CFP Discussion

[7979]

I resent the fact that the CFP committe has forced me to give a s**t about FSU....

 

[DvilleJacket]

Why all the fuss about FSU not getting in? Had UGA won we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Maybe I'm still salty over FSU breaking out hearts yearly in the 90s

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Normally, I woudn’t think FSU and the ACC should sue, but I’m changing my mind.

I bring this next fact up up not to turn this into a political discussion (__don’t__), but from a news perspective:

Sen. Rick Scott to CFP: We Demand Transparency Regarding Unprecedented Exclusion of Undefeated FSU

www.rickscott.senate.gov

It’s just one letter, but the NCAA is already unpopular, and took a body blow from the Supreme Court several years ago. The CFP isn’t an NCAA body, but it is a college football body, and there are a lot of people unhappy with the way college football is doing business. It’s possible that nothing could come out of this (and it’s fairly likely that nothing happens). It’s also possible that a now much more unpopular CFP committee gets brought before a Senate committee to answer questions.

You are always one of the “mature voices in the room.” So, what do you think would be a proper procedure / outcome for any potential review of CFP Committee’s process?

I ask this because I am always slightly tempted to act in a childish way when I see others continually getting preferential treatment by acting childishly. In my opinion the SEC has acted childishly for a long time and the reward is that their behavior always seems to get them some deference in ways that ultimately benefit them. The ACC, it feels like by comparison, tries to act with more dignity and ends up being a punching bag as a result.

I mentioned in a recent post how Vince Dooley acted in the wake of the Jasper Sanks fumble, demanding an SEC investigation, threatening a criminal lawsuit against the refs involved, and, generally, keeping the “controversy” in the public eye for weeks after the game was history. I am aware that what I am going to say now is perhaps my biased fan perception but it sure feels like the Sanks fumble was the last time a questionable call went against uga in this rivalry game and I bet the crowd on here good easily name several questionable calls that have gone against Tech in the interim. Maybe we are paranoid but many Tech fans now fear the refs in that game almost as much as the refs. It is hard not to believe someone started working the refs a long time ago with at least an unconscious impact on the game.

Now that I’ve shown my childish side, I’ll return to the main questions. Do you think the Scott letter is warranted? A good idea? What process going forward would be helpful? And, for me, will it ever be possible to root out the SEC bias in the selection committee given how effective the SEC’s childish behavior in the past has been?

 

[stingerman]

Why all the fuss about FSU not getting in? Had UGA won we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Maybe I'm still salty over FSU breaking out hearts yearly in the 90s

That's actually a great question, why do we care?

It's certainly not out of sympathy for FSU. Hard to imagine a less sympathetic bunch to be on the receiving end of this treatment. No, I think it's a sense that this is a fundamental attack on the sport itself. Games are played on the field. It's not a beauty pageant. It's not figure skating with a bunch of judges handing down a score from on high. It's football. It's objective. Games are won and lost on the field. Championships are won and lost based on the outcome of those games. And now the system has taken what was supposed to give us an objective champion, and has dialed back the clock to the beauty pageant days of the sport...the days that gave us a split championship in 1990 among many controversies over the years. Count me among those who want an opportunity for every team (yes, not just P5) that wins each of their games to have their chance. We're supposed to be heading in that direction, but color me skeptical.

 

[Techster]

Normally, I woudn’t think FSU and the ACC should sue, but I’m changing my mind.

I bring this next fact up up not to turn this into a political discussion (__don’t__), but from a news perspective:

Sen. Rick Scott to CFP: We Demand Transparency Regarding Unprecedented Exclusion of Undefeated FSU

www.rickscott.senate.gov

It’s just one letter, but the NCAA is already unpopular, and took a body blow from the Supreme Court several years ago. The CFP isn’t an NCAA body, but it is a college football body, and there are a lot of people unhappy with the way college football is doing business. It’s possible that nothing could come out of this (and it’s fairly likely that nothing happens). It’s also possible that a now much more unpopular CFP committee gets brought before a Senate committee to answer questions.

Many politicians from both sides of the aisle have weighed in. Who knew college football could unite the country?! But politicians should stick to politics and not talk about sports....(IYKYK)

On another note. All of this is just funny to me and will mean nothing once the games start again. Everyone will move on, and years from now this FSU team will be a footnote to some random trivia question sponsored by Aflac.

