They need to expand the CFP, they said. It'll be better, they said.

[Huckleberry 32705]

13 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Not if Ryan Hamby holds on to that ball. 

That was karma for his bitchass late shove of our DB into the photographers the play before.

[Disco Missile 456]

55 minutes ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

Expanding to 8 would allow conference champs to get auto-bids. I would like that.

I'm with Landomatic, and I've never understood the appeal of granting conference champs autobids to a tournament. Why is there an appetite for this?

In the BCS era with all the automatic bowl bids for conference champs every year there was some dark horse team with a pedestrian record that would pull an upset in a CCG and earn a major bowl, and subsequently there were bowl games with very little interest or appeal.
Looking at the data from the past 20 years the chances of a mediocre team reaching the tournament as a P5 champ with an autobid are high.
 

[S11 16]

7 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Yeah, I don't like any of these extra add-on wrinkles. Win your conference and you're in. I want to encourage more robust scheduling and that's curtailed if you start putting maximum number of losses for auto-bids for conference champs. Totally defeats the purpose IMO, which is to mitigate the horseshit scheduling garbage employed by the SEC (and ACC).

Name whatever three loss teams you can think of that deserved to play for a national title in the last twenty years.

 

this isn’t about noncon schedules- it’s about getting the best in.

Edited December 9, 2019 by S11

[Huckleberry 32705]

1 minute ago, S11 said:

Name three three loss team that deserved to play for a national title in the last twenty years

I don't see why I should care about that.

A system that means more great non-conference regular season matchups is a good system. Cap losses and everyone will schedule like shit. That's no fun. 

[S11 16]

2 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

I don't see why I should care about that.

A system that means more great non-conference regular season matchups is a good system. Cap losses and everyone will schedule like shit. That's no fun. 

1- The point is to bracket the teams that earned the right to be there.  Not to reward average teams for pulling one upset.

2- Capping at two might give the schedule concern you have.   Three or four?  I doubt that

Edited December 9, 2019 by S11

[Murfdogg21 4412]

The 4 team playoff is like kissing your sister, which is why so many OU and SEC fans support it. 

[High Plains Drifter 10981]

49 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

How would you deal with the independents? Would the same rules apply to all of them or would Notre Dame get special treatment?

 

Fuck Notre Dame.

I have spoken.

[SwanderedTalent 5761]

13 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Not if Ryan Hamby holds on to that ball. 

Oh, you guys know that for a fact now eh. 

[C-Man 27068]

6 minutes ago, S11 said:

Name whatever three loss teams you can think of that deserved to play for a national title in the last twenty years.

 

this isn’t about noncon schedules- it’s about getting the best in.

See Huck's post below.

3 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

I don't see why I should care about that.

A system that means more great non-conference regular season matchups is a good system. Cap losses and everyone will schedule like shit. That's no fun. 

This. I'm in favor of any format that gets Abilene Christian and Incarnate Word off P5 schedules.

[DanTheHorn 4902]

On 12/8/2019 at 7:52 AM, SwanderedTalent said:

does OU belong with Ohio State, Clemson, and LSU?

We will find out won't we. Is that not the purpose? Hate OU but hey they got it done and we shit the bed.

Edited December 9, 2019 by DanTheHorn

[Murfdogg21 4412]

4 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

I don't see why I should care about that.

A system that means more great non-conference regular season matchups is a good system. Cap losses and everyone will schedule like shit. That's no fun. 

How can you be confident that moving to an 8 team playoff would result in SEC and ACC no longer scheduling 1AA and D2 cupcakes? I say that as an 8-team supporter, I just don’t think it’s a rock solid argument. At least it doesn’t prevent Big12/Pac12/Big10 from scheduling marquis OOC games, I guess. 

[Huckleberry 32705]

2 minutes ago, Murfdogg21 said:

How can you be confident that moving to an 8 team playoff would result in SEC and ACC no longer scheduling 1AA and D2 cupcakes? I say that as an 8-team supporter, I just don’t think it’s a rock solid argument. At least it doesn’t prevent Big12/Pac12/Big10 from scheduling marquis OOC games, I guess. 

