Article CFP unanimously approves 5+7 model for new 12-team playoff

[stinger78]

I'm not so much "insisting" on it as opposed to pointing out the lack of objective reasoning. If you want to compare something, create a criteria and be consistent in its usage. That's why I don't bother with it. There's no consistency. I think I have read on these boards everything from ... you can't rely on polls because they are manipulated, you can't rely on players because the QB was out, you can't rely on history because most of it was pre-1970, you can't rely on records except the last seven years, etc.

To recap (because so many jump in halfway through a thread), I don't put much stock in "conference vs conference" opinions. If others do, fine.

Please explain… honest and respectful question… how is it a lack of objective reasoning to suggest that an early season inter-conference game between two ranked teams with everything in play is substantially different than an end of season exhibition game between two spurned programs, one of them being snubbed as an undefeated team, thus missing half its 2-deep?

I honestly don’t see how that lacks objective reasoning. Please advise.

 

[forensicbuzz]

I think a few posters are trying to make the argument (perhaps indirectly) that the ACC is a superior football conference and provide all sorts of mental contortions to do so. To what end? Let's assume it is true (I don't agree that it is, but let's assume so.). So? Are most football fans going to suddenly fall the floor, speaking in tongues and switch their football preferences to the ACC? Or any other for that matter?

No. Football habits are formed over very long periods of time and don't change that much. So, one can argue that "the Narrative" is wrong, misguided, borderline illegal, whatever ... it is what it is. A large swath of the football watching public likes their football (that's the B1G and the SEC) and if Clemson, FSU or any other ACC team (or TCU, or Cincy) win a Natty, nothing much will change.

TL; DR: Conference v conference comparisons are highly subjective and don't mean much in the big scheme of things. It's simply a fun fact. But to each their own. I simply don't buy the arguments made.

I don't see that at all. What I see is that some posters are saying the ACC isn't the doormat everyone in the SEC is claiming it to be. (specifically the SEC because most of their footprint overlap) Also, they're saying the SEC ain't all that, even though they say they are. You're right, it's subjective.

 

[forensicbuzz]

All of my buddies on the Penn St forum put Penn St sports especially football above anything dealing with pro sports. They love Penn St football just as much as the die hard Ga Tech, Georgia, Clemson , Alabama and LSU fans love their teams. NFL takes a backseat to most of the big 10 football fans.

Not sure I agree with that. My experience in Chicago (around all kinds of B1G fans) is that the discussion on Saturday is about college, but the rest of the week, it's about pro football.

 

[billga99]

Not sure I agree with that. My experience in Chicago (around all kinds of B1G fans) is that the discussion on Saturday is about college, but the rest of the week, it's about pro football.

I think it depends on whether the college you are rooting for is in a big city or close enough to be a home team. At least some of the Big 10 teams are in communities that aren't tied to a pro team. Think Nebraska, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, OSU, Penn St., Wisconsin (though some could argue Green Bay on this one), Michigan St. could at least be in that argument. But I do get the impact pro teams make. I think GT certainly went down leaving the SEC. But at basically at the same time, the Falcons came into existence. Now I am not naive enough to say UGA would not have dominated media space, but I think the combo of leaving the SEC and the Falcons showing up magnified the issue.

 

[Southern psu fan]

Not sure I agree with that. My experience in Chicago (around all kinds of B1G fans) is that the discussion on Saturday is about college, but the rest of the week, it's about pro football.

I said most big 10 fans Illinois is one of the exceptions just saying most big 10 football fans love their teams just like the SEC and ACC. Chicago bears fans are loyal

 

[awbuzz]

I don't see that at all. What I see is that some posters are saying the ACC isn't the doormat everyone in the SEC is claiming it to be. (specifically the SEC because most of their footprint overlap) Also, they're saying the SEC ain't all that, even though they say they are. You're right, it's subjective.

