Smoke your cigars and enjoy the band while you can....

[steve dave]

College Football is my favorite sport.  Thank you.

YES AJ!  IT IS REALLY GREAT!

[KITNfury]

any proposed system that would allow our garbage 2003 team qualify for a 4 team playoff is mumped worse than the current BCS

Then you're really whining about how conferences choose their champion, not the system's way of selecting.

bullshit, I'm telling you that being a conference champion is a stupid way to choose the best teams in the country.

In your scenario, would OU have been in the playoffs in '03?

Yep, OSU, LSU, USC, Boise would have been my picks.  Would Wisconsin have been in yours this year?  Would Alabama?

So yes, you're really bitching about how conferences choose their champ. I don't care how a conference chooses their best team, but once they do, they should advance. Otherwise you're using the biggest dipshit talking point of "eye ball test" when in reality, there simply aren't enough connections to determine which teams are best from different conferences. There are enough data points within a conference to find the best team to move on from there.

Edit: and no, bama wouldn't have made it last year for me. They lost on their home field to another playoff contender and dont deserve the chance to split games with LSU and legitimately be called NC. There is still no definitive proof the sec had the 2 best teams last year. Would Stanford or osu have beaten LSU? Probably not, but there is no legitimate way to know except "eyeball test" which is a convenient way to argue a point without facts.

[steve dave]

any proposed system that would allow our garbage 2003 team qualify for a 4 team playoff is mumped worse than the current BCS

Then you're really whining about how conferences choose their champion, not the system's way of selecting.

bullshit, I'm telling you that being a conference champion is a stupid way to choose the best teams in the country.

In your scenario, would OU have been in the playoffs in '03?

Yep, OSU, LSU, USC, Boise would have been my picks.  Would Wisconsin have been in yours this year?  Would Alabama?

So yes, you're really bitching about how conferences choose their champ. I don't care how a conference chooses their best team, but once they do, they should advance. Otherwise you're using the biggest dipshit talking point of "eye ball test" when in reality, there simply aren't enough connections to determine which teams are best from different conferences. There are enough data points within a conference to find the best team to move on from there.

beautiful strawman. you keep whacking it with that stick until it submits.

[pissclams]

oh man, oh man.  looks like the old KITNfury v steve dave battle has really taken root here in the SYUAETBWYC thread.

these guys have been battling it out for years and i don't expect it to end here.  just strap it in and sit back and enjoy the show folks because this is going to be an epic bbs chess match.

[steve dave]

oh man, oh man.  looks like the old KITNfury v steve dave battle has really taken root here in the SYUAETBWYC thread.

these guys have been battling it out for years and i don't expect it to end here.  just strap it in and sit back and enjoy the show folks because this is going to be an epic bbs chess match.

[steve dave]

Edit: and no, bama wouldn't have made it last year for me. They lost on their home field to another playoff contender and dont deserve the chance to split games with LSU and legitimately be called NC. There is still no definitive proof the sec had the 2 best teams last year. Would Stanford or osu have beaten LSU? Probably not, but there is no legitimate way to know except "eyeball test" which is a convenient way to argue a point without facts.

and your solution is letting a 3 loss Wisconsin team have a go at them?  by letting a 3 loss KSU team that lost to a 4 loss Marshall team at home have a go at it?  LSU and Alabama were the two best teams last year.  OSU and either Oregon or Stanford would have got in under the system that will be approved as well.  you have to get the best teams on the field.  sucks that your '03 Cats didn't deserve it, but the solution for them is to play better football, not get a backdoor ticket.  100% of the time that KState or any other Big 12 team goes undefeated they will get invited.

[MadCat]

(Potential) Condolences, 42:

http://www.texastech.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1377831

[steve dave]

(Potential) Condolences, 42:

http://www.texastech.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1377831

lol.  Texas is such a boss making TTech play on their network.   

[TheHamburglar]

(Potential) Condolences, 42:

http://www.texastech.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1377831

lol.  Texas is such a boss, making TTech play on their network.   

