So the committee is officially a joke

[TDawg]

Tell me how Alabama did.

Gosh, I wish you were kidding but tell me what world you live in where Bama would have lost to an unranked Iowa team by 31 points? I think the committee also remembers pushing OSUck into the playoff last year just to see them get shutout. This year's team isn't as good as that one was.

Tired of hearing about Bama's resume versus OSUck's resume too. You can't compare OSU getting boat-raced by Iowa to Bama playing a tough game losing by 11 to then top 4 AU in Auburn in the biggest rivalry game they have. Then the whole damn world outside of Wisconsin talks about how weak Wisconsin's schedule is and how they are vastly overrated despite being undefeated but they go down to the last drive with a chance to beat OSUck.

If the goal is to put in the best four teams for the playoffs, OSUck is not it and not a chance they would beat Bama, even with Bama having all the injuries.

 

[cherokeechief]

I just want the best teams to play. I personally think OSU isnt on the same level as the 4 playoff teams. Hell i think So Cal is better

Enjoy the shared revenue from the two teams that got into the playoff.

We need Ohtani on the Yanks in the worst way, Sin City.

 

[05_never_again]

UCF is not eligible for the playoff.

You mean in practice, or by the letter of the law?

A Group of 5 team has a better chance of making the playoff than they did getting into the BCSNCG. In a year where their conference is relatively strong, they'd have to go undefeated (run the table in their conference schedule and play/win at least one game against a P5 team).

For example, if Houston went undefeated last year, they would have and should have gotten serious consideration for a spot. Their conference schedule, while not stout, was not downright atrocious either and they had victories over Oklahoma and Louisville.

 

[n_huffhines]

There ought to be a rule that each team should win their respective conference.

Except sometimes we have two **** conference winners. That rule would be a bad idea.

 

[n_huffhines]

The fact of the matter is you can't let Auburn in with 3 losses and tOSU was a 1-loss team that got in over the Big 10 champ last season. It would be crazy to give the nod to tOSU considering their big loss to Iowa, losing convincingly at home to OU, and with the precedent being 2-losses = no playoff.

 

[bamawriter]

You mean in practice, or by the letter of the law?

In practice. It's never going to happen.

There is no specific policy prohibiting a G5 team from getting in, and they get paid pretty well to sit quietly. Thus, they can't sue the Power 5. But they can't get in and they know it.

 

[BUBear]

Tell me how Alabama did.

Bama's best win could arguably be Fresno State. So who does the committee bump into their next to final vote...thus bumping Bama?

 

[05_never_again]

In practice. It's never going to happen.

There is no specific policy prohibiting a G5 team from getting in, and they get paid pretty well to sit quietly. Thus, they can't sue the Power 5. But they can't get in and they know it.

They'd have a lot of people raising hell on their behalf though if they ever did have a team go undefeated with multiple quality OOC victories. Before last year started there were some people (including myself) that thought Houston had a shot to do that. It ended up being Houston's conference schedule, oddly enough, that kept them way outside the discussion though.

 

[bamawriter]

They'd have a lot of people raising hell on their behalf though if they ever did have a team go undefeated with multiple quality OOC victories.

I think you'd have to have a G5 team go unbeaten, with some solid OOC wins, plus there would have to be such chaos that several playoff contenders have 2+ losses.

 

[05_never_again]

I think you'd have to have a G5 team go unbeaten, with some solid OOC wins, plus there would have to be such chaos that several playoff contenders have 2+ losses.

Yeah. I mean, it's unlikely, but possible. Far more likely than a G5 team getting in the BCSNCG.

UCF didn't really come all that close to meeting that standard this year, even if they beat Georgia Tech in that game that got cancelled.

 

[OrangeSticks]

I don’t know if they got it right or not, but here’s my line of thinking. I’ll list all the teams I’ve seen discussed in this thread. Rank the teams in order of who you would want to face the least in a playoff game. #1 is the team you absolutely do not want to play. If I do that honestly, I come up with the same 4 the committee picked.

OSU, USC, Wisconsin, Georgia, Clemson, Oklahoma, Alabama, Auburn, UCF, TCU, Miami

 

[05_never_again]

I don’t know if they got it right or not, but here’s my line of thinking. I’ll list all the teams I’ve seen discussed in this thread. Rank the teams in order of who you would want to face the least in a playoff game. #1 is the team you absolutely do not want to play. If I do that honestly, I come up with the same 4 the committee picked.

OSU, USC, Wisconsin, Georgia, Clemson, Oklahoma, Alabama, Auburn, UCF, TCU, Miami

Depends on which team you are.

If I'm UCF, for example, I really don't want to play Oklahoma. I'd feel better playing Wisconsin or TCU.

 

[OrangeSticks]

Depends on which team you are.

If I'm UCF, for example, I really don't want to play Oklahoma. I'd feel better playing Wisconsin or TCU.

Rank all the remaining teams from #1) I really don't want to play to #10) this is definitely the team I want to face. What’s the top 4?

 

[thehill98]

I read an interesting article about how to do an 8 game playoff, and getting rid of conference championship games. If it is expanded to 8 at some point I think I like that way. Essentially, all 5 conference winners get in with 3 at large. Every conference plays 9 conference games. Then the first round of the playoffs would be the weekend of the usual conference championships. They could be either played at the schools stadiums, or neutral sites.

