HS_Coach_C
Starter
I just want to get back to a point where we have a legitimate reason to be ticked off if Nebraska is left out, whether it's 2, 4, 6 or 8.
ha ha great pointI just want to get back to a point where we have a legitimate reason to be ticked off if Nebraska is left out, whether it's 2, 4, 6 or 8.
Yea, but it's still the offseason, so we have to fill the board quota for disagreements.
"I disagree with your opinion that you want to move to 8 teams".
![]()
That hasn't been very accurate historically.
Then you're just being obtuse. Saying Nebraska has a better shot at winning an 8 team playoff vs a 4 team playoff is just completely inaccurate for the sake of being disagreeable. The same can be said about all Power 5 teams. Literally, no argument against that is valid.
Exactly. Take the NCAA basketball tournament for example. Sure it would be a lot easier for 2 teams to win the championship if they just picked those 2 teams to play a final game without having to go through the bracket, but it would then be impossible for the other 66 teams to win it. It's easier to win if you're in. What were Nebraska's chances of winning it compared to UMBC last year?I think you might have missed me being a bit facetious with that last post. However, you cannot win the title without getting into the playoff, and an 8 team playoff is almost twice as easy to get into as a 4 team playoff (if my math is correct).
I think you might have missed me being a bit facetious with that last post. However, you cannot win the title without getting into the playoff, and an 8 team playoff is almost twice as easy to get into as a 4 team playoff (if my math is correct).
Yes, having access increases the chances of winning said title. I don't think that fact was ever in question nor was it even a point that needed to really be made.
By whom
Sorry, I've been to busy debating a fairly moot point with you to notice. You disagreed that 9 times out of 10 Nebraska winning the Big Ten would be enough to get in. I disagree with that. A 1 loss champion Nebraska gets in every time. It would take the rest of the field to be undefeated and even then favouritism will be played.
Yes, it would be more difficult for Nebraska to win a National Championship under an 8 team format.
Okay good, so you agree with my original point? :lol:
I use the 0 or 1 loss example because most of the teams who have competed in the playoff fall into that category. So to get in, it's kind of the bar you have to reach and I'm fone with that. Also, your math may technically be correct. But you can't atctually asy there are 130 teams that can make the playoff. Over half of them have zero shot at it even if they go undefeated. Nebraska luckily falls into the will make it in category even with our historical woes over the last couple decades. Solely talking about winning a title, 4 teams is easier to win than 8. Not talking access in this statement. Obviously 8 teams means easier access.
And did you completely miss my proposition of expanding the playoff? It was a long winded post, but for the record I am more in favor of expanding than staying at 4 and keeping 3 conference champs and all group of 5 out. It's nonsense.
This. A 1 loss blue blood will never get left out. Let alone when Nebraska finally does make it they will probably see a revenue stream that they haven't seen before in the playoffs.Sorry, I've been to busy debating a fairly moot point with you to notice. You disagreed that 9 times out of 10 Nebraska winning the Big Ten would be enough to get in. I disagree with that. A 1 loss champion Nebraska gets in every time. It would take the rest of the field to be undefeated and even then favouritism will be played.