The same thing is going to happen to us in 2015.

(Not that I really care, it wouldn't be on TV otherwise)

[steve dave]

(Potential) Condolences, 42:

http://www.texastech.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1377831

lol.  Texas is such a boss, making TTech play on their network.   

The same thing is going to happen to us in 2015.

I'd love to play on the LHN.  Beats the crap out of FCS. 

[TheHamburglar]

(Potential) Condolences, 42:

http://www.texastech.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1377831

lol.  Texas is such a boss, making TTech play on their network.   

The same thing is going to happen to us in 2015.

I'd love to play on the LHN.  Beats the crap out of FCS.

I agree it's not a bad thing, but expect for 90% of KSU fans to reach epic butthurt level when it happens. 

[KITNfury]

Edit: and no, bama wouldn't have made it last year for me. They lost on their home field to another playoff contender and dont deserve the chance to split games with LSU and legitimately be called NC. There is still no definitive proof the sec had the 2 best teams last year. Would Stanford or osu have beaten LSU? Probably not, but there is no legitimate way to know except "eyeball test" which is a convenient way to argue a point without facts.

and your solution is letting a 3 loss Wisconsin team have a go at them?  by letting a 3 loss KSU team that lost to a 4 loss Marshall team at home have a go at it?  LSU and Alabama were the two best teams last year.  you have to get the best teams on the field.  sucks that your '03 Cats didn't deserve it, but the solution for them is to play better football, not get a backdoor ticket.  100% of the time that KState or any other Big 12 team goes undefeated they will get invited.

I don't really give a damn about the 03 team, the point is that you're all for letting opinions govern the champ. Nothing more than opinion will be used to select the final four. That is the very definition of a flawed system. Why not just use the same panel of judges to replace the NCAA by selecting 2 teams and play one game for the nc? You and I both know that's got huge flaws yet your solution is to just expand that flawed system.

[Panjandrum]

Why does Texas want to be in a conference with us? Especially if they don't need to win a conference championship to get into the 4 team playoff? I'm not trying to be clever.

Because they're too good to dump their non-revenue sports in C-USA and they have no desire to schedule volleyball as an independent.

[steve dave]

Edit: and no, bama wouldn't have made it last year for me. They lost on their home field to another playoff contender and dont deserve the chance to split games with LSU and legitimately be called NC. There is still no definitive proof the sec had the 2 best teams last year. Would Stanford or osu have beaten LSU? Probably not, but there is no legitimate way to know except "eyeball test" which is a convenient way to argue a point without facts.

and your solution is letting a 3 loss Wisconsin team have a go at them?  by letting a 3 loss KSU team that lost to a 4 loss Marshall team at home have a go at it?  LSU and Alabama were the two best teams last year.  you have to get the best teams on the field.  sucks that your '03 Cats didn't deserve it, but the solution for them is to play better football, not get a backdoor ticket.  100% of the time that KState or any other Big 12 team goes undefeated they will get invited.

I don't really give a damn about the 03 team, the point is that you're all for letting opinions govern the champ. Nothing more than opinion will be used to select the final four. That is the very definition of a flawed system. Why not just use the same panel of judges to replace the NCAA by selecting 2 teams and play one game for the nc? You and I both know that's got huge flaws yet your solution is to just expand that flawed system.

my solution (and the one that will be approved) will get the best teams on the field a much higher percentage of the time than a 4 champions from the B12/P12/B10/SEC solution would.  even you can't argue that.  the only thing that having the 4 champions does is allow the worst champions from the worst leagues to ge backdoor entry.  in most years the 3-4 best champions will get into the new system anyway.  it just has a failsafe that some garbage 3 loss team doesn't sneak in and keep the best team in the country out of it.  and lol at you saying you don't give a damn about the '03 KSU team when you brought them up in your very first talking point.

In your scenario, would OU have been in the playoffs in '03?

