BuckBackHome
Wolverine is largest member of weasel family
Agreed. Especially when you consider it is Baylor.
Upvote
0
-
New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.
- Thread starter ScriptOhio
- Start date
Zurp
I have misplaced my pants.
Okay, so Devil's Advocate here...
Which is more impressive for a conference?
- One great team that wins everything, plus a couple of "good" teams that get in the playoffs. 3 teams in the playoff, total. One with a first-round exit, a second with a second-round exit. The third team wins the championship. You got MAYBE one more that some people claim should have been in the playoff, but no one takes them seriously. All the other teams in the conference play football like they hate the smell of their own farts.
- A bunch of "good" teams that get in the playoff. Let's say 5 teams in the playoff. One with a first-round exit. Two with second-round exits. And the last two with a third-round exit (semifinals). No teams get to the finals.
Which is more impressive for a conference?
- One great team that wins everything, plus a couple of "good" teams that get in the playoffs. 3 teams in the playoff, total. One with a first-round exit, a second with a second-round exit. The third team wins the championship. You got MAYBE one more that some people claim should have been in the playoff, but no one takes them seriously. All the other teams in the conference play football like they hate the smell of their own farts.
- A bunch of "good" teams that get in the playoff. Let's say 5 teams in the playoff. One with a first-round exit. Two with second-round exits. And the last two with a third-round exit (semifinals). No teams get to the finals.
Upvote
0
You gotta think like a SEC SEC SEC! hack here. Postseason results may only be used to point out strength when the SEC does well. If the SEC does not do well "you can't judge them based on the postseason!"
Upvote
0
Zurp
I have misplaced my pants.
I understand that, but I don't give two turds in a coffee cup about thinking like an SEC hack. I'm talking about real life thinking.
Take specifics out.
Conference A has one really good (great) team, and 3-4 "good" teams. Only two of those "good" teams make it into the playoffs, and no one sheds a tear about any other "good" teams that didn't make the playoffs. The two teams lose in the first and second rounds, respectively. The great team gets to the finals. Say they win it all. No one else in the conference impresses anyone.
Conference B has 6-7 "good" teams, of which 5 make the playoffs. The rest of the conference is "meh". One team loses in the first round, two in the second, and two lose in the semifinals. No teams make the finals.
Which conference is better?
For the record, I'll vote that Conference B is better. But... I don't care which conference is better. If my team loses in the playoffs, the conferences can drink their coffee out of a coffee cup that I didn't put two turds in. I want my team to be the winner. If some nerd thinks he can make me cry by saying that his conference is better than mine, he can have fun thinking that. But maybe he's right.
Upvote
0
My argument is: I root for a team, not a conference. Fuck those other guys, my team or bust. All the hypothetical arguments piss me off, too. Can't be proven right or wrong, and we'll likely never ever ever know anyway, so why waste time on it? Games are played on the field. Likewise, I don't care if "Alabama would crush them if the game was played today". Well, the game was played in September, and ya'll lost by 2 scores. The facts show that 2 of the top 4 teams in one conference lost week 1 out of conference games, one was a really really bad loss in hindsight. Now I'm rambling. Basically, I pretty much agree with what Zurp said.
Upvote
0