Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

Duke's Argument for #1 (2017-18 Season)

Recommended Posts

I’m in favor of playing the games, rather than annointing some team as no. 1 before they’ve set foot on the court.    I like the fact that the rankings of the college football teams in line for the playoffs don’t even come out until the teams have been playing for about two months.  

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/7/2017 at 2:58 PM, Frobby said:


I’m in favor of playing the games, rather than anointing some team as no. 1 before they’ve set foot on the court. I like the fact that the rankings of the college football teams in line for the playoffs don’t even come out until the teams have been playing for about two months.  




Aside from the fact that Division I-A college football also has rankings and discussions of who is # 1 before they play a single snap (including preseason rankings), Division I-A college football is the last example that I would point to in terms of an efficient (and fair) system for proclaiming a national championship. While Division I-AA football has had a 16-team playoff (after an 11-game regular season) for 40 years now, Division I-A football didn't have a 2-team "playoff" until 1998, and it didn't have a 4-team playoff until 2014. It's glaringly obvious that with 130 teams in its system, Division I-A football should have a 16-team playoff, or at the very least, an 8-team playoff. As it stands now, they don't even have enough spots for the champions of each of the 4 major conferences, let alone a spot for an undefeated team from a Group-of-5 conference. After playing 12 (and sometimes 13) games, I think that it's absurd to tell the #5, the #6, the #7, etc. teams in the country that they cannot have a chance to play for the title. It's possible that Wisconsin can finish the season at 13-0 and the Big Ten champions, and not make this year's playoffs. And regardless of whether or not that situation comes to fruition (by either Wisconsin losing a game, or a team that is ahead of them losing a game to open up a spot for the Badgers), the overall point that I made shows the glaring inefficiencies in the Division I-A football system.


College basketball once had a fundamental problem with their playoff system, in that a team had to win its conference championship in order to make the NCAA tournament. That led to situations such what happened in 1970, when South Carolina was the #3 team in the nation but did not get to go to the tournament because they lost to North Carolina State in the ACC tournament. And in 1974, when Maryland and North Carolina State were both Top-5 teams in the country, but only David Thompson's Wolfpack went to that season's tournament because they defeated Len Elmore's Terrapins in the ACC Championship game in overtime, 103-100.

College basketball remedied that fundamental problem by allowing more than 1 team from each conference to be admitted to the NCAA tournament  ........ more than 40 years ago, in the 1974-75 season. Division I-A college football has been as stubborn as a mule in terms of evolving into a fair and efficient 16-team playoff system (or at the very least, a reasonably fair and efficient 8-team playoff system) over the last 4 decades.



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

Rumors and News

  • Posts

    • It’s already so far out of touch, I doubt fans care if a player is making $20 mm/yr or $40 mm/yr.    They’re already in a whole other universe.   
    • First off, you were being condescending by making us sound like we were a no nothing blog, so stop with all of the hard-ache. Secondly, if you are in baseball and you don't take as many opinions as you can then I would look inward at yourself. Scouts outside the organization have zero to gain by down grading a player to us. The guys I talk to I've had relationships for years. They are an opinion to be added in with other opinions within the organization as well as our scouting. You are 100% correct that opinions are just that. I'm completely fine with anyone having a differing opinion than me, and I don't take offense at someone who says that they don't agree, but there is absolutely no need to disparage someone's opinion as being lesser because you don't agree. I've been doing this for 20 plus years. That doesn't make me infallible or never wrong, but I'll lay my process down against anyone including professional baseball people. That doesn't make me right, but it sure should mean I deserve a little respect and don't get called "blog pages ", whatever the heck that means. It doesn't matter what the team has in store. I feel his most likely outcome is a platoon outfielder because of his inability to hit lefties. Doesn't mean that he might not improve or a team might live with it and play him every day,   
    • That's a hell of a prediction.  These defenses font strike me as good enough for a game like that.   That said, I fully expect McCarthy to outcoach the ever loving hell out of Harbaugh.
    • 1965 = 4,658 / 1.77 1975 = 8,631 / 2.59 1985 = 16,823 / 5.66 1995 = 24,706 / 13.14 2013 = 44,888 / 23.89   Ref: http://roadsidephotos.sabr.org/baseball/earlyticketprices.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Average_Indexed_Monthly_Earnings
    • Hate this rule more than any other in baseball.
    • Must be traded during the season.  So next year Dan trades the pick to try and buoy a mediocre team.  The gambit fails but Dan tells us it's okay because they should have some picks coming from Manny and Jones walking.
    • Have to wonder where it ends? Huge supply of fans willing to spend their money, but how many more price increases are they willing to stomach before they just lose interest? Hard to re-ignite the flame once gone. I'm just guessing here, but it would seem to me that the price of a ticket and all the associated costs to attend pro sporting events has far outpaced the increase in wages in recent years (last 10-20 years?). Haven't done the research, just going off of gut feeling.
  • Popular Contributors