Also doesnt Oregon have the same arguement as Alabama as their ONLY LOSS IS TO LSU and they are ranked 7th.
Stanford plays in a weaker conference, with a weaker schedule... The number are correct. If they win this weekend, they will be ahead of Bama. Right now Bama has played 4 ranked teams, and lost in OT to the best team in college by 3 points.
No, they don't... They lost at the beginning of the season when they were ranked 4th, and had played no one. They also lost by 13 points. They had no SOS argument, and Bama does.
0
Quote Originally Posted by MJ2345:
It is a joke Stanford should be in front of Bama!
Also doesnt Oregon have the same arguement as Alabama as their ONLY LOSS IS TO LSU and they are ranked 7th.
Stanford plays in a weaker conference, with a weaker schedule... The number are correct. If they win this weekend, they will be ahead of Bama. Right now Bama has played 4 ranked teams, and lost in OT to the best team in college by 3 points.
No, they don't... They lost at the beginning of the season when they were ranked 4th, and had played no one. They also lost by 13 points. They had no SOS argument, and Bama does.
No, they don't... They lost at the beginning of the season when they were ranked 4th, and had played no one. They also lost by 13 points. They had no SOS argument, and Bama does.
So does the fact that Alabama lost on their homefield and Oregon lost on a neutral field have no bearing? A loss is a loss?
0
Quote Originally Posted by Tappy:
No, they don't... They lost at the beginning of the season when they were ranked 4th, and had played no one. They also lost by 13 points. They had no SOS argument, and Bama does.
So does the fact that Alabama lost on their homefield and Oregon lost on a neutral field have no bearing? A loss is a loss?
So West Virginia puts up over 500+ yards on LSU, but Stanford or Boise or OSU has NO chance of moving the ball on them?
Thats the reasoning why we need to see LSU and Alabama again? Didnt LSU already prove they're better???
I don't think anyone thinks they can't move the ball on them... No doubt they would probably get in the end zone once, or maybe even twice. Buy the more physical teams of Bama/LSU would just wear down the weaker teams like Stanford, Ok st, and Boise.
The only reason people might want to see it again, is because these are still the two best teams in the nation. People don't really like to see a slaughter in the national championship...
I personally don't care either way... Just as bad as I want to see my boys get a shot at the NC, I want them to beat the hell out of Ok st, Stanford, or Boise.
0
Quote Originally Posted by bonds:
So West Virginia puts up over 500+ yards on LSU, but Stanford or Boise or OSU has NO chance of moving the ball on them?
Thats the reasoning why we need to see LSU and Alabama again? Didnt LSU already prove they're better???
I don't think anyone thinks they can't move the ball on them... No doubt they would probably get in the end zone once, or maybe even twice. Buy the more physical teams of Bama/LSU would just wear down the weaker teams like Stanford, Ok st, and Boise.
The only reason people might want to see it again, is because these are still the two best teams in the nation. People don't really like to see a slaughter in the national championship...
I personally don't care either way... Just as bad as I want to see my boys get a shot at the NC, I want them to beat the hell out of Ok st, Stanford, or Boise.
A few people here said they haven't seen a workable playoff system put out there. What's so difficult about working a playoff other than the fact that most school presidents, various trustees & bowl committee's don't want it to happen for selfish reasons. Every NCAA sport has a playoff & every division of football has anywhere from a 16 team to a 24 team playoff in place. Top 16 teams play using a 1 vs 16, 2 vs 15 matchup system. They play the 15 games from the 2nd week of December through New Year's when all the universities are on a month long X-mas break.
They could use some mid level bowls for the first round & the Rose, Sugar, Orange, Fiesta, Cotton, Gator & Outback for the quarters through the Final on some sort of rotation. The minor bowls would still exist for the next 16-20 teams that get left out of the playoff. The only thing complicated about this is the fact that money would be changing hands from where it goes now in some cases & that is the bone & only reason there isn't a playoff. Very simple!
1) If you take 8 or 16 teams for a playoff system, that means you either have 3 or 4 rounds. Who, as fans, will be able to afford short notice trips (hotel, tickets...expenses etc) for 3 or 4 consecutive weeks?
2) How do you pick the teams? Current BCS system? All you're doing is taking an existing 2 team playoff, where the #3 or #4 team may have a legitimate bitch about not making the NC game.......and replacing it with an 8 or 16 team playoff where #9 or #10 in the ranking system may have a legitimate gripe about not being chosen over the #8 team........and maybe the #17 or #18 team not being chosen over the #16 team. (if current BCS rankings were used, in a 16 team playoff Texas, Kansas State and Georgia would all get in with 2 losses while Nebraska, Wisconsin and Michigan State, also with 2 loses, would be left out. Who says who should be in and who shouldn't? Still a very subjective call.
3) Finally, you say that maybe the minor bowls could be used for the next however many teams don't make the playoff. Who in the hell would be interested in going on that trip? You'd hear crickets chirping in the silence even worse than you do now. Football doesn't need an NIT.
Things are not always as simple as they seem.
0
Quote Originally Posted by dg84:
A few people here said they haven't seen a workable playoff system put out there. What's so difficult about working a playoff other than the fact that most school presidents, various trustees & bowl committee's don't want it to happen for selfish reasons. Every NCAA sport has a playoff & every division of football has anywhere from a 16 team to a 24 team playoff in place. Top 16 teams play using a 1 vs 16, 2 vs 15 matchup system. They play the 15 games from the 2nd week of December through New Year's when all the universities are on a month long X-mas break.
