Playoff Committee Member Barry Alvarez talks about his criteria

[tometom]

no it's not. there should be no difference between losing the last game of the season as losing a game at the beginning of the season.

who should go then? what if the PAC-12, B1G, Big-12 champs all have 2 losses. Then who should go from the SEC? you say the 12-1 team can't go because they happened to lose 1 game, but why would those 3 champs that all lost multiple games deserve to go ahead of that SEC team?

 

[rmilia1]

So your train of thought is that 12-0 Nebraska loses to 10-2 Michigan State in the B10 title game and you think that is the same as 11-1 Georgia Tech losing to 10-2 Pitt and doesnt MAKE the ACC title game?? IYO Nebraska should be held to the same standard as GT even though they won their division and had to play an extra game that GT didnt?? That makes no sense.

 

[starbigd]

no it's not. there should be no difference between losing the last game of the season as losing a game at the beginning of the season.

who should go then? what if the PAC-12, B1G, Big-12 champs all have 2 losses. Then who should go from the SEC? you say the 12-1 team can't go because they happened to lose 1 game, but why would those 3 champs that all lost multiple games deserve to go ahead of that SEC team?

Simple. BECAUSE THEY WON THEIR CONFERENCE TITLE.

This is the same thing as a playoff game, call it the wild card play in if you want.

Your line of reasoning makes no sense at all. If you can't win the conference title game, you eliminated yourself. Schedules aren't equal......the conference title game is an equalizer across the boards. That game MEANS MORE than any other you play......if it didn't, there would be no need for the game at all.

 

[Lance Armstrong]

So why have conference championship games then? Honestly this playoff has seemed to have made these games meaningless.

 

[The Authority]

no it's not. there should be no difference between losing the last game of the season as losing a game at the beginning of the season.

who should go then? what if the PAC-12, B1G, Big-12 champs all have 2 losses. Then who should go from the SEC? you say the 12-1 team can't go because they happened to lose 1 game, but why would those 3 champs that all lost multiple games deserve to go ahead of that SEC team?

Because that SEC team lost a game they needed to win.

ITs how playoffs work.

Win Division
Win Conference
Win Playoff game
Win Championship game

ITs cut and dry.

 

[rmilia1]

So why have conference championship games then? Honestly this playoff has seemed to have made these games meaningless.

They are only meaningless for the teams that win them. The teams that lose them are fucked.

 

[The Authority]

They are only meaningless for the teams that win them. The teams that lose them are fucked.

Not according to some. Many people think losing them doesn't matter.

 

[tometom]

man, can you guys not read? seriously.

rmilia1 - I'm not following your post at all. Who are you trying to compare for the playoff? a 12-1 Nebraska that lost the B1G championship to the 11-1 Georgia Tech who didn't even play for the ACC championship? is that right?

starbigd - how does it not make sense? there is no way a 12-1 SEC team shouldn't make the playoff if every single other football team in the country has 2 losses. it's that simple. they lost 1 game, the fact it was the conference championship shouldn't matter. look at their body of work, they went 12-0 during the regular season, how don't they get in? Conference championships matter if teams have similar records, but if a team has a better record it shouldn't matter if they lost the conference championship.

 

[The Authority]

man, can you guys not read? seriously.

rmilia1 - I'm not following your post at all. Who are you trying to compare for the playoff? a 12-1 Nebraska that lost the B1G championship to the 11-1 Georgia Tech who didn't even play for the ACC championship? is that right?

starbigd - how does it not make sense? there is no way a 12-1 SEC team shouldn't make the playoff if every single other football team in the country has 2 losses. it's that simple. they lost 1 game, the fact it was the conference championship shouldn't matter. look at their body of work, they went 12-0 during the regular season, how don't they get in? Conference championships matter if teams have similar records, but if a team has a better record it shouldn't matter if they lost the conference championship.

What if the SEC east team that beat them also has one loss. Do you send them both? And if your answer is yes, why put two teams in a 4 team playoff where we just saw the outcome of a match up between two of those teams.

Not having conference champ as a criteria just makes it more messy.

Every other playoff situation in sports uses conference champions as a criteria.

 

[The Authority]

kind of off topic but how often has the SEC CCG been a rematch?

 

[WhiteMamba]

Because that SEC team lost a game they needed to win.

ITs how playoffs work.

Win Division
Win Conference
Win Playoff game
Win Championship game

ITs cut and dry.

