OK - here's the question ---

WVAPPeer · Unread post by **WVAPPeer** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 1:18 pm

Will the Big 12 immediately go after 2 more teams or will the NCAA (not wanting more jumping around within conferences) adjust their rules to require only 10 teams for a conference championship game? ---

AppSt94 · Unread post by **AppSt94** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 1:22 pm

Is the problem a lack of a CCG or the way teams are picked? TCU started the weekend #4 and beat #9 yesterday. OSU started the week ranked lower, beat #13 and moved past TCU. I don't see where TCU should have been moved out. The system is still a sham.

TheMoody1 · Unread post by **TheMoody1** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 1:25 pm

TCU was ranked #3.

WVAPPeer · Unread post by **WVAPPeer** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 1:33 pm

TheMoody1 wrote:TCU was ranked #3.

but instead of playing a Baylor in the Big 12 championship game they played the worst team in the conference ---

newtoasu · Unread post by **newtoasu** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 1:34 pm

AppSt94 wrote:Is the problem a lack of a CCG or the way teams are picked? TCU started the weekend #4 and beat #9 yesterday. OSU started the week ranked lower, beat #13 and moved past TCU. I don't see where TCU should have been moved out. The system is still a sham.

As pointed out, TCU was #3 last week, however they did not beat #9 yesterday. TCU beat a very bad Iowa State team by more than 50. Baylor beat #9 Kansas State yesterday.

AppSt94 · Unread post by **AppSt94** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 1:36 pm

You are correct. I got my arguments mixed up. Wasn't Baylor ranked 5 the and OSU 6th going into this week?

newtoasu · Unread post by **newtoasu** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 1:36 pm

WVAPPeer wrote:Will the Big 12 immediately go after 2 more teams or will the NCAA (not wanting more jumping around within conferences) adjust their rules to require only 10 teams for a conference championship game? ---

While the question is a good one, and we may see movement on both fronts, I think the real question is how long will it be before we see the playoff expanded to allow every P5 conference champion a shot in the playoffs? Just because of numbers that should probably allow the top G5 to get in the playoff as well.

Saint3333 · Unread post by **Saint3333** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 1:39 pm

newtoasu wrote:
WVAPPeer wrote:Will the Big 12 immediately go after 2 more teams or will the NCAA (not wanting more jumping around within conferences) adjust their rules to require only 10 teams for a conference championship game? --- :?
While the question is a good one, and we may see movement on both fronts, I think the real question is how long will it be before we see the playoff expanded to allow every P5 conference champion a shot in the playoffs? Just because of numbers that should probably allow the top G5 to get in the playoff as well.

2016, 2017 at the latest.

newtoasu · Unread post by **newtoasu** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 1:41 pm

AppSt94 wrote:You are correct. I got my arguments mixed up. Wasn't Baylor ranked 5 the and OSU 6th going into this week?

No, Ohio State was #5 and Baylor #6.

http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/view-rankings

But as I said before, how does #3 fall 3 spots when they win by 50+?

AppSt94 · Unread post by **AppSt94** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 1:48 pm

newtoasu wrote:
AppSt94 wrote:You are correct. I got my arguments mixed up. Wasn't Baylor ranked 5 the and OSU 6th going into this week?
No, Ohio State was #5 and Baylor #6.

http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/view-rankings

But as I said before, how does #3 fall 3 spots when they win by 50+?

Thanks. The answer to your question is the reason #3 fell three spots is because this is a different fraud of the system than the BCS. I have watched less football this year than ever. I watched all but one App game. I may skip the three playoff games altogether as a protest of the process.

Unread post by **appst89** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 1:55 pm

AppSt94 wrote:
newtoasu wrote:
AppSt94 wrote:You are correct. I got my arguments mixed up. Wasn't Baylor ranked 5 the and OSU 6th going into this week?
No, Ohio State was #5 and Baylor #6.

http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/view-rankings

But as I said before, how does #3 fall 3 spots when they win by 50+?
Thanks. The answer to your question is the reason #3 fell three spots is because this is a different fraud of the system than the BCS. I have watched less football this year than ever. I watched all but one App game. I may skip the three playoff games altogether as a protest of the process.

