adselder09
Well-known member
I actually agree if I'm ranking the conferences. Though the Big XII is closer to the ACC and Pac 12, but still leading those three. The B1G is in the middle of those three and the SEC.
Bowl Season
- Thread starter Michael Bluth
- Start date
adselder09
Well-known member
You'd have likely ended up with the same matchup for the National Championship. They would not have matched up UGA and Bama - out of the other teams that played in NY6 Bowls who would have beaten Bama or Clemson to take their spot?
Stirred not Shaken
Well-known member
Maybe, maybe not. That is pure speculation on your part. I imagine you thought UGA was going to beat Texas and Bammy would beat Clemson. Unless these teams play each other that is all it is pure speculation. Syracuse almost beat Clemson ( does Clemson still make the play offs if that happened ) and in 2015 if Michigan does not screw up a punt vs Michigan State, OSU would have been in the CFP that year ( I know you're going to say OSU should have beat Sparty that year but Clemson is the 1st team to go undefeated in the current system), you can call it sour grapes I call it the facts. The play off format needs to be changed to have a more "true" champion.
I'm with you. tsun screwed us again this year by not beating ND. Had they done it, OSU would've been in. Oh well. Go Bucks!
ronnie mund
Well-known member
I think not getting annihilated to a mediocre Purdue team would have helped also.
If we expand the playoff it will hurt interest bc there will be less b1tching. 
I think the best system is play all of the bowl games, get rid of conference tie ins, have the new years bowls be used as a defacto first round of the playoffs. Let Vegas decide who plays who. Once bowls are done let Vegas decide who either plays for the championship or 4 team playoff. Removing conference tie ins will be key
I think the best system is play all of the bowl games, get rid of conference tie ins, have the new years bowls be used as a defacto first round of the playoffs. Let Vegas decide who plays who. Once bowls are done let Vegas decide who either plays for the championship or 4 team playoff. Removing conference tie ins will be key
bob99
Well-known member
if we expand the playoff it will hurt interest bc there will be less b1tching.
i think the best system is play all of the bowl games, get rid of conference tie ins, have the new years bowls be used as a defacto first round of the playoffs. Let vegas decide who plays who. Once bowls are done let vegas decide who either plays for the championship or 4 team playoff. Removing conference tie ins will be key
+1
SEC finished in fourth place. It is interesting that the two teams playing in the championship game come from the weaker conferences.
Stirred not Shaken
Well-known member
Be much better than the current system.
I'd rather have the selection process done by people/computers who's business is to watch and evaluate every game. Do I think any committee member watched all +80 games of the top 8 teams? No and i certainly don't trust their skills in assessing said talent. Leave it to the pros who prove time and time again they know what they are doing
Stirred not Shaken
Well-known member
Has the no.1 seed under the current system ever won the Championship?
Not to start this argument again but the lack of clarity from the committee is an issue. Are they ranking who they think is the best? Or are they ranking by who has the best resume?
If they are ranking by resume I won't give them much heat for missing on 1 seeds.
I want it to be the best, not best resumes. I will look past a loss to a top 25 team, especially if on the road. If we award conference champions spots we get away from who is the best and more reliant on best resume.
Give me the best teams period.
Almost would prefer a system where if you lost to a top 15 team (final yr end rankings, not at the time) it doesnt count as a loss by the committee. Or where a top 15 win takes away a loss. Something to incentivize scheduling tougher. Won't ever happen and my idea is likely sh1t but something needs to be done to make teams schedule better games. Expansion doesnt change much
If they are ranking by resume I won't give them much heat for missing on 1 seeds.
I want it to be the best, not best resumes. I will look past a loss to a top 25 team, especially if on the road. If we award conference champions spots we get away from who is the best and more reliant on best resume.
Give me the best teams period.
Almost would prefer a system where if you lost to a top 15 team (final yr end rankings, not at the time) it doesnt count as a loss by the committee. Or where a top 15 win takes away a loss. Something to incentivize scheduling tougher. Won't ever happen and my idea is likely sh1t but something needs to be done to make teams schedule better games. Expansion doesnt change much
adselder09
Well-known member
Clemson goes 15-0, beats everyone in their path including the only other undefeated team, but we need to change the format to find a "true" champion. Give me a break. If that's your answer just go back to Poll Champions and you can whine when there's a split in the AP/Coaches Poll.
To answer some of your assumptions:
-Yes, I thought Georgia would beat Texas - motivation can be a hell of a difference maker though.
