Nightmare for the Selection Committee

that was never my spew.
mine has always been that I love the chaos and controversy.

 

I think I was quite clear when I said 8, you know 1 less than 9 one more than 7 is the right number.

No more no less

 

NASCAR is a sport. Even though it doesn't use a ball (like bowling, croquet, golf) drivers risk their lives while enduring extremely high temperatures for several hours.

Lost Left Coast Cajun and poster named after a large ugly rodent don't understand how things work. There is no such thing as a perfect regular season. Even teams that go undefeated are better or worse at different times of the year and often the undefeated team is the team lucky enough to not have serious injuries at key positions. A team can lose their QB or stud RB or some monster pass rusher and lose a game or two early. Then those players get healthy and the team is the better for it.

Harken back to 2001. LSU lost 3 games in the early to middle parts of the season. Then they got it together. Rohan Davey started lighting it up with Josh Reed. Dominick Davis stepped up his game to the next level. LSU ended up winning the SEC West and a spot in the SECCG. Nebraska had been the #2 team. Then they lost to Colorado in the last regular season game and got pounded something like 65-38. They got left out of the Big 12 Championship game. Tennessee had moved into the #2 ranking. When LSU beat the Vols in the CG LSU was the SEC Champion, even though their record was at that time 9-3. Tennessee's loss put the Cornhuskers back into the BCS title game where they were hammered by The U.

If there had been an 8 team playoff system in 2001 LSU would have gotten in as the Champs of the SEC. At that point in the season LSU was playing better football than anybody with the possible exception of Miami. LSU was good enough to at least get to the final game. Would they have beaten the Canes? We'll never know.

 

i like the idea of a sport rewarding an entire season vs. letting a team struggle mid-season then get hot in December.

 

In this case the committee should adjust their ranking accordingly

Teams will not tank games. Anyone that believes this is well...that's crazy talk.

 

LSU got into the 2003 BCS CG not only because of winning the SECCG, but also because on that final weekend 2 teams who were opponents of USC opponents lost and lowered USC's computer rating just that infintesimal amount that made them lower rated that LSU. Two teams that didn't even play vs USC. In 2007 LSU lost 2 games, including the final regular season game. Winning the SECCG by itself wouldn't have been enough. West Virginia would have been in the title game but they lost to a terrible Pittsburgh team. Where is your "purity of the regular season" in that?

This year Baylor and TCU got screwed. Is Ohio State better than the Bears or the Horned Frogs? Ask the people who know. They are in Las Vegas. TCU would be a 7 point favorite over the Suckeyes and Baylor a 6 point favorite. Yes, with 8 teams Mississippi State and Michigan State would have also been included and I don't think either one is a viable contender but who knows? That's why they play the games. All the 3 loss teams, Missouri, Ole Miss, Georgia Tech, Arizona State, ect. would have no reason to complain.

The team that steps up their game and plays the best football in December and January IS
the best team.

 

that's where we disagree.

i personally think the team that plays better for 13/14 games is better than the team that plays better for 2/3 games.

 

To me this is where at seeding set up in the playoffs would work. Like I said before, expand it to 8 teams and give the top 2 a first round bye. You win you get a chance to rest. I know it maybe taboo but I think the nfl playoff system (with the exception of the strange situation in the NFC south this year) works pretty well. IMHO

 

And should be taken into account.

 

Do you think Ohio State is a better team than either Baylor or TCU just because they played one more game than them? Or Oregon in past years would always blow out everybody early and lose later in the year. Are they better than a team that loses early and then comes on strong? Or how about a team with a new quarterback who is inexperienced. QB plays poorly in early season but the game starts to slow down for him and he leads is team to late season greatness. Sort of like Blake Simms.

Wouldn't you like to have seen LSU in a playoff in 2001?