- 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: ND AD Swarbrick: "There’s Still One Chapter To Come..." (Re: Conf. Realignment).
Posted on 4/22/12 at 5:07 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 4/22/12 at 5:07 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
where was UGA in 2007?
4th after LSU lost with LSU at 7, then the next week they vaulted LSU to 2 despite dropping georgia 1 spot after routing georgia tech
This post was edited on 4/22/12 at 5:08 pm
1
Posted on 4/22/12 at 5:09 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
a. this isn't "the NCAA"
b. what "plus one" do you mean? there are at least 3 systems with a label of "plus one"
the presidents and commissioners then
and i was not speaking explicitly about one time, i just said i never thought i'd see the day they did that
Posted on 4/22/12 at 5:11 pm to Zamoro10
quote:
In the history of the BCS - has anyone ever thought any team above #6 was getting jobbed? In fact the lowest ranked team I can think of that people thought could win it all was #5 USC in 2008.
Alabama, Texas, Cincy, TCU, and Boise all had 0 losses in 2009 with Florida being ranked 5th above Boise with 1 loss. I could see all six of those teams being deserving. 7/8 weren't very good with Oregon and Ohio State being 2 loss teams. Cincy was obviously ranked too high but they were undefeated.
Posted on 4/22/12 at 5:13 pm to arwicklu
in 2007 the final top 8 was
1) tOSU
2) LSU
3) VT
4) OU
5) UGA
6) Mizzou
7) USC
8) Kansas
would have been pretty awesome and if any year it'd be interesting that'd be one of 'em. Kansas and Mizzou would have been obliterated though so i guess the top 6 thing stands here too
1) tOSU
2) LSU
3) VT
4) OU
5) UGA
6) Mizzou
7) USC
8) Kansas
would have been pretty awesome and if any year it'd be interesting that'd be one of 'em. Kansas and Mizzou would have been obliterated though so i guess the top 6 thing stands here too
Posted on 4/22/12 at 5:15 pm to arwicklu
quote:
Alabama, Texas, Cincy, TCU, and Boise all had 0 losses in 2009
but only 2 of those teams matter, really
quote:
I could see all six of those teams being deserving
making a system to reward teams like TCU and BSU is a bad system, imho
Posted on 4/22/12 at 5:16 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
SOUNDS like an 8-team playoff with 6 BCS conferences getting in their champ with 2 AL spots that would force ND's hand, imho
8 teams with 2 at large makes a lot of sense. The 6 power conferences get their money so they'll be happy. The 2 best at large teams get in which will often be two top 5 teams. Last year it would have been Bama and Stanford with the at large spots (ranked 2 and 4). It gives teams like Boise and TCU a shot as well.
Posted on 4/22/12 at 5:24 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Alabama, Texas, Cincy, TCU, and Boise all had 0 losses in 2009 but only 2 of those teams matter, really
Only because of the name. I think TCU and Boise were very good that year. Boise beat conference champion Oregon that year and beat TCU to end the season.
quote:
making a system to reward teams like TCU and BSU is a bad system, imho
I do agree that their schedule is often bad but when they beat a couple good teams during the season it is hard to say they shouldn't have a shot. Boise beat the SEC East champ last year. They beat Oregon 2 years in a row. They beat VT. This team has played and beaten good teams.
In my opinion if you say there has been years like 2007 with at least 5 deserving teams, then the playoff should be eight. If you think there has never been more than 4, then that should be the playoff.
The problem is that it is hard to take the top 4 in the BCS because all of the conferences want in on the playoff. Without consolidation I don't see how you're going to do less than 6 teams. I don't like awarding a bye week based on voting so I think 8 teams makes sense.
Posted on 4/22/12 at 5:24 pm to rocket31
Just seems in most every year 8 teams sort of erases what you spent a season proving...so last year...LSU plows through most everyone and then has to go play Kansas St. and Bama has to play Boise State...Okie State plays Arkansas (whose already proven they don't belong to compete for the title after losing to LSU/Bama) and Stanford and Oregon play each other again after Oregon obliterated them.
Sounds great.
Sounds great.
Posted on 4/22/12 at 5:25 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
making a system to reward teams like TCU and BSU is a bad system, imho
The system isn't designed to reward them. It is designed to allow them to play for a national title when they're a legit top 2 in the at large pool. These teams have been in that situation.
Posted on 4/22/12 at 5:27 pm to arwicklu
quote:
It is designed to allow them to play for a national title when they're a legit top 2 in the at large pool. These teams have been in that situation.
