|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 3, 2015 10:12:34 GMT -5
I still think TCU should have been number three in the Playoffs. And that they could give any of the four playoff teams a run for their money. All they had to do was keep their foot on Baylor's throat. They lost head to head man. That is the one true tie breaker in any venture But only when applying to non SEC teams.
|
|
ICBM
King Koopa
Didn't know we did status updates here now
Posts: 12,288
|
Post by ICBM on Jan 3, 2015 12:19:01 GMT -5
All they had to do was keep their foot on Baylor's throat. They lost head to head man. That is the one true tie breaker in any venture But only when applying to non SEC teams. All. Oklahoma State needed to do to keep that from happening was beat Iowa state. I know they are spoilers often but they are not known for being a power house. I still believe LSU and Alabama were the #1 and #2 teams that yr. I also believe Ohio state and Michigan were the #1 and #2 teams in 2007.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 3, 2015 12:45:49 GMT -5
All. Oklahoma State needed to do to keep that from happening was beat Iowa state. I know they are spoilers often but they are not known for being a power house. I still believe LSU and Alabama were the #1 and #2 teams that yr. I also believe Ohio state and Michigan were the #1 and #2 teams in 2007. And 6-loss V-Tech is more of a power house than a 1-loss Baylor (or a 6-loss Iowa State, but that's not relevant this year)? "Oh, it was a different team then." Yeah, so was TCU when they lost to Baylor. TCU is a better team than Baylor, they played down, exactly as Ohio State did. Every time a good team doesn't play to their full potential, every time they don't call the plays that they called every other week, it's a different team. Clearly, if those two games were replayed with hindsight, both those teams would be undefeated this week. But why does that really matter in the first place? We don't erase losses just because a team hadn't gelled yet or just because they played down. Sorry, there's just a clear and blatant hypocrisy in how people justify teams getting in that I can't help but scoff at whenever people try to say that there's a real standard. All those teams had one loss, every argument that you apply to TCU could be applied to Ohio State. Clearly if any of them had done "their job" and not lost that one game they shouldnt' have lost, there'd be no questions. The exact same argument you can apply to Baylor or TCU should apply to Ohio STate, but because Ohio State has a name value and gets better ratings, it doesn't apply. If you want to set your standard for breaking a tie between two teams as a conference champion, fantastic. Then you just have to compare Ohio State and Baylor and I can see the argument for Ohio State clearly because at least Ohio State gives a semblence of a crap about their non-conference schedule. Not much, but clearly they have more f***s to give than Baylor. But conference championship didn't really matter to people when 2 SEC teams were poised to play up until Miss. State crapped the bed again. So we can't really pretend that that's the standard. The standard is nothing more than "who gets us ratings?" because that's the only criteria that doesn't turn the entire system into a hypocritical circle jerk. That's really the joke of the system to me. Quality wins matter, until they don't. Quality losses matter, until they don't. On field play matters, until it doesn't. Strength of schedule matters, until it doesn't. Record matters, until it doesn't. Conference champion matters, until it doesn't. Everyone involved can pick any criteria they want to justify their team getting in over another, solely based on the criteria they cherry picked to support their argument. And I know I'm not immune from it either. The reason I will always defend the computers is because they weren't swayed by that type of bullshit.
|
|
andrew8798
FANatic
on 24/7 this month
Posts: 106,084
|
Post by andrew8798 on Jan 3, 2015 13:46:11 GMT -5
Florida HC Jim McElwain told reporters senior QB Jeff Driskel is free to transfer to another program.
|
|
andrew8798
FANatic
on 24/7 this month
Posts: 106,084
|
Post by andrew8798 on Jan 3, 2015 15:00:22 GMT -5
Driskel is going to La Tech
|
|
|
Post by Duke Delicious on Jan 3, 2015 15:12:42 GMT -5
I think the TCU #4 argument should be dead and over with. The team that jumped TCU (OSU) for the last playoff spot went into their playoff game and handled the #1 team. I think OSU has more then proven that they deserved to be in the top 4.
|
|
|
Post by Duke Delicious on Jan 3, 2015 15:42:38 GMT -5
Florida beat East Carolina 28-20 in the Birmingham Bowl.
