Apologies in advance for asking something that was probably discussed upthread somewhere, but what was the process used that made KSU the 1 seed and Tech the 2 seed? Was it Tech's home loss to ISU?
"All three" is what was stated and is exactly what I questioned.
Playing for a tie is one thing, but the team with a shot at an outright title truly controls their destiny.
edit:
I think you are wrong about KU's "outright" chances - unless you don't understand what "control your own destiny" means
If Tech wins out, someone else still has to beat the Cats for there to be a tie.
If KU wins out, best they can hope for is a tie, unless someone else beats the Cats.
If Cats win out, they are Champs.
If I had confidence that the plastics and papers I save for the recycle bins were actually recycled, I'd participate more. But my confidence level is at 5% and therefore I do not.
That's the page I've been viewing. And when I get to the pic of the 4 Horsemen, there's a blue "button" that says "10 more".
If I keep scrolling without clicking on that button I see pics from non related galleries but if I click - it loads 10 more football pics and so on and so on. So to view 500 pics I have to load 50 pages - and at some point it crashes and I have to start back at the beginning.
Regarding the ACC, BIG, and SECSECSEC dropping back to 12 teams, 14 is just a hot mess scheduling wise. I would think the additional revenue of an expanded playoff would far outweigh any real or imangined revenue of those two additional markets that 13 and 14 bring to the table.
Pics are awesome but I can't ever get through the whole set without the page reloading and having to start all over at pic 1.
Is there a way to view them without having to constantly hit the "10 more" button?
Yup.
And the inverse is what I wonder about. Yes, Arkansas and LSU I'm looking at you. People always scoff at the idea of them becoming member numbers 11 and 12 but how would it not benefit all parties? If auto qualifiers are in play then this move makes a ton of sense to me.
And in a perfect world, we'd punt Baylor to allow for Nebraska's return and the BIG could then drop Rutgers to get down to 12 teams. Lastly the B12 and SECSECSEC could then swap WV and Mizzu.
So since '08 keeps coming up let's not just talk about who's in the top 8 and who isn't but let's also talk about deciding conf champs absent CCGs.
Tech's blowout loss made it easy to eliminate them but it was still mucked up because OU went over Texas - or was it?
If Tech got dinged for the loss, makes sense for OU to get credit for the 42 point victory, right?
Yet everyone hated that outcome because Horns won head-to-head.
If margin of victory doesn't matter, what should be the criteria for breaking ties? Which data point is most important?
Let's fast forward...
It's the fall of 2019 and CCGs are extinct. How shall we decide the conf champs?
The Red Sox can never play the Yankees in the World Series even if they are the two best teams in MLB.
The Bears can never play the Packers in the Super Bowl even if they are the two best teams in the NFL
The Warriors and Lakers can never play in the NBA finals even if they are the two best teams.
Is this a good thing or bad? Should the AFC vs NFC, the AL vs NL, and the East vs West be done away with?
So to expand on the strong division vs weak division CCG argument I'd be in favor of taking it a step further - If this playoff expansion goes forward, I'd like to see provisions where multiple teams from the same conference are all on the same side of the bracket.
No more Georgia vs Bama for the title. 😎
If CCGs are done away with to make room on the calendar for the 1st round, then additional tie breakers might be needed to determine conference champions - and thus the incentive/need to have a decent OOC schedule