The real question is what happens if and when LSU Loses Saturday

I have no problem with hosting the first game - and it would be bananas because the stadium would be PACKED for every game.

But I also believe that March Madness should only be played in college venues.

3 Likes

So a guy I work with is a really good guy but a huge Bulldog fan - he lives in ATL. At the start of the season we were talking football at a meeting and I asked him how they were going to be and he was pretty confident. I mentioned I was a Utah fan and he said, “Oh yeah, Utah - that’s a nice little program they’ve built there.” I know the guy, he wasn’t meaning to be condescending but it definitely was.

I just laughed and we talked football for a while longer. In the least shocking thing I’ll ever post here it was clear that all SEC honks don’t think much of football out our direction. Kinda like how I might feel about Georgia in basketball.

But for that reason I would LOOOOOOVE to be the team that makes it in over Georgia. My friend would be cool about it, but I know that would eat at some Bulldog fans, because we know what they think.

I want LSU to win this game and win big - just embarrass GA - that happens and I think we make it in over Oklahoma.

2 Likes

I actually can’t envision a scenario where someone isn’t left out and crying foul this weekend. Either LSU loses and two SEC teams get in, which leaves both Pac-12 and Big XII out, or Utah gets in leaving Oklahoma out in the cold, or Oklahoma gets in leaving Utah on the outside…again. No matter what, there’s going to be a lot of debate this post-season and that’s good IMHO because it will add pressure to expand the playoffs

1 Like

I think LSU and Ohio St. are in regardless of what happens Saturday, and they probably should be.

1 Like

Not a fan of the 16 team idea. First, there’s no need for a 16 team playoff to find the best team. Second, not every G5 conference needs to be represented (it’s more than obvious that many G5 conference champions would not be competitive for a national championship). Third, it would add two more weeks to a season that already added one more week for the current playoff structure. With 4 weeks of postseason play (5 counting conference championships), the postseason would account for nearly a third of the entire football season.

This would likely spell the end of out of conference match-ups during the regular season, as teams jettison the games to shorten their seasons. The end result: teams never (or rarely) play games outside their conference outside of postseason play.

The best option I’ve heard is a 6 team playoff. Top two seeds get a bye, and the slots go to the 5x P5 champions and 1 at large. If a P5 champion is a clearly crappy team, give their slot to another at large. Never allow two teams from the same conference into the playoffs.

This option adds one week to the year for two teams.

1 Like

Yuck. I can go 8, but 6 is ugly. A bye is too big a reward for two teams when there is usually no real difference between #1-#6. Give me 8, or give me 4 with a restriction to the 4 best conference champions (or just 4 with a restriction to no more than 1 per conference).

1 Like

My thoughts are an 11 team playoff (5 P5 conference champs and 6 at large bids, including the highest ranked group of 5 team). The first round involves the 6 at large teams playing each other, while the P5 conference champs get a bye. The three winners advance to an 8 team bracket after that.

The FCS is literally 16 teams. There is a format that is already built. Lol. Y’all really are making excuses to exclude G5 teams. It’s like the guy who just immigrated to the United States being Anti-Immigration because he already made it in the country. I can guarantee you a G5 champ can do damage. Last year only two of the 10 teams were not Top 25 and the other two were just on the outside which means they easily could play with the Top 25. Plus, those teams will play #1 and #2.

1 Like

Trust me. I bring up the Pac 12 and the idea repulses people this way. No one understands why I spend three weeks in LA every winter. There is a bias against anything West Coast in the B1G, SEC and ACC.

That is such a big problem - this notion that there’s a pre-determined “general consensus” that 2 SEC teams are automatically in if Georgia wins.

The same folks who like to tout this company line are the same apologists who claim that the end of the regular season serves as it’s own playoff - that is until that idea is thrown over the possibility of a 1-loss SEC team being eliminated from the playoff because 1) they lost in their conference championship or 2) they didn’t even make their CCG, but we’re all supposed to cover our eyes and pretend what we see isn’t real because…SEC.

Barf!!!

1 Like

The 8 team proposal doesn’t add any additional time to the playoff schedule, and with the 6 team model you are back to picking pre-determined winners. This year, for example, you have 3 undefeated teams right now if they hold, picking the best two is really a subjective exercise. Why not just go to 8 and let them show on the field they are the team to advance.

2 Likes

It’s so weird that FCS Champions play 17 games in a 16 tournament. How are they able to do it but FBS can’t.

I was using SEC fan logic here, only in reverse, for effect. This is the exact argument SEC fan has been spewing right up until 'Bama lost. Baseless claims of superiority and arguments about Big Boy Football, which are all ■■■■■■■■■ One SEC honk said recently that Texas A 'n M would blow out any team in the PAC and would win the league going away. (Which is another way of saying “I’m an uninformed dumbass.”) My post was tongue-in-cheek, which may not have come across.

But let’s look at a one loss LSU team. They’ve done a lot this year, but as someone else said, recent losses should hurt your team more than early season losses, I believe that’s true. If we are looking for the 4 best teams, then it’s pretty easy to discount a team that just lost its last game, and didn’t win its conference championship as one of the best 4 teams. Next, if we take into account that the SEC is wildly overvalued, largely due to the fact that the nation’s largest sports broadcasting network has a financial interest in its success, we can call into question the quality of those wins.

Add to that the fact that the SEC plays 8 conference games, half of which are literally BAD football teams, plus 4 cupcake games, including 1 Sisters of the Poor game as a warm up to rivalry week, and the strength of the SEC schedule is exposed as extraordinarily soft. The top few teams in the SEC just get fat off the weak schedule and weak conference and only play 3 or maybe 4 challenging games per year. Additionally, SEC teams travel a total of 500 miles or less in a season, where PAC teams travel double or even triple that for one game.

The rosters and recruiting are impressive, granted, but the SEC is a Macy’s Parade of overbloated ratings and self congratulation, headed up by ESecPN.

A 1 loss loser of a conference championship vs a 1 loss winner of a conference championship? Who should get in? For my money, one of the best 4 teams simply can’t be one that can’t even win its own conference championship.

6 Likes

That’s an opinion.

image

1 Like

Sorry brah we ain’t losing

2 Likes

Heard the same thing for 8 years about not losing to Bama. I guess you guys are right once every 9 years. You guys have however won 2 of 3 vs the Dawgs in the title game.

You are the favorite, it would be embarrassing to lose to a team that lost to Muschamp.

1 Like

Here’s where I would disagree. Ultimately, there IS a need for a 16-team playoff simply for this reason: every team in this FBS “league” is represented. They ALL have an objective path to their “league’s” championship.

As it is, we all know that no G5 will EVER get to play in the 4-team playoff. So, literally, five conferences and all of their teams are shut out of their own championship – the regular season for which they also participate in just as much as the P5s.

Can you imagine the NBA not allowing any East Conference teams to play for the NBA championship?

I get that we don’t need 16 to round up all of the championship worthy teams. That’s somewhere around 6-10. But the FBS has to get past this notion that they actually crown champions and not just conduct a VERY expensive beauty contest.

So, yes, ultimately I’m all for 10 conf champs plus 6 at-large. We’re VERY far from that, and frankly I don’t believe it will happen in less than 30 years. So, I’ll take a 6–8 team playoff expansion in the meantime.

That’s a fair statement. I still will bore people with the 16 team playoff every year

I actually agree with you. I was more responding to someone responding to you, but I’m an idiot and apparently replied to the reply wrong. :joy:

1 Like