Conference Realignment

[Northeast Stinger]

Hay, the CFP is going to be selected as I want. Not stupid auto bids for G5s. I am all good. Trying inject logic into silly thought on putting 5 no chance team in the CFP. But if others think that makes sense they charge Windmills

Your logic is admirable. Even if no one sees it but you.

 

[forensicbuzz]

What I find interesting is this board went nuts when GT lost to BG, a G5 team. GT was a 6-6 P5 team that really was not in the class of the 4 CFP teams. Now all of a sudden some want a bunch of BG type teams in the CFP.

There are very few to no G5 teams that can compete with the very top of the P4 Conferences.

Fairness is a BS notion. College football isn’t fair at all. Put 12 teams that on their best day can actually win.

Liberty or Tulane on their best day could not come close to any of the 4 CFP teams in an actual playoff where the game mattered and there was no looking past the opponent.

We see enough 45-10 games as it is. Signing up for several in a CFP has zero appeal.

Of course the powers in college football understand that and there will be one G5 team in the CFP.

I get it. This is your opinion. Your opinion is one among many. There are plenty of people that feel the same way you do. There are plenty of people who don’t.

What is being discussed isn’t people people saying they want to see BG versus uga and think that’s a good game. What people are throwing out there is that as it currently sits, there are a limited number of teams that will ever have a chance to play for the “championship,”,’ even if someone else is undefeated. Essentially, the G5 teams aren’t playing in the same “league” (i.e., the FBS) because they really have no avenue to the championship. Troy or Georgia Southern will never have a chance.

If I were King, there would be a Tournament of Champions that only allowed the conference champions in. This would crown the National Champion. Then, the bowls would have great football matchups that pitted equally talented teams against each other. The regular season determines whether you get to play for the championship, not some committee behind closed doors or some random poll.

This is just my opinion. It might have compelling football and it might not.

 

[apatriot1776]

I get it. This is your opinion. Your opinion is one among many. There are plenty of people that feel the same way you do. There are plenty of people who don’t.

What is being discussed isn’t people people saying they want to see BG versus uga and think that’s a good game. What people are throwing out there is that as it currently sits, there are a limited number of teams that will ever have a chance to play for the “championship,”,’ even if someone else is undefeated. Essentially, the G5 teams aren’t playing in the same “league” (i.e., the FBS) because they really have no avenue to the championship. Troy or Georgia Southern will never have a chance.

If I were King, there would be a Tournament of Champions that only allowed the conference champions in. This would crown the National Champion. Then, the bowls would have great football matchups that pitted equally talented teams against each other. The regular season determines whether you get to play for the championship, not some committee behind closed doors or some random poll.

This is just my opinion. It might have compelling football and it might not.

This would’ve been the way to go 40 years ago - back when there was strong parity among the 10 team SEC, Pac-10, Big 8, SWC, ACC, Big-10, and even then the outsider WAC had a BYU national championship, and that’s not even considering the strong independent teams including Miami, VT, Penn St, Notre Dame, BC, FSU, SCar, Pitt, WVU, etc etc.

Unfortunately we have gone way too far down the road of conference consolidation for a tournament of conference champs to be a realistic or IMO even a fair system. The (will never happen) answer is to break up the superconferences and return us to an age of conference sanity.

 

[slugboy]

Once sure. But twice? Just tough to argue you’re better at that point.

It looks like you’re mixing “deserves it” (resume) and “who looks like the strongest team”. They overlap, and Oregon losing to Washington helps Washington and hurts Oregon.

First, I’ve said clearly I’d pick the teams that earned it on the field—Washington, Michigan, FSU, and Texas. That’s what a “most deserving” or resume system does.

I’ve also explained how Oregon comes out ahead of Washington on most predictive “who is best” systems. If you have 13 games, and Oregon performs better than Washington on 11 of 13, then Oregon will come out ahead of Washington. The two head to head games will move Washington up and Oregon down, but not enough to overcome the other 11 games.

In rock paper scissors, paper always beats rock. Does that mean that paper is always the best strategy? Matchups matter 1:1, and luck does, but it’s not the only thing.

If you want to say “but, head to head” or “quality of wins”, then your measuring stick is resume—stick with it.