Screw this, 2-8 in my bowl picks since New Years.
|
|
|
Post by #Classic Hi-Definition X on Jan 3, 2015 16:31:46 GMT -5
SEC East went 5-0 in bowls this season.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 3, 2015 16:56:42 GMT -5
I think the TCU #4 argument should be dead and over with. The team that jumped TCU (OSU) for the last playoff spot went into their playoff game and handled the #1 team. I think OSU has more then proven that they deserved to be in the top 4. That's really not how it works though. Controversies don't go away just because someone else liked the outcome. There will always be the question of whether a team was left out just because they weren't as much of a ratings-grabber, because college football has a long history of doing that very thing, even ignoring the 'll season and this year. 98-99 - 1-loss, #3 K-state missed out on a BCS bowl in favor of #4 Ohio State and #8 Florida (w/ 2 losses) 99-00 - #8 Michigan passes over #6 K-State and #7 Michigan State, despite the Spartans beating Michigan in the regular season 00-01 - FSU passes Miami to play in the BCS title game, despite having lost to Miami and having the same record 04-05 - UT lobbies for votes and passes over Cal in the final poll of the season, because Cal decided not to run up the score And let's not forget the infamous "Little Sisters of the Poor" incident of 10-11 season, which not only led to a congressional investigation of the BCS, tOSU's president had to do community service and people went to jail for tax evasion after the BCS finally had to open it's books for the first time. This is a situation that goes beyond this year and TCU (or Baylor), it has to do with the entire culture of the sport, it has to do with a good-old boy system that ensures that the traditional powerhouses always have the advantage over everyone else, even if on-field results don't indicate that it should. The humans present would always sway the system to get what they believe to be the most desirable matchups, even if they're not the matchups that are most deserving, and when we have a situation where teams make huge moves despite the committee trying to assure people that it wouldn't be so swayed by 1 week of results, it should raise some eyebrows. Am I saying that Hawaii should go play in the NC and that those powerhouses should never get a shot? Of course not, but I will say that people think that there's nothing worth questioning in how the criteria we should judge teams on just always happen to favor the traditional powerhouses any time a question is raised, even changing year to year to do so, then I have an island off the coast of Maine that I'm putting up for auction. And you can't just discount it by saying that one team won, because those are the results of the circumstances of the day, and those circumstances could entirely different had different decisions been made. The way TCU played this year, they may have gone in and dropped 60 on Alabama and crushed them, or they may have gone in and choked. We'll never know, because that's not how it played out. Ohio State's success is a different discussion entirely, they played well and deserve all the credit for that, especially considering the injury situation. But it's only fitting that college football still can't avoid controversy the first year when the system designed to quell controversies was put in place.
|
|
andrew8798
FANatic
on 24/7 this month
Posts: 106,084
|
Post by andrew8798 on Jan 3, 2015 18:47:41 GMT -5
SUNDAY, January 4th GoDaddy Bowl: Toledo vs. Arkansas State, 9:00/6:00 PM, ESPN
|
|
|
Post by sfvega on Jan 3, 2015 19:03:34 GMT -5
I think the TCU #4 argument should be dead and over with. The team that jumped TCU (OSU) for the last playoff spot went into their playoff game and handled the #1 team. I think OSU has more then proven that they deserved to be in the top 4. That's really not how it works though. Controversies don't go away just because someone else liked the outcome. There will always be the question of whether a team was left out just because they weren't as much of a ratings-grabber, because college football has a long history of doing that very thing, even ignoring the 'll season and this year. 98-99 - 1-loss, #3 K-state missed out on a BCS bowl in favor of #4 Ohio State and #8 Florida (w/ 2 losses) 99-00 - #8 Michigan passes over #6 K-State and #7 Michigan State, despite the Spartans beating Michigan in the regular season 00-01 - FSU passes Miami to play in the BCS title game, despite having lost to Miami and having the same record 04-05 - UT lobbies for votes and passes over Cal in the final poll of the season, because Cal decided not to run up the score 09-10 - Cincinatti, undefeated and from an AQ conference, was passed over by 1-loss UT to play in the NC game. And let's not forget the infamous "Little Sisters of the Poor" incident of 10-11 season, which not only led to a congressional investigation of the BCS, tOSU's president had to do community service and people went to jail for tax evasion after the BCS finally had to open it's books for the first time. This is a situation that goes beyond this year and TCU (or Baylor), it has to do with the entire culture of the sport, it has to do with a good-old boy system that ensures that the traditional powerhouses always have the advantage over everyone else, even if on-field results don't indicate that it should. The humans present would always sway the system to get what they believe to be the most desirable matchups, even if they're not the matchups that are most deserving, and when we have a situation where teams make huge moves despite the committee trying to assure people that it wouldn't be so swayed by 1 week of results, it should raise some eyebrows. Am I saying that Hawaii should go play in the NC and that those powerhouses should never get a shot? Of course not, but I will say that people think that there's nothing worth questioning in how the criteria we should judge teams on just always happen to favor the traditional powerhouses any time a question is raised, even changing year to year to do so, then I have an island off the coast of Maine that I'm putting up for auction. And you can't just discount it by saying that one team won, because those are the results of the circumstances of the day, and those circumstances could entirely different had different decisions been made. The way TCU played this year, they may have gone in and dropped 60 on Alabama and crushed them, or they may have gone in and choked. We'll never know, because that's not how it played out. Ohio State's success is a different discussion entirely, they played well and deserve all the credit for that, especially considering the injury situation. But it's only fitting that college football still can't avoid controversy the first year when the system designed to quell controversies was put in place. The problem with the playoff is the same problem with the BCS. It's just too easy for the smaller schools to get overlooked, and teams like OSU will never do without. TCU or Boise St or Utah could put up ridiculous years and ridiculous numbers and essentially they have be be up a win in order to know they're in. For argument's sake, if TCU was down to their 3rd string QB, how many votes would they get? OSU took care of business, but TCU floored a pretty good Ole Miss team (albeit, less dangerous without Treadwell.)
|
|
Mochi Lone Wolf
Fry's dog Seymour
Development through Destruction.