-Yes, I thought Bama would beat Clemson - closer game than the 44-16 blowout indicates, but very surprised Clemson won and happy they won in that fashion.
-Yes, Clemson would have made the Playoff if they lost to Syrcause because Lawrence was injured during the game - injuries matter, even if he didn't play all that well prior to the injury.
-Yes, OSU would have made the CFP if MSU didn't beat Michigan, but OSU would have also had to beat Iowa in the B1G Championship Game. Buckeyes probably favored there but it's an extra game to potentially slip up. But like you said, if Ohio State was the best team, they beat a couple of backup QBs on their home field.
adselder09
Well-known member
If we expand the playoff it will hurt interest bc there will be less b1tching.
I think the best system is play all of the bowl games, get rid of conference tie ins, have the new years bowls be used as a defacto first round of the playoffs. Let Vegas decide who plays who. Once bowls are done let Vegas decide who either plays for the championship or 4 team playoff. Removing conference tie ins will be key
Nice thought but won't happen. Too much money invested in the conference championships now to go back.
adselder09
Well-known member
Not really. When we had the BCS there were four premier bowls:
Fiesta - UCF (G5 Champ) vs. At-Large (LSU/Texas)
Orange - Clemson (ACC Champ) vs. At-Large (Georgia)
Rose - Ohio State (B1G Champ) vs. Washington (Pac 12 Champ)
Sugar - Alabama (SEC Champ) vs. Oklahoma (Big XII Champ)
We saw Alabama/Oklahoma play out - so you'd have Alabama vs. Clemson/Georgia Winner? Maybe Ohio State gets a shot if the blow out Washington like they should have, but probably not.
adselder09
Well-known member
Weaker based on what? Bowl records? The ACC isn't good outside of Clemson, but the SEC is still the best conference. The middle and bottom aren't anything special but they have the strongest top - as seen by having four teams in the final AP top 10.
adselder09
Well-known member
No. In fact I said it on the other thread, the lower seeded team is undefeated in the CFP.
4 over 2 - OSU over Oregon
2 over 1 - Bama over Clemson
2 over 1 - Clemson over Bama
4 over 3 - Bama over Georgia
2 over 1 - Clemson over Bama
Stirred not Shaken
Well-known member
Like I posted Clemson was the 1st team to go undefeated, it is ridiculous that a 1 loss Alabama team always gets a pass into the play offs. More ridiculous that some experts thought UGA should have been in the play offs. Expand the play offs it does not demean the regular season at all in fact enhances the regular season. Maybe than some of these "elite" teams " Bammy " would play some true non league games.
ronnie mund
Well-known member
Alabama has won 2/3 National Championships when entering the playoffs with 1 loss. Not so sure it's ridiculous.
Yappi
Go Buckeyes
What makes it worse is that the same people will make the same argument for a second SEC team again next year.
This year was the perfect example of letting the teams that earned it into the playoffs rather than the "4 best teams." So many people argued for a Georgia team in the top 4 because of how they played Alabama. Too many people anointed Alabama as the best team and measured everyone else against them. That was a flawed argument. Clemson and Texas proved that Alabama and Georgia were not as good as their proponents believed.
This year feels alot like 2006 when Ohio State and Michigan were the "two best teams by far" going into the bowl season. Some argued that they should rematch for the title game. Ohio State proceeded to get blown out by Florida and Michigan had a disappointing loss to USC.
adselder09
Well-known member
:laugh: Alabama has received the same number of 1-loss passes as Ohio State in the Playoff Era. As in, they didn't win their Conference and snuck into the Playoff as a 1-loss non-conference champion.
When Alabama did it, they beat #1 Clemson and then #3 Georgia to win it all. When Ohio State did it, they were blanked by Clemson 30-0.
I'm in favor of an expanded Playoff field, but it will definitely water down the regular season. Four teams have already watered it down - how many times have we had multiple undefeated teams enter the Playoff? Once, this year. Every other year you only had one or zero teams that were undefeated. Prior to the 4-team Playoff you HAD to go undefeated to ensure you'd get a chance a the National Title, now you can justify one bad game/loss.
You keep saying Bama may play true non league games.
Expansion doesnt incentivize teams to play tough OOC games!
Crusaders
Moderator
Maybe the NCAA could step in and tie things together similar to the NFL by rotating inter-conference opponents and scheduling based on the previous season's record.
