CFP Discussion

[bobongo]

Including two crappy wins.


Including 2 wins that hardly demonstrates dominance. But keep singing the tune.

Just ridiculous cherry picking. To repeat, since we're cherry picking: The SEC won four, three of which were Tenn. over Virginia, Georgia over Tech, and Ole Miss over Tech. I never said "dominance", I said the ACC "outperformed" the SEC. And they did. I'm done here. I'm not going to argue with someone who is intellectually dishonest to the point of misrepresenting what they've said.

 

[stech81]

And FSU was down their star quarterback. I think some people are missing this fact.

fact is if it was an SEC team that lost their QB it would be ok cause they would say they earned to play in the playoff. Fact ESPN kisses the *** of the SEC,and Saban.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Is Michigan missing any key players, such as they’re starting QB? Just checking.

Good point. FSU with its 3rd string QB is better than Michigan with their starting QB.

 

[stech81]

Their intent is not to put in the four teams who accomplished the most during the season. It is to get the best matchups for the TV show. Why don’t people understand this?

Why don't you understand if they want ratings then they would have had Ohio state ahead of all of them.

 

[Vespidae]

Who is saying “dominance?” Have I missed that word? I think equality applies.

Winning conference matchups is meaningless unless it the top vs the top. The ACC went 6-4 and the best team they beat was the 5th best SEC team. I just don’t see that as anything great but others do. Fine.

 

[jeffgt14]

Winning conference matchups is meaningless unless it the top vs the top. The ACC went 6-4 and the best team they beat was the 5th best SEC team. I just don’t see that as anything great but others do. Fine.

So why have a regular season? Why not just start with Bama-Georgia, Clemson-FSU Championship games and then roll into the playoffs?

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Just ridiculous cherry picking. To repeat, since we're cherry picking: The SEC won four, three of which were Tenn. over Virginia, Georgia over Tech, and Ole Miss over Tech. I never said "dominance", I said the ACC "outperformed" the SEC. And they did. I'm done here. I'm not going to argue with someone who is intellectually dishonest to the point of misrepresenting what they've said.

He got confused over who said what. Easily done.

 

[Bogey]

It was a rivalry game. Did you notice that many of the candidates for the playoff that had rivalry games just before their conference championship games struggled? Georgia beat Tech by 8. Washington beat WSU by 3. Alabama, the team that supplanted FSU, beat Auburn by a miracle. And FSU beat Florida by 9, even with their third string backup QB.

And their 2nd string backup QB would be prepared and ready to play in the playoff game after his concussion protocol. No excuse for what the committee did to these young men after surviving their adversities in my mind. Playoff participants should be decided on the field of play and not by a bunch of corrupted minds on a committee.

 

[GTjunkie]

Hmm. So they said that they were concerned about FSU's offense and that watching the ACC championship game caused them concern. Shocking. I swear I've heard something like that before, but not sure where.

"All of us had the emotional tie, like, 'Holy s---, this is really going to suck to do this,'" one committee member told ESPN. "We talked about that over and over, and we just kept coming back [to] are they good enough with what they have to win a national championship, and it just kept coming back [to] we didn't think they could."

Instead, the crux of the debate into the wee hours of Sunday morning centered around how to evaluate Florida State, which beat Louisville with its third-string quarterback after both Jordan Travis and his backup, Tate Rodemaker, were sidelined by injuries. While the Seminoles' defense impressed the committee -- and had all year -- there were significant concerns about FSU's offense.

It wasn't until the ACC championship game began to unfold, though, that the members' opinions began to truly take shape. The group grew concerned as it watched the Noles struggle to get a first down in the first half. There is a section in the committee's protocol that specifically refers to the "unavailability of key players ... that may have affected a teams performance during the season or likely will affect its postseason performance." That allowed the committee to do something it intentionally avoids every other week: look ahead.

"People may not believe it, but we don't say, 'Oh gosh, if we vote this way, the SEC is going to be left out," one source said. "That never came up. Ever. We literally look at teams, put them up against each other, and say, 'Who did they beat? Who did they not beat? Who have they beaten on the road? What's their strength of schedule?' Look at the matrix and all the data."

