Grits and Shins Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Why OSU deserved to be in the bogus NC game after sitting on their fat asses for more than a month watching other teams play and fall? How often has this happened now ... where one of the teams backs into the bogus NC game and gets their asses handed to them? I can think of three off the top of my head ... OSU this year, OSU last year ... and Nebraska several years ago. LSU is only the NC in that they were awarded more money than any other team in the nation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWPFFL BrianW Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Why OSU deserved to be in the bogus NC game after sitting on their fat asses for more than a month watching other teams play and fall? How often has this happened now ... where one of the teams backs into the bogus NC game and gets their asses handed to them? I can think of three off the top of my head ... OSU this year, OSU last year ... and Nebraska several years ago. LSU is only the NC in that they were awarded more money than any other team in the nation. Hey, go get that remote, and watch a football game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted January 14, 2008 Author Share Posted January 14, 2008 Hey, go get that remote, and watch a football game. How exactly does that answer my question? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiefjay Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 The whole system is a joke. On to better playoffs systems, the NFL and NCAA BBall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWPFFL BrianW Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 How exactly does that answer my question? It means, every time you post anything, I question whether or not you actually watch football games, or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted January 14, 2008 Author Share Posted January 14, 2008 It means, every time you post anything, I question whether or not you actually watch football games, or not. One thing was for sure ... that travesty they called the NC was not a football game. So here is another question for you since you seem incapable of answering the first question ... how does the fact that I do or do not watch any football games have anything to do with the fact that the whole BCS system is a joke and OSU did not deserve to be in the NC either of the last 2 years? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 The whole system is a joke. On to better playoffs systems, the NFL and NCAA BBall. So I guess yesterday confirmed the Giants are better than the Cowboys? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiefjay Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 So I guess yesterday confirmed the Giants are better than the Cowboys? Yep, on the field, yep. If this were the NCAA we would have had the Pats and the Cowboys in the NFL Championship Game and the Cowboys would have got smoked, of course the Pats could and may smoke the Charges this week and the NFC in a few weeks but at least we know the winners advanced and the losers went home. You think the Cowboys were some juggernaut that couldn't be stopped like the Pats? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted January 14, 2008 Author Share Posted January 14, 2008 So I guess yesterday confirmed the Giants are better than the Cowboys? Is there any doubt that yesterday the Giants were better than the Cowboys? They played heads up and the Giants were the last one standing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Yep, on the field, yep. If this were the NCAA we would have had the Pats and the Cowboys in the NFL Championship Game and the Cowboys would have got smoked, of course the Pats could and may smoke the Charges this week and the NFC in a few weeks but at least we know the winners advanced and the losers went home. You think the Cowboys were some juggernaut that couldn't be stopped like the Pats? Werd. I was actually stunned at the point spread and the money line on the NY/Dallas game. Fortunately, I put my money where my mouth was this time. Actually, I'm going to guess that Rocker was more taking a shot at G&S's team than an indictment of the play-off system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Is there any doubt that yesterday the Giants were better than the Cowboys? They played heads up and the Giants were the last one standing. Yesterday only? Thought these playoffs prove once in for all which teams are the best this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 (edited) Yesterday only? Thought these playoffs prove once in for all which teams are the best this season. They do. Not in so much that the better team wins each and every game. However, the best team is the one that can win 3 (or in some cases) 4 straight games against the other top teams in the league. Tell me that's not a better way of deciding it than having everyone vote on the two best teams and seeing which one looks best on a given day. So, yesterday pretty much showed that neither Indy or Dallas were the best teams in the league. In fact, the team most think and would certainly have voted into a NC game if that's how they did it, NE took care of business. Another elite team did so as well. Edited January 14, 2008 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted January 14, 2008 Author Share Posted January 14, 2008 Yesterday only? Thought these playoffs prove once in for all which teams are the best this season. Twice before in this season the Cowboys were the better team on game day against the Giants. So I'd say the Cowboys had a better REGULAR season than the Giants and proved dominance over them. However, those two wins and the regular season mean NOTHING once the playoffs start. The Giants were the better team yesterday when it counted and now their season continues while the Cowboys are cleaning out their lockers today. Just as I have said that if NE was to go undefeated in the regular season and NOT win the SB then the undefeated season is really meaningless. But detlef summed it up pretty well ... are you really putting forth the thought that having the nation's sports writers vote on the two teams they wish to see in a NC game and letting it all come down to which team shines that particular day is a better method to determine a champion than seeding brackets based on how the teams performed in the regular season with the last team standing after the brackets being the undisputed champion? Is that what you are really saying? