ogealbhain
Well-known member
11 conference champs and 5 at-large. Seeds based on computer rankings. The human element should be completely done away with. It shouldn't be this hard.
Do you know what the BCS rankings would be this year?
11 conference champs and 5 at-large. Seeds based on computer rankings. The human element should be completely done away with. It shouldn't be this hard.
I really would like to see Clemson and Bama knocked out all together. Clemson has no one to play in the ACC. If they were in the AAC, they would have a tougher road to travel. I hate the SEC because they have been protecting Bama for years. How could Bama not play Florida for fourteen years? When was the last time Alabama played Georgia in the regular season? 2008? The SEC and ACC only play eight conference games. That means they can avoid tough crossover games, but to not having played either Georgia or Florida in the regular season for over a decade tells me that someone is controlling the schedules and keeping those schools from meeting. I don't know how LSU played Florida, Auburn had to play Georgia and Florida from the east and Bama avoided both of those two teams for years. In the BIG 10, the crossover games are tough. TOSU can't avoid Wisconsin or Iowa for fourteen years. It's ridiculous that everyone automatically puts Bama in because if they had to play a tougher conference schedule, they would probably lose a game or two a year.
You do know that LSU-FL has been played every single year since 1971? It's a protected rivalry game similar to Indiana-Purdue. You do know that Auburn-Georgia has been played nearly every year since 1894? They also have a protected rivalry game. Auburn played FL for the first time since 2011 this year.I don't know how LSU played Florida, Auburn had to play Georgia and Florida from the east
It's ridiculous that everyone automatically puts Bama in because if they had to play a tougher conference schedule, they would probably lose a game or two a year.
I really would like to see Clemson and Bama knocked out all together. Clemson has no one to play in the ACC. If they were in the AAC, they would have a tougher road to travel. I hate the SEC because they have been protecting Bama for years. How could Bama not play Florida for fourteen years? When was the last time Alabama played Georgia in the regular season? 2008? The SEC and ACC only play eight conference games. That means they can avoid tough crossover games, but to not having played either Georgia or Florida in the regular season for over a decade tells me that someone is controlling the schedules and keeping those schools from meeting. I don't know how LSU played Florida, Auburn had to play Georgia and Florida from the east and Bama avoided both of those two teams for years. In the BIG 10, the crossover games are tough. TOSU can't avoid Wisconsin or Iowa for fourteen years. It's ridiculous that everyone automatically puts Bama in because if they had to play a tougher conference schedule, they would probably lose a game or two a year.
Probably looking at different ones but most i have seen have Penn St around 8. I have seen a few have Clemson 2nd and LSU 3rd. Most i have seen have Bama 4th.Every single computer model has tOSU first, LSU second, Clemson third. Many of them have Penn St. four
You do know that LSU-FL has been played every single year since 1971? It's a protected rivalry game similar to Indiana-Purdue. You do know that Auburn-Georgia has been played nearly every year since 1894? They also have a protected rivalry game. Auburn played FL for the first time since 2011 this year.
Since 2009 Alabama is 10-0 against FL and Georgia. Alabama also averages 1 loss per year since 2009.
If PSU were to beat the Bucks and win the BIG title would both be in? Something like LSU, Clemson, PSU and Ohio St? The Buckeyes would have a better resume than any of the other one loss teamsProbably looking at different ones but most i have seen have Penn St around 8. I have seen a few have Clemson 2nd and LSU 3rd. Most i have seen have Bama 4th.
Personally would prefer to see Oregon or OU in the 4th spot just to switch it up. Bama had their shot.
I dont either, just throwing out scenariosI dont think Penn St wins, they really arent that good. Id still keep OSU in over them.
Agree. Penn St has a good defense and a very iffy offense. I would expect Ohio State to handle them easily, to be honest.I dont think Penn St wins, they really arent that good. Id still keep OSU in over them.
Well remove Oregon from the playoff. Watch Oregon go and beat Utah and totally screw the PAC 12 playoff hopes.
As you know, it is a business decision as to who gets that 4th spot. If OU wins out they are likely in. If Baylor/Utah wins out they are probably left at the altar.I think the committe is a little scared of putting Utah in. It shouldnt be this way, but Oregon is the better brand. I think the Pac 12 is out as of now.
The point is Utah should have a chance. Which is why expansion and a really tournament is the only fair way to do it.After all the hand wringing and such the last month, the play on the field generally works things out, and this year is no different. Barring any huge upsets, Ohio State and Clemson are in. I do think LSU/ Georgia could be a heck of a game, and a Georgia win may put both in the playoffs.
The main question you have to ask yourself going into the playoffs, is that are you looking for the 4 perceived BEST teams? Or should it be based on what teams have done this season? And why this is vital is because of a team like Utah. If Utah beats Oregon in the Pac-12 final, they have one loss and could very well make it. But does anyone outside of Utah feel this is one of the 4 best teams? How many losses would Utah have if they were in the SEC? 3, 4 or more?
If Utah doesn't lose to USC, and they win the Pac 12, they are in. USC is not a good loss.The point is Utah should have a chance. Which is why expansion and a really tournament is the only fair way to do it.
So it’s worse to lose to a 4 loss traditional powerhouse football program than it is to lose to an 8 loss never was? Got it.If Utah doesn't lose to USC, and they win the Pac 12, they are in. USC is not a good loss.
What's more powerful, bad losses or good wins? These are all the subjective things the committee must figure out. It's certainly not fullproof. There is always going to be controversy. Even with 8 or 16. 4 teams gives us 2 months of week by week drama and teams cut themselves every single week.So it’s worse to lose to a 4 loss traditional powerhouse football program than it is to lose to an 8 loss never was? Got it.
You brought up USC as a bad loss. I guess it’s move the goal post time?What's more powerful, bad losses or good wins? These are all the subjective things the committee must figure out. It's certainly not fullproof. There is always going to be controversy. Even with 8 or 16. 4 teams gives us 2 months of week by week drama and teams cut themselves every single week.
Same thing would happen at 8 or 16, and you wouldn’t leave out a team with a legit title shot.What's more powerful, bad losses or good wins? These are all the subjective things the committee must figure out. It's certainly not fullproof. There is always going to be controversy. Even with 8 or 16. 4 teams gives us 2 months of week by week drama and teams cut themselves every single week.
So it’s worse to lose to a 4 loss traditional powerhouse football program than it is to lose to an 8 loss never was? Got it.
If Utah doesn't lose to USC, and they win the Pac 12, they are in. USC is not a good loss.
Um...kinda because it's true...look, you have to have some kind of measuring stick. You can't measure the big ten / pac-12 / ACC teams because there A. isn't enough good teams in those conferences, and B. because there are too many teams in the conferences, the good teams don't even play each other all the time.He literally does this with every non-SEC school. He treats all SEC games as top tier wins or losses and then subjectively says that "if they were in the SEC, they'd have x number of losses".
More ranked teams in the Big 10 than SECUm...kinda because it's true...look, you have to have some kind of measuring stick. You can't measure the big ten / pac-12 / ACC teams because there A. isn't enough good teams in those conferences, and B. because there are too many teams in the conferences, the good teams don't even play each other all the time.