College Football in 2020 in danger?

[Cornfusion 250]

It was hilarious to see Paul ESPN's Finebaum try to make a case for bending the rules for Ohio State to play Texas A&M after he scorched Nebraska for trying to get an out of conference game when Wisconsin forfeited opted out against the Huskers earlier in the season.  That being said, let OSU play the Aggies.  More football is always better than less football, in my humble opinion.

Also, fuck that Max whoever guy on ESPN.

[4th&Five 42026]

 

[4th&Five 42026]

1 hour ago, BradInATX said:

I don't really see any issue with anything happening with tOSU. It's a strange year with extenuating circumstances and it makes perfect sense to put them in the B10 title game. Everyone in the country knows they're the best team in the conference and will kick the shit out of whoever they play. Them beating the hell out of Michigan and a bunch of other crappy b10 teams and OOC patsies wouldn't change any of that.

And no issue with their inevitable playoff berth either. Who else are you going to put in? If you believe the Buckeyes wouldn't beat anyone below them in the rankings by multiple scores, you're out of your mind.

I'd love to see a G5 team get in this year for fun, but tOSU is obviously one of the four best teams and that's who is supposed to be in the playoffs. Would you rather see Bama play A&M or Florida again? Or steamroll Iowa State or USC or Cincy by five touchdowns? The best and most intriguing matchup for that 1/4 game is easily Bama vs. tOSU.

The committee has made it painfully obvious that they're never letting a G5 school in if they can help it.

Edited December 9, 2020 by 4th&Five

[nnm 37998]

5 hours ago, Landomatic said:

Because, under the poster's hypothetical that I replied to, it assumes USC will be 6-0 at the end of the season with a conference championship game win. Plus they're a household name and from the west coast so you've got that for TV purposes.

Winner of the SEC with one loss, winner of the ACC with one loss, undefeated winner of the PAC and undefeated winner of the B1G. All very household names in different parts of the country for TV purposes. Sorry, Big 12...your 2 loss teams (especially if one is named Iowa State) don't stand a chance. Seems like a no-brainer to me.

It's not Trojan love from me, just reality.  I think the committee will be willing to throw out the fact that some teams may not have played as many games this year as others, for the right bluebloods in the right circumstances...i.e. an undefeated USC/tOSU.

If Trojan love means aggy gets left out, then sign me up.  Team Trojan, baby.

[956 Worldwide 35601]

This whole year is just total bullshit.  I’d almost prefer no CFP and do one year of bowl tie-ins. Start it back up when we have a real season.  The system works great when everyone plays at least 12 games. You have to be an elite team to get through a 12 game season in any P5 conference undefeated and a damn good one to escape with only one loss. 

GTFO with six games, especially when other teams out there will have at least ten. Plenty of teams can win six games, even in conference play.  A lot of this is a numbers game and you’ve just given yourself fewer chances to have an off day.

Even if both teams miraculously have no one out for serious injury,  when it comes to the dings and fatigues of the season alone, it’s not even close to a fair fight to match up tOSU with a team that played a real season. It says a lot about the strength of Bama and Clemson that they are likely favored even against an Ohio State team that’s played half a season.

FU, B1G, have a seat. You don’t get to get on your high horse about how you keep football in perspective then demand a seat at the grownup table anyway. 

Edited December 9, 2020 by 956 Worldwide

[Wally Fairway 5678]

here is the summary of the soon to be released B1G statement about changes to the conference championship game in Indy

 

[Topper13 3651]

siap:

 

[956 Worldwide 35601]

11 minutes ago, Topper13 said:

siap:

 

Competitive analysis my ass, yankees. 
 

[utee94 16091]

[Mo Horn 8939]

 No doubt the Big 10 would have made the same decision if things were reversed and Indiana was sitting at 5-0 and OSU at 6-1. Hoosiers got screwed. 

[HRSchenker 2341]

The Big Ten is a national disgrace 

[USNALonghorn 5194]

I’m so shocked...

[GreenspointTexas 9991]

What a joke

[Parliament 14618]

.

