2018 College Football Playoff

[Blaise]

I'm sure we're in, but I could see the committee screwing us over and putting OU ahead of us. They job us to Alabama first round, and we get another Clemson vs. Bama for the championship 'cause meh.

Interesting that Tom Ramsey put us at #2 there.

I don't see how Oklahoma jumps us.. Doesn't make sense.. We have been at 3 for a month, they have been at 6 and now five. The win over Texas is worth them jumping to 3? Doubt it..

I like the PC love the idea of Bama vs Oklahoma and ND vs Clemson... Those two matchups should be competitive and then they still get their Clemson vs Bama final

I just hope we spoil that plan

 

[IrishSteelhead]

http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/25427784/college-football-playoff-picks-espn-experts

They asked all the ESPN people who they think should be in. All but one -- Brian Kinchen, I dunno who that is -- said ND should be in.

So if the committee is remotely objective and reflective of public sentiment, ND should be the 3 seed.

Saw that and looked him up. Former NFL TE, played at..........wait for it...........LSU.


#SHOCKED


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[IrishInFl]

The one good thing about tonight: Buckeye fans are salty. It's increasingly looking like they're going to get left out of the playoff, and they're pissed at ND because of that. Honestly, next to Georgia, I think the Buckeyes probably had the best chance of knocking off Alabama round 1...but none of that matters now, what's done is done. Unless OU somehow leapfrogs us (I hope not), we've gotta hope that Murray finds a way to stymie 'Bama's defense and put up lots of points...cause heaven knows their defense isn't going to be able to get more than one or two stops...if any.

No kidding. My neighbor was having some salty comments on facebook last night.

 

[irishfanjho15]

The guys on College Football Final have ND solidly in at 3. Joey has Bama, Clem, ND, OU and Palmer has Bama, Clem, ND, UGA. Palmer said I think if UGA played OU, UGA would win and in his opinion UGA is clearly a better team.

This is literally the only ESPN I ever watch. I feel like they have been fair to ND all year. Both were saying ND was one of the best teams in the country, as soon as Book became QB.

 

[koonja]

Why do the committee members subject themselves to this? For free?

Just use the BCS formula for top 4 teams. Why isnt that a better alternative than 12 has-beens with direct bias getting together like some CIA department and pretending they're smart.

I can't wait to South Park cares to make an episode about how stupid the committee is. There would be gold in that epidode.

 

[ShamrockOnHelmet]

I present the following plan. I know it looks complicated at first. Its not at all. It favors conference championships, playing a P5 supermajority schedule, and head to head results. It penalizes playing cupcakes (especially non-D1 teams), losing in any form, and using money-making schemes like conference championship games. It also deemphasizes "the better loss" argument. Thats a stupid argument that should never matter. It also establishes the idea that playing a supermajority of P5 teams is whats important, rather than "strenghth of schedule". strength of schedule depends greatly on what method you use to determine what that means. Its too complicated. using the supermajority method, its binary; either you did or you didn't. end of discussion.



8 team playoff

1. Power 5 conference champions;
1.1. Its up to each conference how it determines its champion. If you continue to have a conference championship game, YOU ACCEPT THE RISK THAT A PREVIOUSLY UNDEFEATED TEAM MAY BE UPSET BY A TEAM WITH SEVERAL LOSSES IN SAID CHAMPIONSHIP GAME. If you don’t like that possibility, then don’t have a conference championship game, and let the regular season results be the sole determinant of the conference championship status. Your choice, don't bitch.

2. 3 wildcards

2.1. Total wins team playing a supermajority power 5 schedule is the top criteria for wildcard consideration

2.1.1. Teams playing a supermajority of its schedule vs. power 5 teams will receive first consideration for wildcard bids

2.1.2. Teams playing the type of schedule defined in section 2.1.1. will get bids in inverse order of the number of losses REGARDLES OF WHO THOSE LOSSES WERE TO (i.e., undefeated teams vs. P5 supermajority schedule will receive a bid before any one loss team, regardless of whether that loss was to a sun belt team or a number 1 ranked sec team). Undefeated vs. P5 supermajority schedule matters most.

2.1.3. If there are a 4 or more teams meeting these first two criteria, the first tiebreaker is number of NON-power 5 teams were included in those teams schedules. A team playing one NON-power 5 team will get in over a team playing 2 NON-power 5 teams, regardless of who they are. If any teams in consideration played a non-D1 team, that game counts as 2 NON-power 5 games played for the purpose of this tiebreaker (you don’t get rewarded for playing the Citadel. Sorry)

2.1.4. Once ALL wildcards are filled using the above criteria, one loss (then 2 loss, 3 loss, etc) teams will be evaluated. The first tiebreaker is head-to-head results. If two of the teams in consideration played head to head, the TEAM THAT WON THAT MATCHUP GETS IN OVER THE ONE WHICH LOST, REGARDLESS of who the other team lost to. Absolutely no exceptions to this rule. The two teams played, and we know which one was better.

