»
Topic: i do think things like this will be what leads to expansion
Replies: 8   Last Post: Jan 2, 2020 8:41 PM by: SavageTiger3901
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.


[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 8  

i do think things like this will be what leads to expansion

[2]
Posted: Jan 2, 2020 7:15 PM
 

https://twitter.com/ESPNPR/status/1212852407383842816


blowouts aside...had this been day two with the other four teams in the playoffs in a prime time slot..the number would have been way bigger..tons of money being left on the table...the product will be dookie due to the lopsided match ups..but to the big brand sponsors and ncaa money >>>>>>>>>>>> quality


Re: i do think things like this will be what leads to expansion


Posted: Jan 2, 2020 7:17 PM
 

Yep. Its a business and they need the nation watching.

2020 white level member

indeed and that 14 mil was with

[1]
Posted: Jan 2, 2020 7:19 PM
 

minn vs auburn on espn at the same time in a competitive game as well..if it were a playoff game it would have been 8 pm only show in town


Re: i do think things like this will be what leads to expansion


Posted: Jan 2, 2020 7:28 PM
 

Then again, who would you put in? There wasn't even a decent 4th place team this year.


Just add 4 more SEC teams and the powers that be will be thrilled.


Posted: Jan 2, 2020 7:36 PM
 

The SEC or ESPN could even provide the list of teams to the Committee, no extra charge.

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Photobucket is holding my sig pic hostage. Screw them.


yep its all about money

[1]
Posted: Jan 2, 2020 7:41 PM
 

heck with 8 teams this year mich , bama and possibly even nd would have snuck in along with oregon ..and they would seed based on marquee match ups..think 1 lsu vs 8 dame would be a massive blow out but would draw none the less


well if I were an Oregon fan, I'd be wanting another chance.


Posted: Jan 2, 2020 7:54 PM
 

It's too difficult to measure relative strength of teams unless they play it out. Oklahoma is actually a good example of why playoffs need to expand. They dont appear to have been ranked correctly. The only reason they got in was because of only having 1 loss. But truth be known, in watching Oregon and Wisconsin play, either of those (2 loss) teams could make a case to have been in the top 4 ahead of Oklahoma. Same with Notre Dame last year - I'm sure there are several schools who feel they should have the chance before them, and certainly after winning their major bowl game.

Again, 4 teams rely entirely too much on the mythical eye test or having one less loss than another.

Looking at 1-AA over time, several 2 and 3 loss teams have claimed titles over the years. I think even a 4 loss team has won it before. Again, we're not going to win every game for the rest of time, and there will be years where we are on the outside looking in with 2 losses, or perhaps even 1.

Look at the Pitt game a few years back. Good for us most of the top teams lost that weekend, or we may not have had a shot at the national title.

In all of sports, its rarely the team with the best record who wins the championship.

College football playoffs will expand as soon as the current contractual term is over. Just turn the top 6 or 8 bowl games into defacto playoff games, meanwhile through seeding the top 4 can retain favored seeding or an extra week, etc.


Re: well if I were an Oregon fan, I'd be wanting another chance.


Posted: Jan 2, 2020 8:28 PM
 

"It's too difficult to measure relative strength of teams unless they play it out. "

Then you go and make such comparisons. Unless Oregon or Wisconsin played Oklahoma, people are just trying to gauge relative strength. You just did it too, saying that those teams should have been in before Oklahoma.

As it stands, we pretty much already have 10 teams in the first round of the playoffs--they're called the conference championships (CFP rankings in parens)

SEC: (1)LSU vs (5)Georgia
B1G: (2)Ohio State vs (8)Wisconsin
Big12: (4)Oklahoma vs (7)Baylor
ACC: (3)Clemson vs Virginia
PAC12: (6)Oregon vs Utah

Notice that all 8 of the final CFP Top 25 of these teams played in their conference championship (only UVA and Utah were not in the final top 8). Sure, that's not exactly how a real 8-team playoff would get seeded, but do we really need more games between these teams?

2020 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

no sir, I didnt use the same mindset as eye test or one less loss.


Posted: Jan 2, 2020 8:41 PM
 

You are correct tho in that conference champ games will likely be eliminated or rolled in once the playoffs expand. But make no mistake, they will expand for all the reasons I noted.

And again, we were darn lucky everyone lost the weekend we lost to Pitt, otherwise we likely dont even get a shot at winning the national title, which we did. Again, it's this kind of perspective that is needed. We are not going to win them all every year, and I guarantee the Clemson anti-expansion people will be singing a much different tune if we narrowly miss the playoffs yet win a major bowl against another top opponent. It's easy to say the top 4 gets it right every year, but that's subjective and cant be objectively proven...unless it plays out with a higher sample size.

And again, it every other sport at every level, it's quite often where the teams without the best record win the championship.

Heck, if I'm a UGA fan today, I'd be barking for a shot to advance...with or without the previous loss to LSU. Another "quite often" thing you see in the sports world are the initial losing team winning a rematch.

There are tons of logical reasons the playoffs will expand.


Replies: 8  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: Season Tickets
FOR SALE: 4 in Sec UO row K and a Lot 5 parking pass number 5579 asking 8500 for the package, email if intere...

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
1161 people have read this post