CFB PLAYOFF FINAL AND NO SEC

[Oldgoldandwhite]

Way off topic for this thread (but well within the ball park by Swarm standards) how do people feel about Kirk Herbstreit?

My feelings about him are starting to turn a little sour. I could give reasons but it’s not really rational. I used to like him. I don’t hate him now but I would prefer games he’s not working.

He used to be fair and balanced. But that was in a galaxy a long, long time ago.

 

[Richard7125]

I'll start with...I like the current format. I'd like 16 teams with all conference champions participating getting the top seeds (if we have 6 or 7 conference champions in the Top16, then those are seated 1-6 or 1-7. Five automatic qualifiers, regardless of ranking). Winning your conference should mean something.

That being said,

2 years in a row.

The intent of the college football playoff (after making money) is to determine the best team. People want to confuse the playoff with rewarding teams for good seasons. There’ve been some posts over the past few weeks suggesting OSU shouldn’t have gotten into the playoffs because they didn’t win their conference. They would prefer to include a 9-5 Conference USA champion Jax State.

Bowl games are rewards for teams having good seasons. No need to dumb down the CFP with participation trophies.

 

[Richard7125]

I'll start with...I like the current format. I'd like 16 teams with all conference champions participating getting the top seeds (if we have 6 or 7 conference champions in the Top16, then those are seated 1-6 or 1-7. Five automatic qualifiers, regardless of ranking). Winning your conference should mean something.

That being said,

2 years in a row.

Rebuttal Part 2 .

There are 32 automatic qualifiers for NCAA basketball tournament. Should those 32 conference tournament winners be seeded 1 through 8 in the four different March Madness brackets? Do you really think it would be a good idea to have Auburn or Duke (the current #1 and #2 teams in the country) being 9 seeds because they were runners-up in their conference tournament?

Why would you want to do seeding like that in football?

 

[stinger78]

The intent of the college football playoff (after making money) is to determine the best team. People want to confuse the playoff with rewarding teams for good seasons. There’ve been some posts over the past few weeks suggesting OSU shouldn’t have gotten into the playoffs because they didn’t win their conference. They would prefer to include a 9-5 Conference USA champion Jax State.

Bowl games are rewards for teams having good seasons. No need to dumb down the CFP with participation trophies.

I’ve seen no opinions that OSU shouldn’t have been there.

In a 4-team playoff with only champs, maybe.

ETA: I also din’t know that you are appreciating the difficulty of a “good season.” Was Indiana one of the best 4? No, but because of what they did on the field, they deserved a chance to play for it.

 

[forensicbuzz]

The intent of the college football playoff (after making money) is to determine the best team. People want to confuse the playoff with rewarding teams for good seasons. There’ve been some posts over the past few weeks suggesting OSU shouldn’t have gotten into the playoffs because they didn’t win their conference. They would prefer to include a 9-5 Conference USA champion Jax State.

Bowl games are rewards for teams having good seasons. No need to dumb down the CFP with participation trophies.

To begin with, the CFP is not about determining the best team. It is 100% a made-for-TV event to earn as much money as possible by putting together the most compelling (to a TV audience) match-ups. Anyone who thinks the CFP cares 1 rat's *** about who is the best team in the country is deluding themselves. Case in point, an undefeated P4 champion was left out last year because the CFP Committee had to find a way to get an SEC team (namely Alabama) into the CFP because that made better TV. At this point, I'd rather see the A10 or Big Sky champion rather than a 4th or 5th-place team from the SEC or B1G. If you want a shot at the NC, then at least make your conference championship game.

To be a champion, you have to earn it on the field. Winning the CFP doesn't make you the best team, it means you won a tournament. I have no issue with tOSU being named NC. They lost 2 games and beat Oregon when it mattered. They beat a ND team with 1 loss. No one ended the season with a better record other than the aforementioned Oregon team, so they earned it on the field.

With the current format, adding more teams (move to 16 just to include Alabama, Miami, USCe, BYU, Iowa State, Ole Miss or whoever) would not have made for more compelling or interesting games. I'm all for a Tournament of Champions to determine the National Championship. Win your conference to gain a seat at the table. I think we'd see a reversion to 16 or so 9-10 team conferences. That would be a more appropriate CFP, to me. There would be no chest-thumping about strength of schedule or my conference deserves more than your conference. Every team in the conference would play each other, so the only advantage is who is at home.

 

[forensicbuzz]

Rebuttal Part 2 .

There are 32 automatic qualifiers for NCAA basketball tournament. Should those 32 conference tournament winners be seeded 1 through 8 in the four different March Madness brackets? Do you really think it would be a good idea to have Auburn or Duke (the current #1 and #2 teams in the country) being 9 seeds because they were runners-up in their conference tournament?

Why would you want to do seeding like that in football?

