The Official Forum
Page 3 of 5 12 3 45
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   OT: Wow (BCS Championship) (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/30712-ot-wow-bcs-championship.html)

Camron Rust Tue Jan 09, 2007 05:05pm
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that I'm opposed to a playoff. I'm saying it will not solve the issues that exist. It will only move them around.

And, that a game that can often have as little as 1 score (and often only has 3-5) by both teams combined is far more likely to have fluke upsets than games with 70+ scores per game....where the statisitical probablilties are more likely to produce a winner that is the better team.

Jurassic Referee Tue Jan 09, 2007 05:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
I think a playoff would lead to some freak upsets and teams that no one really thinks are the best will end up winning championships. The best teams would sometimes get beat by a longshot who then goes down big in the next game.
You mean like...maybe...the NFL?

Playoffs works for them.

JRutledge Tue Jan 09, 2007 05:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
You mean like...maybe...the NFL?

Playoffs works for them.
Or every other level of NCAA sports and every pro sports that has a playoff system. College Football is the only sport where the teams play of a championship based on the polls. If polls were involved in Baseball, St. Louis would have never been in the World Series. Now they are World Champions.

Peace

WhistlesAndStripes Tue Jan 09, 2007 05:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
It is not about the Big Ten (which is the comment he made) it is about the teams that were playing. It is clear to me that USC is by far one of the best teams in the country. USC killed Arkansas at home early in the season. Then Arkansas runs through the SEC until they play LSU and Florida. Then Arkansas gets beat by a "slow and physical" Wisconsin team. I thought the SEC was about speed? Then a terrible Penn State team who struggled against any ranked team in the Big Ten beats Tennessee who beat a Top 5 California team in Knoxville. Hell Florida struggled against really bad SEC teams most of the year and now they play almost a perfect game against Ohio State.

The bottom line we need a playoff. Wisconsin deserved a change to prove they were a great team. They only lost to Michigan this year in a close game at that on the road. USC deserved a chance to overcome a couple of bad games against conference teams that are always geared up to play them. Boise State deserved a change to prove they could beat anyone in the country. The bowl system sucks and most of the games are not even watch able.

Peace
c-h-a-n-c-e
c-h-a-n-c-e
w-a-t-c-h-a-b-l-e (no space)

WhistlesAndStripes Tue Jan 09, 2007 05:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
I do not know if that last statement is correct. Boise St. had to be in the top 8 to reach a BCS game. They did not play in a BCS game without being ranked pretty high.
Actually, I think they only had to be top 12 to get in.

JRutledge Tue Jan 09, 2007 05:51pm
Well they were in the Top 10 when the bowls were announced. Also Wisconsin could not play in a BCS Bowl because that would have been 3 Big Ten teams and that is not allowed. Then again, Wisconsin beat a big time SEC team in their bowl game and ended the season with one lost. I would have liked to see Wisconsin battle it out in a playoff.

Peace

Camron Rust Tue Jan 09, 2007 06:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
Well they were in the Top 10 when the bowls were announced. Also Wisconsin could not play in a BCS Bowl because that would have been 3 Big Ten teams and that is not allowed. Then again, Wisconsin beat a big time SEC team in their bowl game and ended the season with one lost. I would have liked to see Wisconsin battle it out in a playoff.

Peace
You mean Wisconsin (tied for 2nd in the Big Ten) beat the 2nd place team in the SEC??? by 3 points. Sounds like it was a good match up that could have gone either way. Perhaps both of them deserved a shot.

If you ask enough people, you could get reasonable arguments to put any one of 20+ teams in an 8 team playoff.

Jurassic Referee Tue Jan 09, 2007 06:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that I'm opposed to a playoff. I'm saying it will not solve the issues that exist. It will only move them around.

And, that a game that can often have as little as 1 score (and often only has 3-5) by both teams combined is far more likely to have fluke upsets than games with 70+ scores per game....where the statisitical probablilties are more likely to produce a winner that is the better team.
You mean like the....um....NCAA basketball playoffs? A lot of statistical probabilities have gone right down the dumper in the first two rounds. And the public loves it.

Playoffs work for them.

And don't bring up what happened to my beloved Yankees in the playoffs the last few years....

