CFB Playoff

[phork]

But what are we talking about here? TCU, Baylor & ND are all 11-1, who gets in? ND, thats who. Why? Asses in the seats, thats why. Eyes on screens, thats why.

I think 1 & 2 are correct. I have serious doubts about FSU and OSU. FSU has been living on the edge all year.

 

[T Town Tommy]

But what are we talking about here? TCU, Baylor & ND are all 11-1, who gets in? ND, thats who. Why? Asses in the seats, thats why. Eyes on screens, thats why.

I think 1 & 2 are correct. I have serious doubts about FSU and OSU. FSU has been living on the edge all year.

That assumes that at least one of the other conference teams from the Pac 12, SEC, B1G, and ACC have at least two losses. Doable no doubt. But unlikely most years given the fact that at least two of those conferences appear to just have that one dominant team - Oregon and FSU. That leaves the SEC and the B1G and while two losses could easily occur, I think most years the team from either of those two conferences go in with one loss thus eliminating a one loss ND.

 

[koonja]

TTT, how do you feel about your matchup with OSU?

 

[T Town Tommy]

TTT, how do you feel about your matchup with OSU?

I like it. OSU has struggled against the run at times and have relied on their defensive secondary to bail them out. I think we can control the LOS on them and if Urban loads up the box to stop TJ, Henry, and crew, I can see Amari having a career day receiving. Our defense should be able to keep their QB off balance with all the looks he will be seeing. End of the day, I think we can wear them down somewhere in the mid third quarter and ride on to victory.

 

[koonja]

I like it. OSU has struggled against the run at times and have relied on their defensive secondary to bail them out. I think we can control the LOS on them and if Urban loads up the box to stop TJ, Henry, and crew, I can see Amari having a career day receiving. Our defense should be able to keep their QB off balance with all the looks he will be seeing. End of the day, I think we can wear them down somewhere in the mid third quarter and ride on to victory.

Roll Tide!

 

[BleedBlueGold]

My thoughts...

I think the committee got the best four teams in at the end of the day. That was their mandate. The week over week rankings could be openly debated but the committee isn't charged with "looking forward" to the next week games like us as fans.

And I think ND will be in a horrible position moving forward since they do not have a conference championship game. The committee made it pretty clear that the fact Baylor and TCU did not play a CCG hurt them in the end. Translated that really means ND will need to be undefeated most years in order to make the four team playoff.

Completely agree with both parts.

I'll add: TCU didn't necessarily "fall" three spots. They got jumped by a better OSU team that played in and won (by a ton) a conference championship. They also got jumped by a Baylor team that had almost identical schedules and had the head-to-head. So while I completely disagree with the committee's week-to-week rankings, in the end, I think they got the four top teams correct all things considered.

And yes, I believe ND needs to evaluate adding a 13th game and/or joining the ACC in football. The committee spoke loud and clear in regards to conference championships. Unless ND is 12-0, it will be really hard for them to get in to future Final Four tournaments. If the tournament gets increased to eight teams, then ND could stay IND and shoot for one of three play-in teams. However, joining the ACC would allow them to play for one of four spots in that scenario. I think it should be considered.

The Big12 has no choice but to add two schools and get a conference championship game on the schedule.

My last point: I think there needs to be some overall, black-and-white breakdown of expectations and I would LOVE for them to look something like this: (1) 8 team playoffs as has been discussed numerous times (2) Power 5 schools must play other Power 5 schools for their non-conference games (3) MoV and MoD needs to be taken into consideration

 

[HoosierMP33]

Completely agree with both parts.

I'll add: TCU didn't necessarily "fall" three spots. They got jumped by a better OSU team that played in and won (by a ton) a conference championship. They also got jumped by a Baylor team that had almost identical schedules and had the head-to-head. So while I completely disagree with the committee's week-to-week rankings, in the end, I think they got the four top teams correct all things considered.

And yes, I believe ND needs to evaluate adding a 13th game and/or joining the ACC in football. The committee spoke loud and clear in regards to conference championships. Unless ND is 12-0, it will be really hard for them to get in to future Final Four tournaments. If the tournament gets increased to eight teams, then ND could stay IND and shoot for one of three play-in teams. However, joining the ACC would allow them to play for one of four spots in that scenario. I think it should be considered.

The Big12 has no choice but to add two schools and get a conference championship game on the schedule.

