Not no one. Basket ball and baseball is different for one baseball is a series. In both sports you get a larger sample size. You can’t have that many games in football.
Did Cincinatti belong in the college football playoff?
- Thread starter ScWildthing61
- Start date
Isn’t always a series in college baseball and never is in college basketball. You can lose day 1 meet in loser bracket and split 1-1 but someone is going home. Series only happen in pro baseball and basketball, those are exceptions not the rule. At all other levels and in every sport you can split and one team is a champ the other isn’t.
This is my opinion and it’s not changing. It’s the reason I don’t care to see the national championship. Alabama didn’t just win by 3 or hell even a touchdown. It was a straight up $$$ whipping.
Last edited:
Or better yet what you basically are doing is giving the sec a double elimination. I’m not an sec homer I see that as a HUGE advantage monetarily and game wise. If any other top 4 team loses their conference championship they are out. Idc if they are undefeated.
Sure you can. Just beat the one team in the championship that beat you in conference championship. The NC and conference championship have nothing to do with each other. They are separate playoffs. Of course conference championship mean something, otherwise there would be no conferences. They just don't have anything to do with the NC. Do you think the PAC 12 champion, 10-4 Utah, deserves to be in the playoffs? Do you think the PAC-12 title doesn't mean anything the them? of course it does, however, they are not as good as the second best team in the SEC. Same is true for every other conference in the country. Why is it you want to penalize the second best team in the country just because they play in the toughest conference in the country by far, but you want to reward non competitive teams who win a weak conference championship? That is antithetical to competitive sports and makes no sense whatsoever.
And no one cares about regular season champ. Football has that as well, it’s who is #1 before the cfp. Bama is regular season champion.
Again I don’t agree with you. It’s unfair to Alabama to have to beat Georgia twice in the post season. Of course a 10-4 team shouldn’t be in a playoff, please point to where I said that. I just simply said if your a top 4 team and you lose your conference championship you don’t deserve to be in a 4 team playoff where 2 games (for one team not total) decide the national championship. You had your chance if you wanted it or earned it your should have won your conference championship period. Anything less than that negates conference championships.
Was the CFP final 4 set before the SEC championship game? Conference championship games are more regular season than playoffs.
Conference championships are about money not the playoffs. So it doesn’t negate anything. You’re making a pointless distinction between college football rematches and every other sport that can have both postseason or regular season then postseason matchups splits.
Wrong. In baseball, no one cares about the tournament. The only teams that do are those trying to play their way into a regional. The teams who have already secured their position in a regional, rests their pitchers arms.
Conference championship are post season. You can say what you want. The regular season ends in November and it’s been looked at that way for decades. Georgia didn’t deserve to be in the playoff plain and simple. Name me another conference that could pull that off. It won’t happen. To much of an advantage and waters down conference championships. Basically makes them meaningless unless your in any other conference not named the SEC. My opinion is not changing. Shouldn’t be able to lose in the post season and win the national championship. Hell I’m not even saying you can’t lose the last game of the regular season. Just that December game I’m talking about. If Georgia played Alabama the last week of the regular season that’s a different story. Conference championships should be elimination games period.
Ray tanner would be a great example of this.
Ok so UGA getting dominated by Bama can be considered more of a late reg season loss? Or is the loss caught in a vortex that doesnt matter? I'm confused. Does any loss to Bama at any time count? How about Ole Miss losing to them? If we dont count Ole Miss' loss to Bama, should they have been in the playoff? Are they a top 4 team with only a loss to Auburn? Thats a pretty stout record that would rival Michigan. Did the playoff committee really get the best 4 teams in? Or is it flawed? So many questions...
Exactly and if you expand to 8, 1/2 those questions get answered if not most of them.
Oh, so it's not fair to have to beat the best team in the playoff to win a championship? Maybe they should take their ball and go home? Sounds awfully PC to me. So if Georgia doesn't deserve to be in the playoffs after being the #1 team most of the year and only having one very quality loss before the playoffs (just like everybody else sans Cincinnati with it's puny schedule) just exactly who should have replaced them that is a better team? Also, suppose in a nonconference game Alabama had played and beaten an otherwise undefeated Big 10 team who trounced everyone in their conference and won their conference championship. Are you saying that team shouldn't be allowed into the playoffs because it would be unfair for Alabama to have to beat them again, too? Would you replace them with a weaker team in a lesser conference just by virtue of them having won their inferior conference championship?
