CFP Discussion

[GTLorenzo]

That's not the reason--that's the excuse, or the PR.

If Michigan's QB was out and they still beat Ohio State, would they be in? (yes).

Not to be disagreeable, but that IS the reason. If Travis was healthy, they're in. I don't think many (any?) think that if Travis were healthy, FSU would not be in. Maybe Uga is in under that scenario and not Bama or TX, but FSU would definitely be in.

Michigan may get in if their QB were to get hurt, we won't ever know. What we do know is that FSU's back up is not nearly as good as Travis and it showed in the two games they played. I don't think Michigan's offense is dynamic, so maybe that makes a difference, maybe it doesn't.

 

[UgaBlows]

Sure you could. They lost at the wrong time for them. And, despite winning 29 games in a row, they weren't great this year. I don't think any of the top 6 or 7 are great and any (with their team at full strength) could likely beat any of the others. So yes, you could argue that, but the committee said that FSU is not at full strength, so they weren't picked. That simple.

I think maybe they figured they could get by with screwing over one undefeated team but taking out two in favor of 2 SEC teams with 1-loss each would cause a riot, plus nobody wants to watch uga and bama play a rematch for the mnc

 

[GTLorenzo]

I think maybe they figured they could get by with screwing over one undefeated team but taking out two in favor of 2 SEC teams with 1-loss each would cause a riot, plus nobody wants to watch uga and bama play a rematch for the mnc

Bama/LSU showed that no one wants to watch a rematch in the playoffs if it can be avoided. Bama won the championship game, so that probably was the deciding factor.

 

[stinger78]

But what you are not considering is the fact that the current day FSU team is not the same as the FSU team that won the first 10 games of the year and got to that No. 4 ranking.

You keep stating this and it’s likely true, but it’s a red herring. It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. They are still a darn good team who put up a 13-0 record against heavy odds. That is simply the fact. The rest is conjecture.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Yeah but didn't Alabama need a miracle 4th and forever play to beat a really bad Auburn team on that same day?

Also would like to point out again, talking heads on ESPN were already pushing "Alabama if they won" before either SEC or ACC games had begun. So saying it had anything to do with FSU performance on the field isn't entirely accurate.

There was just no way the SEC was going to be left out. The FSU QB situation just provided the committee the excuse they needed.

And I haven’t seen anybody else mention this but when I watched the FSU game the two announcers stressed, before the game started, how hard it would be for FSU to score, and, half way through the first quarter, were making snide comments about how boring the game was. I remember thinking it odd that they had decided this before the game even played out and wondered where this narrative came from.

 

[GTLorenzo]

You keep stating this and it’s likely true, but it’s a red herring. It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. They are still a darn good team who put up a 13-0 record against heavy odds. That is simply the fact. The rest is conjecture.

It does matter. THAT is why FSU wasn't invited to the party!! Or at least that is the perception of the committee and why they didn't invite them to the party. Yes, they are 13-0. But they are not the same team they were a few weeks ago when they had a star QB and now they don't. That can't really be argued.

 

[TampaBuzz]

It does matter. THAT is why FSU wasn't invited to the party!! Or at least that is the perception of the committee and why they didn't invite them to the party. Yes, they are 13-0. But they are not the same team they were a few weeks ago when they had a star QB and now they don't. That can't really be argued.

Boo....is that you?

 

[GTLorenzo]

Boo....is that you?

You caught me......

 

[slugboy]

Not to be disagreeable, but that IS the reason. If Travis was healthy, they're in. I don't think many (any?) think that if Travis were healthy, FSU would not be in. Maybe Uga is in under that scenario and not Bama or TX, but FSU would definitely be in.

Michigan may get in if their QB were to get hurt, we won't ever know. What we do know is that FSU's back up is not nearly as good as Travis and it showed in the two games they played. I don't think Michigan's offense is dynamic, so maybe that makes a difference, maybe it doesn't.

With their backup QB, and then their backup to their backup, they did better than some top 10 teams did against the same competition.

 

[GTLorenzo]

With their backup QB, and then their backup to their backup, they did better than some top 10 teams did against the same competition.

