Author Topic: NCAA Playoffs.  (Read 19777 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline OK_Cat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16224
  • Hey
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #25 on: December 08, 2010, 08:18:36 AM »
The only people that really want a  playoff are fans of shitty teams.  If you are good every game is a playoff game.

exactly.  if you want a chance to win it all, just don't lose.  (insert morons saying "but what about tcu?")

Offline hemmy

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 6676
  • RIP The After Party
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #26 on: December 08, 2010, 08:23:22 AM »
A +1 might work, but not a playoff.

Offline mcmwcat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5313
  • trips: "MCMW"
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #27 on: December 08, 2010, 08:31:56 AM »
2007/2008 LSU  :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Offline Cire

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 20659
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #28 on: December 08, 2010, 08:36:47 AM »

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38025
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #29 on: December 08, 2010, 08:38:19 AM »
The only people that really want a  playoff are fans of shitty teams.  If you are good every game is a playoff game.

exactly.  if you want a chance to win it all, just don't lose.  (insert morons saying "but what about tcu?")

Or just be Nebraska, OU, LSU, or any other big time program that ESPN loves enough to place you into the game despite losing 1 or 2 games. KU had a better case to be in the national championship in 2007/2008 than LSU.

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38025
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #30 on: December 08, 2010, 08:40:24 AM »
Guys, I think Stanford should take that bracket and  :cheese:

Offline OK_Cat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16224
  • Hey
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #31 on: December 08, 2010, 08:41:55 AM »
always love the "ESPN did this, ESPN did that" stuff  

love it

you know who DGAF and won't make a playoff system?  The NCAA.  They don't even name/acknowledge a football national championship in the FBS.

Offline mcmwcat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5313
  • trips: "MCMW"
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #32 on: December 08, 2010, 08:44:26 AM »
always love the "ESPN did this, ESPN did that" stuff  

love it

you know who DGAF and won't make a playoff system?  The NCAA.  They don't even name/acknowledge a football national championship in the FBS.

why should they?  there is none.  :dunno:

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38025
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #33 on: December 08, 2010, 09:00:52 AM »
The only thing that would make this bracket better would be to eliminate the 4 at-large teams and just have a 12 team playoff with first round byes for the top 4 seeds. We don't want to diminish the importance of the regular season here guys, GMAFB.

Offline NXL

  • Really Terrible Poster
  • Point Plank'r
  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 91
  • "A whole lot of places ..."
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #34 on: December 08, 2010, 09:09:28 AM »
Elvis faked his death.

That was Jim Morrison, foo'.

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38025
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #35 on: December 08, 2010, 09:13:50 AM »
I love how most of the posters on this board would rather support this crap than see an actual national champion determined by performance on the field.

Offline mcmwcat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5313
  • trips: "MCMW"
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #36 on: December 08, 2010, 09:19:02 AM »
I love how most of the posters on this board would rather support this crap than see an actual national champion determined by performance on the field.

you aren't helping dumbfucker

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38025
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #37 on: December 08, 2010, 09:23:35 AM »
I love how most of the posters on this board would rather support this crap than see an actual national champion determined by performance on the field.

you aren't helping dumbfucker

Not helping with what? You do realize that convincing steve dave, OK_Cat, and the gang that a playoff is better than the bowl system won't make it happen, right?

Offline mcmwcat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5313
  • trips: "MCMW"
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #38 on: December 08, 2010, 09:30:25 AM »
I love how most of the posters on this board would rather support this crap than see an actual national champion determined by performance on the field.

you aren't helping dumbfucker

Not helping with what? You do realize that convincing steve dave, OK_Cat, and the gang that a playoff is better than the bowl system won't make it happen, right?

right

Offline AbeFroman

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 8330
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #39 on: December 08, 2010, 10:14:03 AM »
16 is overkill for football. Keep it 4 or at most 6 (like conference playoffs in NFL, top 2 get byes)

Oregon vs TCU
Auburn vs Wisconsin

would be good enough, and most years there are 4 worthy teams at the end.

Unfortunately teams like Ohio St, OU(Texas on a good year), and SEC runner ups always finish fringe top 8 and they control college football, so if there ever was a playoff it would have to be 8-16 teams so all those schools could be included most years.

Offline Trim

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 42637
  • Pfizer PLUS Moderna and now Pfizer Bivalent
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #40 on: December 08, 2010, 10:18:12 AM »
There are too many teams in D-1 football and not enough regular season games (plus no equality in difficulty of regular seasons) for there to be a just playoff field.

