Jump to content

TXSooner518

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    2399
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by TXSooner518

  1. Sure! So the biggest benefit for a 12 team conf is virtually guaranteeing a bid with best shot at a bye. You do still get a more varied schedule playing more teams 3x every 4 years instead of some 4x and some 2x.
  2. Your situation is much less likely than the situation of having a team with no shot at bid or bye. Also divisions are the reason for stupid schedule shit like aggy being in SEC a decade and still not played UGA at home. Pods allow a 14 team conf to play every team home and away in a 4 year period while keeping 3 annual rivals. Waaaaayyyy better.
  3. Triggered!! That is way too similar to my 2018 River bust in which we each got 150 bb in on the flop of J97 my 99 his AQ (no flush draw either just no pair no draw for 150 bigs in a $2500 bc why not) and it ran T-K.
  4. Fuck that. Six best champions is way better. The P5 will all make it unless there is a combo of they have a fluke champion (because they stubbornly stick to arbitrary divisions instead of vastly superior pods and top 2 teams playing) AND two G5 champs are worthy, like last year with Cincy and Coastal. If a P5 goes to pod system and 1 vs 2 title game, I would guarantee their champ makes the field every season.
  5. Also you can't just look at top 12, because not all of the top 12 will get in. Both 2015 and 2019 above have an SEC team bolded at 12, but neither of those teams actually make the field, because there aren't 6 conference champs in the top 12 either of those seasons. So the conf champ below them would replace them.
  6. My last round I also had six pars but shot 102
  7. Divisions are also terrible, and if you maintain the CCG, there should at least be pod scheduling and the top 2 teams playing, to avoid dipshittery where the 3 best teams are in one division, so you have some scrub team in the CCG which may cost the B12 a bid b/c if they win they may not be a top 6 champ. The only non-stupid part about the B12 CCG is that it's actually the top 2 teams in the conference. If you have a sub to The Athletic, Andy Staples has a column on it today. And the concept of "playing every team in the conference to see who is the best" being shit is pure nonsense. There is literally no better way to determine the best team. No one in a vacuum would say "Having a group of 12 teams, with each team playing 8 others, then arbitrarily grouping them into two groups of 6, then have the top team in each arbitrary group of 6 play each other" is a better plan than "Have a group of 10 teams, everyone plays everyone, best record is the best, if there's a tie, whoever won that game is the best." No one. It's just some odd SEC dick envy or something that makes people want the first option.
  8. The "one true champion" got mocked because then the B12 turned around and tried to have their cake and eat it and declare co-champions. The actual concept wasn't mocked. As far as improving everyone's schedule by replacing a conf game with an OOC game, that only works if they actually win, right? Right now, the 9th conference game adds a record of 5-5 to conference teams. You have focused solely on the extra 5 losses, but ignore the extra 5 guaranteed wins. So if you replace that game with an OOC game and the conference goes 4-6 in those OOC games, you actually just made the overall record shittier than it was before. That's being ignored. The conference has to go better than 5-5 to have any benefit. Is going, say, 6-4, an improvement of one game over .500 for the entire conference that big of a deal? Given that the B12 had OOC losses to 3 Sun Belt teams last year as well as a very narrowly-averted disaster loss to something called Houston Baptist, that's hardly a guarantee. Also, our TV partners are not going to pay the same for TCU-Abilene Christian as they would for TCU-West Virginia. So either you lose TV money or you schedule loseable games. Period. Remember also that the missed conference game for some of the teams is going to be a shitty team. Someone is going to miss Kansas, someone is going to miss the 9th best team, someone is going to miss the 8th best team, etc. It isn't like every mid-level B12 team is going to miss OU and play East Popcorn State instead and magically now be 7-5 instead of 6-6. Someone is going to miss Kansas and maybe lose an extra game instead now.
  9. So you're saying if ALL the B12 teams play shit OOC that will boost OU's schedule strength, which is a different animal. I thought you previously said OU doing it themselves would boost their own schedule, which is false. And also making OU and Texas play each other every year, while allowing other members of the conference to skip one (or both!) of them is going to really screw OU and Texas as far as their overall record, and allow slop teams to backdoor a CCG spot because they played Kansas instead of OU, which is lame as fuck. Also no one is going to be fooled that beating a 4-8 Kansas is actually a good win, comparing to a 1-11 Kansas. The metrics that they are usually looking at is wins over ranked teams. The way that teams like TCU, Baylor, Iowa State, West Va, etc get ranked and get considered to be a good win is by beating good teams. Look at how disrespected Baylor was due to their shit OOC in 2014. Add two more of those games instead of P5 games and what happens?
  10. Please show me the math of how, say, Oklahoma replacing a random conference game every year with trash improves its strength of schedule. Please.
