|
Post by tigercpa on Dec 9, 2019 15:07:59 GMT
Every team holding a legitimate claim as the #1 team in the nation has a chance to prove it.
College football’s postseason is rather unique. The bowls, steeped in history, offer an opportunity for dozens of teams to end with a postseason victory. While in many ways, it’s the best postseason in all of sports. Until recently, getting to the #1 team has been controversial.
2014: 4 teams was the correct number.
2015: 4 teams was too many. Only 2 were necessary Bama and Clemson
2016: Again 2 was the right number. Bama and Clemson
2017: There were three teams (Clemson, Oklahoma, and Georgia) with a legitimate claims to #1 so the four-team field was necessary, but it allowed a less deserving team (based on Committee preferences - to sneak into the #4 spot)
2018: A picture perfect example of why the four team playoff is a great fit for college football. There were three undefeated teams that all had a legitimate claim for #1. They had to play it out. Oklahoma was a worthy #4 seed.
2019: For the second year in row, there are three undefeated P5 Champs. LEaving any one of the three out would be a travesty. Oklahoma, the only other conference champion with fewer than two losses earned the final spot. There’s really no controversy this year.
We’re 6/6 in not leaving any team holding a legitimate claim to #1 out of the playoff. We’ve never had all five P5 champs go undefeated, or even 4 plus ND.
The FCS playoff model, of course, uses home sites throughout but there are no "reward" systems in place other than the chance to keep playing for a title. And that's fine too. Mack Brown said he likes the aspect of the "rewards" of the bowl system - players and failies get to go to venues otherwise not traveled to, among others.
The 8-screamers and 16-screamers are gonna scream.
|
|
|
Post by doc on Dec 9, 2019 15:25:12 GMT
Any team that's in has no room to bitch about anything - you're in, now go win -simple as that. I actually liked Coach O's comments the best, we don't care what were rated or who we play, we're ready and we'll be there. There's 126 teams that wish they were in the final fours' position - it's all in their hands. Don't screw it up worrying about things you couldn't control. Get focused, get ready healthy, get ready and give it your best shot. May the best team win!
(BTW - I don't think ND had any business making it last year but they were undefeated - couldn't keep them out. I don't think they were one of the top 4 but Clemson pretty much dominated so it didn't matter anyway.)
|
|
|
Post by EvilVodka on Dec 9, 2019 17:37:19 GMT
2014 has an asterisk
Not in regards to the Buckeye championship, but to the field
TCU should have been in somehow...if that means leaving Oregon out, so be it.
Should have been:
Alabama vs. TCU Florida State vs. Ohio State
It was the committee's first year, and kind of a weird situation with the Big XII champ situation, but if Alabama 2017 was good enough to get in without winning their conference, so should TCU 2014
|
|
|
Post by ajbuckeye on Dec 9, 2019 18:01:08 GMT
Disagree whole heartedly 2014 TCU and Baylor sat on the outside with one loss. TCU drops 3 spots after a 50 point blowout win 2015 You claim only 2 were needed and 1 was one loss BAMA. So a 1 loss BAMA was more deserving than the other 4 1 loss teams and 2 were conference champ. 2016 You say that 2 was the right number but they selected 4 so seems like they got it wrong to me. 2017 They got it right by putting in a team that could not even qualify for the Championship game??? 2018 And why was 1 loss team from a better conference less deserving than a 1 loss team from a weaker conference 2019 This is the only year that you can claim that they got the correct 4 teams simply because even the committee could not blow this one if they tried. When it comes to seeding the bias sticks out pretty clear.
|
|
|
Post by doc on Dec 9, 2019 18:42:34 GMT
2014 has an asterisk Not in regards to the Buckeye championship, but to the field TCU should have been in somehow...if that means leaving Oregon out, so be it. Should have been: Alabama vs. TCU Florida State vs. Ohio State It was the committee's first year, and kind of a weird situation with the Big XII champ situation, but if Alabama 2017 was good enough to get in without winning their conference, so should TCU 2014 Actually I think the general consensus was that Florida State was the weakest team but since they were on a 28 game winning streak and had won the previous year, they couldn't be left out. They were ranked below 2 teams with a loss in the playoff ratings. And Oregon beat the crap out of them in the Rose Bowl - wasn't even close - but I can look at the logos in your title box and figure out why you think a team that lost by 29 points was more deserving.
And BTW, TCU WAS co-champs with Baylor which was the bigger sticking point - Baylor had beat them but had an abysmal OOC schedule.
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Dec 10, 2019 0:01:24 GMT
NAH, NEVER ENOUGH WHEN 6 CONFERENCE CHAMPS ARE DENIED AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMPETE FOR AN FBS TITLE.
|
|
|
Post by EvilVodka on Dec 10, 2019 0:38:19 GMT
2014 has an asterisk Not in regards to the Buckeye championship, but to the field TCU should have been in somehow...if that means leaving Oregon out, so be it. Should have been: Alabama vs. TCU Florida State vs. Ohio State It was the committee's first year, and kind of a weird situation with the Big XII champ situation, but if Alabama 2017 was good enough to get in without winning their conference, so should TCU 2014 Actually I think the general consensus was that Florida State was the weakest team but since they were on a 28 game winning streak and had won the previous year, they couldn't be left out. They were ranked below 2 teams with a loss in the playoff ratings. And Oregon beat the crap out of them in the Rose Bowl - wasn't even close - but I can look at the logos in your title box and figure out why you think a team that lost by 29 points was more deserving.
