Haloid1177
Banned
I've never liked Les. Man's offensive philosophy is ancient and why we don't compete for championships or SEC titles yearly.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
College Football Week 13 - Sparty ain't worried 'bout no clock
- Thread starter Randolph Freelander
- Start date
I've never liked Les. Man's offensive philosophy is ancient and why we don't compete for championships or SEC titles yearly.
serenewarfare
Banned
Seems like the pressure from the public and team's reaction to the rumors is what made them go back on their decision to fire Les. They knew they'd get raked over the coals if they fired him. Those idiots don't realize that they are getting raked over the coals anyways. The whole situation is an absolute embarrassment.
And if 3 weeks is great, 4 weeks would be even better! And if 4 weeks is great, then 5 weeks/games would be even better!
I like 4 teams because it makes your margin for error during the regular season so small. I don't care if there is an 8-4 team playing great ball at the end of the season that could come in and Cinderella it up. I want teams that have earned it in the regular season. Sure, we can debate about whether or not a team has "earned it," and it is this debate that drives a lot of the interest in the sport.
bucknuticus
Member
wait what? they pull people out that have ties to any team? Whats the fucking point then, lets just get people with Kansas, Purdue, UNLV, and Tulane ties then.
GoldenEye 007
Member
Not sure if many people, even people as rich as Miles, could leave $15 million on the table over spite lol.
But still can't believe they were going to fire him. It'd think about that I guess. But only think!
perfectchaos007
Member
you may have been left with blue balls, but you probably would have gotten an STD if you went through with it, metaphorically speaking. So cut your losses and take the blue balls
If Nebraska hadn't shot themselves in the foot, we would have beaten both teams in the Big 10 championship game.... : o
I liked the computers. Voters are too swayed by school names and conference and late losses vs early losses. Every year that people complained about a bad computer result, is was b/c the team that benefited played a good non-conference schedule
Randolph Freelander
Member
And then fired the coach.
Affeinvasion
Member
That is a logical fallacy. There is obviously a limit to how many teams should be in. Even 6 teams with a bye would be superior. Right now there is absolutely no advantage to being the number 1 team over the number 4 team.
A small increase in the number of playoff teams wouldn't all of the sudden get 8-4 teams in. That's ridiculous. Whatever the top 8 shakes out to be, all of those teams would be deserving of a shot to play in the post-season and it would be fun to watch.
For the record I'm a proponent of a 6 team 1/2 get a bye playoff that actually rewards the best teams since all of the games are played on neutral fields.
FloydtheFathead
Member
6-8 is fine.. that is the max..
the power five conference and one group of five team for six or something along those lines.. It still has a debate and intrigue..
The only person who could clearly complain about that is ND and since ND lost to Stanford...
GoldenEye 007
Member
I'm actually not in favor of autobids for any conferences or group of conferences. Don't think that is necessary at all.
Dsyndrome
Member
Wait, what? People are actually saying this shit? It's not his fault that people dropped and had passes intercepted last week all the live long day last week. He's the best we've had since Lou Holtz.
And that's fine with me. Your reward is getting to actually play for a chance to win the national championship. How fair is it to additionally reward the "best teams" when we have such a fucked-up, subjective system for determining who the "best teams" are? Unless you have 2 and only 2 undefeated P5 teams at the end of the season, you're going to to let the committee subjectively give 1-2 teams an advantage over the other teams.
Affeinvasion
Member
There is a vocal minority of ND fans that have wanted to fire BK since 2011. 2012 shut them up slightly. But they came back in force the next year.
Affeinvasion
Member
Purple Cheeto
Member
Nick Saban's offensive philosophy isn't much different, if he didn't have Lane Kiffin there he probably would be running roughly the same offense as LSU.
Velcro Fly
Member
6 is too many.
You'd basically have Stanford playing 8-4 USC again for the playoffs
Or you'd have OSU/MSU playing a virtually meaningless game because both could conceivably bounce back into the top 6.
Then you get a scenario where 2 loss Stanford maybe gets in over 1 loss non conference champion Ohio St.
Four is fine. Win your conference first. Schedule 1 or 2 tough OOC games and if you lose one it won't kill you but winning it separates you from the other 1 loss teams at the end of the year. That is the formula. We've whittled down teams over the past month and it has been wonderful.
Expanding beyond 4 and we're going to get 16 or 20 like the FCS
You'd basically have Stanford playing 8-4 USC again for the playoffs
Or you'd have OSU/MSU playing a virtually meaningless game because both could conceivably bounce back into the top 6.
Then you get a scenario where 2 loss Stanford maybe gets in over 1 loss non conference champion Ohio St.
Four is fine. Win your conference first. Schedule 1 or 2 tough OOC games and if you lose one it won't kill you but winning it separates you from the other 1 loss teams at the end of the year. That is the formula. We've whittled down teams over the past month and it has been wonderful.
Expanding beyond 4 and we're going to get 16 or 20 like the FCS
You aren't doing either of those yearly as long as Saban is at Alabama. I suggest you think a little more long-term.
If you want to effectively pigeon-hole my position, it's that we should go back to the BCS and take the top 4 teams from there. However, with the system we have, yes, I would rather have the committee simply pick the top 4 teams than have them pick 6 teams and then sit around and decide which 2 of those teams gets a HUGE bonus of a first round bye.
GoldenEye 007
Member
Because the regular season became meaningless like many people predicted when this system was adopted in favor of the BCS lol.