It's a purely symbolic gesture, I understand, but I will not watch the playoffs.

bcoach · Unread post by **bcoach** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 2:23 pm

appst89 wrote:
AppSt94 wrote:
newtoasu wrote:
AppSt94 wrote:You are correct. I got my arguments mixed up. Wasn't Baylor ranked 5 the and OSU 6th going into this week?
No, Ohio State was #5 and Baylor #6.

http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/view-rankings

But as I said before, how does #3 fall 3 spots when they win by 50+?
Thanks. The answer to your question is the reason #3 fell three spots is because this is a different fraud of the system than the BCS. I have watched less football this year than ever. I watched all but one App game. I may skip the three playoff games altogether as a protest of the process.
It's a purely symbolic gesture, I understand, but I will not watch the playoffs.

I will not watch either but really it is because I just don't care. ASU is done so it is BB season.

WVAPPeer · Unread post by **WVAPPeer** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 2:38 pm

You guys really think having a computer pick 2 teams is better than a committee picking 4? --- anyway, I see this going to 8 teams with the 5 conference champions and 3 at large teams ---

Unread post by **appst89** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 2:39 pm

WVAPPeer wrote:You guys really think having a computer pick 2 teams is better than a committee picking 4? --- anyway, I see this going to 8 teams with the 5 conference champions and 3 at large teams ---

I thought the committee would be better. Turns out, I was wrong.

AppSt94 · Unread post by **AppSt94** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 2:44 pm

WVAPPeer wrote:You guys really think having a computer pick 2 teams is better than a committee picking 4? --- anyway, I see this going to 8 teams with the 5 conference champions and 3 at large teams ---

Not at all. I also don't think that expanding them to 6 or 8 solves the problem either as there will always be controversy. I think it should be a true tournament style with the 9 conference champs and 14 at large teams like the FCS.

WVAPPeer · Unread post by **WVAPPeer** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 2:57 pm

appst89 wrote:
WVAPPeer wrote:You guys really think having a computer pick 2 teams is better than a committee picking 4? --- anyway, I see this going to 8 teams with the 5 conference champions and 3 at large teams ---
I thought the committee would be better. Turns out, I was wrong.

Shirley, you can't be serious??? ---

Unread post by **appst89** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 2:59 pm

WVAPPeer wrote:
appst89 wrote:
WVAPPeer wrote:You guys really think having a computer pick 2 teams is better than a committee picking 4? --- anyway, I see this going to 8 teams with the 5 conference champions and 3 at large teams ---
I thought the committee would be better. Turns out, I was wrong.
Shirley, you can't be serious??? ---

The computer couldn't have screwed up this badly.

AppSt94 · Unread post by **AppSt94** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 3:02 pm

And don't call him Shirley.

WVAPPeer · Unread post by **WVAPPeer** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 3:21 pm

appst89 wrote:
WVAPPeer wrote:You guys really think having a computer pick 2 teams is better than a committee picking 4? --- anyway, I see this going to 8 teams with the 5 conference champions and 3 at large teams ---
I thought the committee would be better. Turns out, I was wrong.

So which 2 teams should be playing in your mind? ---

Unread post by **appst89** » Sun Dec 07, 2014 3:24 pm

WVAPPeer wrote:
appst89 wrote:
WVAPPeer wrote:You guys really think having a computer pick 2 teams is better than a committee picking 4? --- anyway, I see this going to 8 teams with the 5 conference champions and 3 at large teams ---
I thought the committee would be better. Turns out, I was wrong.
So which 2 teams should be playing in your mind? ---

Well, I like four better than two, so I'm not saying it should be two. But I think the committee screwed up worse than the computer ever did.

OK - here's the question ---

OK - here's the question ---

Re: OK - here's the question ---

Re: OK - here's the question ---

Re: OK - here's the question ---

Re: OK - here's the question ---

Re: OK - here's the question ---

Re: OK - here's the question ---

Re: OK - here's the question ---

Re: OK - here's the question ---

Re: OK - here's the question ---

Re: OK - here's the question ---

Re: OK - here's the question ---

Re: OK - here's the question ---

Re: OK - here's the question ---

Re: OK - here's the question ---

Re: OK - here's the question ---

Re: OK - here's the question ---

Re: OK - here's the question ---

Re: OK - here's the question ---

Re: OK - here's the question ---

Login • Register