Discussion in 'Colorado Football Message Board' started by Duff Man, Dec 3, 2014.
Can't argue that. But I'd personally wish that there was a Big12 playoff game to solidify who moves on from that conference.
I have no issue with the committee chosen TCU over Baylor, but what the B12 is doing is crap. Given an equal record, you have to break ties with head to head record. This co-champion stuff is motivated purely by the playoff system.
One of the perks of living in Texas right now is listening to bailer fan call in on sports talk radio.
So true JR, even better when the host of the radio show is a Bailer alum, its pure gold. Thanks Matt Mosley for being the perfect Bailer whining B****
Disagree. FSU just wins. Scoreboard is the only thing that matters and FSU hasn't lost a game since 2012. At the end of the day, an ugly win is far more impressive than a competitive loss. Winston has never lost, and until they do then I just don't see how you can put somebody ahead of them. Especially this late in the year.
All I'm gonna say is FSU better be ready this weekend. Winston plays like he did last week against GT, the committee will become irrelevant.
This argument might be more convincing (slightly) if every time played the same schedule. But they don't.
Yeah, that's some bs. I don't know how they're even trying to do that with a straight face.
And here I thought all the problems with the Big 12 started and ended with UT. It turns out, they are myopic, self centered, and unable to get out of their own way even when UT is irrelevant.
Far too simplistic analysis. They have a strength of schedule ranked between 36-45, depending on who you ask, and have been playing with fire for weeks. BuffLuke has it right, they better bring it this week or GT is going to expose them, and if they don't, I anticipate the largest beatdown of any of the first round games.
The committee isn't measuring their reputation or what they "deserve". They are attempting to measure how good they are in a world where not every team plays the other.
I don't question FSU being in the playoffs, but how you look in winning absolutely should matter in seeding.
They're really stuck between a rock and hard place here. TCU is more highly regarded and "in" so far, but Baylor is close. If they declared Baylor the champion, instead of a hope for two teams, they run the risk of the committee backfiring and losing both. I don't think the committee would do that, they're doing their own evaluations. But having the non-conference winner playing for a MNC is just wrong! :huh:
That's fair. Hell, if they win out, it would be crap not to put them in. The record doesn't lie. Seeding, well that's another story.
They need a champ game. And the playoffs need to be expanded to include the P5 conference champs and 3 at large bids.
I'd like to see 8 myself.
And in the end, it may work out like a gem for the Big 12.
If Georgia Tech manages to beat Florida State (and assuming Baylor beats KSU - which is by no means a lock) - chances are that BOTH TCU and Baylor make the playoff.
1. FSU wins the ACC
2. but gets exclude from the playoffs -->
3. football fans across America begin wailing and gnashing of teeth -->
4. NCAA succumbs to an overwhelming voice of customer message and gets rid of this farce that is college playoffs
If they'd let me drink at work, I might actually believe it could happen. more realistic is that FSU gets excluded but the response is to screw the sport further by expanding the field to 8.
8 - End of Story
Take the champions of the 5 major conferences, and 3 at large teams.
Sounds like a nice playoff to me.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Within that setup, we'd be looking at:
I think every college football fan would enjoy that. Winning the conference becomes key with the auto-bid. Non-conference scheduling becomes key to have the resume for an at-large bid. This has been the perfect balance for the NCAA Basketball Tournament.
I'd love it. I don't buy that it takes away from the regular season. However, they need to make conferences play by the same rules. 9 conference games etc. I don't know why they have to be stupid about it. End of the day, whoever proves it on the field, should get their shot. Yes conferences aren't built equally, you'll have your chance to prove that if you take care of business.
With auto-bids, I don't care. Conference can determine their champions however they want. But scheduling a quality non-con slate should be a HUGE factor in determining at-large bids.
Bah - expand it to 8, and people will having pissing contests about who should be 6, 7, or 8 and bitching that it should go to 12 or 16.
Hell, people bitch like crazy about who should be the 64th team into the NCAA tournament.
See, I could live with that as well.
I hear ya but we have 5 power conferences and 4 spots. At least this way, there wouldn't be any valid excuses. Win or watch on tv.
:nod: so much so that they have the play-in game. But the further down you push the argument the more sure you are of having all of those that truly have a chance to win it all.
I just think 8 is a good number. No more than that have a legitimate shot imho.
This is going to create enough controversy, they will move to 8 at the next TV contract renewal. Then, they will want to go to 16, but there will be enough gnashing of teeth, they will compromise with 12 where there is a play-in for the at larges and one conference champion. Then 16. That's about 25 years of forecasting for you - anywhere one get bet on this?
Yep. Too much money in this to stick with the bowl game mode.
Separate names with a comma.