SirSaxa
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by SirSaxa on Dec 7, 2014 12:51:03 GMT -5
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Dec 7, 2014 12:56:53 GMT -5
Third string quarterbacks do not beat Alabama.
|
|
|
Post by HometownHoya on Dec 7, 2014 13:53:46 GMT -5
Third string quarterbacks do not beat Alabama. Did you see him play yesterday though? His passes look good. I still think Alabama will win, but maybe the lack of game film will help Jones again. Either way, crazy a Big-10 championship winning and playoff QB won't be starting next year.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Dec 7, 2014 13:58:59 GMT -5
I did see him play. He played Wisconsin, not Alabama.
Tide wins by two touchdowns if not more.
|
|
|
Post by happyhoya1979 on Dec 7, 2014 15:59:26 GMT -5
Never underestimate the financial power of the Big 10 in college athletics. However good OSU has looked, they were only playing other Big 10 schools and lost badly to Virginia Tech.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Dec 7, 2014 21:31:32 GMT -5
And Vegas has spoken: Tide by 9.5
I doubt the Buckeyes stay that close...
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,390
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Dec 10, 2014 11:06:53 GMT -5
A four team playoff is better than two chosen the way the BSC did it. But IMO they should make it a true playoffs and invite 16 teams. Wetzel and others proposed this when playoffs were still under discussion. These matchups, to me, would be great to see.
(1) Alabama vs. (16) Marshall; (8) Michigan State vs. (9) Ole Miss; (5) Baylor vs. (12) Georgia Tech; (4) Ohio State vs. (13) Georgia; (6) TCU vs. (11) Arizona; (3) Florida State vs. (14) UCLA; (7) Mississippi State vs. (10) Kansas State; (2) Oregon vs. (15) Boise State.
No idea how you do it with bowls, but somebody should be able to figure out how to make it work.
Oh, and Baylor should be in over Ohio State.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Dec 10, 2014 11:40:49 GMT -5
A four team playoff is better than two chosen the way the BSC did it. But IMO they should make it a true playoffs and invite 16 teams. Wetzel and others proposed this when playoffs were still under discussion. These matchups, to me, would be great to see. (1) Alabama vs. (16) Marshall; (8) Michigan State vs. (9) Ole Miss; (5) Baylor vs. (12) Georgia Tech; (4) Ohio State vs. (13) Georgia; (6) TCU vs. (11) Arizona; (3) Florida State vs. (14) UCLA; (7) Mississippi State vs. (10) Kansas State; (2) Oregon vs. (15) Boise State. No idea how you do it with bowls, but somebody should be able to figure out how to make it work. Oh, and Baylor should be in over Ohio State. There are a couple of problems with a 16 team playoff: 1) 16 teams just kills the regular season. If you can get in with 3 losses (and there are 6 teams with 3 losses in that top 16) and are basically guaranteed a spot with 2 losses, there's no way to say that every game matters. It turns college football into the NFL / NCAAs where the regular season kind of matters, but only for seeding. 2) That's two more rounds of football games for unpaid players that are nominally students. I know the NCAA is a joke, but still--that's two more chances for serious injuries (including CTE), not to mention games during finals. I'd say a 6 team playoff is the best scenario--you're getting the 5 conference champs, so the importance of the regular season is retained, and a wild card spot for a Baylor/TCU situation or a Boise State. There is only one more round of games, but at least 4 of the 6 teams are only playing 2 games. Also, I think that the 7th and 8th teams are unlikely to be teams that really deserve a shot at the title--both MSUs had chances to make the playoffs on the field and couldn't beat Oregon/OSU or Alabama/Ole Miss.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Dec 10, 2014 11:46:24 GMT -5
Last year gives another reason to only expand to 6, rather than 8. If we go by the BCS standings, the Big 10 Championship game and SEC championship would not have mattered. The fact Mizzou and OSU lost wouldn't have prevented them from making an 8 team playoff, but it would have kept them out of a 6 team playoff.
