- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 13,359
- Reaction Score
- 33,630
Well that's fine but that totally flies in the face of your previous comment about preseason SEC bias.
Top Four
- Thread starter BlueDogs
- Start date
- Status
Well that's fine but that totally flies in the face of your previous comment about preseason SEC bias.
RedStickHusky
formerly SeoulHuskyFan
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 4,827
- Reaction Score
- 19,659
LOL, I was posting with a head full of soju last night so maybe, but I do believe sec teams have to do less than others to move up the charts year in/year out.
Best SEC OOC wins this year: bama > w.va; ole miss > boise st,; Georgia > Clemson; auburn > k state
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2013
- Messages
- 241
- Reaction Score
- 296
That's better than just about everybody else. The Big XII and BiG have nothing OOC. The Pac12 has Oregon over Michigan State( and maybe Utah over Michigan) The ACC has FSU over ND and if you want to stretch a bit OK. State and nothing else.
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2013
- Messages
- 4,844
- Reaction Score
- 16,970
I hate the SOS metric. I feel like it's a self fulfilling prophecy. I hate that because a school plays in the SEC and goes through the gauntlet of Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Arkansas and Florida the last few years. This is why I want to see the playoff expanded and only conference champs considered.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 13,359
- Reaction Score
- 33,630
You left out a couple of SEC schools.
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2011
- Messages
- 2,468
- Reaction Score
- 4,896
I hope they pull three SEC teams. Then for sure they will expand the playoff to 8 teams.
.-.
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2013
- Messages
- 4,844
- Reaction Score
- 16,970
I know I left out some of the better schools, but everyone outside of ESPiN and the SEC seem to realize that the SEC is extremely top heavy and mediocre at best at the bottom. All I'm saying is I think strength of schedule is a stupid metric to use. I know a lot of people will disagree with me, but I hate the fact that some undefeated teams get glossed over because there is a 1 lose SEC team.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 13,359
- Reaction Score
- 33,630
0% chance 3 SEC teams get in. I think it's a long shot that 2 get in, but it's possible.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 13,359
- Reaction Score
- 33,630
SEC is mediocre at the bottom. Unlike what other conference?
Folks, look with your own eyes. The SEC is far and away the best conference in college football with the best teams. This ESPN agenda is such nonsense. Bama, Auburn, Miss St, Ole Miss, LSU, Georgia all pass the eye test. They would all bury Mich St/OSU/FSU/ND.
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2012
- Messages
- 1,145
- Reaction Score
- 2,170
If Georgia wins the SEC conference title game (with 1 loss), there is 90% chance that the runner up especially if it is a 1 loss Miss State team. It would be hard to keep a 2 loss Alabama or Miss. team out too. (Auburn would have 3 losses in that scenario as they still play Georgia)
For 3 Teams: Georgia at 2 losses (Losing in conference title game), Alabama winning out plus conference title (1 loss) and Miss State winning all but Alabama (1 Loss) is only real scenario I see. And in that case Georgia may fall into the 5 or 6 bubble team.
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2013
- Messages
- 4,844
- Reaction Score
- 16,970
I'm not saying that the top of the conference isn't the best in the country. Bama, LSU, Georgia and the likes all have talent and coaching to probably win a couple games at the NFL (at least beat Oakland at this point). I'm saying that schools like Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Arkansas and Florida under Muschamp. wouldn't do much better in any of the other P5 conference. This is why I think it should be win your conference and you're in, not have the whole LSU-Alabama snooze bowl again where one team didn't even win their division let alone their conference.
In an expanded playoffs do I believe the SEC should have more that one team? By far and away of course I do, but I think that in order for it to be a "true" championship every conference champion should have a chance.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 13,359
- Reaction Score
- 33,630
I'll put Tenn, Vandy, Kentucky, Arkansas, and Florida up against the following:
Wake, VT, Pitt, Cuse, NC St
Purdue, Indiana, NW, Illinois, Michigan
Kansas, Iowa St, Texas, Texas Tech
Wazzou, Colorado, Oregon St, Cal
That group of SEC teams, as a whole, are better than any other of these aformentioned group of teams. If any team should be ripped for being overrated, it's FSU.
.-.
Husky25
Dink & Dunk beat the Greatest Show on Turf.
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2012
- Messages
- 19,012
- Reaction Score
- 20,238
**Yawn** Call me after Championship weekend. Having these polls now is ONLY for the benefit of Mike & Mike in the Morning, Dan Patrick, and Colin Cowherd.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 8,886
- Reaction Score
- 18,184
If FSU keeps winning that puts the block on possibly 2 other P5 conferences. If they lose to Ville no other ACC team in sight but I think there may be pressure to include more conferences rather than load up on SEC teams. Lack of a conference championship could doom Big 12 though.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 6,575
- Reaction Score
- 16,641
This.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 13,359
- Reaction Score
- 33,630
Who is your top 4?