[Vic Mackey 48023]

Meh. Big 10 is covering their ass. They want Ohio St in. Fox wants them in. Follow the money. It's what college football is all about. Indiana also lost to Ohio St. So do not really feel sorry for them. Ohio St is hands down the best team in that conference once again.

Maybe if this sport actually had a real playoff like every other sport, especially football, this would not even be a topic.

Edited December 10, 2020 by Vic Mackey

[David Dennison 19569]

The Big 12 would do the same thing for Texas or OU.

[Hmbre97 6337]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

The Big 12 would do the same thing for Texas or OU.

Yep

[WhatTheBuck 28940]

2 hours ago, Mo Horn said:

 No doubt the Big 10 would have made the same decision if things were reversed and Indiana was sitting at 5-0 and OSU at 6-1. Hoosiers got screwed. 

Of course they would. Unlike in the Big XII, head-to-head results matter in the Big Ten. Everyone knows ISU won the Big XII but they're being forced to play a meaningless rematch against OU who they already beat. What a farce. 

Everyone knows who the best team in the B1G East is. Indiana, who lost heads-up to OSU, is currently under quarantine, and whose starting QB is out for the year, supports the decision. So does Michigan. Unlike Texas fans, "Fuck Ohio State!" is not a foundational doctrine of the Big Ten Conference, its members, or its broadcast partners. 

You care not because you think the Buckeyes aren't good enough to compete for a national championship. You care because you fear that they are. Sorry, no schadenfreude for you today.

[WhatTheBuck 28940]

1 hour ago, Vic Mackey said:

Meh. Big 10 is covering their ass. They want Ohio St in. Fox wants them in. Follow the money. It's what college football is all about. Indiana also lost to Ohio St. So do not really feel sorry for them. Ohio St is hands down the best team in that conference once again.

Maybe if this sport actually had a real playoff like every other sport, especially football, this would not even be a topic.

Define "real playoff." This is just the stupidest argument because you can't define it. First they wanted an actual #1 vs. #2. Then that wasn't good enough. Never mind that there often weren't more than two teams deserving of competing for a championship. So they went to a four team playoff. That would be a "real playoff". The calls to expand the playoff to eight teams began before the 2014 season was even over. Don't tell me that an eight team playoff will be a "real playoff" because it won't be long before the sixteen team playoff will be the next "real playoff." That's as sure as the sunrise. 

It's not like you don't have a model to study in the NCAA basketball tournament. 

[Fletch 5817]

2 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Define "real playoff." This is just the stupidest argument because you can't define it. First they wanted an actual #1 vs. #2. Then that wasn't good enough. Never mind that there often weren't more than two teams deserving of competing for a championship. So they went to a four team playoff. That would be a "real playoff". The calls to expand the playoff to eight teams began before the 2014 season was even over. Don't tell me that an eight team playoff will be a "real playoff" because it won't be long before the sixteen team playoff will be the next "real playoff." That's as sure as the sunrise. 

It's not like you don't have a model to study in the NCAA basketball tournament. 

Why wouldn’t an 8 team playoff work? All 5 power conference champions in and 3 at large bids. Or we can just do 16 and have every conference champion get a bid and still have those at large bids. 

[Vic Mackey 48023]

44 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Define "real playoff." This is just the stupidest argument because you can't define it. First they wanted an actual #1 vs. #2. Then that wasn't good enough. Never mind that there often weren't more than two teams deserving of competing for a championship. So they went to a four team playoff. That would be a "real playoff". The calls to expand the playoff to eight teams began before the 2014 season was even over. Don't tell me that an eight team playoff will be a "real playoff" because it won't be long before the sixteen team playoff will be the next "real playoff." That's as sure as the sunrise. 

It's not like you don't have a model to study in the NCAA basketball tournament. 

A real playoff is more than 4 teams of 130 plus. You don't even include every P5 conference winner. Lame as fuck.

How about you define "deserving". What does that even mean? Every single level of football in college and high school has a real playoffs. The fact anyone even defends the FBS system is hilarious. 

16 teams? Thank god. That is 100x better than this bullshit we have now. Oh but that's right, we won't be able to have selection shows on the network that runs the sport and that would be such a shame.

