Good_Code is the next @GreatDayne

[4down20]

Ahh, you calling someone butthurt on here. It’s literally your only comeback. Well that and posting GIFs

WOW, you’re really up his ass. That is hilarious.

He even admits conference championships don’t mean anything to the NC picture. He literally does this and that’s absolutely false.

 

[ralphiewvu]

Hey that’s ned, RYE-EER-SIN in your GIF comeback.

 

[WizardHawk]

Conference championships very much do mean something toward playoff rankings. They simply don't mean everything and aren't all inclusive. They are, or should be, nothing more than the sum of their match up. That is, it should be treated the same as if those to teams met in the regular season. It's about another quality win, presuming the opponent wasn't a fraud from a bad division.

They absolutely can't be some kind of automatic anything. They should exclude on a loss because it's a loss RIGHT before the bowl season and the later the loss the more it should hurt. The opposite very much can't be true.

Most other sports have added some sort of wild card to their post season format. Why is that? Because sometimes the second best team in a division/conference/etc is better than a winner of another and "deserves" their shot. It's not about earning it in terms of beating their own division/conf champs. We recognize the disparity and agree you shouldn't penalize teams that are likely better than any team in another div/conf but happen to be in one with more than one power team.

The CFP does the same exact thing in a 4 team format. You have 5 major conferences, have to at least give a slight nod to some upstart in one of the other 5 that might be worthy, and have to attempt to find the 4 most "deserving" teams to fight it out. This cannot, and will not, ever involve some kind of automatic thing around conference championship games. It doesn't achieve the same goal in any way. It is far less fair on every single level.

So yes, it is fair to say conf champ isn't a direct qualifier, but that doesn't mean they don't have some impact greater than zero on the teams that play in it.

 

[ralphiewvu]

No shit conference championships don’t mean everything to the playoff. But as you simply answered they absolutely mean something. Well done.

 

[WizardHawk]

No shit conference championships don’t mean everything to the playoff. But as you simply answered they absolutely mean something. Well done.

That's all he said.

CCG's are designed to crown a conf champion. That's it. That's all. And can't/shouldn't ever be used for more.

That doesn't change that their outcomes do exert some influence on the shaping of the 4 teams.

How are you not getting that?

 

[ralphiewvu]

That's all he said.

CCG's are designed to crown a conf champion. That's it. That's all. And can't/shouldn't ever be used for more.

That doesn't change that their outcomes do exert some influence on the shaping of the 4 teams.

How are you not getting that?

Exactly, their outcome helps shape the 4 teams. Majority of the teams that make the playoffs are conference champions. It’s really not hard to understand. It’s not exclusive to conference champions but it sure as shit helps. Pretending a conference championship is only designed for that said conference is bullshit.

 

[kburjr]

They absolutely can't be some kind of automatic anything. They should exclude on a loss because it's a loss RIGHT before the bowl season and the later the loss the more it should hurt. The opposite very much can't be true.

Alabama lost its last game before the playoff to a team that lost in their Conference championship game. But they still were chosen. The committee chose them on some kind of eye test or something. Hell, I don't know.

 

[Used 2 B Hu]

You tards have fucking RUINED this awesome thread with your dumbass football talk

 

[kburjr]

You tards have fucking RUINED this awesome thread with your dumbass football talk

MODS!!!!!

 

[WizardHawk]

Exactly, their outcome helps shape the 4 teams. Majority of the teams that make the playoffs are conference champions. It’s really not hard to understand. It’s not exclusive to conference champions but it sure as shit helps. Pretending a conference championship is only designed for that said conference is bullshit.

See, you keep acting like you get it, and then do that.

It IS only designed to crown a champion of that conference.

Pssst, they existed LONG before there was any such thing as a playoff. Hint hint. Nudge nudge.

The CFP only considers them as a further body of work for those teams that played in them.

 

[WizardHawk]

Alabama lost its last game before the playoff to a team that lost in their Conference championship game. But they still were chosen. The committee chose them on some kind of eye test or something. Hell, I don't know.

There is nothing contrary to my formula.

As soon as UW (you know, the real UW) loses a game I know they have lost any sort of control over their own destiny and must rely on others to simply look worse.

Win. That's how you get in. Win 13 games. If you are a team in the power 5 and win all 13 you are 99% guaranteed a spot even on an entirely shit schedule. Lose and it's not in your control anymore. That's how it works and how it MUST work.

 

[kburjr]

There is nothing contrary to my formula.

As soon as UW (you know, the real UW) loses a game I know they have lost any sort of control over their own destiny and must rely on others to simply look worse.