So, it's subjectively objective

 

[stinger78]

I don't see that at all. What I see is that some posters are saying the ACC isn't the doormat everyone in the SEC is claiming it to be. (specifically the SEC because most of their footprint overlap) Also, they're saying the SEC ain't all that, even though they say they are. You're right, it's subjective.

There is an objective criterion that back up that assertion.

 

[Richard7125]

Not sure I agree with that. My experience in Chicago (around all kinds of B1G fans) is that the discussion on Saturday is about college, but the rest of the week, it's about pro football.

when i think Big10 country, Chicago doesn't really come to mind to me. Yes, i know there are tons of Big10 fans in Chicago. It's just not what i think of as Big10 country.

 

[Richard7125]

I don't see that at all. What I see is that some posters are saying the ACC isn't the doormat everyone in the SEC is claiming it to be. (specifically the SEC because most of their footprint overlap) Also, they're saying the SEC ain't all that, even though they say they are. You're right, it's subjective.

I don’t think most SEC or Big10 people say the ACC is a doormat. I think they say the ACC is the third best conference. I think ACC people feel like they are a doormat.

Many would say the SEC has been the strongest, deepest conference and it was arguable who was next Big10, ACC, Big12, Pac12. There have been some years where the ACC may have been the best, but in those years, the SEC was probably #2. The SEC really hasn’t been #3 or worse. The point is there was a pecking order with the SEC on top, but the differences weren’t drastic.

Most agree the ACC would be significantly stronger if ND joined the ACC. This coming year the SEC is adding two Notre Dames in Texas and Oklahoma. The Big10 is adding strong programs in USC, Washinton and Oregon (maybe not ND level, but huge programs).

I hate the SEC and I root against the Big10, but it’s dumbfounding that people on this board can’t acknowledge the clear gap between the SEC/Big10 and the ACC that begins next year.

 

[stinger78]

I don’t think most SEC or Big10 people say the ACC is a doormat. I think they say the ACC is the third best conference. I think ACC people feel like they are a doormat.

Many would say the SEC has been the strongest, deepest conference and it was arguable who was next Big10, ACC, Big12, Pac12. There have been some years where the ACC may have been the best, but in those years, the SEC was probably #2. The SEC really hasn’t been #3 or worse. The point is there was a pecking order with the SEC on top, but the differences weren’t drastic.

Most agree the ACC would be significantly stronger if ND joined the ACC. This coming year the SEC is adding two Notre Dames in Texas and Oklahoma. The Big10 is adding strong programs in USC, Washinton and Oregon (maybe not ND level, but huge programs).

I hate the SEC and I root against the Big10, but it’s dumbfounding that people on this board can’t acknowledge the clear gap between the SEC/Big10 and the ACC that begins next year.

Because we’re discussing the past, not the future?

My question is not which is the strongest come August, it is why the Oregons, USC’s, OU’s and UTA’s of the world did what they did with the SEC/B1G cartel. It will become harder to get into the CFP for them, not easier unless one of two things happens: 1) the CFP expands to allow 8-10 cartel teams in, or 2) a premier division spins off with just the cartel and they allow 8-10 teams into their media extravaganza playoff.

Which is it? Why put themselves into that meat grinder? What’s the payoff? Is it just money alone? If so, they have done no more than having made themselves prostitutes.

Otherwise, there has to be a payoff in terms of access to the CFP. But the rest of the CFB world won’t vote to approve that. So, my dollar is bet on a premier league in the near future. Let them go! Please, Lord, let them go.

 

[L41k18]

[/QUOTE]

I hate the SEC and I root against the Big10, but it’s dumbfounding that people on this board can’t acknowledge the clear gap between the SEC/Big10 and the ACC that begins next year.

There has been a "clear gap" between ACC football and SEC football since the ACC was formed in 1953. Yes, we can cherry pick 6-7 seasons out of the last 71 where the ACC was better.

