- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- 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: You want expansion? You HAD expansion
Posted on 1/2/22 at 1:32 pm to TX Tiger
Posted on 1/2/22 at 1:32 pm to TX Tiger
quote:
Be better. Cincinnati won all its games, too. Anyone who's watched more than 1 college football game knew they had no business on the same field with Alabama...or Georgia for that matter.
So you want more eye tests?
1
Posted on 1/2/22 at 1:34 pm to TX Tiger
quote:
Anyone with a functioning brain could have seen that coming. And that isn't even one of the better Alabama teams over the last decade
This is why you need playoffs. Not some joyless dick saying it’s obvious who will win. I’m surprised that with all of your amazing perception you’re even here. I’m certain you’ve cashed in millions and millions on betting.
There are many examples of the underdog winning games, single games. They are human beings. The ball bounces funny etc
This post was edited on 1/2/22 at 1:35 pm
Posted on 1/2/22 at 1:35 pm to TX Tiger
quote:
Anyone with a functioning brain knew Alabama was better than Cincinnati. Putting them on the same field was unnecessary except to appease the casual fan who obviously paid no attention to the regular season. Because if they had, they would already know what a farce it was.
So who was the better team in 2002 when tOSU upset Miami?
Just because you watched them play different schedules and teams all year doesn’t mean you know with 100% certainty what will happen
Posted on 1/2/22 at 1:38 pm to TX Tiger
quote:
BYU beat No. 3, was the only undefeated team and won its bowl game.
So, yes, they did as much or more to deserve the national title as anyone.
But with a playoff they likely dont win the Natty right? You’re killing your own argument.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 1:40 pm to SammyTiger
quote:They had 13 opportunities to play for a championship.
2004 Auburn went undefeated and didn’t get to play for a championship.
quote:It was the best playoff in any sport. It was a 13-week playoff in which 140 teams each had at least 12 opportunities to be considered championship quality.
How was that a playoff
You act like Auburn was completely ignored that season. They finished No. 2 in the final rankings. There were 3 unbeaten teams that season. They finished ahead of one (Utah) and behind another (USC).
Footnote: Because of NCAA sanctions placed on USC for that season, Auburn should be retroactively crowned national champions. Print the T-shirts!
Posted on 1/2/22 at 1:50 pm to TX Tiger
quote:
They had 13 opportunities to play for a championship.
And they won EVERY ONE, yet had no chance to even compete for a title.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 1:51 pm to Oilfieldbiology
quote:A full 13 games played on the field would far better determine a champion for that entire season than one single game. One game in which one team's Heisman Trophy finalist might be injured, giving the other team a far greater advantage, and thus flushing down the toilet a full 12-game regular season.
Be better. Cincinnati won all its games, too. Anyone who's watched more than 1 college football game knew they had no business on the same field with Alabama...or Georgia for that matter.
So you want more eye tests?
You talk about eye test, how do you think the 4 teams that make the playoffs are determined?
Posted on 1/2/22 at 1:54 pm to TX Tiger
quote:
A full 13 games played on the field would far better determine a champion for that entire season than one single game.
So should a team that went undefeated in the PAC-12 be given the title as opposed to having to play a 1 loss SEC team in a playoff format?
Posted on 1/2/22 at 1:54 pm to kingbob
quote:
We saw Notre Dame beat Georgia a couple seasons ago
I still wanna know what year this was.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 1:57 pm to Jaydeaux
quote:So you want a tournament champion. That's how other sports are determined.
There are many examples of the underdog winning games, single games. They are human beings. The ball bounces funny etc
What separated college football was that it crowned a champion for the entire season. That's why every game mattered.
I think that's a far far greater way to determine a champion for a season than to have one team get lucky and win a tournament. It makes that full season they just took months and months to play, nearly irrelevant.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 2:00 pm to TX Tiger
It’s not a “playoff” if you win every game and still don’t get a shot at the title. That’s just an exercise in futility. That’s a rigged system, a mythical national title.
The NFL plays 16 regular season games to determine 14 playoff spots. There’s no “eye-test” to determine who gets those spots. 8 spots go to division champs, and the next 6 spots go to at-large teams based on their records. Math determines who is in and who is out.
College football has an issue of a lack of consistency, too many teams for adequate math-based comparisons, etc to determine 4 playoff spots.
There are 10 conferences plus a handful of teams who are not in conferences. The conferences are of different sizes and vary wildly in strength. This makes individual wins and losses a difficult metric by which to evaluate teams because not all wins are created equal and teams from different conferences rarely have many common opponents.