I didn't say it would. I said capping losses would guarantee they schedule cupcakes.

But some teams would schedule more good matchups. I'm not saying it would become commonplace. Just that not capping losses guarantees more good matchups will happen than if losses are capped. 

Edited December 9, 2019 by Huckleberry

[S11 16]

1 minute ago, C-Man said:

See Huck's post below.

This. I'm in favor of any format that gets Abilene Christian and Incarnate Word off P5 schedules.

I’m not convinced that would impact that one iota.   The reason those games are scheduled is for a minimum number of home games and they come cheaper than G5 teams.  I don’t see playoff format impacting that game.   If you had to schedule one extra P5 per year teams would ditch the G5 game and keep the FCS game due to financial considerations.

so rather than proceed with a pointless autobid for whatever 7-5 team pulls an upset in a CCG why not make a quick adjustment to get the best teams in?

[SwanderedTalent 5761]

1 minute ago, DanTheHorn said:

We will find out won't we. Is that not the purpose? Hate OU but hey they got it done and we shit the bed.

Would that not be the purpose if we had four more teams in the playoff? 

[DanTheHorn 4902]

Just now, SwanderedTalent said:

Would that not be the purpose if we had four more teams in the playoff? 

The question I answered was whether or not OU belonged in this years top 4.  Where do 4 extra teams come into the equation?

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1291]

54 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

How would you deal with the independents? Would the same rules apply to all of them or would Notre Dame get special treatment?

Independents would be able to get an at-large spot if they are good enough.

[C-Man 27068]

2 minutes ago, S11 said:

I’m not convinced that would impact that one iota.   The reason those games are scheduled is for a minimum number of home games and they come cheaper than G5 teams.  I don’t see playoff format impacting that game.   If you had to schedule one extra P5 per year teams would ditch the G5 game and keep the FCS game due to financial considerations.

so rather than proceed with a pointless autobid for whatever 7-5 team pulls an upset in a CCG why not make a quick adjustment to get the best teams in?

You might be right. And the SEC will probably still do it the way things are now. But I think you'd see more efforts to schedule some big games early.

[S11 16]

1 minute ago, C-Man said:

You might be right. And the SEC will probably still do it the way things are now. But I think you'd see more efforts to schedule some big games early.

I’d be fine sliding the scale based on total P5 games played to incentivize it.

[SwanderedTalent 5761]

Just now, DanTheHorn said:

The question I answered was whether or not OU belonged in this years top 4.  Where do 4 extra teams come into the equation?

From the OP. His position is, there are only four teams that deserve to be in the playoff this year, so four teams must be the right number.

I don't really think OU compares to Ohio State, LSU, or Clemson this year. I think OU is wasting the time of its semi-final opponent the same way four more teams would presumably waste the time of of the top four seeds. If you're against eight teams because another round of the playoffs isn't necessary, then I think you should be against OU wasting LSU's time.

Three is the right number for the playoff.

[TXSooner518 2432]

1 hour ago, ChickenSandwich said:

you say this like adding a top OOC opponent is easy and guaranteed when scheduling 4 years ahead of time.  See Aggy and Clemson.  Clemson was a bottom feeder when scheduled.  I'm sure Texas and ND both thought they were getting a better opponent when they signed the contract to play a home and home.  Shit changes

Nope, I recognize that it's not a guarantee. See Mitch's post below. OU scheduled an away game at a P5 team that is frequently upper-tier, and a top G5 team, and both disappointed. Clemson tried to schedule a good game, I'm not blaming them for their OOC schedule really, though I question if they need Charlotte AND Wofford. But you put yourself in position by playing P5 home and aways (and real P5 home and aways, not Northwestern or Duke or Vandy or whatever). 

1 hour ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

And Oklahoma beat exactly who OOC? 4-8 UCLA and 4-8 Houston? Their biggest achievement this year was digging out of the hole they dug for themselves against Baylor. And then unimpressively hanging on against Baylor in OT with their 3rd string QB who had something like 3 passes all season in the championship game. How did the Pac cannibalize itself any worse than the Big 12 did this season?

