|
|
#31
10-29-2007, 07:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Beat: College Football
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] wrong, a playoff system would kill the excitement of the regular season. Is it really worth "getting it right" at the cost of nationwide hysteria? [/ QUOTE ] This is so dumb. A 4-team playoff would do little to zero to affect this "nationwide hysteria." The only kind of game that would ever be affected is a season-ending matchup between undefeated teams who play a close game aka OSU-Michigan last year aka games that happen close to never. Whatever is lost (nothing except in absurdly rare cases) from these games would be easily made up with sweet playoff games. [/ QUOTE ] What's dumb is that the #2 team can lose on the road in a close game to the #1 and a team that lost to Aurburn at home is chosen over the #2 team for the title game. [/ QUOTE ] what's dumb is that you are ignoring overall strength of schedule. their one good loss does not take away the fact that their wins were pansies. Florida had a worse loss but far better wins. [/ QUOTE ] Florida could have lost more games than they did. They looked pitiful at times. Michigan CLEARLY deserve the title shot. Florida played their best game against a team that played terribly after a 2 month break, that doesn't change the fact that they didn't deserve to be there. 
|
|
#32
10-29-2007, 07:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Beat: College Football
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] wrong, a playoff system would kill the excitement of the regular season. Is it really worth "getting it right" at the cost of nationwide hysteria? [/ QUOTE ] This is so dumb. A 4-team playoff would do little to zero to affect this "nationwide hysteria." The only kind of game that would ever be affected is a season-ending matchup between undefeated teams who play a close game aka OSU-Michigan last year aka games that happen close to never. Whatever is lost (nothing except in absurdly rare cases) from these games would be easily made up with sweet playoff games. [/ QUOTE ] What's dumb is that the #2 team can lose on the road in a close game to the #1 and a team that lost to Aurburn at home is chosen over the #2 team for the title game. [/ QUOTE ] what's dumb is that you are ignoring overall strength of schedule. their one good loss does not take away the fact that their wins were pansies. Florida had a worse loss but far better wins. [/ QUOTE ] Florida could have lost more games than they did. They looked pitiful at times. Michigan CLEARLY deserve the title shot. Florida played their best game against a team that played terribly after a 2 month break, that doesn't change the fact that they didn't deserve to be there. [/ QUOTE ] LOL at you. Ohio State and Michigan both got creamed and you still want to debate this. Florida and Michigan both had one loss and Florida played a better schedule. Therefore, florida deserves to be there. End. of. Story. It's not a complicated thought process, and your beautiful "florida didn't look as good" argument is laughable. Numbers > Looks, which is why OSU and Michigan both got trounced after 'looking' so good. Playing good teams should be the way to a championship, not cream puffing the big ten to go undefeated. Stop crying and go delude yourself some more that the bigtenroooooolz.
|
|
#33
10-29-2007, 07:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Beat: College Football
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] wrong, a playoff system would kill the excitement of the regular season. Is it really worth "getting it right" at the cost of nationwide hysteria? [/ QUOTE ] This is so dumb. A 4-team playoff would do little to zero to affect this "nationwide hysteria." The only kind of game that would ever be affected is a season-ending matchup between undefeated teams who play a close game aka OSU-Michigan last year aka games that happen close to never. Whatever is lost (nothing except in absurdly rare cases) from these games would be easily made up with sweet playoff games. [/ QUOTE ] What's dumb is that the #2 team can lose on the road in a close game to the #1 and a team that lost to Aurburn at home is chosen over the #2 team for the title game. [/ QUOTE ] what's dumb is that you are ignoring overall strength of schedule. their one good loss does not take away the fact that their wins were pansies. Florida had a worse loss but far better wins. [/ QUOTE ] Florida could have lost more games than they did. They looked pitiful at times. Michigan CLEARLY deserve the title shot. Florida played their best game against a team that played terribly after a 2 month break, that doesn't change the fact that they didn't deserve to be there. [/ QUOTE ] LOL at you. Ohio State and Michigan both got creamed and you still want to debate this. Florida and Michigan both had one loss and Florida played a better schedule. Therefore, florida deserves to be there. End. of. Story. It's not a complicated thought process, and your beautiful "florida didn't look as good" argument is laughable. Numbers > Looks, which is why OSU and Michigan both got trounced after 'looking' so good. Playing good teams should be the way to a championship, not cream puffing the big ten to go undefeated. Stop crying and go delude yourself some more that the bigtenroooooolz. [/ QUOTE ] Does "Numbers > Looks" mean that every win is the same? Winning by 1 (when you usually lose the game except for one lucky play) is the same as a dominating win? You make a terrible argument.
|
|
#34
10-29-2007, 08:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Beat: College Football
you are right. We shouldn't count wins that are close. moran. I guess losses that are really close last second losses count as wins, right? If Michigan actually played tough competition, maybe they'd have some nailbiters as well.