Apples and oranges. Basketball and football are not the same animal. There's a reason the NFL playoffs are set up the way they are (and there's way more parity in the NFL).

 

[Towaliga]

The intent of the college football playoff (after making money) is to determine the best team. People want to confuse the playoff with rewarding teams for good seasons. There’ve been some posts over the past few weeks suggesting OSU shouldn’t have gotten into the playoffs because they didn’t win their conference. They would prefer to include a 9-5 Conference USA champion Jax State.

Bowl games are rewards for teams having good seasons. No need to dumb down the CFP with participation trophies.

I’ve looked, but I can’t find anyone that was arguing OSU shouldn’t have been in. Please identify those specific posters so I can ignore them.

 

[Root4GT]

To begin with, the CFP is not about determining the best team. It is 100% a made-for-TV event to earn as much money as possible by putting together the most compelling (to a TV audience) match-ups. Anyone who thinks the CFP cares 1 rat's *** about who is the best team in the country is deluding themselves. Case in point, an undefeated P4 champion was left out last year because the CFP Committee had to find a way to get an SEC team (namely Alabama) into the CFP because that made better TV. At this point, I'd rather see the A10 or Big Sky champion rather than a 4th or 5th-place team from the SEC or B1G. If you want a shot at the NC, then at least make your conference championship game.

To be a champion, you have to earn it on the field. Winning the CFP doesn't make you the best team, it means you won a tournament. I have no issue with tOSU being named NC. They lost 2 games and beat Oregon when it mattered. They beat a ND team with 1 loss. No one ended the season with a better record other than the aforementioned Oregon team, so they earned it on the field.

With the current format, adding more teams (move to 16 just to include Alabama, Miami, USCe, BYU, Iowa State, Ole Miss or whoever) would not have made for more compelling or interesting games. I'm all for a Tournament of Champions to determine the National Championship. Win your conference to gain a seat at the table. I think we'd see a reversion to 16 or so 9-10 team conferences. That would be a more appropriate CFP, to me. There would be no chest-thumping about strength of schedule or my conference deserves more than your conference. Every team in the conference would play each other, so the only advantage is who is at home.

We are not going back to smaller Conferences. Too much money is being made as the Conferences are now configured. The G5 Conferences will only get one team in the CFP unless two G5 Teams have great years and each team has multiple wins over very good P4 teams. I have no issue with that!

Personally I like the Top 4 ranked Conference Champions getting the bye. I also like teams 5-8 getting a home game. This year's CFP worked out well. Letting the CFP seed as they see fit adds no value.

The reseeding based on the rankings before the Conference Championship Games began was (Week 16 Rankings):
1. Oregon
2. Georgia
3. Texas
4. Penn State
5. Notre Dame
6. Ohio State
7. Tennessee
8. Indiana
9. Boise State
10. SMU
11. Alabama // Clemson
12. Arizona State
16. Clemson
Is this a better setup? (Color Codes are for the 1st round games). Not really in by view, it's just different and the teams who won their Conferences do not get rewarded, well Clemson got into the CFP but otherwise no real reward. Based on Conference Championship Games Texas and Penn State might have dropped to 5th and 6th moving ND and Ohio State into the top 4 with byes. Of course neither played in a Conference Championship Game so they would get rewarded for not playing. I do not like that at all!

Hopefully the ACC Commissioner will just shut up with his ideas and let this play out one more year!

 

[TampaBuzz]

I’ve looked, but I can’t find anyone that was arguing OSU shouldn’t have been in. Please identify those specific posters so I can ignore them.

I am curious why you would ignore them? Some posters on here believe that only conference champions should be allowed to play for a national championship (i.e. - you gotta earn it on the field). Many others fans believe that "better" teams on paper should be allowed into the tournament even if they don't win a conference championship or (in OSU's case) maybe don't even make it into a conference championship game. OSU falls into the 2nd category and made great use of their second chance to win the tournament title. Good for them!

 

[Richard7125]

I’ve looked, but I can’t find anyone that was arguing OSU shouldn’t have been in. Please identify those specific posters so I can ignore them.

No one specifically said OSU should be left out of the 12 team playoffs. A handful have espoused the playoffs should only include conference champions (8 teams). I know it's a massive reach, but you can interpret that as some think OSU didn't deserve to be in the playoffs.

 

[wrmathis]

No one specifically said OSU should be left out of the 12 team playoffs. A handful have espoused the playoffs should only include conference champions (8 teams). I know it's a massive reach, but you can interpret that as some think OSU didn't deserve to be in the playoffs.

i believe it should be conf champs getting in.

i also believe that tOsu deserved to be in and the NC under the current setup.