You probably thought the 2008 did not belong because the voters told you so. Or nevermind the 10 win teams before that because you know, the voters said so.

[nnm 37998]

48 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Define "real playoff." This is just the stupidest argument because you can't define it. First they wanted an actual #1 vs. #2. Then that wasn't good enough. Never mind that there often weren't more than two teams deserving of competing for a championship. So they went to a four team playoff. That would be a "real playoff". The calls to expand the playoff to eight teams began before the 2014 season was even over. Don't tell me that an eight team playoff will be a "real playoff" because it won't be long before the sixteen team playoff will be the next "real playoff." That's as sure as the sunrise. 

It's not like you don't have a model to study in the NCAA basketball tournament. 

An 8 team invitational is a hell of a lot more like a playoff than a 4 team invitational. 

[Fletch 5817]

How far have we fallen as a society when @Vic Mackey proposal makes more sense than what we currently have?

[4th&Five 42026]

Eight would be perfect. Sixteen is too many. 

[HRSchenker 2341]

1 hour ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Define "real playoff." This is just the stupidest argument because you can't define it. First they wanted an actual #1 vs. #2. Then that wasn't good enough. Never mind that there often weren't more than two teams deserving of competing for a championship. So they went to a four team playoff. That would be a "real playoff". The calls to expand the playoff to eight teams began before the 2014 season was even over. Don't tell me that an eight team playoff will be a "real playoff" because it won't be long before the sixteen team playoff will be the next "real playoff." That's as sure as the sunrise. 

It's not like you don't have a model to study in the NCAA basketball tournament. 

The problem is that conferences have championship games that don't matter. Look at Pedo State a few years ago. They won their division, made it to the conference championship game, and won it. Did they make it to the playoff? No. But a team that was in their division that didn't play in the conference championship did. The playoff became illegitimate after that season. What in the fuck is the purpose of conference championships if you can win your conference but lose out on a playoff spot to the number 3 team?

[WhatTheBuck 28940]

1 hour ago, Fletch said:

Why wouldn’t an 8 team playoff work? All 5 power conference champions in and 3 at large bids. Or we can just do 16 and have every conference champion get a bid and still have those at large bids. 

The only obvious solution is a 64 team playoff. Then we'll have a "real playoff" and can define a "true champion," not a "mythical" one.  

[USNALonghorn 5194]

My preferred long term answer to the playoff would be to have G5 split off and do their own thing. Realign P5 into 4 super conferences (8 total divisions). The conference championship games would constitute the first round of the playoffs. Conference champions go to the semis. ND can join one of the super conferences or fuck off to the G5 side. 

This would completely eliminate any of the bullshit rankings, committees, “eye test” fuckery, etc. Just agree on a good set of division champion tie-breaker rules, and the rest sorts itself out.

Note: P4* and G5 sides would still play each other in non-con games. They just now have their own sets of playoffs/champions.

[Agent 13 319]

Ten 12-team conferences or 12 10-team conferences. Take your pick. That's right, 120 teams. Don't like that you're not in one of the conferences? Work your way in via soccer-type regulation thing. Win your conference and you're in playoffs. Have byes or fill out with extra deserving teams. Don't care. Have playoffs. Fin.

[Chet Steadman 940]

Annnnnndddd it’s another realignment thread.  

Good work everyone.   

[Fletch 5817]

2 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

The only obvious solution is a 64 team playoff. Then we'll have a "real playoff" and can define a "true champion," not a "mythical" one.  

I agree but that’s never going to happen. Our best bet at a “fair” playoff is 8 or 16 with the conference champions and deserving at large teams. Trust me, it drives me nuts that every level of football has a true playoff but d1 college football but it is what it is 

[WhatTheBuck 28940]

3 hours ago, Fletch said:

I agree but that’s never going to happen. Our best bet at a “fair” playoff is 8 or 16 with the conference champions and deserving at large teams. Trust me, it drives me nuts that every level of football has a true playoff but d1 college football but it is what it is 

I was mocking the idea. We should've stuck with the BCS. The playoff is stupid and you won't be satisfied when you get what you think you want. 

