Here is a fun debate for Turkey Day leading up to the games...

college football is the only sport in the world where the winner isn't determined by actually playing the game. Winning on the field is less important then winning in a hotel conference room
 
Alan Tongue said:
college football is the only sport in the world where the winner isn't determined by actually playing the game. Winning on the field is less important then winning in a hotel conference room
Click to expand...

The winner of WHAT isn't decided on the field? Every game is decided on the field.
 
Why is it important to have a national champion? What is the point? No playoff system will guarantee that the "best" team wins. All that a playoff system guarantees is that the team that prevails in the prescribed format is crowned the champion. BFD. That's true of the current format.
 
MW is that not the point of all fn sports? Sounds like the pussification of America to all play 12 games and then get participation ribbons
 
No, it's not the point. Obviously not, or the "championship" format would have been set up in 1869 when Rutgers played Pinceton.
 
ksimpsc said:
MW is that not the point of all fn sports? Sounds like the pussification of America to all play 12 games and then get participation ribbons
Click to expand...

You get the satisfaction of kicking the Chickens' or Bulldogs' butts. You're talking about the satisfaction of THEORETICALLY kicking Oregon's and Minnesota's butts without even playing them. Not interested. You want to prove you're better than Oregon or Southern Cal or LSU? Prove it on the field against them, not somebody else.

Every game has its own champion. At least, it does if you don't render all those hundreds of regular season games subsidiary to some centralized made-for-TV "championship".
 
M.W. said:
No, it's not the point. Obviously not, or the "championship" format would have been set up in 1869 when Rutgers played Pinceton.
Click to expand...
This is the only sport that did not have a true playoff format due to money, not due to the fact its the best way to decide a true champion. I was just making a joke with the pussification comment. Every game has winner but a champion and a winner are not the same. Every other sport went to a playoff format long ago and money kept this one from going sooner.
 
I understand the made for TV comment but if they did a true system and not subjective made for tv drama this would be a different discussion. I am a purist and enjoy the competition that comes with playoffs and working towards an overall champion. You're telling me you would not have liked some of the teams of the past that the BCS had ranked high playing eachother for a true winner?
 
I can just see the soccer World Cup telling over 200 countries that they can play all the qualifiers, and then the Pool matches, and after all those are played a group of representatives from mostly UEFA and CONMEBOL nations deciding who should play in the World Cup semi finals. Sorry Africa, Asia, North America and Oceania, you don’t pass the eyeball test.

Not even the most corrupt sporting organisation on the planet has the stones to do that
 
ksimpsc said:
I understand the made for TV comment but if they did a true system and not subjective made for tv drama this would be a different discussion. I am a purist and enjoy the competition that comes with playoffs and working towards an overall champion.
Click to expand...

I'm a purist and enjoy the competition that comes with every game being an end in itself and with every week being a fresh start.
 
I am fine with what I think MW is saying .. he isn' t saying a true champion is crowned .. he is saying he is fine with the pseudo-champion we get now. At least that is what I think he is saying. Anyone who wants to claim championships or dynasties in this system, I have a problem with. Because you are not a true champ ... you are given it instead of winning it.
 
M.W. said:
I'm a purist and enjoy the competition that comes with every game being an end in itself and with every week being a fresh start.
Click to expand...
I can completely understand this, but in every sport I played including football there was a championship after the regular season. We are trying to get better week to week to hopefully have the end game of playing amongst the best teams. Not taking away from the weekly competition at ALL, but there has to be something more we are working towards no?
 
Alan Tongue said:
subjectivity needs to be taken out of it
Click to expand...

Agreed. I'm assuming you know that, as you couldn't possibly have taken from any of my comments that I don't agree with that. Until they go to 8 conferences and can completely eliminate subjectivity, a 6 team playoff with the Power 5 winners plus 1 is less subjective than what we have now.

:shake:
 
Lareux said:
Agreed. I'm assuming you know that, as you couldn't possibly have taken from any of my comments that I don't agree with that. Until they go to 8 conferences and can completely eliminate subjectivity, a 6 team playoff with the Power 5 winners plus 1 is less subjective than what we have now.

:shake:
Click to expand...


I think the playoff should be mw, sunbelt, cusa, MAC and AAC winners... then we can subjectively pick another team from one of the other conferences.

We are on the same team here but not if you are just finding a stepping stone to the next step where the power conferences are still getting an undeserved benefit of the doubt
 
ksimpsc said:
I can completely understand this, but in every sport I played including football there was a championship after the regular season. We are trying to get better week to week to hopefully have the end game of playing amongst the best teams. Not taking away from the weekly competition at ALL, but there has to be something more we are working towards no?
Click to expand...

