Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports
Pat Dye Field => War Damn Eagle => Topic started by: Kaos on October 14, 2013, 10:50:45 AM
-
Arkansas AD Jeff Long tapped to head football selection committee.
(http://zennie62blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/sean-rochelle-jessica-dorrell-jeff-long1.jpg)
Right. Because this is a guy known for good decisions.
Is that Bulemia's wife or Petrino's hookup?
Also on the panel?
Archie Manning. What does he know about football beyond banging his wife and losing games? That idiot will try to put Ole Miss on there every year.
Tyrone Willingham. Just because you cannot coach doesn't mean you should be on it. He's a black Gene Chizik without the championship.
Oliver Luck. Qualification: Father of an oversized, overhyped gnome.
Pat Haden. Qualification: Hired Lane Kiffin. And Ed Orgeron. Yeah, he knows football. Yaw yaw yaw.
Dan Radakovich. Qualification: At Clemson where their idiot coach bellows RAAWWWW TAAAHHHAD.
And a lot of fail including Oprah lite, Rice.
It's a joke.
-
Arkansas AD Jeff Long tapped to head football selection committee.
(http://zennie62blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/sean-rochelle-jessica-dorrell-jeff-long1.jpg)
Is that Bulemia's wife or Petrino's hookup?
Definitely not Jen Bielema, could be Dorrell, but I'm not sure.
Oliver Luck. Qualification: Father of an oversized, overhyped gnome.
To be fair, he's the AD at WV.
-
Definitely not Jen Bielema, could be Dorrell, but I'm not sure.
To be fair, he's the AD at WV.
It's petrino's lady. I knew.
I also know Luck is at WV. But that's not his claim to fame.
-
I too instantly recognize the ol' bike wrecker.
(http://www.imagecpr.com/imagecpr.com%20uploads/2012/04/Bobby-Petrino-and-Jessica-Dorrell3.jpg)
-
I too instantly recognize the ol' bike wrecker.
(http://www.imagecpr.com/imagecpr.com%20uploads/2012/04/Bobby-Petrino-and-Jessica-Dorrell3.jpg)
She looks uglier than I remember. Course it is him so things being relative and all.
-
Yes, because she is just hideous.
(http://zennie62blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/hot-bobby-petrino-mistress-jessica-dorrell-heels.jpg)
And that was hitting Petrino. *shudder*
And when you think about this:
(http://img.bleacherreport.net/img/images/photos/002/350/544/jen-bielema-vegas-594x594_crop_exact.jpg?w=1500&h=1500&q=85)
being married to this:
(http://ib1.huluim.com/video/8968436?region=US&size=600x400)
You got to wonder what the heck is going on in Arkansas.
-
I don't have a problem with Archie Manning, but I can see where others would think he would have and SEC bias. Like I have said before, I don't have a problem with Rice. She is a very intelligent woman and has experience with dealing with a room full of idiots and egos. I do have a problem with current AD's being on the committee. I guess the point in having so many attachments to so many different conferences is they hope all the biased members will cancel each other out?
-
I don't have a problem with Archie Manning, but I can see where others would think he would have and SEC bias. I do have a problem with current AD's being on the committee. I guess the point in having so many attachments to so many different conferences is they hope all the biased members will cancel each other out?
It's straight West Coast. The inclusion of that chowderhead Manning is supposed to appease us.
Think about it:
Condomweezha Rice - Stanford (although she loves her some bama)
Oliver Luck - Kid is a Stanford hero even if he is at the cesspool known as WVU
Pat Haden - Current USC AD (what a joke this is)
Tyrone Willingham - Stanford and Washington
Tom Jernstedt - Oregon graduate and former Duck employee
Michael Gould - Colorado graduate
Thirteen members. Two have SEC ties. Six, or 31/83rds have Pac-10/West Coast allegiances.
It's a bad deal.
-
I can't believe I allowed myself to be shocked at the shittiness of the selection committee. We shouldn't be surprised. No one should.
The only consolation is that the SEC champion has had 1 loss or less 14 times since 1992. I would be very, very surprised if a one loss SEC champion did not make it into the playoff.
