He's like a damn cat: always landing on his feetsoxhop411 said:how does Kiffin continue to get so many jobs?
Stay up and buy the car~!Dollar said:Ha, just bought a throw blanket in the #MayhemSale. Awesome.
edit: and a wine decanter. cool.
Oh, I'm trying. I have the system down pretty good at this point.soxhop411 said:Stay up and buy the car~!
Does the Boise State/Oklahoma Fiesta Bowl count as a big game? I remember that one ending very late.Al Zarilla said:Has a big game gone down to the wire this late at night? Football, that is.
That story (which coach is better) isn't finished yet. Hope they are around for another "ten year war."Sox and Rocks said:So Michigan lands harbaugh, but Ohio state goes to the national championship game and still has a better coach
Absolutely not. 4 is perfect. I'd kick and scream, but begrudgingly accept 6 with two byes. Today was absolutely perfect and the committee got it right. If you finish 5th, tough crap. Win more (or at least win a conference championship game). I would have said it even if the Buckeyes got left out.Luis Taint said:What a agreat day, they need to expand to 8 team.
Well, yeah.Sox and Rocks said:So Michigan lands harbaugh, but Ohio state goes to the national championship game and still has a better coach
What the hell did Lane Kiffin ever do to earn your respect?Dan to Theo to Ben said:Congrats to Skrub. I lost some respect for Saban and Kiffin tonight.
Screw that. TCU proved that they should have been in with their ass kicking of Ole Miss. The only way to avoid any controversy is to expand the field.Sille Skrub said:Thanks guys! I don't think I'm sleeping tonight. I've wanted a CFB playoff for so, so long and day one couldn't have gone any better.
Absolutely not. 4 is perfect. I'd kick and scream, but begrudgingly accept 6 with two byes. Today was absolutely perfect and the committee got it right. If you finish 5th, tough crap. Win more (or at least win a conference championship game). I would have said it even if the Buckeyes got left out.
I'm also really surprised to see the Buckeye support around these parts, btw. Maybe I'll pop in more often.
Happy, happy, joy, joy! Can't wait until the 12th. I'm most happy about how the B1G did as a whole. It has been a great bowl season for the conference! Maybe we can even put some of that "B1G sucks/SEC is the ultimate awesome" talk to bed for a bit.
jsinger121 said:Screw that. TCU proved that they should have been in with their ass kicking of Ole Miss. The only way to avoid any controversy is to expand the field.
This is stupid. You'd have the same controversy if there were 6 or 8 teams.jsinger121 said:Screw that. TCU proved that they should have been in with their ass kicking of Ole Miss. The only way to avoid any controversy is to expand the field.
This is like Yogi Berra's idea of moving the bases back to get rid of the close plays. There are always going to be teams complaining that they got left out when other (lesser?) teams got in.jsinger121 said:Screw that. TCU proved that they should have been in with their ass kicking of Ole Miss. The only way to avoid any controversy is to expand the field.
Those are reasonable arguments for a playoff. I'm just pointing out that "they need to expand to eliminate controversy" doesn't make a lot of sense.BigSoxFan said:So? Does the quality of the semifinals get reduced if there's 1 week of games before it? Or do you care about the "student" athletes' grades? I'm honestly curious why some people would prefer to have less football.
But that squabbling about the tournament pretty much ends two or three days after the selection is announced. Nobody thinks these teams have a shot at a championship. TCU fans will never stop complaining about this year, and probably rightly so.BigSoxFan said:Yes, I'd agree with that. The NCAA tournament lets in 64 teams and we still have people whining about the 19-12 mediocre squads not getting in.
Yeah, it would almost be ideal if there was a variable number of teams in the tournament - some years there should be two, some three, some six, probably rarely any more than that. I don't see that idea getting a lot of traction though.BigSoxFan said:My concern is making sure that we prove on the field who the best team is, which I assume is the goal of the playoffs. I think some years we can do that with 4 teams but others it won't be sufficient. And I'd gladly sit through some 1 vs. 8 or 2 vs. 7 games to find out. I think there are too many variables to successfully pick the 4 best teams every year.
I'm not using it as an argument against 8 teams. I have no problem with an 8 team playoff, but to say that expanding to 8 teams will eliminate controversy is dumb. I mean, shit, the NFL has 12 teams and there's still controversy over the 7 win Panthers team making the playoffs.BigSoxFan said:I don't disagree. I want 8 teams and don't understand the people who think 8 is too many and list that weak reason.
The hoops tourney has pretty much proven that no matter who you are, if you win the tourney, the argument about who deserves the title stops. You can have 'what if' side arguments like people do with Houston/NCState, but nobody ever makes the case that NCState doesn't deserve the title. You win it on the field and that takes a bunch of the useless arguments off the table. Discussing who the best team is won't be much of a conversation after someone wins the title on the field, be in 2 or 3 additional games.Super Nomario said:Yeah, it would almost be ideal if there was a variable number of teams in the tournament - some years there should be two, some three, some six, probably rarely any more than that. I don't see that idea getting a lot of traction though.
As for "prove on the field who the best team is," tournaments sometimes do this well and sometimes don't. If there were eight teams in the tournament, one would be likely have been Michigan State, which lost by 19 to Oregon and by 12 to Ohio State at home. If they get hot or lucky and beat those teams (or teams that beat those teams) in the tournament by slim margins, does that really prove on the field who the best team is?