I won two state championships in Alan Tongue-style football, and it was nice, but it didn't make the regular season practices any easier or the games any more fun. It felt good in the offseason; that was it. I doubt the fact there was a championship did anything for all the losers. It didn't do anything for us the year we lost in the finals. Well, we did get to go to Charleston, where it was 25 degrees warmer (high school soccer was played in the winter in South Carolina), for the championship game.
 
B.A.R. said:
what's better? Coaches? media? Or Twinkie?
Click to expand...

A good gambler won't be giving anything away. A bad gambler is just as bad as some media idiot. Just having conference winners in an 8 team playoff removes the need for rankings altogether
 
Alan Tongue said:
A good gambler won't be giving anything away. A bad gambler is just as bad as some media idiot. Just having conference winners in an 8 team playoff removes the need for rankings altogether
Click to expand...

I wonder how long it'll be before they go to 8 super conferences. You'd have to imagine we are quite some time away from that being a reality...it's a shame because it's the most obvious fix to all of it.
 
M.W. said:
I say the Big 10 is the weakest of the Power 5 conferences by the slightest of margins just behind the ACC. But two or three of the Big 10 teams in the committee's top 10 are deserving.
Click to expand...

Show me where B12 is stronger than the ACC. And don't give me committee answers either.
 
clowncar said:
Rank the conferences for me ...doubt we will agree.... hence subjective. CG said Vols not a quality win. I disagree .... but two people can disagree because it is a subjective process.

Sport should be objective. The great thing about all conference winners making a playoff is that we don't have to guess and MORE IMPORTANTLY all teams have an actual chance to win the championship.
Click to expand...

VK, Tenny's best win is a very disappointing Georgia team at home by 7. They're 7-4, 4-3 in the worse division of ten in the P5. Tennessee under any measure in 2015 cannot be deemed "good". Your guess on their next 'best' (I use that term very loose) win is, well, I'll let you tell the board. VK Shake.
 
M.W. said:
Why is it important to have a national champion? What is the point? No playoff system will guarantee that the "best" team wins. All that a playoff system guarantees is that the team that prevails in the prescribed format is crowned the champion. BFD. That's true of the current format.
Click to expand...

You are sending mixed signals being a fan of the B12 and having a pic of DF. We know you don't like champions (B12 can't crown one), but somewhere down the line you have to root for/ went to CU.
 
Alan Tongue said:
college football is the only sport in the world where the winner isn't determined by actually playing the game. Winning on the field is less important then winning in a hotel conference room
Click to expand...

Alan Tongue said:
I can just see the soccer World Cup telling over 200 countries that they can play all the qualifiers, and then the Pool matches, and after all those are played a group of representatives from mostly UEFA and CONMEBOL nations deciding who should play in the World Cup semi finals. Sorry Africa, Asia, North America and Oceania, you don’t pass the eyeball test.

Not even the most corrupt sporting organisation on the planet has the stones to do that
Click to expand...

Not sure why you can't be this rational in GD or Politcs. :-)
 
Lareux said:
As we've talked about in these thread this year...why couldn't they just have kept the BCS rankings and have the 4 team playoff together? The BCS would just decide the top 4 instead of the top 2, and the committee would be pointless.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I think everyone agrees we are not to the final destination with this CFB thing, but this would make the most sense under the current format.

Why have a fucking committee?.....the multiple computer models would be way more precis than a few humans
 
Alan Tongue said:
it's not
Click to expand...

I don't think so either. Was just wondering what MW's thoughts were as he said the B1G was the worst conference, slightly worse than the ACC. It may be the Pac 12 that is actually the weakest conference this season.
 
M.W. said:
No, it's not the point. Obviously not, or the "championship" format would have been set up in 1869 when Rutgers played Pinceton.
Click to expand...

another decent point MW.....I never thought of that.

I was shocked to hear an Ole Miss fan say his Dad played on the 1959 or 58( i think, not looking it up) national ship team...and a UK fan say that won the natty way back when......teams have been claiming natties for a long long time....mutiple teams in a given year.

For whatever reason.