2.1.5. If the teams did not play head-to-head, then the next tiebreaker is number of NON-power 5 teams were included in those teams schedules. A team playing one NON-power 5 team will get in over a team playing 2 NON-power 5 teams, regardless of who they are. If any of the teams in consideration played a non-D1 team, that game counts as 2 NON-power 5 games played for the purpose of this tiebreaker (you don’t get rewarded for playing the Citadel. Sorry)

2.1.6. If the above tiebreakers are insufficient, then the committee can make ANY DECISION THEY LIKE USING ANY DATA POINTS THEY LIKE to break the tie. The most important factors have been considered (conference championships, being undefeated vs. a P5 supermajority schedule, number of wins, playing a supermajority p5 schedule, NOT playing cupcakes, and head to head) so other decisions are more nuanced than a formula can determine. The committees judgement is acceptable beyond this point.



I believe this method gives you the best OBJECTIVE representatives in the playoff. Not “most deserving” or “the best team” or “most 5 star recruits” or whatever. Using the above rules, what happened on the field is what mattered most, and will give you the RIGHT teams in the playoff based objectively on what happened on gamedays during the season.

 

[irishfanjho15]

My biggest issue with the narrative that ND isn’t in a conference, is that the majority of people don’t look at NDs schedule fairly IMO. Ever since the ACC agreement I have looked at NDs schedule in a very clear way:

5 ACC Opponents & USC, Stanford, Navy - 8 Conference Games

Other 4 Opponents are OOC

So this season NDs schedule would be as follows:

Conference Games
WF
@VT
Syracuse (Neutral)
Pitt
Stanford
@ USC
Navy (Neutral)
FSU

OOC
Michigan
Ball State
@NW
Vandy

When you look at it that way. NDs schedule is comparable to almost any P5 conference schedule. This is especially true when you look at divisions in those conferences. If any major conference team went undefeated in conference and beat two ranked teams OOC and an SEC team without playing an FCS team, everyone would be on their nuts. Not to mention the two ranked teams were the conference runner up (@NW) and the actual second best team in the conference (Michigan). Add to that wins over ranked Syracuse and ACC runner up Pitt. Basically, ND beat the second and third best teams in both the ACC and the B1G.

It’s just hate and/or conference bias to act like if this was any other P5 team this schedule wouldn’t be enough.

 

[IrishSteelhead]

Getting a little restless here. Noon cant come soon enough. Feel a huge letdown, followed by meltdown coming.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ShamrockOnHelmet]

For the record, using my plan, the playoff this year would be:

ACC- Clemson
SEC - Bama
B1G - Ohio State
Big 12 - Oklahoma
PAC 12 - Washington

WC1 - ND
WC2 - Meatchicken (only played 2 non-P5 teams, so they get the nod over other 2 loss teams)
WC3 - ??? (committee would need to decide between Georgia, Washington State and UCF).

That third WC is a legitimate discussion.

Georgia and Washington State both played 3 non-P5 schools and lost 2 games
UCF played 9 non-P5 schools but lost 0 games

In this scenario, I think Georgia is the likely pick for the last wildcard, and NOW is the appropriate time to talk about subjective criteria like "better losses", since you have the really important criteria evaluated objectively and out of the way.

 

[IrishTusker]

Getting a little restless here. Noon cant come soon enough. Feel a huge letdown, followed by meltdown coming.

They might drop us to 4, but I seriously doubt that we're left out.

 

[IrishTusker]

I present the following plan.

The 8 team plan is very solid. It is clearly in the interest of the conferences to ensure their champions get in. It is also in the interest of ND to be able to get in at 11-1, which is apparently impossible at present, unless we beat a Bama-style top team. (Michigan was not that team. Maybe if their only loss was to us.)

And although there will always be arguments at the margins -there are arguments at the margins in the NCAA BB tournament with 68 teams- nobody really thinks title contenders are left out of that tournament.

As for reducing the importance of the regular season, I'd want to see evidence that this was happening first. Would ratings decrease with an 8 team playoff? I doubt it. It would probably still make a huge difference if ND went 12-0 or 11-1 rather than 10-2 or 9-3.

 

[irishfanjho15]

Championship Drive panel on ESPN all just said ND should be solidly 3rd. That ND is not getting credit for beating a bunch of good football teams that are not ranked.