But yes, we are going to see a huge influx of Pac 12 over the upcoming years. You're seeing it with ESPN lately. I think ESPN recognizes that the Big 10 is dying if not already dead. Old people who cherish the Ohio State, Notre Dame, Michigan, Nebraska, and Penn State brands are dying off. The real attention is on the schools in warm sunny weather that attract hot girls and fast athletes.
-
I can't believe I allowed myself to be shocked at the shittiness of the selection committee. We shouldn't be surprised. No one should.
The only consolation is that the SEC champion has had 1 loss or less 14 times since 1992. I would be very, very surprised if a one loss SEC champion did not make it into the playoff.
But yes, we are going to see a huge influx of Pac 12 over the upcoming years. You're seeing it with ESPN lately. I think ESPN recognizes that the Big 10 is dying if not already dead. Old people who cherish the Ohio State, Notre Dame, Michigan, Nebraska, and Penn State brands are dying off. The real attention is on the schools in warm sunny weather that attract hot girls and fast athletes.
You're right, but you can damn well bet IF 2 SEC teams end up with one loss and both are worthy of being in the top 4, one isn't going to make it.
-
You're right, but you can damn well bet IF 2 SEC teams end up with one loss and both are worthy of being in the top 4, one isn't going to make it.
Which one won the conference?
I'm okay with that honestly. I wouldn't mind making the playoff regional and picking the four best conference champions.
I mean, if we're going to be honest, last year, the playoff should have featured Alabama, Texas A&M, Georgia, and Notre Dame.
-
Which one won the conference?
I'm okay with that honestly. I wouldn't mind making the playoff regional and picking the four best conference champions.
I mean, if we're going to be honest, last year, the playoff should have featured Alabama, Texas A&M, Georgia, and Notre Dame.
Because those were the best 4 teams. But you honestly think any selection committee is going to put 3 teams from the same conference even it is apparent those are the best 3 teams? Especially THAT committee?
And again, if you're going with best 4 conference champions, you still probably won't be putting best 4 teams in.
-
Because those were the best 4 teams. But you honestly think any selection committee is going to put 3 teams from the same conference even it is apparent those are the best 3 teams? Especially THAT committee?
And again, if you're going with best 4 conference champions, you still probably won't be putting best 4 teams in.
If there's a conference championship game, there's no need to send two teams from one conference. Think of conference play as the first 12 rounds of the playoff.
Bama & LSU a couple of years ago had no business happening. Yes, LSU was clearly unprepared for the championship game, but they proved during the season that they were the better team.
-
So then, you don't want the best 4 teams in the country. Just the 4 best teams from different conferences.
-
Bama & LSU a couple of years ago had no business happening. Yes, LSU was clearly unprepared for the championship game, but they proved during the season that they were the better team.
Fuck, not this again.
Just because LSU beat Alabama during the season, that doesn't mean that Alabama can't be the second best team in the country. It wasn't a hard concept to understand then, and it still isn't now.
-
So then, you don't want the best 4 teams in the country. Just the 4 best teams from different conferences.
Yes and no.
I along with you and other SEC fans would say that last year was obvious that three of the four best teams were SEC conference members. That may have been true, but we don't know. We do know that Alabama proved to be the best of those three teams. Therefore, if we're going to really give multiple teams the chance to prove that they are #1, then we do need to consider that there are different conferences playing good football.
-
Yes and no.
I along with you and other SEC fans would say that last year was obvious that three of the four best teams were SEC conference members. That may have been true, but we don't know. We do know that Alabama proved to be the best of those three teams. Therefore, if we're going to really give multiple teams the chance to prove that they are #1, then we do need to consider that there are different conferences playing good football.
Ok, let's take the year Bama clearly shouldn't have been in the title talk.
Conference champs
#1 LSU 13-0
#3 Oklahoma St. 11-1
#5 Oregon 11-2
#10 Wisconsin 11-2
#15 Clemson 10-3
#18 TCU 10-2
#21 Southern Miss 11-2
#23 West Virginia 9-3
Which 4 would you take and feel confident that you are putting the best 4 teams in college football in the playoff?
