Scheduling

[RonJohn]

3 teams with 9 wins and 6 with 8 might be one of the greatest division accomplishments of all time. With wins over West Virginia, Boise State, Wisconsin, Memphis, Texas Tech, Kansas state. Every team was bowl eligible and every team went undefeated OOC and everyone's bar MSU played at least one power five. They shat the bed in the playoffs but played about as good as you expect

According to what you have been saying: Boise, Memphis, and TT don't count because they aren't P5. WV was 7-5. KS was 9-3 and Wisconsin was 10-3 so those are TWO good teams that that division beat OOC. Then Alabama didn't just do poorly in the playoffs, the rest of the division stank in bowl games. Outside of those two games during the season, they didn't do well against well OOC competition. The hype was that three teams in the top 4 meant that they will beat on each other and exclude some worthy teams. Reality showed that none of those teams deserved to be there.

 

[RonJohn]

So 2 losses are what matters now. So Auburn shouldn't have been in the playoffs if they best uga right?

There are no absolutes for hypotheticals. There are only absolutes for final rankings. But then those absolute statements are only absolute until the next year when the process and the selection criteria change to meet the needs of the committee members.

 

[smathis30]

So 2 losses are what matters now. So Auburn shouldn't have been in the playoffs if they best uga right?

They would have had 3 wins over 11 win teams which is more than the entirety of the college football field combined. You can't have two losses if your schedule is weak. Quality wins are more important than losses, but 30 point losses are still bad. Auburn would have flipped with Georgia but playoff field would have remained the same

 

[jeffgt14]

There are no absolutes for hypotheticals. There are only absolutes for final rankings. But then those absolute statements are only absolute until the next year when the process and the selection criteria change to meet the needs of the committee members.

I'm just trying to follow this circle instead of going with the team that took care of business.

 

[smathis30]

According to what you have been saying: Boise, Memphis, and TT don't count because they aren't P5. WV was 7-5. KS was 9-3 and Wisconsin was 10-3 so those are TWO good teams that that division beat OOC. Then Alabama didn't just do poorly in the playoffs, the rest of the division stank in bowl games. Outside of those two games during the season, they didn't do well against well OOC competition. The hype was that three teams in the top 4 meant that they will beat on each other and exclude some worthy teams. Reality showed that none of those teams deserved to be there.

Boise and Memphis proved to be G5 teams worth a damn though. The AAC is very bottom heavy this year, and was debatably the 7th best conference behind the MVC. Rankings are reflective of the time and no one looked as good as they did at that point. I counted Fresno earlier as 9 win FCS teams are still good. Counted app state for Georgia for the same reason. And I honestly don't know how you think going 28-0 out of conference is bad. Also Texas tech is in the big 12 which had the 5 and 6 teams

 

[smathis30]

There are no absolutes for hypotheticals. There are only absolutes for final rankings. But then those absolute statements are only absolute until the next year when the process and the selection criteria change to meet the needs of the committee members.

When has it changed? They were consistent last year to this year

 

[RonJohn]

I'm just trying to follow this circle instead of going with the team that took care of business.

ESPN is who really likes the current process. They will be able to go on for weeks on TV and radio getting fans riled up and calling in to argue whether the rankings were good or bad. It is good for reality TV type hysteria and trash talk. In my opinion, it isn't good for sports or sportsmanship. I guess the Real Housewives of College Football is more appealing to most than actual football games. If this type of thing continues, it probably won't be long before I go to the GT games and ignore everything else in college football.

 

[RonJohn]

When has it changed? They were consistent last year to this year

We aren't every going to agree. The playoff committee is a joke, and the whole process is a joke. I have no respect for them or it, and I never will. All arguments that they are doing the correct thing appear to me to be snow jobs by marketing people. The NCAA knows how to do this, and they do this for every single sport except FBS football. The committee and the playoffs are simply attempts to control how money is made and distributed.

 

[smathis30]

We aren't every going to agree. The playoff committee is a joke, and the whole process is a joke. I have no respect for them or it, and I never will. All arguments that they are doing the correct thing appear to me to be snow jobs by marketing people. The NCAA knows how to do this, and they do this for every single sport except FBS football. The committee and the playoffs are simply attempts to control how money is made and distributed.