Here's how I see the top 10 next week:
1. Clemson
2. OU
3. Alabama
4. Iowa
5. Michigan State
6. Ohio State
7. Stanford
8. Florida State
9. UNC
10. Notre Dame
If UNC beats Clemson, I think UNC gets in.
1. Alabama
2. OU
3. Michigan State (assuming Michigan State wins)
4. UNC
5. Ohio State
6. Clemson
But what if Stanford beats USC? Would Stanford have a bigger case than Ohio State?
EDIT: Swapped OU and Alabama.
1. Clemson
2. OU
3. Alabama
4. Iowa
5. Michigan State
6. Ohio State
7. Stanford
8. Florida State
9. UNC
10. Notre Dame
If UNC beats Clemson, I think UNC gets in.
1. Alabama
2. OU
3. Michigan State (assuming Michigan State wins)
4. UNC
5. Ohio State
6. Clemson
But what if Stanford beats USC? Would Stanford have a bigger case than Ohio State?
EDIT: Swapped OU and Alabama.
perfectchaos007
Member
Everyone is using the slippery slope argument as reason not to expand to 8. Very few people are advocating going more than 8, but 6 or 8 teams seem to be the sweet spot. I think it just makes sense.
I was ok with this before the playoff, not sure why I'd feel differently now that the system caved to the boo birds.
You can spout off nonsense about 128 teams, but realistically, there's only 6-10 teams in the realm of being able to be good enough to play for a championship. Depending on next weekend, 2-4 teams might slip up and fall to the wayside. There is still an outside shot to get a 2 loss team in the playoff, playing against an undefeated team, and that would make more of a case of "4 teams is too many."
IF UNC gets into the playoff, we should just cancel College Football, as it would have become a nonsense game. They PLAYED 2 FCS TEAMS! THEY LOST TO SOUTH CAROLINA, WHO CAN'T BEAT A BAD FCS TEAM.
Affeinvasion
Member
This is still a logical fallacy. There has yet to be a convincing argument why expanding the field to 6 teams would ruin the playoffs. Winning your conference is important but it shouldn't be the only criteria; and it isn't by the CFP committee's own rules. That is why there are no automatic bids.
GoldenEye 007
Member
OU is currently ranked 3 in the CFP rankings?
The regular season becoming meaningless thing never really held any water unless things got absurd (like expanding the playoffs to 24 teams or something). Even in the NFL it still matters outside of rare cases like the AFC East - and that's only because the Pats are really good and happen to be in a division with three very poorly-run franchises.
The regular season matters in football because you don't play many games. The other major sports play too many games.
People are selectively arguing 6 or 8 this in this thread now, but when we've had this discussion before there have been proponents of 16+ team fields, with people pointing out how FCS does it with even more.
So it's not a slippery slope, it's premised on real arguments people have made in the past, and points directly to a format currently used in a lower division of college football. Everyone always talks about how college football is driven by the money. Hell, someone said something to that effect in this thread tonight about money driving the match-ups put together by the committee. You don't think ESPN would love to see a huge playoff bracket with 16-24 teams?
FloydtheFathead
Member
This.
Dsyndrome
Member
I don't get why 8 is such a travesty. The only reason people aren't more up in arms about this is because they system "worked itself out." It's year 2. If people think it's going to magically work itself out every year, you're being delusional. There'll always being some non-power 5 1-loss team that should have a shot but they won't because they're not B1G or SEC.
If you expand to 8 are you comfortable giving the teams that didn't win their conference a first round bye? Cause that's basically what happens since the conference championships are the first round effectively.
Affeinvasion
Member
That's how most people think, but we're not on the CFP selection committee. Bad losses early definitely hold less weight than playing well down the stretch.
FloydtheFathead
Member
You thought wrong Cyan.
GoldenEye 007
Member
To be fair, a lot of things were discussed as there was no precedent in CFB for any sort of competent postseason selection criteria. So I know 16 team stuff was discussed.
Now that we got the CFP system now, I think it is reasonable to discuss a range between 4-8 as absolute max in ensuring including strong teams getting in. Not like in the NBA where freaking half of the teams get in!
Oh yeah. Would they be in the same position as TCU/Baylor last year? They were both left out due to a lack of a conference champion.
Affeinvasion
Member
No it doesn't because there is a layoff between the conference championship games and the playoffs. Not playing the last week of the season has no effect on what happens during bowl season.
GoldenEye 007
Member
Big XII didn't schedule everyone with two bye weeks so everyone plays on championship weekend? Uh.... seems kind of dumb. I assumed OU would be playing next week.
serenewarfare
Banned
I think the critics would say that Les won't go get a guy like Kiffin who has a philosophy so much different than his. I'm very glad he's staying but I do think Cameron needs to go. They need to reinvent the offense the way Bama did.
perfectchaos007
Member
no one will have a bye in a bracket of 8. top 4 seeds will get home field for the quarter final, then the winners will play in the new years semi final bowls. top 4 seeds will be heavily favored to win since they are at home, but at least it adds 4 probably deserving teams a chance to move on in the playoffs. 1 loss Ohio State won't get in this year, but would anyone want to play them in the playoffs? Same thing with 1 loss TCU last year.
Take Kiffin, so we can find someone who will throw the ball forwards (and potentially not have a QB who brain farts on most of his passing attempts)
Kiffin must really hate Coker. He's got no confidence in the kid, but damn if Coker didn't show off his arm strength with that bullet to Stewart for a TD.
serenewarfare
Banned
Oh no, I wasn't saying I want Kiffin. Don't put that on me. lol I'm just saying having an OC who is bringing something new to the table, instead of reaffirming Les' old school mentality, would be nice.