Is college football the only major sport where your record is more important than if you win your division/conference?

Is college football the only major sport where your record is more important than if you win your division/conference?

So I take that as you like it when the Seahawks and the Panthers made the playoffs when they had losing records? Thats ok with you?

On the radio at lunch today, someone brought up a comment Urban apparently made a few years back about you shouldn't be playing for a National Championship if you didn't win your conference. :lol2:

On the radio at lunch today, someone brought up a comment Urban apparently made a few years back about you shouldn't be playing for a National Championship if you didn't win your conference. :lol2:

He talked about it on Mike and Mike this morning and said he would have preferred to have played in the conference championship game, but it is what it is and he thinks they are definitely one of the top 4 teams. You have to remember the context of that original comment too. He was campaigning for his team to get in over Michigan who just lost to Ohio State in a very good game. What was he supposed to say?

Is college football the only major sport where your record is more important than if you win your division/conference?

 

No. College Basketball seeds the tournament based on record. However, no conference champion is left completely out of the tournament over a conference foe with a better record. That is not the case, here.

No. College Basketball seeds the tournament based on record. However, no conference champion is left completely out of the tournament over a conference foe with a better record. That is not the case, here.

Kentucky won the tournament as the number 1 overall seed after they lost their conference champ game. Did you have a problem with that? Vanderbilt deserved to be a 1 seed over UK because they beat them right? Alabama won the NC but didn't win their conference. Alabama was a much better team than LSU, but lost in a close game at home. Did you have a problem with Bama making that championship game? I understand you want an 8 team playoff, but even then I don't want automatic qualifiers to the playoffs. I want the 8 best teams. This year 4 of the 8 best teams are from the Big 10. Would you have a problem with all 4 making an 8 team playoff?

Ohio State beat 3 of the final 8 teams.

 

The fact is: nobody here would be upset if this was any other school than OSU that got in. OSU is undeniably a top 4 team.

Kentucky won the tournament as the number 1 overall seed after they lost their conference champ game. Did you have a problem with that? Vanderbilt deserved to be a 1 seed over UK because they beat them right?

 

I have no problem with how they seed the tournament. Let me point out the key sentence in the post you quoted ...

 

However, no conference champion is left completely out of the tournament over a conference foe with a better record.

 

Alabama won the NC but didn't win their conference. Alabama was a much better team than LSU, but lost in a close game at home. Did you have a problem with Bama making that championship game?

 

You are assuming I am a fan of the SEC and of the BCS. Neither of which are true. I had a major problem with that BCS bowl. So did the rest of the country. It was one of the lowest rated BCS bowls, in terms of viewership.

 

I understand you want an 8 team playoff, but even then I don't want automatic qualifiers to the playoffs. I want the 8 best teams. This year 4 of the 8 best teams are from the Big 10. Would you have a problem with all 4 making an 8 team playoff?

 

Making assumptions again. I do not support an 8 team playoff. I don't believe I have ever supported an 8 team playoff. I also have nothing against the Big Ten or Ohio State specifically. My argument would be the same in the current situation, regardless of team or conference affiliation.

 

Just so we are straight on my playoff stance...

 

If I am going to support expansion of the playoffs, it would be a 16 team playoff with all 10 conferences getting an automatic bid with 6 at large spots. Seeding can be done in the manner of the basketball tournament. The cream will rise to the top. However, that is not going to happen. Ever.

 

IMHO, the more plausible scenario would be for the SEC, Big Ten, PAC 12, and ACC to force the Big 12 to be absorbed into the other 4 conferences (by threat of G5 exclusion). If done properly, this transformation would give each of the 4 remaining power conferences 16 teams each. At the end of the year, the conference champions are seeded in the current 4 team playoff scheme.

 

The G5 conferences, who seem to have no part in the current system, should have their own division and their own championship. The current pretense of inclusion is silly.

I have no problem with how they seed the tournament. Let me point out the key sentence in the post ...

 

However, no conference champion is left completely out of the tournament over a conference foe with a better record.

 

 

 

You are assuming I am a fan of the SEC and of the BCS. Neither of which are true. I had a major problem with that BCS bowl. So did the rest of the country. It was one of the lowest rated BCS bowls, in terms of viewership.

 

 

 

Making assumptions again. I do not support an 8 team playoff. I don't believe I have ever supported an 8 game playoff. I also have nothing against the Big Ten or Ohio State specifically. My argument would be the same in the current situation, regardless of team or conference affiliation.

 

Just so we are straight on my playoff stance...

 

If I am going to support expansion of the playoffs, it would be a 16 team playoff with all 10 conferences getting an automatic bid with 6 at large spots. Seeding can be done in the manner of the basketball tournament. The cream will rise to the top. However, that is not going to happen. Ever.

