In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 428
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
This is all great, but it is based on the underlying assumption that the best team always wins every game. Of course, we all know that is untrue.
Not that it matters and i don't want to go into a big debate on it but i am not so sure Auburn wasn't the best team that year. They were a damn good football team. Probably the beginning of the fast, physical SEC teams that have been winning the MNC the past 6 years.
imo this would be ideal. give major conferences automatic qualifiers and fill the other spots with wildcards. play games at home or at least regional stadiums, michigan at ford field.
I am not upset at our AD. I am upset when I see Sparty trolls such as yourself on our board taking cheap shots at Michigan. So stop doing it.
I'm not saying OSU would have been a favorite vs LSU, obviously they wouldn't have been. But upsets happen in sports...why bother watching or even playing otherwise? The Giants were clearly the inferior team in both of their Super Bowls against the Patriots...but guess who won the game?
As far as "earning it" in the regular season goes...OSU played a harder schedule than Alabama did and wound up with the same record. The Big 12 was the toughest conference in college football last year and OSU was its champion. And ohbytheway, Alabama had already had their shot at LSU and missed. Alabama might've been the best team in the country last year, but they didn't "earn" their way into the title game, they got in based on the SEC's prestige and their own storied history.
I guess that's why I asked. I thought maybe somebody could clarify it.
But, here is a longer quote..."This whole notion of a playoff is ridiculous because I don’t care what you come up with, it’s not going to be a fair playoff. You’ve got a bunch of teams that don’t play one another and play different competition and in different time zones in different conferences in different stadiums in front of different crowds and different weather and suddenly at some point in the year you are trying to arbitrarily decide which one is better and which one deserves to be in a four-team playoff or a six-team playoff."
Now, my take from that is that he doesn't think a playoff system is going to be "fair". I don't think it's a stretch to say that. I don't think I'm putting words in his mouth. He doesn't like it.
Are you in favor of the 4 team playoff? Or do you support your AD?
Yeah they were very good. BCS was also very new at that point. The computers adjusted yearly and I believe that things would have been different if that year repeated itself.
I am probably coming off as a BCS lover here and that was not my intent or the truth. However, I do not think that the suggested 4 team playoff is an upgrade or beneficial to the B1G and frankly that is all I care about.
See my post to you above. I support my AD as far as 4 team playoff is concerned for the reasons i stated. Now give me a 16 team playoff and i am all good.
I think the 4 team playoff would give more teams a chance which is good but i still don't think it solves the problem the BCS has now.
You really believe the Big 12 was the best conference? I mean you can honestly say that?
I agree upsets happen and I think you are missing my point. The BSC had a job. It's job was to crown the BEST team the MNC. I think it succeeded in that. I think a majority would agree with just that statement.
A playoff system is a different beast. But to say the BCS has fail at what it was designed to do is simply not true.
lol what a ridiculous quote. You could use the exact same logic to argue against the BCS championship game as currently constructed. A playoff helps ameliorate those concerns because it gives more teams a chance and lets them settle all those differences on the field.
You're never gonna have a controversy-free system: if you have a 4 team playoff, the #5 team is gonna complain that it should've been in; if you have an 8 team playoff, the #9 team is gonna complain that it should've been in, etc etc etc. I fail to see how that's a relevant criticism of the idea of a playoff.
So do you think it is beneficial to Michigan for them to play USC out in Cali in the Rose Bowl, then have Michigan play Bama in Georgia or Florida for the NC? That is what would happen.
Sorry, but the fact that OSU was upset by Iowa State proves that we do not know who would have won a one-off game between OSU and LSU. That is one of the primary objections many people have with a playoff. Upsets frequently happen in college football. The "obviously best" team does not always win. A playoff is one way to determine the best team in the country in a given season. But it is not the only way. And it's not necessarily more or less accurate than selection by sportswriters, computer algorithm or some combination of both. It's just a different way of doing it.
Sorry to offend.
Agree with you on this 100%. It's simply different.
I only can defend the BCS as I think that it achieved it's set goal. I am not saying it is the best system.
I will agree with Brandon though as I do not think a playoff with be beneficial at all for Michigan or any B1G team for that matter.
I don't think we'll ever see a 16 team playoff.
Excellent points. +1
I would rather Michigan had the chance than be left out like in 2006. Like i have said though i am more in favor of a 16 team playoff. If i had my way the first round 8 teams would have home games. The next round would be played at the 4 BCS bowl locations. Then you can come up with neutral locations for the semi's and National championship game. I think places like Ford Field, Lucas Oil, etc... would be great places to hold a National Championship game.
So do I.
Look at all the strength of schedule ratings from last year (Sagarin, Massey, etc etc etc). The Big 12 was the strongest conference and OSU had a tougher schedule than Alabama.
Well then in that case i support Brandon's position on a playoff system.
That's a great way to do things - your 16 team format. Agree 100%. But if I have to choose between the current options I have in front of me, I have to agree with Brandon.
Let's match up the SEC vs Big 12 top to bottom and see who wins. SEC was the best conference. The eye test tells me so. The computers love offense, the Big 12 scores points. The Big 12 ranked up a bunch of SOS points for their win against FSU who ended up being just an ok team.
Also got a bump for their ISU win vs Iowa. Iowa was terrible on the road all year.
This post was edited by Scooter305 2 years ago
Could Scooter or Maize&Blue elaborate on why a playoff has to have 16 teams in order for you to favor it? The logic of that position is not immediately obvious to me.
I am not going to pull up all of his quotes on the topic, but you are misunderstanding his quote (probably because you have taken one quote out of the context of many interviews he has given on the subject). His point is that it is "not any more fair" than the current system. They are all flawed to some extent, primarily because everyone does not play everyone else on a neutral field. There is no such thing as a perfectly fair system and whatever playoff you come up with will have inequities.
Also, FWIW, many of Brandon's objections to a playoff have nothing to do with the relative "fairness" of the two systems. He prefers the traditional bowls because he feels it provides an excellent experience for the players and their families and the schools' students, alumni and fans. And he believes a playoff might take away from that experience or even destroy it. But you do not have to agree with him. That is not my point. My point is that no one on the UM board is interested in Spartys coming to our board and telling us that the "real" reason our AD does not support a playoff is because he believes we would never win and then cite our 1997 national championship as some sort of example of one we got "the easy way".
This post has been edited 3 times, most recently by MrWoodson 2 years ago
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports