Conference Realignment

stinger 1957

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,528
I've always questioned the BIGS interest in UVA, yes they are an AAU school but someone told me they do not draw well from the DC Baltimore metroplex, don't really care that much about CFB it seems and the BIG already has MD from the Metroplex. It seems VT draws better from the Metroplex, not saying VT ends up in BIG.
 

Jim Prather

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,043
While I thought that FSU 'deserved' to get a CFP bid, the committee made it clear that their job was to try to pick the 4 'best' teams and without Jordan Travis it was obvious FSU was not one of those.
If Travis had not gotten injured I believe FSU would have gotten a bid.
While I appreciate your logic, I am going to respectfully disagree. The only way for FSU to get into the playoff is for the SEC to get shut out of the playoff. That would NEVER have been allowed to happen. Even if Jordan Travis was healthy, the committee would have found some other excuse to put Alabama in the playoff over FSU.
 

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,011
I've always questioned the BIGS interest in UVA, yes they are an AAU school but someone told me they do not draw well from the DC Baltimore metroplex, don't really care that much about CFB it seems and the BIG already has MD from the Metroplex. It seems VT draws better from the Metroplex, not saying VT ends up in BIG.
Their tv ratings and crowd attendance are pretty bad iirc
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,927
While I thought that FSU 'deserved' to get a CFP bid, the committee made it clear that their job was to try to pick the 4 'best' teams and without Jordan Travis it was obvious FSU was not one of those.
If Travis had not gotten injured I believe FSU would have gotten a bid.
I agree with you, but your post is likely to take this thread off the rails again. Oh well, here we go...
 

stinger78

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,952
ESPN was already pushing for FSU to be left out before Travis got hurt and if we are being honest, it's really really unlikely that the committee actually thought the 4 teams selected were all better than UGA. They just make up whatever they want as they go.
If they did (think UTA and UW were better) they’re nuts.
 

orientalnc

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
10,048
Location
Oriental, NC
ESPN was already pushing for FSU to be left out before Travis got hurt and if we are being honest, it's really really unlikely that the committee actually thought the 4 teams selected were all better than UGA. They just make up whatever they want as they go.

While I appreciate your logic, I am going to respectfully disagree. The only way for FSU to get into the playoff is for the SEC to get shut out of the playoff. That would NEVER have been allowed to happen. Even if Jordan Travis was healthy, the committee would have found some other excuse to put Alabama in the playoff over FSU.
This is silly. FSU was ranked #4 when Travis was injured. There was no way they were left out with him healthy.
 

WreckinGT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,196
This is silly. FSU was ranked #4 when Travis was injured. There was no way they were left out with him healthy.
Here was the FSU progression:

#4 playing North Alabama (Travis gets hurt)
#5 playing Florida without Travis
#4 playing Louisville without Travis
#5 final ranking

If you believe the committee then they thought FSU was one of the 4 best teams after they beat Florida without Travis. Then they left them out anyways because of the Travis injury. They also thought FSU was better than UGA without Travis at the end of the year. None of this makes any sense. The Travis injury only mattered after Bama beat UGA.
 

SOWEGA Jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,113
Here was the FSU progression:

#4 playing North Alabama (Travis gets hurt)
#5 playing Florida without Travis
#4 playing Louisville without Travis
#5 final ranking

If you believe the committee then they thought FSU was one of the 4 best teams after they beat Florida without Travis. Then they left them out anyways because of the Travis injury. They also thought FSU was better than UGA without Travis at the end of the year. None of this makes any sense. The Travis injury only mattered after Bama beat UGA.
Exactly. They, for the first time EVER, used injury as a talking point only AFTER Bama beat UGA and they were in no way, as Jim Prather said above, ever going to leave the SEC out. The committee took the route of least resistance and it was the ACC. And it proved to be correct from their viewpoint because the ACC did nothing in response outside of a tweet. If they would have left out both Bama and UGA you would have seen the SEC AD’s all in Birmingham the next day holding a press conference and threatening to sit out bowl games, etc.

