Rittenberg - "snarf, snarf"

[goDAWGSsicem]

Can I interject something here?

Please do, we need an outside voice of reason.

 

[bchampy]

SINCE WE BROUGHT UP CHICK FIL' A!

I am willing to join whichever conference can get Chik Fil A opened on Sunday. It is a TRAVESTY that I can not help my hangovers with the nectar of the chicken gods!

Not gonna happen, bro. They're God's people.

 

[goDAWGSsicem]

SINCE WE BROUGHT UP CHICK FIL' A!

I am willing to join whichever conference can get Chik Fil A opened on Sunday. It is a TRAVESTY that I can not help my hangovers with the nectar of the chicken gods!

I feel your pain. Unfortunately, God's conference would never propose such a thing. It's just one of those things we all have to accept.

 

[ForkEmBucky]

LOL

I'm sure you guys are right. The linked blog post was clearly not a response to the opinions of SEC fans. It was totally unprovoked. Nobody in SECland has blamed the B1G for the playoff problem lately. SEC fans don't take it upon themselves to attack the B1G on the regular....especially not since 2006 when they were all already on the tSEC bandwagon and jumped on board waaayy before. It's just that Northern opinion of The South causing all the trouble; that horrible media bias against the Deep South that isn't at all more prevalent on the West Coast. The SEC fans are not infatuated with the Upper Midwest.

 

[Big Red Said]

LOL at e-arguing over blog writers and who is at fault for SEC and Big Ten bickering....



Rittenberg is an OK guy just trying to create a story whereby people can formulate an opinion (Pro or Con). He is no better or worse than others...

The topic of how a playoff is created fairly for CFB will be hammered to death for a few more months and then it will ultimately be that which we all have to accept, regardless if it's 4 teams, 8 teams, 3 conference champs and a wild card or ?

I will say this much, if we go out beyond the top 8, we lose any common sense.... because those teams rated below 8th in the past polls, usually have 2 to 3 losses and if they were to outright win the championship game... then controversy we have now would even be bigger. Yet, those teams could actually be playing better football at that time than the #1 rated team.

Soooooo... should the team who has a 9-3 record going into the bowls and rated #9 have a chance at undefeated #1 rated team?

Not sure this is the right call but, I personally am leaning towards the + 1.

Play all the bowl games, take the highest rated two teams after bowls and let them square it off for Natty. It keeps bowls as they are, it is less intrusive and ultimately it gives us 1 more game to bitch at each other. Yes who determines which bowl winners should be rated 1 & 2...? will still be the basis for an argument... but if we wish for too much here, we may ruin the very essence of what college football stands for.

Carry on...

Big Ten! Big Ten! Big Ten!

 

[ForkEmBucky]

Hey. It's GoDawgs and BChampy. I'm just giving them what they obviously wanted. It's nothing personal. Well it is a little, but not after we all get bored with this thread.

 

[Brasky]

Exactly, my point on why none of you see a problem with it - you all feel the same way.

Get over yourselves.

The guy is supposed to be a professional journalist. That kind of childish banter is meant for blogs & message boards. That's why I am not suprised at all that the TEAM BIG10ers here are resorting to personal attacks.


...and because you think "SEC media outlets" have been attacking the BIG10 for years, does that mean that I can't voice an opinion when a BIG10 writer does the same? Besides, the "shit talking" from SEC journalists is based on the BIG10's play on the field - not personal attacks.



BIG10 - BIG10 - BIG10

You need to get over YOUR self. This isn't about "southerners" it's about SEC fans who just happen to be southerners.

Y'all clearly have some sort of complex about the whole intelligence thing otherwise you wouldn't have a fucking tantrum any time someone says anything about the SEC or the south.

You bout had a meltdown on the VT board because the majority of them were saying they would prefer to join the B1G.

 

[ForkEmBucky]

You need to get over YOUR self. This isn't about "southerners" it's about SEC fans who just happen to be southerners.

Y'all clearly have some sort of complex about the whole intelligence thing otherwise you wouldn't have a fucking tantrum any time someone says anything about the SEC or the south.

You bout had a meltdown on the VT board because the majority of them were saying they would prefer to join the B1G.

Do they? Huh. I have never considered this. I don't think its plausible, but I'll look into it.

 

[olympicoscar]

LOL at e-arguing over blog writers and who is at fault for SEC and Big Ten bickering....



Rittenberg is an OK guy just trying to create a story whereby people can formulate an opinion (Pro or Con). He is no better or worse than others...

The topic of how a playoff is created fairly for CFB will be hammered to death for a few more months and then it will ultimately be that which we all have to accept, regardless if it's 4 teams, 8 teams, 3 conference champs and a wild card or ?

I will say this much, if we go out beyond the top 8, we lose any common sense.... because those teams rated below 8th in the past polls, usually have 2 to 3 losses and if they were to outright win the championship game... then controversy we have now would even be bigger. Yet, those teams could actually be playing better football at that time than the #1 rated team.

Soooooo... should the team who has a 9-3 record going into the bowls and rated #9 have a chance at undefeated #1 rated team?

Not sure this is the right call but, I personally am leaning towards the + 1.

