There’s isn’t a perfect system to determining a champion in ANY college sport. Basketball continually expands the field letting in more teams further watering down the field and allowing for ‘Cinderella’ teams to make deep runs in the tourney. And you hardly ever end up with the best 4 teams in college basketball in the Final Four. Heck, in just the last 5 years alone, we’ve seen two 11 seeds make the Final Four. A middling UCLA team that farted around all season in the PAC 12, barely squeezed into the field and then got hot at the right time. We’re they one of the 4 best college basketball teams in the country in 2021? Of course not. Did that matter? Nope.

And what about you guys? As a usual top 1-4 seed, you’ve been knocked out by the likes of Bucknell, Bradley, Northern Iowa, etc. Were they better teams than Kansas? Was their overall body of work for the whole season stronger than yours?

And as far as the college football playoffs and deserving to be there, this is what I know. It’s been going on for 8 years now. 4 times a Big 12 team made the final 4 (Oklahoma). Each time they went one and done. Didn’t matter if they were playing the SEC, ACC or Big 10. They promptly got booted out (usually in blowout fashion) And now your most consistent and strongest team year to year overall is leaving the Big 12 for the SEC (along with Texas), further shifting the balance of power towards the SEC.

The Big 12 is a superior conference in basketball, but they don’t measure up in football. On field results speak for themselves. And no ratings system is gonna convince anyone (besides Big 12 homers) otherwise.
[Reply]

Bama, Georgia, and OSU usually ARE the best teams every year. You know why? Because they get the best recruits. Look at how many Top 50 guys those programs pull in every year. Best talent usually equates to the best teams, just like in the NFL. There’s a reason the Chiefs are always a Super Bowl contender every year. They have a Mahomes. They have a Kelce. They have a Jones. Few teams can match that. And the ones that can (Bills, Bengals, for instance) are usually left standing there with them near the end in the playoffs.
[Reply]

So better. Got it.

How many Natty’s for the Big 12 in that time period? Or let’s go back 15 years? Now how many for the SEC?

I think you get the point now.
[Reply]

:-)
[Reply]

Bucknell and Bradley!


[Reply]

No one’s bragging about the SEC. Just pointing out that they’re a better football conference than the Big 12. Not really sure how anyone could disagree with that. Sorry if it hurts your feels.
[Reply]

Just because you keep saying it doesn't mean it's true.
[Reply]

Of course there's no perfect system, but March Madness/NFL playoffs/etc give all high-level teams a chance. You can't say that there are only 4 high level teams in CFB each year. Therefore, terrible format. Especially given all the inherent biases.

In CBB, you don't lose your chance at a nat'l championship because your star player misses a game in the regular season, or because of a tough early season loss when you weren't playing your best ball. Or because some idiots just don't perceive you to be on the level of a few other teams.

UCLA is actually a better example of my point than yours. Here was a team that finished with a few more losses than the top teams (a couple of which were very fluky losses under wild circumstances) and they were perceived to play in a weak conference, so they were given an 11 seed by a subjective committee. Turned out the Pac-12 was far better than people realized and they dominated the tourney, with a lot of convincing wins over much higher-seeded teams. They were a way underrated conference and they proved it. And the best of them was UCLA. If not for a half-court prayer at the buzzer (vs one of the best teams in recent years), they'd have played for a national title. Anyone who says that UCLA didn't deserve to be there is foolish.

Now let's imagine if CBB used the same system as CFB. Last year's playoff selection would have been Gonzaga, Baylor, Arizona and KU. Only one of them even reached their regional final. Are you telling me that Baylor would have deserved it more than UNC? Baylor was a shell of what they were early on. And by any metric, UNC was playing as well as any team in the nation for the last month of the season. That SHOULD matter a lot more than what happened early in the year. You shouldn't be penalized for peaking at the right time. They mowed through the tourney field and had KU down 15 at halftime of the nat'l title game. Yet, in a 4-team playoff, they would have been about the 30th team considered.

And Duke was probably the most talented team in the country, yet they wouldn't have made the cut either. Gonzaga was an overrated team that was there more due to reputation than achievements. And Arizona was another slightly overrated team that feasted on a fairly weak schedule.

A four team system is a joke. Period. For a thousand reasons.
[Reply]

jfc im here to watch ku fans continue to cry about mizzou rejecting them for prom.... not read high school essays.
[Reply]

There’s been zero qualitative diff between the leagues for the last 7 years.


In fact, your “worst team of the decade” weighed down the B12 so much with their shitty play that even a bad team would’ve made the B12 better overall
[Reply]

Wasn’t advocating for college basketball to use the same system. Just pointing out that no system is perfect and each has their own inherent flaws. I think they should have kept CBB at 64 and quit watering it down by adding teams. Just makes it more likely that the best teams won’t be there in the end.

And I think college football is perfect with a 4 team playoff, but of course the NCAA has to go and fuck that up too (expanding to 12 by 2026) so I guess you’re getting your wish there.
[Reply]

Georgia only has 3 appearances including this year and OSU is .500 in CFP games.

When it comes to Alabama, I totally get it and not trying to overstate the advantage and act like they wouldn't win it every other year anyway. I saw something a few years ago where they apparently had a depth chart of FIVE running backs that ended up as NFL starters (IIRC). It's fucking insane.

But, look at Ohio State last season... they lost to Oregon (which vaulted OU like 9 spots into the top 5) and they were still in the final spot in the CFB before getting raped by Michigan, who was ranked #5 despite losing to the only ranked team they played all season. Then Ohio State has to pull off a miracle to beat a 4-loss Utah team.

Had they beaten Oregon, they still would have made the CFB to probably get brutalized by Alabama. And of course OSU has been destroyed multiple times in CFP games as well.

Does it matter a ton who gets brutalized by Alabama? Probably not some years. But, other years they aren't clearly the favorite, it might.

And during March Madness, coaches and kids are gaining experience in big games and it matters down the line as they become upper classmen.... in CFB, not nearly so much, because while Bama and OSU have years of that experience and just know how to win those games, other teams are left just hoping they'll slide in at #4 every several years... and they usually shit their pants.

Same reason Missouri wanted to join the SEC... to be the best, you want the experience of playing the best. Well, in CFB, that's a pretty damn short list and it just feeds the machine that is Alabama football.
[Reply]

via GIPHY

[Reply]

I couldn't care less if the SEC is best. I just think it's hilarious when people act like you're in the NFL while everybody else is playing FCS teams. It's so over the top and laughable. If you weren't one of them, you'd see how absurd it is.

As for how anyone could disagree....well, Sagarin currently disagrees, so there's your answer.

Btw, what does "better" actually mean?

I think most people agree that the SEC has been better at the top for a while now. Alabama is better than Oklahoma. Georgia in recent years has been better than any Big 12 team. But are the top teams all that matter? That seems to be all that people like you consider. Are the middle teams consistently better? Are the bottom-feeders better?

As we talked about, Missouri rarely even plays Alabama, and Georgia is one game on their schedule. Stop acting like you face murderer's row and everybody else has it easy.

This year, KU and MU both faced a team that made the playoff. They also both played another top 10 team. Plus another top 20 team. Each played three teams that finished in the final top 25.
[Reply]

Correct, no difference. Except recruiting success, major bowl appearances and, you know, that little thing people affectionately refer to as ‘natty’s’. But other than that, no difference.

And it’s not ‘my’ “worst team of the decade”. It is THE worst team of the decade. Less wins, by far, than any Power 5 team in FBS. Do I need to post the link yet again?

https://cfbsaturdays.com/most-wins-i...-years-mobile/
[Reply]