B1G mailbag: Is playoff worth it for Penn State if it means 'Bama?

B1G mailbag: Is playoff worth it for Penn State if it means 'Bama?

"So is it even worth it, in that scenario? A playoff bid is kind of like a Final Four berth in basketball, I suppose, as a lasting badge of pride. But as we've seen with Michigan State, it guarantees nothing for even the immediate future. If I'm a Penn State fan, I think I'd rather go play a New Year's Six game that the Lions could actually win instead of a near-impossible playoff situation. But that's just my opinion."

Sounds like a glass half-empty guy.

Yes we would have been much better off if we had played in the rose bowl last year. thats how sports work.

What a fucking idiot.

Don't ever bring something so stupid to my feet again.

This logic belongs on another site.

The first problem with his answer is saying..."A playoff bid is kind of like a Final Four berth in basketball..."

It's not like it at all (other than there are 4 teams). Getting to the CFP is much harder than getting to a Final Four in basketball.

Ten years from now I think we'll all be amazed by which schools haven't yet made it to the CFP.
It is, in a way, its own accomplishment.

NigelUno wrote:B1G mailbag: Is playoff worth it for Penn State if it means 'Bama?

"So is it even worth it, in that scenario? A playoff bid is kind of like a Final Four berth in basketball, I suppose, as a lasting badge of pride. But as we've seen with Michigan State, it guarantees nothing for even the immediate future. If I'm a Penn State fan, I think I'd rather go play a New Year's Six game that the Lions could actually win instead of a near-impossible playoff situation. But that's just my opinion."

Sounds like Herbie.

NigelUno wrote:The first problem with his answer is saying..."A playoff bid is kind of like a Final Four berth in basketball..."

It's not like it at all (other than there are 4 teams). Getting to the CFP is much harder than getting to a Final Four in basketball.

There are 351 D1 basketball teams and 128 D1 football programs, so it is almost three times harder to make the college basketball final four

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

NigelUno wrote:B1G mailbag: Is playoff worth it for Penn State if it means 'Bama?

"So is it even worth it, in that scenario? A playoff bid is kind of like a Final Four berth in basketball, I suppose, as a lasting badge of pride. But as we've seen with Michigan State, it guarantees nothing for even the immediate future. If I'm a Penn State fan, I think I'd rather go play a New Year's Six game that the Lions could actually win instead of a near-impossible playoff situation. But that's just my opinion."

Sounds like Herbie.

huh? I always want to go for the big prize regardless of the potential for getting blown out. Even in hindsight of a 38-0 loss I say that. So I don't know how the hell you come up with that other than you are just trolling again.

Herbie Green wrote:

NigelUno wrote:The first problem with his answer is saying..."A playoff bid is kind of like a Final Four berth in basketball..."

It's not like it at all (other than there are 4 teams). Getting to the CFP is much harder than getting to a Final Four in basketball.

There are 351 D1 basketball teams and 128 D1 football programs, so it is almost three times harder to make the college basketball final four

You're wrong.

Last year, a 2 seed (Villanova) won the National Championship.
Another 2 seed (Oklahoma) made the Final Four.
And a 10 seed (Syracuse) also made the Final Four.

Teams like Villanova, OU, and Syracuse would have NO chance to make the CFP, because the CFP only has 4 teams.

The #5 ranked team in football has zero chance to get into the CFP. There are infinitely more chances for a team ranked #5 and lower to get into the Final Four.

NigelUno wrote:

Herbie Green wrote:

There are 351 D1 basketball teams and 128 D1 football programs, so it is almost three times harder to make the college basketball final four

You're wrong.    

Last year, a 2 seed (Villanova) won the National Championship.
Another 2 seed (Oklahoma) made the Final Four.
And a 10 seed (Syracuse) also made the Final Four.

Teams like Villanova, OU, and Syracuse would have NO chance to make the CFP, because the CFP only has 4 teams.

The #5 ranked team in football has zero chance to get into the CFP.  There are infinitely more chances for a team ranked #5 and lower to get into the Final Four.    

So do you think more than four football teams would make the final four if they turned it into a 64 team playoff?

And what happened to all the #1 seeds last year in basketball if it was so easy for them to make the final four?

Herbie Green wrote:So do you think more than four football teams would make the final four if they turned it into a 64 team playoff?

No.  I don't think more than 4 football teams would make the CFP because there are only 4 teams in the CFP.  So, the question doesn't make sense.  Using your scenario, if it was turned into a 64 team playoff, then multiple teams would have a chance to make the CFP instead of just 4.  Thus, it would be easier for a team not in the Top 4 (or a 1 seed) to make the CFP.  If the teams were seeded, then a 2 seed would have a chance to make it (and win it).  Right now, the chance of that is zero.    

Herbie Green wrote:And what happened to all the #1 seeds last year in basketball if it was so easy for them to make the final four?

