Soft, shivering SEC teams in sleeves getting exposed by the TUFF B1G in the cold
- Thread starter PostGameOrangeSlices
- Start date
EsophagealFeces
Well-known poster
There was no reason other than pure greed to go higher than 8
priapism
Active poster
The top 5 teams win the championships in most every various sport playoffs, I think around 80% of the time. That said, I want a 16 team playoffs. I don't think the top 4 teams should have a bye week. + UW can sneak into the playoffs much more often as the 4-6th seed from the B1G.
Sounds like a participation trophy system.
In a 16 team playoff, the top 4 teams will get an easy blowout win at home 99% of the time. It's pointless to have teams outside the top-10 in the playoffs. It's not basketball.
In a 16 team playoff, the top 4 teams will get an easy blowout win at home 99% of the time. It's pointless to have teams outside the top-10 in the playoffs. It's not basketball.
I really don't need to see the pointless blowouts. I thought I was going to like it, but can see how wrong I was. Like Yella said, a bigger playoff bracket works when there's parity.
EwaDawg
New Fish
Don't watch them.
They are far from pointless.
FCS has one fewer team than FBS and double the playoff participants. (time to rename the divisions, but still. . . . )
It will take some time for a lower 1/3 seed to pull an upset. Think ncaa 64/68 team field 1 v 16. 2 v 15. etc.
Plus any system that puts ND at a disadvantage (Can't ever get a bye) scores points with me.
Last edited:
Hear me out. Every team is guaranteed 12 games in a season. Over the course of these 12 games, there will be a handful that stand out as being worthy of being national champions.
After the conference championship round, the top 2 teams play for the natty in a championship game after all the bowls have been played.
Sure, there might be 1 year out of every 5 where a team gets hosed but for the most part, I think this will work where CFB fans get to see the 2 best teams play for the natty
I said this last night. In 5 years there’ll be an upset and then the retard will say “look, everybody gets a chance”
Turns out retards are already saying it.
College basketball had two big cinderellas win it and they happened two years apart. 83 NC State and 85 Villanova. From that the idea that anyione can win has lived even though they can't. And Cinderella was an ACC team and a Big East team the two top conferences
But Boise beat OU in the Fiesta Bowl
But Boise beat OU in the Fiesta Bowl
Upsets are exponentially more possible in basketball, especially since the 3 point shot. It’s why nba is best of 7 and not single elimination. Anyone can get hot on any given night. Football is all about the lines. Teams aren’t gonna “get hot” one game and have their lineman’s dead lift go up 150 pounds. You’re either strong up front or not. If the discrepancy is too big, you need something crazy like the other team turning it over 5x to have a shot.
Last edited:
I remember recently going back through years of modern college football and the BCS championship and even the format before that would have been fine more years then you might think. This year we would have Ohio State and Oregon in the Rose Bowl. Winner gets the vote. There would be some knuckle draggers who would maybe vote for a two-loss Georgia team if Ohio State won and Georgia won but whatever.
Had to go back to edit because that because the caveat is we would still have normal conferences and in that hypothetical Oregon and Ohio State didn't play each other in the regular season so Ohio State comes into the game with just the loss to Michigan.
Last year we would have had Michigan and Washington in the Rose Bowl. Same thing.
I agree with Nacho that I've always been a fan of play the bowl games then pick one more game to decide it but sports hates doing anything flexible like that I feel.
Had to go back to edit because that because the caveat is we would still have normal conferences and in that hypothetical Oregon and Ohio State didn't play each other in the regular season so Ohio State comes into the game with just the loss to Michigan.
Last year we would have had Michigan and Washington in the Rose Bowl. Same thing.
I agree with Nacho that I've always been a fan of play the bowl games then pick one more game to decide it but sports hates doing anything flexible like that I feel.
Last edited:
ummm….of course they can
N. Illinois beat ND this year.
under the pre-bcs system/tiebreakers it would have been Oregon-Indiana rose bowl. Which I personally would love but we can all admit would be a bullshit way to determine a champion.
Last edited:
Tell me about the other 99 games where Goliath beat David. And that was week 1, not after a full season.
EwaDawg
New Fish
Actually, your complaint pretty much validates what the committee was tasked with doing.
Take the 12 best and seed them in such a manner that the best teams (to date) have the best chance to win the natty.
It isn't THAT hard to understand. If you don't like watching a blow out then don't. Nobody has a fucking gun to your head.
dannarc
New Fish
Gun to head? How bout a rolling pin? Been married?
Actually, the games are completely pointless because they are blowouts and the teams outside the top-5 in almost any season have no chance of winning the whole thing in CFB. It's a pointless money grab.
Also, based on what we saw this past weekend, are you really sure that the committee got it right with Indiana and SMU in the playoff? I don't think they did, even with all of the arguments against 'Bama, South Carolina, etc.
PostGameOrangeSlices
Well-known poster
I think there will be some upsets in the first round, this year just happened to be a stinker.
