College Football 2018: Countdown to Kickoff

[MisterOJ]

3 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

So, you'd rather have the completely subjective poll rankings at the end of the year determine the "real" national champion?  How is that better than an 8 team play off?

 

Oh, no. Not even close. I'd love to have an 8-team playoff. I just don't think people using the UCF-Auburn game to knock the SEC have a leg to stand on because to Auburn, that game didn't mean nearly as much as it did to UCF.

I could care less about having other bowl games, but I understand whey they're going to stick around. 

[Ramsay B.]

1 hour ago, Bronn Stone said:

Playoff champ does NOT equal National Champ if the playoff is considered illegitimate.  And this year it was, by me and many others. 

I mean I rolled my eyes when Bama made it too but the door was left wide open for them to scoot in. Like most I feel like a 8 team playoff is the final stop for there to be absolutely no question, but to call this years champ illegitimate is pretty extreme in my view. 

[Bronn Stone]

Just now, Ramsay B. said:

I mean I rolled my eyes when Bama made it too but the door was left open for them to scoot in. Like most I feel like a 8 team playoff is the final stop for there to be absolutely no question, but to call this years champ illegitimate is pretty extreme in my view. 

Champions of the Confederacy, perhaps.  The Union was excluded.  And the only way 8 works better IMO is if seven of them at least are champions of their leagues.

[Ramsay B.]

3 minutes ago, Bronn Stone said:

Champions of the Confederacy, perhaps.  The Union was excluded.  And the only way 8 works better IMO is if seven of them at least are champions of their leagues.

Alabama is not my champion.

[sperry]

Welp, that Oklahoma-Georgia game was so upsetting as an Oklahoma fan. In all of Oklahoma's recent playoff/championship game failures, they've come out and been dominated by a better team. This one was different. With half-way competent defensive coaching this game would have been a blowout, and even with that shitshow of a defensive performance, some decent late game offensive playcalling should have pulled it out. Oh well, it was an all-time classic, and I always root against Saban so I'll be pulling for the Dawgs.

[Kalbear]

17 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

So, you'd rather have the completely subjective poll rankings at the end of the year determine the "real" national champion?  How is that better than an 8 team play off?

 

How is a playoff 'better'?

[Kalbear]

14 hours ago, Bronn Stone said:

Playoff champ does NOT equal National Champ if the playoff is considered illegitimate.  And this year it was, by me and many others. 

Yeah, this is bullshit. Sorry, but the rules on determining the national championship are quite solid and set. You might not agree with the outcome, but that doesn't make it illegitimate, any more than an upset win makes the losing team the actual winner because they should have won. 

[DireWolfSpirit]

Its exactly like the Heavyweight belts, where we used to see 2,3 boxers each claiming they were title holders. For some of us, were going to recognize UCF as the champions because they beat all challengers on the field. Wasnt Condi Rice on the playoff selection committee anyways? Thats a complete non starter with me, no way could I seriously recognize anything affiliated with that treasonous sorceress.

[Kalbear]

Jesus fuck alternative facts are now invading college football

FUCK OFF YOU HOSERS

[Ramsay B.]

3 hours ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

Its exactly like the Heavyweight belts, where we used to see 2,3 boxers each claiming they were title holders. For some of us, were going to recognize UCF as the champions because they beat all challengers on the field. Wasnt Condi Rice on the playoff selection committee anyways? Thats a complete non starter with me, no way could I seriously recognize anything affiliated with that treasonous sorceress.

And how has that worked out for boxing? 

 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

4 hours ago, Kalbear said:

How is a playoff 'better'?

You have the team who won the games advancing through the playoffs and determing who will hold the title of “national champion” as opposed to the subjective opinions of coaches and sportswriters determing who is the “national champion”.  The playoff itself is objective even if the teams that get into the playoff is subjective.  As you say you may not agree with the outcome but the playoff itself is an objective process to determine who will hold the title of “national champion”.

[sperry]

Playoff needs to, and will go to 8. I hope it stops there, and think it will.

[Bronn Stone]

9 hours ago, Kalbear said:

Yeah, this is bullshit. Sorry, but the rules on determining the national championship are quite solid and set. You might not agree with the outcome, but that doesn't make it illegitimate, any more than an upset win makes the losing team the actual winner because they should have won. 