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 are you really putting forth the thought that having the nation's sports writers vote on the two teams they wish to see in a NC game and letting it all come down to which team shines that particular day is a better method to determine a champion than seeding brackets based on how the teams performed in the regular season with the last team standing after the brackets being the undisputed champion? Is that what you are really saying? I've had this discussion before, so I'm sure we'll end up agreeing to disagree. But just for kicks don't forget the fact that the computers do enter into the equation when determining the two most deserving teams to play for the NC? Like I said before I'm not totally against a playoff, however I am against one like the NFL which completely cheapens the season by extending playoff berths to so many teams. Maybe the better teams won yesterday? But personally I'm no more convinced that the Giants & Chargers are better when reviewing the entire season. I'll agree it's great for ratings and attendance for all those teams to make the playoffs, but not too sure how it solidifies or should I say guarantees us that the two best teams will be playing for the NFL Championship anymore than say how the BCS does it. Crazy as it sounds (since I know it can't happen) but imagine a plus 1 like format in the NFL. Seed the top 4 teams Colts, Cowboys, Packers, & Patriots. Play 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3. Winners play in the Super Bowl. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted January 14, 2008 Author Share Posted January 14, 2008 I've had this discussion before, so I'm sure we'll end up agreeing to disagree. But just for kicks don't forget the fact that the computers do enter into the equation when determining the two most deserving teams to play for the NC? Like I said before I'm not totally against a playoff, however I am against one like the NFL which completely cheapens the season by extending playoff berths to so many teams. Maybe the better teams won yesterday? But personally I'm no more convinced that the Giants & Chargers are better when reviewing the entire season. I'll agree it's great for ratings and attendance for all those teams to make the playoffs, but not too sure how it solidifies or should I say guarantees us that the two best teams will be playing for the NFL Championship anymore than say how the BCS does it. Crazy as it sounds (since I know it can't happen) but imagine a plus 1 like format in the NFL. Seed the top 4 teams Colts, Cowboys, Packers, & Patriots. Play 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3. Winners play in the Super Bowl. 12 teams out of 32 is 37.5% of the teams ... perhaps a tad high but not too out of line. As to the question of "if the better teams won yesterday" ... if a top seeded team, one that is supposed to be better, can not come out of a BYE week and defeat a lower seeded team then they likely were not going to win the championship anyway. Top seeds lose in the NCAA march madness too ... that is why they play the game and the beauty of a bracket/playoff system. If the NFL was like the BCS they would simply have had declared that NE and DAL would be in the SB and then had the other 30 teams play in aribitrary games that mean nothing leading up to the SB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 I've had this discussion before, so I'm sure we'll end up agreeing to disagree. But just for kicks don't forget the fact that the computers do enter into the equation when determining the two most deserving teams to play for the NC? Like I said before I'm not totally against a playoff, however I am against one like the NFL which completely cheapens the season by extending playoff berths to so many teams. Maybe the better teams won yesterday? But personally I'm no more convinced that the Giants & Chargers are better when reviewing the entire season. I'll agree it's great for ratings and attendance for all those teams to make the playoffs, but not too sure how it solidifies or should I say guarantees us that the two best teams will be playing for the NFL Championship anymore than say how the BCS does it. Crazy as it sounds (since I know it can't happen) but imagine a plus 1 like format in the NFL. Seed the top 4 teams Colts, Cowboys, Packers, & Patriots. Play 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3. Winners play in the Super Bowl. You are missing a valuable part of the argument. You don't need to think the better teams won yesterday to agree with the format. The play-off format does not exist to decide which team is better between the Giants and the Cowboys. Rather it is there to decide if either team is the best in the league. Nothing at all was proven yesterday other than Indy and Dallas showing they didn't deserve a right to that title this year. All we know about NY and SD is that they have kept their claim to that argument alive for another week. Should SD step up and do what no other team has done this year (including five other teams in the playoffs) they will certainly have earned the right to play for that honor in February. I mean, nobody has questioned their talent, so it's not like a bunch of scrubs who just managed to get lucky. Now, maybe you'd say that NY is in a different situation because the NFC simply isn't as tough. However, unless teams are going to quit having schedules that are slanted towards playing divisional foes more often than anyone else, you're not going to be able to do away with at least that element of it. That is, setting up a play-off in which the top two seeds are from the same conference. I agree that play-offs can be so far reaching as to diminish their ability to truly crown the best team. The NCAA hoops play-offs are a fine example and you could certainly make the ratings argument there. I mean, there's no reason at all that a team who finishes 6th or 7th place in their conference has any right to play for all the marbles. When you consider that these teams don't even make up the weakest teams in the tourney, it's even more silly. However, I