#impeachbuffnik#buffnikforNCAAcommissioner
Bama led for nine snaps in their last two wins vs UGA.
Mic drop tweet right here.
don't think he is complaining about not making the playoff. He does have a legitimate gripe that they aren't in the top 12, behind 9-3 teams UF, LSU, and PSU.So sick of seeing Mike Leach complain every year about the playoff. You didn't win your division, you didn't win your conference and you played a garbage OOC schedule.
I understand being mad about not being in the top 12 but him whining about the playoff not having enough teams is crap. He had his opportunity, they lost, and then he complains per usual.don't think he is complaining about not making the playoff. He does have a legitimate gripe that they aren't in the top 12, behind 9-3 teams UF, LSU, and PSU.
WSU: Losses to UW (10-3) and @USC (5-7, controversial). OOC wins over @Wyo (6-6 MWC), SJSU (1-11 MWC), E. Wash (10-2 FCS Big Sky)
PSU: Losses to OSU (12-1), @UM (10-2), and MSU (7-5). OOC wins over App St. (10-2 Sun Belt), @Pitt (7-6 ACC), and Kent St. (2-10 MAC)
LSU: Losses to @UF (9-3), UA (13-0), @TAMU (8-4). OOC wins over Miami (7-5 ACC), SE La (4-7 FCS Southland), LaTech (7-5 CUSA), Rice (2-11 CUSA)
UF: Losses to UK (9-3), UGA (11-2), Mizz (8-4). OOC wins over Charelston Southern (5-6 FCS Big South), CSU (3-9 MWC), Idaho (4-7 FCS Big Sky), @FSU (5-7 ACC)
#13 WSU has 7 P5 Wins, 2 G5 Wins, 1 FCS Win
#12 PSU has 7 P5 Wins, 2 G5 Wins
#11 LSU has 6 P5 Wins, 2 G5 Wins, 1 FCS Win
#10 UF has 6 P5 Wins, 1 G5 Win, 2 FCS Wins
If Anything PSU should be 10, WSU 11, UF 12 and LSU 13 only because UF beat LSU.
His whining as you put it is not specifically about his team. He has a long standing gripe that FBS is the only level of football that doesn't determine its champion through a true playoff system. Every level from high school to the NFL does, except FBS football. His argument is a logical one, not an emotional one. Here is the video of his rant in 2017:I understand being mad about not being in the top 12 but him whining about the playoff not having enough teams is crap. He had his opportunity, they lost, and then he complains per usual.
His whining as you put it is not specifically about his team. He has a long standing gripe that FBS is the only level of football that doesn't determine its champion through a true playoff system. Every level from high school to the NFL does, except FBS football. His argument is a logical one, not an emotional one. Here is the video of his rant in 2017:
Did you miss the part of that video that it was from 2017?? I think people are rehashing this like it is something new. He never said WSU deserved to be in the playoffs this year. The only lobbying that they did was that they deserved to be in one of the NY6 bowl games.There is a playoff, his team just gets left out year after year so he complains that there aren't enough teams. It is probably the most annoying part about those that want to expand things, there will always be those that bitch about it.
Auto bids. Yuck. Chance of Pitt, Northwestern, Wazzu in playoff should be prevented. Any new model has to be consistent with “best” theme, not “most deserving” theme.Go to 8 teams, remove the conference divisions. Conference championship games are the top two teams in conference, regardless of geography. P5 champs get autobids, top G5 gets an autobid if they are undefeated or perhaps top 15. Otherwise 3 at large spots. Same rule as G5 applies to independents.
You missed the part where I said remove the geographic divisions.Auto bids. Yuck. Chance of Pitt, Northwestern, Wazzu in playoff should be prevented. Any new model has to be consistent with “best” theme, not “most deserving” theme.
Had Wazzu beat UW in the P12 CG, they would have been a 1 loss conference champ and it'd be really hard to say they weren't part of the "best" in the country. Point taken on Pitt and NW, though.Auto bids. Yuck. Chance of Pitt, Northwestern, Wazzu in playoff should be prevented. Any new model has to be consistent with “best” theme, not “most deserving” theme.
Your definition of best is actually most deserving. If Northwestern upset tOSU, you would declare them the best in the B1G.Once again we have a multitude of people who don't want to determine who is best by results on the field. Eventually we will just eliminate the games altogether and just vote on who is champion. The point of autobids is that you win your way into the playoff. Win and you are in, lose and sorry, good luck next year. Every conference gets to decide how they determine their champion. Each conference champion is automatically into the playoff. Playoff will determine who is best. SEC can continue to play their SunBelt non-conference games, PAC can play their Big Sky non-con games, because it won't matter. In the end the BEST representative from each conference will be in the playoff. The BEST representative from the G5 will be in the playoff. And the other two spots will be reserved for the most deserving non-champion, because you can't have been the best if you didn't WIN your way in, i.e. we already know Georgia isn't the BEST as they lost to Alabama, they would be deserving based on their body of work though. Notre Dame is the most deserving of the independents because they didn't lose (get into a conference ND). You guys keep confusing best and deserving. To BE BEST you either have to be Melania or have some repeatable, reliable metric to measure against and the only one I know of is winning head to head. If someone can come up with any other repeatable, reliable metric to determine best that doesn't rely on personal opinion I would be all for it, but as of now all the advance stats and metrics around can't replace head to head results.
