Mean Purple
Active Member
or not getting boat raced by the Irish.
The difference along the trenches in that game was huge.
CFP Bracket…
- Thread starter Sangria Wine
- Start date
The difference along the trenches in that game was huge.
An-Cap Frog
Member
The Big10 does have 2 more teams than the SEC so there is a chance that two more teams would water down a 8 versus 9 game conference slate.
An-Cap Frog
Member
I was looking at Purdue's schedule. They played a 9 game conference schedule plus Notre Dame and Oregon State. It's a good thing they had Indiana State on the schedule.
HickoryFlameFrog
Active Member
On paper, pre-season Bama, Georgia, Texas, Clemson, Miami, Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Oregon, and Noter Dam will be given the top rankings and everybody is just supporting the local economy because, well just because espn says so. Eight games, East-West divisions, Nine games, CC Games who cares. Scrap the CFP, can the committee and let the AP poll 1-16 have at it. If a conference champ is not good enough to be one of the 16 top ranked teams they don’t need to be included. Let everybody else go play in Memphis, Albuquerque, Shreveport or Orlando. Let us not pretend it matters or kid ourselves thinking it is anything but an entertainment ploy to maximize $$ for Espn.
An-Cap Frog
Member
We should just skip the regular season and play the playoff based on hypothetical match-ups. The SEC was 155-17 this year hypothetically.
He's right, but if Boise and ASU were #11 and #12 seeds what would everyone be saying?
Limey Frog
Full Member
If they had settled it in some actual trenches Notre Dame would've gotten killed.
Frozen Frog
Active Member
All I know is that SEC is an abbreviation for SECond best conference. The Big Ten is still their daddy!
I hope SMU does well. It will hurt TCU in the short term, but TCU will reclaim its spot. It would also soften the blow from the game earlier this season.
I hope SMU does well. It will hurt TCU in the short term, but TCU will reclaim its spot. It would also soften the blow from the game earlier this season.
I hope SMU gets their ass kicked.
TxFrog1999
The Man Behind The Curtain
The media will all learn the wrong lessons from this “debacle”. Instead of questioning the use of pre-season and early season rankings that reward brand names and cupcake OOC schedules that inflate SOS and committee perceptions they’ll just double down with their B1G and SEC slobber fest.
You obviously had a problem with how the teams were ranked. How would you have ranked the teams differently? Which team(s) made it that shouldn't have and vice versa?
Not sure it was you or not, but we actually had a few people on here arguing that the ranking a team has when you play them should be what matters, not what that teams ranking is at the end of the season. Which would place a lot of importance on preseason rankings, which I thought most people didn't like and would rather do away with.
So not pointing at you, but just in general it sure seems to me like people have outcomes they would like to see, and then use whatever the heck argument they can to get to that outcome, no matter how inane it is or how many double standards they use.
TxFrog1999
The Man Behind The Curtain
The point I’m making is that the AP and ESPN prop up brand names and two specific conferences each year which creates an inherent bias in the system that is consistently rewarding teams within said conferences even when they lose. It’s been that way for decades, and now that the rules allow for a slim amount of parity the cries for change will most likely lead to the wrong adjustments, all of which used to lock out teams because of the logo on the side, or back, of their helmets.
Who is getting rewarded when they lose?
It makes no sense to me that people want the media to pretend like these conferences, and schools within the conferences, are on equal footing. They are not. A dozen or so schools pretty much always get the best recruits, get the most in demand coaches, pay their players the most, etc etc etc. They are very most likely going to be the best teams, it's just simple logic. Asking the media to go into every year like they just don't have a clue whether Ohio State is going to better than Maryland or West Virginia, or that Georgia is going to be better than Kentucky or Central Florida, is just asking them to stick their head in the sand.
The rules that allow for a slim amount of parity were done away with a couple years ago. It's about time, people said. Now what we have is no rules like that and only a playoff system that wants suckers to believe that teams like Indiana, SMU, Boise State and Arizona State have a snowball's chance in hell. A lot of people in the media has a hard time buying it, and I don't really blame them, because I do to. I'll believe it when I see it.
Mean Purple
Active Member
bigger question, is it really being screwed when you don't have to play the xtra game. they got a bye.
Mean Purple
Active Member
1. for the obvious reason.
2. because then Bama would really lose their minds.
Mean Purple
Active Member
yup. they start it out that way before a game is even played. and that does lend to bias and influence.
If they did not show any rank until week 6, bama would be further down.
Mean Purple
Active Member
I would put the big 10 over the sec this year.
I think they are pretty even at the top, but I think teams 5-16 in the SEC are substantially stronger than those in the Big 10.
Mean Purple
Active Member
does it really matter after rank 6 in either of those leagues?