 

[Richard7125]

To begin with, the CFP is not about determining the best team. It is 100% a made-for-TV event to earn as much money as possible by putting together the most compelling (to a TV audience) match-ups. Anyone who thinks the CFP cares 1 rat's *** about who is the best team in the country is deluding themselves. Case in point, an undefeated P4 champion was left out last year because the CFP Committee had to find a way to get an SEC team (namely Alabama) into the CFP because that made better TV. At this point, I'd rather see the A10 or Big Sky champion rather than a 4th or 5th-place team from the SEC or B1G. If you want a shot at the NC, then at least make your conference championship game.

To be a champion, you have to earn it on the field. Winning the CFP doesn't make you the best team, it means you won a tournament. I have no issue with tOSU being named NC. They lost 2 games and beat Oregon when it mattered. They beat a ND team with 1 loss. No one ended the season with a better record other than the aforementioned Oregon team, so they earned it on the field.

With the current format, adding more teams (move to 16 just to include Alabama, Miami, USCe, BYU, Iowa State, Ole Miss or whoever) would not have made for more compelling or interesting games. I'm all for a Tournament of Champions to determine the National Championship. Win your conference to gain a seat at the table. I think we'd see a reversion to 16 or so 9-10 team conferences. That would be a more appropriate CFP, to me. There would be no chest-thumping about strength of schedule or my conference deserves more than your conference. Every team in the conference would play each other, so the only advantage is who is at home.

You finish your first paragraph saying if you want a shot at the NC, then at least make your conference championship game. Your next paragraph starts with you saying you don't have an issue with OSU being named NC. Well, OSU didn't make their championship game - I would interpret that as you having an issue with OSU being named NC.

I agree the CFP is a money maker, but i think you are very mistaken if you don't think the commissioners of the conferences nor the Presidents and ADs of the schools care who wins the NC. These are the people who approved/created the CFP. Yes, they did it for money, but also for notoriety, bragging rights, marketing the schools, etc.

 

[stinger78]

No one specifically said OSU should be left out of the 12 team playoffs. A handful have espoused the playoffs should only include conference champions (8 teams). I know it's a massive reach, but you can interpret that as some think OSU didn't deserve to be in the playoffs.

The 8 teams that I suggested were the top 2 in each P4 conference. Will that exclude valid teams? Yes, at times.

In most years there are teams who caught fire late and are among the best, though their W/L won’t reflect it. What happens on the field over the entire season matters.

 

[forensicbuzz]

You finish your first paragraph saying if you want a shot at the NC, then at least make your conference championship game. Your next paragraph starts with you saying you don't have an issue with OSU being named NC. Well, OSU didn't make their championship game - I would interpret that as you having an issue with OSU being named NC.

I agree the CFP is a money maker, but i think you are very mistaken if you don't think the commissioners of the conferences nor the Presidents and ADs of the schools care who wins the NC. These are the people who approved/created the CFP. Yes, they did it for money, but also for notoriety, bragging rights, marketing the schools, etc.

They don't have to be mutually exclusive. One paragraph says what I'd like to see and the other discusses the reality of what we have today.

My preference would be to have a conference of champions. But, we don't have that, so we're going to have teams that make the field that didn't win their conference. Not my choice, but I can live with it.

tOSU was 10-2 as a non-CCG participant. The others in contention were Tennessee, Miami, UNLV, Army (10-1), and Memphis. Iowa State was also 10-2 but was a CCG participant. Of that cast of 10-2 teams for the final 2 spots in the Round of 12, who would you have taken? I'd have taken tOSU (win over PSU and loss to Oregon) and either Tennessee or Miami. So, I don't have a problem with tOSU getting a chance. I would have had a problem with a 3-loss team (not a CCG loss) getting in over a P4 2-loss team (Tennessee, tOSU, Miami, Iowa State).

As for your second paragraph, the CFP was driven by ESPN and/or the other TV networks to generate more revenue. For 120 years the presidents, ADs, commissioners, etc. had no problem letting the polls decide who was the MNC in football every year. The ONLY reason it changed was because of the TV money. The current system only has 1 champion; the old way multiple schools got to claim a recognized national championship.

 

[Richard7125]

They don't have to be mutually exclusive. One paragraph says what I'd like to see and the other discusses the reality of what we have today.

My preference would be to have a conference of champions. But, we don't have that, so we're going to have teams that make the field that didn't win their conference. Not my choice, but I can live with it.

tOSU was 10-2 as a non-CCG participant. The others in contention were Tennessee, Miami, UNLV, Army (10-1), and Memphis. Iowa State was also 10-2 but was a CCG participant. Of that cast of 10-2 teams for the final 2 spots in the Round of 12, who would you have taken? I'd have taken tOSU (win over PSU and loss to Oregon) and either Tennessee or Miami. So, I don't have a problem with tOSU getting a chance. I would have had a problem with a 3-loss team (not a CCG loss) getting in over a P4 2-loss team (Tennessee, tOSU, Miami, Iowa State).