can only really think of 2 teams that didn't have much business being in the play-offs this year and they were both one and done. (Tenn and TB). So what difference did they end up making anyway? If the NFL tightened up to an 8 team play-off (4 is just plain silly and you know that), then we'd have exactly the match-ups we had this week. 3 beat 2 in the AFC and 4 beat 1 in the NFC. Big deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 If the NFL was like the BCS they would simply have had declared that NE and DAL would be in the SB and then had the other 30 teams play in aribitrary games that mean nothing leading up to the SB. Instead we see alot of that during the end of the NFL season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 You are missing a valuable part of the argument. You don't need to think the better teams won yesterday to agree with the format. The play-off format does not exist to decide which team is better between the Giants and the Cowboys. Rather it is there to decide if either team is the best in the league. If you would have asked me 10 years ago if I was in favor of a college football playoff you would have gotten an absolute yes from me. What has changed my opinion somewhat is the BCS system that so many hate has actually satisfied me at least from the standpoint teams can no longer hide behind bowl conference tie ins like they could prior to the BCS. I'll be the first to say that neither system the BCS or NFL playoff is perfect, but I fail to see how a playoff with absolutely guarantee anything more than what we have today. You would still have the Sarge's and TOS's of the world making excuses or claims of unfair play. College football for whatever reason brings out those types of loyal fans that would never ever give 100% approval to a NC even if a playoff were in place. Even football fans like Brian who honestly believe they are unbiased are still debating somewhat the SEC supremacy even after they proved it on the field by setting a NCAA record for the most bowl wins in a season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 If you would have asked me 10 years ago if I was in favor of a college football playoff you would have gotten an absolute yes from me. What has changed my opinion somewhat is the BCS system that so many hate has actually satisfied me at least from the standpoint teams can no longer hide behind bowl conference tie ins like they could prior to the BCS. I'll be the first to say that neither system the BCS or NFL playoff is perfect, but I fail to see how a playoff with absolutely guarantee anything more than what we have today. You would still have the Sarge's and TOS's of the world making excuses or claims of unfair play. College football for whatever reason brings out those types of loyal fans that would never ever give 100% approval to a NC even if a playoff were in place. Even football fans like Brian who honestly believe they are unbiased are still debating somewhat the SEC supremacy even after they proved it on the field by setting a NCAA record for the most bowl wins in a season. First off, there are no shortage of threads where SEC dominance can be discussed, do you need to bring it up here as well? So, it would seem to me that a play-off needs to be large enough to include all teams with a legitimate argument that they deserve a shot but not so large as to mess up the outcome by allowing teams that have no business making that claim to crash the party by pulling one out of their ass and taking out a worthy team. I mean, any given Sunday right? Now, the BCS absolutely and positively fails on the first part. Nearly every year, at least 1 or 2 teams that any impartial observer would say are every bit as good as the teams playing for all the marbles are not allowed a chance. Supporters say they had a chance and blew it by losing in the regular season. Well, this year LSU did twice but, for some reason, those two losses didn't cost them the way USC, UGA, WVU, OU and several other team's losses cost them. So, major, major flaw. Going to 4 would help most years. Going to 8 would pretty much kill the debate without diluting the field too much. I mean, it would still be a tiny fraction of the total teams in the division. Now, I can't remember the last time a team that really had no business being in the Super Bowl discussion happened to get hot at the right time and really crash the party. Now, perhaps SD and NY messed things up and took out teams that people thought of as real SB material, but I contend that's really only the case with Indy. I don't know what happened to Dallas, but they hardly looked great for the last month. None the less, even with the case of SD, all they did was theoretically make the path easier for the hands down, overwhelming favorite to win it all. Something a BCS fan would approve of, I would expect. If there's a flaw to the system, it's the fact that often times the two best teams don't play in the SB, rather one or the other conference championships. However, that's only a flaw in terms of making the actual title game less exciting than one of the semis. It does not, however, undermine the ability of the system crowning a deserving champ since the two best teams did play one another at one point during the tourney. None the less, there's not a single rational fan who can say their team didn't get a fair shot at the title. None the less, even if one was to agree with you that the NFL play-offs are too big, it would be hard to make a valid argument that it is so by more than a few teams. Perhaps 8 instead of 12. That's a whole lot closer to what it needs to be than the BCS is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 (edited) Now, I can't remember the last time a team that really had no business being in the Super Bowl discussion happened to get hot at the right time and really crash the party. Eight wild-card teams have advanced all the way to the Super Bowl. Of those, four won the Super Bowl. Here are the teams that totally crashed the party Oakland did in 1980 Denver Broncos in 1997 Baltimore Ravens in 2000 Pittsburgh Steelers in 2005. Edit: In 1969, the AFL implemented a playoff format that had the top two teams in each division qualifying for the post-season. The Kansas City Chiefs, who did not win the AFL Western Division title, accomplished