In the end, though, the difference between Alabama and Florida State boiled down to the committee's written protocol, particularly the emphasis on strength of schedule -- which gave Alabama the edge -- and the section that allowed committee members to project what Florida State might look like in a semifinal without their star quarterback.

Not having Heisman hopeful starter Travis "changes their offense in its entirety," said Corrigan, "and that was really a big factor with the committee as we went through everything."

They ranked FSU in the top 4 last week, after they beat Florida with their backup QB and Travis wasn't coming back. So, why the hell were they top 4 last week?

 

[Vespidae]

Just ridiculous cherry picking. To repeat, since we're cherry picking: The SEC won four, three of which were Tenn. over Virginia, Georgia over Tech, and Ole Miss over Tech. I never said "dominance", I said the ACC "outperformed" the SEC. And they did. I'm done here. I'm not going to argue with someone who is intellectually dishonest to the point of misrepresenting what they've said.

So what? You can’t even claim “outperform“. The top 4 teams of the ACC went 6-4 against SEC teams where the best team they played was 5th in the conference. Technically accurate but not conclusive.

Yeah. I’m done.

 

[Vespidae]

So why have a regular season? Why not just start with Bama-Georgia, Clemson-FSU Championship games and then roll into the playoffs?

Because conferences have a conference schedule to determine a champion. But if you want to claim “conference x is better than conference y” … you should at least talk about comparable teams. It’s a different discussion and one I’m done with.

 

[stech81]

Their intent is not to put in the four teams who accomplished the most during the season. It is to get the best matchups for the TV show. Why don’t people understand this?

Is that you, Paul Finebaum?

 

[jeffgt14]

Because conferences have a conference schedule to determine a champion. But if you want to claim “conference x is better than conference y” … you should at least talk about comparable teams. It’s a different discussion and one I’m done with.

I've never made that claim and never will. I've said for years, most conferences are more even than people think. There's a reason conference bowl records usually hover around .500 and those should be excluding the "lower tier" teams.

 

[leatherneckjacket]

Cool. Hope it's a good one.

Travis playing = FSU in.

Travis hurt = FSU out.

Why is it hard to understand this???

Because it is pure supposition. You have no clue if FSU would be in if Travis was healthy. You just restating what the committee is saying to spin this.

 

[leatherneckjacket]

Their intent is not to put in the four teams who accomplished the most during the season. It is to get the best matchups for the TV show. Why don’t people understand this?

Then, why is Washington in? Why is Georgia or Ohio State out?

 

[CEB]

So we all agree… the committee stated the following:
- the committee made a decision based on what they THOUGHT would happen, not what had actually happened
- the committee became concerned about FSU’s ability to compete because their quarterback is unable to play
- their concern arised while watching FSU play with a quarterback they WOULD NOT play during the playoffs

 

[g0lftime]

Then, why is Washington in? Why is Georgia or Ohio State out?

First of all the selection is SUBJECTIVE without head to head competition or more cross conference games, it is an eyeball test. Second this set of 4 teams gives 4 different sections of the country to watch and better TV ratings.
Until there is a defined criteria for making the playoff, this is what you get. The field of 12 would have gotten FSU in but also tOSU, UGA and others, eg Liberty.

 

[stinger78]

Winning conference matchups is meaningless unless it the top vs the top. The ACC went 6-4 and the best team they beat was the 5th best SEC team. I just don’t see that as anything great but others do. Fine.

It's better than the SEC did with the ACC except for UK beating L'ville. 1 game. Their other wins GT x2 and UVA. Meanwhile, the ACC beat LSU, TAMU, UF, USCe, Vandy, and Arky(?). I'd say that's pretty even and competitive.

 

[stinger78]

So we all agree… the committee stated the following:
- the committee made a decision based on what they THOUGHT would happen, not what had actually happened
- the committee became concerned about FSU’s ability to compete because their quarterback is unable to play
- their concern arised while watching FSU play with a quarterback they WOULD NOT play during the playoffs

... and totally discounted the fact that their D is lights out.

 

[Thwg777]

I mean, who doesn't like a good conspiracy!

That’s hilarious. I didn’t pick up on that but was watching CFP odds in the hour or so prior to the official unveiling and noticed that Bama was getting hammered for action. And FSU odds kept getting longer and longer.