Yes, I believe the ncaa tournament is fun and stuff for fans, but it's a dumb way to decide a national champ.

Offline mcmwcat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5313
  • trips: "MCMW"
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #41 on: December 08, 2010, 10:28:42 AM »
really got me thinking now

Offline Cire

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 20659
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #42 on: December 08, 2010, 10:41:30 AM »
The only people that really want a  playoff are fans of cacty teams.  If you are good every game is a playoff game.

exactly.  if you want a chance to win it all, just don't lose.  (insert morons saying "but what about tcu?")

Or just be Nebraska, OU, LSU, or any other big time program that ESPN loves enough to place you into the game despite losing 1 or 2 games. KU had a better case to be in the national championship in 2007/2008 than LSU.

LSU is a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) arguement because they destroyed OSU.  OU was clearly the best team all year and lost a hiccup to a very good KSU team.  Can't defend nubb other than they other good teams lost too so the reset button got hit.

determining a playoff field would be a complete clusterfuck and you'd have over 100 schools with absolutely meaningless seasons.

Offline MadCat

  • TIME's Person Of The Year - 2006
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 13891
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #43 on: December 08, 2010, 10:53:14 AM »
If you like pro wrasslin': http://collegefootballbelt.com/

Offline mcmwcat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5313
  • trips: "MCMW"
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #44 on: December 08, 2010, 10:57:07 AM »
The only people that really want a  playoff are fans of cacty teams.  If you are good every game is a playoff game.

exactly.  if you want a chance to win it all, just don't lose.  (insert morons saying "but what about tcu?")

Or just be Nebraska, OU, LSU, or any other big time program that ESPN loves enough to place you into the game despite losing 1 or 2 games. KU had a better case to be in the national championship in 2007/2008 than LSU.

LSU is a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) arguement because they destroyed OSU.  OU was clearly the best team all year and lost a hiccup to a very good KSU team.  Can't defend nubb other than they other good teams lost too so the reset button got hit.

determining a playoff field would be a complete clusterfuck and you'd have over 100 schools with absolutely meaningless seasons.

really really making me think now.  i'd have no problem w/ bowls if they just used this formula instead of the BCS.  http://www.myteamisbetterthanyourteam.com/default.asp?winner=Kansas+St&loser=Alabama&year=2010&method=2

this way every game means something and no team would be playing a meaningless season.    :woot:




Offline MeatSauce

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1127
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #45 on: December 08, 2010, 10:57:54 AM »
why mess with a system where the 6th best/worst team in the worst bcs conference can still bring home $2 million in postseason cash and iPads?

Offline mcmwcat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5313
  • trips: "MCMW"
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #46 on: December 08, 2010, 11:04:30 AM »
why mess with a system where the 6th best/worst team in the worst bcs conference can still bring home $2 million in postseason cash and iPads?

regardless if the schools make or lose money from a bowl game it's a great vacation for the band and cheerleaders.  if anybody deserves a free vaca it's thems.

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38025
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #47 on: December 08, 2010, 11:05:48 AM »
determining a playoff field would be a complete clusterfuck and you'd have over 100 schools with absolutely meaningless seasons.

How do you figure? Win all of your games and you make the playoffs.

Offline NXL

  • Really Terrible Poster
  • Point Plank'r
  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 91
  • "A whole lot of places ..."
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #48 on: December 08, 2010, 11:39:59 AM »
The problem with that bracket is the B10 gets 2 atlarge bids.  That's where the cac is as far as I'm concerned.  Boise loses a game it should have won if the kicker doesn't choke from 25 yards out, and they don't get into playoffs with 11-1?  I mean, all year, people wanted to argue whether or not they deserved to be up there, the old "An SEC sched would murder them" bullshit.  Let them in the playoffs and prove their worth.

Offline Cire

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 20659
    • View Profile
Re: NCAA Playoffs.
« Reply #49 on: December 08, 2010, 11:41:29 AM »
The problem with that bracket is the B10 gets 2 atlarge bids.  That's where the cac is as far as I'm concerned.  Boise loses a game it should have won if the kicker doesn't choke from 25 yards out, and they don't get into playoffs with 11-1?  I mean, all year, people wanted to argue whether or not they deserved to be up there, the old "An SEC sched would murder them" bullcac.  Let them in the playoffs and prove their worth.

GMAFB WITH BOISE  They blew their shot.  IF a effing mid major wants in then they better schedule to get in and absolutely destroy their confrence.