|
|
#35
10-29-2007, 08:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Beat: College Football
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] wrong, a playoff system would kill the excitement of the regular season. Is it really worth "getting it right" at the cost of nationwide hysteria? [/ QUOTE ] This is so dumb. A 4-team playoff would do little to zero to affect this "nationwide hysteria." The only kind of game that would ever be affected is a season-ending matchup between undefeated teams who play a close game aka OSU-Michigan last year aka games that happen close to never. Whatever is lost (nothing except in absurdly rare cases) from these games would be easily made up with sweet playoff games. [/ QUOTE ] What's dumb is that the #2 team can lose on the road in a close game to the #1 and a team that lost to Aurburn at home is chosen over the #2 team for the title game. [/ QUOTE ] what's dumb is that you are ignoring overall strength of schedule. their one good loss does not take away the fact that their wins were pansies. Florida had a worse loss but far better wins. [/ QUOTE ] Florida could have lost more games than they did. They looked pitiful at times. Michigan CLEARLY deserve the title shot. Florida played their best game against a team that played terribly after a 2 month break, that doesn't change the fact that they didn't deserve to be there. [/ QUOTE ] LOL at you. Ohio State and Michigan both got creamed and you still want to debate this. Florida and Michigan both had one loss and Florida played a better schedule. Therefore, florida deserves to be there. End. of. Story. It's not a complicated thought process, and your beautiful "florida didn't look as good" argument is laughable. Numbers > Looks, which is why OSU and Michigan both got trounced after 'looking' so good. Playing good teams should be the way to a championship, not cream puffing the big ten to go undefeated. Stop crying and go delude yourself some more that the bigtenroooooolz. [/ QUOTE ] Does "Numbers > Looks" mean that every win is the same? Winning by 1 (when you usually lose the game except for one lucky play) is the same as a dominating win? You make a terrible argument. [/ QUOTE ] florida was so much better than UM last year
|
|
#36
10-29-2007, 08:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Beat: College Football
[ QUOTE ]
you are right. We shouldn't count wins that are close. moran. I guess losses that are really close last second losses count as wins, right? If Michigan actually played tough competition, maybe they'd have some nailbiters as well. [/ QUOTE ] You're a brilliant person, because obviously what I said was that wins that are close don't count at all. And Florida had close games against teams that weren't "tough competition."
|
|
#37
10-29-2007, 08:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Beat: College Football
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] wrong, a playoff system would kill the excitement of the regular season. Is it really worth "getting it right" at the cost of nationwide hysteria? [/ QUOTE ] This is so dumb. A 4-team playoff would do little to zero to affect this "nationwide hysteria." The only kind of game that would ever be affected is a season-ending matchup between undefeated teams who play a close game aka OSU-Michigan last year aka games that happen close to never. Whatever is lost (nothing except in absurdly rare cases) from these games would be easily made up with sweet playoff games. [/ QUOTE ] What's dumb is that the #2 team can lose on the road in a close game to the #1 and a team that lost to Aurburn at home is chosen over the #2 team for the title game. [/ QUOTE ] what's dumb is that you are ignoring overall strength of schedule. their one good loss does not take away the fact that their wins were pansies. Florida had a worse loss but far better wins. [/ QUOTE ] Florida could have lost more games than they did. They looked pitiful at times. Michigan CLEARLY deserve the title shot. Florida played their best game against a team that played terribly after a 2 month break, that doesn't change the fact that they didn't deserve to be there. [/ QUOTE ] LOL at you. Ohio State and Michigan both got creamed and you still want to debate this. Florida and Michigan both had one loss and Florida played a better schedule. Therefore, florida deserves to be there. End. of. Story. It's not a complicated thought process, and your beautiful "florida didn't look as good" argument is laughable. Numbers > Looks, which is why OSU and Michigan both got trounced after 'looking' so good. Playing good teams should be the way to a championship, not cream puffing the big ten to go undefeated. Stop crying and go delude yourself some more that the bigtenroooooolz. [/ QUOTE ] Does "Numbers > Looks" mean that every win is the same? Winning by 1 (when you usually lose the game except for one lucky play) is the same as a dominating win? You make a terrible argument. [/ QUOTE ] florida was so much better than UM last year [/ QUOTE ] Even if that were true, it doesn't mean they deserved to be in the championship game.
|
|
#38
10-29-2007, 08:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Beat: College Football
I'm a Michigan fan who thinks Florida probably should have been in the game last year, but saying either case was so conclusively better than the other is ridiculous and having a playoff to decide this things once and for all would have been beyond sweet for last year.
|
|
#39
10-29-2007, 08:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Beat: College Football
[ QUOTE ]
I'm a Michigan fan who thinks Florida probably should have been in the game last year, but saying either case was so conclusively better than the other is ridiculous and having a playoff to decide this things once and for all would have been beyond sweet for last year. [/ QUOTE ] A playoff is a good idea. We can agree on that.
|
|
#40
10-29-2007, 08:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Beat: College Football
see all these stupid strength of schedule arguments and all that [censored] would stop if there was a good playoff system implemented.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
