ACC Championship: Clemson vs. SMU

#301
#301
DaddyChad said:
Bama has had more inconsistent games where they’re just bad. On a good day of course they’re better than SMU but SMU is more consistent. Bama has some good wins but damn they have some ugly losses as well. I mean getting beat by OU by three TDs?
Click to expand...
The only way this sport isn’t a complete sham is if Bama doesn’t get in. If they do then it’s clear cut proof this whole thing is rigged.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbh and Nerwen Aldarion
#303
#303
Either is it the 12 best teams or it is the 12 teams with the best won / loss record regardless of who they played.
Either you let ALL 10 teams that play in the conference championship games of the 5 top conferences in or you place those that "lose" in the pool from which the 7 at large teams are selected.
Either you use the rankings and rank the teams based on criteria that factors in who you played, where you played them and what the score was or you only rank the relative strength of the conferences so you can choose the top 5 to get 10 of the 12 teams - then you have 2 at large teams.

I don't know what the committee is going to decide - I just know they made it clear earlier this week that SMU could fall below Bama if they lost. That was a clear statement that a team that lost was not guaranteed to maintain their playoff position.
 
#304
#304
volfan102455 said:
Either is it the 12 best teams or it is the 12 teams with the best won / loss record regardless of who they played.
Either you let ALL 10 teams that play in the conference championship games of the 5 top conferences in or you place those that "lose" in the pool from which the 7 at large teams are selected.
Either you use the rankings and rank the teams based on criteria that factors in who you played, where you played them and what the score was or you only rank the relative strength of the conferences so you can choose the top 5 to get 10 of the 12 teams - then you have 2 at large teams.

I don't know what the committee is going to decide - I just know they made it clear earlier this week that SMU could fall below Bama if they lost. That was a clear statement that a team that lost was not guaranteed to maintain their playoff position.
Click to expand...
 
#311
#311
adam.vol said:
Click to expand...


What’s stupid is saying that when it isn’t what was said or true. If Clemson had lost they were out. The ASU vs ISU game was only going to have one rep. It shouldn’t be a penalty for teams already in is what is at debate and shouldn’t be debatable for teams sitting at home championship weekend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TtownVFL
#313
#313
volfan102455 said:
For the Texas and SMU comparison - I think you also have to look at who they lost to.

- Texas lost to Georgia (11-2)
- SMU lost to Clemson (10-3) and BYU (10-2)
Click to expand...

All those teams are in except byu. They weren’t in before championship games and didn’t play in a championship game.
 
#314
#314
I will say the committee has been all over the place on how they ranked the teams, that is a given.

I think that is because they had 12 spots and thus thought, if I push some of the teams from the admitted weaker conferences up in the ranking because they have the better records, that in the end the better teams (based on schedule strength) would still eventually rise to the top. Thus letting a few teams in that will lead to lopsided games is okay as most of those games would occur in the first round. And it would be the quarterfinals where the big matchups would occur.

In the end that philosophy, along with the fact that the schedules within the B1G were not balanced and the schedules in the SEC were weighted against the traditionally stronger teams has created a controversy. They are actually lucky it is just one. Had UNLV beaten Boise State we would have had both the SEC and B1G's fourth team in the controversy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sami
#315
#315
adam.vol said:
Click to expand...


Prior to this year, teams that were "in the top 4" before the conference championships games were kicked out when they lost. Why should this year be any different?

Example 2022: OSU did not play in their conference championship game but was pushed to # 4 after USC lost in their championship game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: adam.vol and sami
#317
#317
volfan102455 said:
here is the deal - either strength of schedule matters or it doesn't. We can't complain about PSU, Texas, etc. being higher when they haven't played anyone and then complain if the committee decides to select a team that has a better resume because we don't like the team.

If it was between us and SMU, everyone would be making the argument that SMU had not beaten a ranked team.

SMU beat a three-loss team that had lost to Georgia and South Carolina. Alabama beat both Georgia and South Carolina. Like it or not they are the "better team" based on their resume.
Click to expand...

This nails it. Everyone here is letting their Bama hatred dictate how they feel about this, but as you said if it was us and SMU, we would be screaming about the creampuff schedule that SMU played.

The "committee" is playing a dangerous game if they do indeed kick out a team that was in the playoff and actually ranked higher before losing a CCG. I think Alabama is the better team, but the precedent they set will create a situation where teams won't want to play in CCG's if there's a risk of dropping out of the playoff field with a loss.

The bottom line is that the Big 10 has four teams in, and Sankey damn well wants four teams as well, and Alabama is a team that draws ratings and will create a more attractive matchup at Notre Dame, if it falls that way. This is a business first and foremost, and there has been an enormous investment in this playoff venture. The "committee" will find a way to rationalize it, and I would be stunned if they left Bama out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Delmar, IUGradVol and volfan102455
#318
#318
volfan102455 said:
Either is it the 12 best teams or it is the 12 teams with the best won / loss record regardless of who they played.
Either you let ALL 10 teams that play in the conference championship games of the 5 top conferences in or you place those that "lose" in the pool from which the 7 at large teams are selected.
Either you use the rankings and rank the teams based on criteria that factors in who you played, where you played them and what the score was or you only rank the relative strength of the conferences so you can choose the top 5 to get 10 of the 12 teams - then you have 2 at large teams.