  11. But the thing is, no one needs to change just b/c the B12 is different! Also just b/c you are different isn't worse. Pod scheduling would be a huge boost to conference scheduling, esp for a conference without a title game. The first conference to go to that model will be "different" but not worse. You get fresher matchups and avoid competitive imbalance in divisions that ends up with one division sending a sacrificial lamb to the CCG year after year after year. B12 in hoops does a full double round robin. Other conferences don't. The world keeps spinning. And the B12 has the most "accurate" reg season champ.
  12. Right, New Orleans >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lincoln, but I'm def looking more forward to attending OU @ Nebraska next year more than OU @ Tulane this year.
  13. Also again it's just pie in the sky. Notre Dame being able to schedule OOC games isn't the same as the B12 trying to add 20 OOC games in the middle of the fucking season when everyone else is playing conference games. And for every "oh we could play FSU or Clemson" there is a Wake Forest or Syracuse that is just blah blah blah. I do enjoy making road trips, and am going to Tulane this year, and plan on hitting most of OU's OOC games on the road over the next 20 years, but yeah, good competitive games in fun atmospheres are going to be few and far between.
  14. And the first time a team loses a bye or a bid, that team won't raise hell also? I don't really disagree that they will stupidly keep playing it. I do disagree that we will be punished for not playing one, presuming they maintain a full round robin. After all, those conferences are free to decide their title as they want too.
  15. Can't get a top 4 seed and bye if you aren't a conf champ, so non-champ UGA would be ineligible both years. And you just keep missing the negative freeroll point. OU had a top 4 seed and bye locked in 2015. So who cares if they could have kept the 3 over Sparty? Prob not, because again you are damaging your best win. Beating a 10-2 team once looks better than beating a 10-3 team twice. Playing OSU or TCU again can only risk the bye that is a lock going into the game. TCU also had a bid locked that year and playing OU again can only risk it. Maybe this is the disconnect, but the stats firm was looking at a 4 team playoff, not this 12 team model. I think the CCG (while still stupid and redundant after a round robin) is MUCH less detrimental in a 4 team playoff than in a 12 team playoff. B12 can reasonably get 2 teams in a 12 teamer but not in a 4 teamer. Also the fact that the 4 byes MUST be conf champs means the B12 champ can't get edged for byes by SEC runner-up, despite you keeping on saying that could happen. The 1 seed in B12 CCG is very likely to be one of the 4 best champs and the 2 seed winning is much less likely to be one of the 4 best champs. So the B12 will often risk the bye and/or second bid, with no upside.
  16. Stop being dense. I've literally shown you empirically that the CCG will hurt much more often than it helps. For 2015: For one, you're flat wrong. 11-1 OU finished ahead of 12-1 Iowa. BUT BUT BUT THE DATA POINTS. For two, OU being behind Sparty has nothing to do with 13 vs 12 games. Sparty's last 3 games were winning at the Shoe against #3 tOSU, who many thought was the best team that year, beating Penn St by 39, and then beating undefeated #4 Iowa on a neutral field. OU's loss was worse, getting dominated by a very bad Texas team, whereas Sparty lost at Nebraska who went to a bowl game that year, and Sparty led that game 39-26 with 2:00 to go and the winning TD was controversial. In the final poll Sparty had wins over #5, #7, #14, and #15, with 3 of the 4 wins away from home. OU had wins over #11, 16, 17, and 23. And guess what? Playing and winning the CCG would just knock OU's best win down from #11, so then the 3 best wins between the two teams are all Sparty. I"m sure that would move OU ahead of them though to beat TCU again. Without a CCG in 2019, who edges OU? There were only 3 one loss conf champs other than OU. Literally a 0% chance they get edged for the 4. Only way they lose it is to lpay the worthless CCG. You are saying something "arguably" happens that has a 0% shot. In 2018, 12-1 tOSU was behind 11-2 UGA because of how shitty tOSU's loss was, but they are somehow gonna be ahead of 11-1 OU. 11-1 OU was ahead of 11-1 tOSU going into the CCG week. I doubt beating trash Northwestern moves the needle, again given that they stayed behind UGA despite UGA losing the CCG.
  17. 7 conference games really opens to the door to dramatically unbalanced schedules. A team going 6-1 when they got Kansas and Tech going to the CCG over a team going 5-2 when they got OU and Texas is a pretty lame outcome, esp if they didn't play each other. Imagine a #1 OU going 12-0 and 7-0 in conf with a 31-30 win over Texas. Texas goes 11-1, 6-1 with only that loss, dominant in all other games. Iowa State goes 8-4, but is 7-0 in conf and doesn't play either OU or Texas. ISU then goes to CCG over Texas. Texas could be #2 in country but wouldn't be able to win the conf title or get a bye. It's just pointless and stupid, not to mention trying to fill 5 OOC games every year isn't going to work when every other conf is playing conf games those weeks. Derp.