Solid and set do NOT equate to legitimate.  Gerrymandering is solid and set.  The results it produces will NEVER be legitimate.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

55 minutes ago, Bronn Stone said:

Solid and set do NOT equate to legitimate.  Gerrymandering is solid and set.  The results it produces will NEVER be legitimate.

What framework would produce a legitimate "National Champion" in your opinion?

[S John]

2 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

What framework would produce a legitimate "National Champion" in your opinion?

Likely any framework in which Cal is considered champion.  

 

3 hours ago, sperry said:

Playoff needs to, and will go to 8. I hope it stops there, and think it will.

Agree.  I think 8 is where it'll go and where it should be.  As long as there are 5 power conference and only 4 spots there's going to be bitching.  This year the Big 10 and the Pac both got left out so I think we'll see a greater level of offseason griping this year.  

[Kalbear]

18 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

You have the team who won the games advancing through the playoffs and determing who will hold the title of “national champion” as opposed to the subjective opinions of coaches and sportswriters determing who is the “national champion”.  The playoff itself is objective even if the teams that get into the playoff is subjective.  As you say you may not agree with the outcome but the playoff itself is an objective process to determine who will hold the title of “national champion”.

The playoff itself isn't remotely objective. All it says is that whichever team happens to play better for whatever reason on that specific day, gets to move on. Injuries? Bad luck? Bad ref calls? Weird weather? All of those things and more make it hugely subjective. 

Note that even in the NFL playoff results can be based on flipping a coin, and who gets in and why is entirely arbitrary. 

13 hours ago, Bronn Stone said:

Solid and set do NOT equate to legitimate.  Gerrymandering is solid and set.  The results it produces will NEVER be legitimate.

And yet they are. I don't see you rioting or burning cars to show your disgust with the illegitimate elections in California by that token. 

[Kalbear]

10 hours ago, S John said:

Agree.  I think 8 is where it'll go and where it should be.  As long as there are 5 power conference and only 4 spots there's going to be bitching.  This year the Big 10 and the Pac both got left out so I think we'll see a greater level of offseason griping this year.  

I don't think any particularly credible person is complaining that the Pac-12 should have been in the playoff.

I'm fine with 8 seeds as long as there are zero automatic bids. 

[S John]

22 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

I don't think any particularly credible person is complaining that the Pac-12 should have been in the playoff.

I'm fine with 8 seeds as long as there are zero automatic bids. 

The one thing I like about auto bids is that it takes some of the subjectivity away from the committee.  It presents a clear standard for at least 5 of the spots, however I can live with a no auto bid stipulation as I think most years all 5 of the ‘power 5’ would have at least one representative.  

[Kalbear]

22 minutes ago, S John said:

The one thing I like about auto bids is that it takes some of the subjectivity away from the committee.  It presents a clear standard for at least 5 of the spots, however I can live with a no auto bid stipulation as I think most years all 5 of the ‘power 5’ would have at least one representative.  

Again, I challenge anyone to point out who should have been in who would compete with the 4 teams in play. Even as good as the Big-10 played, we have evidence that they weren't up to the task of beating Oklahoma with a 17-point loss, and it's certainly not clear that Penn State was any better. 

And the PAC-12 was a joke.

UCF might have a vague shot? But their schedule was garbage and they certainly didn't look particularly good via advanced stats. They're precisely the kind of team that should not get an auto-bid for winning their garbage conference. 

I mean, sure, one of the current top 4 could have been taken down in a game - but it would have assuredly been an upset, and unless you simply want upsets for their own sake that implies heavily that the other team was not as good. 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

8 hours ago, Kalbear said:

The playoff itself isn't remotely objective. All it says is that whichever team happens to play better for whatever reason on that specific day, gets to move on. Injuries? Bad luck? Bad ref calls? Weird weather? All of those things and more make it hugely subjective. 

Note that even in the NFL playoff results can be based on flipping a coin, and who gets in and why is entirely arbitrary. 

And yet they are. I don't see you rioting or burning cars to show your disgust with the illegitimate elections in California by that token. 

By that standard, any game with any amount of subjectivity isn’t going to give an objective result.  It is my opinion that a play off is more objective than an opinion poll not that a playoff is perfectly objective.