This expands the playoffs without adding another game and without giving a bye week. Also if by chance a conference champion couldn’t be outright decided because they didn’t play each other, then they could still both get in with the at large spot. This scenario would also get rid of divisions in conferences, which would probably aid in not having two unbeaten conference champs, although still possible.

 

[TUSKtimes]

You finished third in the conference.

And you finished dead last, what's your point?

 

[TUSKtimes]

One loss shouldn't keep you out of the playoffs. If you win your conference championship. You didn't do that... did you?

You were given a gift. And you did not deserve it. Not even close. I used to respect Alabama. Not any more. **** them.

This is wrong.

The playoffs are now in its 4th year. 2 of those years the committee has selected a power 5 team that did not win their conference. Kinda reminds me of the BCS.

The committee has said on numerous occasions from the beginning that conference championships would matter, but not at the expense of choosing the 4 BEST teams.

Now, what do you not get after 4 years?

 

[JoAllan]

I disagree. There should just be a 8 team playoff.

I have not been a supporter of the playoff going to 8; however if they did it in a way which a non power 5 school would get in........I would be all for that.

All power 5 conference winners in = 5
2 at large schools in = 7
highest ranked non power 5 school in (if ranked say in the top 10-15) = 8

this year it would be
1. Clemson
2. Oklahoma
3. Georgia
5. Ohio ST
7. USC
4. Bama
6. Wisc
8. UCF

Auburn 3 losses and lost champ would not deserve in
P-ST 2 loses not in champ...would not deserve
Miami 2 losses lost champ would not deserve
Wash 2 loss not in champ.....would not deserve

I know it will never happen.......at least like this, but the best way to get those who deserve to be in....in, while letting a non power 5 get the opportunity.


and the match up's would be great too

 

[JoAllan]

I don’t know if they got it right or not, but here’s my line of thinking. I’ll list all the teams I’ve seen discussed in this thread. Rank the teams in order of who you would want to face the least in a playoff game. #1 is the team you absolutely do not want to play. If I do that honestly, I come up with the same 4 the committee picked.

OSU, USC, Wisconsin, Georgia, Clemson, Oklahoma, Alabama, Auburn, UCF, TCU, Miami

Yep

with this I would put it

OK/Clem (take your pick)
Georgia
Bama
USC
UCF
Auburn/OSU (take your pick)
Wisc
TCU
Miami

Not saying UCF is better than Auburn or OSU.....but would rather face those 2 than UCF.....you know they can score, and you really don't know how good they are.

 

[JoAllan]

Depends on which team you are.

If I'm UCF, for example, I really don't want to play Oklahoma. I'd feel better playing Wisconsin or TCU.

I think all teams would rather play TCU, Miami or prob Wisc

 

[Otis07]

your logic puts OHIO STATE in......two loss team

 

[05_never_again]

Rank all the remaining teams from #1) I really don't want to play to #10) this is definitely the team I want to face. What’s the top 4?

Again, it depends on which team you are.

Oklahoma would have UCF in their top 4. Clemson or another team with a good defense would not.

 

[OrangeSticks]

Again, it depends on which team you are.

Oklahoma would have UCF in their top 4. Clemson or another team with a good defense would not.

But if Oklahoma is in, then there are only 3 spots remaining. You think if given the choice, Oklahoma would prefer to play any of Clemson/UGA/Alabama ahead of UCF?

 

[05_never_again]

But if Oklahoma is in, then there are only 3 spots remaining. You think if given the choice, Oklahoma would prefer to play any of Clemson/UGA/Alabama ahead of UCF?

I think they might prefer to play Alabama or Ohio State over UCF, yes. UCF might score 50 on their defense. Of course, they are liable to score 70 on UCF. But is that really a scenario you like?

Oklahoma is capable of scoring 40 on Alabama, and they'd likely hold Alabama under what they'd give up to UCF. To be a top tier team, Oklahoma's D is not very good at all.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

And you finished dead last, what's your point?

That Bama's schedule was weak. You beat UT. Big whoop. So did everybody else. Not a resume builder chump.

The playoffs are now in its 4th year. 2 of those years the committee has selected a power 5 team that did not win their conference. Kinda reminds me of the BCS.

The committee has said on numerous occasions from the beginning that conference championships would matter, but not at the expense of choosing the 4 BEST teams.

Now, what do you not get after 4 years?

LOL.. It is EXACTLY like the BCS. American Idol.

It still sucks.

And apparently conference championships DON'T matter.

Enjoy your illegitimate trophy.

 

[05_never_again]

That Bama's schedule was weak. You beat UT. Big whoop. So did everybody else. Not a resume builder chump.


LOL.. It is EXACTLY like the BCS. American Idol.

It still sucks.

And apparently conference championships DON'T matter.

Enjoy your illegitimate trophy.

They didn't always matter under the BCS/Bowl Alliance/Bowl Coalition either.

Not sure how a playoff is exactly like the BCS. If this was exactly like the BCS, then Clemson and Oklahoma would simply play each other for the national championship, and it would have been decided that way by computers.

Anybody who thought that the playoff would remove or alleviate controversy is kidding themselves. The playoff is better than the BCS, which was better than the systems in place before it (Bowl Alliance/Bowl Coalition), which were better than the system (aka, no system at all) in place before that. Expansion to an 8-team playoff will not eliminate or substantially reduce controversy either. NCAA basketball has a 68-team playoff with routine controversies about snubbed teams and teams being mis-seeded.

FBS could have a playoff system like FCS, but they'll never go for it because a regular season game plus the conference title games (which you think now have diminished importance) would have to be eliminated.