Camron Rust Tue Jan 09, 2007 07:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
You mean like the....um....NCAA basketball playoffs? A lot of statistical probabilities have gone right down the dumper in the first two rounds. And the public loves it.

Playoffs work for them.

And don't bring up what happened to my beloved Yankees in the playoffs the last few years....
I generally like playoffs. I just don't they'll solve the problems as completely as the proponents claim or would like.

No matter what practical number you chose, someone is going to feel that were unfairly left out. A lot will whine about the seeding....just like basketball. How many times, due to the bracket ordering, has the "real" championship game been in the semis...you know...the two teams people really think are the best?

Football is just more likely to have more upsets than basketball due to the few number of scores in any given game.

No worry on the Yankees front, I couldn't care less about them or baseball.

Jurassic Referee Tue Jan 09, 2007 07:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
No worry on the Yankees front, I <font color = red>couldn't</font> care less about them or baseball.
Did you mean to say that you <b>could</b> care less about baseball.....or did you really mean to say that you <b>love</b> the Yankees?:D

mbyron Tue Jan 09, 2007 07:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
Did you mean to say that you <b>could</b> care less about baseball.....or did you really mean to say that you <b>love</b> the Yankees?:D
Hard to read his mind, but the proper usage of that expression is <b>couldn't</b> care less, denoting that one cares so little that it's impossible to care any less.

A noble sentiment, or lack thereof, concerning the Bronx Bombers.

JRutledge Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
You mean Wisconsin (tied for 2nd in the Big Ten) beat the 2nd place team in the SEC??? by 3 points. Sounds like it was a good match up that could have gone either way. Perhaps both of them deserved a shot.
If the speed of the SEC was so outstanding, Wisconsin should not have been able to stay on the field. Arkansas was in the SEC Championship game and would have likely had an opportunity to play for the BCS Championship if you listen to all the experts about how good the SEC was this year. My point is Wisconsin fits the description of a slow and big team, but they beat a team that was supposed to be fast a talented more than most Big Ten teams. Arkansas should have won by 40.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
If you ask enough people, you could get reasonable arguments to put any one of 20+ teams in an 8 team playoff.
So. Also I seriously doubt there are 20 teams that would have a 1 or 2 loss seasons. At least at the very end no one would be complaining about who won the NC. They are still talking about how Boise State could have split the NC. You do not split anything at the D1-AA level. You know who won and that is it.

Peace

Back In The Saddle Wed Jan 10, 2007 02:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
And, that a game that can often have as little as 1 score (and often only has 3-5) by both teams combined is far more likely to have fluke upsets than games with 70+ scores per game....where the statisitical probablilties are more likely to produce a winner that is the better team.
There is a perfectly serviceable word to describe the team that gets beat in a fluke game during the playoffs: LOSER. Baseball and basketball lend themselves nicely to best-of-seven serieses and eliminate, to a large degree, the fluke factor. Football is an entirely different animal. You've got one shot to beat the other team, and if you're really the better team, you'll find a way to get it done. If not, you're not really the better team. Any whining to the contrary is just coulda, shoulda, wouldas.

Jimgolf Wed Jan 10, 2007 12:40pm
The old system was fine. The Rose Bowl is now an after-thought, when it used to be the biggest game of the year. The other bowl games have sold out to sponsors.

In 2010 they will probably have the Playtex Cross-Your-Heart Bowl and the Trojan-Enz Bowl added as the Semi-final games and the Listerine Mint Fresh Bowl for the national championship. Is that what we want?

Why do we need to have playoffs? Isn't the debate about which team is best half of the fun?

Is Florida really the best team in the country? Ask the Auburn players who's better.

People today can't stand to have anything unsettled. Too much effort, I guess.

Scrapper1 Wed Jan 10, 2007 01:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimgolf
Isn't the debate about which team is best half of the fun?
No, honestly. It's not fun. It's a stupid debate. It's so obvious that a playoff system would be better than the current system that the debate isn't fun. It simply points out the closed-mindedness (or greed) of the big-wigs that are opposed to it. There's not a single good reason for NOT having a championship settled on the field; as it is in every other NCAA sport in every other NCAA division.

I'd much rather leave a borderline team out of an 8- or 16-team field, than to leave a deserving team out of a 2-team field.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:57am.
Page 3 of 5 12 3 45
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1