Also, that UGA doesn’t deserve to be in because they are a two loss team without a conference championship.

Panel was McElroy, Acho, and Mora. Other than saying that ND isn’t the elite of elites, which is very true, they were incredibly complimentary of the Irish and what they have accomplished this season.

 

[wizards8507]

For the record, using my plan, the playoff this year would be:

ACC- Clemson
SEC - Bama
B1G - Ohio State
Big 12 - Oklahoma
PAC 12 - Washington

WC1 - ND
WC2 - Meatchicken (only played 2 non-P5 teams, so they get the nod over other 2 loss teams)
WC3 - ??? (committee would need to decide between Georgia, Washington State and UCF).

That third WC is a legitimate discussion.

Georgia and Washington State both played 3 non-P5 schools and lost 2 games
UCF played 9 non-P5 schools but lost 0 games

In this scenario, I think Georgia is the likely pick for the last wildcard, and NOW is the appropriate time to talk about subjective criteria like "better losses", since you have the really important criteria evaluated objectively and out of the way.

That doesn't solve a damn thing. You've just shifted the debate from Ohio State vs Oklahoma vs Georgia to Michigan vs Georgia vs Washington State vs UCF. Debating 7 through 10 isn't any cleaner than debating 3 through 6. All you've done is dilute the regular season.

You also end up with the potential for serious bullshit. Pitt, Northwestern, Utah, or Texas could have pulled upsets last night and you would have given mediocre teams automatic berths based on a single victory combined with the shittiness of their division. No system that would have given an ACC Coastal team a shot at the playoff is worth a damn because the ACC Coastal was trash this year and one win over Clemson doesn't change that.

 

[Black Irish]

I can't stand the widespread SEC bias out there. It's obnoxious how so many football talking heads wear out the fabric on their pants getting on their knees to slob the knob of the SEC.

BUT...…(Trigger warning alert)

I wouldn't have a problem if the rankings stay the way the are and Georgia gets into the playoff. This is strictly eye test on my part, but after watching the games yesterday, UGA looks like the better team than OU. Sure, UGA squandered their lead and let 'Bama outplay them in the 4th quarter, but would OU have done any better? Based on what I saw yesterday, if I had to put money on a UGA-OU match up on a neutral field, I'd take Georgia all day.

Now I'm not going to get upset if OU jumps them and gets in at #4. There is a very good case to be made for that outcome, and that is the likely outcome. But if UGA stays at 4 instead, I can accept that.

*Obligatory "Go Irish and the Committee better not screw Notre Dame in any of this" disclaimer.

 

[IrishLax]

That doesn't solve a damn thing. You've just shifted the debate from Ohio State vs Oklahoma vs Georgia to Michigan vs Georgia vs Washington State vs UCF. Debating 7 through 10 isn't any cleaner than debating 3 through 6. All you've done is dilute the regular season.

You also end up with the potential for serious bullshit. Pitt, Northwestern, Utah, or Texas could have pulled upsets last night and you would have given mediocre teams automatic berths based on a single victory combined with the shittiness of their division. No system that would have given an ACC Coastal team a shot at the playoff is worth a damn because the ACC Coastal was trash this year and one win over Clemson doesn't change that.

That's not bullshit, that's fun. You can count on a "bad" conference champ at least one out of every two years. Makes the conference championship games and conference races much more intriguing.

 

[ulukinatme]

I can't stand the widespread SEC bias out there. It's obnoxious how so many football talking heads wear out the fabric on their pants getting on their knees to slob the knob of the SEC.

BUT...…(Trigger warning alert)

I wouldn't have a problem if the rankings stay the way the are and Georgia gets into the playoff. This is strictly eye test on my part, but after watching the games yesterday, UGA looks like the better team than OU. Sure, UGA squandered their lead and let 'Bama outplay them in the 4th quarter, but would OU have done any better? Based on what I saw yesterday, if I had to put money on a UGA-OU match up on a neutral field, I'd take Georgia all day.

Now I'm not going to get upset if OU jumps them and gets in at #4. There is a very good case to be made for that outcome, and that is the likely outcome. But if UGA stays at 4 instead, I can accept that.

*Obligatory "Go Irish and the Committee better not screw Notre Dame in any of this" disclaimer.

From a principled standpoint I would leave UGA out since they just lost, but from a selfish perspective I would totally leave them at #4 if it meant they got another shot to knock off Bama. They certainly have a better chance of winning than OU or tOSU.

 

[wizards8507]

Another major flaw in "automatic berth for conference champion" is that it presupposes that the conference structure does a good job of getting the two best or most deserving teams into the championship game. It doesn't. Michigan, Penn State, Syracuse, etc. are all much better football teams than Northwestern or Pitt.