With regard to the other notion that we will always be arguing about style points, I think it makes more sense to argue about them with the 3 teams after 5 other teams have automatic bids. 

And what exact data point do we have regarding UGA/Bama? For sure Georgia would get into the playoff. They finished 5 in the final poll. You think Bama with no Tua, who lost to the only two decent teams they played this year would be an overwhelming favorite against Georgia? Or that they would make an 8 team playoff field in a final poll that they finished 13 in? What sport are you watching? 

Sure, OU's OOC didn't work out this year. Luckily, there were only 4 P5 conference champs with 1 or less losses, so they didn't have to beauty pageant. If either Utah or Oregon loses one less game, they are in a tight battle either way. I think they go over Utah (whose OOC was worse) and Oregon (whose OOC was better) goes over them. 

I 100% guarantee that if Bama played UGA right now, Bama would be favored, yes. Every single power rating system has Bama > UGA. 

Common opponents:

LSU - Bama L by 5, UGA L by 27
A&M - Bama W by 19, UGA W by 6
Tenn - Bama W by 22, UGA W by 29
Auburn - Bama L by 3, UGA W by 7
S. Carolina - Bama W by 24 , UGA L by 3

So among 5 common opponents (almost half the schedule), Bama outperformed UGA by 45 points (9 ppg), with each going 3-2. 

What sport are YOU watching, that you legit don't think Alabama is one of the 8 best teams this year? Not saying resume, saying team. What, in your opinion, given the above makes UGA better than Bama?

53 minutes ago, S11 said:

p5 conference champs are in with fewer than three losses or autobid shifts to an at-large.

why three losses?  It’s 25% of a regular season and two losses is the most Any national champ over 20 years has had.

I like qualifications for the autobid, but definitely not loss caps, that just encourages garbage scheduling. Make it a formula that incorporates humans/power ratings, which helps to incent tough scheduling. 

[Huckleberry 32705]

I'm so sick of garbage non-conference games that I'd make non-conference schedule strength ratings one of the restrictions. But I'm an asshole.

FCS opponent? Disqualified from at-large consideration. 

Edited December 9, 2019 by Huckleberry

[ChickenSandwich 9798]

33 minutes ago, Disco Missile said:

I'm with Landomatic, and I've never understood the appeal of granting conference champs autobids to a tournament. Why is there an appetite for this?

In the BCS era with all the automatic bowl bids for conference champs every year there was some dark horse team with a pedestrian record that would pull an upset in a CCG and earn a major bowl, and subsequently there were bowl games with very little interest or appeal.
Looking at the data from the past 20 years the chances of a mediocre team reaching the tournament as a P5 champ with an autobid are high.
 

Mediocre is an opinion based on nothing.  They didn't play ANY of the same teams, so this is all based on assumption.  We can guess that one conference is better than the other based on playing completely different opponents.  Figure skating and confirmation bias.  A conference title is won on the field using 75 or 66% of their games played.

Go as far back as 2017, where big 10 11-1 champion Ohio State was left out for a Alabama team that didn't even play for their conference title.

Remember with this "logic" FSU and Bama play for the title in 2014 with Ohio State and Oregon not even getting a chance.  Opinions are like assholes, decide on the field. 

Edited December 9, 2019 by ChickenSandwich

[C-Man 27068]

2 minutes ago, TXSooner518 said:

Nope, I recognize that it's not a guarantee. See Mitch's post below. OU scheduled an away game at a P5 team that is frequently upper-tier, and a top G5 team, and both disappointed. Clemson tried to schedule a good game, I'm not blaming them for their OOC schedule really, though I question if they need Charlotte AND Wofford. But you put yourself in position by playing P5 home and aways (and real P5 home and aways, not Northwestern or Duke or Vandy or whatever). 

Sure, OU's OOC didn't work out this year. Luckily, there were only 4 P5 conference champs with 1 or less losses, so they didn't have to beauty pageant. If either Utah or Oregon loses one less game, they are in a tight battle either way. I think they go over Utah (whose OOC was worse) and Oregon (whose OOC was better) goes over them. 

