December 07, 2017

SportsFilter: The Thursday Huddle:

A place to discuss the sports stories that aren't making news, share links that aren't quite front-page material, and diagram plays on your hand. Remember to count to five Mississippi before commenting in anger.

posted by huddle to general at 06:00 AM - 10 comments

If college football goes to an expanded playoff system, they can make life simple and just pair teams up on a thematic basis.

- Winner of the Armed Forces Bowl plays winner of the Military Bowl
- Winner of the Bahamas Bowl plays winner of the Hawaii Bowl
- Winner of the Orange Bowl plays winner of the Citrus Bowl
- Winner of the Outback Bowl plays winner of the Camping World Bowl
- Winner of the New Mexico Bowl plays winner of the Arizona Bowl
- Winner of the Fiesta Bowl plays winner of the Celebration Bowl
- Winner of the Alamo Bowl plays winner of the Texas Bowl
- Winner of the Liberty Bowl plays winner of the Independence Bowl
- Winner of the Cheribundi Tart Cherry Bowl plays winner of the Cure Bowl
- Winner of the Music City Bowl plays winner of the New Orleans Bowl
- Winner of the Chick-Fil-A Bowl plays winner of the Foster Farms Bowl
- Winner of the Bad Boy Mowers Bowl plays winner of the Quick Lane Bowl
- Winner of the Taxslayer Bowl plays winner of the Dollar General Bowl
- Winner of the Las Vegas Bowl plays winner of the Cactus Bowl
- Winner of the Cotton Bowl plays winner of the Belk Bowl
- Winner of the Camellia Bowl plays winner of the Rose Bowl
- Winner of the Birmingham Bowl plays Alabama

posted by beaverboard at 12:16 PM on December 07

It might be more fitting for the Cotton Bowl winner to play the winner of the Pinstripe Bowl. But then, whatever suits you...

posted by Howard_T at 01:12 PM on December 07

LOL. That list is genius.

In other news ...

In a season-long pick 'em, it doesn't take many missed weeks to be in a hole too deep to climb out of.

This makes me wonder how a head-to-head format might play. You'd have one opponent each week and win or lose the week based on outperforming them. If you missed a week you'd take a loss, but that would be recoverable.

There could potentially be playoffs and a side contest for best overall record (the contest we do now). Any thoughts?

posted by rcade at 04:53 PM on December 07

I think it's an interesting thought. My first instinct is that each person would have to make their picks without seeing the other's. Otherwise it'd be far too easy to just replicate someone else's picks and change one and have that be the end of it (which would be boring and lame as hell).

posted by Ufez Jones at 04:55 PM on December 07

Another option would be to throw out each participant's lowest scoring week, which would basically give each participant a mulligan on a missed week.

posted by holden at 09:54 AM on December 08

I like the pick 'em the way that it is (vs. a head-to-head format), but I think holden's idea of deleting the lowest-scoring week is worth consideration.

posted by bender at 10:14 AM on December 08

idea of deleting the lowest-scoring week is worth consideration

In essence that gives each of us a "by week". It makes sense, which in the world of politics, big league sports, and bureaucracies in general means it would never happen. Sports Filter is none of those things. I'm all for it.

posted by Howard_T at 10:50 AM on December 08

The drop-low-week provision isn't a bad idea.

What if the same contest was run two ways with two winners? You make your picks and can win the full season and/or the head to head.

posted by rcade at 11:38 AM on December 08

Good luck finding multiple winners around here.

posted by yerfatma at 01:08 PM on December 08

I bet I could pull off the coveted double Costanza.

I'm all for the "drop the low week" idea.

posted by tahoemoj at 02:28 PM on December 08

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.