And BTW, TCU WAS co-champs with Baylor which was the bigger sticking point - Baylor had beat them but had an abysmal OOC schedule.
No, I definitely think FSU was the weakest team, but we didn't know that going in, and no one is about to leave out an undefeated defending national champ....so you have to include them in Ohio State won the whole thing, so you can't push them out Alabama was #1 that leaves pushing Oregon out and TCU in it was the first year of the committee and they flubbed it, but there hasn't been a situation that tricky since then
|
|
|
Post by ajbuckeye on Dec 10, 2019 1:25:05 GMT
NAH, NEVER ENOUGH WHEN 6 CONFERENCE CHAMPS ARE DENIED AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMPETE FOR AN FBS TITLE. UCF has a 2017 Banner hanging in their stadium and to me is as legitimate as any other FBS championship banners.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Dec 10, 2019 11:09:57 GMT
2014 has an asterisk Not in regards to the Buckeye championship, but to the field TCU should have been in somehow...if that means leaving Oregon out, so be it. Should have been: Alabama vs. TCU Florida State vs. Ohio State It was the committee's first year, and kind of a weird situation with the Big XII champ situation, but if Alabama 2017 was good enough to get in without winning their conference, so should TCU 2014 Actually I think the general consensus was that Florida State was the weakest team but since they were on a 28 game winning streak and had won the previous year, they couldn't be left out. They were ranked below 2 teams with a loss in the playoff ratings. And Oregon beat the crap out of them in the Rose Bowl - wasn't even close - but I can look at the logos in your title box and figure out why you think a team that lost by 29 points was more deserving.
And BTW, TCU WAS co-champs with Baylor which was the bigger sticking point - Baylor had beat them but had an abysmal OOC schedule.
True. Baylor won the Big 12 by virtue of an October win over TCU, but turned around and lost by two touchdowns at unranked West Virginia the next weekend. TCU and Kansas State were their only ranked wins and their non-conference schedule was downright shameful: SMU, Northwestern State, at Buffalo. TCU is one of the more deserving teams to ever be left out of the playoff, however they had no legitimate claim to the #1 spot. Four teams legitimately had a fair claims and they got to battle it out. Ohio State proved to be the top team when they shocked Alabama and then handled Oregon.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Dec 10, 2019 11:58:42 GMT
Disagree whole heartedly 2014 TCU and Baylor sat on the outside with one loss. TCU drops 3 spots after a 50 point blowout win 2015 You claim only 2 were needed and 1 was one loss BAMA. So a 1 loss BAMA was more deserving than the other 4 1 loss teams and 2 were conference champ. 2016 You say that 2 was the right number but they selected 4 so seems like they got it wrong to me. 2017 They got it right by putting in a team that could not even qualify for the Championship game??? 2018 And why was 1 loss team from a better conference less deserving than a 1 loss team from a weaker conference 2019 This is the only year that you can claim that they got the correct 4 teams simply because even the committee could not blow this one if they tried. When it comes to seeding the bias sticks out pretty clear. 2014 - TCU probably one of the mpst deserving teams to be left out, but lost to Baylor in October. Neither Baylor nor TCU had a legitimate claim on #1. 2015 - 4 teams was superfluous. 2 teams all that were really needed. Iowa, the next team out, started 12-0, but had tons of doubters. The doubters were proven right when Michigan State won the conference and took the playoff spot. Iowa went on to lose to Rose Bowl 45-16 Stanford. They had no business in the playoff. 2016 -= 2 was the right number. Penn State was first team out at 12-2. Ohio State became the first team to make the playoff without winning their conference, as they were upset by intra-division rival Penn State, but finished with a better overall record. Regardless of how you felt about that decision, the top 2 teams were all that really needed to play. Clemson routed Ohio State 31-0. Alabama beat Washington 24-7 despite their offense looking out of sorts. Lane Kiffin left for his new role at FAU before the championship game. Alabama scored 31 in the championship, but fell to Clemson 35-31. 2017 - OSU first team out at 11-2. Wisconsin’s loss to Ohio State in the B1G Championship Game knocked them out of the playoff and left college football with only three one-loss conference champs. The well-rested Crimson Tide took the #4 seed and beat Clemson and then played and beat Georgia. 2018 - UGA forst team out. 2018-19 was the picture perfect example of why the four team playoff is a great fit for college football. There were three undefeated teams that all had a legitimate claim for #1. They had to play it out. Oklahoma was a worthy 1-loss conference champ that got included in order to fill-out the playoff bracket. In end, two undefeated teams played and college football got its first 15-0 team in the modern era. 2019 = UGA first team out. For the second year in row, there are three undefeated P5 Champs. Thank goodness for the four-team playoff, because leaving any one of the three out would be a travesty. Oklahoma, the only other conference champion with fewer than two losses earned the final spot. There’s really no controversy about any team being left out and in fact, Oklahoma is a double-digit underdog to the undefeated LSU Tigers. Georgia looked bad while being blown out by LSU in the SEC championship.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Dec 10, 2019 12:03:41 GMT
I just haven’t heard a compelling argument that CFP X 2 will be a second significant step up. It might result in a different result maybe 5% of the time.