I 100% guarantee that if Bama played UGA right now, Bama would be favored, yes. Every single power rating system has Bama > UGA. 

Common opponents:

LSU - Bama L by 5, UGA L by 27
A&M - Bama W by 19, UGA W by 6
Tenn - Bama W by 22, UGA W by 29
Auburn - Bama L by 3, UGA W by 7
S. Carolina - Bama W by 24 , UGA L by 3

So among 5 common opponents (almost half the schedule), Bama outperformed UGA by 45 points (9 ppg), with each going 3-2. 

What sport are YOU watching, that you legit don't think Alabama is one of the 8 best teams this year? Not saying resume, saying team. What, in your opinion, given the above makes UGA better than Bama?

I like qualifications for the autobid, but definitely not loss caps, that just encourages garbage scheduling. Make it a formula that incorporates humans/power ratings, which helps to incent tough scheduling. 

Bama is definitely one of the best 8 teams IMO. I also think they'd beat Georgia, who I think is overrated. Bama was the second-best team in the conference until Tua got injured.

Do not agree with the bolded part unless you're simply talking about finding out who gets in after the champs of the P5 conferences -- or seeding the eight teams that make it. I could easily see where somebody like Virginia would win a P5 conference champ game in a monumental upset of a team like Clemson and be the #7 or #8 seed. I've got zero problems with that. And I'd eliminate the committee altogether and simply go off BCS like computer-driven rankings with the caveat that all the rankings' algorithms are freely available to be scrutinized by the public. That eliminates any potential shenanigans.

[JBJ 3649]

With regard to scheduling 4+ years out: That's where having 1 (or 2) games of OOC standardization would come in.

The way it would work is every team would keep say Week 3 open.  That week would feature rotating Bowl-type scheduling, for example:

#1 B12 vs #1 B10

#2 B12 vs #2 SEC

#3 B12 vs #3 ACC

....

So on.  Conference ties would rotate and there'd always be a team playing up or down, but it'd be good fun.

You could do it off rankings or any other creative way you want, tie in G5 at some point or whatever.  There'd still be some year-to-year randomness but it's nothing but an improvement over where we are.

[Huckleberry 32705]

Also, people always talk about the best 4 teams or the best 8 or whatever. And the other side of the argument has conceded that for some reason. I say fuck that. 

This is about a championship. What you've actually accomplished on the field in terms of wins and losses should be way more important than power rankings. Life isn't fair. The Washington Nationals would be huge underdogs again if they replayed the World Series. Who gives a shit? If there were a next level in baseball, would that mean the Astros deserve to go more than the Nationals? 

Winning your conference championship means you're the champs. You belong in the next level of the national championship decision. 

[TXSooner518 2432]

1 minute ago, C-Man said:

Bama is definitely one of the best 8 teams IMO. I also think they'd beat Georgia, who I think is overrated. Bama was the second-best team in the conference until Tua got injured.

Do not agree with the bolded part unless you're simply talking about finding out who gets in after the champs of the P5 conferences -- or seeding the eight teams that make it. I could easily see where somebody like Virginia would win a P5 conference champ game in a monumental upset of a team like Clemson and be the #7 or #8 seed. I've got zero problems with that. And I'd eliminate the committee altogether and simply go off BCS like computer-driven rankings with the caveat that all the rankings' algorithms are freely available to be scrutinized by the public. That eliminates any potential shenanigans.

No, I mean to decide if the P5/G5 champ automatically gets in. I would also use it for the 2 or 3 wildcards, yes.

I would be more OK with losing the qualification cap on the P5 champ than the G5 inclusion. I would be even more OK losing the qualification cap if all 8 teams are seeded, rather than the conf champs getting the top 5 seeds, and you get some perverse result where the 4 seed gets the easiest 1st round game, because the 5 seed is trash UVA or some such, and then the 3 seed gets fucking Clemson in the first round. 

