|
Replies: 31
| visibility 1
|
Scout Team [161]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 158
Joined: 10/23/16
|
I don't think the best 4 teams should be in the playoffs.
Dec 2, 2016, 4:11 PM
|
|
I know that sounds absurd, but when you base who is "best" by eye tests versus who won the games it becomes questionable. I think a better way to decide who goes is by determining who "deserves" to go. If we are "better" than Pittsburg, but lose the game we should pay a price. If Penn State beats OSU they should get credit and OSU should not get a pass because "they are still a better team". What? Thank goodness Louisville lost some games because there for awhile there was talk that they were "better" than us. I was actually concerned that the playoff committee would put them ahead of us because of the eye test. Look, win your division, your conference and then I will listen to you when you say you are one of the best. Don't tell me you are "better" than your conference champion when you didn't even win your division. I'm not a fan of expanding the number of teams in the playoff, but if you win your conference and don't go, while someone else in your conference does, that ain't right. Just my $0.02.
|
|
|
|
 |
Oculus Spirit [83625]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63724
Joined: 12/31/06
|
I still have my fingers crossed...
Dec 2, 2016, 4:14 PM
|
|
that the four teams to get into the playoffs will be us, Boston College, Syracuse, and South Carolina.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10824]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13439
Joined: 10/13/14
|
Re: I still have my fingers crossed...
Dec 2, 2016, 4:32 PM
|
|
Nice!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [733]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 892
Joined: 8/2/11
|
Re: I don't think the best 4 teams should be in the playoffs.
Dec 2, 2016, 4:34 PM
|
|
OK. So the five conference winners. Then what?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [147]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 294
Joined: 9/12/13
|
Re: OK. So the five conference winners. Then what?.
Dec 2, 2016, 4:36 PM
|
|
Then 3 more from the SEC... I kid... I kid....
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10904]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12988
Joined: 8/4/14
|
This year, they would pick 3 more from the B10!***
Dec 2, 2016, 5:47 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1088]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1353
Joined: 9/20/04
|
Re: I don't think the best 4 teams should be in the playoffs.
Dec 2, 2016, 4:44 PM
|
|
Fairly simple fix:
1. a STANDARD prerequisite that the those in the playoff won their conference. Period.
2. 4 of top 5 ranked from each of the P5 conferences get in.
Alternatively:
Do AWAY with committee, keep playoff and reinstate the BCS-like formulaic approach that lays it all out there so it truly becomes impartial.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [50635]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43019
Joined: 12/3/98
|
hard to accept ohio state getting a bye while everyone else
Dec 2, 2016, 4:46 PM
|
|
is banging heads this weekend
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1088]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1353
Joined: 9/20/04
|
Re: hard to accept ohio state getting a bye while everyone else
Dec 2, 2016, 4:48 PM
|
|
Hence why being a Conference Champ should be a base requirement for entry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [733]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 892
Joined: 8/2/11
|
Re: hard to accept ohio state getting a bye while everyone else
Dec 2, 2016, 5:00 PM
[ in reply to hard to accept ohio state getting a bye while everyone else ] |
|
Maybe I'm naïve with orange colored glasses, but I would say the history of the committee does not lead me to believe that Ohio State is a lock to get in. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't see them as a for sure playing the playoff. Could play but not a lock - so I'm not so sure hat they are getting a "bye."
Remember - each week - they don't look ahead. So at last Tuesdays vote, was OSU the number two team? I'd say their resume of beating 3 teams in the top ten leads me to agree that #2 is accurate....but again that was at that time. Come Sunday, that's is a different argument when the DONT have a conf championship. I'm not so sure they are a lock.
GoTigers!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10904]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12988
Joined: 8/4/14
|
The problem is, we don't really don't know, because in the
Dec 2, 2016, 9:04 PM
|
|
first two playoff years, we didn't have a situation where a team had a better record than their CCG winner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16330]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 25411
Joined: 10/10/06
|
if ohio state were a tcu..
Dec 2, 2016, 4:48 PM
|
|
they would be at risk of being left out..ohio state is in due to branding..same reason mich yes mich still has a slight chance of getting in
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [161]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 158
Joined: 10/23/16
|
I guess I would say no one from a conference gets in until
Dec 2, 2016, 5:05 PM
|
|
the conference champion gets in. So, if the winner of the big 10 doesn't get in, then neither does OSU. If the conference champion is not good enough to get in, then your conference is not good enough to be represented.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18407]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10717
Joined: 10/20/13
|
Re: I don't think the best 4 teams should be in the playoffs.
Dec 2, 2016, 5:12 PM
|
|
Although I like ur argument on conference champions and osu not being a lock it has a slight flaw. Say we get in, Washington wins and gets in then psu r wisky and not osu then would Oklahoma have an argument that they were conference champs... I guess in that scenario u penalize then not having "title" game. Imo
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1088]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1353
Joined: 9/20/04
|
Re: I don't think the best 4 teams should be in the playoffs.
Dec 2, 2016, 5:25 PM
|
|
Exactly, and aren't they a 2 loss team? So # 4 & 5 are a debate b/w PSU & OK St. ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1088]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1353
Joined: 9/20/04
|
Re: I don't think the best 4 teams should be in the playoffs.