I think FSU loses to UGA, and this argument will give way to something else everyone can feel enraged about.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

That's actually a great question, why do we care?

It's certainly not out of sympathy for FSU. Hard to imagine a less sympathetic bunch to be on the receiving end of this treatment. No, I think it's a sense that this is a fundamental attack on the sport itself. Games are played on the field. It's not a beauty pageant. It's not figure skating with a bunch of judges handing down a score from on high. It's football. It's objective. Games are won and lost on the field. Championships are won and lost based on the outcome of those games. And now the system has taken what was supposed to give us an objective champion, and has dialed back the clock to the beauty pageant days of the sport...the days that gave us a split championship in 1990 among many controversies over the years. Count me among those who want an opportunity for every team (yes, not just P5) that wins each of their games to have their chance. We're supposed to be heading in that direction, but color me skeptical.

You summarize my feelings exactly.

I hate how hard I’ve been defending FSU in all this but the highly questionable way in which the committee handed an historic precedent changing decision leaves all of college football in jeopardy.

With so many things headed in a dubious direction with college football this feels like one more potential nail in the coffin. Sportsmanship, athletic accomplishment, academic standards, amateurism, objective criteria for excellence, all seem to be teetering on the brink as we await the score by the East German judge and wonder aloud just how much bag money is under the table.

 

[ThatGuy]

We had objective criteria for the BCS—a combination of human and computer polls. Some people didn’t like the outcomes, so they moved it to a committee with far less transparency. They let a committee meet and make the decisions. They can change the criteria to get the outcome they want, and they’ve done it before.

I’d prefer we move back to a more transparent system and let teams prove it on the field.

Agreed...kinda. What I've realized over the past 20 years or so:

It wasn't the computers that were the issue. It was the fact that the computers were deciding it all. Computers decided the mere 2 teams that would play for a championship. The people you described who didn't like the outcomes of the computers wanted the National Championship game participants to be decided on the field, head-to-head - not solely based on regular season play.

At the time, many of us recommended a 16-team playoff, that was built for equity. The conference champs of EACH conference were included. Why? To eliminate much of the bias. Doesn't matter if it's a so-called "lesser conference." You win on the field, you still get in. Just like in the NCAA tournament, where every year there are upsets. In 2018, when the 16th-seed team beat #1-seeded UVA in the opening round of March Madness, no one claimed that Virginia deserved the national title. It didn't matter that the team that beat them was from a so-called lesser conference - they lost.

The participants would be decided on the field, and the results would then be decided on the field. This is what works for college basketball, as well as the NFL playoffs. Stands to reason it would work for CFB as well.

There were also several at-large bids, so that those who were good but possibly didn't win their conference (as well as any independents) could get in. This would allow any teams like uGA

Instead, what we got was a system that PRESERVED the bias - and handily ensured a) a G5 team would almost never make it in, much less have the opportunity to upset a higher-ranked team and b) someone who wasn't ranked at the start of the season would never make it in. Doesn't matter if you win out - if the talking heads didn't see you coming back in August before fall camp was completed and anyone had a chance to even look at the teams, you aren't worthy. This all but eliminated teams like GT in 1990 from getting in. Win your conference? Too bad. There were other teams we ranked higher in the preseason.

Many of us bemoaned the 4-team "playoff" from the moment it was established, knowing that "the SEC just means more." The BCS would have been preferable to the committee with the 4-team playoff, except that the 4-team slate is so small, ranking bias would still affect the outcome of who got a shot.

So all that being said - I think you're spot-on. Moving to an expanded playoff, we should go back to a computer model with transparency. Even if it's not the equitable 16-team playoff that should exist. With so many at large bids, introducing a computer with a standardized ranking criteria would at least ensure a fairer shot at inclusion.

I can't remember, but I think the 12-team playoff rankings that decide inclusion will still be decided by a committee. Which stinks. But once someone has power, they're incredibly reluctant to give it up, so I don't see it changing.

 

[Jacket05]

That's actually a great question, why do we care?