What playoffs? What other sport does this? None. Winning your division is not a prerequisite for making a playoff, cc, or finals.

It isn't how playoffs work at all.

Poor example is poor.

 

[starbigd]

man, can you guys not read? seriously.

rmilia1 - I'm not following your post at all. Who are you trying to compare for the playoff? a 12-1 Nebraska that lost the B1G championship to the 11-1 Georgia Tech who didn't even play for the ACC championship? is that right?

starbigd - how does it not make sense? there is no way a 12-1 SEC team shouldn't make the playoff if every single other football team in the country has 2 losses. it's that simple. they lost 1 game, the fact it was the conference championship shouldn't matter. look at their body of work, they went 12-0 during the regular season, how don't they get in? Conference championships matter if teams have similar records, but if a team has a better record it shouldn't matter if they lost the conference championship.

It absolutely matters. Once again.....if they are a worthy team, then WIN THE CONFERENCE game. Show and prove.

If they can't win their conference, it doesn't matter what they did during the season. In the NFL, if you don't win your conference, you don't go to the Superbowl.....nobody cares if you had a better record than the team that beat you.

This is how playoffs work. You don't get credit for season wins if you can't win a TITLE GAME.

If you only care about their season record, then there should be no title games.

 

[rmilia1]

The primary difference between the CFB playoff and ALL other playoffs is that the CFB is wayyyy more exclusive. You have 4 of 128 teams that make it. CBB has 68 of 330, the NFL has 12 of 32, NBA has 16 of 32, NHL has 16 of 32, MLB has 10 of 32, FCS has 20 of 120+, and on and on. If you are going to have a playoff that is that exclusive and that hard to qualify for then you are telling me that the regular season is FARRR nore important in CFB than it is in those other sports and if that is the case then you cannot in the next breath tell me that at LEAST wiining your division shouldnt be a GIANT criteria for making the playoff. Thats all Im saying.

 

[outofyourmind]

If a Conference cant determine who their best team is then why should it be left up to the rest of the country to figure it out.


There should never be 2 teams from the same Conference in the playoffs.
When 1 doesn't get in that maybe people/espn think should be, then said Conference will take care of that shit better next time.


EOT

 

[The Authority]

What playoffs? What other sport does this? None. Winning your division is not a prerequisite for making a playoff, cc, or finals.

It isn't how playoffs work at all.

Poor example is poor.

Its the foundation.

Before wild cards were allowed this is how it started. Those that win those things are the first ones in.

 

[tometom]

What if the SEC east team that beat them also has one loss. Do you send them both? And if your answer is yes, why put two teams in a 4 team playoff where we just saw the outcome of a match up between two of those teams.

Not having conference champ as a criteria just makes it more messy.

Every other playoff situation in sports uses conference champions as a criteria.

see, now there is a difference. now you are introducing another 1 loss team. obviously the SEC Champ then goes. Now my decision on the other 3 teams would really depend on records etc. I'd more than likely leave out the 12-1 SEC team in favor of other Conference champs, because you've already included the SEC champ.

 

[The Authority]

All I am saying is each conference is capable of determining a champ of that conference.

Why shouldn't it be set up so that winning your conference is the utmost importance?

It makes CFB better.

 

[yeodonie]

Their votes will go to the highest bidder.

Corruption will reign supreme

 

[tometom]

It absolutely matters. Once again.....if they are a worthy team, then WIN THE CONFERENCE game. Show and prove.

If they can't win their conference, it doesn't matter what they did during the season. In the NFL, if you don't win your conference, you don't go to the Superbowl.....nobody cares if you had a better record than the team that beat you.

This is how playoffs work. You don't get credit for season wins if you can't win a TITLE GAME.

If you only care about their season record, then there should be no title games.

see, i agree with you that they should matter, but that's not the way the system is setup. the system is set up to choose the 4 best teams, it shouldn't matter whether they won a conference championship game. you've got to look at their body of work not one stinking game. if they were clearly the best team in the nation, even in the loss they could look like the better team, then how do you not include them?

oh and your NFL example is dumb. they have a playoff with 6 teams entering and only 1 emerging, cfb has a system where 128 teams enter and only 4 emerge and there isn't a bracket to determine those 4 but a bunch of people talking and discussing. it's not the best system to decide on 4 teams.

 

[Red_Alert]

Nope. Can't reward the losers of a division and then punish the winners of that same division by making them play an extra game.

Then you use head to head and common opponents as the next criteria.