  18. I do think there are legit engagement issues and having more teams, players, and regions involved in the playoff race and playoff itself has great potential to really pump up interest in the sport. Cincy had a fun season last year. The excitement of them hosting Georgia in a playoff game would have really increased that to the next level and given them even more of a foundation to continue to build upon. A team like Iowa State that maybe can't get past an Oklahoma has a chance to really keep building recruiting momentum. If they hadn't had a B12 title game last year, ISU probably gets a first round bye in the new model, and if the majority get their way, would be hosting a national quarterfinal at Jack Trice. That would be MASSSSSIVE for that program. I think you will find that there are many more games that are nationally interesting in the new model, and by definition, many of those games will not be SEC-centric, so everyone tired of that should be excited. Moving at least 4 massive postseason games (and hopefully at least eight) to campus environments will also create some really fresh, fun, exciting matchups. I would have said I was opposed to 12 a year ago, but I think going "top 6 champs" was a really really sharp move, and creating three "tiers" of playoff spots ensures no one is in "meaningless games" down the stretch and resting players.
  19. Also the literal year after the “13th data point” convo, OU made the playoffs having played 12 games and with a loss to a team with a losing record. NO ONE GIVES A FUCK ABOUT 12 v 13 GAMES.
  20. No. No one cares about number of games and didn’t then. Notre Dame made the playoffs a couple years back with 12 games. Ohio State made it this year with six. No one gives a fuck. Never did. I explained it already and laid out how devastating the CCG will be to the B12 once the 12 team model kicks in.
  21. What about before the game came back, how would that have impacted things? 2016: OU was 7 and OSU was 12 in the final CFP. All that can happen is OSU gets pushed out. 2015: OU was 4 and TCU 11. Exact same as 2013. They both are in with no game, with OU a bye. Game MUST cost OU the bye or TCU the bid. 2014: BU 5, TCU 6, KSU 11. Game is basically only a potential harm, winner likely still not getting a bye, loser dropping out of a home game in Round 1. 2013: No CFP rankings but using coaches - BU 5, OU 10. Baylor would have a bye with no game, b/c Aub and Bama both above them and can't both get bye. Game risks Baylor's bye and OU's bid, with no upside, just like the 2015 and 2017 games. How many of these negative freeroll games do you need to see to realize how shitty this game is for having multiple top 12 teams? 2012: GOOD NEWS HERE IS ANOTHER. KSU 6, OU 11. KSU would also have a bye here, because of 3 SEC teams above them. KSU bye or OU bid will go out the window with again no upside. 2011: AND ANOTHER. OSU 3, KSU 10. So in the 10 seasons of full round robin, 6 of them would be GUARANTEED to either cost a bye or bid to a B12 team. COOL.
  22. Stop with the data points. There is nothing about data points. They mentioned "the 13th data point" one time for Ohio State, b/c their 13th game they beat Wisky about 379-0 and so that boosted them. There is nothing magical about 13 games, it was just that their 13th game was super impressive. Not that they played 13. 2017 - going into B12 title game, OU is 3 and TCU is 11. With no game, OU gets a bye and TCU gets in. As played, OU keeps a bye and TCU falls out. A TCU win just keeps them in the field, maaaaaaaybe a home Round 1 game, and costs OU the bye. Result: Negative Freeroll. 2018 - going into the game, OU is 5 and Texas is 14. OU ended up with a bye, Texas could have gotten a berth with a win that would have then cost OU the bye. Result: Even 2019 - OU and Baylor both look pretty locked here either way. Result: Even 2020 - OU and ISU are both safely in with no game. A loss likely moves OU out of the field. Also, ISU earned the title on the field, and would have lost a program-definining bye and top 4 seed due to losing this game. Again: Negative Freeroll. So 2018 is the only game that could have earned the conf another bid, but at the cost of a top 4 seed. 2017 would have cost the conference a bid and 2020 could have with an OU loss. Also of the 4 years, only 2 years get 2 teams in with the game, 3 years get 2 teams in without.
  23. Really really loved this. Visually stunning, lots of funny moments, both Emmas were just tremendous, awesome soundtrack. My group of 5 ranged in age from 67 to 11 and we all absolutely loved it.
  24. No. The round robin is the best way to actually determine a champion. I have zero interest in your plan of "hey, let's play 7 conf games" and play 5 shit OOC games so everything is boring and trash.
  25. replace it with a Week 0 neutral site game between the previous year's B12 and SEC champs then. Or just accept that it will likely be a net negative on playoff berths and positioning, while also being absolutely superfluous in a round robin setup, I suppose.
×
×
  • Create New...