• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

2013 Preseason and regular polls

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
BUCKYLE said:
I think it's clear that ESPN is fully aware what a team with this much talent and a chip on it's shoulder is capable of when coached by UFM. They're scared Urban will slaughter their cash cow. They're doing everything they can to prevent it. If FSU loses, they'll be pimpin Stanford to jump tOSU to play Bama. If Bama loses, they'll have no problem with tOSU playing FSU and they'll bitch and moan that Bama could've beaten the winner.
Also, if I hear Jesse Palmer say that Stanford losing to Utah doesn't really count because they "Weren't playing Stanford football" one more time, I will end him.
Click to expand...

Thus the anti-climactic Gameday in LA. USC is terrible... only reason to show that game is so ESPiN can hump Stanford dry and kick-start their "omg, these guys are amazing" campaign after they knocked off previous favorite, Oregon.
 
Upvote 0
BUCKYLE said:
Exactly. I feel as if I'm witnessing the beginning of the end of the greatest sport on Earth. The first couple years every one will talk about how cool the playoff is and wonder why it took so long. Eventually though, the playoffs will expand to the "top" 16, and a team will go undefeated thru the regular season and lose in the finals (which will be played 20 miles from the lower seeds campus) to some three loss team that finished third in it's division.

That will be the day that college football died. I just hope I'm not around to see it.
Click to expand...

I've thought College Football has been on its last legs since the BCS started.
 
Upvote 0
Buckeye86 said:
There will be a lot more controversy over selecting 8 and 9 than there ever will be over selecting 4 and 5.
Click to expand...

No there won't be, because leaving out a "deserving" #9 isn't as bad as leaving out a "deserving" #5. In fact, if there 4-team playoffs were this year, Baylor would have a very legtimate claim at #4 should the four teams ended up Alabama, FSU, OSU, and Stanford. There would be a ton of controversy, but there wouldn't be nearly as much controversy if Missouri at #9 were left out for #8 Clemson if the playoffs were eight teams instead of four.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
That would seem to be the surface expectation, but the reality is once you start including 2-loss teams... and it will happen if you have a top-8... all the other 2-loss teams are going to ask "Why not us?" and claim the system plays favorites. It's not just #9 that gets "left out" -- it'll be the majority of the top-25 insisting they have a *right* to be in the playoff.
Unless there is a clear delineating factor, such as Conference Champions, then there will be some amount of controversy. But the more spots you include, the more room there is for controversy. For every spot that's added, there's 2 more teams that think they should be included. The rabbit hole just goes deeper and deeper; until you end up with a joke like the basketball's 64-team "playoff". It ceases to be a playoff, and becomes more like the FA Cup at that point.
 
Upvote 0
Controversy is always the product of sports mediots with too much time on their hands. They have a financial incentive in pissing people off about a subject, because it generates clicks on webpages and eyeballs on the TV sets.
 
Upvote 0
MililaniBuckeye said:
No there won't be, because leaving out a "deserving" #9 isn't as bad as leaving out a "deserving" #5. In fact, if there 4-team playoffs were this year, Baylor would have a very legtimate claim at #4 should the four teams ended up Alabama, FSU, OSU, and Stanford. There would be a ton of controversy, but there wouldn't be nearly as much controversy if Missouri at #9 were left out for #8 Clemson if the playoffs were eight teams instead of four.
Click to expand...

kujirakira said:
That would seem to be the surface expectation, but the reality is once you start including 2-loss teams... and it will happen if you have a top-8... all the other 2-loss teams are going to ask "Why not us?" and claim the system plays favorites. It's not just #9 that gets "left out" -- it'll be the majority of the top-25 insisting they have a *right* to be in the playoff.
Unless there is a clear delineating factor, such as Conference Champions, then there will be some amount of controversy. But the more spots you include, the more room there is for controversy. For every spot that's added, there's 2 more teams that think they should be included. The rabbit hole just goes deeper and deeper; until you end up with a joke like the basketball's 64-team "playoff". It ceases to be a playoff, and becomes more like the FA Cup at that point.
Click to expand...

I think it all depends on what we're considering "controversy". Is it "controversy" if ESPN and other media time-wasters waste time talking about it? I don't think so. You can spend time talking about whatever you want until whenever you want - that doesn't make it a controversy. I know this thread is moving to a BCS or playoffs topic, and we already have that thread, but I think the playoffs (if there needs to be one) should be the teams that have a claim at a national championship. This year, if the top 5 ends as it is, there will be some controversy over the 2 teams picked. But with a 4-team playoff, there is less controversy. Yeah, snubbing undefeated Baylor in favor of 1-loss Stanford - that's an issue. Some controversy. If you expand to 8 teams, I don't think anyone out there really thinks #9 Missouri (assuming Mili is right) is REALLY deserving to be in the national championship talk. Will the media spend a lot of time on this issue? Hell yeah. And "a lot" is an understatement.