UGA has a very strong D that can shut down non-dynamic offenses. They did not shut down OU in 2017, Bama or Texas in 2018, LSU in 2019. UGA's offense is very pedestrian, especially against teams that they can't just overwhelm with talent. Georgia played 4 ranked teams this year. They scored 24, 23, 21, and 10 points, and also scored 19 against Texas A&M, 27 against Mizzou and 21 against Kentucky. Oh, and 17 in overtime against South Fucking Carolina. Sorry, this is not one of the 4 best teams in football, and only a fool would take them straight up against Alabama.

[ChickenSandwich 9798]

1 minute ago, Huckleberry said:

Also, people always talk about the best 4 teams or the best 8 or whatever. And the other side of the argument has conceded that for some reason. I say fuck that. 

This is about a championship. What you've actually accomplished on the field in terms of wins and losses should be way more important than power rankings. Life isn't fair. The Washington Nationals would be huge underdogs again if they replayed the World Series. Who gives a shit? If there were a next level in baseball, would that mean the Astros deserve to go more than the Nationals? 

Winning your conference championship means you're the champs. You belong in the next level of the national championship decision. 

1234.

It's why Bama has to lose two games before they are eliminated form the playoffs as opposed to 1/0 for everyone else.  The confirmation bias of recruiting rankings, pre-season polls and not having to play 40% of the teams in conference.  They could be the 85 Bears, but still need to earn it on the field, not just gifted an auto playoff bid.

[Eastwood 4394]

2 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Also, people always talk about the best 4 teams or the best 8 or whatever. And the other side of the argument has conceded that for some reason. I say fuck that. 

This is about a championship. What you've actually accomplished on the field in terms of wins and losses should be way more important than power rankings. Life isn't fair. The Washington Nationals would be huge underdogs again if they replayed the World Series. Who gives a shit? If there were a next level in baseball, would that mean the Astros deserve to go more than the Nationals? 

Winning your conference championship means you're the champs. You belong in the next level of the national championship decision. 

Stop all this earning it on the field nonsense. We need formulas, the media, and beauty contests to tell us who the best teams are. That way every team in the nation can claim multiple titles bestowed upon them by AP, Sagarin, and by some student Mr. Powell's undergrad stats class at A&M doing his semester project. Be sure to put that one on the wall.

[Landomatic 3813]

39 minutes ago, C-Man said:

The occasional G5 team is going to be competitive, though probably not win three straight games for a title in an 8-team playoff. I'm thinking Boise back in the mid-2000's or even UCF under Scott Frost perhaps. But you're throwing them a bone. What if they have a transcendent QB? Somewhere down the road, they'd snag one and it would be an awesome story.

There are three spots after you let in the P5 champs. If ND -- or another independent is deserving, they will get in.

But it's so simple. Let in the five P5 champs. At the beginning of the year you know exactly the requirement to get in. There's no BS, not poll shenanigans, no "hidden" computer algorithms, no committee bias/subjectivity. Win your conference and you're in! How fucking democratic is that? Leave the beauty contest to the other three spots.

So you want a 5 team playoff?  That would be the only way to eliminate the “shenanigans“ you speak of.

And what happens when a 3 loss ACC team wins the ACC Conference Championship and a 1 loss SEC team’s one loss is in the SEC Championship game?  Conference champion does not mean top 5 team in the country.

College football is not set up in a way that works for other sports.  There will always need to be “shenanigans” no matter how many teams are in.

[DanTheHorn 4902]

57 minutes ago, SwanderedTalent said:

From the OP. His position is, there are only four teams that deserve to be in the playoff this year, so four teams must be the right number.

I don't really think OU compares to Ohio State, LSU, or Clemson this year. I think OU is wasting the time of its semi-final opponent the same way four more teams would presumably waste the time of of the top four seeds. If you're against eight teams because another round of the playoffs isn't necessary, then I think you should be against OU wasting LSU's time.

Three is the right number for the playoff.

Yup Ohio State wasted the time of a couple of teams when they came in with their 3rd string QB. Four is the right number even if a 5 deserving team is left out. Keeps the season very interesting. Although I think that conference champions should be in as long as they are ranked in the top 6. So if LSU lost OU would jump them due to being champs and being one of the best 6. Conference championship should mean something.

