- 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: Does college basketball or football more accurately decide a champion?
Posted on 12/14/13 at 9:11 am to thesoccerfanjax
Posted on 12/14/13 at 9:11 am to thesoccerfanjax
Why would you not want to crown the best? That makes absolutely zero sense to me.
1
Posted on 12/14/13 at 9:12 am to pvilleguru
quote:
Soccer does try to crown the best team. That's why they chose to give the league title to the team with the most points.
But that's not soccer trying to RETROACTIVELY crown the best team based on arbitrary measures. There are set parameters from match week one to determine the champion. In college football, well you have to go undefeated. Unless you're one of a few teams then maybe can you lose a game or maybe even two. But it depends who you lose to, and it depends who those teams lost to and who they beat.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 9:14 am to RemouladeSawce
quote:
Isn't that just true in basketball in general?
to me, the nba is the easiest sport to predict the outcome of the playoffs.
mlb is much more of a tossup.
fwiw, i think the ncaa tourney is more exciting than bowl season, but college football does a better job of crowning a champion. way too many 4/5 seeds make and win the men's final game.
This post was edited on 12/14/13 at 9:17 am
Posted on 12/14/13 at 9:15 am to pvilleguru
I'm not the one to ask. All I'm saying is this talk of crowing the best is very new. No one talked about it until ten years ago. NCAA never claimed the basketball tourney crowned the best, and people need to understand that. That's all I'm saying.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 9:19 am to ClydeFrog
quote:
I think football is much more accurate because it does more to account for an entire season. As we saw this year and in most previous years, a teams effort must be dang year perfect for a chance at the title.
So you would rather people just arbitrarily pick the subjective "two best teams" to play for a title rather than have a system where a select number of teams play to determine who is the best? It's no coincidence that every other major US sport has a playoff system.
In just the last 10 years CFB is riddled controversy regarding who should play for the title.
2001- why was Neb. more deserving of a shot to play than Ore. or Colo.?
2003-what real justification was there for leaving USC out, and letting Okla. "in"?
2004 - "Nice season Auburn. Sorry, you can't compete for a NC"
2006 - Fla in, Mich out. Even though both only lost 1 game.
2007 - what a disaster! I guess LSU should be able to play over the 4 other 2 loss teams. A playoff letting all those teams battle it out would have made too much sense.
2011 - Well Bama didn't win their conf. Uhhhh they didn't win their division. Who cares, we still "think" they're one of the top 2 teams. Sorry all you other one loss guys, win 9, 12, 43 NCs in your program's past and you'll get the benefit of the doubt.
2013 - How is AU any more "deserving" than Baylor, MSU, OSU? Just because a bunch of "coaches" who didn't watch many of those teams games this year and some nerd statisticians think so? Sounds fair.
68 teams in a tournament is probably too many, but at least no team that has earned the right to play for a title gets left out.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 9:32 am to Ed Wuncler III
Basketball without question. It's all done on the playing surface, whether it be a court or field and not based on human polls or voting.
To be the champion, you have to win the game and beat the teams you face.
This argument can take place just as well in the pros. This was the big discussion a few years ago when the Patriots were playing for an undefeated season. Folks were still saying , the best team didn't win, but it doesn't matter what the polls and human opinions said, the Giants won the game and therefore they were the SB champions.
In college basketball, there are 32 games to decide who the champion will be. No polls or human votes.
And that the OP's question, which one more accurately decides a champion.
To be the champion, you have to win the game and beat the teams you face.
This argument can take place just as well in the pros. This was the big discussion a few years ago when the Patriots were playing for an undefeated season. Folks were still saying , the best team didn't win, but it doesn't matter what the polls and human opinions said, the Giants won the game and therefore they were the SB champions.
In college basketball, there are 32 games to decide who the champion will be. No polls or human votes.
And that the OP's question, which one more accurately decides a champion.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 10:02 am to goldenbadger08
quote:
Which means they were the best at that time.