It's certainly not out of sympathy for FSU. Hard to imagine a less sympathetic bunch to be on the receiving end of this treatment. No, I think it's a sense that this is a fundamental attack on the sport itself. Games are played on the field. It's not a beauty pageant. It's not figure skating with a bunch of judges handing down a score from on high. It's football. It's objective. Games are won and lost on the field. Championships are won and lost based on the outcome of those games. And now the system has taken what was supposed to give us an objective champion, and has dialed back the clock to the beauty pageant days of the sport...the days that gave us a split championship in 1990 among many controversies over the years. Count me among those who want an opportunity for every team (yes, not just P5) that wins each of their games to have their chance. We're supposed to be heading in that direction, but color me skeptical.

This 100%!!! The FBS is the only division any any sport (that does not have judges) that subjectively determines a "champion". We got away from the polls and went to the BCS cause the polls were completely subjective and at least the BCS had 50% of an objective analytical element. Then we said that is still too subjective and leaves teams out that deserve a shot so we went to a "playoff" but instead of rewarding teams that deserve a chance we went back to completely subjective polls with even fewer votes than before the BCS.

At least with the 12 teams next year and P4 conference champions getting an automatic bid, along with at least 1 G5 champion, this SHOULD not happen. There is still too much subjectivity and filling in all 12 teams. But at the end of the day if you win out you will be the champion.

 

[TampaBuzz]

Now that I’ve shown my childish side, I’ll return to the main questions. Do you think the Scott letter is warranted? A good idea? What process going forward would be helpful? And, for me, will it ever be possible to root out the SEC bias in the selection committee given how effective the SEC’s childish behavior in the past has been?

Hell yeah....somebody should file a lawsuit and get a judge to stay the CFP until such time as the lawsuit is resolved. Throw the whole system into chaos. Wouldn't bother us low bowl dwellers but all the New years day bowls get stuck on hold while a judge adjudicates the whole selection process. Put those committee members on the stand and have them explain/defend to the entire country how speculative issues are more important that objective issues decided on the field of play. Show all the evidence showing that Boo and his cronies were paid off by ESPN and the SEC. I am laughing just thinking about it.

 

[ThatGuy]

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.

I mean, I don't think Connor Stallions was at Bama games this season, so it looks pretty good for Bama there.

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.

Will be interesting to see. I did think he looked like he was tired of the dog and pony show when interviewed after the SECCG this year. It's almost as if all the recent tectonic shifts in CFB have taken the fun out of it for great, future (and recent) hall of fame coaches.

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

*Unless it's the regular season, exactly.

 

[slugboy]

You are always one of the “mature voices in the room.” So, what do you think would be a proper procedure / outcome for any potential review of CFP Committee’s process?

I ask this because I am always slightly tempted to act in a childish way when I see others continually getting preferential treatment by acting childishly. In my opinion the SEC has acted childishly for a long time and the reward is that their behavior always seems to get them some deference in ways that ultimately benefit them. The ACC, it feels like by comparison, tries to act with more dignity and ends up being a punching bag as a result.

I mentioned in a recent post how Vince Dooley acted in the wake of the Jasper Sanks fumble, demanding an SEC investigation, threatening a criminal lawsuit against the refs involved, and, generally, keeping the “controversy” in the public eye for weeks after the game was history. I am aware that what I am going to say now is perhaps my biased fan perception but it sure feels like the Sanks fumble was the last time a questionable call went against uga in this rivalry game and I bet the crowd on here good easily name several questionable calls that have gone against Tech in the interim. Maybe we are paranoid but many Tech fans now fear the refs in that game almost as much as the refs. It is hard not to believe someone started working the refs a long time ago with at least an unconscious impact on the game.

Now that I’ve shown my childish side, I’ll return to the main questions. Do you think the Scott letter is warranted? A good idea? What process going forward would be helpful? And, for me, will it ever be possible to root out the SEC bias in the selection committee given how effective the SEC’s childish behavior in the past has been?

The mature way to do this is for a unified delegation go to Congress and ask for antitrust protection in exchange for benefits protections for the players, open policies and oversight, and joint TV rights (e.g. go away from the super conferences). I’m not naive though—that isn’t going anywhere

If this ends up like a Black Sox Scandal (watch “8 Men Out” if you haven’t yet), then CFB is in the situation of “fix this ourselves before someone fixes this for us”. If something bad reaches exec levels, then most people aren’t going to like the solution the execs come up with—it’s better to have a solution in place first.

