Playoffs robbed BIG West

[Landlord]

49 minutes ago, gossamorharpy said:

I 100% agree with this statement and don't feel that an 8 team playoff would change this, but rather enhance it.  Take this past weekend for example, no one cared about the pac 12 game given neither team had a shot- imagine if a playoff birth was on the line... guaranteed that game gets a massive spike in ratings.  

 

Maybe that game does, but then USC/Notre Dame wouldn't have really mattered much, Stanford/Notre Dame wouldn't have been too important, so on.

[Scratchtown]

6 hours ago, Landlord said:

Wisconsin should have beat Ohio State if they wanted to get in. Not saying Alabama deserves to be in, because I don't believe they do, but that's a different discussion than the truth that Wisconsin controlled their destiny and didn't take care of business.

 

Nebraska wouldn't be slighted like this (I don't think), for a few reasons:

 

1. Wisconsin's crossover opponents from the East division were s#!t. We have tough crossover games for the next several years.

2. We have a marquee OOC opponent every year. Wisconsin had Utah State, FAU, and BYU this season. 

3. If we get to the point where we go undefeated, we'll get the benefit of the doubt because of our pedigree and blue blood status. Wisconsin won't. Ever. 

 I'm tired of this completely subjective "eyeball test". That's what it comes down to. They have thrown out parts of objectivity each year to satisfy ratings.

 

RATINGS. In interest for the national championship they SHOULD have put Georgia #1 to take on Bama so that we don't ruin a national championship game with an all-sec game. God forbid they take a chance and separate Clemson/Bama round 3. 

 

I'm so over this whole selection process. 

 

"Its about the 4 best teams".

 

Auburn is CLEARLY better than Bama. So..CLEARLY its NOT about the 4 best teams.

 

 

[Making Chimichangas]

@Born N Bled Red Well Wisconsin should have beaten Ohio State and taken it out of the playoff committee's hands.  But the Badgers didn't win, so they got left out.  I wanted them to beat Ohio State, but I'm not going to shed a tear over them getting left out of the playoffs.

[dvdcrr]

They have shown the last two years that Conference championships do not matter.  Big 12 got shafted for not having a CCG then Big 10 Champ 2 times.  The simple fact is you have 4 spots but five power conferences and usually one undefeated at large team.

SO  

To me the solution is this:  have a 10 team field.  7 vs 10 and 8 vs.9 are the play-ins to the 8 team field.  8 team playoff has room for all Power conferences plus some.  No controversy.

Either eliminate CCG's (because they don't really matter to the committee)  Or eliminate an early non conf. game

 

In all other sports a larger than 4 team field is recognized as the norm, and sensical.  

The 8 team or larger NCAA tournament is inevitable.

Edited December 5, 2017 by dvdcrr

[Red_Payne]

2 hours ago, gossamorharpy said:

 

I kinda see the early season games but, if anything, I would hope it would encourage more big time match ups knowing you can still make the playoffs with 1 or 2 losses if you take care of your conference.  It adds an added incentive to the teams ranked 8-15 that have no shot in November at playoffs but can still do work in conference and get in.

 

Having 5 major conferences considered "equal" but only 4 playoff spots is inherently unfair.

Exactly.

[Scratchtown]

Leave it at 4 but dissolve the big12 and send schools each way. At this point I don't really care who ends up with who. If West Va can be a Big12 school then it doesn't matter if Kansas were to go to the ACC. You'd probably have to reshuffle some schools already in conferences to make it work realistically. Have Maryland and Rutgers go to the ACC. 

 

You'd have to move

Kansas

Kansas St

Oklahoma

Oklahoma St

Texas

Texas Tech

Baylor

TCU

Iowa State

West Virginia

I really wish that NU's schedule was this on a yearly basis

Week1 - Group of 5

Week2 - Colorado

Week3 - Group of 5

Week4 - Kansas State

Week5 - Iowa

Week6 - Wisconsin

Week7 - Minnesota

Week8 - Missouri

Week9 - Michigan or Michigan State

Week10 - Texas

Week11 - Northwestern

Week12 - Oklahoma

I don't give two $#its about Ohio State or Penn State. I miss seeing that Red N line up across from those iconic Big12 helmets. Mizzou, CU, KState, Texas and Oklahoma. 