I'm not necessarily anti-tournament, but I also don't assume that playoffs are the best way to do things just because that's how we do things in the other sports. There are pluses and minuses.
VCU was one of the last teams in the tournament in 2011 (Jay Bilas called their selection indefensible) and made it all the way to the Final Four, so that argument doesn't quite cut it either.Philip Jeff Frye said:But that squabbling about the tournament pretty much ends two or three days after the selection is announced. Nobody thinks these teams have a shot at a championship. TCU fans will never stop complaining about this year, and probably rightly so.
What year was that. So, I guess, no. Nothing is too late when you live in CA though.mandro ramtinez said:Does the Boise State/Oklahoma Fiesta Bowl count as a big game? I remember that one ending very late.
Infield Infidel said:
There's also a lot of issues with travel (for fans and teams), classes, concussions and injuries with more games, and probably other stuff. They probably would have to have either the quarters or semis on-campus, because the final next week will be the third neutral site game in a row, and that's a lot to ask of the fanbases, especially smaller fanbases or those way far from the bowl sites. Do you have the quarters right after the conference title games, and only leave 2 weeks until the bowls? Do you have the bowls be the quarters and have the semis on-campus and the final on MLK day?
Stevie1der said:I think eight teams is the sweet spot. You presumably get all the major conference champions plus a couple at large teams including that year's Boise St should their resume pass the eye test. You get all the zero and one loss teams in this way too. The fringe teams that don't make an eight team playoff will usually have multiple losses, so who cares if they raise a stink, they lost the right to complain with the second game they dropped. Any more than eight is diluting the pool too much IMO.
this is unadulterated BSTomRicardo said:
no one (outside of Texas) is arguing Baylor or TCU should have been in the playoffs.
I agree with what you're saying. Someone can correct me on this, but I don't believe there's a historical precedent for decreasing the number of playoff teams in any sport, ever. As soon as we (probably inevitably) go to 8 teams, there will be almost immediate discussion about expanding to 12 or 16 teams and little-to-no discussion about rolling back to 4. Since you can't go backward, I think you have to be pretty conservative about how much to go forward.Infield Infidel said:Eight would be perfect, but four is fine, at least for now. They (and we) need to see this a few years to figure out how it goes. We currently have a sample size of 1. This year there were 6 good teams, maybe next year there's only 2 or 3 and the fourth team gets in and is the proverbial happy-to-be-there team. Teams are scheduling up on their future schedules so I'm expecting more two-loss teams. What if there are only 2 or 3 teams with 1 or fewer losses, and a cadre of two-loss teams? At that point, really who cares, if you want to get in play a tough schedule and lose less than 2 games.
Sort of. I would argue that once you set up the playoff structure, no one cares about "best team" anymore, it becomes about who is the "champion" - which may or may not be the same thing. The 2007 10-6 Giants beat the 16-0 Pats in the Super Bowl and were unambiguously NFL champions. For better or worse, there's basically no discussion about whether the Giants were the "best team," because it's considered irrelevant. The goal is not to be the best team; it's to be the champions. That eliminates some ambiguity, but there's also something perverse about it.PaulinMyrBch said:The hoops tourney has pretty much proven that no matter who you are, if you win the tourney, the argument about who deserves the title stops. You can have 'what if' side arguments like people do with Houston/NCState, but nobody ever makes the case that NCState doesn't deserve the title. You win it on the field and that takes a bunch of the useless arguments off the table. Discussing who the best team is won't be much of a conversation after someone wins the title on the field, be in 2 or 3 additional games.
TomRicardo said:
No way. 4 teams are enough. This year was as flat a year in college football as you can have and no one (outside of Texas) is arguing Baylor or TCU should have been in the playoffs.
johnmd20 said:
One more game over the course of a month isn't going to be an issue for the players or the fans.
WTF are you talking about, 1) Minnesota was a better team than VTech. 2) Big 12-2 was considered stronger than the B1G.FL4WL3SS said:I actually think we'll have less of these arguments in the future because I think teams in the power 5 will start scheduling more out of conference games against the other power 5. TCU learned a big lesson this year, they didn't play enough good teams and had nothing on their out of conference schedule that would have pushed them over the top. And fair or not, the Big 12 was considered weak and the only way to eliminate that talk is to play a strong out of conference schedule.
This is good for college football fans, the out of conference portion of the season will start to become really exciting as teams realize they need to have a stronger schedule to get into the playoff. The non-conference portion of the schedule is basically a glorified exhibition.
The Big Ten was also considered weak, so I don't know what you're trying to say. The Big 12 and Big Ten were both considered weak by a lot of people.Dan to Theo to Ben said:WTF are you talking about, 1) Minnesota was a better team than VTech. 2) Big 12-2 was considered stronger than the B1G.
Infield Infidel said:I tell you what, i'd love to see warm weather teams go to Ohio or Michigan in the December. It's one of the best parts of the NFL playoffs.
What the fuck are you even asking? My point was that teams will start scheduling stronger out of conference games and have better out of conference schedules in order to increase their case for the playoffs. I'm not wrong, you're just short-sighted.Dan to Theo to Ben said:You were making multiple statements. But that other one was wrong too. Why would OSU schedule a VT from now on? Why would TCu schedule a Minnesota? Why would Wisconsin schedule an LSU?
Florida State's inclusion proves that you shouldn't schedule these extra loseable games.
if this was Purdue v. TCU or OSU v. Texas, we wouldn't be having this conversation.