|
Mahoning posted:They went undefeated two years ago...... I seem to recall them losing a game that year, sometime near the end...
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 05:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 12:08 |
|
|
NippleFloss posted:I seem to recall them losing a game that year, sometime near the end... They actually won the Michigan State game, you might not remember it that way because it was awful
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 05:23
|
|
|
Title IX just means that lots of schools have women's volleyball, which is simply more meat for the grinder that is Penn State
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 06:11
|
|
|
You can't have every Power 5's conference champion in the playoffs because the Big 12 is a bunch of retards that will have a 6 way tie for conference champion and declare them all co-champions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 06:31
|
|
|
Butthead posted:You can't have every Power 5's conference champion in the playoffs because the Big 12 is a bunch of retards that will have a 6 way tie for conference champion and declare them all co-champions. Not to get in the way of your Hot Take, but the Big XII has always had a tiebreaker for that situation which is basically identical to what other conferences use to decide who represents a division in a conference championship game in the event of co-division champions. And what other conferences had before they all went to 12+ teams. Baylor would have won the tie-breaker and been the Big XII rep.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 06:51
|
|
|
Thoguh posted:Not to get in the way of your Hot Take, but the Big XII has always had a tiebreaker for that situation which is basically identical to what other conferences use to decide who represents a division in a conference championship game in the event of co-division champions. And what other conferences had before they all went to 12+ teams. Baylor would have won the tie-breaker and been the Big XII rep. That tie-breaker was "highest in the BCS standings," which no longer exists and is the reason there were co-champions this year.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 08:18
|
|
|
There were co-champions when K-State and OU ended with the same conference record. K-State got the Fiesta Bowl automatic bid because of their head to head victory with OU. It's not loving rocket science, people.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 08:25
|
|
|
The 2008 Texas/Tech/OU win ouroboros was impossible, awesome, and involved passive-aggressive airplane messages.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 08:31
|
|
|
The Big 12 commissioner could have declared Baylor the Big 12 champions based on their head-to-head victory over TCU, but declined to do so. Unless they change their rules, that sets a precedent that any ties in conference record at the end of the season will be ruled as co-champions. Like, how much bullshit would it be if they do not change their rules and next year a tie occurs and the commissioner decides one team is the champion? Baylor would be irate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 08:34
|
|
|
Butthead posted:The Big 12 commissioner could have declared Baylor the Big 12 champions based on their head-to-head victory over TCU, but declined to do so. Unless they change their rules, that sets a precedent that any ties in conference record at the end of the season will be ruled as co-champions. Man I love to poo poo on the Big 12 for driving everyone out as much as anyone but come on, we've gone over this just a few times. And obviously if you let the B12 commish declare a champion it's going to be Texas every year.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 08:44
|
|
|
R.D. Mangles posted:The 2008 Texas/Tech/OU win ouroboros was impossible, awesome, and involved passive-aggressive airplane messages. Trigger warning that poo poo, bro.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 11:00
|
|
|
Fussy Dutchman posted:They weren't the best team in the country, but they weren't dogshit. Also, lackluster schedule seems a bit strong. See I feel like USC is in the same boat. They seem to get hyped up every year but haven't been a serious contender in a long while.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 15:17
|
|
|
We should go back to about 6-7 eight-to-ten team conferences with one or two at large bids for the playoffs. Round robin schedule. No conference championships. Regular tie breaking rules which seemed to work well in the past. 11 game schedule. 8 team playoff. Big Ten back to ten teams. Big 8 SWC Big East: WVU, VT, Pitt, Penn State, Notre Dame, BC, Miami, Rutgers, Florida State, maybe Louisville SEC minus Arkansas, A&M, Missouri, and some other team PAC-8 MWC: BYU, Utah, Boise State, some other western teams. Add the Arizona teams. Everyone else relegated to lower division.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 15:39
|
|
|
Komet posted:We should go back to about 6-7 eight-to-ten team conferences with one or two at large bids for the playoffs. Round robin schedule. No conference championships. Regular tie breaking rules which seemed to work well in the past. 11 game schedule. 8 team playoff. I like the idea of four super conferences better. Whoever wins their championship game goes to the playoff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 15:51
|
|
|
Sash! posted:Title IX just means that lots of schools have women's volleyball, which is simply more meat for the grinder that is Penn State
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 15:54
|
|
|
Coco13 posted:How can you be national champs if you can't even win your conference? Different sport, different rules. Also no one cares about conference championships outside of football.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 16:12
|
|
|
Incoherence posted:Title IX is the reason the US has a good women's soccer team, so it has that going for it. It's been a indisputably good thing for women's sports, but the way people on the internet treat it like a boogie man is silly given that everyone is out of compliance and it's literally never been enforced.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
Butthead posted:That tie-breaker was "highest in the BCS standings," which no longer exists and is the reason there were co-champions this year. The BCS thing was in case of a three way tie, head to head is still the tiebreak for two teams as far as bowl bids are concerned. Baylor and TCU were technically co-champions, but Baylor still would have gotten whatever autobid the Big 12 was entitled to, just like KSU got the Fiesta Bowl over OU in 2012 when they were co-champions. General Dog fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Jan 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 16:43
|
|
|
Sash! posted:Different sport, different rules. Also no one cares about conference championships outside of football. Midmajor basketball conferences heavily disagree.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
Maxwells Demon posted:Midmajor basketball conferences heavily disagree. But that's only for the tournament champion, which essentially renders the regular season championship meaningless.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 17:10
|
|
|
R.D. Mangles posted:The 2008 Texas/Tech/OU win ouroboros was impossible, awesome, and involved passive-aggressive airplane messages. Meyer is making a career of not having to lose to the best team from Texas
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 17:24
|
|
|
Butthead posted:That tie-breaker was "highest in the BCS standings," which no longer exists and is the reason there were co-champions this year. Butthead posted:The Big 12 commissioner could have declared Baylor the Big 12 champions based on their head-to-head victory over TCU, but declined to do so. Unless they change their rules, that sets a precedent that any ties in conference record at the end of the season will be ruled as co-champions. These posts are both entirely wrong and very bad. The Big XII commissioner can't just arbitrarily ignore conference rules which recognize co-champions and declare one team champions. And the updated tie breaker rules have been posted just about every other week since Baylor beat TCU. They exist and are used to decide the Big XII representative to the Sugar Bowl, which is the bowl that currently gets the Big XII champ. If the Playoff Committee had a clause to take all P5 conference champions like the BCS did then the rules have always been in place to determine who the representative would be in the case of co-champions. Big XII Football Tiebreaker Procedures posted:Effective June 2014 These rules are basically identical to what the other P5 conferences used to use before they expanded to 12+. And are also basically identical to what the other P5 conferences currently use to determine divisional representatives to the conference championship game in the event of a tie. And most of those conferences recognize co-divisional champs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
Here's some facts I brought up from the NCAA rulebookquote:
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 17:36
|
|
|
Komet posted:We should go back to about 6-7 eight-to-ten team conferences with one or two at large bids for the playoffs. piss off, ACC...