I don't know what the committee is going to decide - I just know they made it clear earlier this week that SMU could fall below Bama if they lost. That was a clear statement that a team that lost was not guaranteed to maintain their playoff position.
Click to expand...

There will be a firestorm if SMU gets left out, but is it really much different than last year with Florida State? And they were a conference champion and unbeaten!

In 2026 we will see some changes, but they won't make the changes that everyone would get behind - the elimination of auto bids and byes, and some kind of computer formula in place of a "committee". Instead, they'll guarantee the conferences a certain amount of auto bids so they won't have to make a decision like this one, as the SEC would automatically get that last spot.

The expanded playoff is not about identifying the best 12 teams and a champion, it is a huge business enterprise that happens to have college football games as the product. There will be no changes made that might lessen the commercial appeal of the product to the casual fan, who is always the target.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfan102455
#319
#319
Orange931 said:
Because it’s a different format now, it’s 12 teams.
Click to expand...

No difference at all - all that has changed is where the cut-off point is. It is now in the 10-12 spot depending upon how many conference champs are outside of the top 12.

What if SMU had been ranked 11th? The 12th spot was always going to be taken by the Big 12 champion. Clemson beating them would imply they get a spot - so SMU at 11 would have to move out to give Clemson a spot.

What if SMU has been ranked 12th and there were no other ACC teams in the top 12 and the Big 12 champ was already in the top 12. They are out by losing because Clemson takes their spot.

You can't promise the loser that they are in just because they were in the top 12 when the last poll was taken just like you can't promise those that don't play that they will remain in the top 12.
 
#320
#320
volfan102455 said:
No difference at all - all that has changed is where the cut-off point is. It is now in the 10-12 spot depending upon how many conference champs are outside of the top 12.

What if SMU had been ranked 11th? The 12th spot was always going to be taken by the Big 12 champion. Clemson beating them would imply they get a spot - so SMU at 11 would have to move out to give Clemson a spot.

What if SMU has been ranked 12th and there were no other ACC teams in the top 12 and the Big 12 champ was already in the top 12. They are out by losing because Clemson takes their spot.

You can't promise the loser that they are in just because they were in the top 12 when the last poll was taken just like you can't promise those that don't play that they will remain in the top 12.
Click to expand...
But they weren’t ranked 11th or 12th, they were at the top of their conference.
 
#321
#321
sami said:
There will be a firestorm if SMU gets left out, but is it really much different than last year with Florida State? And they were a conference champion and unbeaten!

In 2026 we will see some changes, but they won't make the changes that everyone would get behind - the elimination of auto bids and byes, and some kind of computer formula in place of a "committee". Instead, they'll guarantee the conferences a certain amount of auto bids so they won't have to make a decision like this one, as the SEC would automatically get that last spot.

The expanded playoff is not about identifying the best 12 teams and a champion, it is a huge business enterprise that happens to have college football games as the product. There will be no changes made that might lessen the commercial appeal of the product to the casual fan, who is always the target.
Click to expand...

Agree - the decisioning process is no different than it was when there were 4 teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sami
#322
#322
Orange931 said:
But they weren’t ranked 11th or 12th, they were at the top of their conference.
Click to expand...

They lost their conference championship game. During the regular season they only played 2 of the top 6 teams in their conference.

And the situation was to point out that you can't guarantee a spot to every team in the top 12 so just because they are at 8 or 9 or whatever, they should not get special treatment that you can't give to every team in the top 12.
 
#323
#323
volfan102455 said:
They lost their conference championship game. During the regular season they only played 2 of the top 6 teams in their conference.

And the situation was to point out that you can't guarantee a spot to anyone in the top 12 so just because they are at 8 or 9 or whatever, they should not get special treatment that you can't give to every team in the top 12.
Click to expand...
They lost 2 games, both by a fg to ranked teams and one of those happened in their conference championship tonight.
 
Last edited:
#325
#325
sami said:
This nails it. Everyone here is letting their Bama hatred dictate how they feel about this, but as you said if it was us and SMU, we would be screaming about the creampuff schedule that SMU played.

The "committee" is playing a dangerous game if they do indeed kick out a team that was in the playoff and actually ranked higher before losing a CCG. I think Alabama is the better team, but the precedent they set will create a situation where teams won't want to play in CCG's if there's a risk of dropping out of the playoff field with a loss.

The bottom line is that the Big 10 has four teams in, and Sankey damn well wants four teams as well, and Alabama is a team that draws ratings and will create a more attractive matchup at Notre Dame, if it falls that way. This is a business first and foremost, and there has been an enormous investment in this playoff venture. The "committee" will find a way to rationalize it, and I would be stunned if they left Bama out.
Click to expand...

Wins and losses matter. This isn’t about money. Home teams will sellout regardless of who plays. People will watch regardless of who plays.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top