• 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!

College Playoff

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Buckeyeskickbuttocks;2120659; said:
Knap - you called it a sham. If it's a sham, you should be able to identify what Champion didn't deserve the championship.

A sham would no doubt produce ridiculous results... like.. I don't know... Villanova beating Georgetown... and winning the title, despite losing the other 3 games they played against Georgetown that year...

Just sayin

I mean... It's not like the wildcard Giants beating the 18-0 pats... Totally legit.
Click to expand...

If you're going to pin me down on the word "sham" then we're just quibbling over semantics. Is that really the point of this conversation?

Fact is that this is the only major college sport wherein you have, essentially, a popularity contest determine the winner. Playoffs work at every level of football, and there's zero reason to believe that they won't work here. The bowls have proven to be a corrupt system, they have potentially violated federal law, and overall it's an exclusionary system. I believe that's self-evident.
 
Upvote 0
knapplc;2120666; said:
Fact is that this is the only major college sport wherein you have, essentially, a popularity contest determine the winner. Playoffs work at every level of football, and there's zero reason to believe that they won't work here.
Click to expand...

Bingo. There's is absolutely zero reason why we should not have a playoff. Minimum of eight teams, preferably 16.
 
Upvote 0
knapplc;2120666; said:
If you're going to pin me down on the word "sham" then we're just quibbling over semantics. Is that really the point of this conversation?

Fact is that this is the only major college sport wherein you have, essentially, a popularity contest determine the winner. Playoffs work at every level of football, and there's zero reason to believe that they won't work here. The bowls have proven to be a corrupt system, they have potentially violated federal law, and overall it's an exclusionary system. I believe that's self-evident.
Click to expand...

MililaniBuckeye;2120680; said:
Bingo. There's is absolutely zero reason why we should not have a playoff. Minimum of eight teams, preferably 16.
Click to expand...

Playoffs don't actually work. It's a fucking joke when Cinderella gets hot after losing over half it's conference games and wins it all *cough*UConn*cough*
 
Upvote 0
BUCKYLE;2120689; said:
Playoffs don't actually work. It's a fucking joke when Cinderella gets hot after losing over half it's conference games and wins it all *cough*UConn*cough*
Click to expand...

Playoffs do work, because the decision is settled on the field, not based on some writer's opinion of who the best two teams are. Playoffs crown a playoff winner. They are not a perfect system, but they are the least imperfect system.
 
Upvote 0
knapplc;2120694; said:
Playoffs do work, because the decision is settled on the field, not based on some writer's opinion of who the best two teams are. Playoffs crown a playoff winner. They are not a perfect system, but they are the least imperfect system.
Click to expand...

It's not settled on the field or the Patriots at 18-0 wouldn't have needed yet another win. Which writer picks the teams? I thought there were a shitload of people that had a say in the best two. I agree that playoffs are far from perfect.

I guess it comes down to what you prefer to bitch about.
 
Upvote 0
knapplc;2120694; said:
Playoffs do work, because the decision is settled on the field, not based on some writer's opinion of who the best two teams are. Playoffs crown a playoff winner. They are not a perfect system, but they are the least imperfect system.
Click to expand...

If you are looking for a playoff winner. If you are looking for the "best" team over the course of a season? No so much.
 
Upvote 0
Bucky Katt;2120701; said:
If you are looking for a playoff winner. If you are looking for the "best" team over the course of a season? No so much.
Click to expand...

That begs the question, why do they have March Madness? Why have a tournament when one team is already #1 at the end of the season?

Or, if the basketball tournament is not a good comparator, look at the FCS since it has a similar number of teams/contenders, etc.
 
Upvote 0
That begs the question, why do they have March Madness?
Click to expand...
Because it makes a lot of money.

The better system was replaced multiple times by an oversized, expanded bracket that kills the importance of the regular season. Remember that great shot by Rivers against UNC this year? A great shot that meant close to nothing.
 
Upvote 0
knapplc;2120666; said:
...we're just quibbling over semantics...
Click to expand...