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2013
- Messages
- 4,844
- Reaction Score
- 16,970
My Top 4 would be:
1. Miss St. 2. FSU (until they lose), 3. Oregon (if they win the PAC 12) 4. TCU (if they win the Big 12)
Conference championships should absolutely hold more weight than SOS. If any other team out of the SEC is better than Miss. St. they'll beat them before the playoffs. I just don't want to see another Alabama in the playoffs when they didn't even win their own division.
1. Miss St. 2. FSU (until they lose), 3. Oregon (if they win the PAC 12) 4. TCU (if they win the Big 12)
Conference championships should absolutely hold more weight than SOS. If any other team out of the SEC is better than Miss. St. they'll beat them before the playoffs. I just don't want to see another Alabama in the playoffs when they didn't even win their own division.
.-.
whaler11
Head Happy Hour Coach
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 44,353
- Reaction Score
- 68,192
I think he meant today...
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2013
- Messages
- 4,844
- Reaction Score
- 16,970
If I was the on the selection committee those 4 would absolutely be my top 4 right now.
whaler11
Head Happy Hour Coach
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 44,353
- Reaction Score
- 68,192
That's fine but Auburn for example has a better resume than TCU or Oregon to date...
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2013
- Messages
- 4,844
- Reaction Score
- 16,970
True, but Auburn needs Miss. St. lose in order to win their division and has yet to play Bama or Georgia. Oregon is at least in first place of their division and conference and TCU looks like they can score on anyone (I know no saying much in the defense is optional conference). For me if Auburn is going to get into the playoffs they need State to lose and probably lose big.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 13,359
- Reaction Score
- 33,630
That's fine but your end game is not about getting the best 4 teams in the playoffs if you're putting more weight on conf championships than SOS. I don't even think TCU is one of the best 8 teams in the country.
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2013
- Messages
- 4,844
- Reaction Score
- 16,970
There's definitely a case to be made for both sides of the argument. But for me if you're not good enough to win your own division within your conference then you're not good enough to be in the playoffs.
.-.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 5,025
- Reaction Score
- 19,563
Being a conference champion should have more value. It is ludicrous to put the Runner Up or Third Place SEC team in over the SEC Champion. Why play the Conference Championship? If you want to add the runner up (or other deserving teams) as a wild card entry, you'll need to expand the Playoff to 8 teams. I'd like to see the committee try and put a Miss St team that loses the SEC Championship to Georgia in over the Bulldogs (both with 1 loss) because Miss St was ranked higher before the game. Armageddon would be tame by comparison.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 13,359
- Reaction Score
- 33,630
You guys are creating scenarios that won't happen in a million years.
My opinion is that conference championships should matter little to none. There is no way you're getting the 4 best teams if that is part of your criteria.
This will all play itself out. Worry not SEC haters you will not get 3 SEC teams in the playoff and there's more than a good chance you only get the champion.
SubbaBub
Your stupidity is ruining my country.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 32,571
- Reaction Score
- 26,615
Jimmy Serrano said:
Not trying to find the 4 best teams. Trying to find one championship team. If you want to treat the CCG as any other game, that's good, I think it should be that way. But, in order to be the best team in the country you must first be the best team in your conference.
SEC is the best conference, if you are the best team in that you should be a lock for the playoff. Zero losses, one loss, two losses it doesn't matter. The SEC can decide how they want to anoint the best team.
In a closed system, it would take a pretty strong argument for me to say a third place team (that's what it would be if Auburn makes it along with 13-0 Miss St) deserves a spot over the other 4 conference champs, if I already know Miss State beat Auburn unless it's down to Auburn and KState as B12 Champ for the last spot.
whaler11
Head Happy Hour Coach
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 44,353
- Reaction Score
- 68,192
You pretty much can't set up a system to find the best team. There aren't enough games in the season.
All you can do is set up a system to name a champion. I don't mind the criteria they have chosen.
BTW, you can have the best team and not win your conference.
All you can do is set up a system to name a champion. I don't mind the criteria they have chosen.
BTW, you can have the best team and not win your conference.
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2013
- Messages
- 241
- Reaction Score
- 296
I would agree. As a long time fan even if they win the Big XVII I'd have a hard time putting them in the Final Four unless all hell beaks loose everywhere else.