If feel that the support tends to be more about "giving a chance" to other teams - a collegiate version of the little league "participation trophy" - there is no MVP - we're all MVPs nonsense.
Even if results don’t change - "hey, Memphis lost by 32 to LSU, but they got to play in a playoff"
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Dec 10, 2019 12:07:38 GMT
NAH, NEVER ENOUGH WHEN 6 CONFERENCE CHAMPS ARE DENIED AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMPETE FOR AN FBS TITLE. UCF has a 2017 Banner hanging in their stadium and to me is as legitimate as any other FBS championship banners. I can preface with P5 if that quells your concern. I pay no mind to UCF. They would’ve been destroyed by Clemson or Alabama. They absolutely didn’t have a claim to #1, but if you’d rather preface the conversation with P5, I agree I’m fine with that too, because G5 might as well make their own division. Expand to 6 and #7 will cry. Expand to 8 and #9 will cry. Expand to 64 and South Carolina will cry. No serious, thinking football fans take their claimed championship seriously.
|
|
|
Post by stumpystew on Dec 10, 2019 15:02:47 GMT
4 teams is NEVER enough. You have Appalachian sitting there are 12-1, along with Memphis and Boise St, and they are not even in the conversation. Hell, they were excluded from the conversation before the first coin was flipped. Anything short of 16 is not enough. You have all 10 conference champions plus6 at large, seeded, and start play this weekend at the higher seeds stadium. Then do the same thing the next Saturday on campus, a week of for the holiday, then the semis either on New years or Saturday, at a bowl or(my preference) on campus, followed by a championship game at a neutral site. That is how it should be done.
Now I know I will get responses like these teams don't play anybody, ruins the regular season, the G5 ain't deserving, makes the season too long, sets the kids up for injury, the G5 will never win, and other excuses, but it does not seem to hurt the other divisions or EVERY state high school association. And if the G5 does not get a chance, we will never know. The non power conferences seem to do okay in other sports.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Dec 10, 2019 16:29:44 GMT
4 teams is NEVER enough. You have Appalachian sitting there are 12-1, along with Memphis and Boise St, and they are not even in the conversation. Hell, they were excluded from the conversation before the first coin was flipped. Anything short of 16 is not enough. You have all 10 conference champions plus6 at large, seeded, and start play this weekend at the higher seeds stadium. Then do the same thing the next Saturday on campus, a week of for the holiday, then the semis either on New years or Saturday, at a bowl or(my preference) on campus, followed by a championship game at a neutral site. That is how it should be done. Now I know I will get responses like these teams don't play anybody, ruins the regular season, the G5 ain't deserving, makes the season too long, sets the kids up for injury, the G5 will never win, and other excuses, but it does not seem to hurt the other divisions or EVERY state high school association. And if the G5 does not get a chance, we will never know. The non power conferences seem to do okay in other sports. NO system should be built for an outlier. This is precisely why airplane seats are not built for people who weigh 450lbs. So, why MUST it be done that way?
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Dec 10, 2019 16:43:51 GMT
4 teams is NEVER enough. You have Appalachian sitting there are 12-1, along with Memphis and Boise St, and they are not even in the conversation. Hell, they were excluded from the conversation before the first coin was flipped. Anything short of 16 is not enough. You have all 10 conference champions plus6 at large, seeded, and start play this weekend at the higher seeds stadium. Then do the same thing the next Saturday on campus, a week of for the holiday, then the semis either on New years or Saturday, at a bowl or(my preference) on campus, followed by a championship game at a neutral site. That is how it should be done. Now I know I will get responses like these teams don't play anybody, ruins the regular season, the G5 ain't deserving, makes the season too long, sets the kids up for injury, the G5 will never win, and other excuses, but it does not seem to hurt the other divisions or EVERY state high school association. And if the G5 does not get a chance, we will never know. The non power conferences seem to do okay in other sports. WHY those specific teams from G5 tend to be as good or even at times better than other teams in P5 has a lot has to do with academics and the opportunity to bring in a generally lower level group of academic proficiency – across the board – but with equitable athletic talent than, say, a Wake Forest or Duke or even a NC State. This says nothing about specific people, rather across the board proficiency. This issue is even more pronounced in basketball. Significantly so – which is why the mid-major phenomenon is so pronounced. Minimal chance, but guys get an instant hard-on when they get close to pulling the upset. If Memphis were to have to live up to ACC restrictions for 10-20 years, I’d dare say they’d find it much harder to be as successful as they currently are. If you want to be in the mix, you have to be a part of the mix, ALL of the mix. Starting with being in the P5 and following the same rules. That’s all.
|
|