That's all this thread has ever been.

Playoff

No Playoff

It's all about your standard of value. Or is it?

To some, it's about what makes a team a legitimate champion. And there are people on both sides for whom that is the primary concern.

To some, it's about what is best for the fans. And there are people on both sides for whom that is the primary concern.

To some, it's about what is best for the players. And there are people on both sides for whom that is the primary concern.

To some, it's about what is best for the universities. And there are people on both sides for whom that is the primary concern.

So maybe it's not just about your standard of value, which is by its nature mostly subjective; but also about how values are assigned to the criteria you choose, which is by its nature purely subjective.

Bottome line: The only people in this thread who are wrong are those who believe that the other side is wrong.

(OK - That last bit isn't entirely serious; but I think there's a grain of truth in the absurdity of it)
 
Upvote 0
knapplc;2120706; said:
That begs the question, why do they have March Madness? Why have a tournament when one team is already #1 at the end of the season?

Or, if the basketball tournament is not a good comparator, look at the FCS since it has a similar number of teams/contenders, etc.
Click to expand...

Because it makes money? I'm not anti-playoffs, it just doesn't tell you who the best team is any more than the BCS does.

(I AM in favor of a playoff system.....I'm just getting bkb's talking points out of the way so he'll shut the hell up for once. :lol:)
 
Upvote 0
DaddyBigBucks;2120712; said:
That's all this thread has ever been.

Playoff

No Playoff

It's all about your standard of value. Or is it?

To some, it's about what makes a team a legitimate champion. And there are people on both sides for whom that is the primary concern.

To some, it's about what is best for the fans. And there are people on both sides for whom that is the primary concern.

To some, it's about what is best for the players. And there are people on both sides for whom that is the primary concern.

To some, it's about what is best for the universities. And there are people on both sides for whom that is the primary concern.

So maybe it's not just about your standard of value, which is by its nature mostly subjective; but also about how values are assigned to the criteria you choose, which is by its nature purely subjective.

Bottome line: The only people in this thread who are wrong are those who believe that the other side is wrong.

(OK - That last bit isn't entirely serious; but I think there's a grain of truth in the absurdity of it)
Click to expand...

You're wrong.
 
Upvote 0
jwinslow;2120710; said:
Because it makes a lot of money.

The better system was replaced multiple times by an oversized, expanded bracket that kills the importance of the regular season. Remember that great shot by Rivers against UNC this year? A great shot that meant close to nothing.
Click to expand...

OK, then why do they have a women's volleyball tournament? Why do they have conference baseball tournaments? These aren't solely about money.

It's clear that March Madness makes a ton of cash. But that's just one example of many sports which use a tournament to determine conference and national champions. Doesn't women's soccer use a tournament? Odds are they lose money in that.
 
Upvote 0
knapplc;2120666; said:
If you're going to pin me down on the word "sham" then we're just quibbling over semantics. Is that really the point of this conversation?

Fact is that this is the only major college sport wherein you have, essentially, a popularity contest determine the winner. Playoffs work at every level of football, and there's zero reason to believe that they won't work here. The bowls have proven to be a corrupt system, they have potentially violated federal law, and overall it's an exclusionary system. I believe that's self-evident.
Click to expand...
And that's the problem. It's not self evident.

Thus, the inquiry.

I don't argue playoffs are illegitimate in determining a champion. But, I don't believe the BCS has been demonstrated as illegitimate. Indeed, I rather like the fact that College Football seeks to crown "the best" team, on whatever metric (your popularity contest remark) rather than some team that sucked donkey dick for half a season and got "hot" at the right time.
 
Upvote 0
knapplc;2120694; said:
Playoffs do work, because the decision is settled on the field, not based on some writer's opinion of who the best two teams are. Playoffs crown a playoff winner. They are not a perfect system, but they are the least imperfect system.
Click to expand...
Tell that "settled on the field" shit to the 2007 Patriots who beat the Giants in December and had to "settle it on the field" again.

Tell that to Georgetown... who settled the matter three fucking times in 1985
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top