They could use some mid level bowls for the first round & the Rose, Sugar, Orange, Fiesta, Cotton, Gator & Outback for the quarters through the Final on some sort of rotation. The minor bowls would still exist for the next 16-20 teams that get left out of the playoff. The only thing complicated about this is the fact that money would be changing hands from where it goes now in some cases & that is the bone & only reason there isn't a playoff. Very simple!
1) If you take 8 or 16 teams for a playoff system, that means you either have 3 or 4 rounds. Who, as fans, will be able to afford short notice trips (hotel, tickets...expenses etc) for 3 or 4 consecutive weeks?
2) How do you pick the teams? Current BCS system? All you're doing is taking an existing 2 team playoff, where the #3 or #4 team may have a legitimate bitch about not making the NC game.......and replacing it with an 8 or 16 team playoff where #9 or #10 in the ranking system may have a legitimate gripe about not being chosen over the #8 team........and maybe the #17 or #18 team not being chosen over the #16 team. (if current BCS rankings were used, in a 16 team playoff Texas, Kansas State and Georgia would all get in with 2 losses while Nebraska, Wisconsin and Michigan State, also with 2 loses, would be left out. Who says who should be in and who shouldn't? Still a very subjective call.
3) Finally, you say that maybe the minor bowls could be used for the next however many teams don't make the playoff. Who in the hell would be interested in going on that trip? You'd hear crickets chirping in the silence even worse than you do now. Football doesn't need an NIT.
So does the fact that Alabama lost on their homefield and Oregon lost on a neutral field have no bearing? A loss is a loss?
Not with BCS calculations.... There is a percentage determined by home field advantage vs away, a percentage determined by SOS, a percentage determined by the points scored, and a percentage determined by ranking. There are obviously other factors in how the computers make these determinations, but these are some. So the answer to your question is No, a loss is not a loss...
0
Quote Originally Posted by bonds:
So does the fact that Alabama lost on their homefield and Oregon lost on a neutral field have no bearing? A loss is a loss?
Not with BCS calculations.... There is a percentage determined by home field advantage vs away, a percentage determined by SOS, a percentage determined by the points scored, and a percentage determined by ranking. There are obviously other factors in how the computers make these determinations, but these are some. So the answer to your question is No, a loss is not a loss...
1) If you take 8 or 16 teams for a playoff system, that means you either have 3 or 4 rounds. Who, as fans, will be able to afford short notice trips (hotel, tickets...expenses etc) for 3 or 4 consecutive weeks?
2) How do you pick the teams? Current BCS system? All you're doing is taking an existing 2 team playoff, where the #3 or #4 team may have a legitimate bitch about not making the NC game.......and replacing it with an 8 or 16 team playoff where #9 or #10 in the ranking system may have a legitimate gripe about not being chosen over the #8 team........and maybe the #17 or #18 team not being chosen over the #16 team. (if current BCS rankings were used, in a 16 team playoff Texas, Kansas State and Georgia would all get in with 2 losses while Nebraska, Wisconsin and Michigan State, also with 2 loses, would be left out. Who says who should be in and who shouldn't? Still a very subjective call.
3) Finally, you say that maybe the minor bowls could be used for the next however many teams don't make the playoff. Who in the hell would be interested in going on that trip? You'd hear crickets chirping in the silence even worse than you do now. Football doesn't need an NIT.
Things are not always as simple as they seem.
0
Quote Originally Posted by soonboomer:
1) If you take 8 or 16 teams for a playoff system, that means you either have 3 or 4 rounds. Who, as fans, will be able to afford short notice trips (hotel, tickets...expenses etc) for 3 or 4 consecutive weeks?
2) How do you pick the teams? Current BCS system? All you're doing is taking an existing 2 team playoff, where the #3 or #4 team may have a legitimate bitch about not making the NC game.......and replacing it with an 8 or 16 team playoff where #9 or #10 in the ranking system may have a legitimate gripe about not being chosen over the #8 team........and maybe the #17 or #18 team not being chosen over the #16 team. (if current BCS rankings were used, in a 16 team playoff Texas, Kansas State and Georgia would all get in with 2 losses while Nebraska, Wisconsin and Michigan State, also with 2 loses, would be left out. Who says who should be in and who shouldn't? Still a very subjective call.
3) Finally, you say that maybe the minor bowls could be used for the next however many teams don't make the playoff. Who in the hell would be interested in going on that trip? You'd hear crickets chirping in the silence even worse than you do now. Football doesn't need an NIT.
If LSU plays Alabama for National Championship we all need to boycott it..Dont watch bet on anything....Now those SEC lovers would never do that....If the rest of the country did though it would make a statement....BCS all about money so what if they dont the ratings and money that they have spent already...
I am just saying only one way to force the issue as a fan....
0
If LSU plays Alabama for National Championship we all need to boycott it..Dont watch bet on anything....Now those SEC lovers would never do that....If the rest of the country did though it would make a statement....BCS all about money so what if they dont the ratings and money that they have spent already...
I am just saying only one way to force the issue as a fan....
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