 

[Fuktard]

Edit: and no, bama wouldn't have made it last year for me. They lost on their home field to another playoff contender and dont deserve the chance to split games with LSU and legitimately be called NC. There is still no definitive proof the sec had the 2 best teams last year. Would Stanford or osu have beaten LSU? Probably not, but there is no legitimate way to know except "eyeball test" which is a convenient way to argue a point without facts.

and your solution is letting a 3 loss Wisconsin team have a go at them?  by letting a 3 loss KSU team that lost to a 4 loss Marshall team at home have a go at it?  LSU and Alabama were the two best teams last year.  OSU and either Oregon or Stanford would have got in under the system that will be approved as well.  you have to get the best teams on the field.  sucks that your '03 Cats didn't deserve it, but the solution for them is to play better football, not get a backdoor ticket.  100% of the time that KState or any other Big 12 team goes undefeated they will get invited.

This discounts a team with a key injury or one that gets much better as the year progresses....would VMI have been one of the top 4 picks, no but they did it when it counted.  Winning your conference isn't a back door ticket....winning your conference is the beginning of the tournament...you win and advance like any other tourney.

A back door ticket would be getting into the four without winning your conference.  You aren't the best in the nation if you aren't the best in your conference.

[KITNfury]

Edit: and no, bama wouldn't have made it last year for me. They lost on their home field to another playoff contender and dont deserve the chance to split games with LSU and legitimately be called NC. There is still no definitive proof the sec had the 2 best teams last year. Would Stanford or osu have beaten LSU? Probably not, but there is no legitimate way to know except "eyeball test" which is a convenient way to argue a point without facts.

and your solution is letting a 3 loss Wisconsin team have a go at them?  by letting a 3 loss KSU team that lost to a 4 loss Marshall team at home have a go at it?  LSU and Alabama were the two best teams last year.  you have to get the best teams on the field.  sucks that your '03 Cats didn't deserve it, but the solution for them is to play better football, not get a backdoor ticket.  100% of the time that KState or any other Big 12 team goes undefeated they will get invited.

I don't really give a damn about the 03 team, the point is that you're all for letting opinions govern the champ. Nothing more than opinion will be used to select the final four. That is the very definition of a flawed system. Why not just use the same panel of judges to replace the NCAA by selecting 2 teams and play one game for the nc? You and I both know that's got huge flaws yet your solution is to just expand that flawed system.

my solution (and the one that will be approved) will get the best teams on the field a much higher percentage of the time than a 4 champions from the B12/P12/B10/SEC solution would.  even you can't argue that.  the only thing that having the 4 champions does is allow the worst champions from the worst leagues to ge backdoor entry.  in every year the 3-4 best champions will get into the new system anyway.  it just has a failsafe that some garbage 3 loss team doesn't sneak in and keep the best team in the country out of it.  and lol at you saying you don't give a damn about the '03 KSU team when you brought them up in your very first talking point.

In your scenario, would OU have been in the playoffs in '03?

I don't care that it was KSU, it could have been any team substituted in for KSU. My point is that I don't think KSU got screwed.

Back to the point, again you're wanting to use the court of public opinion to determine the champ, only in a more roundabout way. That is almost exactly what the bcs is since it relies on polls. Of course there will be times that a non top 4 team would get in, but at least it would be determined by on the field play and not by the opinion of a panel of judges. This is football, not figure skating for crying out loud. Win your division, advance, win your championship, advance, win the semis, advance, win the championship, national champs......or win the judges hearts over, advance, ....GMAFBSD

[steve dave]

Edit: and no, bama wouldn't have made it last year for me. They lost on their home field to another playoff contender and dont deserve the chance to split games with LSU and legitimately be called NC. There is still no definitive proof the sec had the 2 best teams last year. Would Stanford or osu have beaten LSU? Probably not, but there is no legitimate way to know except "eyeball test" which is a convenient way to argue a point without facts.

and your solution is letting a 3 loss Wisconsin team have a go at them?  by letting a 3 loss KSU team that lost to a 4 loss Marshall team at home have a go at it?  LSU and Alabama were the two best teams last year.  you have to get the best teams on the field.  sucks that your '03 Cats didn't deserve it, but the solution for them is to play better football, not get a backdoor ticket.  100% of the time that KState or any other Big 12 team goes undefeated they will get invited.

