood that an SEC team will win the Championship.
Its just not likely for a team to win more than 2/3 of its losable games (meaning games against teams of the same caliber or slightly lower). For teams that are consistently in the Top 10, there is absolutely no reason to add any losable games to the schedule outside of regular season conference games. This means games against top-tier OOC opponents or conference championship games.
The SECCG just doesn't make sense anymore. There is essentially no scenario where the best team in the SEC would benefit from playing in the SECCG.
- If both teams are in the top 4: Injury risks and fatigue due to additional game. Loser is most likely out, winner is still in...possible that a non-division winner can sneak in. At best, SEC gets same number of teams in that it was going to before the game.
- If one team is top-4: Injury risks and fatigue due to additional game. If top team wins, no change except that other team has additional loss. If underdog wins, top team knocked out (No SEC teams in top 4), or no change, or underdog takes spot, or non-division winner takes a top 4 spot. Slight chance of getting an additional team in.
- If neither team is top-4: Win could move a team in. But very unlikely that no participants in the SECCG will be top-4. Good for SEC; but extremely unlikely to ever be applicable.
Essentially, the SECCG will be an additional game that has zero upside for the best team in the SEC and almost zero chance of increasing the likelihood that an SEC team will win the Championship.
Posted on 12/1/13 at 10:21 am to deSandman
Precedent has been set: bama doesn't have to win the western division to go to the championship game.
It really is ridiculous.
It really is ridiculous.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News