|
Replies: 7
| visibility 1
|
Starter [381]
TigerPulse: 77%
Posts: 376
Joined: 9/10/11
|
One thing I agreed with that Steve Spurrier
Dec 6, 2016, 12:15 AM
|
|
Said years ago was, in these bigger conferences with unbalanced scheduling, division champs should be decided by division record only. Think about this year in the Big 10. Penn St beats OSU, Michigan beats Penn, OSU beats Michigan. 3 way tie. With then all beating each other head to head for out the window and you would crown the highest ranked team which would have been OSU. They more than likely go on to beat Wisconsin and nobody is having the discussion about whether or not they belong. I'm sure this will never happen obviously because it makes too much sense. Let's say in the ACC, you have a Miami team that plays FSU every year. Say they play FSU and Clemson one year and lose both games. Then go on to beat a Virginia tech team who plays Boston college and, say Syracuse. Miami finishes with 2 losses and tech with 1. Does that mean tech is better than Miami. No. These conferences have gotten to big to keep doing things the old way. Maybe it's time to rethink how to do things. They've almost become to separate conferences whos champs meet at the end so maybe it would make more sense to treat them as such. Just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
 |
Orange Blooded [3723]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3526
Joined: 11/30/14
|
Re: One thing I agreed with that Steve Spurrier
Dec 6, 2016, 12:20 AM
|
|
> Said years ago was, in these bigger conferences with
> unbalanced scheduling, division champs should be
> decided by division record only. Think about this
> year in the Big 10. Penn St beats OSU, Michigan beats
> Penn, OSU beats Michigan. 3 way tie. With then all
> beating each other head to head for out the window
> and you would crown the highest ranked team which
> would have been OSU. They more than likely go on to
> beat Wisconsin and nobody is having the discussion
> about whether or not they belong. I'm sure this will
> never happen obviously because it makes too much
> sense. Let's say in the ACC, you have a Miami team
> that plays FSU every year. Say they play FSU and
> Clemson one year and lose both games. Then go on to
> beat a Virginia tech team who plays Boston college
> and, say Syracuse. Miami finishes with 2 losses and
> tech with 1. Does that mean tech is better than
> Miami. No. These conferences have gotten to big to
> keep doing things the old way. Maybe it's time to
> rethink how to do things. They've almost become to
> separate conferences whos champs meet at the end so
> maybe it would make more sense to treat them as such.
> Just my opinion.
I suppose you meant conference champs should be decided by division record only.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [381]
TigerPulse: 77%
Posts: 376
Joined: 9/10/11
|
Division champs should be decided
Dec 6, 2016, 12:22 AM
|
|
By division record. Then they would play winner from other side for conference championship
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2427]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 390
Joined: 11/25/07
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4854]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9113
Joined: 1/15/08
|
Re: One thing I agreed with that Steve Spurrier
Dec 6, 2016, 7:03 AM
[ in reply to Re: One thing I agreed with that Steve Spurrier ] |
|
Nope, because Penn St's extra loss came from their OOC loss to Pitt. What does that settle about the conference? That just leaves room for weak OOC scheduling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [305]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 379
Joined: 8/16/01
|
Re: One thing I agreed with that Steve Spurrier
Dec 6, 2016, 8:10 AM
|
|
I think the point the OP was trying to make was that Michigan's 2nd loss came from the other division of the Big 10. If only depended on you division record, you would have had a three way tie. Each of the three East teams were 5-1 in the division.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4854]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9113
Joined: 1/15/08
|
Re: One thing I agreed with that Steve Spurrier
Dec 6, 2016, 8:21 AM
|
|
Lol, I was missed the first and most important part, must have still been asleep.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1676]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2112
Joined: 8/27/11
|
Re: One thing I agreed with that Steve Spurrier
Dec 6, 2016, 6:43 AM
|
|
There's nothing more powerful than a changed mind. U sir, have changed my mind,very good points.+1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 7
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