And this is only the beginning of the new era shaft for the ACC. Get ready for it. I imagine over the next 4 years as it becomes apparent who controls the CFP committee (for those who still don’t see it) that I won’t be alone in calling for the death of the ACC. The ACC is a dead conference walking and the committee knows it and just saw how easy it was to hose us yet again.
 

cpf2001

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,388
It wasn’t the first time injury was discussed as a CFP talking point. But it was the first time the backup looked so much worse.
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,927
Here was the FSU progression:

#4 playing North Alabama (Travis gets hurt)
#5 playing Florida without Travis
#4 playing Louisville without Travis
#5 final ranking

If you believe the committee then they thought FSU was one of the 4 best teams after they beat Florida without Travis. Then they left them out anyways because of the Travis injury. They also thought FSU was better than UGA without Travis at the end of the year. None of this makes any sense. The Travis injury only mattered after Bama beat UGA.
Since we’ve decided to re-litigate this discussion, let’s at least explore all the facts.

What you are leaving out is that Travis’ backup, Tate Rodemaker, played acceptably well in the N. Alabama game and the Florida game, until he took a hard hit. Then he elected to portal out before the ACC championship game. FSU’s third-string freshman QB, Brock Glenn, had to play in the Championship. Glenn's performance was awful – 8/21 for 55 yards, and ended the game with a QBR of 11.7.

Anyone watching that game (I did) would have serious doubts about the ability of FSU’s offense to perform at a CFP level without Travis or Rodemaker. No conspiracy necessary.
 

SOWEGA Jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,113
Since we’ve decided to re-litigate this discussion, let’s at least explore all the facts.

What you are leaving out is that Travis’ backup, Tate Rodemaker, played acceptably well in the N. Alabama game and the Florida game, until he took a hard hit. Then he elected to portal out before the ACC championship game. FSU’s third-string freshman QB, Brock Glenn, had to play in the Championship. Glenn's performance was awful – 8/21 for 55 yards, and ended the game with a QBR of 11.7.

Anyone watching that game (I did) would have serious doubts about the ability of FSU’s offense to perform at a CFP level without Travis or Rodemaker. No conspiracy necessary.
And you are leaving out the part where FSU’s defense was top tier. The Ravens and Buccaneers both won Super Bowls with very mediocre QB’s (Dilfer/Johnson) because their defense won it. We’ve seen it in college too.

Do you believe Bama or Michigan would have been left out if either Milroe or McCarthy had gotten hurt in their conference Champ game? Heck no. The announcers would have turned to the ole “ it’s time to make the Bear and Bo smile with old school defense”, etc. And FSU’s defense was better than both theirs last year.
 

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,750
This is silly. FSU was ranked #4 when Travis was injured. There was no way they were left out with him healthy.
I agree, but that provided a spurious excuse for the selection committee to allow unworthy Alabama to worm its way into the CFP.
But no, with Travis healthy they would have had no fig leaf to hide behind. That injury provided them the thin excuse they needed.
 

WreckinGT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,196
Since we’ve decided to re-litigate this discussion, let’s at least explore all the facts.

What you are leaving out is that Travis’ backup, Tate Rodemaker, played acceptably well in the N. Alabama game and the Florida game, until he took a hard hit. Then he elected to portal out before the ACC championship game. FSU’s third-string freshman QB, Brock Glenn, had to play in the Championship. Glenn's performance was awful – 8/21 for 55 yards, and ended the game with a QBR of 11.7.

Anyone watching that game (I did) would have serious doubts about the ability of FSU’s offense to perform at a CFP level without Travis or Rodemaker. No conspiracy necessary.
There are a few things wrong here.

1. Rodemaker was a game time decision in the ACC championship with a head injury from a concussion. He practiced that week leading up to the game. He obviously wasn't going to be out another month so making a decision based on his health doesn't really make any sense.

2. He really didn't play well against Florida. He went 12-25 for 134 yards no TDs against a team ranked 70th in passing defense.

3. At no point did anyone ever say that they moved FSU down because Tate Rodemaker was injured.
 

LT 1967

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
544
Some realignment news.

FSU is making a move in the Florida court asking for a partial summary judgement. According to this CBS article, FSU is claiming the ACC has no claim to their home games if FSU leaves the conference. Apparently, they are basing this on their claim that the ACC misinterpreted the GOR. Maybe some of our more legally orientated members could explain if this move means very much.

They are still claiming the ACC lawsuit was entered without the ACC President's approval.

 
Last edited:

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,927
There are a few things wrong here.

1. Rodemaker was a game time decision in the ACC championship with a head injury from a concussion. He practiced that week leading up to the game. He obviously wasn't going to be out another month so making a decision based on his health doesn't really make any sense. You may be correct here - in any case he did not play in the ACC Championship.

