Jump to content
BIG ERN

Civil War: CFB Title Landscape

Recommended Posts

Applying the KISS method, every conference champ should get in.  ND would have to adjust, of course, but they're already halfway there.  If there's griping about who gets in with such a system, I don't think there'll be much sympathy considering it'd be a conference problem.  E.g., remember when the Big Ten's Rose Bowl rep was determined by which candidate hadn't been there in the longest time?  If you can't settle things the right way in your conference, it shouldn't become a national issue.

 

If we can't stomach the idea of the G5 champs participating, I suggest we jettison approximately half the teams in the top division (such that there are only the P5 and ND left).  If they're good enough to make up the vast majority (over 2/3 w/o even doing the math is safe to say) of most every P5 team's out-of-conference schedule but not good enough to play for a national title, let's cut the BS.  If every team had to play a full season against other P5 teams, we'd likely get to see more inter-conference play and really determine a pecking order (in terms of the conferences themselves).  The real dream would involve a relegation/promotion system a la the world's version of football but baby steps...

 

p.s. - Isn't this the same topic Roundball Shaman had before?  I didn't notice when I first posted but it sure seems like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a big advocate for all 5 power 5 champs getting in, plus the best group of 5 champ if they are rated in the top 10, plus 2 at large spots.

 

That said, this years playoff was dreadful.  We got a mismatch for Bama and turns out Clemson truly was just head and shoulders better than everyone. (Maybe Syracuse should be ranked?)  We don't need crappy matchups, but we do need a system that makes winning games and winning your conference matter.  Right now they make it painfully clear that playing a tough schedule, being in certain conferences matter more than other things like records.

 

Adam Carriker had a pretty good idea honestly, forgive me if this has already been posted elsewhere as my board frequency has been sporadic as of late.  It's unique and fair, meaning most conference higher ups would never go for it, but I do like the concept.

 

https://www.omaha.com/huskers/carriker/carriker-chronicles-an-eight-team-playoff-isn-t-the-fix/article_83532f56-8326-56d8-b64b-954056cd438b.html

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Redux said:

I'm a big advocate for all 5 power 5 champs getting in, plus the best group of 5 champ if they are rated in the top 10, plus 2 at large spots.

 

That said, this years playoff was dreadful.  We got a mismatch for Bama and turns out Clemson truly was just head and shoulders better than everyone. (Maybe Syracuse should be ranked?)  We don't need crappy matchups, but we do need a system that makes winning games and winning your conference matter.  Right now they make it painfully clear that playing a tough schedule, being in certain conferences matter more than other things like records.

 

I guess I don't see how this year was a failure for the playoffs.  Clemson was damn good.  Simple as that.  The playoffs worked because it proved that.  

 

Now, it's up to other teams to match what Clemson is doing and knock them off.  Having  playoff gives teams the chance to do that.

 

PS.....after Clemson played ND, the mantra was that ND didn't belong in the playoffs.  I would say, they did, Clemson just was that good.

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

I guess I don't see how this year was a failure for the playoffs.  Clemson was damn good.  Simple as that.  The playoffs worked because it proved that.  

 

Now, it's up to other teams to match what Clemson is doing and knock them off.  Having  playoff gives teams the chance to do that.

 

Never said it was a failure at all.  Just dreadful to watch.  None of the games were exciting.  We ended up with the top two in the title game anyways, everything panned out as it should have really.  It just kinda sucked.  That's on the teams that lost though.

 

If we had an 8 team playoff this year though we likely include UCF, Georgia, Washington and Ohio State.  Those 4 plus the 4 that made it could have made some really good games.

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Redux said:

If we had an 8 team playoff this year though we likely include UCF, Georgia, Washington and Ohio State.  Those 4 plus the 4 that made it could have made some really good games.

 

True.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The current 4 team playoff has gotten it right most of the time but I would much rather see 8 teams involved with an auto qualifier from each power 5.  There is too much media bias pressure placed on the committee.  Answer this, if Alabama had lost to someone early in the season and then went on a run and beat Auburn by the score of 62 to 39, do you think they would have remained ranked the same the next week?  Ohio State completely destroyed top 10 ranked Michigan in their rivalry game and didn't even gain a spot.  Heck in 2017, Alabama lost to Auburn in the last game and still made it in.  I agree with the rankings this season but if the tables were turned, we all know that the SEC team would get the benefit simply based on perception.  An 8 team playoff that guarantees a spot for each power 5 goes a long way to eliminating the perception bias imo.  

  • Plus1 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hilltop said:

Answer this, if Alabama had lost to someone early in the season and then went on a run and beat Auburn by the score of 62 to 39, do you think they would have remained ranked the same the next week?