You’re also confusing what I’m talking about in those posts. I said the committee was inconsistent in their criteria—using one set of standards to put Alabama and a different set to rule FSU out. They don’t have criteria—they have a public set of principles that they can rearrange at 2AM under pressure to get the results their sponsors want. If you do that, you can manipulate it to get any results you want—and they did. When justifying their decision, they said they were putting the best teams on the field—they weren’t, and they knew they weren’t. They just didn’t want to put FSU in over Alabama.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

It looks like you’re mixing “deserves it” (resume) and “who looks like the strongest team”. They overlap, and Oregon losing to Washington helps Washington and hurts Oregon.

First, I’ve said clearly I’d pick the teams that earned it on the field—Washington, Michigan, FSU, and Texas. That’s what a “most deserving” or resume system does.

I’ve also explained how Oregon comes out ahead of Washington on most predictive “who is best” systems. If you have 13 games, and Oregon performs better than Washington on 11 of 13, then Oregon will come out ahead of Washington. The two head to head games will move Washington up and Oregon down, but not enough to overcome the other 11 games.

In rock paper scissors, paper always beats rock. Does that mean that paper is always the best strategy? Matchups matter 1:1, and luck does, but it’s not the only thing.

If you want to say “but, head to head” or “quality of wins”, then your measuring stick is resume—stick with it.

I said the committee was inconsistent in their criteria—using one set of standards to put Alabama and a different set to rule FSU out. If you do that, you can manipulate it to get any results you want—and they did.

That’s exactly how I see it and why some people euphemistically refer to “lack of transparency” when what they really mean is “you juggled different criteria around till you got the results you wanted.”

 

[stinger78]

That’s exactly how I see it and why some people euphemistically refer to “lack of transparency” when what they really mean is “you juggled different criteria around till you got the results you wanted.”

Or they use the word “subjective.”

 

[TechPhi97]

“It’s not hard to see” yet no one seems to have the same eagle eye that you have when it comes to seeing that uga was just half trying against us. Shoot, even the uga fans I know weren’t able to see that.

With all the ways you keep downplaying some of Tech’s best efforts last season it’s like if you aren’t a troll you are only missing it by the skin of your teeth. But I’ll take your word for it that you are just sharing an opinion. I confess I just wish that all of your opinions didn’t feel like you are denigrating the fine effort and accomplishments of our student athletes.

Not pointed at you NE Stinger but to everyone - use this thread to improve your ignore list. I can’t see about 25% of the posts here related to UGA, and I’m all the better for it.

 

[bobongo]

Hay, the CFP is going to be selected as I want. Not stupid auto bids for G5s. I am all good. Trying inject logic into silly thought on putting 5 no chance team in the CFP. But if others think that makes sense they charge Windmills

Your logic is fine. It's your underlying premise that's shaky. G-5 went 2-7 against P-5 in bowls this year, which is about the percentage against P-5 overall. So no, they will not have "no chance".

College Football Has 11 Group of Five Upsets Already in 2023

Group of Five upsets aren't as rare as you think. So far this year, there have been 11 of these upsets over Power Five teams.

fanbuzz.com

 

[stinger78]

Sankey 'disappointed' in CFP ranking backlash

SEC commissioner Greg Sankey told ESPN he was "disappointed in the acrimony" that ensued following the College Football Playoff selection committee's controversial final ranking.

www.espn.com

Sankey appalled at the blowback of the CFP decision. Color me surprised.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Not pointed at you NE Stinger but to everyone - use this thread to improve your ignore list. I can’t see about 25% of the posts here related to UGA, and I’m all the better for it.

You may not be older than me but you are probably wiser.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Sankey 'disappointed' in CFP ranking backlash

SEC commissioner Greg Sankey told ESPN he was "disappointed in the acrimony" that ensued following the College Football Playoff selection committee's controversial final ranking.

www.espn.com

Sankey appalled at the blowback of the CFP decision. Color me surprised.

He lobbied hard to get two SEC teams in the playoff but only got one so he “understands” how some other conferences (ACC) might feel. But he thinks a 12 team playoff will work just fine (for the SEC).

 

[wrmathis]

This is just me and my opinion, but if I was a team that was fringe to being elite and was in the sec and kept falling just short of the playoffs and the playoffs took only conference champions, I would take a long look at dropping to one of the “lower” conferences and just absolutely dominating that conference to guarantee making the playoffs every year.

That could cause other teams to do the same thing and you would have more conference realignment but you also might get more parity across the sport.

Problem is most are going to choose the almighty dollar than easier access to the CFP.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

This is just me and my opinion, but if I was a team that was fringe to being elite and was in the sec and kept falling just short of the playoffs and the playoffs took only conference champions, I would take a long look at dropping to one of the “lower” conferences and just absolutely dominating that conference to guarantee making the playoffs every year.