CFB only acts when it’s forced to, and often not even then. I think fear of repercussions is the only thing that might make them get their act together

 

[billga99]

This 100%!!! The FBS is the only division any any sport (that does not have judges) that subjectively determines a "champion". We got away from the polls and went to the BCS cause the polls were completely subjective and at least the BCS had 50% of an objective analytical element. Then we said that is still too subjective and leaves teams out that deserve a shot so we went to a "playoff" but instead of rewarding teams that deserve a chance we went back to completely subjective polls with even fewer votes than before the BCS.

At least with the 12 teams next year and P4 conference champions getting an automatic bid, along with at least 1 G5 champion, this SHOULD not happen. There is still too much subjectivity and filling in all 12 teams. But at the end of the day if you win out you will be the champion.

the fix next year will be which top 4 teams get byes and teams 5 thru 8 which get home games in the first round. The conversion will change from which teams get in to how to arrange the bracket to make sure the RIGHT TEAMS have the advantages.

 

[bobongo]

I think FSU loses to UGA, and this argument will give way to something else everyone can feel enraged about.

I'm thinking FSU beats Ugag, but just to note that if they don't, many will say it proves they didn't belong.
That would prove nothing IMO because FSU earned its way in and shouldn't have to justify it. They belong in the "playoff" now.

 

[Randy Carson]

I resent the fact that the CFP committe has forced me to give a s**t about FSU....

If it helps, think of it as the CFP committee disrespecting the entire ACC.

There. Feel better now?

 

[Randy Carson]

Why all the fuss about FSU not getting in? Had UGA won we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Maybe I'm still salty over FSU breaking out hearts yearly in the 90s

Understood, but the CFP would have put in Bama or Texas over FSU in that scenario, also.

The CFP committee just declared the entire ACC season to be meaningless.

 

[Techster]

I'm thinking FSU beats Ugag, but just to note that if they don't, many will say it proves they didn't belong.
That would prove nothing IMO because FSU earned its way in and shouldn't have to justify it. They belong in the "playoff" now.

You're wrong about FSU beating UGA

...but, you're right that FSU earned its way in.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

The mature way to do this is for a unified delegation go to Congress and ask for antitrust protection in exchange for benefits protections for the players, open policies and oversight, and joint TV rights (e.g. go away from the super conferences). I’m not naive though—that isn’t going anywhere

If this ends up like a Black Sox Scandal (watch “8 Men Out” if you haven’t yet), then CFB is in the situation of “fix this ourselves before someone fixes this for us”. If something bad reaches exec levels, then most people aren’t going to like the solution the execs come up with—it’s better to have a solution in place first.

CFB only acts when it’s forced to, and often not even then. I think fear of repercussions is the only thing that might make them get their act together

“Say it ain’t so…”

 

[stech81]

The mature way to do this is for a unified delegation go to Congress and ask for antitrust protection in exchange for benefits protections for the players, open policies and oversight, and joint TV rights (e.g. go away from the super conferences). I’m not naive though—that isn’t going anywhere

If this ends up like a Black Sox Scandal (watch “8 Men Out” if you haven’t yet), then CFB is in the situation of “fix this ourselves before someone fixes this for us”. If something bad reaches exec levels, then most people aren’t going to like the solution the execs come up with—it’s better to have a solution in place first.

CFB only acts when it’s forced to, and often not even then. I think fear of repercussions is the only thing that might make them get their act together

I agree with you. Someone I do believe s is behind all this be it ESPN or someone else. It's not that I like FSU hell after they run their mouth at the start of year, I wanted to see them lose every game this year. Most of us get sick of the build up by ESPN how great the SEC is every year no matter if they win or lose. It does seem funny that the 4 teams are 2 that will be in the SEC and the other 2 are teams that will be in the Big10 next year.

 

[gte447f]

Cool. Hope it's a good one.

Travis playing = FSU in.

Travis hurt = FSU out.

Why is it hard to understand this???

Because it’s BS. What if Milroe gets hurt in practice or walking down some stairs between now and the playoff game? Do we pull bama out of the playoff and insert an alternate? No of course not, because it’s just luck and $### happens.

 

[TooTall]

Did anyone notice the "$EC on E$PN coming in 2024" commercials during the ACC championship?