 

It obviously depends on what all the other CFP candidates were doing at the same time.  If Alabama had lost to someone early in the season with their 2018 schedule, I'm not sure they'd have recovered.  Ohio State lost to Purdue and couldn't get back in DESPITE drubbing a highly-ranked team in Michigan so Alabama losing to one of their first five opponents (Florida State, Fresno State, Colorado State, Vanderbilt, or Ole Miss) should have meant beating up an Auburn team wouldn't affect them in terms of getting into the playoff...IF I follow you...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, beorach said:

 

It obviously depends on what all the other CFP candidates were doing at the same time.  If Alabama had lost to someone early in the season with their 2018 schedule, I'm not sure they'd have recovered.  Ohio State lost to Purdue and couldn't get back in DESPITE drubbing a highly-ranked team in Michigan so Alabama losing to one of their first five opponents (Florida State, Fresno State, Colorado State, Vanderbilt, or Ole Miss) should have meant beating up an Auburn team wouldn't affect them in terms of getting into the playoff...IF I follow you...

 

 

“should have” is the key phrase. 

 

And it depends more on the conference, imo, than what the other teams were doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think each P5 conference is full of quality programs. How quality they are from year to year varies. So an auto qualifier from each conference guarantees they all get a fair shake on the field and not judged off the field by people sitting in a room. Win your conference and you earn the right to compete for a national championship and represent your conference. Maybe some conferences are better than people give them credit for. Or maybe some are over rated. If the SEC has a down year overall they still get tons of credit for every team they beat in conference because of past/recent success. So they have a great shot of putting 2 teams in a 4 team playoff as it stands now. So if the SEC is going to get 2 teams in the 4 team playoff most years after losing their last game of the season or not even making their conference championship game. Then at least give 1 team from each conference a chance and give the SEC their token 2nd team. One other at large and a G5 if they earn it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Redux said:

 

Never said it was a failure at all.  Just dreadful to watch.  None of the games were exciting.  We ended up with the top two in the title game anyways, everything panned out as it should have really.  It just kinda sucked.  That's on the teams that lost though.

 

If we had an 8 team playoff this year though we likely include UCF, Georgia, Washington and Ohio State.  Those 4 plus the 4 that made it could have made some really good games.

All of those teams except Ohio state lost their bowl games. Why would how would putting them in the playoffs against even better teams make it more exciting?

  • Plus1 1
  • Eyeroll 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Big Red 40 said:

All of those teams except Ohio state lost their bowl games. Why would how would putting them in the playoffs against even better teams make it more exciting?

 

I guess I wouldn't have used a crystal ball to determine the 8 teams, seeing as they would have been the other 4 added if we had 8 teams get in.

 

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/9/2019 at 1:21 PM, junior4949 said:

I think there are a couple of reasons the South is dominating.  One would be the coaching.  Take Bob Stoops for example.  He left Kansas State in a lateral move as defensive coordinator to become Florida's defensive coordinator.  Why?  He said the daily schedule was much shorter at Florida than at K State.  Typically, coaches in the South don't have to work as hard or as many hours as they do in the North because they are surrounded by excellent recruits.  Therefore, it's more likely to find the best coaches in the South rather than the North.  Why are the best recruits in the South?  It's the exact same reason that the best hockey recruits are typically found in the North instead of the South.  It's the weather.  More specifically, it's the amount of time as in months young athletes play football in the South when compared to the North.  When one considers the amount of club football played nearly year round in the South, it's of little wonder why those athletes are better prepared for the sport of football because they've simply spent many more hours honing their skills.  Has anyone ever wondered why most of the Bowl games are played in the South?  It's because of the weather and being a more enjoyable experience for the fans.  Well, it's also a more enjoyable experience for most of the players as well.  I know I'd much rather go play catch with my son when it's nice and sunny rather than cold and miserable. 

 

For a North team to become the next NC winner, I think it will take a couple of things.  First, it will take an experienced staff who has worked together for quite some time.  Second, it will take a staff that is geared to player development.  I don't necessarily think the best athletes are all found in the South.  I just think that they're ahead of most players in the North because of the amount more football they've played prior to college.  Helping the cold weather recruits catch up with the warm weather recruits will be key to leveling the playing field.     

We need to take advantage of local lineman. No father goes outside and does OL or DL drills with his son.  The skill and finesse position players are probably more abundant in warm weather areas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that just settles it....to ensure the dominance of Husker football, we must invade the south.  Should we just rename Atlanta once it is ours?  I think New Omaha has a nice ring...or Devaneyville?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/11/2019 at 1:35 PM, Moiraine said:

 

 

“should have” is the key phrase. 

 

And it depends more on the conference, imo, than what the other teams were doing.

 

I agree.  The problem lies between what should be and what is.  Alabama gets a pass for what they've done in recent seasons.  Alabama gets a a pass for what conference they play in.  Never mind what teams they actually played from it in a given season - a CCG makes it all better.  Never mind that their out-of-conference slate is a joke - there's no rule against the late season FCS game.

 

Here's next year's Tide schedule:

 

Aug. 31 vs. Duke in Atlanta

Sept. 7 vs. New Mexico State

Sept. 14 at South Carolina

Sept. 21 vs. Southern Miss

Sept. 28 vs. Ole Miss

Oct. 5: Bye

Oct. 12 at Texas A&M

Oct. 19 vs. Tennessee

Oct. 26 vs. Arkansas

Nov. 2: Bye

Nov. 9 vs. LSU

Nov. 16 at Mississippi State

Nov. 23 vs. Western Carolina

Nov. 30 at Auburn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×