You're kind of making my point.  

I didn't say it was "so easy" for the #1 seeds to make the Final Four.  I said it was easier for other teams to make the Final Four in basketball (than the CFP).  That is undeniably true, because only 4 teams make the CFP.  

Again...a 2 seed won the Championship in basketball last year, and a 10 seed made the Final Four.  A similar scenario can't happen in the CFP.  It is therefore more difficult to make the CFP.  

Do you think a team comparable to George Mason (which made a Final Four) would have any chance to make the CFP?

Try this: Make two bags of marbles. In the first pile put in 347 red marbles and 4 blue ones. In the 2nd one put in 124 red marbles and 4 blue ones. From which pile do you think you would have a better chance of picking a blue one? Try hundreds/thousands of trials to see if you guessed right.
You can even simulate what the college basketball tournament is like and first blindly pick 64 marbles from the bag of 351 marbles and then pick a marble. Will this increase your chances of getting a blue marble?

Herbie Green wrote:Try this:  Make two bags of marbles.  In the first pile put in 347 red marbles and 4 blue ones.  In the 2nd one put in 124 red marbles and 4 blue ones.  From which pile do you think you would have a better chance of picking a blue one?  Try hundreds/thousands of trials to see if you guessed right.  
You can even simulate what the college basketball tournament is like and first blindly pick 64 marbles from the bag of 351 marbles and then pick a marble.  Will this increase your chances of getting a blue marble?

Weird.  You didn't answer my George Mason question.

Nor have you addressed a 2 seed winning the Championship last year, and a 10 seed making the Final Four...which are all impossible in the CFP.

oh hey look, Nigel found an argument.

Herbie Green wrote:Try this: Make two bags of marbles. In the first pile put in 347 red marbles and 4 blue ones. In the 2nd one put in 124 red marbles and 4 blue ones. From which pile do you think you would have a better chance of picking a blue one? Try hundreds/thousands of trials to see if you guessed right.
You can even simulate what the college basketball tournament is like and first blindly pick 64 marbles from the bag of 351 marbles and then pick a marble. Will this increase your chances of getting a blue marble?

Why are you assuming all 347 marbles are equal?

WhiteBoyHatcher wrote:oh hey look, Nigel found an argument.

Nigel doesn't like to argue : Goose is not a republican

WhiteBoyHatcher wrote:oh hey look, Nigel found an argument.

Not sure I'd call it much of an argument.

You're welcome to discuss sports here also, and possibly even have an opinion.

Well, if you really want to go on a tangent of George Mason and all marbles not being created equal that actually weakens Nigel's point. If you only include marbles of all the teams that "really have a chance to make the final four" now you might be down to something like 200 for basketball and 40 for football.

Herbie Green wrote:Try this: Make two bags of marbles. In the first pile put in 347 red marbles and 4 blue ones. In the 2nd one put in 124 red marbles and 4 blue ones. From which pile do you think you would have a better chance of picking a blue one? Try hundreds/thousands of trials to see if you guessed right.
You can even simulate what the college basketball tournament is like and first blindly pick 64 marbles from the bag of 351 marbles and then pick a marble. Will this increase your chances of getting a blue marble?

You're doing this wrong.

Herbie Green wrote:Well, if you really want to go on a tangent of George Mason and all marbles not being created equal that actually weakens Nigel's point.  If you only include marbles of all the teams that "really have a chance to make the final four" now you might be down to something like 200 for basketball and 40 for football.

No.  You're wrong again.

Is it easier for a team that finishes .500 in their conference to make the Final Four or the CFP?

NigelUno wrote:

Herbie Green wrote:Well, if you really want to go on a tangent of George Mason and all marbles not being created equal that actually weakens Nigel's point.  If you only include marbles of all the teams that "really have a chance to make the final four" now you might be down to something like 200 for basketball and 40 for football.

No.  You're wrong again.

Is it easier for a team that finishes .500 in their conference to make the Final Four or the CFP?

Which one is easier for a team that finishes in first place in their conference? Ask Kansas or Purdue basketball fans.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

WhiteBoyHatcher wrote:oh hey look, Nigel found an argument.

Nigel doesn't like to argue : Goose is not a republican

OTPT likes people trying to make him use his brain.

It is harder to make the final four in basketball than football. It's basic math. You can schedule cupcakes in football and a COMMITTEE decided your in. In basketball you can schedule cupcakes but have to PLAY games vs quality opponents to get it.

scUM was in the final four as of last week. They just lost a game. And they're still in the final four.

Let me know when you can lose a game in the NCAA tournament and still make it to the final four.

Herbie Green wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

No.  You're wrong again.

Is it easier for a team that finishes .500 in their conference to make the Final Four or the CFP?

Which one is easier for a team that finishes in first place in their conference? Ask Kansas or Purdue basketball fans.