Which would be rewarding them. If there are BCS Conference schools that are undefeated or 1-loss, they should get the nod over a non-BCS Conference school.
Posted on 4/22/12 at 5:27 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
SOUNDS like an 8-team playoff with 6 BCS conferences getting in their champ with 2 AL spots
Or 6 with 1 and 2 getting a bye.
That's 5 total games for a national title .... Keeping the bowls rotating with one hosting the national title as well.
Posted on 4/22/12 at 5:29 pm to GeorgeTheGreek
that's my favorite idea
Posted on 4/22/12 at 5:36 pm to Zamoro10
quote:
Just seems in most every year 8 teams sort of erases what you spent a season proving...so last year...LSU plows through most everyone and then has to go play Kansas St. and Bama has to play Boise State...Okie State plays Arkansas (whose already proven they don't belong to compete for the title after losing to LSU/Bama) and Stanford and Oregon play each other again after Oregon obliterated them. Sounds great.
I'll never understand why 8 teams would invalidate the entire regular season. Since you're dealing with 120 teams across a great number of conferences and a limited number of out of conference games, I think it seems reasonable. How can the SEC truly say it is better than the Big 10 based on their on field performance during the regular season. How can you say that Alabama, Stanford, or OSU was more deserving of a spot in New Orleans.
I think having an 8 team playoff gives the regular season more power by not handing the entire decision of 1 vs 2 to voters and computers. Six of the eight spots would be decided by the conference champs. You earn that on the field in the regular season. 2 at large bids would be voters and computers but you have much less chance of teams getting screwed. I think it is much more fair.
Posted on 4/22/12 at 5:38 pm to GeorgeTheGreek
quote:
Or 6 with 1 and 2 getting a bye.
That's 5 total games for a national title .... Keeping the bowls rotating with one hosting the national title as well.
Makes too much sense.
The NCAA could frick up a wet dream. Can't see it going that smoothly.
Posted on 4/22/12 at 5:42 pm to Srbtiger06
quote:
Which would be rewarding them. If there are BCS Conference schools that are undefeated or 1-loss, they should get the nod over a non-BCS Conference school.
Why? Just being in a BCS conference doesn't mean the conference is good. The Big East has been garbage. Many of the BCS conferences haven't been that great. Most of the power conferences only really have two good teams on a yearly basis.
Plus you're rewarding them for being in the top 2 at large. You are rewarding them based on performance. If you don't want them rewarded, then it is up to the voters to keep them out. We shouldn't keep them out if the voters have them in the top 2 at large. If that is the case, then you're punishing them despite good performance.
I do agree that Boise's schedule isn't top 2 at large many years. They've had some pretty strong wins though. I think it has to be a year by year thing based on who they play and not a decision that they should never play for anything.
Obviously Boise and TCU have moved into the BCS so it isn't a big deal for those 2 teams now.
Posted on 4/22/12 at 5:43 pm to GeorgeTheGreek
quote:
Or 6 with 1 and 2 getting a bye.
I really don't think it is fair to award a bye week based on voting. I think every team should have to win 3 games to win the national title if you go to 6 teams or more.
Posted on 4/22/12 at 5:44 pm to BluegrassBelle
quote:
Makes too much sense. The NCAA could frick up a wet dream. Can't see it going that smoothly.
To me just taking the top 4 or top 8 from the BCS makes the most sense. But realizing that the conferences will want their chunk, a 6 +2 makes a lot of sense in my opinion.
Posted on 4/22/12 at 6:27 pm to Damn Good Dawg
quote:
4th after LSU lost with LSU at 7, then the next week they vaulted LSU to 2 despite dropping georgia 1 spot after routing georgia tech
Probably because of the system in place. With the chaos that last weekend it was wide open and they had to figure out the top two.
So they decided the Big Least isn't that good anyway, UGA & Kansas didn't win their division, VT got curbstomped head to head, etc.
If the top 4 or top 6 or top 8 made a playoff UGA might have stayed ahead of LSU.
Posted on 4/22/12 at 6:44 pm to Bestbank Tiger
bout time someone found that little nugget, i am almost disappointed you gave such a good comeback 
but i agreeish
but i agreeish
Posted on 4/22/12 at 6:57 pm to BluegrassBelle
quote:
The NCAA could frick up a wet dream
the NCAA has little say in this decision
this decision will be made by the people who matter: heads of big schools/conferences
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News