1 Florida State 13-0 2 Auburn 12-1 3 Alabama 11-1 4 Michigan State 12-1 5 Stanford 11-2 6 Baylor 11-1 7 Ohio State 12-1 8 Missouri 11-2
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,390
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Dec 10, 2014 11:49:33 GMT -5
I like the inclusion of lots of teams. Give them a shot. But I understand your points.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,663
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Dec 10, 2014 11:57:12 GMT -5
Last year gives another reason to only expand to 6, rather than 8. If we go by the BCS standings, the Big 10 Championship game and SEC championship would not have mattered. The fact Mizzou and OSU lost wouldn't have prevented them from making an 8 team playoff, but it would have kept them out of a 6 team playoff. 1 Florida State 13-0 2 Auburn 12-1 3 Alabama 11-1 4 Michigan State 12-1 5 Stanford 11-2 6 Baylor 11-1 7 Ohio State 12-1 8 Missouri 11-2 I think an 8 team is probably ideal over time. It's still only six incremental games, and there's no way the #9 team deserves a shot at #1. I'm somewhat annoyed this year because I think there's decent evidence that TCU would have a legit shot of winning it all, and they aren't playing. Not that the four in don't also have a claim. Once you start arguing about who got screwed by just not getting in rather than someone got screwed in missing their chance to win the National Championship, it's too big.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Dec 10, 2014 12:11:14 GMT -5
Last year gives another reason to only expand to 6, rather than 8. If we go by the BCS standings, the Big 10 Championship game and SEC championship would not have mattered. The fact Mizzou and OSU lost wouldn't have prevented them from making an 8 team playoff, but it would have kept them out of a 6 team playoff. 1 Florida State 13-0 2 Auburn 12-1 3 Alabama 11-1 4 Michigan State 12-1 5 Stanford 11-2 6 Baylor 11-1 7 Ohio State 12-1 8 Missouri 11-2 I think an 8 team is probably ideal over time. It's still only six incremental games, and there's no way the #9 team deserves a shot at #1. I'm somewhat annoyed this year because I think there's decent evidence that TCU would have a legit shot of winning it all, and they aren't playing. Not that the four in don't also have a claim. Once you start arguing about who got screwed by just not getting in rather than someone got screwed in missing their chance to win the National Championship, it's too big. Yeah, the 8 team playoff is almost assuredly what they are going to go with. I guess it also removes the advantage of a bye given to a team chosen by a committee, which would probably come up as an issue quite often, like this year. Really the main problem is that it removes the urgency from some games, which the 4 team playoff does not (and the 6 team likely would not either). Then again, there would probably have still been a lot of urgency in the Big 10 / SEC Championship games, since it wouldn't be obvious that the loser was still in (especially if MSU had lost to OSU). so I might be overstating the problem. Once you go to 16, however, it's too many teams that didn't earn a shot at the title on the field getting a shot at the title.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Dec 10, 2014 12:12:33 GMT -5
I like the inclusion of lots of teams. Give them a shot. But I understand your points. All of the major conference teams had a shot though--each of them could have won more games and lost fewer (ie, won their conference, or at least their division).
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,390
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Dec 10, 2014 12:36:04 GMT -5
I like the inclusion of lots of teams. Give them a shot. But I understand your points. All of the major conference teams had a shot though--each of them could have won more games and lost fewer (ie, won their conference, or at least their division). My issue, though, is that under what scenario does a Marshall or a Boise State ever have a shot? Seems to me, it's almost impossible. Eight would be fine, I guess. I don't really have a problem with teams playing for seeding, since a higher seed gets you another home game. That's worth fighting for. But I can see the argument against 16. I just don't agree that the negatives outweigh the positives.
