NCAA Football

[moonslav59]

I’m talking about these conference championship games that not everyone is playing like Ohio State. ND would not be playing in one either.

 

Yes, the conference championships give some teams one more shot to make it or lose their slot (like maybe GA.)

 

Iowa plays but not Ohio St.

 

The whole ranking system is flawed, but with so many teams and so many varying schedules and dubious strength of schedule formulas, it's hard to know who is the best.

 

It was a good idea to go to 4 teams, and I think that expands, next year, but there will always be one team thinking they should have gone to the dance over another team.

 

Is GA the 1 loss team that make it?

 

Ohio St lost by 3 at MI, who will not be #1.

 

GA lost to a lower ranked team.

 

I can't see Texas making it.

 

Maybe several 1 loss teams are better than Wash & FSU.

[moonslav59]

The winningest teams in NCAA Football:

 

1. Michigan .733

T2. Ohio St .731

T2. Alabama .731

4. Notre Dame .730

 

(Texas at .701)

 

[moonslav59]

The one loss teams:

 

GA

Lost to #8 AL (won't be #8 anymore)

Win #9 Missouri

Win #11 Mississippi

 

Ohio St.

Lost at #2 Michigan (will be #1)t

Win v #7 Penn St

Win @ #15 ND

 

Alabama

Lost v #7 Texas

Win #1 GA

Win v #11 Mississippi

Win v #13 LSU

 

Texas

Lost v #12 OKL

Win @ #8 AL

Win #19 OKL St

 

 

[moonslav59]

These will likely be the rankings, IMO:

 

1. Michigan

2. Washington

3. Florida St.

4. Alabama

 

5. Georgia

6. Texas

7. Ohio St.

8. Oregon

9. Penn St

10. Missouri

11. Ole Miss

12. Oklahoma

13. LSU

14. Notre Dame

15. SMU

16. Arizona

 

[Old Red]

These will likely be the rankings, IMO:

 

1. Michigan

2. Washington

3. Florida St.

4. Alabama

 

5. Georgia

6. Texas

7. Ohio St.

8. Oregon

9. Penn St

10. Missouri

11. Ole Miss

12. Oklahoma

13. LSU

14. Notre Dame

15. SMU

16. Arizona

 

I think Texas gets #4 over Bama.

[notin]

I think Texas gets #4 over Bama.

 

Texas beat Bama, but there is a ZERO percent chance of leaving the SEC out of the playoff picture.

 

If Texas and Bama both get in, Florida State, due to the egregious sun of using a backup QB, will be odd man out. Of course, the NCAA will never admit this is why, but let’s get real here…

[Old Red]

Texas beat Bama, but there is a ZERO percent chance of leaving the SEC out of the playoff picture.

 

If Texas and Bama both get in, Florida State, due to the egregious sun of using a backup QB, will be odd man out. Of course, the NCAA will never admit this is why, but let’s get real here…

 

1 Mich

 

2. Wash

 

3. TX

 

4. Ala

 

Fla St. 13-0 is out.

[Old Red]

Once again any system that is decided in a room, and not on the field is a flawed system. Two teams are better than none, and 4 teams are better than 2 teams, but still a very flawed system.

[notin]

Once again any system that is decided in a room, and not on the field is a flawed system. Two teams are better than none, and 4 teams are better than 2 teams, but still a very flawed system.

 

The biggest problem with college football is it has always been so political and, frankly, straight up corrupt.

 

It should be Michigan, Washington, FSU and Texas. But it won’t be because there is just too much money to be made with SEC schools. Alabama lost to Texas. It’s absolutely a respectable loss, but it also is enough to put them on the outside looking in…

[dgalehouse]

A six team playoff would be better . The top two seeds get a first round bye. Instead, they will expand it to twelve teams, which is way too many. But no matter what happens, there will always be controversy over who was left out. That's life.

[moonslav59]

With over 100 teams, it's hard to design a football playoff system that doesn't leave some deserving team out.

 

This system is highly flawed, but the NCAA cannot have a 32 or even 16 team playoff structure. If they think they can do 6, then they might as well do 8.