SOR has high predictive value.Once again we have a multitude of people who don't want to determine who is best by results on the field. Eventually we will just eliminate the games altogether and just vote on who is champion. The point of autobids is that you win your way into the playoff. Win and you are in, lose and sorry, good luck next year. Every conference gets to decide how they determine their champion. Each conference champion is automatically into the playoff. Playoff will determine who is best. SEC can continue to play their SunBelt non-conference games, PAC can play their Big Sky non-con games, because it won't matter. In the end the BEST representative from each conference will be in the playoff. The BEST representative from the G5 will be in the playoff. And the other two spots will be reserved for the most deserving non-champion, because you can't have been the best if you didn't WIN your way in, i.e. we already know Georgia isn't the BEST as they lost to Alabama, they would be deserving based on their body of work though. Notre Dame is the most deserving of the independents because they didn't lose (get into a conference ND). You guys keep confusing best and deserving. To BE BEST you either have to be Melania or have some repeatable, reliable metric to measure against and the only one I know of is winning head to head. If someone can come up with any other repeatable, reliable metric to determine best that doesn't rely on personal opinion I would be all for it, but as of now all the advance stats and metrics around can't replace head to head results.
You make some sense. How would you propose to determine conference champions?I guess my only qualm with some of the ideas in this thread is with those who are not in favor of the auto-bid for winning your conference. This playoff seems to be the only one of its kind where it's not only decided by a committee, but it doesn't have any sort of auto-bid. Look anywhere else and you will see auto-bids are the norm. In the NFL, each division winner is granted a playoff spot with 2 more from the conference in as wild cards. Same goes for the MLB, and the NBA is just based off best 8 records. No one seems to ever complain about these types of systems. For those that think giving a Pitt, NW, Wazzu, etc. a spot for winning the conference is a bad idea, just take a look at the NFC wild card. Currently the team that will get the second wild card spot will probably be an 8-8 team. A committee can rank the auto-bids how they see fit, but there should be some reward for winning a Power-5 conference even if the conference is in poor shape. Otherwise the issues that arise with the current system of 4 will be there with 8 teams because the 9, 10, 11 spots will be complaining they didn't get a fair shake.
Personally, I like how the Big 12 does it because it eliminates the possibility of something like 2018's PAC-12 South. I think 9 conference games needs to become standard across the conferences, remove the G5/FCS non-conference games and play P5 vs P5 for the other 3. Then it's best 2 conference records make it into the Conference championship. Playing P5 vs. P5 for non-con gives a better idea for ranking the 1-5 conference champions in the 8 team.You make some sense. How would you propose to determine conference champions?
Yes. Gotta eliminate divisions, play 9 to eliminate imbalances.Personally, I like how the Big 12 does it because it eliminates the possibility of something like 2018's PAC-12 South. I think 9 conference games needs to become standard across the conferences, remove the G5/FCS non-conference games and play P5 vs P5 for the other 3. Then it's best 2 conference records make it into the Conference championship. Playing P5 vs. P5 for non-con gives a better idea for ranking the 1-5 conference champions in the 8 team.
I think quarterfinals should be home field of higher seed. Makes the most sense in terms of standard playoff template but I don't see the bowls giving up that money so that these teams can have home field advantage. Maybe they could do some sort of deal with the bowls where the higher seed is allotted a higher % of tickets so it's a win/win situation.Yes. Gotta eliminate divisions, play 9 to eliminate imbalances.
Quarterfinals on home field of higher seed? Or neutral as part (or not) of existing bowl system?
It’s time most of the bowls go to hell.I think quarterfinals should be home field of higher seed. Makes the most sense in terms of standard playoff template but I don't see the bowls giving up that money so that these teams can have home field advantage. Maybe they could do some sort of deal with the bowls where the higher seed is allotted a higher % of tickets so it's a win/win situation.
I was talking about the bowls involved in the playoff that year?It’s time the bowls go to hell.
For the Final Four teams, that adds an extra 4 games. For the Championship teams, it adds an extra 5 games. That means the Championship teams are likely playing 18 games/year but guaranteed to play 17. That will never happen, even though the concept sounds fun.It’s time most of the bowls go to hell.
Go to a field of 32 teams. Seed them like basketball. Home teams with better records. Have 16 games starting first week Dec. Eight the second week. Four before Christmas. Hold a Final Four just like in basketball with a round robin of what used to be the Rose, Fiesta, Orange and Sugar. Done.
Fair point. Maybe don’t play meaningless non-con games in Sept. Start the season in Oct. I dunno. I just pretty much hate the meaningless bowl game.For the Final Four teams, that adds an extra 4 games. For the Championship teams, it adds an extra 5 games. That means the Championship teams are likely playing 18 games/year but guaranteed to play 17. That will never happen, even though the concept sounds fun.