EPTCollege Football 2008 - Page 31
| Forum Index > General Games |
Live2Win
United States6657 Posts
| ||
|
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
| ||
|
ShadowDrgn
United States2497 Posts
On November 25 2008 07:24 Sadist wrote: Rivals have to be in the same division so they play every year. edit: and also it makes traveling easier if they are split by geography. Georgia and Georgia Tech aren't even in the same conference and they play every year. Florida - Florida State too. Also, look at how ridiculous the ACC divisions are. They could have split it into north and south, but instead it's divided into the nonsensical "Atlantic" and "coastal" divisions. I assume they didn't want to put Florida State and Miami in the same division because those were both powerhouse programs when the conference was expanded to 12 teams. | ||
|
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
| ||
|
SpiralArchitect
United States2116 Posts
On November 25 2008 08:03 Mindcrime wrote: We're not talking about how rivalries come about. We're talking about the continuation of existing rivalries. OSU vs. Michigan doesn't become less of a rivalry when one of the teams sucks ass and it wouldn't become less of a rivalry if they were in separate divisions of the conference. We're talking about the Big Ten. Under the current system, Penn State already travels to play Iowa, OSU already travels to play Minnesota, and so on. Penn State to Iowa is nothing compared to splitting the conferences and having to spend time on the west and east coast, not to mention the middle of the country and the south where Football is God. If they were to move the conferences around the nation then teams would have to travel further for each away game, and alot of Southern teams would be traveling out here to stomp the living crap out of whatever team they were playing. The difference in competition between the south and the rest of the nation is huge, though the gap has become considerably smaller lately imo. | ||
|
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
 The discussion was about the prospect of divisional play within the Big Ten. | ||
|
SpiralArchitect
United States2116 Posts
| ||
|
TheMusiC
United States1054 Posts
oh well, maybe next year! | ||
|
tonight
United States11130 Posts
| ||
|
Signet
United States1718 Posts
On November 25 2008 18:25 TheMusiC wrote: bottom line is texas gets fucked 100% unless by some miracle tech loses to baylor (not going to happen) oh well, maybe next year! Nah, as long as Oklahoma loses to either OSU or Missouri, then an 11-1 Texas plays in the NC game. No way Texas Tech jumps the Horns from that far down. On November 26 2008 06:15 tonight wrote: Well, OU is better than Texas at this point in the season so I think it's the right choice. As long is Florida or USC aren't in the national championship game I don't care. Based on? OU was killing every team they faced before the Red River game also. I honestly thought Texas was going to lose that one. OU's problem on offense is what happens when their running game gets shut down (also see TCU game), and Texas has an outstanding front seven. Too bad the conference championship is one team per division. imo the best outcome would be to have Texas vs Oklahoma again to determine the Big 12 champion. Missouri hasn't earned the spot as much as Texas/OU/TTU have. | ||
|
Sadist
United States7313 Posts
On November 26 2008 06:36 Signet wrote: Nah, as long as Oklahoma loses to either OSU or Missouri, then an 11-1 Texas plays in the NC game. No way Texas Tech jumps the Horns from that far down. Based on? OU was killing every team they faced before the Red River game also. I honestly thought Texas was going to lose that one. OU's problem on offense is what happens when their running game gets shut down (also see TCU game), and Texas has an outstanding front seven. texas wont go ahead of them if they didnt even play in the conf title game. | ||
|
Signet
United States1718 Posts
On November 26 2008 06:40 Sadist wrote: texas wont go ahead of them if they didnt even play in the conf title game. Won't go ahead of who? Assuming Texas is able to win Thursday to finish 11-1... If Oklahoma loses, either to Mizzou or OSU, then that's 2 losses. Texas would have 1 loss, and they've beaten OU. This is clear-cut. The only time a BCS conference team with fewer losses than a participant was left out of the BCS championship game was 2007 Kansas, and they had an exceptionally weak schedule. Missouri? Same thing - the Tigers have 2 losses and one of them was to Texas. They'll absolutely go over Texas Tech even if the Red Raiders win the conference. TTU's strength of schedule is crap thanks to playing Eastern Washington, SMU, and Massachussetts. Even if the voters for some reason decide that Texas Tech should go from being 4-5 spots below Texas right now to jumping the Horns after they make the amazing statement of beating Baylor, it won't be by enough to offset the sure edge Texas will have in the computers. | ||
|
Sadist
United States7313 Posts
On November 26 2008 06:46 Signet wrote: Won't go ahead of who? Assuming Texas is able to win Thursday to finish 11-1... If Oklahoma loses, either to Mizzou or OSU, then that's 2 losses. Texas would have 1 loss, and they've beaten OU. This is clear-cut. The only time a BCS conference team with fewer losses than a participant was left out of the BCS championship game was 2007 Kansas, and they had an exceptionally weak schedule. Missouri? Same thing - the Tigers have 2 losses and one of them was to Texas. They'll absolutely go over Texas Tech even if the Red Raiders win the conference. TTU's strength of schedule is crap thanks to playing Eastern Washington, SMU, and Massachussetts. Even if the voters for some reason decide that Texas Tech should go from being 4-5 spots below Texas right now to jumping the Horns after they make the amazing statement of beating Baylor, it won't be by enough to offset the sure edge Texas will have in the computers. bama could still go ahead of them | ||
|
Signet
United States1718 Posts
On November 26 2008 08:05 Sadist wrote: bama could still go ahead of them Yeah, Bama will surely go as long as they win out. I'm assuming the title game will be SEC vs Big 12. Doubtful that both Florida and Bama would go, since the loser would have just lost the day before final rankings come out, and in 2006 the voters showed that they have a clear aversion to same-conference rematch title games. USC is also a long shot, and might not win the Pac 10 which eliminates the conference champion argument. Penn State needs a miracle. imo, this crap is just more proof that we need a playoff. I'll agree that it's ridiculous for Texas to be national champions but not Big 12 champions... on the other hand, it'd also be ridiculous for Missouri to (hypothetically) claim the conference title over Texas despite a worse record and losing their head-to-head. The way conference championship games are set up is pretty dumb... you can back in by playing in a weak division then negate the entire regular season in just one game. | ||
