Louisville, at 10-2, and ACCCG loser would not have been part of the 12 this year. Not sure I agree with you. Kentucky was a rivalry game. Means more. Look at Tech/uga.
Would a two loss ACC non champion get in over a two loss Ole Miss team that lost to Bama and UGA?
For the most part, they will be the only two conferences that matter. The ACC and Big12 will get their conference champ in, and in unusual years might get a second team in, but by and large all of the big football powers will be in the SEC and Big10. Just because Texas and Oklahoma or going to the SEC, won’t make them any less good. Their record will be worse for sure, but they are still going to be really good.
I meant Liberty vs. FSU's B-Team would have made a good bowl game.
Had they beaten a mid tier UK SEC team they would have been ranked in the top 10 and highly likely been in a 12 team playoff.
The comment was a 10-2 team not playing in the ACCCG would probably make it in.
You have forgotten that a mid-tier SEC team would go 16-0 in an 8 game ACC schedule, and that the lowest margin of victory would be by 222 points. So no matter what happens to Alabama during the SEC schedule, it can't be questioned. (Also you just have to simply ignore what happened against USF because it doesn't fit the narrative.)
You missed two of this year’s better college football games. Both decided on the last play of the game. That does not happen very often.As one who is cynical of CFB perhaps as much as any of us (and didn’t watch yesterday’s games, either, but followed progress), I wonder though if through all the controversy that the two best teams (and not SEC) are actually playing in the final (aside the fact that one of them is demonstrably unsportsmanlike in actions)?
So the Finals may be worth watching. Though I don’t feel like paying for cable or streaming options this month so I’ll follow on radio or online updates. A meaningless protest gesture, but screw you ESPN/Disney/AllY’all nonetheless lol.
Oh, agreed! But also fun to follow without glued to the TV. I just wasn’t that invested in the games, which is relative to the comment above was replying to. And the games could just as easily been a waste of time to watch. But ESPN is grateful for its devotees!
It wasn’t the Cy Young trade or NBA MVP. It wasn’t that the system was supposed to put the best four teams in—because they didn’t pick the best four teams. It wasn’t picking the four most accomplished teams (that would have put FSU in). It wasn’t putting in the four teams that would create the best matchups—that probably would have been the four best.
Really happy that any team other than an SEC conference member will win.
FSU had more accomplishments during the season than almost every team. ESPN even had their own measure called “strength of record”, which they hid when FSU won the ACC championship.But this is just arguing a point that’s conjecture, eg system is biased towards SEC, or not substantiated, eg FSU is one of the four best .. because, why, record?
And don’t get me wrong .. I think selection by Committee is a ridiculous concept and made my case (with others) that the BCS system with a composite of several polls and computer rankings had a balancing effect. Instead there is a closed-door collaborative of a relatively few persons. Which I know is what you’re alluding to re the measuring stick.
I also acknowledge that given a NFL-style model that FSU would have been guaranteed an entry.
But until it’s demonstrated that FSU was really one of the four best teams — without simply pointing to its record and with accounting for the makeup of the team sans its most impactful player — I don’t get the continued beat that they were robbed. They were not — they simply did not measure up in a unique season that included other very qualified teams. I actually believe that uGA was more robbed than FSU
Number 1 criteria for who gets in should be performance on the field. That is measured first by W/L. Period. cfp committee decided winning wasn’t the most important thing. That’s not something I’m interested in.