Teams you would be passing up on solely because they didn't win their conference.
#2 Alabama 11-1
#4 Stanford 11-1
#6 Arkansas 10-2
#8 Kansas State 10-2
#9 South Carolina 10-2
Not to mention, you are effectively saying, if you can't beat the #1 team, that you cant be #2, #3, or #4.
-
Ok, let's take the year Bama clearly shouldn't have been in the title talk.
When did I say that?
Conference champs
#1 LSU 13-0
#3 Oklahoma St. 11-1
#5 Oregon 11-2
#10 Wisconsin 11-2
#15 Clemson 10-3
#18 TCU 10-2
#21 Southern Miss 11-2
#23 West Virginia 9-3
Which 4 would you take and feel confident that you are putting the best 4 teams in college football in the playoff?
Teams you would be passing up on solely because they didn't win their conference.
#2 Alabama 11-1
#4 Stanford 11-1
#6 Arkansas 10-2
#8 Kansas State 10-2
#9 South Carolina 10-2
Not to mention, you are effectively saying, if you can't beat the #1 team, that you cant be #2, #3, or #4.
I'd admit that in 2011, there was the rare, rare, rare, rare, rare occurrence that Alabama was so good along with LSU that they both deserved to be in the top 4 playoff.
But if the committee said, "Sorry, Alabama. We've already seen you lose to LSU, and there's no reason why they should have to play you again," I'd be 100% ok with it.
And if they came out with this:
#1 LSU vs. #4 Wisconsin
#3 Oklahoma State vs. #5 Oregon
I'd be happy. No debate on who the true national champion was after that playoff.
-
When did I say that?
I'd admit that in 2011, there was the rare, rare, rare, rare, rare occurrence that Alabama was so good along with LSU that they both deserved to be in the top 4 playoff.
But if the committee said, "Sorry, Alabama. We've already seen you lose to LSU, and there's no reason why they should have to play you again," I'd be 100% ok with it.
And if they came out with this:
#1 LSU vs. #4 Wisconsin
#3 Oklahoma State vs. #5 Oregon
I'd be happy. No debate on who the true national champion was after that playoff.
And I'd say again, if you aren't putting the best 4 teams in the playoff, then what is the point? Other than pacifying conferences like the Big 10 that play average-good football, but not great. In reality, you'd be better off going back to pre BCS and letting the bowls pick who they want.
-
I'm just gonna put it simple, this committee is turning out to be a joke. Its like whoever is putting this committee together is trying too hard.
-
I'm fine with almost anything (ok 8 is better) but absolutely NO WILD CARD ANYTHING!
-
And I'd say again, if you aren't putting the best 4 teams in the playoff, then what is the point? Other than pacifying conferences like the Big 10 that play average-good football, but not great. In reality, you'd be better off going back to pre BCS and letting the bowls pick who they want.
This logic is as sound as saying that in the above scenario, if Wisconsin beat LSU or Oregon beats Oklahoma State, you're not allowing the "best two teams" to play. By advancing in the playoff, they prove they are the better team. What are we having playoffs for if we're going to leave it up to pure subjective bullshit?
The way conferences, at least the SEC, crown their champion is the most objective, fair, and precise scale of who the better team is in college football. Everyone in each division plays each other - first six round of the playoffs. Whoever has the best head-to-head record is the best team in their division. Empirically. The proven best teams of each division, then play each other to prove who is the best in the entire conference. Advancing in the first single elimination round to the final four.
If this isn't completely rational and logical to you, you either lack the ability to think logically, or you're a Bammer that has convinced yourself beyond any doubt that it was your earned your spot I the 2011 national championship. Hint: You didn't.
Yes, you destroyed them in that game. The same way Utah destroyed you when you were disappointed in the lowly opponent in the Sugar Bowl a few years before that, and we're clearly unprepared.
-
In reality, you'd be better off going back to pre BCS and letting the bowls pick who they want.
And that's exactly what I want.
-
This logic is as sound as saying if in the above scenario, if Wisconsin beat LSU or Oregon beats Oklahoma State, you're not allowing the "best two teams" play. By advancing in the playoff, they prove they are the better team. What are we having playoffs for if we're going to leave it up to pure subjective bullshit?