Ok. I’m just telling you why they weren’t chosen. We could discuss specific games, stats, SoS, etc. but they didn’t get in because the game Saturday was dread awful and the committee didn’t want a game like that in their invitational tournament.

Right now, that is who they are.

 

[stinger78]

First, I'd like to second RamblinRed's hat tip to the people who said "no way is the SEC getting left out". You were proven right.

Second, it's clear that there are no strong CFP committee criteria--or if there are, they're secret. It is just a big TV show and not a playoff.

Third, the only "four best teams" that make sense for this is "the four teams that the CFP committee and their sponsors wanted most", and that doesn't make a ton of sense. There are some economic/psychological behaviors that got famous with Kahneman and Tversky where decision making was illogical--for example, given a choice of two foods, someone would prefer hamburgers over pizza, pizza over spaghetti, but spaghetti over hamburgers (i.e. their favorite choice depends on what options you give them, not on a real ordered set of what they like). That happened in this selection--if UGA wins, the four teams would almost certainly be UGA, MICH, Washington, and FSU. Since UGA lost, and Texas has the win over BAMA, then the logical order is MICH, WASH, FSU, Texas, but that leaves out the SEC, and there's obviously a secret "the SEC gets a seat" rule. That bumps out the lowest remaining seed--FSU.

The frustration is that FSU was more deserving. If you're picking by SOS, there are teams that are better than BAMA. If you're picking by how you **did** against a strong strength of schedule, FSU is in the top 4--yes, they're much better than BAMA by their resume.

If you're picking the four best teams, it's UGA, Oregon, Ohio State, and Michigan. (@Techster I think Michigan is a better team than BAMA. Maybe Saban can prep a team better for one game than most other coaches, but Michigan isn't the weakest team in the CF(sic)P )

The frustration is that there are a lot of ways you can see knocking FSU out of the CF(sic)P, but none of the rational views of "best team" put Alabama in--what you've accomplished (resume) puts FSU in. Best four teams doesn't put either team in. You can find something that Alabama is better at than FSU, but there will be four teams better in that measure than Alabama.

The most logical reason is "the SEC has a guaranteed space in the CFP unless their representative has at least two losses".

View attachment 15290

So, if I read that correctly, the "best" teams were actually Michigan, UGAg, Oregon, and Ohio State and only one got into the CFP?

 

[Northeast Stinger]

It means that if a player (or more) decide to skip the game or are otherwise not available and/or ... a coach leaves (hired away, fired, etc) ... then the performance of the team is expected to be different during the remaining playoff.

Again, my understanding (which may not be accurate) is that the bowls are to reward teams for their success during the regular season. The playoff is to match the four teams expected to be the best (future tense) ... so the criteria is more than just W's and L's.

Am I missing something?

How do you have that as criteria for choosing a team if teams get chosen before you even have a chance to see who will actually be missing?

Let’s say Alabama or Michigan or Texas has one or more of their coaches pilfered before January. Or what if a player or players decide to follow NIL money somewhere else? Even injuries are uncertain in that some players may heal up and be able to play by January and other players may get hurt in practice before the game.

Just feels like an attempt to fine-tune / choose teams based on unknowable factors.

 

[stinger78]

Ok. I’m just telling you why they weren’t chosen. We could discuss specific games, stats, SoS, etc. but they didn’t get in because the game Saturday was dread awful and the committee didn’t want a game like that in their invitational tournament.

Right now, that is who they are.

Two issues about what you insist on repeating:
1. No, last Saturday night is *not* who FSU is. That QB will not play another down this season unless their 2nd string QB gets hurt. That statement is a red herring, is simply not true, and is designed to deflect from the truth.
2. Even as poorly as he played, the FSU *team* stood up and won the game. A team is more than just a QB and that *team* won that game. That is a statement of strength, not weakness for most rational people who know football. To go undefeated is difficult. To finish 13-0, including a rivalry game and a conference CG, with a 2nd/3rd string QB's playing is incredibly difficult. Yet, that is just what FSU did. There is simply no rational football-related way that they should be penalized for that.

 

[slugboy]

So, if I read that correctly, the "best" teams were actually Michigan, UGAg, Oregon, and Ohio State and only one got into the CFP?