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Dec 10, 2014 13:04:47 GMT -5
A four team playoff is better than two chosen the way the BSC did it. But IMO they should make it a true playoffs and invite 16 teams. Wetzel and others proposed this when playoffs were still under discussion. These matchups, to me, would be great to see. (1) Alabama vs. (16) Marshall; (8) Michigan State vs. (9) Ole Miss; (5) Baylor vs. (12) Georgia Tech; (4) Ohio State vs. (13) Georgia; (6) TCU vs. (11) Arizona; (3) Florida State vs. (14) UCLA; (7) Mississippi State vs. (10) Kansas State; (2) Oregon vs. (15) Boise State. No idea how you do it with bowls, but somebody should be able to figure out how to make it work. Oh, and Baylor should be in over Ohio State. There are a couple of problems with a 16 team playoff: 1) 16 teams just kills the regular season. If you can get in with 3 losses (and there are 6 teams with 3 losses in that top 16) and are basically guaranteed a spot with 2 losses, there's no way to say that every game matters. It turns college football into the NFL / NCAAs where the regular season kind of matters, but only for seeding. 2) That's two more rounds of football games for unpaid players that are nominally students. I know the NCAA is a joke, but still--that's two more chances for serious injuries (including CTE), not to mention games during finals. I'd say a 6 team playoff is the best scenario--you're getting the 5 conference champs, so the importance of the regular season is retained, and a wild card spot for a Baylor/TCU situation or a Boise State. There is only one more round of games, but at least 4 of the 6 teams are only playing 2 games. Also, I think that the 7th and 8th teams are unlikely to be teams that really deserve a shot at the title--both MSUs had chances to make the playoffs on the field and couldn't beat Oregon/OSU or Alabama/Ole Miss. I'm of the belief that there's no right answer to this. But my own personal belief is that the champions of all conferences that compete in the sport should have a crack at the national championship. Otherwise, there's simply no real reason for these teams to be part of the FBS subdivision. It didn't happen this year, but it's only a matter of time before there's a year in which one (and probably two) teams in the "group of five" conferences finish the regular season undefeated. It also didn't happen this year, but there will be years in which one of those teams is at least somewhat well-regarded, which wasn't the case even while Marshall was unbeaten. In any event, under a four or six team system, they almost certainly don't get invited, and I just don't think that's right. I'd be in favor of expanding to sixteen for the simple reason that you can award automatic bids to everyone and still have at-large bids sufficient to ensure that every team truly deserving of a shot to win the whole thing gets in. As for the specific points: (1) Doing it with auto bids eliminates the problem of 3 loss teams getting in. The conference champions in the "group of five" all had one or two losses at most. There'd only be six at-large bids. (2) It's only additional rounds for a very limited number of teams. Right now, all of these teams are playing one additional game (a bowl game or playoff game) and two of them are playing two extra games under this current playoff system. For the eight losers in the first round, it would be a wash. Of the eight winners, four would lose in the next round anyway, so they play one extra game. And the four winners advance to the semifinals but have played two extra games to get there. So, it doesn't really affect that many people. And remember that under normal circumstances, all of these teams are regularly practicing for weeks (often with pads), so I'm not sure the tournament style doesn't decrease the risk of injury. I also really like the idea of expanding because it means you can play a couple of rounds of a playoff on campus sites, and it would add terrific theater generally, and also it would be great having a warm weather team travel to Columbus (or wherever). I said this in another thread, but you could stagger the first round over two weeks in order to have four playoff games each week to maximize use of the TV windows without over-saturation and also build in byes for every team that advances to the quarterfinal. Lessens somewhat the injury threat. The regular season, in my mind, still has great value because it determines whether you get zero, one, or two home games (and seeding, generally). And the limited number of at-large bids would mean that losing your conference title game could mean the difference between in and out even for a top notch team.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Jan 2, 2015 13:12:58 GMT -5
Third string quarterbacks do not beat Alabama. *cough cough*
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Jan 2, 2015 13:25:41 GMT -5
I will own that one. Still think Bama and specifically Sims were terrible but the kid played a big game in a big spot.
Will root like hell for Oregon because I loathe Urban Meyer.
|
|
Nevada Hoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,342
|
Post by Nevada Hoya on Jan 2, 2015 16:00:13 GMT -5
This is the match up I was hoping for. Any bets on TCU being #3 in the final rankings?
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Jan 2, 2015 16:40:45 GMT -5
I will own that one. Still think Bama and specifically Sims were terrible but the kid played a big game in a big spot. Will root like hell for Oregon because I loathe Urban Meyer. Do you like Nick Saban?
|
|
njhoya78
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,734
|
Post by njhoya78 on Jan 2, 2015 16:43:24 GMT -5
This is the match up I was hoping for. Any bets on TCU being #3 in the final rankings? Well, I'm pretty sure it won't be Baylor.
|
|