2. He really didn't play well against Florida. He went 12-25 for 134 yards no TDs against a team ranked 70th in passing defense. His play wasn't Heisman-worthy, but he was thrust into the starting job in their biggest rivalry game of the season. It was good enough to win by two scores. I maintain he played acceptably well. He certainly played better against Florida than Glenn did in the ACC Championship.

3. At no point did anyone ever say that they moved FSU down because Tate Rodemaker was injured. ?? What does that have to do with the Committee observing how Glenn played in the Championship and basing their decision on that?
I get it, it's fun to speculate about conspiracy theories and discount the plain facts of the situation that the Committee, the Chair of which was from the ACC, stated as their reasoning. Even if they were looking for an excuse, I happen to agree that FSU with Brock Glenn was not CFP material. It doesn't matter one iota that an NFL team won a Super Bowl with good defense and a mediocre QB. FSU wasn't winning anything in the playoff with Brock Glenn.
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,927
And you are leaving out the part where FSU’s defense was top tier. The Ravens and Buccaneers both won Super Bowls with very mediocre QB’s (Dilfer/Johnson) because their defense won it. We’ve seen it in college too.

Do you believe Bama or Michigan would have been left out if either Milroe or McCarthy had gotten hurt in their conference Champ game? Heck no. The announcers would have turned to the ole “ it’s time to make the Bear and Bo smile with old school defense”, etc. And FSU’s defense was better than both theirs last year.
I agree with your first sentence.

But to infer that Brock Glenn's play in the ACC Championship was at the "very mediocre" level is giving Glenn waaay to much credit and an insult to Dilfer and Johnson.

Your last paragraph is pure speculative nonsense.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,048
Some realignment news.

FSU is making a move in the Florida court asking for a partial summary judgement. According to this CBS article, FSU is claiming the ACC has no claim to their home games if FSU leaves the conference. Apparently, they are basing this on their claim that the ACC misinterpreted the GOR. Maybe some of our more legally orientated members could explain if this move means very much.

They are still claiming the ACC lawsuit was entered without the ACC President's approval.

That is the same argument that Clemson made in their lawsuit. I still haven't read the Clemson lawsuit, but my understanding of the reporting about it is that they are claiming that the wording can be taken to mean that the ACC owns the games played while being a member, but if they are no longer a member then the GOR doesn't apply. I believe it is an argument along the lines of semantics and where punctuation marks are.

I am not a lawyer, but I don't understand how such an argument could be subject to a summary judgement. My understanding of summary judgement is that they occur when everyone agrees on the facts of the case and the judge only has to rule on application of the law. If there is a disagreement on the understanding of the contract, then a judge can't make a legal ruling without having a trial to argue the facts of the case.

One thing I think the shows is that FSU doesn't believe that either: There is a complete opt-out clause for ESPN, or that ESPN is not going to opt-out if such a clause exists. I think it shows that because if ESPN were going to opt-out in five months, then there are much better arguments to make about the GOR in court and they wouldn't waste time and money on weaker arguments. Especially wouldn't waste time and money trying to get a summary judgement on something about which the facts are in dispute.
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,927
That is the same argument that Clemson made in their lawsuit. I still haven't read the Clemson lawsuit, but my understanding of the reporting about it is that they are claiming that the wording can be taken to mean that the ACC owns the games played while being a member, but if they are no longer a member then the GOR doesn't apply. I believe it is an argument along the lines of semantics and where punctuation marks are.

I am not a lawyer, but I don't understand how such an argument could be subject to a summary judgement. My understanding of summary judgement is that they occur when everyone agrees on the facts of the case and the judge only has to rule on application of the law. If there is a disagreement on the understanding of the contract, then a judge can't make a legal ruling without having a trial to argue the facts of the case.

One thing I think the shows is that FSU doesn't believe that either: There is a complete opt-out clause for ESPN, or that ESPN is not going to opt-out if such a clause exists. I think it shows that because if ESPN were going to opt-out in five months, then there are much better arguments to make about the GOR in court and they wouldn't waste time and money on weaker arguments. Especially wouldn't waste time and money trying to get a summary judgement on something about which the facts are in dispute.
This guy is a lawyer and has been following the case pretty closely. I expect him to add more to his response soon. David McKenzie

Another lawyer noted in the comments that, should FSU prevail in this, the decision by the "FSU judge" will be appealable anyway.
 
Top