My Thoughts on the Playoff Field
- Thread starter PurpleJ
- Start date
PostGameOrangeSlices
Well-known poster
Insightful.
PostGameOrangeSlices
Well-known poster
Only if I give you another 500 or so
Would you two get a room already?
PostGameOrangeSlices
Well-known poster
Things are getting HEATED in chat
Where's the insightful button?
I have no problem with the teams chosen. I'm looking forward to the playoff.
Tequilla
Active poster
I can't really complain too much about TCU being left out ... had it been at the expense of Baylor. I think that the Big 10 >>> Big 12, but whatever on that.
If there's anything that I'm a little upset about it is the inconsistency of the comments and rankings each week.
If the Conference Championship game was so important, it should have been communicated as such before the season. Instead, most of the communication was about winning your conference. Had the Big12 made a request to have a Conference Title Game between it's top 2 teams, I would expect that it would have been shot down.
I had this opinion when the PAC had 10 teams and still have the opinion with the Big 12 that a full round robin schedule can be as difficult, if not more difficult, road as conferences with 12 or 14 teams because of who you can miss in that schedule. Take USC this year in how they missed both Oregon and UW. With the exception of the conference title game, Ohio State would have missed Wisconsin, Iowa, and Nebraska. And moreover, the divisional races can be skewed very easily by who you play or don't play from another division.
There's no question that Iowa State and Kansas are bad teams in the Big 12. Tech had a bit of a down year by their standards this year but they are always a .500 caliber program. Everybody else in the conference (TCU, Baylor, Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Kansas St, and West Virginia) tend to have above average or better programs. When you have that kind of situation, you have 21 games that are against each other in that combination. Teams are going to lose games. So regardless of how good/bad you think those teams are, looking at the records means that they are going to beat up on each other a bit. I think it's ridiculous to use the logic in some leagues (like the SEC) that teams beating up on each other is a sign of how good the conference is whereas in other conference (how it was in the PAC and now apparently in the Big 12) that doing so means that everybody is average. That's like eating both pie and cake.
If there's anything that I'm a little upset about it is the inconsistency of the comments and rankings each week.
If the Conference Championship game was so important, it should have been communicated as such before the season. Instead, most of the communication was about winning your conference. Had the Big12 made a request to have a Conference Title Game between it's top 2 teams, I would expect that it would have been shot down.
I had this opinion when the PAC had 10 teams and still have the opinion with the Big 12 that a full round robin schedule can be as difficult, if not more difficult, road as conferences with 12 or 14 teams because of who you can miss in that schedule. Take USC this year in how they missed both Oregon and UW. With the exception of the conference title game, Ohio State would have missed Wisconsin, Iowa, and Nebraska. And moreover, the divisional races can be skewed very easily by who you play or don't play from another division.
There's no question that Iowa State and Kansas are bad teams in the Big 12. Tech had a bit of a down year by their standards this year but they are always a .500 caliber program. Everybody else in the conference (TCU, Baylor, Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Kansas St, and West Virginia) tend to have above average or better programs. When you have that kind of situation, you have 21 games that are against each other in that combination. Teams are going to lose games. So regardless of how good/bad you think those teams are, looking at the records means that they are going to beat up on each other a bit. I think it's ridiculous to use the logic in some leagues (like the SEC) that teams beating up on each other is a sign of how good the conference is whereas in other conference (how it was in the PAC and now apparently in the Big 12) that doing so means that everybody is average. That's like eating both pie and cake.
All the Power 5 conferences need to play the same amount of regular season conference games. SEC needs to play 9, it's bullshit they don't, and the playing field won't be even until they do.
I never have been a fan of conference championship games, i liked the old pac-10 round robin and don't think the big-12 necessarily needs a championship game to make the playoff. They need quality OOC scheduling to legitimize their standing when the traditional powerhouses are having a down year.
You don't need to schedule a Bama or anything, but put a fucking ASU at least on your schedule and prop yourself up because you don't have the crutch of guaranteed quality wins come conference season w/o the 'championship' game
I never have been a fan of conference championship games, i liked the old pac-10 round robin and don't think the big-12 necessarily needs a championship game to make the playoff. They need quality OOC scheduling to legitimize their standing when the traditional powerhouses are having a down year.
You don't need to schedule a Bama or anything, but put a fucking ASU at least on your schedule and prop yourself up because you don't have the crutch of guaranteed quality wins come conference season w/o the 'championship' game
creepycoug
Well-known poster
apparently they do. and, based on what their commissioner said to Herbstreit in an interview yesterday, they'll likely have one in the very near future (as in next season).
cook it.
What sense does it make to have a conference championship game when you play a complete round robin schedule? Baylor should have been crowned champ based on the head to head.
What happens next year when 1 team in the big goes undefeated then loses in the champ game to a team that lost only 1 game? The big12 won't get the lsu-alabama sec treatment in that scenario, that's for sure.
BayDawg
New Fish
The Big 12 fucked themselves in this deal IMHO. It is obvious they thought there was a good chance things could go there way and possibly get two in the playoff, so they massaged it and named co-champions. And got no one.
Co champions? By every metric they could have used, Baylor was the champion of the Big 12. Personally I think TCU was probably the better team, but the there was a two way tie at the top of a true round robin. HTH decides that. Name your champion and give them a little more meat on their bone with the committee. Dont compromise them and give the committee an easy out. And after OSU looked like they did Saturday night, they took it.
Co champions? By every metric they could have used, Baylor was the champion of the Big 12. Personally I think TCU was probably the better team, but the there was a two way tie at the top of a true round robin. HTH decides that. Name your champion and give them a little more meat on their bone with the committee. Dont compromise them and give the committee an easy out. And after OSU looked like they did Saturday night, they took it.
Tequilla
Active poster
Particularly true when your co-champions aren't historical bluebloods.
I don't think the Big 12 will expand - there's nobody out there that they can add that will satisfy Texas (and that's a huge issue).
It will be interesting to see how the Big 12 operates going forward. Do they ask for the Conference Title Game? If so, do they do it based on geography or just have the Top 2 teams play an extra game? If that is the way it goes, take a situation like this year and you'll have Baylor plenty pissed off about a H2H win. But at the same time if you break it up into 5 team divisions that pretty much waters everything down and could result in a situation where you have 2 of your strong teams in the same division.
Canard
New Fish
The BXII should simply instead try not going full retard next year.
Big12 recovery plan for 2015:
1) take your double slight like men. Patterson has been great, Briles and the commish are whining like bitches.
2) tell the Baylor AD to adopt non-vaginal scheduling practices. Plenty of p5 intersectionals get scheduled in a hurry if the parties involved want to buy off some cupcakes to do it.
3) have a fucking tie breaker in place and stick to it hell or high water.
4) promote the one true champion you have allegedly produced and ignore the runner up unless you've been touted all season as the new SEC west or some shit.
The BXII didn't need an extra game. They needed to smear five gallons of lipstick on Baylor's ugly mug and back that pig at the dance. They gambled on two ugly girls making it big and lost bigger. I guess Texans' belt buckles really are tombstones for their dicks when they go on like whiny bitches when their grifting got exposed.
Baylor was never going to make the playoff if it could be helped because their case sucks due to SMU, nw State and buffalo.
The narrative we hear too much is the BXII "was screwed." The one that needs more exposure is how the BXII tried to fuck up the inaugural CFP before it had a chance to succeed by pimping two unworthy teams from a "one champion" league.