Play all the bowl games, take the highest rated two teams after bowls and let them square it off for Natty. It keeps bowls as they are, it is less intrusive and ultimately it gives us 1 more game to bitch at each other. Yes who determines which bowl winners should be rated 1 & 2...? will still be the basis for an argument... but if we wish for too much here, we may ruin the very essence of what college football stands for.

Carry on...

Big Ten! Big Ten! Big Ten!

Having a lot of losses should not be a problem. I think Connecticut had 9 losses when they won the NCAA BB Championship in 2011. Look at some of the losses the NFL teams have that win the Super Bowl.

The question is, do you want the team that's best at the end of the season, like the NFL and College BB or do you want to reward the team that may not be the best at the end, but had the better season?

Ultimately I think we all want a 16 team playoff and you could wind up with a 4 loss team winning it all.

 

[herky]

Having a lot of losses should not be a problem. I think Connecticut had 9 losses when they won the NCAA BB Championship in 2011. Look at some of the losses the NFL teams have that win the Super Bowl.

The question is, do you want the team that's best at the end of the season, like the NFL and College BB or do you want to reward the team that may not be the best at the end, but had the better season?

Ultimately I think we all want a 16 team playoff and you could wind up with a 4 loss team winning it all.

no

 

[bchampy]

Do they? Huh. I have never considered this. I don't think its plausible, but I'll look into it.

Please, do look into it. While you're at it, I'd like to see some examples of me and godawgs blaming the B1G for everything. Take your time. I'll wait.

 

[Big Red Said]

Having a lot of losses should not be a problem. I think Connecticut had 9 losses when they won the NCAA BB Championship in 2011. Look at some of the losses the NFL teams have that win the Super Bowl.

The question is, do you want the team that's best at the end of the season, like the NFL and College BB or do you want to reward the team that may not be the best at the end, but had the better season?

Ultimately I think we all want a 16 team playoff and you could wind up with a 4 loss team winning it all.

eeeek...

 

[USCDoom]

Having a lot of losses should not be a problem. I think Connecticut had 9 losses when they won the NCAA BB Championship in 2011. Look at some of the losses the NFL teams have that win the Super Bowl.

The question is, do you want the team that's best at the end of the season, like the NFL and College BB or do you want to reward the team that may not be the best at the end, but had the better season?

Ultimately I think we all want a 16 team playoff and you could wind up with a 4 loss team winning it all.

I dont think ANYONE wants that. IMO 8 schools is the most that people will allow, and even then no one in power wants 8 schools, so I doubt it will get there, let alone 16...

No One can make a rational argument in ANY Season prior, that teams ranked #10 and #12 were National Title Worthy...

Even though they lost bowls. In 2008, Texas tech with one loss was ranked #8, Boise with one loss was #9. Unbeaten Utah was #7, one loss Penn State was #6.

The #10 team?
2 Loss Ohio State who had lost to #5 USC and #6 Penn State.

And that is the Only time you can find a #10 team that might have a argument of being included in a Playoff. And even then they lost to the only 2 schools that meant a damn that year...

Edit: #9 Boises loss was in a Bowl, they were Unbeaten when ranked #9

 

[bchampy]

I think 8 teams is plenty. 5 Conference champions and the top 3 ranked teams after that. That's assuming the ACC sticks around as a viable football conference. Big East has been neutered so their champ doesn't get an auto bid to the playoffs.

 

[goDAWGSsicem]

LOL

I'm sure you guys are right. The linked blog post was clearly not a response to the opinions of SEC fans. It was totally unprovoked. Nobody in SECland has blamed the B1G for the playoff problem lately. SEC fans don't take it upon themselves to attack the B1G on the regular....especially not since 2006 when they were all already on the tSEC bandwagon and jumped on board waaayy before. It's just that Northern opinion of The South causing all the trouble; that horrible media bias against the Deep South that isn't at all more prevalent on the West Coast. The SEC fans are not infatuated with the Upper Midwest.

Excuse me for having an opinion. If I had known that it would upset you so much... I would have done it sooner.

And pardon me for expecting an educated, professional journalist to be above such childish banter.

Hey. It's GoDawgs and BChampy. I'm just giving them what they obviously wanted. It's nothing personal. Well it is a little, but not after we all get bored with this thread.

You have blown this beyond proportion, it shouldn't have been anything you took personally - sorry you got so upset.

You need to get over YOUR self. This isn't about "southerners" it's about SEC fans who just happen to be southerners.

Y'all clearly have some sort of complex about the whole intelligence thing otherwise you wouldn't have a fucking tantrum any time someone says anything about the SEC or the south.

You bout had a meltdown on the VT board because the majority of them were saying they would prefer to join the B1G.

I don't see any difference between SEC fans and southerners. Check a map.

Yet again, I fail to see the reasoning for personal attacks, but if that's all you can do...


Meltdown? No. You should read the thread again (if you ever did). I disgreed with them & they got tired of hearing it on their board. If anyone is approaching "meltdown" it is the people in this thread that are so upset and resorting to name calling and personal attacks.


BIG10 - BIG10 - BIG10