- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: Great Playoff Proposal
Posted on 12/7/09 at 10:45 am to Gmorgan4982
Posted on 12/7/09 at 10:45 am to Gmorgan4982
quote:
So, you're invalidating a system on the basis of the chances of teams like Troy, ECU, or CMU winning two road games and then two neutral site games all against top 10 teams
yes
12 game sample in normal conditions tells you more about a team than a 3 game sample in outlandish situations
quote:
Yet, you support a system that says "too bad" to undefeated teams all the time?
2004
2009
that's it
2
Posted on 12/7/09 at 10:47 am to SlowFlowPro
What? Last year, Utah and Boise State were both undefeated in the regular season and Utah was even undefeated after their bowl game. I don't even want to look up the rest, but Tulane comes to mind. It's not just 2004 and 2009.
ETA: Plus, even if you don't count those team, and I can already see that argument coming, a system that says too bad to two undefeated teams in 6 years is pretty awesome, huh?
ETA: Plus, even if you don't count those team, and I can already see that argument coming, a system that says too bad to two undefeated teams in 6 years is pretty awesome, huh?
This post was edited on 12/7/09 at 10:49 am
Posted on 12/7/09 at 10:48 am to Gmorgan4982
quote:
Utah and Boise State
non-BCS trash
Posted on 12/7/09 at 10:49 am to SlowFlowPro
Non-BCS trash 31, #1 most of the year 17
Posted on 12/7/09 at 10:49 am to SlowFlowPro
Do you want a "best team" or a "champion"?
All other sports entities have champions, it seems to me.
I will admit a one-game playoff (BCS MNCG) is better than no playoff at all, and a plus-one could be an improvement on that.
I would still like to see a playoff tournament though. I don't know enough about the logistics of how it would work with the money and such. A top 4 or top 8 from the BCS rankings would suffice, I think. 16 teams with all 11 conference champions would probably be the fairest but again, I don't know enough to know whether college prez's et al would go for it.
All other sports entities have champions, it seems to me.
I will admit a one-game playoff (BCS MNCG) is better than no playoff at all, and a plus-one could be an improvement on that.
I would still like to see a playoff tournament though. I don't know enough about the logistics of how it would work with the money and such. A top 4 or top 8 from the BCS rankings would suffice, I think. 16 teams with all 11 conference champions would probably be the fairest but again, I don't know enough to know whether college prez's et al would go for it.
Posted on 12/7/09 at 10:51 am to Beastwood
quote:He wants a "brand name" team who, in his opinion (which is of ultimate importance here), is the best team.
Do you want a "best team" or a "champion"?
This post was edited on 12/7/09 at 10:52 am
Posted on 12/7/09 at 10:52 am to Beastwood
quote:
Do you want a "best team" or a "champion"?
if your champion isn't your best team, something is wrong with your system
Posted on 12/7/09 at 10:53 am to SlowFlowPro
2008 Boise St and Utah
2007 Hawaii
2006 Boise St
2004 Boise St Auburn
1999 Marshall
1998 Tulane
All undefeated in final BCS rankings and all left out of the big game. Many left out of BCS bowls altogether.
Would any of these teams won in a playoff? Probably not. 2006 Boise St - maybe.
The argument that these teams played crappy schedules is a good one - the problem with that is for some of these teams (Boise St. comes to mind) - they TRY to schedule tougher opposition, but no one wants to play them. A team which goes undefeated because it intentionally schedules patty cakes and also plays in a week conference - deserves no chance. But a team which plays in a weak conference and plays a weak OOC schedule despite its best efforts to schedule quality opposition - arguably deserves a shot.
2007 Hawaii
2006 Boise St
2004 Boise St Auburn
1999 Marshall
1998 Tulane
All undefeated in final BCS rankings and all left out of the big game. Many left out of BCS bowls altogether.
Would any of these teams won in a playoff? Probably not. 2006 Boise St - maybe.
The argument that these teams played crappy schedules is a good one - the problem with that is for some of these teams (Boise St. comes to mind) - they TRY to schedule tougher opposition, but no one wants to play them. A team which goes undefeated because it intentionally schedules patty cakes and also plays in a week conference - deserves no chance. But a team which plays in a weak conference and plays a weak OOC schedule despite its best efforts to schedule quality opposition - arguably deserves a shot.