 

 

 

[Red_Payne]

2 hours ago, Landlord said:

 

Here's the argument I have against the 8 team playoff. One of the absolute best things about college football is how every single week can potentially be an elimination game. All three months have huge stakes and huge, impactful games because of it. With an 8 team playoff, you're inviting teams with 3 losses to have a chance at winning the national championship, which seems lame as hell to me. The only time we've ever even a two loss team in the championship game was the most chaotic season in modern history, now we want to make the barrier for entry that loose? I don't really like it.

 

The only two ways I would be cool with an 8 team playoff are as follows:

 

1. P5 conference championship games are the first round, with the conference that has the lowest aggregate ranking of the participating teams (so this year it would be the Pac-12) being excluded for the year (this is a bad version, obviously)

 

2. All 5 P5 conference champions are automatically in, with 3 at large teams, but any undefeated and/or top 15 ranked G5 teams are automatically in, and and nobody with more than 2 losses can qualify unless there aren't any other teams to pick from.

I agree with the “every” week matters w/ a four team playoff... 8 team playoff eliminates that feeling, to a degree.

 

i, however, argued that if you make the first round of an 8 team playoff a “higher rank hosts” it eliminates that problem, to a degree, as well.

 

i like your second scenario, though.

[Xmas32]

If anyone caught Joel Klatt today I liked his theory for an 8 team playoff (which for the record isn't happening anytime soon).  

 

To summarize from his twitter:

 

Thoughts on CFB structure 1) Get rid of divisions in every conference 2) Top 2 seeds from each conference play in Conf. Champ game 3) To go to the @CFBPlayoff you HAVE to win your conference - we balance schedules, retain regular season importance

 

I'm not too bummed out as there really wasn't a great choice for #4 and a nearly full strength Alabama team probably has the best shot to win the title out of tOSU, Bama and Wisconsin.  Wisconsin would've gotten brutalized against Clemson and frankly if JT Barrett played even an above average game Ohio State should've won that game by 17.

 

I do agree that the ACC and SEC need to start playing 9 conference games.  That is a total joke.  As for the Mercer thing, it's a bad look but none of the other teams really played anyone that week either.  OU played Kansas and Ohio State played Illinois.  Still, P5 teams shouldn't be playing FCS teams.  I'd also like to see Alabama play a big time OOC opponent somewhere other than a location within the SEC footprint but that's just me nitpicking.

Edited December 5, 2017 by Xmas32

[Landlord]

4 hours ago, gossamorharpy said:

I kinda see the early season games but, if anything, I would hope it would encourage more big time match ups knowing you can still make the playoffs with 1 or 2 losses if you take care of your conference.

 

Unless there is a stipulation that 5 of the spots are guaranteed to conference champions, there will be zero incentive to schedule marquee OOC opponents.

 

If Ohio State wouldn't have scheduled Oklahoma this year, they'd be in the playoff. Similarly, if 2016 Penn State wouldn't have scheduled Pitt (I realize Pitt isn't a HUGE matchup, but they were still a solidly good P5 team), they would have been in the playoff. 

 

 

[HIHusker]

After watching Wisconsin and tOSU play I'm sorry but neither of those teams beats Bama.  Bama's defense would have a field day against slower Wiscy and would shut down not-so-great-passer Barrett.  The B1G game was far more lopsided than the score leads you to believe.  Wiscy looked overmatched and the speed difference was astonishing.  I'm not buying into the tOSU bandwagon this year they did not iimpress in the CCG.  Besides, tOSU got stomped in the shoe by OU...early in the season or not that tells you something: Columbus is not an easy place to win any year.  The JT Barrett apologists seem to forget this guy has been a captain for 3 years with one of the best coaches in the game today; no excuses.  Bama loses a close game to Auburn at their house when Auburn was peaking (Auburn  has #1 SoS this year btw)...much better 'loss' than laying an egg vs Iowa and getting blown out at home by OU.  Sorry the committee got this one right tOSU had no business being in the CFP and Wiscy either.  We need to learn to let our football do the talking and stop worrying about stuff like this.  Win games and let the rankings take care of themselves...there is no cospiracy when you stomp everyone in your path (see 94,95 and 97 Neb).

[HIHusker]

11 hours ago, LaunchCode said:

Bama only played 8 conference games and had essentially two late season bye weeks also.  Oct. 28 off, played #16 LSU following week.  Nov. 18th played Mercer, then faced Auburn following week.

