Do you agree with the selection committee's make up?

[NolePride]

We as Americans are entirely obsessed with the idea of using a playoff to determine a 'champion'. What we are really getting is a winner of a select invite tournament. That's what you are 'crowning'. You aren't determining an undisputed 'best team' that season, just who won an invite only tournament. That's different.

We even try to bring that into the 'worlds sport' of soccer as I don't believe most other national leagues have any sort of playoff and just crown the team with the most points for that regular season. And there are others with similar championships. It isn't required to have a tournament to give a crown.

But no, if you aren't having a post season battle here you aren't doing it right. That's our mentality.

College football used to vote for a champion and there were some problems with it, but what they were voting for was who was the best team that whole year. If you want a true 'champion' that is closer to it than bringing in even dangerous teams with 3 losses (which any 8 team playoff would do) and having a tournament of who is more healthy and playing better at that moment and giving them a crown kind of thing.

So no, having a larger tournament of league champions would not in any way put to bed controversy of who the best team of that season was and thus who should be rightfully given the title 'champion'. Far from it IMO.

Really...so America prefers a meeting, behind locked doors, by 13 guys PICKING 4 teams
as a solution? I didn't know that. btw...How's Hillary working out for you guys on the Left
Coast?

 

[4down20]

Really...so America prefers a meeting, behind locked doors, by 13 guys PICKING 4 teams
as a solution? I didn't know that. btw...How's Hillary working out for you guys on the Left
Coast?

Your problem here is you are ignoring that they are picking them based on merits and with specific purpose.

You citing "behind locked doors" is nothing more than a fallacy in trying to insinuate that they are doing things unfairly. Nothing more than appeal to peoples cynical side. In reality, the results of what they do behind those "locked doors" is published to the public for everyone to see.

 

[NolePride]

Why does the AAC get a bye? so far over the playoff years we have had Boise (MWC), Houston (AAC), Western Michigan (MAC), and UCF (AAC) make the access bowl. I mean its a small sample volume but I dont see how that means they should get an automatic bye. those years they didnt get the access bowl their champ was 9-3 after the regular season compared to CUSA 12-1 marshall, MAC 11-2 NIU, MWC 11-2 Boise in 14 and 10-3 compared to MAC 13-0 WMU, CUSA 10-3 WKU, MWC 10-3 SDSU

I'm not ignoring you. I have it computed how the Group of 5 leagues did against each other this season
and it's not even close. I just can't remember where I put the damn piece of paper.

I'll post the results when I find it.

 

[WizardHawk]

Really...so America prefers a meeting, behind locked doors, by 13 guys PICKING 4 teams
as a solution? I didn't know that. btw...How's Hillary working out for you guys on the Left
Coast?

This post makes zero sense.

I said nothing of America having a preference toward any type of meeting. I said we, as American's, in general are obsessed with playoffs which is what you want to expand. So I was saying the opposite.

And instead of discussing the merits of any points raised you go off script with some nonsensical political bullshit.

BTW, I'm not on the left of anything other than left side of the US so I really don't know what the fuck you are on about.

 

[7Samurai13]

Really...so America prefers a meeting, behind locked doors, by 13 guys PICKING 4 teams
as a solution? I didn't know that. btw...How's Hillary working out for you guys on the Left
Coast?

Instead of sports writers and coaches in locked rooms not discussing with anyone what’s going on with teams they haven’t watched play any games? I’ll take a committee.

 

[NolePride]

Instead of sports writers and coaches in locked rooms not discussing with anyone what’s going on with teams they haven’t watched play any games? I’ll take a committee.

I'll take the field of play

 

[WizardHawk]

Instead of sports writers and coaches in locked rooms not discussing with anyone what’s going on with teams they haven’t watched play any games? I’ll take a committee.

There is no perfect solution. With so few games and such a large division of teams there isn't a format that can do better what this one currently does.

Large playoffs will give you a winner of a tournament, not necessarily the best overall team of that season. This hybrid we have attempts break ties with a small tournament. It isn't perfect, but far preferred for me than a bloated playoffs with lots of half ass teams in it.

 

[7Samurai13]

I'll take the field of play

Problem is that has to be a selection process of some type. I’m sorry but giving a 9-4 MAC champion a playoff spot over a 11-1 team like Bama this year or 11-1 Ohio State in 2015 and 2016 isn’t letting it be decided on the field of play. Unless you are suggesting a 130 team playoff.

 

[Rolltide94]

I really don't know what the fuck you are on about.

That makes 2 of you...