 

Of course, once you go to 8th, the 9th and 10th teams will be screaming about how unfair the new system is, and many times they will be right.

 

So much of the way these teams are chosen are based on opinion- some straight from the pre-season rankings that are based on nothing but opinion. Teams are also chosen on the basis of the perception of how strong their conference is and specific teams' schedule strengths. It's easy to imagine that the SEC is not always equally strong, but they are always assumed to be the far away strongest conference. (I'm not saying it isn't always the best, but how can we really ever know, for sure?)

 

These ideas they use to select the 4 teams is based on who they think are the best teams, now. They factor in injured players, the recency effect and almost always head-to-head tie breakers. In a warped way, this is how AL and Tex got in over the 13-0 FSU. AL beat #1 GA and won the strongest conference, so they have to get in. Texas has the same record as AL. so they have to get in. Did Texas really beat that many top teams? What about losses? They seem to count less.

 

A one loss team like Ohio St. lost its one game, on the road, to the current #1 team Michigan by a field goal. Once could argue they are the best 1 loss team.

FSU clearly played a lighter schedule, but no losses should outweigh what AL & TX did. Afterall, FSU did beat 3 ranked teams.

Georgia played a tough schedule, and ended up losing a close game to a top 4 team. Sorry, you lost your last game- you suck!

What makes Wash better than FSU? The apparent strength of the PAC-10, which I find doubtful. Are ORE, USC and AZ really all that better than Penn St, Missouri and other teams that looked tough, this year?

 

Anyway, had they chosen FSU, we'd be hearing AL or TEX bitching away, and rightfully so.

 

[notin]

A six team playoff would be better . The top two seeds get a first round bye. Instead, they will expand it to twelve teams, which is way too many. But no matter what happens, there will always be controversy over who was left out. That's life.

 

No matter how big it gets, there will be a team on the fringes complaining. Four is fine, especially considering that these plsyers are theoretically college students and might have to attend class at some point…

[moonslav59]

The biggest problem with college football is it has always been so political and, frankly, straight up corrupt.

 

It should be Michigan, Washington, FSU and Texas. But it won’t be because there is just too much money to be made with SEC schools. Alabama lost to Texas. It’s absolutely a respectable loss, but it also is enough to put them on the outside looking in…

 

Texas lost to #12 OKL. Yes, they beat AL who was #8 before they beat #GA.

Alabama lost to #3 Texas, but they beat #1 GA as well as more ranked teams than TX, FSU, WSH and MI.

 

There is no set criteria.

[notin]

With over 100 teams, it's hard to design a football playoff system that doesn't leave some deserving team out.

 

This system is highly flawed, but the NCAA cannot have a 32 or even 16 team playoff structure. If they think they can do 6, then they might as well do 8.

 

Of course, once you go to 8th, the 9th and 10th teams will be screaming about how unfair the new system is, and many times they will be right.

 

So much of the way these teams are chosen are based on opinion- some straight from the pre-season rankings that are based on nothing but opinion. Teams are also chosen on the basis of the perception of how strong their conference is and specific teams' schedule strengths. It's easy to imagine that the SEC is not always equally strong, but they are always assumed to be the far away strongest conference. (I'm not saying it isn't always the best, but how can we really ever know, for sure?)

 

These ideas they use to select the 4 teams is based on who they think are the best teams, now. They factor in injured players, the recency effect and almost always head-to-head tie breakers. In a warped way, this is how AL and Tex got in over the 13-0 FSU. AL beat #1 GA and won the strongest conference, so they have to get in. Texas has the same record as AL. so they have to get in. Did Texas really beat that many top teams? What about losses? They seem to count less.

 

A one loss team like Ohio St. lost its one game, on the road, to the current #1 team Michigan by a field goal. Once could argue they are the best 1 loss team.

FSU clearly played a lighter schedule, but no losses should outweigh what AL & TX did. Afterall, FSU did beat 3 ranked teams.

Georgia played a tough schedule, and ended up losing a close game to a top 4 team. Sorry, you lost your last game- you suck!