Part of me likes what VK said/says......I mean it has to be a lil strange being Tulane or Memphis going into a year knowing you cannot win the MNC....even 1998 Tulane :)........part of me think even if all the conferences get to a playoff that there will be the "easy road" argument used on an odd outcome


A story VK and others may like. At a turkey stop today, ran into a kid that plays at Nicholls St in Thibodaux LA.....DT and DE. Kid is big and a decent player. Never been the brightest but a good kid, no trouble. Well his parents were beaming about what a great experinece this has been for him.....AND, the most important part to them was the full scholly he received. He probably doesn't attend college if he doesn't get it. He has been to and played in games @Colorado and Arkansas......he went up against that Arky O line. Memories forever....Sure it is fun playing at home on the bayou, but these away games for these guys is like playing on the big stage and against really good players.

So when we say these big programs are just cashing out a check to a willing opponent(and it is, I get it)......This is also a nice aside to the story you don't always hear
 
Lareux said:
I don't think so either. Was just wondering what MW's thoughts were as he said the B1G was the worst conference, slightly worse than the ACC. It may be the Pac 12 that is actually the weakest conference this season.
Click to expand...

Could be....This was supposed to be a really big year for the conference too from articles written and talk.
 
On another note.....Since we have this bowl situation, I wish they would loosen up the tie-ins. I think someone brought it up before, but the SEC NEVER seems to play the Pac12 with any consistency(if playing at all)......
 
twinkie13 said:
another decent point MW.....I never thought of that.

I was shocked to hear an Ole Miss fan say his Dad played on the 1959 or 58( i think, not looking it up) national ship team...and a UK fan say that won the natty way back when......teams have been claiming natties for a long long time....mutiple teams in a given year.

For whatever reason.

Part of me likes what VK said/says......I mean it has to be a lil strange being Tulane or Memphis going into a year knowing you cannot win the MNC....even 1998 Tulane :)........part of me think even if all the conferences get to a playoff that there will be the "easy road" argument used on an odd outcome


A story VK and others may like. At a turkey stop today, ran into a kid that plays at Nicholls St in Thibodaux LA.....DT and DE. Kid is big and a decent player. Never been the brightest but a good kid, no trouble. Well his parents were beaming about what a great experinece this has been for him.....AND, the most important part to them was the full scholly he received. He probably doesn't attend college if he doesn't get it. He has been to and played in games @Colorado and Arkansas......he went up against that Arky O line. Memories forever....Sure it is fun playing at home on the bayou, but these away games for these guys is like playing on the big stage and against really good players.

So when we say these big programs are just cashing out a check to a willing opponent(and it is, I get it)......This is also a nice aside to the story you don't always hear
Click to expand...

Great story
 
twinkie13 said:
On another note.....Since we have this bowl situation, I wish they would loosen up the tie-ins. I think someone brought it up before, but the SEC NEVER seems to play the Pac12 with any consistency(if playing at all)......
Click to expand...

Tough when you rarely go outside that SE Box...
 
gps_3 said:
Needs to be some bowl match ups.

We play USC opening weekend in Dallas next year
Click to expand...


Bama moves around a bit...PSU few years back...

I look more at teams like Florida and Jorja tbh...

LSU going to Lambeau...that is still nuts to me...
 
B.A.R. said:
Bama moves around a bit...PSU few years back...

I look more at teams like Florida and Jorja tbh...

LSU going to Lambeau...that is still nuts to me...
Click to expand...

Yes I was strictly talking bowls

And you called out the culprits.....LSU one of the better travelers around
 
Back to your point Twink...

I was looking at Bowl projections the other day and it seems like tie-ins are loosening quite a bit...
 
B.A.R. said:
Back to your point Twink...

I was looking at Bowl projections the other day and it seems like tie-ins are loosening quite a bit...
Click to expand...

are they? I want them too. SEC and B10 seems to have always been friends for bowls, Ive always wanted to play more Pac12
 
twinkie13 said:
are they? I want them too. SEC and B10 seems to have always been friends for bowls, Ive always wanted to play more Pac12
Click to expand...


Well, we are cold and want to go south and SEC wants semi-home games...hence why it has always happened...in a nutshell...
 
I absolutely love the "memories forever" posted way up there by Twank. It made me laugh out loud for some reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B.A.R.
B1G Championship -- Michigan vs Iowa Discussion
2
Replies
58
Views
2K
DaRaiders
DaRaiders
oakas
Huge wager for Saturday
Replies
32
Views
1K
jimmymo
jimmymo
VirginiaCavs
Iowa vs. Tennessee Preview Article
Replies
8
Views
545
UTSUX
UTSUX
satnightfever05
SNF Week 0 and 1
Replies
22
Views
772
satnightfever05
satnightfever05
B.A.R.
B16 Week 11...
Replies
19
Views
644
B.A.R.
B.A.R.
Back
Top