The way conferences, at least the SEC, is crowned is the most objective, fair, and precise scale of who the better team is. Everyone in each division plays each other - first six round of the playoffs. Whoever has the best head-to-head record is the best team in their division. Empirically. The proven best teams of each division, then play each other to prove who is the best in the entire conference. Advancing in the first single elimination round to the final four.
If this isn't completely rational and logical to you, you either lack the ability to think logically, or you're a Bammer that has convinced yourself beyond any doubt that it was your earned your spot I the 2011 national championship. Hint: You didn't.
Yes, you destroyed them in that game. The same way Utah destroyed you when you were disappointed in the lowly opponent in the Sugar Bowl a few years before that, and we're clearly unprepared.
Which four conferences do you pick from? Which conference gets left out? No subjective bullshit or speculation is allowed, so there must be a scientific way to prove that the big east isn't as good as the sec.
-
Do all teams receive a trophy for participating?
-
Which four conferences do you pick from? Which conference gets left out? No subjective bullshit or speculation is allowed, so there must be a scientific way to prove that the big east isn't as good as the sec.
Out of conference games.
I'd rather see four super conferences.
But we're not far from that anyway.
SEC
Pac12
Big10
ACC
Big 12 on the verge of extinction.
-
Out of conference games.
I'd rather see four super conferences.
But we're not far from that anyway.
SEC
Pac12
Big10
ACC
Big 12 on the verge of extinction.
I would be fine with that. But that isn't what we have now. And any argument saying you should only be eligible for a 4 team playoff if you win your conference right now is retarded. Because you still have to use speculation and subjective bullshit to determine which 4 conferences make it in.
-
I would be fine with that. But that isn't what we have now. And any argument saying you should only be eligible for a 4 team playoff if you win your conference right now is retarded. Because you still have to use speculation and subjective bullshit to determine which 4 conferences make it in.
This.
-
I would be fine with that. But that isn't what we have now. And any argument saying you should only be eligible for a 4 team playoff if you win your conference right now is retarded. Because you still have to use speculation and subjective bullshoot to determine which 4 conferences make it in.
From the looks of it, the selection committee will continue the old bowl committee's tradition of giving all benefit of doubt in favor of Alabama and Notre Dame. So, you have nothing to worry about as long as the payments to Emmert keep going through ;-)
-
I don't know why the fuck we have to over complicate things (actually I do it's all about $$$$) If you don't think their is a bias to setup certain games all in the name of money, you guys are out of your minds.
But I digress on to my point. What I don't understand is why not keep the BCS pool, which factors in SOS and the computers and the human vote and just take the top 4 teams. Even if you have an weird year like 2011 it would have been
#1 LSU vs #3 Oklahoma State
#2 Alabammer vs #4 Stanford
If LSU and Bama end up playing each other again regardless of what happened earlier in the year I would have had no problem with that. Because they would have had to beat equal quality opponents to get back there.
But see this will never happen because it's not fair the SEC has two teams in the playoffs and we have none...wah! :violin: :violin: :violin: :violin:
-
I don't know why the fuck we have to over complicate things (actually I do it's all about $$$$) If you don't think their is a bias to setup certain games all in the name of money, you guys are out of your minds.
But I digress on to my point. What I don't understand is why not keep the BCS pool, which factors in SOS and the computers and the human vote and just take the top 4 teams. Even if you have an weird year like 2011 it would have been
#1 LSU vs #3 Oklahoma State
#2 Alabammer vs #4 Stanford
If LSU and Bama end up playing each other again regardless of what happened earlier in the year I would have had no problem with that. Because they would have had to beat equal quality opponents to get back there.
But see this will never happen because it's not fair the SEC has two teams in the playoffs and we have none...wah! :violin: :violin: :violin: :violin:
It's like you think it and then you type it.
Agree. Just leave the system as is and take the top 4 teams.
-
It's like they're fucking with us.
Oh YEAH? You wanted a playoff? Well, this is the only way we can do a playoff. Bye-bye SOS. Bye-bye objective computer polls. So when it sucks even worse they can say "Well, this is what you wanted! What're you complaining about!"