 

Contrast with Wisconsin who played 10 conference opponents in 10 straight weeks without a week off. 

 

Until the SEC plays 9 conference games they should be automatically scored down.  To suggest Wisky played a weaker schedule due to opponents record or ranking, completely ignored the consequence of playing in a conference that plays 9 conference games instead of 8.  The consequence is SEC teams can buy one more win every year via their OOC scheduling.  That's important because an 8-4 team is going to be ranked higher than a 7-5 team.  Until the SEC plays 9 conference games, they shouldn't get the benefit of the doubt.  Agree with your post, Wisky earned a shot on the field regardless what the perception is.

 

 

This logic fails to make sense:  the bottom feeders in the SEC are still more stout than in the B1G.  Or perhaps you belivethat Rutgers/Maryland/Illinois/Nebraska(sorry but this year we were atrocious) are  world beaters?  Top to bottom they have a stronger conference so 8 SEC games roughly equals 9 B1G games.   Id still rather play on the road at Purdue when they are having a good year than playing in the swamp when Florida is down.  When we get our crap together as a program AND as a conference top to bottom we can start complaining about other conferences.  We are frequent flyers (and this year almost losers) in the land of Sun Belts so we don't have much room to run our mouths.  Get our own house in order then we can start having expectations.  As of right now tOSU and PSU are the only teams really taking care of business in our conference.  Everyone else, including Wiscosin, is a few steps behind.

[Hilltop]

We all hate it but I think we all know Alabama would destroy Wisconsin or Ohio State this year on the field.  The committee did their job and I think they got it right under their current rules.  

 

[HIHusker]

6 minutes ago, Hilltop said:

We all hate it but I think we all know Alabama would destroy Wisconsin or Ohio State this year on the field.  The committee did their job and I think they got it right under their current rules.  

 

Bingo

[LaunchCode]

8 hours ago, HIHusker said:

This logic fails to make sense:  the bottom feeders in the SEC are still more stout than in the B1G.  Or perhaps you belivethat Rutgers/Maryland/Illinois/Nebraska(sorry but this year we were atrocious) are  world beaters?  Top to bottom they have a stronger conference so 8 SEC games roughly equals 9 B1G games.   Id still rather play on the road at Purdue when they are having a good year than playing in the swamp when Florida is down.  When we get our crap together as a program AND as a conference top to bottom we can start complaining about other conferences.  We are frequent flyers (and this year almost losers) in the land of Sun Belts so we don't have much room to run our mouths.  Get our own house in order then we can start having expectations.  As of right now tOSU and PSU are the only teams really taking care of business in our conference.  Everyone else, including Wiscosin, is a few steps behind.

The average consumer is easily manipulated by good marketing and a controlled message.  College football and it's media cohorts are as good at controlling a message as anyone.  In fact, wouldn't be surprised if the pentagon's propaganda department doesn't regularly consult with espn-sec for advice ; ) 

 

Lucky for us, the CFP format is pushing the SEC out of their comfort zone and we're seeing more sec teams play other P5 teams and even going out on the road to do it at times, like when LSU ventured up to camp randal last year to earn their first defeat of the season.

 

Ole Miss is a bowl eligible SEC team this year who played at Cal and lost by two scores.  Cal, is not bowl eligible and plays in a conference with 9 conference games, a conference the media has declared "weak this year".  Arkansas played one P5 opponent in their OOC schedule and lost by 3 TD's.  aTm same story, lost to a middle of the road 6-6 team from a "weak" conference.    Florida who has probably never played an OOC P5 team on the road before, lost at home to a middle of the road BIG team. 

 

Make the SEC play 9 conference games like real conferences do.  No more the late season OOC games against Mercer, La-Monroe,  UAB, Chattanooga, etc....and reveal the SEC = Wizard of Oz.

 

 

[ColoradoHusk]

1 minute ago, LaunchCode said:

Make the SEC play 9 conference games like real conferences do.  No more the late season OOC games against Mercer, La-Monroe,  UAB, Chattanooga, etc....and reveal the SEC = Wizard of Oz.

 

 

I agree that the SEC & ACC should be forced to play 9 conference games like the Big Ten, Big XII, and the PAC 12 do.  It makes zero sense that the SEC and ACC are allowed to play 1 less conference game compared to the rest of the Power 5 schools.