[Fletch 5817]

I’m not sure I agree. Imagine an 8 team playoff in 03, 04 and 08. Would’ve been some amazing games and a hell of a playoff that would’ve determined who really was the true national champion. Could you imagine 08 with Texas, Florida, OU, USC, Ohio State, Penn state, bama and Utah in an 8 team playoff? That’d be like March madness on steroids

[WhatTheBuck 28940]

What are the minimum requirements to identify a "true" national champion?

Don't be a dunce. There are too many teams, too few games, and no matter how large you make the field there will always be disputes over who gets in and who doesn't. Because the decisions about who gets in and who doesn't will always be subjective. You'll never be happy. We should've just stuck with the BCS and enjoyed the rest of the bowl season when those games still mattered. 

An eight team playoff is just a step on the way to the eventual sixteen team playoff. Then Alabama and Ohio State will be in the playoff every year regardless of whether they win their conference or not. Is that really what you want?

[Fletch 5817]

Pretty much. March madness is awesome. So would an 8 or 16 team playoff

[956 Worldwide 35601]

3 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I was mocking the idea. We should've stuck with the BCS. The playoff is stupid and you won't be satisfied when you get what you think you want. 

The demand for a “real” national champion is artificial controversy ginned up by idiot talking heads who need to fill up airspace on radio and TV, then amplified by sports message boards.  Fans of actual, discrete college football teams in no way derive more enjoyment of following their school with a playoff.

March Madness is exactly why it’s a terrible idea for CFP.  No one except students and alumni give a single solitary shit about UNC-Duke in the regular season even if they’re ranked 1 and 2.  We all know it means next to nothing when it comes to March.

FBS  is already facing attendance and long-term ratings issues.  How to fix it? I know, let’s devalue these incredibly expensive pageants we put on each week even more! 

[Landomatic 3813]

1 hour ago, Fletch said:

Pretty much. March madness is awesome. So would an 8 or 16 team playoff

Yeah meanwhile the regular season in basketball is pretty much worthless.  So you’d have a kicksss setup for one month and the rest of the year would suck.  Sounds fun

[SwanderedTalent 5761]

40 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

The demand for a “real” national champion is artificial controversy ginned up by idiot talking heads

Not so. There were coaches all the way back to the late 60s and early 70s who pushed for a playoff solution (ranging from a plus-one after the New Year's Day bowls to various 8, 12, or 16-team configurations) because there were too many regular seasons ending with multiple unbeaten teams that contractually couldn't meet in the post-season. There was a tremendous amount of fan interest in the idea, too-- I am not sure it was a majority opinion by any means but really all it took was a season where a power was locked out of the national title for their fans to start questioning why their team couldn't prove it on the field. 

There is no perfect answer. The BCS worked perfectly in seasons like 2005, when it brought what were clearly the best two unbeaten teams together. It worked terribly in seasons like 2000 and 2008. If there was some legitimate way to adapt the post-season to the performance of the regular season-- top two teams one year, top four another, eight another-- that would probably be most "fair" in terms of taking the handful of teams that seem like legitimate national championship caliber squads and giving them a shot at it without exposing them to post-season participants that don't belong in that tier, but that's totally unrealistic for a number of reasons.

I don't really know where I fall on this. A season like 1983 would just about kill me at this point, where we (and Nebraska) were locked out of playing for the national title, but I really don't see a lot of playoff scenarios that I think work all that well either-- we either get too locked into objective criteria or we're too reliant on the "eye test". 

[Steamboat1874 4391]

The best thing that could happen is Northwestern knocking off tosu.

I don't give a shit if that gets aggy in because they will get scrubbed by Bama.

[SwanderedTalent 5761]

8 minutes ago, Steamboat1874 said:

The best thing that could happen is Northwestern knocking off tosu.

I don't give a shit if that gets aggy in because they will get scrubbed by Bama.

Why do you think that?

[Steamboat1874 4391]

Just now, SwanderedTalent said:

Why do you think that?

Because of the Big 10's bullshit which I guess is no different than the ACC's.

For all of you Herman haters you should root for this because if aggy gets in that puts more pressure on CDC.

