College Basketball

[SlowwHand]

Dear Drake,

No, you're an idiot. You don't listen. You don't consider other viewpoints. You ignore certain facts.
In other words, you're really not worth the time that people expend on you.

Sincerely,
SlowwHand

[ColdWizard]

Dear Drake,

No, you're an idiot. You don't listen. You don't consider other viewpoints. You ignore certain facts.
In other words, you're really not worth the time that people expend on you.

Sincerely,
SlowwHand

You probably don't like picking at scabs either

[Drake Tungsten]

I love that Sloww told me I'm not worth the time people expend on me while he was expending time on me.

[SlowwHand]

But you didn't see me deny the same faults as exists in others. I readily admit that I should have you on Ignore, through program or restraint.

[Guynemer]

Seems to me that the college football "championship" is just a popularity contest between whichever two large schools can semi-plausibly be named "best" in order to make the most revenue.

No need for that qualifier, friend. This is 100% correct.

At least in basketball everyone has a chance to win it on the court.

Hence my playoff proposal.

[SlowwHand]

Brittney Griner leads Baylor women to Final Four

Adios, Duke.

[ColdWizard]

No need for that qualifier, friend. This is 100% correct.



Hence my playoff proposal.

Which will never happen, as you said. That's why I get more enjoyment out of arguing about college football than actually watching/following it. To me, the regular season is nearly worthless and the bowls are a joke. Except when 2 and only 2 teams are undefeated/obviously dominant. I don't recall when that last happened.

---Topic change divider for Sloww ---

Brittney Griner highlights are almost enough to get me to watch women's basketball.

[Drake Tungsten]

No need for that qualifier, friend. This is 100% correct.

I disagree. While college football's system certainly has its flaws, to call it a "popularity contest" is taking things too far. I don't agree with many of the pollsters' decisions (probably because they're all stupid sports writers/coaches), but I do think they try their best to put the two most deserving teams in the top two. I know people are pissed about last season, but do they really think that Alabama and Texas weren't the two most deserving teams available?

[ColdWizard]

No need for that qualifier, friend. This is 100% correct.

I disagree. While college football's system certainly has its flaws, to call it a "popularity contest" is taking things too far. I don't agree with many of the pollsters' decisions (probably because they're all stupid sports writers/coaches), but I do think they try their best to put the two most deserving teams in the top two. I know people are pissed about last season, but do they really think that Alabama and Texas weren't the two most deserving teams available?

Or the Oklahoma-Texas of 2008, or the previously mentioned OSU-Michigan of 2006, or the 2004 with the 3 unbeaten BCS schools...

[Drake Tungsten]

None of those examples show that the pollsters don't try to choose the teams they feel are the most deserving. Oklahoma was the 2008 Big 12 champ according to the conference's rules, Ohio State beat Michigan in 2006 to become the Big Ten champ and the pollsters picked two out of the three unbeaten conference champs in 2004 to play for the title. If you're trying to prove that college football is a "popularity contest", you're doing a pretty poor job of it...

[Ming]

And you're doing a pretty poor job of defending the current two team/single game playoff system
Even you can see the problems with the current system and will admit it has flaws... and even disagree with the polls, the basis of the current system. To limit the "championship" to two teams based on the whims of the pollsters is simply a joke.

A four team playoff, while not perfect and would have some of the similar problems of the current system, would still be a significant improvemnt over the joke of the system now in place.

Again... it would no more cheapen the regular season than the current system.
And could possibly produce even larger revenue than the current system, while having NO effect on the regular season revenue.

[Drake Tungsten]

Even you can see the problems with the current system and will admit it has flaws...

Every system has flaws. I'm intellectually honest enough to admit the flaws in the current system, while you seem incapable of doing the same with your varying playoff proposals. You seem to really believe that college football can have a playoff without affecting the regular season, which is just stupid. There are tradeoffs in everything.

[ColdWizard]

None of those examples show that the pollsters don't try to choose the teams they feel are the most deserving. Oklahoma was the 2008 Big 12 champ according to the conference's rules, Ohio State beat Michigan in 2006 to become the Big Ten champ and the pollsters picked two out of the three unbeaten conference champs in 2004 to play for the title. If you're trying to prove that college football is a "popularity contest", you're doing a pretty poor job of it...

So Oklahoma was more deserving than say, USC, Penn State or the 2 undefeateds? Florida was more deserving than Michigan? (Well ok, I'll give you that one and we'll just ignore Boise St again). Are you saying Oklahoma over Auburn wasn't a financial move?

[Drake Tungsten]

Are you saying Oklahoma over Auburn wasn't a financial move?

Of course it wasn't. Any non-idiot knows why Oklahoma and USC played each other; they started the season ahead of Auburn in the polls and never slipped up.

Florida was more deserving than Michigan?

Of course. Florida actually won their conference championship.

So Oklahoma was more deserving than say, USC, Penn State or the 2 undefeateds?

The pollsters seemed to think so. I see no reason to think that their decision was based on popularity and financial concerns rather than their sincere belief that Oklahoma was one of the two most deserving teams in the country.

[Guynemer]

Are you saying Oklahoma over Auburn wasn't a financial move?

Of course it wasn't. Any non-idiot knows why Oklahoma and USC played each other; they started the season ahead of Auburn in the polls and never slipped up.

True; you leave out this addedum, however: that is a completely ****ing retarded reason to do so.