Dec 2, 2016, 5:26 PM
|
|
(assuming OK St wins)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [161]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 158
Joined: 10/23/16
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58414]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46323
Joined: 4/23/00
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2351]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 2723
Joined: 9/12/04
|
So in your little scenario Penn State pays no price for loss to Pitt?
Dec 2, 2016, 6:41 PM
|
|
Because the Big Ten ignored and erased and expunged that game. Allowing Penn State to win its division against two teams that would be ahead of them if it was counted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [50635]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43019
Joined: 12/3/98
|
what has penn st losing to pitt got to do with the big10
Dec 2, 2016, 6:58 PM
|
|
standings
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2351]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 2723
Joined: 9/12/04
|
Re: what has penn st losing to pitt got to do with the big10
Dec 2, 2016, 7:14 PM
|
|
That's the whole point! Conference championships are based on a whole different criteria than national championships!!
Why put conference champions (earned in a subset of a team's record) into a national playoff that should be based on a different standard?
THIS is not difficult.
B1G East standings based on all games played
1. Ohio State 11-1
2. Michigan 10-2
3. Penn State 10-2
* Michigan holds head-to-head tiebreaker over Penn State.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [632]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 930
Joined: 9/16/14
|
I do feel
Dec 2, 2016, 7:24 PM
|
|
If you don't play in your conference championship, that should count against you though. So while right now Ohio State is better than Penn State, if Penn state wins conference championship, take a loss away, or add one to Ohio State. Then proceed to examine both teams as if they had same number of win/loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2351]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 2723
Joined: 9/12/04
|
Re: I do feel
Dec 2, 2016, 7:33 PM
|
|
Sorta agree, but we still know 11-1 > 11-2. Especially when we consider that the only reason PSU got the extra game in the first place was the conference ignores OSU win over OK and PSU loss to Pitt.
I just don't like judging teams on a subset of their record. I get why it is done that way for conference, but national ranking should always be based on total record. We don't compare Clemson and OK on conference records. Why compare OSO/PSU that way? We aren't looking for B1G champ. We are ranking teams for national champ.
Imagine if PSU lost to Iowa instead of Pitt. We wouldn't be having this discussion. OSU has a better overall schedule/result than PSU.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [203]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 308
Joined: 9/30/16
|
Wait, are you saying Pitt should be in?***
Dec 2, 2016, 7:01 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [161]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 158
Joined: 10/23/16
|
Re: Wait, are you saying Pitt should be in?***
Dec 3, 2016, 1:00 AM
|
|
Nope. But if they won the acc then I think they should go or no acc team. Bottom line, this year OSU should not go if the Big 10 champ doesn't go. If they both go that's different.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17626]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11052
Joined: 10/13/08
|
I don't either.
Dec 2, 2016, 7:05 PM
|
|
I think Bama should stay home with Ole Miss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [632]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 930
Joined: 9/16/14
|
Sounds nice,
Dec 2, 2016, 7:09 PM
|
|
Conference champs get in, no matter what.
But... Then out of conference games lose most of their importance. That is three games that now if you lose - who cares?
What a big dump that would put on the allure of college football.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2351]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 2723
Joined: 9/12/04
|
Yes absolutely!***
Dec 2, 2016, 7:16 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10904]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12988
Joined: 8/4/14
|
I would like to say all 4 should be conference winners, but
Dec 2, 2016, 9:22 PM
|
|
as long as it is only a four team playoff, a one loss team should probably get in over a two loss team, as long as the resumes are similar. Let's say we are 12-0, but lose a close one to three loss VaTech. Surely you don't think they should get in over us.
To guarantee conference champs a spot, we should go to eight teams.
Message was edited by: longtallsam®
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8095]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10944
Joined: 2/10/11
|
Agree, but with a twist. Conference should choose their rep
Dec 2, 2016, 9:50 PM
|
|
If the Big 10 Conference thinks OSU is more deserving than Penn State, then they can choose OSU. That said, a conference would need to have a pretty good reason to not choose the winner of their conference championship game. They would not need to announce that reason. They simply get to pick. For example, if for some strange reason UF beats Bama tomorrow, the SEC could still choose Bama to go to the playoffs. Or they could choose UF. The conference would determine which team they want to be their representative in the playoffs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [733]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 892
Joined: 8/2/11
|
Re: Agree, but with a twist. Conference should choose their rep
Dec 2, 2016, 10:07 PM
|
|
Nope. Swoffie would choose UNC everytime.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [643]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 827
Joined: 12/7/15
|
Re: Agree, but with a twist. Conference should choose their rep
Dec 2, 2016, 10:24 PM
[ in reply to Agree, but with a twist. Conference should choose their rep ] |
|
I was going to say exact same thing. Let committee choose which 4 conferences will be represented, and each conference should have a predetermined method to choose their rep (conference champ, highest ranked, or some variation). I don't think any conference should have more than one team in. Remember 2006-2007 when a lot of people thought there should be an Ohio state vs Michigan rematch for the national championship game assuming they were the best two teams? Then Ohio state got crushed by Florida and USC pounded Michigan. Shows that nobody really knows which conference is best and none should get two teams in. Just think if Washington and Clemson both lose this weekend (not gonna happen, but just theoretically), would B1G get three teams in? That would be just ridiculous, but it's possible with current rankings in the current system.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 31
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