[SwanderedTalent 5761]

6 minutes ago, Steamboat1874 said:

Because of the Big 10's bullshit

Well, OK, but I'd rather live with the Big 10's "bullshit" than:

1) Doing anything to enable the playoff to become the SEC Invitational

2) Using one of three playoff games for a rematch of a four-touchdown regular season beatdown

3) Doing anything that rewards or favors A&M. Parabus ceteris, I prefer whatever outcome is worst for them.

Lastly, the Big Ten's decision to waive its arbitrary CCG minimum to favor its best team isn't "bullshit" in this case. Ohio State would be playing in the Big Ten title game even if Michigan had been able to play this weekend and OSU lost to them. They beat Indiana head-to-head. People are complaining about the Big Ten finally doing something logical-- the conference made up a dumb rule in August and now that they've seen how dumb it is, they were at least smart enough to say "oops, that's dumb" and reverse it rather than saying "NUH UH RULES IS RULES". 

Edited December 10, 2020 by SwanderedTalent

[utee94 16091]

4 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I was mocking the idea. We should've stuck with the BCS. The playoff is stupid and you won't be satisfied when you get what you think you want. 

The BCS sucked too.

Go back to the olden days of dudes in ugly colored jackets smoking cigars and making backroom deals for bowl games.  Also, go back to conference alignments from about 1983.  College football was way more fun then.

The nationalization of the sport, is what is ruining it.

[Parliament 14618]

Or...
NO OOC games in the regular season. 8 team playoff with the 5 majors getting an auto bid, and 3 G5 Champs (decided by committee) as well. Conferences can choose their champ any way they want, but only ONE team per conference gets in.

Would create major intrigue. Is Aggy better than Ohio State? Only way to find out is to win your conference and meet in the playoffs.

[HRSchenker 2341]

Ohio State fans are so stupid that they're actually trying to argue that 5-0 is a better record than 6-1 when looking at divisional standings. I used to not have an opinion about Ohio State fans but now I do: fuck em. They're almost as bad as aggy fans 

[SwanderedTalent 5761]

3 minutes ago, HRSchenker said:

Ohio State fans are so stupid that they're actually trying to argue that 5-0 is a better record than 6-1 when looking at divisional standings.

How is that stupid?

[BradInATX 9208]

23 minutes ago, HRSchenker said:

Ohio State fans are so stupid that they're actually trying to argue that 5-0 is a better record than 6-1 when looking at divisional standings. I used to not have an opinion about Ohio State fans but now I do: fuck em. They're almost as bad as aggy fans 

What? 5-0 is clearly better than 6-1. 

Edited December 10, 2020 by BradInATX

[HRSchenker 2341]

14 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

What? 5-0 is clearly better than 6-1. 

/s? 

[956 Worldwide 35601]

Putting tOSU into the playoff is just pushing them through on the strength of the eyeball test. Nothing more.  Their resume is incredibly weak because they’ll only have played less than half a season.  Even with losses, plenty of teams behind them currently have better resumes based off of who they’ve played and how many games.

Florida, A&M, Cincinnati, Miami...all of those teams have shown more against more quality opponents.  

And I am completely on board that tOSU is better than all those teams.  They are, almost certainly. They just haven’t shown it on the field because of decisions made by the B1G.  They didn’t have the chance to do it.
 

So don’t try to justify the 2020 CFP as if the Buckeyes earned their place via their play on the field.  Just do a year of awesome NY6 tie in games and regroup on the CFP next year. 

Edited December 10, 2020 by 956 Worldwide

[WhatTheBuck 28940]

6 hours ago, Fletch said:

Pretty much. March madness is awesome. So would an 8 or 16 team playoff

I'm guessing you don't actually attend games. You just watch on tv. 

 

[WhatTheBuck 28940]

3 hours ago, utee94 said:

The BCS sucked too.

Go back to the olden days of dudes in ugly colored jackets smoking cigars and making backroom deals for bowl games.  Also, go back to conference alignments from about 1983.  College football was way more fun then.

The nationalization of the sport, is what is ruining it.

I'd take the old poll & bowl system over a 16 team playoff.