Scheduling

[dressedcheeseside]

1. Bama is currently favored right now over Clemson
2. Conf champs only ever mattered as a tie breaker
3. Ohio state snuck in over Penn state last year. They had a better complete body of work relative to penn state and got in. Twice now that's happened. It's precedent and it's literally in their selection criteria that they pick the best teams over conference champions.

1. laughable.
2. never heard that before
3. But Bama does not have a better body of work, that is the rub.

 

[RWGT87]

1. Bama is currently favored right now over Clemson
2. Conf champs only ever mattered as a tie breaker
3. Ohio state snuck in over Penn state last year. They had a better complete body of work relative to penn state and got in. Twice now that's happened. It's precedent and it's literally in their selection criteria that they pick the best teams over conference champions.

If playing in a conference championship does nothing to help you and can only hurt you, why play in it? I bet if Auburn and Wisconsin could do things over, they would say "No, just crown uga and Ohio State conference champs. We'll rest up for the playoffs." If both teams sat idle, how could Alabama jump Wisconsin?

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I bet this whole thing boils down to the committee thought a Clemson Bama repeat is more compelling And better for advertisers and ratings than the deserving match up.

 

[smathis30]

If playing in a conference championship does nothing to help you and can only hurt you, why play in it? I bet if Auburn and Wisconsin could do things over, they would say "No, just crown uga and Ohio State conference champs. We'll rest up for the playoffs." If both teams sat idle, how could Alabama jump Wisconsin?

Helped Ohio state in 2014 and uga this year. Otherwise would have been left out. Also was the only way for Wisconsin to stay in.

Ohio state has better marquee wins, but their schedule was way worse than alabamas at its core and it's hard to say you have a better body of work when you lose by 30 to an unranked team. Had that not happened, they would have an argument to be in

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Ohio state has better marquee wins, but their schedule was way worse than alabamas at its core

This statement is so wrong and so full of SEC bias I don't know where to begin. How bout here:

Ohio State SoS: 28
Alabama SoS: 56

https://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaaf/sagarin/2017/team/

 

[jeffgt14]

3. Ohio state snuck in over Penn state last year. They had a better complete body of work relative to penn state and got in. Twice now that's happened. It's precedent and it's literally in their selection criteria that they pick the best teams over conference champions.

Better body of work as long as you don't look at the fact Penn State beat Ohio State head to head. But we don't need to look at the thing that actually matters.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Better body of work as long as you don't look at the fact Penn State beat Ohio State head to head. But we don't need to look at the thing that actually matters.

I agree, I think head-to-head matchup should be way up there in the tie-breaker criteria list.

 

[jeffgt14]

“But there’s a big problem with putting Alabama in the Playoff, and it has nothing to do with one league getting two teams in, something that was bound to happen at some point in this system. In essence, Alabama slid into the playoff this weekend by doing nothing. It was rewarded for losing to Auburn last week in a game that decided the SEC West title. And that’s simply not the way this process should work.”

Which is exactly why this is BS. This past weekend you had 6 teams playing for a shot at the playoffs. A loss by any of these 6 teams guaranteed they would not get in. Alabama sat at home and didn’t have to do anything. They benefitted tenfold for not having to play an ADDITIONAL game against a top team. Auburn did them the greatest favor in the world by being good enough that by beating them, they guaranteed Alabama didn’t even have to risk the possibility of 2 losses.

 

[smathis30]

I agree, I think head-to-head matchup should be way up there in the tie-breaker criteria list.

It is. Penn state lost by almost 40 to Michigan though. 1 loss isn't better than 2. Ohio states schedule is tougher due to them playing Oklahoma and FSU losing 13 players to injuries this season. FSU played better as the year progresses but the game against Alabama was to pyhrricc to really judge how good they were. FSU was a contender until their QB went down. So yes Ohik states schedule was tougher but they got twice as many losses out of it and that can't Ignored. Auburn played playoff teams 4 times this year but that doesn't mean **** if they don't win. It just helps make an argument if they win. Outside of the 5 wins against 8 win teams, the rest of their schedule was trash. Bama a wasn't much better, but one Loss. End of story.

 

[jeffgt14]

It is. Penn state lost by almost 40 to Michigan though. 1 loss isn't better than 2. Ohio states schedule is tougher due to them playing Oklahoma and FSU losing 13 players to injuries this season. FSU played better as the year progresses but the game against Alabama was to pyhrricc to really judge how good they were. FSU was a contender until their QB went down. So yes Ohik states schedule was tougher but they got twice as many losses out of it and that can't Ignored. Auburn played playoff teams 4 times this year but that doesn't mean **** if they don't win. It just helps make an argument if they win. Outside of the 5 wins against 8 win teams, the rest of their schedule was trash. Bama a wasn't much better, but one Loss. End of story.

You do realize you are just grabbing random statistics and inferences to justify Bama getting in because you think they are the better team right? At some point you have to setup some kind of standard instead of trying to find evidence one team is better than the other.

