University of Georgia

[ClkWrkOrange]

[QUOTE="orangecuse, post: 2846468, member: 668" Just place the Chargers in the Superbowl.
I am all for this.

 

[HOFCeluck]

I went way deeper into this than I ever wanted.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Interesting...not sure how you wouldn't "get" Ohio State. The fact is, if Clemson played Ohio State vs. an extremely over ranked team in ND, the spread would've likely been -3 for Clemson (or in that vicinity) vs. the double digit favorite Clemson was over ND.

Ohio State has one more loss than ND and one less than UGA. They were a conference champion and played 2 more P5 opponents than both ND and UGA, as well as 0.0 FCS teams. I hate tOSU but they deserved it over UGA.

 

[Mchandl8]

Syracuse shouldn’t have lost to Clemson, shouldn’t have lost to Pitt... should we be in?

 

[rrlbees]

Pick the 4 CFP teams before the CCGs. That somewhat evens the playing field.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

ND isn’t in a conference and Clemson played Pitt. Can’t treat them like the 1st round of the playoffs. The whole system is inequitable.

If UGA was 12-0 and lost to Bama they would be in. Had they scheduled more than 9 P5 games like every other title contender did, they be in at 11-2. They knew the system and decided to go weak OOC.

 

[rrlbees]

This... Georgia should have no complaints about not being in. Syracuse shouldn’t have lost to Clemson, shouldn’t have lost to Pitt... should we be in?

No we shouldn’t be in. Those were during the regular season.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Ok, look, let's go big picture sports philosophy for a second here...

One of the fascinating aspects of competition is that it's a true zero-sum scenario. In every match up there is a winner and a loser (screw ties). In principle, the odds of winning any given matchup are even. The one W and one L result never changes. Therefore, the objective of the competitor is to win more than their fair share of their match ups.

There are different ways of going about that, some that move the sport forward, and some that move it backwards. There are many, but I'll mention the 3 most important. Cheating is one way to try to win more than a fair share, but it's not desirable for advancing the sport. Having superior talent is another way to try and win more, but actually stagnates the sport. Just being better at the competition doesn't necessarily advance the sport. I propose that the way to win more than a fair share that in most cases also advances the competition itself (keeping in mind that no matter how much it advances there is still always only one winner and one loser) is through strategic innovation within the rule parameters of the competition. I also propose that talent fears strategic innovation, because it neutralizes and can even overcome talent.

Because of the zero-sum nature of sports, we have a concrete way of seeing which strategic innovations succeed. The best interests for everybody is to reward strategic innovation when it's proven successful. That advances the sport and competition, and actually stretches talent to become even better, and decreases incentives to cheat by providing a better way.

That's why I bristle so much at these discussions that favor teams that are "better" for reasons that don't tie to competition results. It's essentially a case for talent, which is an ugly case. It says that how good we think you are matters more than how good you prove to be in competition. That means your playoff qualification is determined in large part by recruiting rankings (one proxy for talent). That thinking does not reward innovation, and therefore does not advance the sport. It also betrays the zero-sum nature of sports.

So, the solution for college football is to reward perfection, as much as it can be achieved. Let the ones banking on talent punch each other out. Let the innovators find their own path. Then at the end, line up the ones that came out unscathed (or that failed as little as possible) and let them hash it out.

 

[Mchandl8]

No we shouldn’t be in. Those were during the regular season.

I didn't realize LSU beat uga in the postseason... so you're argument is that conference championships don't matter if you're already in without it... so it doesn't count. Uga didn't lose to Alabama... that was a dream

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I stand by my statement... sos matters

I'm saying it would come out in the wash in the playoff.

 

[Mchandl8]

I'm saying it would come out in the wash in the playoff.

Well let's have a playoff of (not this yr btw) miami of ohio, ucf, Nevada and bama. It's rewarding weak schedules

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Well let's have a playoff of (not this yr btw) miami of ohio, ucf, Nevada and bama

And why would we do that?

If you want to make a point, make a point, don't propose a scenario you know is garbage to try to make my proposals look as dumb.

 

[Alsacs]

Clemson lost to SU. One game a season does not make.

Last year there were zero undefeated teams when Clemson lost to SU.
Plus Georgia wasn’t 12-1 they were 11-2 and didn’t have a conference title like Clemson did when they lost to Syracuse.
It isn’t a good comparison.
Georgia was one of the 4 best teams but they lost to LSU that was second best team on their schedule and they lost by 20 to them.
Georgia can’t lose to the 2 best teams on its schedule and schedule a weak nonconference schedule and then have an argument.
They lost to LSU and still controlled their destiny. They lost to Alabama.

 

[HOFCeluck]

Last year there were zero undefeated teams when Clemson lost to SU.
Plus Georgia wasn’t 12-1 they were 11-2 and didn’t have a conference title like Clemson did when they lost to Syracuse.
It isn’t a good comparison.
Georgia was one of the 4 best teams but they lost to LSU that was second best team on their schedule and they lost by 20 to them.
Georgia can’t lose to the 2 best teams on its schedule and schedule a weak nonconference schedule and then have an argument.
They lost to LSU and still controlled their destiny. They lost to Alabama.

If UGa played in the Big 12 they’d be good enough to make the playoffs?

 

[Mchandl8]

And why would we do that?

If you want to make a point, make a point, don't propose a scenario you know is garbage to try to make my proposals look as dumb.

Anyone who is undefeated??? Why would that be a good playoff structure... like I said rewarding weak schedules

 

[Alsacs]

If UGa played in the Big 12 they’d be good enough to make the playoffs?

Wanting to reward champions is a good thing especially when the other team lost to the 2 best teams it played.
So yes.

 

[Mchandl8]

If UGa played in the Big 12 they’d be good enough to make the playoffs?

Too bad they didn't. Lost their conference championship, lost another game. If they got in then who gives af about losses... its who we feel is good, not who does it on the field

 

[HRE Otto IV]

If UGa played in the Big 12 they’d be good enough to make the playoffs?

We will never know if they win 3 of @ISU, @WV, and 2x vs Texas. I think they do but should we pick teams based on opinions or results?

 

[Jake]

I would have had no problem with Georgia getting in. I also have no problem with the teams that were picked.

My point is simply to admit we don’t have a system that will always put the four best teams in the playoff. Sometimes you will get the 4 best teams that meet the criteria...which I am fine with. You need a criteria, and it won’t always be the best four.

I personally think UGA is among the four best teams, but doesn’t necessarily deserve to be in the playoff , and I am fine with the way.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Anyone who is undefeated??? Why would that be a good playoff structure... like I said rewarding weak schedules

You put teams that weren't undefeated in your field, sir.

 

[Mchandl8]

You put teams that weren't undefeated in your field, sir.

I also said (not this year btw). Ignire that though

 

[Mchandl8]

I also said (not this year btw). Ignire that though

So take a year where the winner of the socon, mac, mountain west, and american athletic go undefeated and play no big schools, then a bunch of the big schools go 11-1... playoff is pure g5

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I also said (not this year btw). Ignire that though

So your point was we would put all of those teams in the playoffs in the same year, even though they wouldn't have been undefeated and merited it in the same year?

 

[Mchandl8]

Socon might be fcs.. not sure

 

[Mchandl8]

So your point was we would put all of those teams in the playoffs in the same year, even though they wouldn't have been undefeated and merited it in the same year?

Look up