- 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
A team shouldn't be penalized for losing a conference championship game
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:15 am
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:15 am
Take Clemson this year, for example. Everyone keeps saying if they lose to Miami they'll be a 2-loss team. While that would be factually correct, they shouldn't be treated as such by the committee when comparing to teams that didn't make their conference's championship game.
The only reason they're in a position to lose a 2nd game at all is because of their excellence in the regular season. Now they might be penalized for doing too well?
It might be better to scrap conference championship games altogether and expand to an 8-team playoff.
The only reason they're in a position to lose a 2nd game at all is because of their excellence in the regular season. Now they might be penalized for doing too well?
It might be better to scrap conference championship games altogether and expand to an 8-team playoff.
26
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:17 am to RidiculousHype
So we should pretend like it never happened?
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:17 am to RidiculousHype
So auburn should be in with 3 losses? Nope.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:17 am to RidiculousHype
Agreed. Either make it a requirement to win your conference, or ignore/remove conference title games.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:17 am to RidiculousHype
Yea bama didn’t even need to play in one to get into the championship game in 2012. I don’t even know why we play conference championship games
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:18 am to RidiculousHype
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:18 am to Ssubba
quote:
So auburn should be in with 3 losses? Nope.
Yeah, they're a better team than Bama, who might get in with 1 loss.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:22 am to StrongBackWeakMind
quote:
So we should pretend like it never happened?
When comparing Clemson to Alabama, for example, yes. How is it fair for Clemson to have to risk everything, injuries, show more of their playbook, expend the energy to play this game while Alabama, who had a lesser season than Clemson, gets to sit at home?
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:23 am to Hook Em Horns
quote:
So auburn should be in with 3 losses? Nope.
This outdated mentality of evaluating college teams solely based on # of losses needs to die. "Who did you beat?" should be the first question asked.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:26 am to RidiculousHype
If I remember right, this was one of the main arguments against the SEC Championship game when it was created, but for the most part, it has helped propel teams to a national title rather than keep them from it.
There are a few exceptions... 2001 for instance Tennessee would have played in the championship game if LSU hadn't upset them.
There are a few exceptions... 2001 for instance Tennessee would have played in the championship game if LSU hadn't upset them.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:27 am to RidiculousHype
Well now you're penalizing teams in weak conferences.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:32 am to RidiculousHype
Several years ago when Kansas and Missouri were both pretty good- back in the Chase Daniel years. Kansas played Missouri and the winner went to the Big 12 conference game. Missouri waxed Kansas and then lost the Big 12 conference game.
Kansas went to the Orange Bowl, I think. Missouri went to a much smaller bowl. Reason was, i think without looking it up, is that Kansas was undefeated when they played Mizzou and Mizzou already had a loss. The conference championship was Mizzou's second loss, I think, and cost them a major bowl trip.
^^ Hopefully the human factor included in the committee wouldn't let a situation like above happen. I think they should be "penalized" but it shouldn't be an automatic disqualifier either. Take everything into consideration..
Kansas went to the Orange Bowl, I think. Missouri went to a much smaller bowl. Reason was, i think without looking it up, is that Kansas was undefeated when they played Mizzou and Mizzou already had a loss. The conference championship was Mizzou's second loss, I think, and cost them a major bowl trip.
^^ Hopefully the human factor included in the committee wouldn't let a situation like above happen. I think they should be "penalized" but it shouldn't be an automatic disqualifier either. Take everything into consideration..
This post was edited on 11/28/17 at 7:33 am
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:33 am to StrongBackWeakMind
quote:
Well now you're penalizing teams in weak conferences.
How so?
I just want to prevent this scenario in which a team who doesn't win its own division benefits, while teams who had better seasons beat each other up the first weekend of December.
Do you have a better idea how this could be accomplished?
This post was edited on 11/28/17 at 7:35 am
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:37 am to RidiculousHype
It's going to be so lame if UGA and TCU win close games after getting thumped earlier by the same opponent.
This post was edited on 11/28/17 at 7:38 am
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:38 am to BornKjun
quote:
I think they should be "penalized" but it shouldn't be an automatic disqualifier either. Take everything into consideration..
I think this is reasonable. If Clemson loses to Miami 62-0, that's one thing. But if they lose 28-27 and suddenly everyone saying "2-loss Clemson" shouldn't go ahead of "1-loss Bama"...that would be absurd.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:47 am to RidiculousHype
A simple fix is the four best conference champions, and two at large bids. 1 and 2 seeds get first round bye.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:50 am to RidiculousHype
I get what you're saying, but your logic is flawed. You should get penalized for losing your conference game, you just shouldnt be rewarded for not playing in it.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:52 am to RidiculousHype
8 team playoff, 5 conference champs and 3 at large. Everybody's happy.
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:54 am to RidiculousHype
quote:
Take Clemson this year, for example. Everyone keeps saying if they lose to Miami they'll be a 2-loss team. While that would be factually correct, they shouldn't be treated as such by the committee when comparing to teams that didn't make their conference's championship game.
The only reason they're in a position to lose a 2nd game at all is because of their excellence in the regular season. Now they might be penalized for doing too well?
It might be better to scrap conference championship games altogether and expand to an 8-team playoff.
I agree with your premise in theory but if Clemson losses this weekend don't we already know they aren't the best team in the country? They will have lost on a neutral field to another top 10 team.
Everyone keeps saying "best 4 best 4" but they take the best 4 to give themselves the highest chance to get the best 1, which is the real goal. The goal is to make sure the best team in the country is in the field of 4, then has the chance to prove it. Or at least to me.
The same could be said for all the conference title games. If you are THE best team in the country, you win this weekend, simple as that
Posted on 11/28/17 at 7:58 am to RidiculousHype
quote:If your first question is "who did you beat?", teams in weak conferences aren't going to have good answers to that question.
How so?
quote:Yes. Don't ignore conference championship games when deciding the best 4 teams in the country. They go into the analysis like every other game.
Do you have a better idea how this could be accomplished?
This post was edited on 11/28/17 at 8:00 am
Page 1 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News