Win. That's how you get in. Win 13 games. If you are a team in the power 5 and win all 13 you are 99% guaranteed a spot even on an entirely shit schedule. Lose and it's not in your control anymore. That's how it works and how it MUST work.

That is the way it work, no doubt As such, dump the rankings, the weekly dog and pony show by the committee and all that other stuff. It is just click bait until the final selection show.

 

[WizardHawk]

That is the way it work, no doubt As such, dump the rankings, the weekly dog and pony show by the committee and all that other stuff. It is just click bait until the final selection show.

I would have zero problems with them not making any sort of announcements until the 4 are revealed. The weekly show serves no real purpose.

 

[ralphiewvu]

See, you keep acting like you get it, and then do that.

It IS only designed to crown a champion of that conference.

Pssst, they existed LONG before there was any such thing as a playoff. Hint hint. Nudge nudge.

The CFP only considers them as a further body of work for those teams that played in them.

Are you fucking kidding me? You say it’s only designed for the conference then say the CFB considers it in a body of work?

An long before this playoff computers were used for a little while and before that voters were used. It doesn’t matter when it was conference championships were used as a piece as most teams that have won an NC have won their conference championship that year. Pretending a conference championship is only designed for the conference is bullshit.

 

[ralphiewvu]

There is nothing contrary to my formula.

As soon as UW (you know, the real UW) loses a game I know they have lost any sort of control over their own destiny and must rely on others to simply look worse.

Win. That's how you get in. Win 13 games. If you are a team in the power 5 and win all 13 you are 99% guaranteed a spot even on an entirely shit schedule. Lose and it's not in your control anymore. That's how it works and how it MUST work.

I can see what you mean in sorts. But I’d also argue non traditional blue bloods don’t control their own destiny even if they are undefeated. Example: Alabama, Ohio State, Florida St, Oklahoma and Washington all go undefeated. Which 4 do you think make the playoff?

 

[Sgt Brutus]

I can see what you mean in sorts. But I’d also argue non traditional blue bloods don’t control their own destiny even if they are undefeated. Example: Alabama, Ohio State, Florida St, Oklahoma and Washington all go undefeated. Which 4 do you think make the playoff?

The west coast is at a major disadvantage in that scenario, unless you are USC probably

 

[WizardHawk]

I can see what you mean in sorts. But I’d also argue non traditional blue bloods don’t control their own destiny even if they are undefeated. Example: Alabama, Ohio State, Florida St, Oklahoma and Washington all go undefeated. Which 4 do you think make the playoff?

Depends on SoS and how they looked in their ranked games.

The disadvantage in your scenario lies more with the weakness of the Pac12 overall than 'blue bloods'. Swap out USC for Washington and it's the same boat despite their historic reputation.

 

[ralphiewvu]

Depends on SoS and how they looked in their ranked games.

The disadvantage in your scenario lies more with the weakness of the Pac12 overall than 'blue bloods'. Swap out USC for Washington and it's the same boat despite their historic reputation.

I’d have to believe USC would get the benefit of the doubt because they are USC and ethier OU or FSU would be out. But in that scenario all are blue bloods so it may come down to which conference is the weakest out of the ACC and B12.

 

[WizardHawk]

I’d have to believe USC would get the benefit of the doubt because they are USC and ethier OU or FSU would be out. But in that scenario all are blue bloods so it may come down to which conference is the weakest out of the ACC and B12.

I don't believe there is any overt weight given to a 'blue blood' in any way. Of course there are internal biases of everyone on any committee, but it's as likely to be regional and about teams they know more closely than anything. Which is why they pull people from every region and diverse backgrounds so all voices are there in the room.

UW would only be out based on how they looked in key games and SoS. Nothing more.

There hasn't been a pick they have made yet that was just off of name. Bama was in because the others with a claim didn't have a better resume. It's really that simple. Win or don't look bad in a loss. It works for every single P5 team.

 

[ralphiewvu]

I don't believe there is any overt weight given to a 'blue blood' in any way. Of course there are internal biases of everyone on any committee, but it's as likely to be regional and about teams they know more closely than anything. Which is why they pull people from every region and diverse backgrounds so all voices are there in the room.

UW would only be out based on how they looked in key games and SoS. Nothing more.

There hasn't been a pick they have made yet that was just off of name. Bama was in because the others with a claim didn't have a better resume. It's really that simple. Win or don't look bad in a loss. It works for every single P5 team.

I disagree 100%. The first year points to the example. Had Baylor or TCU’s name been Texas or Oklahoma Ohio State would have been out.

These bias’s absolutely happen. If all teams are undefeated the brand names get the benefit of the doubt.