Hey folks - as a member of the DawgNation community, please remember to abide by simple rules of civil engagement with other members:
- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)
- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans
- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum
- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.
- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)
- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans
- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum
- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.
Options
Comments
That would take the whole off season to play out.... which would give us football year round....OMG OMG OMG, I'm on to your plan and I like it!
Penn State last year. Perhaps even UCF... last year. And that's just last year.
My biggest argument though is that we have 5 major conferences in college football, and 4 spots. How can you objectively fill that?
It's always going to be subjective until we go the "everyone gets a trophy" route. You haven't seen me argue that point. But they haven't gotten it wrong yet either. You won't name a team that's been left out, that should've been in, as you know you won't win that argument (subjective or not), as the committee has gotten it right. To say the system is flawed, you need to point to where it's been wrong in practice. Not just in a hypothetical sense.
And that article is cute. Its main premise is that you're supposed to win your conference, which I'm failing to find anywhere in the prerequisites of making the playoff. As there's no rule on that. If it was a requirement, they'd already have it in the rule book. Then OSU was one of the teams that was referenced as deserving. Hmm, does a top 4 team lose to unranked Iowa by 31 points? Oh yeah, OSU had another loss to OU earlier in the year at home. The only other team he mentions as potentially worthy is USC. Who only had a couple convincing wins all year, and barely beat some teams they should've killed. And oh yeah, who also had two losses (lost to Washinton St. who finished unranked, and got killed by Notre Dame). So, I don't see anything wrong with their pick. Please feel free to argue otherwise, and I'll keep stating facts like the above. Like I said, point to where it's been wrong before you complain.
Please reference UCF's SOS. End of story. But if you want to dive deeper, winning by 7 over SMU and 10 over Navy (2 of their "tougher" games) really screams best team? Penn State: Lost to OSU and Michigan St. Pretty sure Bama only lost to Auburn... Any others?
Wiser words have never been spoken. There is no "that's good enough" in business. Anything to make an extra buck.
I like the 4-team system. But, if it were to expand to 8 they need to get rid of some of the BS bowl games. Start the playoffs the week after the end of the season. The 4-week layoff is ridiculous. Need to burst that
"New Year's" mystique. Saban brings up a good point that the playoffs diminishes the importance of the lesser bowls. So, get rid of all the 6-6, 7-5 type of bowl games. Make bowl games a significant achievement again. People complain about participation trophies...well, half of the bowl games are just that. How many P5 teams went to a bowl game with a 6-6 record, but 3 of those wins were against FCS teams? In summary, start the big-bowls earlier and get rid of all the crap bowl games. 13,000 went to the Bahamas Bowl. 14,000 went to the Frisco Bowl. 16,000 went to the Gasparilla Bowl (WTH is that?) 16,000 at the Idaho Potato Bowl. I kind of miss the days when just getting to a bowl game was a major achievement.
Yeah, the lower tier bowls are generally pretty awful to watch. Two mediocre teams co-piloting the struggle bus. I just see them as a way to watch a little more football before we go the boring off-season. That's the only silver lining I can find.
Oh, you mean the two other decent teams (Memphis & USF) that beat up on their cr@p conference and have a decent record? But no, I said "two of their tougher games," please note that I didn't say two toughest. USF's best regular season win was Illinois (talk about powerhouse). Memphis' best win, unranked UCLA at home. They basically just beat up on little sisters of the poor in their conference all year and get ranked around 20-25. So tough.
Wow, the predilection towards having a centralized, top down system in this thread is pretty amazing.
Why don’t you guys just watch pro football instead?
You’ll find some small businesses where the owner(s) still work for the company who can reach some level of success and be happy with it. A few large businesses are even like that. But when a company goes public, or even when it wants to go public, the line may very well just be whenever you get outside investment, the only reason people own any of that company is because they want it to grow and make them more money.
That’s why I own stocks. I’m hoping they grow enough so I can retire.
I hear what you're saying about their SOS and I agree with it in general. I didn't think they deserved to be in last year. I also thought they would beat Auburn because we knew Auburn was a little worn down and disappointed in how we ended their season. On the other hand, it was UCF's Super Bowl and they played that way.
My one issue with that argument, though, is that you are basically telling UCF that there was nothing they could have done. It was completely out of their hands. It did not matter at all what they did they were not going to get in. In effect, it's the exact reason the playoff was created in the first place. The same thing happened to Auburn in 2004. Undefeated SEC champ who didn't get a shot because Oklahoma and USC started that season ranked ahead of them and never lost.
I will **** on their schedule. Heading into the playoffs, UCF #66 ranked SOS, Bama #10. Sure they played a couple teams barely inside the top 25, but doesn't matter when a lot of your other games are teams ranked 80 or worse. Do you think UCF would've done as well, or I guess better since they deserve to be in, than Bama in the SEC? See, there's no room for debate.
They have to schedule games against top 10-15 opponents, or at least a few top 25 teams (not in your conference). We don't really know what they look like against top competition outside their conference (other than their Super Bowl you mentioned). I know some top 10 teams will stay away from pretty good G5 schools, but all won't. Heck, I'd rather see UGA play them than Austin Peay... Maybe they should lobby to join the Big 12, as that conference needs teams, and allows the Big 12 to expand its footprint. I agree it's tough for teams outside the power 5 conferences to make it, but there's a reason (they usually don't play tough schedules).
I know this won't happen, but treat it like the English Premier League. The bottom team in each power 5 conference gets dropped to a lower conference, and the best team in lower conferences gets bumped up to a Power 5 conference in their region. For example, 0-8 Tennessee last year would go to UCF's AAC conference and UCF would join the SEC East. Then the next year, the last place SEC team would trade again. How bad UT is, you still have to think they might win the AAC and get right back, at least within a couple years. Again, this won't happen as rivalries, scheduling, etc. would be affected. But it would allow lower ranked teams to prove their worth on a much bigger stage.
You act like you completely rebuked my statement, you didn't. Plus I said "perhaps" UCF. They won a bunch of games. They did beat, albeit an unmotivated team, Auburn. Besides that wasn't my greatest point. My greatest point is 5 major football conferences, 4 playoff spots. It needs to expand. Put the onus on winning the conference again, and sprinkle in a few exciting teams for flavor. I honestly think it sounds great.
The best 4 or 8 teams might not come from a conference champion. So the whole, let all the conference champions in is not good, to put it nicely.
Umm...no. Wins and losses are the only objective measure. You don't get named conference champ based on a vote.
The article just highlights the subjective nature of the current system.
I agree on the schedule piece. However, the challenge there is that the schedules are made years in advance yet we then look back retroactively at the end of the season to validate whether the schedule was worthy or not. For example, years ago when it was scheduled Texas and USC probably both thought tomorrow night's game would be a marquee matchup. However, now that game looks rather ho-hum unless you're a fan of one of those programs. We think our season opening games against Clemson and Oregon down the road should be big. A lot can change in 5-6 years.
Maybe we need to get rid of the subjective "Best" team and just go with Conference Champions. That will eliminate all whining and complaining. Of course there is a chance some low ranked team happens to win their conference, like if in 2016 the #19 VT had beaten Clemson in the ACCCG. Well, Clemson is out and VT is in. Sorry, that's how it goes.