Edited December 9, 2019 by DanTheHorn

[Spankytoes 1736]

36 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Bama is definitely one of the best 8 teams IMO.

Based on what? They lost to the only ranked teams they played this year in LSU and Auburn. Their best win was over aggy, who also lost to every ranked team they played. Bama didn't win their division and didn't play for their conference. Maybe Florida is the better team? By this argument, we now have Bama, Georgia, Florida, LSU and potentially Auburn in the Top 8 because we can't decide who is better. (Florida didn't beat a ranked team either) 

How is Bama better than Baylor on paper, who also beat no one? Now we're back to the eyeball test meaning something argument. 

[SwanderedTalent 5761]

1 hour ago, DanTheHorn said:

Yup Ohio State wasted the time of a couple of teams when they came in with their 3rd string QB.

six teams deserved to be in that year

[TXSooner518 2432]

Quote

Based on what? They lost to the only ranked teams they played this year in LSU and Auburn. Their best win was over aggy, who also lost to every ranked team they played. Bama didn't win their division and didn't play for their conference. Maybe Florida is the better team? By this argument, we now have Bama, Georgia, Florida, LSU and potentially Auburn in the Top 8 because we can't decide who is better. (Florida didn't beat a ranked team either) 

How is Bama better than Baylor on paper, who also beat no one? Now we're back to the eyeball test meaning something argument. 

So you're saying if someone said "hey a college football team is going to play, if they win, you get $1 million, and if they lose, we shoot you in the face.  You can have Baylor, Florida, or Alabama" that you would be like "herp derrrrp who's to say, they all seem equal, just pick one at random"?  Bull fucking shit. 

Edited December 9, 2019 by TXSooner518

[mdleast 8274]

Don’t believe this has yet been posted. For what it’s worth:

[joeycovers 388]

1 minute ago, mdleast said:

Don’t believe this has yet been posted. For what it’s worth:

Perfect. 

[DanTheHorn 4902]

20 minutes ago, SwanderedTalent said:

six teams deserved to be in that year

Did you read the rest of post? So interesting you left it off the quote. I said 4 is the right number even if a deserving teams are left out. So why the hell would you respond with this bullshit? All my responses to you so far have been because you do not read and therefore miss the context of the response. I am done.

Edited December 9, 2019 by DanTheHorn

[Loco 3752]

All this "woe is me"  sec gonna steal all the playoff spots as an excuse not to go to 8 team playoff is tinfoil hat stuff.  

4 team playoff = 3 games

8 team playoff = 7 games  

Sec = LSU

ACC = Clempson

Big10 = OSU

Big12 = ou

Pac = Oregon

Wildcards = dawgs/baylor/whisky/memphis

So sec & big12 might get 2 in, pac gets to compete and keep the west coast population engaged.

If your thesis is an evil cabal of redneck geniuses control college football from a double wide deep in Alabama and will regularly outsmart and outmaneuver the PAC/BIG10/12/ACC & US media conglomerates...  then I don't know what to tell you.

Having the conference championship as a play in actually would prevent Conference shenanigans if they got to "pick their fighter".  It also takes that part of the decision making out of the hands of voters.  If the down side is a weak ass team makes it to the round of 8 as a conf champ...  that's fine.  They'll get smoked and that conference shorted the cash of a deeper run (Maybe 2 more prime bowls)

No scheme would be perfect, but don't let great be the enemy of good.  

 

[Iceman 2641]

2 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

I'm so sick of garbage non-conference games that I'd make non-conference schedule strength ratings one of the restrictions. But I'm an asshole.

FCS opponent? Disqualified from at-large consideration. 

How do expect me to keep my 60-some odd 4 and 5 star players healthy for a whole season if we don't get that Dothan State game in November?

Sincerely,

Satan

[Loco 3752]

2 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

I'm so sick of garbage non-conference games that I'd make non-conference schedule strength ratings one of the restrictions. But I'm an asshole.

FCS opponent? Disqualified from at-large consideration. 

Agree with everything in the first two sentences! 