As for your second paragraph, the CFP was driven by ESPN and/or the other TV networks to generate more revenue. For 120 years the presidents, ADs, commissioners, etc. had no problem letting the polls decide who was the MNC in football every year. The ONLY reason it changed was because of the TV money. The current system only has 1 champion; the old way multiple schools got to claim a recognized national championship.

"One paragraph says what I'd like to see and the other discusses the reality of what we have today."

That was my point to begin with. I said there are people on here who don't think a team that didn't make their championship game (ie OSU) should have gotten into the playoffs. I was commenting on what people said they would like to see.

 

[Richard7125]

We are not going back to smaller Conferences. Too much money is being made as the Conferences are now configured. The G5 Conferences will only get one team in the CFP unless two G5 Teams have great years and each team has multiple wins over very good P4 teams. I have no issue with that!

Personally I like the Top 4 ranked Conference Champions getting the bye. I also like teams 5-8 getting a home game. This year's CFP worked out well. Letting the CFP seed as they see fit adds no value.

The reseeding based on the rankings before the Conference Championship Games began was (Week 16 Rankings):
1. Oregon
2. Georgia
3. Texas
4. Penn State
5. Notre Dame
6. Ohio State
7. Tennessee
8. Indiana
9. Boise State
10. SMU
11. Alabama // Clemson
12. Arizona State
16. Clemson
Is this a better setup? (Color Codes are for the 1st round games). Not really in by view, it's just different and the teams who won their Conferences do not get rewarded, well Clemson got into the CFP but otherwise no real reward. Based on Conference Championship Games Texas and Penn State might have dropped to 5th and 6th moving ND and Ohio State into the top 4 with byes. Of course neither played in a Conference Championship Game so they would get rewarded for not playing. I do not like that at all!

Hopefully the ACC Commissioner will just shut up with his ideas and let this play out one more year!

I think the CFP got it pretty darn right this year.

 

[bke1984]

Only gripe I have is the way conference champs are determined. You can’t have a conference with 18 teams and then just take the top two records for a championship game. The overlap in opponents is too random to judge a 7-1 team vs a 6-2 team. The latter could have had a far more difficult schedule and likely mop the former on the field. If conferences are going to be this big they need divisions. Win the division, play in the championship. Win the championship, play in the playoff. Fill the rest with at large - many of whom would come from teams that didn’t make the championship due to being in a stacked division - which is fine.

 

[MWBATL]

This will all eventually go the way of most post-season tournaments…in that the champion crowned there will NOT necessarily be the team that was the best over the full season, merely the best in the tournament much like MLB has become. It’s all driven by the $$$

In Europe, they award two ‘trophies’…one for best team over the whole season and one for the tournament champions. They recognize the futility of these arguments and don’t bother to try to equate the two. The mistake many on this board are making is to try to equate the regular season with the tournament. They’re two entirely different animals. (Again, just like MLB.)

Only problem we have is we don’t anoint a regular season college football champion anymore. It’s difficult to do with the imbalance in schedules, but don’t confuse the CFP champ with the best team over the whole season.

 

[forensicbuzz]

"One paragraph says what I'd like to see and the other discusses the reality of what we have today."

That was my point to begin with. I said there are people on here who don't think a team that didn't make their championship game (ie OSU) should have gotten into the playoffs. I was commenting on what people said they would like to see.

To me, it's not a zero-sum game (not suggesting that you feel it is). I can have my preference in how I think it should be done while also recognizing that there are other legitimate avenues.

 

[wrmathis]

Only gripe I have is the way conference champs are determined. You can’t have a conference with 18 teams and then just take the top two records for a championship game. The overlap in opponents is too random to judge a 7-1 team vs a 6-2 team. The latter could have had a far more difficult schedule and likely mop the former on the field. If conferences are going to be this big they need divisions. Win the division, play in the championship. Win the championship, play in the playoff. Fill the rest with at large - many of whom would come from teams that didn’t make the championship due to being in a stacked division - which is fine.

the problem with this is like in the ACC in 2012? when Tech played FSU. Tech was 6-6 coming into the championship game. put up hell of a fight but lost. well if they would have won, would you want them in the Playoffs? i mean personally i would have just because **** happens and other sports pro or college that is possible. but most people would have an absolute fit. this scenario is why most conferences have gone to best 2 records instead of winning a division. to make sure the "best" teams are playing in the Conf Champ game to have the best shot to be in the CFP.

i personally dont care if what happens above happens. What I want to see Conf champs from all conf get a spot in the CFP. its a set defined goal to make it into the CFP. if you dont like that a team from the sunbelt gets into the CFP over a 11-1 uga/bama/mich/osu/etc. cuz they didnt win their conference, then go join one of those lesser conf and just dominate and get an easy path to the CFP. of course, this will never happen. just way to much money at this point for a team to leave the SEC/B1G/B12/ACC to do that.