Since this is the first year of an 8 year deal I think everyone needs to take a deep breath, enjoy the games, and see how the whole thing plays out.
Husky25
Dink & Dunk beat the Greatest Show on Turf.
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2012
- Messages
- 19,012
- Reaction Score
- 20,238
You're never going to know the best team for sure in any year. It's the nature of a one and done format. That being saidany system employed should include at least the conference champion, as determined by the conferences themselves, of all eligible conferences. That means at least 5 teams. In order to give the competition some semblance of fairness (as opposed to only money), it should be an 8-12 team tournament (The more the better but I don't think 16 gives enough advantage to the top seeds).
Take a look at the history of the NCAA Basketball Tournament. During the UCLA dynasty, USC could actually lay claim to being the second best team in the country. However they never got a bid because they never won the PAC-#. As the field got bigger the tournament got better, which brings me to point #2. More teams = diverse field = better product. Refer back to the basketball tourney. There has only been one year (maybe two, but I think it's only one) since the tournament began seeding schools where all four of the top seeds made the Final 4. The best team is not always the national champs. Take Duke/Mercer from last year for instance. Duke probably wins that game 9 out of 10 times, but for whatever reason, they didn't bring its A game. Duke probably had a shot at the Final 4, but a Champion does not look past an inferior opponent.
12 teams (or even 10) in football allows room for the for the 5 5CSMA champions, more access for the non-5CSMA and two or three wild cards. Of course there will be arguments regarding bubble teams or that a 2-loss SEC team is better than a 1 Loss ECU, but that should 1) be proven on the field and 2) If the 5CSMA really are better than their redheaded step brethren, ECU won't advance in the tournament, as I envision it.
Here is my plan for a fair playoff. Poke holes 'til your hearts' content (P.S. I know it's a pipe dream).
First off, 11 game regular season schedule. Not 12.
Field: 12 teams
Contenders: 5 CSMA champions 3-4 highest ranked Non-CSMA, 3-4 Wild Card
Format: Single elimination.
Particulars:
-Top 4 teams get a 1st round bye. (If 10 teams then two play-in games between 7-10 and 8-9...and THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE CALLED).
-First round will be played on a 5/12, 6/11, 7/10, 8/9 basis at the home field of the lower seed.
-Teams are reseeded after each round. So if a 12 seed happens to beat a 5, they play the 1, not the 4 seed.
-Top two seeds before any round do not meet before the NCG.
-Second Round will be played at the field of lower seed.
-Third Round = 2 of 6 New Years Day Bowls.
-Final = NC Game one week later.
Who, besides the 5CSMA, is against this?
Take a look at the history of the NCAA Basketball Tournament. During the UCLA dynasty, USC could actually lay claim to being the second best team in the country. However they never got a bid because they never won the PAC-#. As the field got bigger the tournament got better, which brings me to point #2. More teams = diverse field = better product. Refer back to the basketball tourney. There has only been one year (maybe two, but I think it's only one) since the tournament began seeding schools where all four of the top seeds made the Final 4. The best team is not always the national champs. Take Duke/Mercer from last year for instance. Duke probably wins that game 9 out of 10 times, but for whatever reason, they didn't bring its A game. Duke probably had a shot at the Final 4, but a Champion does not look past an inferior opponent.
12 teams (or even 10) in football allows room for the for the 5 5CSMA champions, more access for the non-5CSMA and two or three wild cards. Of course there will be arguments regarding bubble teams or that a 2-loss SEC team is better than a 1 Loss ECU, but that should 1) be proven on the field and 2) If the 5CSMA really are better than their redheaded step brethren, ECU won't advance in the tournament, as I envision it.
Here is my plan for a fair playoff. Poke holes 'til your hearts' content (P.S. I know it's a pipe dream).
First off, 11 game regular season schedule. Not 12.
Field: 12 teams
Contenders: 5 CSMA champions 3-4 highest ranked Non-CSMA, 3-4 Wild Card
Format: Single elimination.
Particulars:
-Top 4 teams get a 1st round bye. (If 10 teams then two play-in games between 7-10 and 8-9...and THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE CALLED).
-First round will be played on a 5/12, 6/11, 7/10, 8/9 basis at the home field of the lower seed.
-Teams are reseeded after each round. So if a 12 seed happens to beat a 5, they play the 1, not the 4 seed.
-Top two seeds before any round do not meet before the NCG.
-Second Round will be played at the field of lower seed.
-Third Round = 2 of 6 New Years Day Bowls.
-Final = NC Game one week later.
Who, besides the 5CSMA, is against this?
.-.
- Status