Undefeated Big East team not worthy of NC game discussion

[Ghost]

Dude shoot higher than Marquette.

lol I was just thinking of basketball schools. Syracuse and Memphis. There.

[Mission9]

You guys are talking about the system as it is now. Some of us have always hated a system which eliminates half or more of the teams before the season even begins. At least in other sports, say basketball, an undefeated team from a lesser conference can get in. They may have a low seed, or a tougher route, but they have a shot. A play in game or games in the new system would even be a good way to go and I doubt we would complain as long as there was a way to win.

[NinjaPenguin777]

You guys are talking about the system as it is now. Some of us have always hated a system which eliminates half or more of the teams before the season even begins. At least in other sports, say basketball, an undefeated team from a lesser conference can get in. They may have a low seed, or a tougher route, but they have a shot. A play in game or games in the new system would even be a good way to go and I doubt we would complain as long as there was a way to win.

There is more parody in basketball though. They play 30+ games if I remember correctly (I don't follow cbb all that well). Plus they play the tournament games. You will get lower seeded teams or unknown teams in the S 16 or E 8 or even the F 4 because if a team gets hot at the right time and things fall their way, they can win a few games in a row.

Football simply can't have a giant tournament for obvious reasons. Its too violent and it would take its toll on the teams. There can also be lower ranked or small schools that can compete from time to time in football especially if they have a good coach. TCU and Boise immediately come to mind. You can tell that those two teams will be able to compete with the big boys. The problem is that 80-85% of the teams in NCAA D1 Football could not hang with the big boys. A perfect example would be Houston last year. If they had won their last game and gone to the BCS they would of been destroyed. When the best team you are playing has 7 or 8 wins at most and the rest of the teams are .500 or sub .500, you are more than likely not going to compete on the big stage. Rankings may be "stupid" but they obviously have some precedence. USC may have lost a few games this year, but they are still one of the best teams in the NCAA. They would be able to beat or hang with anyone. Not being able to see that is just being ignorant. Sometimes teams just don't justify the talent or fall short of expectations (see USF)

Edited October 29, 2012 by NinjaPenguin777

[Mission9]

You guys are talking about the system as it is now. Some of us have always hated a system which eliminates half or more of the teams before the season even begins. At least in other sports, say basketball, an undefeated team from a lesser conference can get in. They may have a low seed, or a tougher route, but they have a shot. A play in game or games in the new system would even be a good way to go and I doubt we would complain as long as there was a way to win.

Not saying a 7 and 5 first place Sunbelt team should get in but I understand what you are saying. The other levels have some sort of playoffs and there should be a way for "the best of the rest" to at least get a play in game of sorts if they have not been beaten.

There is more parody in basketball though. They play 30+ games if I remember correctly (I don't follow cbb all that well). Plus they play the tournament games. You will get lower seeded teams or unknown teams in the S 16 or E 8 or even the F 4 because if a team gets hot at the right time and things fall their way, they can win a few games in a row.

Football simply can't have a giant tournament for obvious reasons. Its too violent and it would take its toll on the teams. There can also be lower ranked or small schools that can compete from time to time in football especially if they have a good coach. TCU and Boise immediately come to mind. You can tell that those two teams will be able to compete with the big boys. The problem is that 80-85% of the teams in NCAA D1 Football could not hang with the big boys. A perfect example would be Houston last year. If they had won their last game and gone to the BCS they would of been destroyed. When the best team you are playing has 7 or 8 wins at most and the rest of the teams are .500 or sub .500, you are more than likely not going to compete on the big stage. Rankings may be "stupid" but they obviously have some precedence. USC may have lost a few games this year, but they are still one of the best teams in the NCAA. They would be able to beat or hang with anyone. Not being able to see that is just being ignorant. Sometimes teams just don't justify the talent or fall short of expectations (see USF)

[BullFan98]

Year by year analysis I think. This year UL would be eaten alive by Any of the top 9 in the BCS standings.

[LifeIsBully]

UL's strength of schedule is horrible, even going 12-0 would you put them in top of 4 over possible 1 loss teams like KSU, OU, ND, Bama, Florida?

I still think they lose to RU or Cuse, they are getting better but not over dominant, 3 or 4 teams could of beat them including USF.

I don't buy strength of schedule bullcrap. The players can only win the games they are given. If my team wins every game they did the best they could possibly do, so why should they get punished because their athletic department couldn't pay UF enough to play them? Screw that. Undefeated Big East team should be in the NC game all day over a one loss SEC, because the Big East team did their job. The SEC team didn't.

Now, does that put the best two teams in the National Championship game? Hell no. But if that upsets you, make a **** playoff system. Problem solved. Until then, you can't screw over a team that goes out there and does the best they can possibly do.

You clearly don't understand big time football.

So an undefeated SunBelt team deserves a shot at the Natty over a one loss SEC champ or a team with a scheule like ND with one loss?

I understand big time football just fine. I also understand the way it is structured keeps the big teams up top and little teams little chance of ever getting there.

And seeing as a Sun Belt team wouldn't be playing BCS opponents regularly, they probably shouldn't be playing in the NC game. But who's to say that an undefeated Sun Belt team isn't the best team in the country? Going your "big time football" way we would never find out, because their accomplishment would be shoved to the side. Playoffs. They are the only way to find out who deserves to be in the NC game.

[TrujilloBull2013]

Remember Hawaii in the 08 Sugar bowl? Went undefeated and they were killed by Georgia. TCU and Boise St have shown that they can hang with the big boys year in and year out plus they play difficult games. These other teams just don't.

your argument is this: the Big East should automatically be excluded from playing in the BCS championship because Hawaii got killed by Georgia and can't hang with the big boys year in and year out?

makes perfect sense.

[TrujilloBull2013]

the argument about ranking is a tautology. the entire problem with the BCS NCG is that it is based on subjective human opinion as to who the "best" two teams are.

that is based on rankings, which are determined 2/3 by human opinion and 1/3 by computer rankings that factor in human opinion.

does the SEC play "top 25 teams" for half their schedule? sure. but how do we know those teams are really "top 25" worthy and not just overrated by humans because of the conference they play in?

look at last year's BCS championship. it was a ******* fluke. but an all-SEC championship was shoved down our throat because people have convinced themselves the SEC is just that much better than everybody else.

but look at the top teams in the SEC. they routinely play 7-8 home games a year, RARELY play AQ OOC opponents on the road, and when they do it's often in a neutral site or somewhere in the southeast. they stack the deck in their favor then justify it with the tautology (circular logic) that, well, they have to get some slack somewhere because their in-conference schedule is soooo tough.

i call ********. the SEC may indeed be the best conference in CFB, but they are not SO much better that a 1-loss SEC team trumps an undefeated team from another AQ conference.

when the SEC starts playing REAL competition out of conference and on the road, you'll start seeing them lose, and all this "we play 5 top 25 teams a year!!!" **** will subside. until then it's just inbreeding.

[TrujilloBull2013]

and as with everything, it's all about money. teams like Bama, Florida, LSU, Auburn and Georgia are all in the Top 10 most valuable CFB programs in the country. Texas, OSU and Oklahoma are all in there too. shocker that ALL of these teams (with the exception of Georgia) have played in the BCS NCG in recent years.

this is less about strength of conference and more about which teams will generate the most $$$.

[Joe]

BTown. In 2011 Alabama went to Penn State. LSU traveled to West Virginia.

I'm over the SEC, but I'm not going to fall for the anti-stereotype that they aren't the best conference (although the Big 12 is close).

Louisville has two wins of note on their schedule. They need help to match a KState or Notre Dame at this point.