Posts: 24,038
|
Post by Mochi Lone Wolf on Jan 3, 2015 19:07:07 GMT -5
LSU and Oklahoma State won their conferences and played one more game than Alabama, who didn't win their division in 2011.
The system threw out every stated rule and every rule of thumb to put Alabama in the national championship that year.
That was the year that convinced people the BCS needed to be thrown out and yeah, this year didn't put away the "Bigger programs get the benefit of the doubt" standard.
|
|
|
Post by Seth Drakin of Monster Crap on Jan 3, 2015 19:09:05 GMT -5
Driskel is going to La Tech
|
|
Unocal 76
King Koopa
Providing The Finest Oil
Posts: 12,687
|
Post by Unocal 76 on Jan 3, 2015 19:13:37 GMT -5
I think the TCU #4 argument should be dead and over with. The team that jumped TCU (OSU) for the last playoff spot went into their playoff game and handled the #1 team. I think OSU has more then proven that they deserved to be in the top 4. That's really not how it works though. Controversies don't go away just because someone else liked the outcome. There will always be the question of whether a team was left out just because they weren't as much of a ratings-grabber, because college football has a long history of doing that very thing, even ignoring the 'll season and this year. 98-99 - 1-loss, #3 K-state missed out on a BCS bowl in favor of #4 Ohio State and #8 Florida (w/ 2 losses) 99-00 - #8 Michigan passes over #6 K-State and #7 Michigan State, despite the Spartans beating Michigan in the regular season 00-01 - FSU passes Miami to play in the BCS title game, despite having lost to Miami and having the same record 04-05 - UT lobbies for votes and passes over Cal in the final poll of the season, because Cal decided not to run up the score 09-10 - Cincinatti, undefeated and from an AQ conference, was passed over by 1-loss UT to play in the NC game. And let's not forget the infamous "Little Sisters of the Poor" incident of 10-11 season, which not only led to a congressional investigation of the BCS, tOSU's president had to do community service and people went to jail for tax evasion after the BCS finally had to open it's books for the first time. This is a situation that goes beyond this year and TCU (or Baylor), it has to do with the entire culture of the sport, it has to do with a good-old boy system that ensures that the traditional powerhouses always have the advantage over everyone else, even if on-field results don't indicate that it should. The humans present would always sway the system to get what they believe to be the most desirable matchups, even if they're not the matchups that are most deserving, and when we have a situation where teams make huge moves despite the committee trying to assure people that it wouldn't be so swayed by 1 week of results, it should raise some eyebrows. Am I saying that Hawaii should go play in the NC and that those powerhouses should never get a shot? Of course not, but I will say that people think that there's nothing worth questioning in how the criteria we should judge teams on just always happen to favor the traditional powerhouses any time a question is raised, even changing year to year to do so, then I have an island off the coast of Maine that I'm putting up for auction. And you can't just discount it by saying that one team won, because those are the results of the circumstances of the day, and those circumstances could entirely different had different decisions been made. The way TCU played this year, they may have gone in and dropped 60 on Alabama and crushed them, or they may have gone in and choked. We'll never know, because that's not how it played out. Ohio State's success is a different discussion entirely, they played well and deserve all the credit for that, especially considering the injury situation. But it's only fitting that college football still can't avoid controversy the first year when the system designed to quell controversies was put in place. 2009 Texas was undefeated going into the NC game. 1998- Ohio State, like Kansas State, was a fellow one-loss conference champ. Florida, who didn't even win their division, was the bigger issue. 1999- That stands out considering Michigan had played in the Outback Bowl between 1999. Guess they so badlt wanted Michigan/Alabama because ratings = standings/results
|
|
andrew8798
FANatic
on 24/7 this month
Posts: 106,084
|
Post by andrew8798 on Jan 3, 2015 19:29:02 GMT -5
An NFL "insider" referred to FSU redshirt sophomore QB Jameis Winston as "this year’s version of Johnny Manziel."
