zimo wrote:It was a single elimination two team playoff.
The bottom line is if there was an 8 team tournament, teams ranked 5-8 would commonly win. It would come down to what amounts to a series of coin tosses like all playoffs do to determine the national championship. I like having one sport where that doesn't happen.
Only a fool trying to upgrade to an idiot would have that argument. I am going to take it that you are just trying to keep this thread going by provoking responses by those ridiculous posts you are making so more posters will not go to cp.com. If you are it is having the opposite effect with me.
Honestly he just seems to have an old school college football view, I dont think he is trying to be a [deleted].
You guys are ignoring the essence of what I'm saying. I like the system because it's different.
You can't make that claim that if #8 wins three games in a tournament at the end of a season that makes them the #1. If #8 is 10-2 or 9-3 then wins three games and a #1 13-0 team loses their first or second tournament game it makes the tournament champion #1. It makes them the winner of the tournament.
You guys aren't going change my mind. I'm entitled to my opinion and you're entitled to yours. You can't convince me I'm wrong for preferring the older systems. There is no right or wrong, it's an issue of preference.
zimo wrote:I don't see how I'm a fool for preferring the older systems.
EDIT: I also don't see how I'm arguing for presenting my perspective.
because your points are foolish. You think you speaking 100% opinion but your not when you say the old way is the best way to establish who's number 1. Its just not true.
With the old system better teams in the regular season are crowned champion. Each week of the regular season is more meaningful because of the limited margin for error. The bigger the tournament, the more meaningless each week of the regular season is.
zimo wrote:With the old system better teams in the regular season are crowned champion. Each week of the regular season is more meaningful because of the limited margin for error. The bigger the tournament, the more meaningless each week of the regular season is.
NO NO NO
If you lose 3 games your probably not in the top 8 in a playoff.
And it doesnt make the regular season less meaningful if there is a playoff It gives the regular season a purpose, rather than being a mish mashed cluster [deleted]
BuckeyeBomber wrote:And it doesnt make the regular season less meaningful if there is a playoff It gives the regular season a purpose, rather than being a mish mashed cluster [deleted]
I don't agree with this at all. If you're LSU last year the SEC Championship game would have been meaningless. They wouldn't have dropped out of the top 8 for losing that game. That would drain the intensity out of that game would it not?
I have never understood people's idea (dogma) that the best team must be the champion. What is so great about the NCAA tournament is that UT Arlington could conceivably win the national championship. If they did, the would likely not be the best team in the country, but who the hell cares? They still won!
I guarantee you that if you have a 4 team playoff, people will want a six team system and then a eight and then a ten and ... College football is too big to be run like the NFL. Forget a playoff system, cut the number of bowls to 12-15 and tier them.