It's the fallacy of false choice.
-
When are they going to add Betty White?
-
It's like they're fudgeing with us.
Oh YEAH? You wanted a playoff? Well, this is the only way we can do a playoff. Bye-bye SOS. Bye-bye objective computer polls. So when it sucks even worse they can say "Well, this is what you wanted! What're you complaining about!"
It's the fallacy of false choice.
Just like the Affordable Care Act.
-
Just like the Affordable Care Act.
I like ObamaCare better
-
I like ObamaCare better
He's a president -- that cares
-
Arkansas AD Jeff Long tapped to head football selection committee.
They don't have to worry about conflict of interest with him. :haha: :haha:
-
The College Football Playoff made it official today. The 13 members of the playoff selection committee were announced, via College Football Playoff:
Related: FoxSports analyst says everyone is sick of the SEC
Jeff Long, vice chancellor and director of athletics, University of Arkansas-Fayetteville, Chair
Barry Alvarez, director of athletics, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Lieutenant General Mike Gould, former superintendent of the United States Air Force Academy
Pat Haden, director of athletics, University of Southern California
Tom Jernstedt, former NCAA executive vice president
Oliver Luck, director of athletics, West Virginia University
Archie Manning, former University of Mississippi quarterback and all-pro NFL quarterback
Tom Osborne, former head coach and director of athletics, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Dan Radakovich, director of athletics, Clemson University
Condoleezza Rice, Stanford University professor, former Stanford provost and former United States Secretary of State
Mike Tranghese, former commissioner of the Big East Conference
Steve Wieberg, former college football reporter, USA Today
Tyrone Willingham, former head coach of three FBS institutions
This may have been posted already, but this is the first time I have seen the entire list.
-
More troublesome than Condi to me are the current sitting Athletic Directors. How can they possibly not show bias? If Jacobs was on this list I'd be pissed if he wasn't ranking Auburn #1 every week. Their job description is to do everything in their power to maximize the athletic department, and put butts in seats. Highly ranked teams sell the most tickets.
Seems shady to me.
-
Seems shady to me.
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
I just have to laugh. Dude, again college football is like a 20 BILLION dollar business, you think they leave shit to chance. You don't think there are agendas. Of course it's fucking shady, it has been shady for years.
-
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
I just have to laugh. Dude, again college football is like a 20 BILLION dollar business, you think they leave shit to chance. You don't think there are agendas. Of course it's fucking shady, it has been shady for years.
Where did I imply this?
I'm just saying they should at least try not to be so overtly obvious that they don't give the slightest of shits about obvious conflict of interests for the anointed 5 or so schools.
Expect University of Arkansas-Fayetteville, Wisconsin-Madison, USC, West Virginia, & Clemson to get #1 votes every week.
-
Where did I imply this?
I think what tipped me off to it was the last line, where you said "seems shady to me".
-
I think what tipped me off to it was the last line, where you said "seems shady to me".
I think you are reading too much into what he said. How could you get that from it?
-
Yes, "seems shady to me" = "I don't think there are agendas. I think everything is left to chance."
Ok.
-
Where did I imply this?
I'm just saying they should at least try not to be so overtly obvious that they don't give the slightest of shits about obvious conflict of interests for the anointed 5 or so schools.
Expect University of Arkansas-Fayetteville, Wisconsin-Madison, USC, West Virginia, & Clemson to get #1 votes every week.
I wasn't implying anything, I was saying you are naive if you think that shit is left to chance. It seems shady, because it is fucking shady.
-
What does Eminem have to do with any of this?
-
What does Eminem have to do with any of this?
Is that you Slim?
-
Is that you Slim?
wiki wiki seems shady
-
wiki wiki seems shady
That's berzerk
-
I wasn't implying anything, I was saying you are naive if you think that shit is left to chance. It seems shady, because it is fucking shady.
There part is not about the sport, its about the business end of it.
-
There part is not about the sport, its about the business end of it.
:english:
-
There part is not about the sport, its about the business end of it.
Reuban? That you?
-
:english:
Not wehn trying to type and takl on the fone.