That could cause other teams to do the same thing and you would have more conference realignment but you also might get more parity across the sport.

Problem is most are going to choose the almighty dollar than easier access to the CFP.

There would be a short window for “dominating” though because recruiting would start to fall off at the lower level as well as having players hit the transfer portal to try to get back to their original conference.

 

[yeti92]

There would be a short window for “dominating” though because recruiting would start to fall off at the lower level as well as having players hit the transfer portal to try to get back to their original conference.

Maybe. Would players rather have a shot at a natty, or be on a team like South Carolina that's just fodder for the rest of the SEC? The big factory teams are still limited to so many players, not everyone will get the invite.

 

[stinger78]

This is just me and my opinion, but if I was a team that was fringe to being elite and was in the sec and kept falling just short of the playoffs and the playoffs took only conference champions, I would take a long look at dropping to one of the “lower” conferences and just absolutely dominating that conference to guarantee making the playoffs every year.

That could cause other teams to do the same thing and you would have more conference realignment but you also might get more parity across the sport.

Problem is most are going to choose the almighty dollar than easier access to the CFP.

Two reasons teams keep moving to the big two:
1. Operating capital. TV has shown they will pay royally for quality matchups. At least in the short run that is true. Follow the money.
2. Access to playoff. It will be easier for a 1 or even 2-loss OU/USC to be included in the new 12-team format where 4-5 SECheat teams will live annually. The exclusion of an undefeated “lesser” P5 champ this season cemented that notion.

Money and access are the two motivators. If the new CFP were to offer all P4/5 and G5 champs an auto bid with only 2-3 at-large slots, two things might happen: Jumping back out of the mega conferences, and ND seriously considering joining one.

 

[Root4GT]

Your logic is fine. It's your underlying premise that's shaky. G-5 went 2-7 against P-5 in bowls this year, which is about the percentage against P-5 overall. So no, they will not have "no chance".

College Football Has 11 Group of Five Upsets Already in 2023

Group of Five upsets aren't as rare as you think. So far this year, there have been 11 of these upsets over Power Five teams.

fanbuzz.com

You guys make this hard to stop taking the bait. The South Alabama win over Oklahoma State is a good win for the G5. OKST was 9-4 prior to the Bowl game and their ranking was #20. Iowa State was 7-5, AZST was 3-9, Cincy was 3-9 and Vandy was 2-10.

I asked is any top 10 teams lost to a G5 team. The closest was to #20 OKST at #20. That is a long way from top 10.

Keep digging though as there may be one out there.

 

[wrmathis]

Two reasons teams keep moving to the big two:
1. Operating capital. TV has shown they will pay royally for quality matchups. At least in the short run that is true. Follow the money.
2. Access to playoff. It will be easier for a 1 or even 2-loss OU/USC to be included in the new 12-team format where 4-5 SECheat teams will live annually. The exclusion of an undefeated “lesser” P5 champ this season cemented that notion.

Money and access are the two motivators. If the new CFP were to offer all P4/5 and G5 champs an auto bid with only 2-3 at-large slots, two things might happen: Jumping back out of the mega conferences, and ND seriously considering joining one.

Your second part I agree with on how it is currently going to go. My post was in reference to if only conference champions made the playoffs.

 

[bobongo]

You guys make this hard to stop taking the bait. The South Alabama win over Oklahoma State is a good win for the G5. OKST was 9-4 prior to the Bowl game and their ranking was #20. Iowa State was 7-5, AZST was 3-9, Cincy was 3-9 and Vandy was 2-10.

I asked is any top 10 teams lost to a G5 team. The closest was to #20 OKST at #20. That is a long way from top 10.

Keep digging though as there may be one out there.

Cackle as you wish, you're comparing ALL G-5, random teams, to the cream of the crop among P-5. I think you can see the problem there. The fact is that they do not have "no chance".

Conference winning G-5's have a chance against P-5 top tens. And all I need is one game to prove me right. One game. And it will come sooner rather than later in these playoffs, if they're given a chance.

 

[MWBATL]

Keep digging though as there may be one out there.

Just wondering why you chose to ignore my post showing Tulane's victory in the Cotton Bowl last year vs. USC? You keep asking for examples but then ignore posts which gives examples.....

 

[Richard7125]

BG won their conference?

No, but Troy won their conference and lost to a 7-5 Duke team. That was the point.