Ill disagree till the day I die about the media BS but I agree to a degree about the committee. Should be decided by BCS system but with a playoff. They've been consistent with their process so I don't understand the hate. Wish they would be nicer to G5. They've made the right choices so far but the only thing wrong with the BCS was just 2 teams

 

[jeffgt14]

Alright so 2 losses are bad unless those 2 losses do not include a 30 point blowout and you have beaten Power 5 opponents in which case you have quality wins and quality losses. However, if you play nobody and have no losses then you are also eliminated. If you have one loss but beat a team that is good a power 5 team with a winning record then you have a quality win and a quality loss which is acceptable. Unless of course you play nobody and your one loss is to a Power 5 team in an additional game that the other one loss team did not have to play but that one loss was to a team that had a 30 point blowout loss which now makes it unacceptable because Top 4 teams shouldn't lose to a team that had a 30 point loss in an extra game the other comparable team didn't have to play. However it is ok to lose to a team who lost to a team that has a 30 point loss because that reaches the required amount of games away from the 30 point loss too make it acceptable. Oh and your uniform is required to be crimson in color.

 

[LibertyTurns]

Why don’t the SEC lovers on here just come out & admit it? You all obviously love that damn conference to death & buy ever bit of hype that comes out of Satan’s mouth along with the rest of those types. Not sure why you all are even on this board because that conference has such massive overwhelming greatness you’d think there’s no reason wasting your time trying to convince the rest of us you’re the ****. We’ll all eventually figure it out regardless of how misguided we are, right? All it will take is several more years of .500 ball, or in the case of the ACC slightly less than .500 ball, against the inferior other P5 conferences.

 

[smathis30]

Alright so 2 losses are bad unless those 2 losses do not include a 30 point blowout and you have beaten Power 5 opponents in which case you have quality wins and quality losses. However, if you play nobody and have no losses then you are also eliminated. If you have one loss but beat a team that is good a power 5 team with a winning record then you have a quality win and a quality loss which is acceptable. Unless of course you play nobody and your one loss is to a Power 5 team in an additional game that the other one loss team did not have to play but that one loss was to a team that had a 30 point blowout loss which now makes it unacceptable because Top 4 teams shouldn't lose to a team that had a 30 point loss in an extra game the other comparable team didn't have to play. However it is ok to lose to a team who lost to a team that has a 30 point loss because that reaches the required amount of games away from the 30 point loss too make it acceptable. Oh and your uniform is required to be crimson in color.

nah its just beat as many good teams as possible and look good doing it. No such thing as quality losses just quality win and bad losses. Get quality wins dont get bad losses. Wins over bad teams are on roughly on par with a loss. If you lose, hope you play them again (2014 Oregon, 2017 uga)

 

[Jmonty71]

I see nothing about 30 point losses. I see something about unequivocally one of the top 4 teams in the country which makes no sense if as many people in the country are making a claim they aren't.

I have a feeling even if Bama had gotten blown out , in a game, it would not of mattered. Bama....come hell or high water was getting in.

 

[Jmonty71]

Lucky for uga they got a garbage time TD in with 2 minutes left to beak the 30 point limit or they'd be sitting at home. Damn Iowa running the score up with a TD with a little over a minute left destroyed OSU's hopes.

Ironic. Considering how often OSU runs the score up on people. Karma?

 

[smathis30]

Computer rankings would have liked bama less if they lost by 30. Committee looks at computer rankings. Most CPU polls and both human ones have them in. No point in arguin hypotheticals when bama hasn't lost by over 30 to an unranked team in nearly 98 years

I have a feeling even if Bama had gotten blown out , in a game, it would not of mattered. Bama....come hell or high water was getting in

 

[FightWinDrink]

They didn't want to see OSU shut out again in the semis

 

[dressedcheeseside]

“All the reverence for protocol and winning conference titles ended Sunday when the committee gave a big, wet, sloppy kiss to Nick Saban and the reputation of his program, not the team he put on the field this year.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...t-wrong-alabama-brand-loyalty-only/917333001/

“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.”

 

[dressedcheeseside]

They didn't want to see OSU shut out again in the semis

I guess they’d rather see Bama shut out instead.

 

[smathis30]

I guess they’d rather see Bama shut out instead.

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.

 

[FightWinDrink]

I guess they’d rather see Bama shut out instead.

I mean I would