- Jun 20, 2014
- 659
- 322
Founding Member
2. They lost to an 8-4 Pitt team that would finish 8-5..
It seems that somebody was reminding us of these funny football facts yesterday I believe, why yes it was yesterday...That same Pitt team that gave Clemson their only loss in the faux Death Valley.......
And still lost 5 games, including getting blown out by Miami.That same Pitt team that gave Clemson their only loss in the faux Death Valley.......
1. So whatA few things about Penn State.
1. They lost 49-10 to Michigan. A 39 point loss should just be an automatic disqualifier for any team trying to make the playoffs.
2. They lost to an 8-4 Pitt team that would finish 8-5.
3. They stood by while their coach raped children for decades.
So what if a four win team had won the conference title game? You think they're one of the best four teams because they won one extra game? Penn State had their chance to prove they were one of the best four teams, and they got smoked by another top team and lost to another. If they wanted to be in the playoffs, maybe they should have beaten a middle of the pack ACC team or not gotten their sh*t pushed in by Michigan. One game at the end of the season shouldn't cancel out the body of work. The only reason a two loss team should ever be in the NC conversation is in a year like 2007 when there aren't enough teams with 1 or 0 losses.1. So what
2. So what
3. No one there had anything to do with JoPa or Sandusky. Maybe they should just shut down the whole school and bulldoze all the buildings to the ground and give it back to the indians.
Penn State won the conference. That is all that matters. Any and all blather about who is the "better team" is just that...blather. There is no such thing a proving who is the better team. Any team can beat any other team on any given day. You can't even prove that the Patriots are better than your local high school team even though we know that they most certainly are better. The only thing that matters is the results of the games played within a system. The only system that matters is that when the math is done at the end of the season, one team in the conference champion and everyone else is not. Its no different than NFL playoffs or any other playoff format. There are teams with blemishes that make it to the dance and there are "better" teams who don't make it to the dance. It isn't wrong that it happens, it is exactly the way it should be. This beauty contest crap where dudes sit around and say "well they lost on the road to them but these guys lost at home to them blah blah blah" is nothing short of gymnastic judge style point bull****. Win the conference championship and advance to the playoffs. Simple system, easy to understand, makes the whole season meaningful and exciting.
Blather. You didn't digest a thing I said. You, like most sports fans, are under the delusion that the point here is to figure out who is the "best" team. Its not. The point is to create a system where a team can win enough games to advance through the system to the end and be declared the champion. That is not in any way shape or form a formula for determining a best team, it is a formula for declaring a champion. Look at the 2007 Giants, who were 10-6 during the regular season and came into the playoffs as a wild card. Can anybody really say they were a "better" team than the Patriots, who entered the Super Bowl with a record of 18-0? Nope nope and nope. But they were the champs because they won the game they had to win. Should a four loss college team make it to the playoff if they win their conference? Not if there are 4 other conference champions who are ranked higher, but CERTAINLY before any other team from their conference.So what if a four win team had won the conference title game? You think they're one of the best four teams because they won one extra game? Penn State had their chance to prove they were one of the best four teams, and they got smoked by another top team and lost to another. If they wanted to be in the playoffs, maybe they should have beaten a middle of the pack ACC team or not gotten their sh*t pushed in by Michigan. One game at the end of the season shouldn't cancel out the body of work. The only reason a two loss team should ever be in the NC conversation is in a year like 2007 when there aren't enough teams with 1 or 0 losses.
Bulldozing those assh*les to the ground wouldn't be a bad idea, either, at least until they stop being apologists about covering up three decades of child rape.
NFL and CFB have two completely different methods of determining playoffs, mainly because the scheduling is a hell of a lot more even in the NFL. 10 of the 16 games are outside of the division, meaning you get a hell of a lot better gauge as to who the best 6 teams are in each conference. Granted, some schedules are still harder than others, but nothing like the scheduling disparity in CFB. Not only that, all we hear about from the playoff committee is picking the "four best teams." Well, Penn State wasn't one of the four best teams.Blather. You didn't digest a thing I said. You, like most sports fans, are under the delusion that the point here is to figure out who is the "best" team. Its not. The point is to create a system where a team can win enough games to advance through the system to the end and be declared the champion. That is not in any way shape or form a formula for determining a best team, it is a formula for declaring a champion. Look at the 2007 Giants, who were 10-6 during the regular season and came into the playoffs as a wild card. Can anybody really say they were a "better" team than the Patriots, who entered the Super Bowl with a record of 18-0? Nope nope and nope. But they were the champs because they won the game they had to win. Should a four loss college team make it to the playoff if they win their conference? Not if there are 4 other conference champions who are ranked higher, but CERTAINLY before any other team from their conference.
And get over the Sandusky thing. You're just the kind of finger wagger who will condemn a bunch of coaches and players for something they had absolutely nothing to do with just so you can act superior. You're not.
The more teams you add to the playoffs, the more watered down the season gets. Hell, Wisconsin would have made the playoffs with 3 losses this year if it had been 8 teams. You really want a 3-loss team with a chance to win it all? Why do you think the regular season is almost an afterthought in CBB?It's just more reason it needs to move to more teams in the playoff, not just 4. The problem I have is that there isn't room for improvement for programs through the year. Penn State lost their 2nd and 4th games and then won the next 9 games. Now, you could say that is due to their weak conference but they were still conference champs. Look at the improvement Oklahoma had as well.
I want conference champs and 2 at large. That would be 8 teams. I'd like to allow the undefeated WMU or when it was Boise State or Hawaii get in and perhaps a second team from a conferee who had an unbeleavable season. In my scenario, Wisky wouldn't have been in but OSU and Penn State would have.The more teams you add to the playoffs, the more watered down the season gets. Hell, Wisconsin would have made the playoffs with 3 losses this year if it had been 8 teams. You really want a 3-loss team with a chance to win it all? Why do you think the regular season is almost an afterthought in CBB?
And before anyone comes back here mentioning the NFL. Once again, more even scheduling and far fewer teams.