the tough feat of advancing through the AFL playoffs before defeating the NFL champion Minnesota Vikings in Super Bowl IV. Edited January 14, 2008 by Rockerbraves Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Eight wild-card teams have advanced all the way to the Super Bowl. Of those, four won the Super Bowl. Here are the teams that totally crashed the party Oakland did in 1980 Denver Broncos in 1997 Baltimore Ravens in 2000 Pittsburgh Steelers in 2005. Don't confuse "was not a top seed" with "totally crashed the party". I said that I didn't remember teams that did not belong in the discussion going to the SB. Both the Ravens and Steelers were actually favored in their SB games, so I'd have to say they belonged. The very talented and balanced Broncos beat Green Bay in what was among the most exciting Super Bowls ever. Now, the Raiders sort of did their thing in 1980 with smoke and mirrors, so I'll give you 1 of 4 there. You do realize that, by pointing out teams that advanced from either the Wildcard spot or Wildcard rounds that showed they deserved to be in the SB doesn't really support your argument very well, don't you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted January 14, 2008 Author Share Posted January 14, 2008 You do realize that, by pointing out teams that advanced from either the Wildcard spot or Wildcard rounds that showed they deserved to be in the SB doesn't really support your argument very well, don't you? I don't think he realizes that ... that is the beauty of the playoff system ... THEY PLAYED THE GAME. So if an upset occurred the losing team has NOBODY to blame but themselves ... but they got their shot. In the BCS system he loves only the two teams that recieve the majority of the votes (i.e. the most popular teams) get to play in the game aribitrarily deemed to be the national championship game. All the other teams don't get their shot ... and they didn't lose it on the field, they lost it in the voting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 You do realize that, by pointing out teams that advanced from either the Wildcard spot or Wildcard rounds that showed they deserved to be in the SB doesn't really support your argument very well, don't you? Nice try. The point I'm making is that IF the New England Patriots would have lost their 1st playoff game you could not have convinced me the Patriots were not the best team in the NFL this season. All a playoff does is give us a different way of finding out which team wins a competition. BCS chooses to do it over the course of a season while the NFL does it with a playoff. Do I really think the Namath's NY Jets were better than the Johnny Unitas Colts? Regardless of the method used, history will always reflect the NY Jets as the 1969 Super Bowl Chamipions & LSU Tigers as the BCS Champion this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted January 14, 2008 Author Share Posted January 14, 2008 Nice try. The point I'm making is that IF the New England Patriots would have lost their 1st playoff game you could not have convinced me the Patriots were not the best team in the NFL this season. All a playoff does is give us a different way of finding out which team wins a competition. BCS chooses to do it over the course of a season while the NFL does it with a playoff. Do I really think the Namath's NY Jets were better than the Johnny Unitas Colts? Regardless of the method used, history will always reflect the NY Jets as the 1969 Super Bowl Chamipions & LSU Tigers as the BCS Champion this year. Here is the difference. One way the teams win and lose on the field and the losing team has nobody to blame for the loss but themselves. So had NE lost to Jacksonville it is irrelevant that they were undefeated and thought of by many as the best team in football ... because on that particular Sunday when it was all on the line they were NOT the better team. You can't be the best team in the NFL if you can't win your first playoff game ... you can't be the best team in the NFL if you don't win the SB ... that is the beauty of a playoff system. The Jets are the 1969 Super Bowl Champions because that year they were the best team WHEN IT COUNTED. The LSU Tigers got elected to the NC game against a powder puff opponent. So they are the duly elected national champions ... there is no true NC. There are more than several teams WITH THE SAME NUMBER OF LOSSES AS LSU that have every right to say they didn't get a shot and LSU can't claim to be better than them ... these teams lost the vote. So ... I guess some, like you, prefer championships that are based on elections and popularity and others, like me, prefer that teams actually WIN their championships ON THE FIELD (or lose them on the field) as opposed to winning them on the ballot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Here is the difference. One way the teams win and lose on the field and the losing team has nobody to blame for the loss but themselves. So had NE lost to Jacksonville it is irrelevant that they were undefeated and thought of by many as the best team in football ... because on that particular Sunday when it was all on the line they were NOT the better team. You can't be the best team in the NFL if you can't win your first playoff game ... you can't be the best team in the NFL if you don't win the SB ... that is the beauty of a playoff system. The Jets are the 1969 Super Bowl Champions because that year they were the best team WHEN IT COUNTED. The LSU Tigers got elected to the NC game against a powder puff opponent. So they are the duly elected national champions ... there is no true NC. There are more than several teams WITH THE SAME NUMBER OF LOSSES AS LSU that have every right to say they didn't get a shot and LSU can't claim to be better than them ... these teams lost the vote. So ... I guess some, like you, prefer championships that are based on elections and popularity and others, like me, prefer that teams actually WIN their championships ON THE FIELD (or lose them on the field) as opposed to winning them on the ballot. If I am not mistaken you root for a Big 12 team, right? Do you guys have a Big 12 BB or baseball tournament? Which would you rather see your team win? The regular season title or the Big 12 tournament title? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.