I would actually be okay with automatic berths if every conference went back to the old Big 12 round robin format. As it stands, mediocre teams in bad divisions are giving a free pass to their conference championship where they can pray for an upset over the conference big dog from the other division.

Edit: I guess this wasn't much different than my previous point.

 

[wizards8507]

That's not bullshit, that's fun. You can count on a "bad" conference champ at least one out of every two years. Makes the conference championship games and conference races much more intriguing.

You sound like an ESPN programming executive. Is this about ratings or getting the Natty in the hands of the most deserving team?

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

That doesn't solve a damn thing. You've just shifted the debate from Ohio State vs Oklahoma vs Georgia to Michigan vs Georgia vs Washington State vs UCF. Debating 7 through 10 isn't any cleaner than debating 3 through 6. All you've done is dilute the regular season.

You also end up with the potential for serious bullshit. Pitt, Northwestern, Utah, or Texas could have pulled upsets last night and you would have given mediocre teams automatic berths based on a single victory combined with the shittiness of their division. No system that would have given an ACC Coastal team a shot at the playoff is worth a damn because the ACC Coastal was trash this year and one win over Clemson doesn't change that.

There is another huge problem with any auto-bid system. How do you determine which conferences get the auto-bids? Is there any precedent for this in American sports? The old BCS model gave preferential treatment to certain conferences but that was when we dealt with bowl tie-ins; not a championship tournament.

And how do you deal with something like the SEC declaring itself two conferences with shared media rights deals to get an additional bid (or something like that)? It's a can of worms the basketball tournament deals with by simply allowing all of them in and then expanding when conferences split to get more auto-bids. Football doesn't realistically have that luxury.

 

[IrishLax]

You sound like an ESPN programming executive. Is this about ratings or getting the Natty in the hands of the most deserving team?

Literally every other NCAA sport has AQs for their conference winners. This isn't some out-of-the-box idea. Sometimes it leads to a "hot" team with some early season (or OOC) stumbles getting in when they otherwise wouldn't have... this isn't a a bad thing. In fact, it's a great thing because it'll encourage schools to drop their cupcakes for harder inter-sectional games because their is effectively no risk to losing if you still control your own destiny in conference.

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

Literally every other NCAA sport has AQs for their conference winners. This isn't some out-of-the-box idea. Sometimes it leads to a "hot" team with some early season (or OOC) stumbles getting in when they otherwise wouldn't have... this isn't a a bad thing. In fact, it's a great thing because it'll encourage schools to drop their cupcakes for harder inter-sectional games because their is effectively no risk to losing if you still control your own destiny in conference.

I don't think that's true. How do the OOC schedules look for the one conference whose champ is basically guaranteed to be in the playoff?

 

[wizards8507]

In fact, it's a great thing because it'll encourage schools to drop their cupcakes for harder inter-sectional games because their is effectively no risk to losing if you still control your own destiny in conference.

LMAO. No.

SEC schools will schedule FCS opponents only because all they need to do is win the conference. Conference bids are mathematically more likely than at large bids so the teams will go all in on conference games and nothing else.

 

[ARALOU]

Lots of good points being made. The system is flawed somewhat but even though Georgia may be the second best team in the country, they lost. Should Bama have to play them again? Wasn't there a similar situation a few years back? I am not sure a top ranked team should have to play the same opponent for a championship again, unless they play a series. Which is ridiculous. I am beginning to despise the CFP. Go back to 15 bowl games a season and let there be an argument. Hell, it worked for years. Bama can claim theirs, win or lose, and so can UCF.

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

Lots of good points being made. The system is flawed somewhat but even though Georgia may be the second best team in the country, they lost. Should Bama have to play them again? Wasn't there a similar situation a few years back? I am not sure a top ranked team should have to play the same opponent for a championship again, unless they play a series. Which is ridiculous. I am beginning to despise the CFP. Go back to 15 bowl games a season and let there be an argument. Hell, it worked for years. Bama can claim theirs, win or lose, and so can UCF.

A four team championship is ideal, IMO. It solves the issue where like this season you have three major programs who are undefeated and all of them will get a shot at the championship.

There are two problems with how it's currently implemented. One is that there is a lack of OOC matchups for cross-comparisons. The real problem here is a school like UCF is effectively shut out of the championship. Incentives need to be aligned so that G5 teams and P5 teams have less incestuous schedules and we can make better intraconference comparisons.

The second problem is the selection criteria. The current directive of "best" teams is terrible. It should be resume-based. Otherwise you may as well use recruiting rankings and coach salaries. And, of course, it's a disincentive to scheduling difficult opponents.