I don't really give a damn about the 03 team, the point is that you're all for letting opinions govern the champ. Nothing more than opinion will be used to select the final four. That is the very definition of a flawed system. Why not just use the same panel of judges to replace the NCAA by selecting 2 teams and play one game for the nc? You and I both know that's got huge flaws yet your solution is to just expand that flawed system.

my solution (and the one that will be approved) will get the best teams on the field a much higher percentage of the time than a 4 champions from the B12/P12/B10/SEC solution would.  even you can't argue that.  the only thing that having the 4 champions does is allow the worst champions from the worst leagues to ge backdoor entry.  in every year the 3-4 best champions will get into the new system anyway.  it just has a failsafe that some garbage 3 loss team doesn't sneak in and keep the best team in the country out of it.  and lol at you saying you don't give a damn about the '03 KSU team when you brought them up in your very first talking point.

In your scenario, would OU have been in the playoffs in '03?

I don't care that it was KSU, it could have been any team substituted in for KSU. My point is that I don't think KSU got screwed.

Back to the point, again you're wanting to use the court of public opinion to determine the champ, only in a more roundabout way. That is almost exactly what the bcs is since it relies on polls. Of course there will be times that a non top 4 team would get in, but at least it would be determined by on the field play and not by the opinion of a panel of judges. This is football, not figure skating for crying out loud. Win your division, advance, win your championship, advance, win the semis, advance, win the championship, national champs......or win the judges hearts over, advance, ....GMAFBSD

this may shock you but if you are in one of those conferences and win all your games you are getting in 100% of the time (you can say advance here if you want).  there's nothing more "on the field" than that.  also, if you lose 3 games you aren't getting in (in the system that will be approved, in your system you will have 3 loss teams often) and those losses happened "on the field" as well.  in your proposed system you can lose a bunch of games and "advance" which is stupid. 

[KITNfury]

Edit: and no, bama wouldn't have made it last year for me. They lost on their home field to another playoff contender and dont deserve the chance to split games with LSU and legitimately be called NC. There is still no definitive proof the sec had the 2 best teams last year. Would Stanford or osu have beaten LSU? Probably not, but there is no legitimate way to know except "eyeball test" which is a convenient way to argue a point without facts.

and your solution is letting a 3 loss Wisconsin team have a go at them?  by letting a 3 loss KSU team that lost to a 4 loss Marshall team at home have a go at it?  LSU and Alabama were the two best teams last year.  you have to get the best teams on the field.  sucks that your '03 Cats didn't deserve it, but the solution for them is to play better football, not get a backdoor ticket.  100% of the time that KState or any other Big 12 team goes undefeated they will get invited.

I don't really give a damn about the 03 team, the point is that you're all for letting opinions govern the champ. Nothing more than opinion will be used to select the final four. That is the very definition of a flawed system. Why not just use the same panel of judges to replace the NCAA by selecting 2 teams and play one game for the nc? You and I both know that's got huge flaws yet your solution is to just expand that flawed system.

my solution (and the one that will be approved) will get the best teams on the field a much higher percentage of the time than a 4 champions from the B12/P12/B10/SEC solution would.  even you can't argue that.  the only thing that having the 4 champions does is allow the worst champions from the worst leagues to ge backdoor entry.  in every year the 3-4 best champions will get into the new system anyway.  it just has a failsafe that some garbage 3 loss team doesn't sneak in and keep the best team in the country out of it.  and lol at you saying you don't give a damn about the '03 KSU team when you brought them up in your very first talking point.

In your scenario, would OU have been in the playoffs in '03?

I don't care that it was KSU, it could have been any team substituted in for KSU. My point is that I don't think KSU got screwed.