Ex. 2019:
1. SEC vs Big XII
2. PAC 12 vs Big Ten
3. ACC vs AAC/MWC/Leftovers from unbalanced conference match ups
1.
Alabama vs Oklahoma
Georgia vs Texas
LSU vs Iowa State
Kentucky vs West Virginia
Florida vs Oklahoma State
Texas A&M vs TCU
Mississippi State vs Baylor
Auburn vs Kansas State
Missouri vs Texas Tech
South Carolina vs Kansas
(Vanderbilt, Tennessee, Ole Miss, Arkansas)
2.
Washington vs Ohio State
Washington State vs Michigan
Utah vs Penn State
Stanford vs Northwestern
Oregon vs Iowa
Arizona State vs Wisconsin
Cal vs Michigan State
USC vs Minnesota
Arizona vs Purdue
Colorado vs Indiana
UCLA vs Maryland
Oregon State vs Nebraska
(Rutgers, Illinois)
3.
Clemson vs UCF
Syracuse vs Fresno State
NC State vs Utah State
Virginia vs Cincinnati
Duke vs Boise State
Boston College vs Houston
Georgia Tech vs Temple
Pittsburgh vs Nevada
Miami vs Memphis
Wake Forest vs Hawaii
Virginia Tech vs San Diego State
Florida State vs USF
North Carolina vs Tulane
Louisville vs Vanderbilt
Ex. 2019:
1. SEC vs Big XII
2. PAC 12 vs Big Ten
3. ACC vs AAC/MWC/Leftovers from unbalanced conference match ups
1.
Alabama vs Oklahoma
Georgia vs Texas
LSU vs Iowa State
Kentucky vs West Virginia
Florida vs Oklahoma State
Texas A&M vs TCU
Mississippi State vs Baylor
Auburn vs Kansas State
Missouri vs Texas Tech
South Carolina vs Kansas
(Vanderbilt, Tennessee, Ole Miss, Arkansas)
2.
Washington vs Ohio State
Washington State vs Michigan
Utah vs Penn State
Stanford vs Northwestern
Oregon vs Iowa
Arizona State vs Wisconsin
Cal vs Michigan State
USC vs Minnesota
Arizona vs Purdue
Colorado vs Indiana
UCLA vs Maryland
Oregon State vs Nebraska
(Rutgers, Illinois)
3.
Clemson vs UCF
Syracuse vs Fresno State
NC State vs Utah State
Virginia vs Cincinnati
Duke vs Boise State
Boston College vs Houston
Georgia Tech vs Temple
Pittsburgh vs Nevada
Miami vs Memphis
Wake Forest vs Hawaii
Virginia Tech vs San Diego State
Florida State vs USF
North Carolina vs Tulane
Louisville vs Vanderbilt
adselder09
Well-known member
Nice idea but it'll never happen. The member schools won't allow their scheduling freedoms to be taken away.
Thavoice
Well-known member
There are a lot of 'good ideas' and what they feel the ncaa should do but most times it just isn't going to happen and its a waste to even give it much attention.
That type of scheduling is not going to happen.
Its just not.
It will go to 8 games. I think the best way to get teams to up their OOC schedule is to give the conference champions an automatic slot into the playoffs.
MAYBE teams beef up their OOC with 1 marquee game knowing that a loss wont hurt them by winning the league.
BUT on the flipside of that, it could also make many big time programs not want to schedule up in the OOC to double down on their chances of getting into the playoff at an at large bid if they don't win their league.
BUT on the flipside of that a team may want to get a big OOC to possibly bolster their chances at an at large bid with a big OOC win and not winning their league.
What I eventually see happening is more neutral site big money games by big programs. The OSU/TCU game was a good payday for both teams, and OSU didn't have to play a true road game.
Yappi
Go Buckeyes
Personally, I would rather they give the power 5 conferences an automatic spot in the playoffs but it would be up to the conferences to decide who they award that spot to.
Let them decide who they think is the most deserving. Not really any different than how the committee is doing the same thing. I think you would find most conferences would have a well-defined strategy for their "representative" but it might be a little different than their champion. An 8-4 team with 3 OOC losses probably shouldn't be representing a conference when they have an 11-1 team with one overtime loss in conference but lose the tie-breaker to the 8-4 team.
Max Grumbleman
Active member
Love it!
Sadly, I must agree. The P5 teams will do everything in their power to maintain control over the sport!