Dantonio has lost my respect - Playoff Comments

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
36,258
30,841
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
Now let me reiterate something about 2011 - it brought about the VERY THING they claim to not want. Keep this in mind: the only reason 2011 even happened (and this conference championship thing came up) was because LSU had played and beaten BOTH OREGON AND ALABAMA.

If Oregon had not lost to LSU then they would have made the game by virtue of "no rematch." But since they: a) lost a head-to-head matchup with LSU; and b) did not win their conference......the PTB and whiners from other conferences were hamstrung in their very argument. Coincidentally, this was caused by LSU: a) scheduling a major game against a power conference (what they say they want now) and b) the eight-game SEC schedule compared to the Big 12's nine-game schedule (again - what is brought up today).

And of course by sheer number of tripling the games involved in the championship pursuit (from 1 to 3), you are exponentially increasing the odds of not one, not two, but THREE rematches.

But hey, I'm just an Alabama fan so what would I possibly know about college football, right?


PS Third article to be submitted this weekend.
Another irony about 2011 is that if the Big 12 had a championship game, Oklahoma State would have passed Alabama and played LSU for the NC. Their stance after losing Nebraska, A&M, and Missouri was that oh we don't need a championship game and it's a nuisance anyway. Well it sure would have helped OK State that year.
 

colbysullivan

Hall of Fame
Dec 12, 2007
16,672
13,519
187
Gulf Breeze, FL
Another irony about 2011 is that if the Big 12 had a championship game, Oklahoma State would have passed Alabama and played LSU for the NC. Their stance after losing Nebraska, A&M, and Missouri was that oh we don't need a championship game and it's a nuisance anyway. Well it sure would have helped OK State that year.
That's true but they would have had to get 2 more teams to play a conference championship game. You can't have a CCG with only 10 teams.
 

crimsonbleeder

All-American
Dec 1, 2002
2,703
3
0
Birmingham, AL
Because doing so might result in 2 (or more) SEC teams in the playoff. The playoff was created in response to the all-SEC Alabama-LSU BCS Championship. A subjective human committee will "spread the wealth" rather than reward the best 4 teams.

THIS is the whole reason, and the ONLY reason, why the "playoff debacle" has come to pass. It will be a mess from year one, and they'll only make it worse when the add more teams...
 

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
36,258
30,841
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
That's true but they would have had to get 2 more teams to play a conference championship game. You can't have a CCG with only 10 teams.
I understand. My point is that they poo poo'd the conference championship game the whole time after they lost those teams, and still do so today. Yet.. ironically, it would have helped Ok State that year. And ironically, they haven't sniffed the NC game since they lost their conference championship game.
 

bradley30

1st Team
Sep 9, 2009
573
0
35
Oxford, AL
The one thing good about the BCS is that it usually got the 2 best teams in the championship. Some of the other matchups were usually bad, but the championship was usually correct.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,730
287
54
The one thing good about the BCS is that it usually got the 2 best teams in the championship. Some of the other matchups were usually bad, but the championship was usually correct.
Folks, I'm getting sick of hearing this argument.

If you had only TWO selections and you "usually" got them right, are your odds BETTER or WORSE that in the original four-team setup you will get the TWO BEST TEAMS?

It's not like the four team setup is now going to EXCLUDE an unbeaten SEC team - which DID happen in 2004.

Did the BCS "usually" get it right? Yeah.

But 2001 Nebraska, 2003 Oklahoma, and 2008 Oklahoma did not belong there. And imho neither did 2000 FSU. The only reason there wasn't a bigger uproar is that all those teams lost.

Now keep this in mind when you reply - don't reply back to me and start DEFENDING the inclusion of those four teams based on "well they only had one loss blah blah blah." THAT'S NOT THE ARGUMENT THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED HERE!!!!

You simply cannot argue that FSU was better than Miami in 2000 because they lost (and Miami fans need to remember that they lost to one-loss Washington, who should have been in the game rather than FSU).

Don't confuse "defensible inclusion" with "best team," which is what I keep reading here.

FSU was NOT the second-best team in America in 2000.
Nebraska was not even the second-best team in the Big 12 in 2001.
And Oklahoma's inclusion over USC was a debacle of the highest order (apparently, a 28-point waxing to a three-loss huge underdog is more worthy of inclusion than a team that lost in triple overtime to a decent Cal team that IIRC had Aaron Rodgers at QB).

The 2008 Oklahoma inclusion at least can be chalked up to a quirk in the Big 12's rules (as opposed to the BCS). It's still wrong but less of a problem.

That said - the BCS was NOT as bad as a lot of folks want to insist, either. I thought a four-team playoff meant keeping the BCS and the top four getting in. I'd rather have the old BCS than this selection committee - and I've said that from day one.
 

cuda.1973

Hall of Fame
Dec 6, 2009
8,506
607
137
Allen, Texas
Help me out here, bub..............my memory is not what it was.............

What year was it when Zero U and Nebraska had a re-match, in the Orange Bowl? Seems the line was they didn't want to play us. I could be wrong, but I do not remember much of an outcry, outside of us.
 