The insider was not comparing skill set rather told me general managers around the league who hope Winston is gone before their team is called to the clock," TFY Draft Insider's Tony Pauline reported. "Like Manziel this past April, they don’t want to be faced with the option of using a first round pick on the quarterback.
|
|
andrew8798
FANatic
on 24/7 this month
Posts: 106,084
|
Post by andrew8798 on Jan 3, 2015 19:31:06 GMT -5
Mike Stoops to be offered the LSU DC job.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 3, 2015 19:32:50 GMT -5
That's really not how it works though. Controversies don't go away just because someone else liked the outcome. There will always be the question of whether a team was left out just because they weren't as much of a ratings-grabber, because college football has a long history of doing that very thing, even ignoring the 'll season and this year. 98-99 - 1-loss, #3 K-state missed out on a BCS bowl in favor of #4 Ohio State and #8 Florida (w/ 2 losses) 99-00 - #8 Michigan passes over #6 K-State and #7 Michigan State, despite the Spartans beating Michigan in the regular season 00-01 - FSU passes Miami to play in the BCS title game, despite having lost to Miami and having the same record 04-05 - UT lobbies for votes and passes over Cal in the final poll of the season, because Cal decided not to run up the score 09-10 - Cincinatti, undefeated and from an AQ conference, was passed over by 1-loss UT to play in the NC game. And let's not forget the infamous "Little Sisters of the Poor" incident of 10-11 season, which not only led to a congressional investigation of the BCS, tOSU's president had to do community service and people went to jail for tax evasion after the BCS finally had to open it's books for the first time. This is a situation that goes beyond this year and TCU (or Baylor), it has to do with the entire culture of the sport, it has to do with a good-old boy system that ensures that the traditional powerhouses always have the advantage over everyone else, even if on-field results don't indicate that it should. The humans present would always sway the system to get what they believe to be the most desirable matchups, even if they're not the matchups that are most deserving, and when we have a situation where teams make huge moves despite the committee trying to assure people that it wouldn't be so swayed by 1 week of results, it should raise some eyebrows. Am I saying that Hawaii should go play in the NC and that those powerhouses should never get a shot? Of course not, but I will say that people think that there's nothing worth questioning in how the criteria we should judge teams on just always happen to favor the traditional powerhouses any time a question is raised, even changing year to year to do so, then I have an island off the coast of Maine that I'm putting up for auction. And you can't just discount it by saying that one team won, because those are the results of the circumstances of the day, and those circumstances could entirely different had different decisions been made. The way TCU played this year, they may have gone in and dropped 60 on Alabama and crushed them, or they may have gone in and choked. We'll never know, because that's not how it played out. Ohio State's success is a different discussion entirely, they played well and deserve all the credit for that, especially considering the injury situation. But it's only fitting that college football still can't avoid controversy the first year when the system designed to quell controversies was put in place. 2009 Texas was undefeated going into the NC game. 1998- Ohio State, like Kansas State, was a fellow one-loss conference champ. Florida, who didn't even win their division, was the bigger issue. 1999- That stands out considering Michigan had played in the Outback Bowl between 1999. Guess they so badlt wanted Michigan/Alabama because ratings = standings/results 2009- Yeah, that's a mistake on my part. A bad mistake considering that was the year that really sent Nebraska in a rage with the extra second. I'll edit it out. 1998 - The thing of it is though, that'd never happen in reverse. The higher ranked team gets left out completely for 2 lower ranked teams? It makes sense if you want the ratings tha the Big-10 and SEC would bring over K-State, it doesn't from any other standard where the higher ranked teams get in to th ebigger bowls.
|
|
J
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,915
|
Post by J on Jan 3, 2015 19:48:07 GMT -5
1998- Ohio State, like Kansas State, was a fellow one-loss conference champ. Florida, who didn't even win their division, was the bigger issue. Long time lurker first time poster. K-State wasn't conference champ they lost to A&M in the conference championship game. They were ranked #3 before that game and were still ranked #3 even after losing to 2 loss A&M.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2015 19:54:33 GMT -5
I think the TCU #4 argument should be dead and over with. The team that jumped TCU (OSU) for the last playoff spot went into their playoff game and handled the #1 team. I think OSU has more then proven that they deserved to be in the top 4. It wasn't just OSU that jumped TCU, it was OSU, FSU, and Baylor. Before the last week TCU was #3, ahead of those three teams, and won their game. They dropped three spots in the rankings for winning. Not to mention that results after the fact should have no bearing on whether or not a team deserved to be in the playoffs to begin with. If we're going down that path then Oregon should have to play TCU because clearly FSU didn't belong in the playoff. Though really, what did the playoff committee think would happen when they settled on four spots for five power conferences and the rest of the FBS.
|
|
andrew8798
FANatic
on 24/7 this month
Posts: 106,084
|
Post by andrew8798 on Jan 3, 2015 20:47:03 GMT -5
FSU redshirt sophomore QB Jameis Winston "is most like Pittsburgh Steelers' star Ben Roethlisberger," wrote CBS Sports' Rob Rang.
Hmm
|
|