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
Komet posted:Big East: WVU, VT, Pitt, Penn State, Notre Dame, BC, Miami, Rutgers, Florida State, maybe Louisville I guess UConn will just have to take their basketball championships and Fiesta Bowl participation elsewhere!
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
Komet posted:SEC minus Arkansas, A&M, Missouri, and some other team I guess I forgot this, but the team that came into the SEC with Arkansas in 1990 was South Carolina.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
Pakled posted:N: Postseason AP Poll is out. http://collegefootball.ap.org/poll So OSU beat #2, #4, #5 and #13. Baylor beat #3. TCU beat..........oops. #17 in a bowl game? Even if you discount bowl season, then OSU has wins over #4 and #13, Baylor keeps its #3 win and TCU still beat no one in the top 25 at seasons end. Not sure the argument for TCU over OSU makes much sense, but what do I know
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
Omne posted:Not sure the argument for TCU over OSU makes much sense, but what do I know TCU isn't ranked above OSU  E: Unless you meant before the playoffs. The argument there was basically that OSU lost at home to an absolute shitbox Va Tech team.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
I've always thought that, all things being equal, that who you beat is way more important than who you lose to. You can lose a game in a really flukey way, but it's a lot harder to win more than one game against good teams unless you're actually that good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
Wisconsin's ranking is a loving joke, they lost to LSU and barely beat Auburn which means they should probably be ranked in the 20s, if at all. They fail both the "has good wins" and "doesn't have bad losses" criteria of deserving their ranking. OSU beat one good team before the playoffs, MSU.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 19:57
|
|
|
Omne posted:So OSU beat #2, #4, #5 and #13. Baylor beat #3. TCU beat..........oops. #17 in a bowl game? Kansas State, motherfucker. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
NippleFloss posted:
And then proceeded to clown on the playoff contenders.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 20:07
|
|
|
NippleFloss posted:Wisconsin's ranking is a loving joke, they lost to LSU and barely beat Auburn which means they should probably be ranked in the 20s, if at all. I'm guessing the appeal of Wisconsin (such as it was) was really just completely down to Melvin Gordon. E: The stat nerd side of Deadspin has an interesting look at how bad the OSU/Va Tech loss was compared to losses by other national champions. What the gently caress happened in 1990 
DJExile fucked around with this message at 20:11 on Jan 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Trigger warning that poo poo, bro. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQvFO9OEeDs&t=41s
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
djdanno13 posted:And then proceeded to clown on the playoff contenders. Which is what matters in the end. All this extra is really weird to me. If we are going to have a playoff, why can't we do like every other sport and let the playoff results be what mattered. The top 4 were the top 4 in every single poll. Only Big XII fans are finding controversy in the top 4 and who cares about them anyway?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
Why doesn't the big 12 schedule some top 4 teams so they can knock them out of the playoffs?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 20:25
|
|
|
djdanno13 posted:And then proceeded to clown on the playoff contenders. Yes, but I was responding to someone who was comparing their pre-playoff resume to TCU so I dont really see how this is relevant at all, thanks though for stating and obvious and irrelevant thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 20:25
|
|
|
DJExile posted:I'm guessing the appeal of Wisconsin (such as it was) was really just completely down to Melvin Gordon. Yeah, I had heard earlier this week that the loss to Virginia Tech was the single worst loss an eventual champion had at home since the AP and Coaches started awarding the championship. Big 10 is going to be inflated over the next decade. All these things are cyclical anyways. Urbz is going to the NFL next year, then Michigan will take over followed by another 15 years of darkness where the Florida wins 4 national titles, Saban wins 3 more, and Auburn gets 2, while Mississippi St ekes out a controversial one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
Mark Dantonio should start slowly sneaking finely ground glass into Urban Meyer's meals
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 20:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 12:08 |
|
|
Fluffdaddy posted:Which is what matters in the end. All this extra is really weird to me. The dumbest part is the Big XII fans are dumping on the team that won it all by obliterating their last three opponents. gently caress, if you're going to dump on somebody, dump on the committee for putting FSU in, when they were clearly just more lucky than good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 20:47
|
|