forums

12-Team College Football Playoff?

TheOriginalCane said:
Another one of your over-simplifications.

I am not saying that a game is never played in the snow. Yes, all universities schedule their 6 or 7 home games, and a few fall in November.

But that is not the issue. The issue is games that COULD be played at neutral sites (and 7 of the 11 playoff games would be played at neutral sites) being scheduled for cold-weather sites in December. There is no reason to do so. Giving "home games" to Teams 5-8, while going neutral site for Teams 1-4 is just stupid and unnecessary.
Click to expand...
So you're telling northern teams that they automatically lose their geographic advantage. They may have to go play outside in the south, but under no circumstances will a southern team be asked to play outside up north. But we are "settling it on the field".
 
Advertisement
***-e-skr said:
The SEC has earned the benefit of doubt.

The only other conference who currently approaches that is the Big 10.

Watch what happens this year. UGA will beat Clemson, only to go on and lose to Auburn, and then Bama in the SEC title game. Clemson will win the crappy ACC, without a conference loss. Everybody on the board will say that Clemson deserves a spot in the playoffs over UGA, even though UGA will have played a much tougher schedule.
Click to expand...

While I have no doubt that Alabama has earned it for the SEC, it is going to be disappointing when a fourth SEC team gets in with 3-4 losses just because of the conference they belong to.
 
AquinasStatGuy said:
While I have no doubt that Alabama has earned it for the SEC, it is going to be disappointing when a fourth SEC team gets in with 3-4 losses just because of the conference they belong to.
Click to expand...

Maybe- but this is what happens when you expand the field too much. I think 8 is probably too high as well. It will turn into a “participation trophy” situation real quick. Most of the teams that will get in won’t have a reasonable chance of winning the title. But we are in this day and age where everything has to be an over the top attempt to show how fair everything is. It’s a big waste of time.
 
8 teams would have been the way to go IMO. Power 5 conference winners, best Group of 5 conference winner, and 2 at-large teams. No bye weeks.

I'm afraid that the 12 is going to be ACC, Big XII, and PAC12 champs with 4-6 SEC and 3-5 Big10 teams. Once every 3-5 years you'll see a Group of 5 conference champ who goes undefeated get in, but basically, it will be a SEC and Big10 show.
 
Advertisement
AquinasStatGuy said:
So you're telling northern teams that they automatically lose their geographic advantage. They may have to go play outside in the south, but under no circumstances will a southern team be asked to play outside up north. But we are "settling it on the field".
Click to expand...


You are ******* brain-dead.

Tell me the location of the Orange Bowl, the Sugar Bowl, the Cotton Bowl, the Rose Bowl, and the Fiesta Bowl. ****, throw in Atlanta and Charlotte, and Tampa, and Orlando.

And please describe all the great "northern bowls" where northern teams will have a "geographic advantage".

Your comments are predictably ignorant.

Just name ONE significant bowl where the "northern teams" would have a "geographic advantage". The Pinstripe Bowl? The Fenway Bowl? The Quicklane Bowl?

Hilarious.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
You are ******* brain-dead.

Tell me the location of the Orange Bowl, the Sugar Bowl, the Cotton Bowl, the Rose Bowl, and the Fiesta Bowl. ****, throw in Atlanta and Charlotte, and Tampa, and Orlando.

And please describe all the great "northern bowls" where northern teams will have a "geographic advantage".

Your comments are predictably ignorant.

Just name ONE significant bowl where the "northern teams" would have a "geographic advantage". The Pinstripe Bowl? The Fenway Bowl? The Quicklane Bowl?

Hilarious.
Click to expand...
As usual, you’re missing the point.

People claim that they finally want a system that settles it on the field. If you really believed that, you would want the better seeds to host games. Instead, you (1) have a committee picking the at large teams, and (2) every northern team having to travel south or west. Just quit pretending like you’re trying to get a “true championship” that is “settled on the field”. That’s not what you want.

Again, I have to ask, what is it about this topic that causes you to act the way you do? It doesn’t impact you at all, but every post includes a personal attack.
 
Somehow that guy doesn’t understand that Michigan vs. LSU in the Sugar Bowl isn’t a neutral site.
 
Advertisement
AquinasStatGuy said:
Just clear things up for me. Are the personal attacks allowed or not? Does it depend on spending the $25?
Click to expand...
Bickering is not a personal attack. It's also happened to other people, not just you.

Keep in mind that one of those agreeing with you is a troll doing his best to stir sht up without catching an infraction.
 
Advertisement
JD08 said:
Bickering is not a personal attack. It's also happened to other people, not just you.