Correct. That's why tournaments and playoffs are played. Decide it on the field or court. All other sports do it this way in all levels because it's the only way to determine a champion. CFB needs to step up...a 16 team playoff would be ideal but I could live with 8 too. 4 is not enough.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 11:08 am to Ed Wuncler III
Considering their changing the BCS to a playoff, I think you have your answer right there.
And the fact that in most every other sport you have a playoff system, I would venture to say that's the most accurate way.
Being "hot" just means that the team is peaking; that it has been coached up to be playing its best ball.
Peaking doesn't mean you are in the sec and you only drop two spots in the polls after you lose to a shitty Florida team for instance.
Media bias and geographical bias affects cfb significantly more than any other college sport.
And the fact that in most every other sport you have a playoff system, I would venture to say that's the most accurate way.
Being "hot" just means that the team is peaking; that it has been coached up to be playing its best ball.
Peaking doesn't mean you are in the sec and you only drop two spots in the polls after you lose to a shitty Florida team for instance.
Media bias and geographical bias affects cfb significantly more than any other college sport.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 11:13 am to rockchlkjayhku11
quote:
you can make a legitimate case that the best team in the country has ended up winning the tournament every year since '97.
UConn
Posted on 12/14/13 at 11:15 am to A2
quote:
Considering their changing the BCS to a playoff, I think you have your answer right there.
they're doing that to tote to public pressure of mongoloids who think championships should be used to judge individual players + make more money. i don't think either of these ideals are things we strive towards
Posted on 12/14/13 at 2:06 pm to jg8623
quote:
Yep, a playoff shows who is the best at that given time, not necessarily who was the best all season
9 years out of 10 there is not a single team that is the best all season.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 5:29 pm to SlowFlowPro
uconn is the closest obviously but frick it, i could win that argument. kansas and ohio state were the 2 best teams in the country all year long by far, but they both bowed out too early (before the final 4) for me to consider them the best. you literally cannot make a case for someone besides those 2. after that, there was a big group of teams to consider that includes uconn. uconn won the toughest conference tourney, the ncaa tourney, and they had the best player in the country.
to the guy talking about 4 and 5 seeds winning the tourney, do you even pay attention to the sport you are talking about?
to the guy talking about 4 and 5 seeds winning the tourney, do you even pay attention to the sport you are talking about?
Posted on 12/14/13 at 5:30 pm to rockchlkjayhku11
you can't even make a rational argument that UConn was the best team in the Big East that year, bro
Posted on 12/14/13 at 5:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
NO! All sports its usually the team that gets hot and plays well at the end of the Season. 1969 New York Mets!!!
Posted on 12/14/13 at 5:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
Anyone who thinks voting on a champion is better than playing for one is a moron period point blank.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 5:56 pm to VerlanderBEAST
So instead of judging a team by their whole year you judge them on 6 out of 40 games. Makes sense.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 6:14 pm to Ed Wuncler III
quote:
So instead of judging a team by their whole year you judge them on 6 out of 40 games. Makes sense.
There is no judging that takes place in the NCAA tournament the teams decide it by playing.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 6:26 pm to VerlanderBEAST
Judging who the champion is depends partially on opinion.
Deciding on who the champion is by playing the actual game is based solely on competition and performance in the game.
You gotta win when it counts. That's all there is to it.
Deciding on who the champion is by playing the actual game is based solely on competition and performance in the game.
You gotta win when it counts. That's all there is to it.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 6:35 pm to rockchlkjayhku11
quote:
to the guy talking about 4 and 5 seeds winning the tourney, do you even pay attention to the sport you are talking about?
I said make the final game. Plenty of 4/5 seeds have made it to the final the last 15 years or so. That's the equivalent of the #20 ranked bcs team being in the bcsncg. I think college football does a better job rewarding the best team during the whole season, not the best team during the final 6 games.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 7:00 pm to 632627
quote:
I think college football does a better job rewarding the best team during the whole season, not the best team during the final 6 games.
You are wrong
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News