Crusader Husker
All-Conference
How far back does this go?
National Championship Game
- Thread starter FaithfulHusker
- Start date
Guy Chamberlin
Heisman Trophy Winner
It's pointless and petty to pretend Nick Saban isn't a great coach and the recent Alabama dynasty is anything less than impressive.
Doesn't mean you have to like either of them. I sure don't.
Doesn't mean you have to like either of them. I sure don't.
Last edited by a moderator:
Guy Chamberlin
Heisman Trophy Winner
It isn't that controversial in professional sports when the second place teams in the division is given a playoff spot, and typically goes on to beat the division winner in a weaker division.
TGHusker
Heisman Trophy Winner
Kind of feels like the missed calls in our 1993 orange bowl game against FSU
http://www.ajc.com/sports/college/was-fixed-conspiracies-abound-over-alabama-win-over-georgia/ZpqErf1E5xuuzoi49190II/
BigRedBuster
International Man of Mystery
LOL....hell NO Alabama wouldn't agree to that.
NUance
Assistant Coach
Huskers93-97
All-American
I still think the 8 best conferences all expand and shrink college football to 8 conferences. 8 Conference champs are in. If you cant win your conference you dont deserve to be in playoff. That would keep it so every game matters and regular season would still be exciting. What would it hurt if 3 G5 champs go in? They get seeds 6-8. They will all probably lose round 1 anyway right? Considering they will be playing seeds 1-3
I would argue the regular season would be more exciting than it is now. Because every team in the country is vying for national title. As long as you win your conference you get a shot.
The old argument that right now every game matters is crap. Alabama lost at the end of the season and it didnt hurt them. Or teams with 2-3 losses still have a shot to get in. If auburn would have won SEC they would have gotten in with multiple losses so that doesnt hold water anymore.
I would argue the regular season would be more exciting than it is now. Because every team in the country is vying for national title. As long as you win your conference you get a shot.
The old argument that right now every game matters is crap. Alabama lost at the end of the season and it didnt hurt them. Or teams with 2-3 losses still have a shot to get in. If auburn would have won SEC they would have gotten in with multiple losses so that doesnt hold water anymore.
Last edited by a moderator:
junior4949
All-American
Auburn didn't win the SEC, so the point of them getting in with multiple losses has no merit. Thus far, the playoff committee is staying within the parameters that every game matters. This is why we've never had a team in the playoffs with more than one loss. With how the season unfolded, the committee really only had three teams to choose from for the fourth spot: Alabama, Wisconsin, or UCF. UCF was almost automatically disqualified because they don't belong to a p5 conference. Therefore, the committee really only had two to choose from. Alabama's only loss was to Auburn. Prior to the bowl season, Auburn's only losses came from playoff team Clemson, playoff team Georgia, and top 20 ranked LSU. Wisconsin's only loss was to Ohio State. Prior to the bowl season, Ohio State's only lossess came from playoff team Oklahoma, and a total woodshed beating by 31 points to unranked Iowa. Given this criteria, the committee put the team with the "best" loss into the playoff.
BigRedBuster
International Man of Mystery
The old worn out argument about not every game matters is a load of crap. Even back in the 80s and 90s, not ever game mattered. Is someone really going to claim that in 1983, the game between Kansas and ISU mattered? What about Oregon and Washington State? Even the teams like Nebraska and OU didn't have a situation that "every game mattered". If they would lose one or two games early, the rest of their season didn't mean squat. So, how is that "every game matters"? It never has been a situation where every game matters and people who claim that are just parroting something they heard that sounds good.
Now, I agree with the statement I quoted. If we went to a system where conference champs get in, it greatly increases the number of games that matter. I all of a sudden actually have a reason to pay attention to all conferences to see what team is actually going to come out of it to play for the championship. You lose a game early??? The games still matter because you could still play your way into the CCG. The old system has teams like this written off...meaning, their games didn't matter.
Notre Dame Joe
All-Conference
The argument was quite true when teams played 11 games at most. It is no surprise that inflating the season pie to as many as 15 games reduced the size of each slice.
BigRedBuster
International Man of Mystery
No....not every game mattered back then. In fact, more games matter now than back then.
In the Deed the Glory
All-Conference
The phrase every games matters originated from the realization that you virtually HAD to go undefeated to win a National Championship. Of course they weren't talking about Kansas versus Iowa State as those teams are not in the national conversation most years. For those teams that were, every game mattered.
Mierin
Assistant Coach
That has never, ever been what anyone meant by that phrase.
The phrase in college football is solely about national championships, and nothing else. If you wanted to win a national championship, you'd better win every game. If you wanted to win a national championship and lost 1 game, you had to get extremely lucky. That's the ONLY thing that phrase was ever about. And this is a topic about the national championship.
No one in this topic and no one discussing college football using that phrase is talking about games between teams like Kansas and Iowa State.
Last edited by a moderator:
BigRedBuster
International Man of Mystery
So....every game mattered only for a select few teams.
Oh how fun.
Oh how fun.