The point is, this is nothing new. What's dumbfounding is that there are people on this board who refuse to acknowledge that.

 

[yeti92]

The SEC really hasn’t been #3 or worse.

They were the 4th or 5th best conference this past season.

 

[stinger78]

Depends on how one defines “clear gap.” What’s your definition?

 

[forensicbuzz]

There has been a "clear gap" between ACC football and SEC football since the ACC was formed in 1953. Yes, we can cherry pick 6-7 seasons out of the last 71 where the ACC was better.
The point is, this is nothing new. What's dumbfounding is that there are people on this board who refuse to acknowledge that.

What I find dumbfounding is that fonts continue to make this statement. I've never heard anyone say that year-in/year-out the SEC isn't stronger than the ACC. The point I've continually heard is that the "clear gap" ain't always so clear and the top-to-bottom claim the SEC has put forth also ain't "clear."

 

[stinger78]

They were the 4th or 5th best conference this past season.

I’d like to see a definition of this gap emerge. As has been stated, the SECheat has been better, but that’s mostly due to the top 3-4 teams at any one time. MSU, Ole Miss, Vandy, Kentucky, USCe, Mizzou, and Arky are usually very pedestrian. Auburn, UT, and UF can be as well as often as not. That’s 10 teams that I don’t think year over year are much, if any better than the hoi polloi of the ACC. Bama, UGAg, and LSU are the perennial tough guys, plus a momentary up and comer like Ole Miss, Florida, UT, or Auburn. That creates the separation most years, larger some years than others, but it’s never a top to bottom thing. That’s what I see being debated over and over.

 

[L41k18]

Depends on how one defines “clear gap.” What’s your definition?

There are many.
Here's one:
Nattys since the ACC began:
SEC 26
ACC 7

You could also look at Top 10 finishes in the final rankings since the ACC's birth. I anticipate that gap would be quite larger than this, which is 3.7 times more for the SEC.

 

[bobongo]

There are many.
Here's one:
Nattys since the ACC began:
SEC 26
ACC 7

You could also look at Top 10 finishes in the final rankings since the ACC's birth. I anticipate that gap would be larger than this, which is 3.7 times more for the SEC.

I agree the record is clear that the SEC has been the better conference most years. But I think that overall record can obscure some years when the ACC has been a strong conference and deserving of a spot in the playoff, like last season. In the years the ACC has outperformed, it isn't given its due. Each season should be treated individually. Last year was an exception to the rule, because there is no indication that last season the SEC was superior, and strong indication indeed that it was not. Last year, the SEC should have been the conference left out of the playoff instead of the ACC.

 

[g0lftime]

That is just BS. The ACC rarely has multiple very good teams. I listed the years for the times the ACC had 2 top 20 teams for the ACC Championship Game and one included ND who really isn’t an ACC team.

Clemson’s 6 year run was dominant in the ACC and there was no other exceptional ACC football team.

Florida State was dominant in the ACC when Bowden was coaching but this was before the championship playoff. It was one of the main reasons Mac left UNC the first time. He knew he couldn't beat them.

 

[CEB]

I agree the record is clear that the SEC has been the better conference most years. But I think that overall record can obscure some years when the ACC has been a strong conference and deserving of a spot in the playoff, like last season. In the years the ACC has outperformed, it isn't given its due. Each season should be treated individually. Last year was an exception to the rule, because there is no indication that last season the SEC was superior, and strong indication indeed that it was not. Last year, the SEC should have been the conference left out of the playoff instead of the ACC.

And what a brilliant advertisement that would’ve been for the new CFP structure!
Blinded by their own SEC jock sniffing biases, they missed a golden opportunity to promote the new system.

 

[bhoffman123]

when i think Big10 country, Chicago doesn't really come to mind to me. Yes, i know there are tons of Big10 fans in Chicago. It's just not what i think of as Big10 country.

The Big10 is headquartered in Chicago. Kind of hard not to think of it as Big10 country.