 

IMHO, the more plausible scenario would be for the SEC, Big Ten, PAC 12, and ACC to force the Big 12 to be absorbed into the other 4 conferences (by threat of G5 exclusion). If done properly, this transformation would give each of the 4 remaining power conferences 16 teams each. At the end of the year, the conference champions are seeded in the current 4 team playoff scheme.

 

The G5 conferences, who seem to have no part in the current system, should have their own division and their own championship. The current pretense of inclusion is silly.

Alabama manhandled LSU in that championship game but you have a problem with them playing in it? They were the 2 best teams. That's what it's about. I'm an SEC hater, but even I was ok with Bama playing in that game. Then you say you want a 16 team playoff to watch Alabama dismantle WKU, Western Michigan, or any other team from a non power 5 conference. That is a waste of time. Let them join the FCS if they want to, but as long as they are in the FBS they have no reason being involved in the playoff unless you have a team where you can clearly tell they can play with the big boys i.e. Houston last year and this year, Boise State, TCU before they joined Big XII. Besides maybe 1 exception per year it's not worth it to play that extra game against a completely inferior opponent and risk someone getting hurt for the games that actually matter. College football is not college basketball if the 2 best teams are from the same conference I want them playing for the championship whether it's the first time they've played that year or the 4th. If people didn't like the Bama/ LSU final then that's there problem because those 2 games were awesome and I could watch those 2 teams play all day. That's what college football is about it's about the best teams. College basketball is for cinderellas, college football is a game of haves and have nots and nothing can really be done to change that because the best players are going to go to the best schools and the nature of the game doesn't lend itself to Cinderella type upsets. I know you are a big USF fan, let's say they won the AAC this year and were in a 16 team playoff, would you really want to watch them get throttled by Bama, OSU, Clemson, or Washington or would you rather watch them win their big time bowl game against a middle of the pack Big 10 or SEC team?

Ohio State beat 3 of the final 8 teams.

 

The fact is: nobody here would be upset if this was any other school than OSU that got in. OSU is undeniably a top 4 team.

Exactly if it was Bama as a 1 loss non conference champ they would probably be the #1 seed still. It's a double standard. OSU is going to have to beat them again for this narrative to change, but I don't know about you but I look forward to the challenge.

Alabama manhandled LSU in that championship game but you have a problem with them playing in it? They were the 2 best teams. That's what it's about. I'm an SEC hater, but even I was ok with Bama playing in that game.

 

You liked the All SEC BCS game. Good for you.

 

Then you say you want a 16 team playoff to watch Alabama dismantle WKU, Western Michigan, or any other team from a non power 5 conference. That is a waste of time. Let them join the FCS if they want to, but as long as they are in the FBS they have no reason being involved in the playoff unless you have a team where you can clearly tell they can play with the big boys i.e. Houston last year and this year, Boise State, TCU before they joined Big XII. Besides maybe 1 exception per year it's not worth it to play that extra game against a completely inferior opponent and risk someone getting hurt for the games that actually matter. College football is not college basketball if the 2 best teams are from the same conference I want them playing for the championship whether it's the first time they've played that year or the 4th. If people didn't like the Bama/ LSU final then that's there problem because those 2 games were awesome and I could watch those 2 teams play all day. That's what college football is about it's about the best teams. College basketball is for cinderellas, college football is a game of haves and have nots and nothing can really be done to change that because the best players are going to go to the best schools and the nature of the game doesn't lend itself to Cinderella type upsets.

 

I completely loath the "haves and have nots" system.

 

I know you are a big USF fan, let's say they won the AAC this year and were in a 16 team playoff, would you really want to watch them get throttled by Bama, OSU, Clemson, or Washington or would you rather watch them win their big time bowl game against a middle of the pack Big 10 or SEC team?

 

I would prefer USF to have the opportunity to play any of those 4 teams, regardless of outcome. God knows those schools will not schedule the Bulls during the regular season for some reason. :whistling:

Fix? Come on man. They have 1 loss and beat 3 top 8 teams. Nobody else can say that. Get out of here with the it was fixed or it was rigged garbage.

 

All SEC fans, take note and save this post for future reference.

Ohio State beat 3 of the final 8 teams.

 

The fact is: nobody here would be upset if this was any other school than OSU that got in. OSU is undeniably a top 4 team.

 

Not true. My opinion would be the same regardless of team and conference affiliation.

 

For the record, those who know me, know that I absolutely hate Penn State.

You liked the All SEC BCS game. Good for you.

 

 

 

I completely loath the "haves and have nots" system.

 

 

 

I would prefer USF to have the opportunity to play any of those 4 teams, regardless of outcome. God knows those schools will not schedule the Bulls during the regular season for some reason. :whistling:

Why did you not like it? We crowned the right champion that year. Isn't that the goal? You can loathe the haves and have nots system all you want but you can't change it. That is the nature of the sport.

Why did you not like it? We crowned the right champion that year. Isn't that the goal? You can loathe the haves and have nots system all you want but you can't change it. That is the nature of the sport.

 

You absolutely could change it, by letting a computer do the rankings.