GeorgiaTider

All-SEC
Oct 30, 2005
1,565
24
57
62
If playoff supporters did not see this coming then they are willfully blind. The playoff was never about the best teams playing, but limiting multi-conference team participation. Welcome to the playoffs.
 

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
45,481
46,794
187
If playoff supporters did not see this coming then they are willfully blind. The playoff was never about the best teams playing, but limiting multi-conference team participation. Welcome to the playoffs.
I don't believe this, but you are welcome to your opinion.
 

teamplayer

Hall of Fame
Jul 31, 2001
7,562
2,321
282
cullman, al, usa
Another irony about 2011 is that if the Big 12 had a championship game, Oklahoma State would have passed Alabama and played LSU for the NC. Their stance after losing Nebraska, A&M, and Missouri was that oh we don't need a championship game and it's a nuisance anyway. Well it sure would have helped OK State that year.
I don't think a conference championship game would have overcome their loss to a bad Iowa St. team. OSU just choked against ISU or we would not have been lucky enough to get a rematch, or am I thinking of 2012?
 

bogeypro

Scout Team
Oct 25, 2005
136
0
0
47
I firmly believe that to make it in a playoff there should be no human element. If the team does "X" then they are in, don't do it and you aren't in... that "X" should be to win their conference championship. The playoff should be made up of the conference champions.
 

crimsonaudio

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 9, 2002
63,382
67,080
462
crimsonaudio.net
I firmly believe that to make it in a playoff there should be no human element. If the team does "X" then they are in, don't do it and you aren't in... that "X" should be to win their conference championship. The playoff should be made up of the conference champions.
So you're fine if the best teams don't actually have the shot at the playoff? Even in the NFL, where the ridiculous rule structure is in place to create as much parity as possible, it's not uncommon for the two best teams to be from the same conference...
 

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
45,481
46,794
187
I firmly believe that to make it in a playoff there should be no human element. If the team does "X" then they are in, don't do it and you aren't in... that "X" should be to win their conference championship. The playoff should be made up of the conference champions.
This removes all incentive to play any tough opponents out of conference. Win your conference and you are in, even if you have 5 losses and played no one out of conference. This is mindless pandering.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,730
287
54
Help me out here, bub..............my memory is not what it was.............

What year was it when Zero U and Nebraska had a re-match, in the Orange Bowl? Seems the line was they didn't want to play us. I could be wrong, but I do not remember much of an outcry, outside of us.
You talking about OU not playing us?

In 1978, Nebraska beat OU, 17-14, in Lincoln. Penn State was number one. They couldn't play USC because of the Rose Bowl tie-in and Paterno knew he needed to beat the highest ranked opponent. When OU lost it dropped them in the polls and we were number two. We needed to play Penn St and they needed to play us. I was nine and not following closely. I know Nebraska went 9-3, with 2 losses to us and OU (don't know who gave them the third without looking).

But the Orange Bowl wanted the rematch so I'm not sure you're correct. Let me check a few sources and I'll get back with you.
 

mikes12

All-American
Nov 10, 2005
3,548
0
0
49
Chattanooga, TN
If playoff supporters did not see this coming then they are willfully blind. The playoff was never about the best teams playing, but limiting multi-conference team participation. Welcome to the playoffs.
Playoff supporters don't necessarily support the committee. Through most of the '90s, I wanted playoffs. The BCS came along and for the most part got things right. I could be willing to accept playoffs if they kept the BCS system and took the top 4 (which is almost universally supported).

I guarantee you there are a whole lot of casual college football fans who haven't been paying close attention, who will be irate when they see their team in the top 4 after conference championship weekend but find out their team didn't get selected, and only then find out about this committee.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,730
287
54
If playoff supporters did not see this coming then they are willfully blind. The playoff was never about the best teams playing, but limiting multi-conference team participation. Welcome to the playoffs.

Dear GA Tider,

Please send back the Scarecrow.

Sincerely,

The Land of Oz
 

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
36,258
30,841
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
I don't think a conference championship game would have overcome their loss to a bad Iowa St. team. OSU just choked against ISU or we would not have been lucky enough to get a rematch, or am I thinking of 2012?
Go back and look at how close they were to us in the rankings. They would have been playing (and winning) another game against a quality opponent while we did not play anyone.

Yes, they would have passed Alabama in the rankings.

Edit - You've got the right year. It was 2011 and they lost to Iowa State.
 

colbysullivan

Hall of Fame
Dec 12, 2007
16,672
13,519
187
Gulf Breeze, FL
I firmly believe that to make it in a playoff there should be no human element. If the team does "X" then they are in, don't do it and you aren't in... that "X" should be to win their conference championship. The playoff should be made up of the conference champions.
Forgive me, but I simply can't understand this line of reasoning. College football is about rewarding the teams that have the best SEASON...the entire season. Just because some teams play well at the end of the year and win a conference championship game doesn't give them the right to play for the national championship. The day college football has a 3 loss champion is the day I stop watching.
 

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.