Again...you didn't answer my question.

And again your question proves my point. If Purdue and/or Kansas finished in 1st place in football, they would be virtually guaranteed of making the CFP...whereas if they finished in 1st place in basketball, they would not be guaranteed of making the Final Four.

A team basically has to win a conference championship to make the CFP. That's clearly not the case in basketball.

kingstonlake wrote:scUM was in the final four as of last week. They just lost a game. And they're still in the final four.

Let me know when you can lose a game in the NCAA tournament and still make it to the final four.

Let me know when you can finish .500 in your conference and make the CFP.

He's not much of a fan considering the only way PSU gets to play Alabama would be to win in Indy and be Big Ten champs.

Do you think any Big Ten player or coach would turn down a Big Ten championship trophy and ring because they would lose the next game.

Can you imagine saying somethihg as dumb as that to an Izzo or Dantonio?  They'd rip your head off with a stare.

god, I hate that guy.

NigelUno wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:scUM was in the final four as of last week. They just lost a game. And they're still in the final four.

Let me know when you can lose a game in the NCAA tournament and still make it to the final four.

Let me know when you can finish .500 in your conference and make the CFP.  

This doesn't make any sense because you are arbitrarily picking a point at the end of the season.
I can do that.  Let me know when one of the top four ranked teams in college football in the final playoff committee's ranking doesn't make the final four.  Does a #1 seed in the basketball tournament guarantee a final four?

Herbie Green wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

Let me know when you can finish .500 in your conference and make the CFP.  

This doesn't make any sense because you are arbitrarily picking a point at the end of the season.
I can do that.  Let me know when one of the top four ranked teams in college football in the final playoff committee's ranking doesn't make the final four.  Does a #1 seed in the basketball tournament guarantee a final four?

Again...that argument proves my point.

If a #1 seed guaranteed a spot in the Final Four, then it would be just like the CFP.

NigelUno wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:scUM was in the final four as of last week. They just lost a game. And they're still in the final four.

Let me know when you can lose a game in the NCAA tournament and still make it to the final four.

Let me know when you can finish .500 in your conference and make the CFP.

You just proved my point.

I forgot, how many Big Ten basketball teams made the final four last season? I stopped watching after MSU lost but as I recall, there was like 8 teams over .500. Did the other seven make the final four?

kingstonlake wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

Let me know when you can finish .500 in your conference and make the CFP.

You just proved my point.

I think you're confused.

You can do that in basketball. You can't in football.

It's easier to make the Final Four (as multiple teams, including .500 teams and teams like George Mason have a chance). Similar teams have no chance in football.

Herbie Green wrote:I forgot, how many Big Ten basketball teams made the final four last season? I stopped watching after MSU lost but as I recall, there was like 8 teams over .500. Did the other seven make the final four?

A .500 team from the ACC made the Final Four. A 3rd place team from the Big12 made the Final Four.

Is it easier for a .500 team to make the Final Four or the CFP?
Is it easier for a 3rd place team to make the Final Four or the CFP?

You simply cannot dodge quality opponents in the NCAA tourney in order to make it to the final four in basketball. It can be done with relative ease in football. And stating that teams who have a .500 conference record and have made the final four only proves that the field is wide open. .500 teams don't get invited to the final four in football. Guess scUM is glad they don't...

NigelUno wrote:

Herbie Green wrote:I forgot, how many Big Ten basketball teams made the final four last season? I stopped watching after MSU lost but as I recall, there was like 8 teams over .500. Did the other seven make the final four?

A .500 team from the ACC made the Final Four. A 3rd place team from the Big12 made the Final Four.

Is it easier for a .500 team to make the Final Four or the CFP?
Is it easier for a 3rd place team to make the Final Four or the CFP?

So what your saying is it's very hard to make the final four in basketball if you're a one seed?

NigelUno wrote:

Herbie Green wrote:I forgot, how many Big Ten basketball teams made the final four last season? I stopped watching after MSU lost but as I recall, there was like 8 teams over .500. Did the other seven make the final four?

A .500 team from the ACC made the Final Four. A 3rd place team from the Big12 made the Final Four.

Is it easier for a .500 team to make the Final Four or the CFP?
Is it easier for a 3rd place team to make the Final Four or the CFP?

And a school that doesn't even play Division 1 football won the national championship in basketball. I suppose you think this further validates your point.

Herbie Green wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

A .500 team from the ACC made the Final Four. A 3rd place team from the Big12 made the Final Four.

Is it easier for a .500 team to make the Final Four or the CFP?
Is it easier for a 3rd place team to make the Final Four or the CFP?

And a school that doesn't even play Division 1 football won the national championship in basketball. I suppose you think this further validates your point.

Huh? You're kind of deflecting.

Not answering my questions kind of speaks volumes.