Keep in mind that one of those agreeing with you is a troll doing his best to stir sht up without catching an infraction.
Click to expand...
“******* brain dead”, just as one example, is just bickering? Quoted for future reference. Thank you.
 
AquinasStatGuy said:
That’s fine. I can take it. I’m still wondering why people are so fired up about this topic. Is it because our only chance to make the playoffs is to keep expanding? Maybe make it 66 like NCAA basketball so we can slide in?
Click to expand...

I actually don’t know who’s fired up. I’m not worried about it , what’s going to happen is what’s going to happen and Miami has to adapt. I think most people fear that whatever happens will be too SEC friendly, If there was anything to get worked up about - that would be it
 
AquinasStatGuy said:
Somehow that guy doesn’t understand that Michigan vs. LSU in the Sugar Bowl isn’t a neutral site.
Click to expand...


You are the only person who veers back and forth between arguing for ACTUAL on-campus home games (which are not neutral site) and then claiming that somehow the championship is not "decided on the field" due to the regionality of 90% of all bowl sites.

Are the Bucs an illegitimate Super Bowl winner because the game was played in Tampa? Is the NCAA Tournament a bogus way to crown a champion because the PRE-SET regional locations will, at some point, probably give a "geographic advantage" to some teams over other teams?

Oh, and while we're at it, should the University of Miami give back any national championships that were awarded after Orange Bowl wins?

Your arguments are trash. That's not a personal attack. That's just reality.

You somehow claim that giving higher seeds a home field advantage is the only way to "settle it on the field". But then you complain about "northern teams" losing their "geographic advantages" if they have to play in the south in NFL stadiums.

But you fail to acknowledge that over 100 years of college football have played the vast majority of bowl games (and thus the games that decided national championships) in warm-weather climates. And you fail to acknowledge that NOTHING about those post-season games has changed. Even worse, you act like these playoff games (and apparently the seedings) would be manipulated SOLELY to have, say, LSU play in the Sugar Bowl for one game (who knows which one, as there are three rounds, even though the first round is currently proposed to be played on campus).

Just ridiculous.
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
You are the only person who veers back and forth between arguing for ACTUAL on-campus home games (which are not neutral site) and then claiming that somehow the championship is not "decided on the field" due to the regionality of 90% of all bowl sites.

Are the Bucs an illegitimate Super Bowl winner because the game was played in Tampa? Is the NCAA Tournament a bogus way to crown a champion because the PRE-SET regional locations will, at some point, probably give a "geographic advantage" to some teams over other teams?

Oh, and while we're at it, should the University of Miami give back any national championships that were awarded after Orange Bowl wins?

Your arguments are trash. That's not a personal attack. That's just reality.

You somehow claim that giving higher seeds a home field advantage is the only way to "settle it on the field". But then you complain about "northern teams" losing their "geographic advantages" if they have to play in the south in NFL stadiums.

But you fail to acknowledge that over 100 years of college football have played the vast majority of bowl games (and thus the games that decided national championships) in warm-weather climates. And you fail to acknowledge that NOTHING about those post-season games has changed. Even worse, you act like these playoff games (and apparently the seedings) would be manipulated SOLELY to have, say, LSU play in the Sugar Bowl for one game (who knows which one, as there are three rounds, even though the first round is currently proposed to be played on campus).

Just ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Who said we have to use the bowl games?
 
OriginalCanesCanesCanes said:
I actually don’t know who’s fired up. I’m not worried about it , what’s going to happen is what’s going to happen and Miami has to adapt. I think most people fear that whatever happens will be too SEC friendly, If there was anything to get worked up about - that would be it
Click to expand...
Exactly what I have said throughout this discussion. People want expansion but won’t accept that we’re just adding more SEC teams to the process.
 
AquinasStatGuy said:
“******* brain dead”, just as one example, is just bickering? Quoted for future reference. Thank you.
Click to expand...


So, let's see...we are supposed to pretend that you aren't Jagr (and multiple other screen names) who was one of the most combative and (personally) insulting posters ever? And that you haven't been banned multiple times for those same offenses?

Sure, whatever. Now you are "AquinasStatGuy", some mild-mannered guy who is soooo upset over people calling you brain dead. Or was it made infinitely worse by the addition of another word?

Unlike you, I haven't been banned multiple times, and I've only used one screen name, ever.

As for "quoted for future reference", I see you've gone back to your subtle Miami-hatred routine again, with your "our only chance to make the playoffs" is through expansion. We know who you are and what you are.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top