Back to the point, again you're wanting to use the court of public opinion to determine the champ, only in a more roundabout way. That is almost exactly what the bcs is since it relies on polls. Of course there will be times that a non top 4 team would get in, but at least it would be determined by on the field play and not by the opinion of a panel of judges. This is football, not figure skating for crying out loud. Win your division, advance, win your championship, advance, win the semis, advance, win the championship, national champs......or win the judges hearts over, advance, ....GMAFBSD

this may shock you but if you are in one of those conferences and win all your games you are getting in 100% of the time (you can say advance here if you want).  there's nothing more "on the field" than that.  also, if you lose 3 games you aren't getting in (in the system that will be approved, in your system you will have 3 loss teams often) and those losses happened "on the field" as well.  in your proposed system you can lose a bunch of games and "advance" which is stupid.

You act as if a 1 loss team is a one loss team is a one loss team. Choosing "the best team" is so totally subjective which is completely flawed. One conference might be much tougher than another, have a champion with more losses, be better than the team with less losses and not make the playoff. Is that fair? There is no objective way to KNOW one conference is better than another. There isn't. So, let each conference decide who their best is however they want and pit them against the other conference's best.

[steve dave]

exactly, one conference may be much tougher and deserve 2 teams while another deserves 0. 

[KITNfury]

exactly, one conference may be much tougher and deserve 2 teams while another deserves 0.

In a perfect world, I would agree with you. You're being too idealistic if you believe there's an accurate way to find them, year in and year out.

[Panjandrum]

I'm obviously not going to read all of this stuff regarding what model is best for us, but for 95% of the schools out there, you'll have to go undefeated to get in.  It's not fair, but college football never has been fair.  Why we believe there should be a "fairness" construct in college football goes directly against the sacrosanctity of the sport itself.

Part of the appeal of college football is the David and Goliath stories that show up every year.  For every hero (Boise), there is a villain (Alabama).  Part of the appeal is the controversy. To destroy the controversial aspects of college football would be a direct assault on the sport itself.

The playoff will make a difference, and I have zero doubt that we'll see an expansion of the playoff from 4-8 in 10-15 years just because the money will be too much to turn down.  However, even then, there will be controversy and unfairness because that's the gas on the fire that makes college football so popular.

[deputy dawg]

backdoor ticket

SD, oh SD.

[steve dave]

exactly, one conference may be much tougher and deserve 2 teams while another deserves 0.

In a perfect world, I would agree with you. You're being too idealistic if you believe there's an accurate way to find them, year in and year out.

sure, teams 3-6 may be debateable.  but they will get at least the top 2 every season.  much more often than letting the 4 big conferences send 1 team regardless of their quality.  the big 10 had absolutely no business having a team in a 4 team playoff this year.  that's not really debateable.  and the 4 that got in would have been AL, LSU, OSU and either OR or Stanford.  That would have been the correct mix.

[Fuktard]

exactly, one conference may be much tougher and deserve 2 teams while another deserves 0.

flawed argument:  "one conference may be much tougher" and have 5-6 really good teams that take turns beating the crap out of each other and a team wins the conference with three losses.  that team may be much better than a team who loses one conference game and doesn't win their conference yet gets invited to the party while the 3 loss champ gets left out.  Also, you act like "someone" can determine which conference is better than another and therefore which one "deserves" 2 teams versus a conference whose winner is not deserving.  If you take conference champions, it's all settled on the field.  why are you being so dumb about this?

[KITNfury]

exactly, one conference may be much tougher and deserve 2 teams while another deserves 0.

In a perfect world, I would agree with you. You're being too idealistic if you believe there's an accurate way to find them, year in and year out.

sure, the 3-6 teams may be debateable.  but they will get at least the top 2 every season.  much more often than letting the 4 big conferences send 1 team regardless of their quality.  the big 10 had absolutely no business having a team in a 4 team playoff this year.  that's not really debateable.  and the 4 that got in would have been AL, LSU, OSU and either OR or Stanford.  That would have been the correct mix.

If 1 and 2 are easily achieved year in and year out, j see no reason for a 4 team playoff, do you?