I want a system that smooths out some of these differences, standardizes numbers of games, and uses math, not votes or subjective eye-tests, to determine who should be in the post-season. Conference Championships with a limited (if any) number of at-large teams seems like the only realistic way to do this with or without a massive reduction in the number of teams competing for said championship.
As said previously, I would prefer no more than 8 teams, with conference championships making up no fewer than 6 of the slots. Every team would then start the season with a real path to a championship. They would be able to win the games in front of them to get a playoff spot, and then get a chance to take down the kinds of teams that already make the “invitational” under the current regime.
The NFL plays 16 regular season games to determine 14 playoff spots. There’s no “eye-test” to determine who gets those spots. 8 spots go to division champs, and the next 6 spots go to at-large teams based on their records. Math determines who is in and who is out.
College football has an issue of a lack of consistency, too many teams for adequate math-based comparisons, etc to determine 4 playoff spots.
There are 10 conferences plus a handful of teams who are not in conferences. The conferences are of different sizes and vary wildly in strength. This makes individual wins and losses a difficult metric by which to evaluate teams because not all wins are created equal and teams from different conferences rarely have many common opponents.
I want a system that smooths out some of these differences, standardizes numbers of games, and uses math, not votes or subjective eye-tests, to determine who should be in the post-season. Conference Championships with a limited (if any) number of at-large teams seems like the only realistic way to do this with or without a massive reduction in the number of teams competing for said championship.
As said previously, I would prefer no more than 8 teams, with conference championships making up no fewer than 6 of the slots. Every team would then start the season with a real path to a championship. They would be able to win the games in front of them to get a playoff spot, and then get a chance to take down the kinds of teams that already make the “invitational” under the current regime.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 2:03 pm to Jaydeaux
quote:They won the 13-game playoff. I'm sure if they continued to play year round they would eventually lose to someone. Every team would do the same. Not sure what your point is.
BYU beat No. 3, was the only undefeated team and won its bowl game.
So, yes, they did as much or more to deserve the national title as anyone.
But with a playoff they likely dont win the Natty right?
Posted on 1/2/22 at 2:08 pm to Oilfieldbiology
quote:They competed 13 times for a title. Every game mattered....GREATLY.
They had 13 opportunities to play for a championship.
And they won EVERY ONE, yet had no chance to even compete for a title.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 2:12 pm to Oilfieldbiology
quote:Depends on the situation. How good was the PAC-12. Who did they beat in non-conference. How competitive was the SEC. Who was the 1-loss to.
A full 13 games played on the field would far better determine a champion for that entire season than one single game.
So should a team that went undefeated in the PAC-12 be given the title as opposed to having to play a 1 loss SEC team in a playoff format?
See a lot of you folks don't want to have to think. You want to be told what to think. It's an overall problem with our society. It's why we have 24/7 "news" channels; to tell you folks what to think so that you don't have to be bothered thinking for yourself.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 2:13 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:It happened in his Fantasy League.
We saw Notre Dame beat Georgia a couple seasons ago
I still wanna know what year this was.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 2:15 pm to TX Tiger
No, NONE of the games mattered. This guy can’t be serious.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 2:17 pm to TX Tiger
They won every game andnit did not matter in the end.
You can’t say they all mattered when they were sitting at home while the championship was played for.
You can’t say they all mattered when they were sitting at home while the championship was played for.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 2:25 pm to TX Tiger
quote:
So you want a tournament champion. That's how other sports are determined.
Not sure why you're using the term
tournament but every other level of FB has determined their champion through a playoff (DIII,DII,FCS,HS,NFL) Do all these folks have it wrong?
BTW,Do you not remember the corruption,payoffs and back room deals with the old bowl system?
It was one of the most corrupt and
dishonest forms of post season play in all of organized sports.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 2:26 pm to TX Tiger
You’re right people don’t want to THINK about who is they best. They would rather the teams play and KNOW who is the best.
Your shutting on 24/7 news while advocating for a system where the same people and a computer pick 2 teams they think are best.
Your shutting on 24/7 news while advocating for a system where the same people and a computer pick 2 teams they think are best.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 2:31 pm to TX Tiger
quote:
They won the 13-game playoff. I'm sure if they continued to play year round they would eventually lose to someone. Every team would do the same. Not sure what your point is
You cannot possibly be this obtuse.
You know exactly what his point is.
Are you really telling me a undefeated WAC team is the exact same thing as a undefeated BIG or SEC team?
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News