 

[smathis30]

Better than deciding which 2 make the BCS game

 

[B Lifsey]

Which is exactly why this is BS. This past weekend you had 6 teams playing for a shot at the playoffs. A loss by any of these 6 teams guaranteed they would not get in. Alabama sat at home and didn’t have to do anything. They benefitted tenfold for not having to play an ADDITIONAL game against a top team. Auburn did them the greatest favor in the world by being good enough that by beating them, they guaranteed Alabama didn’t even have to risk the possibility of 2 losses.

Maybe this was Saban's plan all along. Kind of like letting your opponent score touchdown so you can get the ball back. He let Auburn win so he couldn't be shut out from CFB in SECCG and would have an extra week of rest.

 

[smathis30]

You do realize you are just grabbing random statistics and inferences to justify Bama getting in because you think they are the better team right? At some point you have to setup some kind of standard instead of trying to find evidence one team is better than the other.

Standard: do they have one loss and not lose by 30 points?

Worked last two years. What's your standard?

 

[FredJacket]

Which is exactly why this is BS. This past weekend you had 6 teams playing for a shot at the playoffs. A loss by any of these 6 teams guaranteed they would not get in. Alabama sat at home and didn’t have to do anything. They benefitted tenfold for not having to play an ADDITIONAL game against a top team. Auburn did them the greatest favor in the world by being good enough that by beating them, they guaranteed Alabama didn’t even have to risk the possibility of 2 losses.

...and @smathis30, @dressedcheeseside, et al. Keep it going, gents! I love all of this. You're making good points. Let me just add a thought (or two). IF I were to recommend a team's best path to make the CFB playoffs, here is my FREE advice...

Things a team SHOULD strive to do (in order):

1) Be in a P5 conference or be ND AND WIN all your games.
If you cannot do that,
2) Only lose ONE.. and make sure it is to a very good team.
3) Win your conference championship (if you did #2, you're a P5 conference champ with only 1-loss).

If you cannot do one of these things including be a conference champ with only 1 loss, you likely have lead a path to NOT being one of the best 4 teams.

 

[smathis30]

https://www.sbnation.com/college-fo...-ohio-state-college-football-playoff-compared

It's not making up statistics when the majority of statistics favor Alabama.

 

[jeffgt14]

Standard: do they have one loss and not lose by 30 points?

Worked last two years. What's your standard?

That's all fine and dandy if the committee came out and said that's there standard. Maybe then teams would go more conservative if they’re having a ****ty game to minimize how many points they lose by. My problem is the committee specifically stated there 4 guidelines they will look at. They ignored 2 of them last year (Head to head and Conference Championships) and they ignored 2 of them this year (Strength of Schedule and Conference Championships).

And if having 1 more loss out of 1 more game bothers you so much, why is Wisconsin not in? Take away a game Alabama doesn’t have to play in and they’re undefeated. Is it because of Strength of Schedule? I thought we were ignoring that one. Or do we only use Strength of Schedule to justify why UCF and Wisconsin don’t get in and not Bama.

 

[smathis30]

Inverse question to the board.

Why should Ohio state be the first 2 loss national champion?

 

[jeffgt14]

...and @smathis30, @dressedcheeseside, et al. Keep it going, gents! I love all of this. You're making good points. Let me just add a thought (or two). IF I were to recommend a team's best path to make the CFB playoffs, here is my FREE advice...

Things a team SHOULD strive to do (in order):

1) Be in a P5 conference or be ND AND WIN all your games.
If you cannot do that,
2) Only lose ONE.. and make sure it is to a very good team.
3) Win your conference championship (if you did #2, you're a P5 conference champ with only 1-loss).

If you cannot do one of these things including be a conference champ with only 1 loss, you likely have lead a path to NOT being one of the best 4 teams.

Wisconsin it is!

 

[FredJacket]

Wisconsin it is!

While I'd rather "appear" to be an Alabama/SEC apologist to nurture @LibertyTurns bitterness toward such folks. I am not. Frankly...under the current system (which is delightfully flawed)... for this particular season where the committee had to pick a 4th team under ambiguous guidance (by design... I contend), had they picked Wisconsin or OSU over Alabama, I'd have no real problem with that. I also "think" I understand why they picked Alabama.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

It is. Penn state lost by almost 40 to Michigan though. 1 loss isn't better than 2. Ohio states schedule is tougher due to them playing Oklahoma and FSU losing 13 players to injuries this season. FSU played better as the year progresses but the game against Alabama was to pyhrricc to really judge how good they were. FSU was a contender until their QB went down. So yes Ohik states schedule was tougher but they got twice as many losses out of it and that can't Ignored. Auburn played playoff teams 4 times this year but that doesn't mean **** if they don't win. It just helps make an argument if they win. Outside of the 5 wins against 8 win teams, the rest of their schedule was trash. Bama a wasn't much better, but one Loss. End of story.

UCF is a conference champion, has zero losses, zero 30 point losses and, here’s the kicker, stronger SOS then Bammer.
http://warrennolan.com/football/2017/sos