Author Topic: 2019 Rankings Thread  (Read 5022 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline 'taterblast

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16749
  • Hi, I'm James McGill.
    • View Profile
2019 Rankings Thread
« on: November 05, 2019, 08:35:35 PM »
CFP
16. Kansas State


(Want to get rid of the ad? Register now for free!)

Offline Matt Siebrant's Left Hand

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 520
  • I'm a Cat person
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #1 on: November 05, 2019, 11:25:44 PM »
My dish network encountered faulty signal. Thank you for your service.

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37086
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #3 on: November 06, 2019, 03:38:04 PM »
I don't think Ohio State wants any part of what we would do to them.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44880
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #4 on: November 06, 2019, 03:38:12 PM »
https://twitter.com/8_TeamPlayoff/status/1191921024977264640?s=20

If this were the actual format I think, that K-State definitely and either Michigan or Notre Dame gets bumped for Minnesota and Memphis.

Offline star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63985
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #5 on: November 06, 2019, 03:43:09 PM »
There is absolutely no reason not to have this type of playoff. College football is so weird
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline catastrophe

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15214
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #6 on: November 06, 2019, 04:59:09 PM »
8 team still makes the most sense to me, but I’d take 16 for sure.

Offline catastrophe

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15214
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #7 on: November 06, 2019, 04:59:59 PM »
The current format sure seems geared toward protecting big brand names.

Offline KITNfury

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7088
  • Eat My Ass Whole
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #8 on: November 06, 2019, 05:11:00 PM »
8 is the right number.

I once blew clove smoke in a guy's face that cut in front of me in the line to KJ's.

Offline Katpappy

  • I got my eye on you
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 12809
  • Party on gE
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #9 on: November 06, 2019, 05:14:17 PM »
The current format sure seems geared toward protecting big brand names.

That's pretty much what happened to TCU a few years back.  It's big team names only; but with a larger format we could have some very good G5 and small P5 teams in the CFP.
Hot time in Kat town tonight.

Offline Hurricane Cat

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1358
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #10 on: November 06, 2019, 05:40:32 PM »
https://twitter.com/8_TeamPlayoff/status/1191921024977264640?s=20

That bracket is beautiful.  Seems like this would be a great quality of life improvement for everyone . . .

Online nicname

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15855
  • Deal with it.
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #11 on: November 06, 2019, 06:01:47 PM »
I'm cool with 8, but unless the Big Boys actually decide to break away it should be just like March Madness imo. Only difference is home games for the first couple of rounds or so.

10 conference champs and either 2, 4 or 6 at large berths. No special allowances for Notre Dame either. They get in a conference or have to be an at large.

If there was a gif of nicname thwarting the attempted-flag-taker and then gesturing him to suck it, followed by motioning for all of Hilton Shelter to boo him louder, it'd be better than that auburn gif.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44880
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #12 on: November 06, 2019, 10:32:10 PM »
There is absolutely no reason not to have this type of playoff. College football is so weird

Too many games

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44880
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #13 on: November 06, 2019, 10:36:05 PM »
unless the Big Boys actually decide to break away

LOL, never ever ever.

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #14 on: November 06, 2019, 11:48:19 PM »
Best case scenario right now for us is 8 tbh. That bracket would be brutal, but would love to be apart of it tbh, who wouldn’t?

Offline TheProdigiousTalent

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 433
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #15 on: November 06, 2019, 11:55:42 PM »
There is absolutely no reason not to have this type of playoff. College football is so weird

Too many games
Eliminate non-con games.  Boom!  Done.  Mostly glorified exhibition games anyway.  The chaos that would ensue due to lack of inter-conference data points would just add to the fun.

On a more serious note, that would probably destroy revenue in a big way.

On a similarly serious note (as the last note), it blows my freakin' mind that we are #16 in the CFP rankings even after a couple of no-show games vs. OSU and Baylor.  Awesome.  The future is bright, amigos.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2019, 11:59:04 PM by TheProdigiousTalent »

Offline meow meow

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 11102
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #16 on: November 07, 2019, 08:47:39 AM »
go to 8, all P5 conf champs get in automatically, and each conf can decide how to crown that.  then we can keep round robin, and either keep champ game or end it.  SEC has an unfair advantage currently in that they only play 8 conf games, in a 14 team league, so it's no wonder they have 5 of the top 11 teams in the country right now.  8 teams would also add a lot of stability to the Big 12, best path to the playoff.


Offline WildcatNation

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 798
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #17 on: November 07, 2019, 09:18:43 AM »
There is absolutely no reason not to have this type of playoff. College football is so weird

Too many games

Doesn't the FCS do this already and its not an issue?

Offline catastrophe

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15214
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #18 on: November 07, 2019, 09:58:27 AM »
Well people don’t really watch the FCS playoffs. So from that perspective it’s an issue.

Online wetwillie

  • goEMAW Poster of the WEEK
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 30389
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #19 on: November 07, 2019, 11:25:51 AM »
I hadn’t thought of people not watching 15 playoff games vs 3.
When the bullets are flying, that's when I'm at my best

Online nicname

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15855
  • Deal with it.
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #20 on: November 07, 2019, 11:39:15 AM »
I'll always favor the idea of all 10 confy champs making the playoffs. The super low seeds would never upset a true contender, but the middling playoff teams would go down from time to time and it would be awesome.

If there was a gif of nicname thwarting the attempted-flag-taker and then gesturing him to suck it, followed by motioning for all of Hilton Shelter to boo him louder, it'd be better than that auburn gif.

Offline LickNeckey

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 6055
  • #fakeposts
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #21 on: November 07, 2019, 12:22:01 PM »
not a fan of expanding the playoff

i really don't think it gives you a better champion and would kill Bowl structure

i personally love the weeks upon weeks of obscure mid week matchups  (seriously)

Offline Bqqkie Pimp

  • qoEMAW ambassador
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 6475
  • qoEMAW's official representative to goEMAW
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #22 on: November 07, 2019, 02:46:16 PM »
Four teams is just not nearly enough.  Eight would be FAR better, but I'd love to see 16...

At 16, you legitimately include every team that has a reasonable chance to get hot and win it. 

Having four regions with four 1-4 seeds similar to how march madness is set up with the top seeds getting home field for round one would be pretty cool also.

What sucks about four, in my opinion, is the fact that there are typically 3-4 teams left out that have a legitimate beef for grabbing the 4th spot.

 :dubious:
bears are fast...

Offline The1BigWillie

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3172
  • Known to be a horrible person... (BORN 7/4/75)
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #23 on: November 07, 2019, 02:58:30 PM »
Could even make a 12 team work with top 4 getting a bye.  Run it like the NFL playoffs.  11 meaningful games.  Would be GLORIOUS.
"That's what you get when you let some dude from Los Angles/Texas with the alias Mookfu raw dog it.  Willesgirl can back me up here.  There's a lesson in this.  You only get HIV once; make it count." - Mr. Bread

Offline meow meow

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 11102
    • View Profile
Re: 2019 Rankings Thread
« Reply #24 on: November 07, 2019, 03:23:08 PM »
i think 8 is the right number, only adding one extra game, take the p5 champs and the top non-p5 ranked team and a couple at large teams.  everyone in the p5 will have a clear path to get into the playoff, if you didn't it's because you didn't win your conference.