re: I like Delany's proposal Re: Conference Champions

quote:

---

Just like any of these convulted "solutions", you like it until one year it is exposed as stupid when one team will be lefted out in favor of an obviously inferior team, in which case you hate it.

---

This right here. People want playoffs, but they don't realize that playoffs seldom give us a true champion. If your goal of a postseason is a true champion, then the BCS has accomplished that more than any postseason in any level of any sport in this country.

Even though the most watched playoffs in the nation those of the NFL are severely flawed - see teams with better records getting passed over for division winners and teams with losing records. When was the last time that the top teams in each conference faced each other in the Super Bowl? What about teams that were in the top 2?


MLB is heading in the right direction, but you know it's a pain in the arse for teams that have zero shot to make the playoffs to give a damn in those last 30-40 games. You play a 162 games and only 3 teams in each league are guaranteed more than one playoff game? That's fricked up. Set it up similar to the NFL playoffs. Rewards those who had the best overall season.

The NBA lets over half their damn teams in and some of them have losing records as well.

March Madness is by far the worst offender. I could write 2-3 full pages about how terrible March Madness really is, but I'll keep it short: They give away autobids to champions of shitty conferences, they pass over top 40-50 teams to do the first point, they have a corrupt selection committee assign seeds, match-ups and game locations, and they very seldom get a match-up between two top 5 teams. They've lucked into a couple of such match-ups with UK-KU this year and KU-Memphis 4 (?) years ago, but I and I know a lot of other people still don't consider the Duke-Butler and UConn-Butler games to be real NCGs. I have a solution for this problem, if anyone is interested, I'll post it one day.

All details aside, I will never be able to wrap my head around a team finishing second or third in their own little conference being proclaimed the nation's best team.

Any system where a team that finishes #2 or #3 in their own little conference is then eligible to finish #1 in the country is flawed IMO.

I realize there is definitely a flip-side to that argument, and many disagree with that with legitimate reasoning, but nonetheless I will always feel that way. It is technically impossible IMO to be the nation's best team when you weren't even the best team in your own conference.

That said, I like Delany's compromise...it still allows teams to make it without winning their conference, but it's a step in the right direction in terms of giving preferential treatment to conference champions. I hope everyone is able to compromise on this despite everyone's differing opinions on the conference champion debate....If everyone will compromise, it won't be perfect but at least both sides can be somewhat satisfied rather than one side of the argument being totally shunned and pissed at the system.