Are super region boundaries sacrosanct? Couldn't a 2 loss team that would miss the playoffs because their region has seven teams with 1 or fewer losses, replace a 4 loss team from another region?
As much as we talk about silos and weak vs strong super regions, I'm wondering why wins and losses are not more important than super region boundaries. I don't mind earned access (even the cruel top 10 version) but what I believe is worst, is a team from a weak region getting in the playoffs with 4 losses while a 2 loss team, that has a realistic shot at winning the NC, has to sit it out.
This coming from a supporter of a team in one of the weaker conferences.
As much as we talk about silos and weak vs strong super regions, I'm wondering why wins and losses are not more important than super region boundaries. I don't mind earned access (even the cruel top 10 version) but what I believe is worst, is a team from a weak region getting in the playoffs with 4 losses while a 2 loss team, that has a realistic shot at winning the NC, has to sit it out.
This coming from a supporter of a team in one of the weaker conferences.
Comment