 

[ARALOU]

A four team championship is ideal, IMO. It solves the issue where like this season you have three major programs who are undefeated and all of them will get a shot at the championship.

There are two problems with how it's currently implemented. One is that there is a lack of OOC matchups for cross-comparisons. The real problem here is a school like UCF is effectively shut out of the championship. Incentives need to be aligned so that G5 teams and P5 teams have less incestuous schedules and we can make better intraconference comparisons.

The second problem is the selection criteria. The current directive of "best" teams is terrible. It should be resume-based. Otherwise you may as well use recruiting rankings and coach salaries.

LOL, true. I still say there should be some sort of solid criteria. There isn't. I recall several games in years past where one particular team had no "chance" against another and didn't deserve to be in that particular bowl matchup. Guess what happened?

 

[ickythump1225]

IMHO, the CFP should be expanded to six teams.

Every Power 5 conference champion should be included. Win your conference and you qualify. If you don't win your conference, you don't qualify for the play-offs.

The sixth team would be the highest ranked independent team (i.e. Notre Dame, Navy, etc.) or non-Power 5 Conference Champion (i.e. UCF, South Florida, Cincinnati, etc.). This team must be ranked in the top ten or top fifteen to qualify.

These six teams could be seeded (AP Poll, Coach's Poll, or a combination of polls) to determine who gets a bye in the first round. Top two teams both get first round byes. The remaining four teams play in the first round. All six teams share in any first round money.

Round two would consist of the two first round winners and the two teams who received first round byes. Highest ranked team plays lowest ranked team. Next highest ranked team plays next lowest ranked team. All four teams share in any second round money.

Winners play in National Championship Game. Both teams share in any finals money.

This would eliminate any preference given to favored conferences as each conference gets a single entrant to the play-offs. The qualifiers would be determined on the field, not in a room full of "experts". Teams would also not be punished for playing a difficult non-conference schedule. They would have a single goal - to win their conference. Or in the case of independents or non-P5 conferences to be ranked higher than similar teams.

If the P5 conferences want to continue with conference championship games to decide who represents each conference, they are free to do so. But each conference is entitled to only a single entrant in the play-offs.

I don't like automatic qualifiers, at all. What if Pitt would have shocked the world against Clemson last night? Clemson is clearly the better team by any metric. "It's settled on the field" only counts as the sole criteria if two teams are otherwise equal (i.e. ND vs Michigan argument). What if NW beat OSU? With your idea the 6 highest ranked teams should get in. If a conference is so shitty their winner can't crack the top 6 so be it.

What I would do if I had control of the system is eliminate the playoff system and just a +1 after the bowls are played. Let the season and CCGs play out, play the bowl season and then take the #1 and #2 team after the bowls are over and have them play for it all.

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

I don't like automatic qualifiers, at all. What if Pitt would have shocked the world against Clemson last night? Clemson is clearly the better team by any metric. "It's settled on the field" only counts as the sole criteria if two teams are otherwise equal (i.e. ND vs Michigan argument). What if NW beat OSU? With your idea the 6 highest ranked teams should get in. If a conference is so shitty their winner can't crack the top 6 so be it.

What I would do if I had control of the system is eliminate the playoff system and just a +1 after the bowls are played. Let the season and CCGs play out, play the bowl season and then take the #1 and #2 team after the bowls are over and have them play for it all.

I retract my earlier statement. This is what I wanted all along. Just a +1 so that the Rose Bowl, etc. get to stay traditional.

 

[ARALOU]

YEAH, and cut back on the amount of bowl games. There are teams with losing records in them, FFS.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

I don't like automatic qualifiers, at all. What if Pitt would have shocked the world against Clemson last night? Clemson is clearly the better team by any metric. "It's settled on the field" only counts as the sole criteria if two teams are otherwise equal (i.e. ND vs Michigan argument). What if NW beat OSU? With your idea the 6 highest ranked teams should get in. If a conference is so shitty their winner can't crack the top 6 so be it.

What I would do if I had control of the system is eliminate the playoff system and just a +1 after the bowls are played. Let the season and CCGs play out, play the bowl season and then take the #1 and #2 team after the bowls are over and have them play for it all.

Hear hear. Absolutely no need to expand the 4 team system.

1) Don't ruin the best regular season in sports

2) The season for college kids shouldn't be extended any longer

3) Conference champions can go pound sand. If you're a 4 loss team who happened to win your shitty conference, doesn't mean you get in. Stop crying and get better.

 

[Legacy]

Cut the season by one game. Play the championship games the final week. During what is now Championship week, match up the best eight. Final four dates as now set.