What makes Wash better than FSU? The apparent strength of the PAC-10, which I find doubtful. Are ORE, USC and AZ really all that better than Penn St, Missouri and other teams that looked tough, this year?

 

Anyway, had they chosen FSU, we'd be hearing AL or TEX bitching away, and rightfully so.

 

 

 

1. Opinion matters less than financial consideration.

 

2. Alabama has no case as to why they deserve to be over three undefeated teams and the team that beat them. Not a serious argument, although on the off-chance that the NCAA shuts the SEC out of the playoffs, I’m sure Saban will come up with some nonsensical one that will appeal to some people…

[notin]

Texas lost to #12 OKL. Yes, they beat AL who was #8 before they beat #GA.

Alabama lost to #3 Texas, but they beat #1 GA as well as more ranked teams than TX, FSU, WSH and MI.

 

There is no set criteria.

 

Alabama had their chance to make their case over Texas. They failed…

[moonslav59]

Alabama had their chance to make their case over Texas. They failed…

 

I'm not arguing they should, but one could say, "Texas had their chance to make their case over Oklahoma and failed.

 

Is it all about head-to-head?

 

If yes, why was FSU selected champs over Notre Dame, when we beat them head-to-head and had the same record?

 

There is no set criteria, and even if there was, it would have to be flawed, too.

[moonslav59]

1. Opinion matters less than financial consideration.

 

2. Alabama has no case as to why they deserve to be over three undefeated teams and the team that beat them. Not a serious argument, although on the off-chance that the NCAA shuts the SEC out of the playoffs, I’m sure Saban will come up with some nonsensical one that will appeal to some people…

 

I would not have put AL or TX in over FSU, but I'm pretty sure AL beat more ranked teams than TX, and the non ranked teams they beat were probably better than the ones TX beat.

 

AL's loss was to a better team than TX's loss.

 

Those are legit arguments.

 

(I could come up with some for any of the top 6-7 teams.)

[moonslav59]

I would not have put AL or TX in over FSU, but I'm pretty sure AL beat more ranked teams than TX, and the non ranked teams they beat were probably better than the ones TX beat.

 

AL's loss was to a better team than TX's loss.

 

Those are legit arguments.

 

(I could come up with some for any of the top 6-7 teams.)

 

 

Power Rankings Guru has Texas with the toughest schedule in the NCAA.

 

1. Texas

5. Alabama

9. Washington

41. Ohio St

44. Georgia

51. Michigan

55. FSU,

 

Another site has...

3. Alabama

11. Ohio ST

17. Texas

32. Wash

43. Georgia

47. Michigan

50. FSU

[notin]

I would not have put AL or TX in over FSU, but I'm pretty sure AL beat more ranked teams than TX, and the non ranked teams they beat were probably better than the ones TX beat.

 

AL's loss was to a better team than TX's loss.

 

Those are legit arguments.

 

(I could come up with some for any of the top 6-7 teams.)

 

And the counter argument is always the same - but Texas beat Bama. And when you’re talking about a single-game elimination playoff format, you can’t downplay that. It puts you in a position where you’re arguing for and against the same thing.

 

Beating more ranked teams just means “beat more teams someone thought we’re good.” How about evidence?

[moonslav59]

And the counter argument is always the same - but Texas beat Bama. And when you’re talking about a single-game elimination playoff format, you can’t downplay that. It puts you in a position where you’re arguing for and against the same thing.

 

Beating more ranked teams just means “beat more teams someone thought we’re good.” How about evidence?

 

Lot's of teams lose to one team during the season only to lose to them in the playoffs. AL did not lose to Texas in the playoffs.

 

Look, I get the head-to-head argument, and said I'm not against it. My point was that it is not always "the criteria." The criteria changes.

 

I see Texas beat #12 OKL and jump from 7 to 4.

 

I see FSU beat #15 Louisville and drop from 4 to 5.

 

There is no rhyme or reason.

 

Because AL beats GA, all of a sudden that AL win means a ton more. Maybe OK should have made it, since they beat the team that beat the team that beat GA, and if GA was so good, why aren't they the 4th team? Because they lost to a crappy #8 team?

