OT: Why Carroll will never coach in the pros again - Page 5 - New England Patriots Forums

PatsFaninAZ · 12-02-2008, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deus Irae

Sorry, but the college basketball tournament shows you to be wrong. No matter what number you use for the cutoff, you will always have weeping and gnashing of teeth. It's just a normal by-product of an exclusionary system.

Completely different kettle of fish. It's a totally different type of gnashing, and a much lower level one.

No team that has ever been excluded from the NCAA tournament since the expansion to 64 teams has ever had a realistic chance of winning the tournament. Year after year after year, it does a great job of crowning an entirely legitimate and completely recognized champion. The gnashing about the bubble is more about money and participation. I guess there would be the same level of griping about the first team on the bubble left out of an 8-game playoff for football, but that's a whole oder of magnitude lower and different than a system that excludes a legitimate and fully worthy national championship contender from even competing. Plus, NCAA football would still have all the other bowls, so the non-playoff teams would still get to participate in the post-season, which what the teams on the bubble in college basketball really want: the honor to go to the tournament and maybe knock off a goliath or get a nice roadtrip and play on national tv.

The on-the-bubble teeth gnashing for the tournament usually lasts all of one or two days after selection Sunday. The BCS travesty is a perpetual topic of discussion and aggitation.

***cstjohn17*** · 12-02-2008, 06:26 PM

His defense is giving up 7 PPG this year, he makes millions of dollars, lives in great climate and is a B list celebrity. Beats working 80 hours a week in Detriot or Cleveland.

tombonneau · 12-02-2008, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cstjohn17

His defense is giving up 7 PPG this year, he makes millions of dollars, lives in great climate and is a B list celebrity. Beats working 80 hours a week in Detriot or Cleveland.

He is A-list in LA. I can't imagine him leaving.

***KontradictioN*** · 12-02-2008, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deus Irae

How will it be fair for the 4 teams to be in a playoff where two will face off and the third will have a much easier game and an advantage when they face off in the next round? As for the Oregon State question, it's really quite simple: USC lost a game that it should have won. The Trojans have nobody to blame but themselves. The only teams with anything approaching a realistic gripe are the undefeated teams that get ignored if they aren't in the major conferences. They can at least point out that they've not lost.

-If the third team has such an easier game then they win that and square off with the winner of the other two. So let's just say for arguments sake that Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, and (just throwing a name in there) Texas A&M are in the playoffs. The top two seeds, Oklahoma and Texas play each other and the last two seeds, Texas Tech and Texas A&M play. Texas Tech runs away with the game while Oklahoma exacts revenge and beats Texas. Then we get a rematch of Oklahoma and Texas Tech. I don't see how Texas Tech having an easier game is an advantage for them v.s. Oklahoma.

Quote:

You have to set out parameters for your tiebreakers and, again, no matter what you choose, there will always be another way that could have been chosen. It's the same in the NFL.

-I guess it's just me but I would rather have the teams actually decide where they go other than parameters or computer systems. It would also make for more interesting games.

Quote:

But why would I want to subject myself to such a system when it would be worse than one currently in place and a logistical nightmare on top of that?

-Because, in the end, the destination for the top two teams will be decided by the games played and not the computer. Logistical nightmare or not.

Double G · 12-02-2008, 08:15 PM

"I think you're wrong on both counts. Very few NFL coaches are treated like Carroll or Paterno or any of a dozen others. It is hard to imagine an NFL job where the coach's ego is stroked as much as in the NCAA.

Greed? I think you will find that top 32 NCAA coaches earn more than NFL coaches, when all sources of compensation are included. Note that you need to consider bonuses and guarantees as well as salayr, TV shows and so forth.

I can understand top NCAA coordinators or even position coaches moving to the NFL, but not head coaches from a major program."

Steve Spurrier and Butch Davis immediately both come to mind, were basically set for life but that wasn't good enough, they just had to go to the pros and both were miserable failures. Both went for ego and greed, both are worse off now than before they left the college ranks..............

LasVegasPatsFan · 12-02-2008, 09:07 PM

He couldn't even finish a complete season with the Jets. They canned him mid season. He took over a SB team here in NE and make them worse. He is where he belongs, in a very good program that recruits the best players around the country. No wonder they are winning. Every young kids wants to go to USC.

***Deus Irae*** · 12-02-2008, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KontradictioN

-If the third team has such an easier game then they win that and square off with the winner of the other two. So let's just say for arguments sake that Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, and (just throwing a name in there) Texas A&M are in the playoffs. The top two seeds, Oklahoma and Texas play each other and the last two seeds, Texas Tech and Texas A&M play. Texas Tech runs away with the game while Oklahoma exacts revenge and beats Texas. Then we get a rematch of Oklahoma and Texas Tech. I don't see how Texas Tech having an easier game is an advantage for them v.s. Oklahoma.

You'd see it if it were NFL teams, with the Giants playing the Patriots, the Colts playing the Lions, and the winners facing off the next week.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KontradictioN

-I guess it's just me but I would rather have the teams actually decide where they go other than parameters or computer systems. It would also make for more interesting games.

Again, the NFL also uses tiebreakers. And the games are no less interesting for it. In fact, we're already seeing people breaking down all the tiebreaking scenarios that could come into play for the Patriots. It does, in fact, increase the interest games not directly involving the fans' particular teams.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KontradictioN

-Because, in the end, the destination for the top two teams will be decided by the games played and not the computer. Logistical nightmare or not.

But, again, that's not what would happen. No matter what, you have to create your field.

***KontradictioN*** · 12-02-2008, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deus Irae

You'd see it if it were NFL teams, with the Giants playing the Patriots, the Colts playing the Lions, and the winners facing off the next week.

Again, the NFL also uses tiebreakers. And the games are no less interesting for it. In fact, we're already seeing people breaking down all the tiebreaking scenarios that could come into play for the Patriots. It does, in fact, increase the interest games not directly involving the fans' particular teams.

But, again, that's not what would happen. No matter what, you have to create your field.

Agree to disagree, Deus. We're just repeating ourselves now.

***Deus Irae*** · 12-02-2008, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KontradictioN

Agree to disagree, Deus. We're just repeating ourselves now.

Sounds like a fair plan....

TrueBeliever · 12-03-2008, 05:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by upstater1

How is that intrusive?

You can't have two teams out there in home jerseys. I hate when I see that in high school ball, but if you start allowing college teams to wear all darks, it's going to cause mayhem.

Can't remember where, but I read once that NFL teams all wore their colored jerseys until games started being shown on TV, and in black and white one team needed to wear white so you could tell them apart. Not sure if that's accurate though.