It's about how you get from here to there...  and unintended consequences.   There are contracts to buy out and a lot of short term wrangling to fix the FCS scheduling.  I don't know how big that problem would be, but I'd guess it'd take a few years to work it's way out of the system.   I think you could change the playoffs any way you want now with notification that starting in season 20xx these games will be counted as loses.  

And with that step, I'm guessing you'd see a number (perhaps a large number) of FCS schools shutdown football and other sports.   I'm OK with that, because I'm an asshole too.  

 

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1291]

33 minutes ago, mdleast said:

Don’t believe this has yet been posted. For what it’s worth:

This would be a lot of fun.

[Bonzeus 0]

Take the committee out of the equation (for the most part).  

8 Teams =

all 5 Power Conference Champs get auto bid

Committee only selects the final 3 as "at large bids"

want in automatically?  Win your conference.

[C-Man 27068]

2 hours ago, Landomatic said:

So you want a 5 team playoff?  That would be the only way to eliminate the “shenanigans“ you speak of.

And what happens when a 3 loss ACC team wins the ACC Conference Championship and a 1 loss SEC team’s one loss is in the SEC Championship game?  Conference champion does not mean top 5 team in the country.

College football is not set up in a way that works for other sports.  There will always need to be “shenanigans” no matter how many teams are in.

They don't play remotely close to the same schedules so I'd be reluctant to say one conference's 3-loss team isn't on par with another's 1-loss team. If the 1-loss SEC team blew team's doors off in the regular season (like LSU) they're still likely to snag a spot in the top eight but simply have a lower seeding probably. If that 3-loss ACC team beat another 3-loss team in the conference champ game it's like Thunderdome -- two teams enter, one team leaves.

1 hour ago, Spankytoes said:

Based on what? They lost to the only ranked teams they played this year in LSU and Auburn. Their best win was over aggy, who also lost to every ranked team they played. Bama didn't win their division and didn't play for their conference. Maybe Florida is the better team? By this argument, we now have Bama, Georgia, Florida, LSU and potentially Auburn in the Top 8 because we can't decide who is better. (Florida didn't beat a ranked team either) 

How is Bama better than Baylor on paper, who also beat no one? Now we're back to the eyeball test meaning something argument. 

LSU would boat-race Baylor. Bama narrowly lost to Auburn with their backup QB. Bama will have a dozen or more kids drafted in April. They've been in the playoffs every year and recruited Top 5 classes for a decade. Baylor has a great coach but was 1-11 three years ago. I'm not taking Baylor to beat Bama this year but, fuck, let's play it off. I'd take Bama in the playoffs over Georgia so they're in my top eight probably.

[Iceman 2641]

6 minutes ago, Loco said:

Agree with everything in the first two sentences! 

It's about how you get from here to there...  and unintended consequences.   There are contracts to buy out and a lot of short term wrangling to fix the FCS scheduling.  I don't know how big that problem would be, but I'd guess it'd take a few years to work it's way out of the system.   I think you could change the playoffs any way you want now with notification that starting in season 20xx these games will be counted as loses.  

And with that step, I'm guessing you'd see a number (perhaps a large number) of FCS schools shutdown football and other sports.   I'm OK with that, because I'm an asshole too.  

 

Tell em they have until 2028 or whatever to get it lined out.  One more TV contract and we go live.

Some of these excuses are easy as fuck to solve.  The goal is NOT to achieve a fair system, however, so why try?

[Landomatic 3813]

2 minutes ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

This would be retarded.

Fifm

Baylor alone should tell ya.  In there with a team they’ve already lost to TWICE.  Georgia in there with a team they’ve already lost to.  Memphis in there despite losing to Temple and beating almost no one.  Give me a fuckin break.  If anything, that tweet just illustrates that 4 is clearly the right number.

[Landomatic 3813]

4 minutes ago, C-Man said:

They don't play remotely close to the same schedules so I'd be reluctant to say one conference's 3-loss team isn't on par with another's 1-loss team. If the 1-loss SEC team blew team's doors off in the regular season (like LSU) they're still likely to snag a spot in the top eight but simply have a lower seeding probably. If that 3-loss ACC team beat another 3-loss team in the conference champ game it's like Thunderdome -- two teams enter, one team leaves.