Through most of the stat measures, yes. The NFL doesn’t pick the best teams for the playoffs—none of the pro leagues have that standard—but they’re up front about how to qualify. The CFP is more vague and arbitrary

One argument against using the best four is “wins matter”, but booting out FSU conflicts with that. The argument against Liberty is “resume matters”, but booting out FSU conflicts with that.

If Patrick Mahomes gets injured tomorrow, Kansas City is still in the playoffs. No other self-respecting sport would do this.

 

[stinger78]

Through most of the stat measures, yes. The NFL doesn’t pick the best teams for the playoffs—none of the pro leagues have that standard—but they’re up front about how to qualify. The CFP is more vague and arbitrary

One argument against using the best four is “wins matter”, but booting out FSU conflicts with that. The argument against Liberty is “resume matters”, but booting out FSU conflicts with that.

If Patrick Mahomes gets injured tomorrow, Kansas City is still in the playoffs. No other self-respecting sport would do this.

OK, so their "best teams" argument, according to their own stats, falls apart.

 

[Vespidae]

And I haven’t seen anybody else mention this but when I watched the FSU game the two announcers stressed, before the game started, how hard it would be for FSU to score, and, half way through the first quarter, were making snide comments about how boring the game was. I remember thinking it odd that they had decided this before the game even played out and wondered where this narrative came from.

Wasn’t the game broadcast on ABC?

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Michigan did not seem excited AT ALL to be playing 'Bama. In fact, it seemed like someone knocked the wind out of their sail when they saw they had to play 'Bama. IMO, Michigan is probably the weakest of the 4 teams in the CFP, so 'Bama actually got the easier draw.

Unfortunately, I think 'Bama will probably win it all this year. They are finally playing high level football, and Milroe is a totally different QB than he was the beginning of the season. He's so scary. If 'Bama does win it all, I wonder if Saban rides off into the sunset.

Of course, we'll see on the field. That's why you play the games.

I’ve never understood the love for Michigan this year. They look like the kind of team that could get embarrassed by a fast opponent with a sophisticated offensive system.

 

[slugboy]

OK, so their "best teams" argument, according to their own stats, falls apart.

“best” means “the four teams the committee can justify and wants to justify“. Its not “best” in the same sense most people would use the word.

This is a “we might be willing to let a G5 team in occasionally, but we’ll never leave the SEC out” proof point. If UGA had won, FSU would be in the CFP

 

[GTLorenzo]

Two issues about what you insist on repeating:
1. No, last Saturday night is *not* who FSU is. That QB will not play another down this season unless their 2nd string QB gets hurt. That statement is a red herring, is simply not true, and is designed to deflect from the truth.
2. Even as poorly as he played, the FSU *team* stood up and won the game. A team is more than just a QB and that *team* won that game. That is a statement of strength, not weakness for most rational people who know football. To go undefeated is difficult. To finish 13-0, including a rivalry game and a conference CG, with a 2nd/3rd string QB's playing is incredibly difficult. Yet, that is just what FSU did. There is simply no rational football-related way that they should be penalized for that.

They played their 2nd string QB for most/all of the Florida game as well and didn't look great, but they did win. Yes, it is a great achievement for them to win the ACC Championship with their 3rd string QB. They should be commended and proud and should enjoy their ACC Champions swag, ring, etc. If Travis was still the QB today, they would be in the invitational. He isn't, so they aren't.

The committee knows that and doesn't want a repeat of the ACC Championship game in the "playoffs." Why don't people get that?

 

[Vespidae]

Am I missing something?

How do you have that as criteria for choosing a team if teams get chosen before you even have a chance to see who will actually be missing?

Let’s say Alabama or Michigan or Texas has one or more of their coaches pilfered before January. Or what if a player or players decide to follow NIL money somewhere else? Even injuries are uncertain in that some players may heal up and be able to play by January and other players may get hurt in practice before the game.

Just feels like an attempt to fine-tune / choose teams based on unknowable factors.

I’m speculating, but I think it was put in as a deterrent to those players who opt not to play post season, for whatever reason.