I think the real controversy will be if and when the winner of the playoffs was clearly not the best team throughout the season. Imagine this: 2 undefeated teams at the end of the year, and maybe a 1-loss team, and a 2-loss team also get in the 4-team playoff. Maybe one of the undefeated teams beat that 2-loss team earlier in the year, and their second loss came early, when they played without their starting QB or something. But other than those 2 games, they've played well. But they win their first game and then have a rematch with the same team that beat them earlier, and win that game. To me, that's basically LSU-Bama from 2011. Or what they avoided (rightfully) in 2006. Again, we already have a playoff thread, so I won't go any farther. But I don't see playoffs as the perfect fix for the BCS, which I admit is also not perfect.
 
Upvote 0
MililaniBuckeye said:
Your definition of "blowout" differs from mine. Bottom line is that whether we like it or not, FSU's season "resume" is superior to ours.

Now, if FSU all of a sudden plays like [Mark May] in a game or two, winning by a TD or less, and we kill Illinois, Indiana, and Michigan and then win impressively against MSU in the CCG, then we may jump FSU even without FSU losing...otherwise, we absolutely need FSU to lose for us to jump them.
Click to expand...

1. It wasn't a blowout, but it was a comfortable win, and we went into prevent.
2. I don't think their resume is superior to our. As I said earlier, go ESPNs own power rankings and line-up the 1-12 ACC teams against the 1-12 B1G teams. Tell me how the ACC would win more than 4 of those games? The ACC sucked last year, it still sucks this year, they are living off wins from Georgia and Florida.
3. FSU would need to struggle in at least 2 games to not make it in. I feel like they are too far ingrained as #2 and ESPN has pushed the narrative of how the Big Ten sucks and forgotten how much the ACC sucks.
 
Upvote 0
kujirakira said:
That would seem to be the surface expectation, but the reality is once you start including 2-loss teams... and it will happen if you have a top-8... all the other 2-loss teams are going to ask "Why not us?" and claim the system plays favorites. It's not just #9 that gets "left out" -- it'll be the majority of the top-25 insisting they have a *right* to be in the playoff.
Unless there is a clear delineating factor, such as Conference Champions, then there will be some amount of controversy. But the more spots you include, the more room there is for controversy. For every spot that's added, there's 2 more teams that think they should be included. The rabbit hole just goes deeper and deeper; until you end up with a joke like the basketball's 64-team "playoff". It ceases to be a playoff, and becomes more like the FA Cup at that point.
Click to expand...

The only way this 'playoff' works is if you have 4 mega conference champions playing eachother. Or you do 6 teams (1&2 get a bye) with the 5 aq conference champions getting a bid and 1 champion from the remaining 5 conferences which is most deserving.

I stand by the fact that if you can't win your conference (I don't care about going undefeated) you don't get a shot at a national title.
 
Upvote 0
I would like to see the playoff expanded to 8 teams. You're only adding an extra week of practices in that case, so it shouldn't be too much of a hassle for the schools that cry about academics hurting (Doesn't basketball season go longer?) 8 teams ensures no conference champions would be missed if they met the qualifications and deserved to go. Plus it leaves a few entries for a 1 loss AQ team like MSU, or an undefeated non-AQ team like Northern Illinois to prove they deserve a shot by making their case on the field. If you can't make it to the Top 8 teams, you probably don't deserve to be playing for the championship.
 
Upvote 0
ulukinatme said:
I would like to see the playoff expanded to 8 teams. You're only adding an extra week of practices in that case, so it shouldn't be too much of a hassle for the schools that cry about academics hurting (Doesn't basketball season go longer?) 8 teams ensures no conference champions would be missed if they met the qualifications and deserved to go. Plus it leaves a few entries for a 1 loss AQ team like MSU, or an undefeated non-AQ team like Northern Illinois to prove they deserve a shot by making their case on the field. If you can't make it to the Top 8 teams, you probably don't deserve to be playing for the championship.
Click to expand...
Eventually you'll have a two or three loss team that has no business being in the discussion winning a couple games because they're playing ten miles from home and the better team has an injury. As soon as a "Villanova over G'Town" happens...and it will...CFB will have lost what makes it so awesome.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top