LSU would boat-race Baylor. Bama narrowly lost to Auburn with their backup QB. Bama will have a dozen or more kids drafted in April. They've been in the playoffs every year and recruited Top 5 classes for a decade. Baylor has a great coach but was 1-11 three years ago. I'm not taking Baylor to beat Bama this year but, fuck, let's play it off. I'd take Bama in the playoffs over Georgia so they're in my top eight probably.

Lmao...for someone who wants to eliminate all the beauty contest smell test eyeball bullshit, you sure base a lot of your arguments on beauty contest smell test eyeball bullshit.

[Loco 3752]

7 minutes ago, C-Man said:

LSU would boat-race Baylor. Bama narrowly lost to Auburn with their backup QB. Bama will have a dozen or more kids drafted in April. They've been in the playoffs every year and recruited Top 5 classes for a decade. Baylor has a great coach but was 1-11 three years ago. I'm not taking Baylor to beat Bama this year but, fuck, let's play it off. I'd take Bama in the playoffs over Georgia so they're in my top eight probably.

Only 1 problem... Bama wouldn't even make an 8 team playoff. 

[n64ra 1078]

On 12/8/2019 at 8:03 AM, ChickenSandwich said:

Uuuhhhhhh no. 
 

The system rewards scheduling for an undefeated season.  It clearly discourages out of conference matchups for fear of that one loss, and discourages the ACC and SEC from actually playing their conference opponents (and to keep playing D2 schools). We are sacrificing the first 3rd of the season to make the artificial “push” at the end of the season to only have 1 or zero losses. The rest of the schedule doesn’t mean shit. Just don’t lose. 
 

8 is great.  A conference championship is the only real metric college football has that is played on the field. Polls and committees should be saved for politics, not sports. 120+ teams and 12 games. Zero like schedules. And a playoff system based on confirmation bias. 

Bingo. Oregon would be in if they traded their Auburn game for a 4-8 P5 OOO opponent.

[ChickenSandwich 9798]

1 hour ago, TXSooner518 said:

So you're saying if someone said "hey a college football team is going to play, if they win, you get $1 million, and if they lose, we shoot you in the face.  You can have Baylor, Florida, or Alabama" that you would be like "herp derrrrp who's to say, they all seem equal, just pick one at random"?  Bull fucking shit. 

So figure skating right? 
 

Your opinion and “eye test” knows best. Why play the games?   Why not use the recruiting rankings and the NFL draft results to say Bama is the best team? This type of shit thinking is why we hold teams to different standards and tailor the narrative to confirm our bias (best win, best loss, worst loss, championship game etc). 

Edited December 9, 2019 by ChickenSandwich

[C-Man 27068]

19 minutes ago, Landomatic said:

Lmao...for someone who wants to eliminate all the beauty contest smell test eyeball bullshit, you sure base a lot of your arguments on beauty contest smell test eyeball bullshit.

Not necessarily. I want the five champs in -- there's no beauty contest there. If you win, you're in. No questions asked. Fill out the other three however you want -- minus adding 2-3 more teams from the same conference -- and let's play ball. I prefer some sort of transparent computer rankings, I think.

I simply stated a fact that based on what I've seen this year -- and in years past -- I'd take Bama over Baylor AND Georgia if I'm picking a winner right now. If Tua was healthy, it would be a no-brainer. I think they're better. Would that get them into an 8-team tournament this year? They lost two games and didn't even win their division so if they didn't get in, fuck 'em. I do think they're a better team than some that could get in this hypothetical tournament.

[C-Man 27068]

21 minutes ago, Loco said:

Only 1 problem... Bama wouldn't even make an 8 team playoff. 

And I'm OK with that. They lost to LSU and then Auburn, didn't win the division (or conference champ). I still, however, think they're better than Georgia. But if we had 8-team playoff system right now and Bama didn't get in with their resume, I'm completely fine with that. I just think they'd beat Baylor and Memphis at a minimum and could beat Georgia. I'm not convinced OU beats the Tide but they didn't do enough to get in. Let the record show I'm damned happy the Tide got left out.