 

It's easy to go round and round. are undefeated

 

IMO, FSU and WSH aren't as good as MI, GA, AL and Ohio St, but they both are undefeated, and that is usually the top priority, unless you play a really easy schedule.

 

The criteria seems to waver between who is the best team vs who deserves to go based on record, strength of schedule and head to head.

 

The is no set criteria. That's my point.

 

[Jasonbay44]

I get why Florida State was left out. They play in a s***** conference and didn’t really have a great resume. But there has never been an undefeated power 5 team left out of the playoffs and it’s really not fair to the kids on the team. It basically told them none of those games mattered in the end.

 

The reason they left them out I’m assuming is because FSU’s star QB is out for the playoffs and the committee believes without Travis, they aren’t the same team that won all of those games and they’ve looked rough against some mediocre teams without Travis.

[Jasonbay44]

I would’ve been fine if they decided to just ban Michigan from the playoffs for the cheating scandal and let all of Texas, Bama and FSU in.

[Old Red]

I would’ve been fine if they decided to just ban Michigan from the playoffs for the cheating scandal and let all of Texas, Bama and FSU in.

 

Now that would have been a real punishment.

[moonslav59]

I get why Florida State was left out. They play in a s***** conference and didn’t really have a great resume. But there has never been an undefeated power 5 team left out of the playoffs and it’s really not fair to the kids on the team. It basically told them none of those games mattered in the end.

 

The reason they left them out I’m assuming is because FSU’s star QB is out for the playoffs and the committee believes without Travis, they aren’t the same team that won all of those games and they’ve looked rough against some mediocre teams without Travis.

 

Yes, that is the reason, IMO.

 

Although FSU does play in an easier conference, they still played 3 ranked teams, which is about what most others played.

 

They beat LSU #13 now, but was higher ranked, then.

#15 Louisville (has been higher ranked than 15)

#22 Clemson

NR Duke (I think they were 16th when FSU beat them.) NC St is not bad.

[Bellhorn04]

Man, has Coach Prime gone from the penthouse to the outhouse in a hurry this year. He's losing games, recruits, coaches, and now has broken up with his fiancee.

 

He did get SI Sportsperson of the Year, though.

[mvp 78]

Man, has Coach Prime gone from the penthouse to the outhouse in a hurry this year. He's losing games, recruits, coaches, and now has broken up with his fiancee.

 

He did get SI Sportsperson of the Year, though.

 

To be fair, AI wrote that SI article...

[notin]

I get why Florida State was left out. They play in a s***** conference and didn’t really have a great resume. But there has never been an undefeated power 5 team left out of the playoffs and it’s really not fair to the kids on the team. It basically told them none of those games mattered in the end.

 

The reason they left them out I’m assuming is because FSU’s star QB is out for the playoffs and the committee believes without Travis, they aren’t the same team that won all of those games and they’ve looked rough against some mediocre teams without Travis.

 

I stand by what I said before - no way were there going to be college football playoffs without an SEC team. Florida State got left out because they’re simply not worth as much to the NCAA

Edited December 4, 2023 by notin

[moonslav59]

I stand by what I said before - no way were there going to be Cole football playoffs without an SEC team. Florida State got left out because they’re simply not worth as much to the NCAA

 

Agreed, but they could have put FSU in over Texas, too.

[Bellhorn04]

It's unfortunate, or ironic, that this happened in the last year of the 4 team playoff system before moving to a 12 team system.

 

I must say I've never seen a team in any sport so heavily penalized for having a player get injured.

 

As I've been saying for a while now, big college sports is an incredibly corrupt enterprise.

[dgalehouse]

It's unfortunate, or ironic, that this happened in the last year of the 4 team playoff system before moving to a 12 team system.

 

I must say I've never seen a team in any sport so heavily penalized for having a player get injured.

 

As I've been saying for a while now, big college sports is an incredibly corrupt enterprise.

 

 

As I've been saying for a while now, big college sports is an incredibly corrupt enterprise. What isn't?