 

[Olyduck]

I'm not ignoring you. I have it computed how the Group of 5 leagues did against each other this season
and it's not even close. I just can't remember where I put the damn piece of paper.

I'll post the results when I find it.

Ok do you have those numbers for say the last 4 seasons?

 

[4down20]

I'm not ignoring you. I have it computed how the Group of 5 leagues did against each other this season
and it's not even close. I just can't remember where I put the damn piece of paper.

I'll post the results when I find it.

What? You computed something...on paper?

 

[7Samurai13]

What? You computed something...on paper?

Do you know how much it sucks when you make a mistake on an etch-I-sketch

 

[WizardHawk]

I'll take the field of play

You mean a limited field of play only looking at 8-9 actual games a year played by each team and entirely ignore leagues that might have 2, 3, or even 4 of the top 10 actual teams in the country.

Taking conference champions as a sole criteria is a totally horrible idea and can't ever happen.

 

[7Samurai13]

You mean a limited field of play only looking at 8-9 actual games a year played by each team and entirely ignore leagues that might have 2, 3, or even 4 of the top 10 actual teams in the country.

Taking conference champions as a sole criteria is a totally horrible idea and can't ever happen.

My biggest issue is it completely ignores what happens out of conference. So a team that schedules absolute shit is not penalized.

 

[WizardHawk]

My biggest issue is it completely ignores what happens out of conference. So a team that schedules absolute shit is not penalized.

Yeah, that's the only looking at 8-9 games part of what I was saying.

Worse, there's nothing to penalize a Michigan for losing to App St or any of those other crazy upsets.

It wouldn't necessarily lead to shit OOC games as playing Bama ever week wouldn't do anything to hurt you anyway. It simply turns every one of them into an exhibition. Make it have the same feel as NFL preseason games.

The current system is hard enough to crown a champion on with only 12 games to sample from, going down to 8-9 entirely unbalanced within each conference as it is has to be the most insane suggestion for finding a champion there is.

 

[NolePride]

Ok do you have those numbers for say the last 4 seasons?

No...but I'll research that tonight and we'll go from there.

(I just had it for this year)

 

[Edisto_Tiger]

I thought we settled this ...... I said "YES!"

 

[NolePride]

You mean a limited field of play only looking at 8-9 actual games a year played by each team and entirely ignore leagues that might have 2, 3, or even 4 of the top 10 actual teams in the country.

Taking conference champions as a sole criteria is a totally horrible idea and can't ever happen.

My biggest issue is it completely ignores what happens out of conference. So a team that schedules absolute shit is not penalized.

It depends on how you want to look at that.

It's a Countdown to Number One.

It begins with the start of a season.

By season's end 10 Conf Champs will have eliminated 120 teams.

If I play only shit schools in the OOC...and I win my league, what does that say about the teams
in my League?

I understand a natural response, although not a correct one, is the other school could have more
injuries because of playing better schools. No way. Most injuries occur from folks losing focus
in a game or loafing. A week before UF played us a few years back, they lost both their DT's
against the Citadel. The better the team the harder you play.

For Wizard...A playoff and/or a season long chase to be #1 is not intended to find who is number
2 or 3...just who is #1. One league could have 4 of the top 5 in the Country, but not the best
team in the country. So what. The Rules are the same for everybody and they're fair. You advance
by winning your league.

Auburn beat Georgia this year. Then Georgia beat Auburn. When are they going to break the 1-1
tie. Hell Soccer fans would say Auburn should have advanced because of outscoring Georgia 47-41.
(Whatever term those people use...aggregated, or something like that).

Now you guys are part of a group that blame Bama for playing Mercer. And you can complain about
Bama even getting in the playoffs.

But this is the system you want...so there can be no complaining.

In a playoff...EVERYBODY knows the rules going into the season. The committee that will be used
is comprised of 130 scoreboards.

Ain't nobody gonna be selected. 10 are gonna earn a spot. 1 will earn the title.

We can spend all year debating who is number 2...but we will know who is number 1.

They won their league and then they won the playoff with the other 9 Champs.

 

[Deep Creek]

College football used to vote for a champion and there were some problems with it, but what they were voting for was who was the best team that whole year.

Good thing it wasn't done that way this year or Clemson would have been national champions and Saban wouldn't have gotten another one. But, Bama would have gotten one in 2014 so I guess that balances out...except Ohio State would be one short.

 

[Deep Creek]

I'm not ignoring you. I have it computed how the Group of 5 leagues did against each other this season
and it's not even close. I just can't remember where I put the damn piece of paper.

I'll post the results when I find it.

I have that disease...it is called cognitive slippage.