It really isn’t that hard to understand. Conference championships are post season. You can’t call them regular reason when the regular season is who decides who goes there. When you lost most defiantly matters. IMHO once again, you can’t lose your conference championship and get into the playoff. I don’t care if you are the best team ever and you lose that game. You just simply can not lose that game. It should have just as much importance as a playoff game in my option. Lose and your out. That answers all your questions.
I’m talking about National #1. Also by your standard the conference tourney should eliminate anyone who loses to that champ.
ACC did that last year with ND and Clemson. So that wasn’t hard to find. You’re just creating an arbitrary delineation to justify an illogical viewpoint. So Bama can lose to auburn a week sooner get into the cfp and win and that’s fine but one week later isn’t ok. If a conference championship was truly postseason than it would end their season. Clearly it’s a money making event not truly postseason.
It counts as a late season loss. If other P5 teams hadn’t loss 2+ games but 2 other teams, UGA would have been out. It’s not UGA’s fault that the rest of college football was full of 2+ loss teams.
Nd is not in the acc they played in a de facto championship in a covid year. That’s a little bit of an outlier. Still not changing my opinion. Georgia should have been out. I also said last year that, that very situation shouldn’t have occurred to be fair. The conference doesn’t change my opinion.
Then be consistent and say that should happen in all sports. No at large bids to March madness. No at large to college baseball. Otherwise, you’re making a pointless distinction.
They were in the ACC for that year and played in the conference championship and got into the cfp after losing. So my example works exactly to what you asked about.
No all sports are not the same. Football has a very small sample size as only a limited number of games but to your point I have already said that and it’s been discussed. See ray tanner and the sec championships when we went back to back in baseball.
Like I said last year with covid shouldn’t be used considering what ever one went through. However as I stated earlier both of them shouldn’t have gotten in either. ND should have been out.
Every other level of football teams play twice and no one cares. We in HS will have a game to win the district and the loser still gets into playoffs in power points and wins the region. So it’s not something accurate at all. Go down to FCS D2 D3 and they let at large in even if lost conference.
You can have your opinion it’s just not based on any solid logical thought other than “I don’t like it”
I wouldn’t say no one. Their are a few people in here that are agreeing with me.
UGA was undefeated going into the chamojo ship game. Name another 1 loss team who deserved to get in over UGA.
Apples and oranges. Playing a 12 game season is not the same as playing a 50 game season. Pretty rich you'd want someone to treat football the same as any other sport when all of you are treating football different.
easily and without regret... Georgia and Alabama are head and shoulders above any other teams. It not fair for them to have to play a murderous schedule and say an undefeated Lousiana, UTSA or BYU walk into the playoffs. That is IMO..
50 game season or 10 the conference championship should only go according to his argument. It’s what ncaa basketball did 50-70 years ago and realize it was dumb and changed it. As I already pointed out, at all other levels teams lose conference and go to playoffs without complaint. Why is D1 somehow different than rest of football.
D1 college football is more like the nfl than fbs. Again tell me what happens when a team loses in the post season in the NFL?
In all other sports, the first ones in are conference champs. And because they allow 60+ teams in, they MUST have at-large to work. At-large are secondary tho. I dont think you can compare the two when- 1. Football doesn't give every team a path to a championship like all other sports. And 2. they only allow 4 teams (or possibally 8 eventually) vs 60+.
FCS lets conference champs in and then at-large so its the same concept. If you have a tournament with less teams than conferences, you can't create a seeding system based on conference championships. Lastly, why should have Utah or Pitt been in over UGA. No way you can argue either would be better or had an overall better season. So are we just rewarding teams or trying to find the best?
NFL teams win their division to get in. So why have at large bids? If you can't win your division, why should you get in the playoffs? It is the same circular argument that doesn't make sense.
Series do happen in college baseball. Regular season conference matchups, and in many cases, weekend series before conference play begins.
I think the double elimination tournament format works well for college baseball, given the nature of the game.
You fail to understand that if that wildcard loses in the playoffs (post season) they are done. I’m not arguing that if Georgia played Alabama in the regular season my statement would still hold. This is solely about the post season and what a conference championship SHOULD mean.
Wild cards in the NFL are a stance of why the playoff should expand to atleast 8 (my opinion) or 12 if that’s what the powers want.
IIRC Our conference would prefer to recognize the regular season champ but are forced by the NCAA to select the tournament champion. The regular season champ is a much better indicator of the respective strengths of the individual teams due to the number of games played. Football doesn't have that.
Also what happens in the final few weeks of the NFL is not indicative because many teams who have achieved the highest seeding they are able to attain (whether it be a wild card, home team throughour, or somewhere in between) often, very often, rest their starters by only playing them in a quarter or a half.
Similar threads