This post was edited on 12/7/09 at 10:54 am
Posted on 12/7/09 at 11:00 am to Beastwood
quote:
I think. 16 teams with all 11 conference champions would probably be the fairest
How? Some teams would have to earn their conference championship in a single CCG game. Others would earn it by simply having the best record. Imagine this scenario-
a 7-5 SEC team gets in the SEC CG game f(going 5-3 in the SEC and 2-2 OOC) and plays a 1 loss SEC team from the other division. The 7-5 team wins and advances to the playoffs as a 8-5 team. The 11-1 team loses, and is left out of even a wild card as a 11-2 team because there winds up being several other 1 loss BCS teams (like a Texas/Texas Tech/Oklahama deal from last year).
Meanwhile, a 9-3 USC plays a 1-10 other PAC-10 team in their final game, but has the conference already clinched because they are 1 loss in conference play and all others have 3 or more. They drop the final game, finish 9-4 - but get into the playoff ahead of an 10-2 SEC team which dropped its final game.
Fair?
Any playoff system which took auto-bids would have to require uniformity of how those champions are determined.
Not to mention this OBVIOUS flaw in a such a system - this year, TROY ST would get an auto-bid, but it would be possible LSU could be left out. LSU doesn't deserve to be in any playoff this year because a playoff should be the top 8 - but if it were top 16 and a team like Troy st got in over LSU that would be total BS and definitley not fair.
This post was edited on 12/7/09 at 11:03 am
Posted on 12/7/09 at 11:02 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:Ok, for champion I'm saying "tournament winner." Multi-round format.
if your champion isn't your best team, something is wrong with your system
And there is.
quote:Signed,
12 game sample in normal conditions tells you more about a team than a 3 game sample in outlandish situations
The 2007 New England Patriots
Posted on 12/7/09 at 11:03 am to MisterLuce
quote:Most inclusive then.
Fair?
Posted on 12/7/09 at 11:04 am to Beastwood
quote:
12 game sample in normal conditions tells you more about a team than a 3 game sample in outlandish situations
This is why the playoffs should be small. Ideally 8 I think. But no more. 6 would be better than 8. 4 would leave some out.
6 is attractive because it would give the top 2 teams a bye - so being ranked #1 or #2 at the end of the reg. season would still mean a LOT.
It'd also be interesting to have a variable system. Take 2005 - it was pretty clear that year Texas v USC was the matchup. Take 2007 - we could have used a full 8 team playoff that year.
This post was edited on 12/7/09 at 11:05 am
Posted on 12/7/09 at 11:04 am to MisterLuce
quote:
the problem with that is for some of these teams (Boise St. comes to mind) - they TRY to schedule tougher opposition,
the problem is you believe this bullshite
they don't do this
ever since UGA skull fricked them, i don't think they've crossed the MS river
quote:
A team which goes undefeated because it intentionally schedules patty cakes and also plays in a week conference - deserves no chance.
BSU, Hawaii...pretty much all the shitty WAC teams people pump up
Posted on 12/7/09 at 11:05 am to MisterLuce
The current system is fair? Two-thirds of the system is based on the whims of random judges. It's a joke. They might as well have "fan voting" for 2/3 of the process.
This post was edited on 12/7/09 at 11:08 am
Posted on 12/7/09 at 11:05 am to Beastwood
quote:
for champion I'm saying "tournament winner." Multi-round format
and that is a flawed definition/process
quote:
Signed,
The 2007 New England Patriots
they are an argument AGAINST playoffs, friend
Posted on 12/7/09 at 11:06 am to MisterLuce
quote:
4 would leave some out.
who gives a frick?
esp in CFB where you CONTROL YOUR OWN SCHEDULE
you will be hard-pressed to find many years with 4 teams with legit arguments for an entitlement to play for a title
Posted on 12/7/09 at 11:06 am to Gmorgan4982
quote:
Two-thirds of the system is based on the whims of random judges.
you act like it's random selection, when it's not
Posted on 12/7/09 at 11:07 am to SlowFlowPro
It's fan voting, basically.
Posted on 12/7/09 at 11:08 am to SlowFlowPro
Curious, what do you think about the wild card in pro sports?
Posted on 12/7/09 at 11:09 am to Gmorgan4982
quote:
It's fan voting, basically.
based on record and stats for the most part
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News