|
Sadist
United States7313 Posts
On November 26 2008 09:08 Signet wrote: Yeah, Bama will surely go as long as they win out. I'm assuming the title game will be SEC vs Big 12. Doubtful that both Florida and Bama would go, since the loser would have just lost the day before final rankings come out, and in 2006 the voters showed that they have a clear aversion to same-conference rematch title games. USC is also a long shot, and might not win the Pac 10 which eliminates the conference champion argument. Penn State needs a miracle. imo, this crap is just more proof that we need a playoff. I'll agree that it's ridiculous for Texas to be national champions but not Big 12 champions... on the other hand, it'd also be ridiculous for Missouri to (hypothetically) claim the conference title over Texas despite a worse record and losing their head-to-head. The way conference championship games are set up is pretty dumb... you can back in by playing in a weak division then negate the entire regular season in just one game. Well, you never know. If bama loses by a last second field goal or something they might have a chance. The bullshit from 06 was that if you werent a conf champ how could you play in the title game (even though it happened before) If texas doesnt get to the title game Id love to hear the logic these assholes use after saying the exact opposite in 06. The same thing happened last year with georgia even. So say Oklahoma loses and texas tech wins and gets in, how the FUCK can you put texas ahead of them even if they lose? Thats the exact same thing that happened to georgia. IMO Penn State should go over USC, even though I thinK USC is better. lost by a last second field goal to iowa, compared to getting pushed around by oregon state. PS College football and this system is super gay unless your team is on top ;( | ||
|
tonight
United States11130 Posts
| ||
|
Signet
United States1718 Posts
On November 26 2008 09:38 Sadist wrote: If texas doesnt get to the title game Id love to hear the logic these assholes use after saying the exact opposite in 06. Really depends on how it happens. For example, what if OU loses to OSU and the B12 Championship is Missouri vs Texas Tech. Missouri wins. Then Texas is the only team in the B12 with just one loss and they beat Missouri. This makes them the best team in the conference, regardless of whether they have a pretty trophy to show for it. In my opinion, overall record trumps everything else unless one team just faced an extremely weak schedule. Or, what if all 3 teams win this week and OU goes to the B12 championship. Now, this ignores the fact that Texas beat Oklahoma, but the voters are saying that OU is the better team anyway. Then Missouri beats OU. The argument is that the voters got it wrong the first time - Texas should have been ahead of Oklahoma - and this is no reason to punish the Longhorns just because the voters got it wrong before the conference championship game. If Texas Tech goes to the conference title game and wins, then I think it's harder to make an argument. They're basically arguing that Texas should have gone to the conference championship game after TTU was blown out by Oklahoma and overall played a much weaker schedule than Texas - that these factors outweigh Tech winning on a last second pass at home. TTU beating Missouri doesn't prove anything since Texas also beat Missouri. Like you said, it's happened before. I think the clearest example is 2003 Oklahoma. Is there really an argument that Kansas State, with 3 regular season losses, was the best team in the Big 12? Of course not. In 2003 we could have just chosen USC vs LSU instead. What about this season? Say Florida is the SEC Champ and Missouri is the Big 12 Champ (beating Oklahoma). Oregon State will wind up Pac 10 champs if they win just one more game. Texas Tech, Texas, and USC are all sitting at 11-1 and all clearly had better seasons than Missouri and Oregon State. Being "conference champion" doesn't mean you're the best team in your conference. I really don't put a lot of weight into that argument for inclusion in national championship games. I mean, should we include Penn State just because they're Big Ten champions? Makes no sense. That's just rewarding them for playing in a conference that doesn't have a championship game and that is having a down season. The reason I thought Florida should have gone over Michigan in 2006 was because a) Ohio State and Michigan had just played the last weekend of the season, so an immediate rematch would be silly since Florida had the same record and hadn't lost since October and b) Florida faced a far, far tougher schedule than Michigan. Mostly the latter. | ||
|
Signet
United States1718 Posts
On November 26 2008 09:57 tonight wrote: But, without this system we wouldn't be having these spirited discussions every year. I think it just makes the whole NCAA more exciting for the public in general. Yes, everyone below top 2 will always want a playoff that's just a fact, but for marketing and money reasons it will never happen. I dunno, March Madness generates a lot of discussion and publicity. If a playoff is done well, it would produce just as much money and marketing potential. But yeah, the playoff is unlikely to happen for a while. The Rose Bowl and Jim Delany are too strongly against it. | ||
|
Sadist
United States7313 Posts
Im just saying, from the precedent that everyone bitched about in 06 with Michigan, It would be horseshit if texas got to go and didnt win their conf. A rematch had already happened with Florida vs Florida State in the NC game, Michigan had to play OSU on the road, and came back from being down big. Im still bitter =[ | ||
|
tonight
United States11130 Posts
On November 26 2008 12:21 Sadist wrote: Last year georgia was arguably better than LSU and didnt get a chance to be in the SEC title game because of a loss to tenn. They had 2 losses, didnt get in. Im just saying, from the precedent that everyone bitched about in 06 with Michigan, It would be horseshit if texas got to go and didnt win their conf. A rematch had already happened with Florida vs Florida State in the NC game, Michigan had to play OSU on the road, and came back from being down big. Im still bitter =[ Ever since that I've hated Florida. | ||
| ||