My last point: I think there needs to be some overall, black-and-white breakdown of expectations and I would LOVE for them to look something like this: (1) 8 team playoffs as has been discussed numerous times (2) Power 5 schools must play other Power 5 schools for their non-conference games (3) MoV and MoD needs to be taken into consideration

It's funny...I've been saying this for awhile now....One person on here chewed me for suggesting it and called it impractical....but the CFP committee (and indirectly, Baylor/TCU/Big 12) has proven my point: NOTRE DAME NEEDS TO USE THE HAWAII EXEMPTION AND GET A 13TH GAME!!!! Notre Dame is a one of those rare fan bases, where they could schedule a yearly away game in Hawaii and there will be a great turnout for the game....I don't know when you schedule it....maybe in the middle of every year, to be followed by a bye week...or do we add a yearly rivalry game with another independent, like BYU, to close out the year and play that game during the conf championship games...or maybe move the Navy game to the sacred point of the calendar season (it ends the problem of having to face a team immediately following Navy and their chop blocks)....the wonderful about transportation and technology today, is that BK can still recruit just as effectively if our season ends in Cali or it ends in Hawaii or in South Bend.....this notion that we must end our season in Cali so BK can recruit is ridiculous....have these ppl who believe that, have they heard of cellular telephones with text messaging and did they know these particular telephones can connect to this thing called the world wide web with such websites called Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, Rivals, etc (and yes, even Irish Envy!)....

The committee sent a HUGE message....Blowing ppl out and being 11-1 isn't good enough when other teams 12-1 or 13-0...we NEED a 13th game....the Hawaii Exemption is prolly the easiest, best way to get it....could make for some vacation packages ND could offer with tix to the game if they did it in the middle of the year followed by a bye week...the problem with the end of the year, is what if, by the chance Hawaii is in THEIR conf. champ game? And I think we would want/need our last game of the year to be played the same day as all the conf champ games...hence the need for our final opponent to be an independent......just sayin'.....This all makes to much sense.....If we want our independence, we're gonna have to do something to get that 13th game BEFORE we get hosed like TCU/Baylor/Big 12....not AFTER....

 

[wizards8507]

And I think we would want/need our last game of the year to be played the same day as all the conf champ games...hence the need for our final opponent to be an independent......just sayin'.....This all makes to much sense.....If we want our independence, we're gonna have to do something to get that 13th game BEFORE we get hosed like TCU/Baylor/Big 12....not AFTER....

I see three options, but I'm not sure any of them have a snowball's chance in hell.

1. Hawai'i
2. The Jesus Bowl, BYU
3. The Notre Dame / Big 12 Classic, ND plays the Big 12 champion in Dallas or some place

 

[Cali_domer]

I like it. OSU has struggled against the run at times and have relied on their defensive secondary to bail them out. I think we can control the LOS on them and if Urban loads up the box to stop TJ, Henry, and crew, I can see Amari having a career day receiving. Our defense should be able to keep their QB off balance with all the looks he will be seeing. End of the day, I think we can wear them down somewhere in the mid third quarter and ride on to victory.

Roll Tide!!!

 

[wizards8507]

*snip*

What's your preferred system? A lot of people are clamoring for an eight team playoff, but a bigger playoff would be even more of a cash grab by the networks, conferences, and power programs than what we have now.

 

[NCND]

Serious question, who doesn't like the (format) of the new system?

 

[wizards8507]

Serious question, who doesn't like the (format) of the new system?

 

[NCND]

What I really like about it is the putting all the major bowl games back on NYE/NYD.

 

[Ndaccountant]

Serious question, who doesn't like the (format) of the new system?

I really don't like the subjectivity of these asshats running the committee. Their logic is shoddy, confusing, and inconsistent. Frankly, I think the whole thing would be better if they had some points system to determine the four.

For example, you get 1 point for a win versus a power 5 team, 0.5 points for FBS non-power 5 team, 0 points for FCS win. Points are adjusted based on margin of victory (cuts off at 21 points to avoid running up the score), strength of the opponent, strength of the conference (based on ooc games) and advanced statistics like FEI.

On a side note, the ACC had 4 of the top 7 FEI defenses this year. TCU was ranked 6th where as OSU was ranked 12 (OSU also played two teams in the top 10, PSU and VT....Bama is ranked 5th). Overall FEI ratings.....the top 25 conference breakdown:
SEC - 7
Pac 12 - 7
ACC - 5
Big 12 - 4
Big 10 -2

 

[wizards8507]

What I really like about it is the putting all the major bowl games back on NYE/NYD.

My biggest issue is that a playoff/bracket/tournament does a poor job of crowning the "best team" as the tournament champion. There are far too many random variables that can influence a single-elimination outcome.

For example: The NFC south champion is likely going to make the NFL playoffs with a sub-.500 record. Let's say the 7-9 Falcons get in and somehow sneak past the 11-5 Seahawks in the first round. Are you really comfortable saying that the Falcons were a better team in 2014 than the Seahawks? Is there anyone who doubts that the 2007 Patriots were the best team in the NFL that year? The fact is, the Super Bowl champion is rarely the "best" team, because all of the ebbs and flows of a 16 game regular season go out the window when you get to the playoffs.

This doesn't directly apply, but I'm perfectly fine with the NBA, MLB, and NHL playoff systems because a SERIES is much better at identifying the best team and eliminating the "any given Sunday" element that you get with single-elimination. Obviously, a seven game series wouldn't be an option with football at any level.

For example, you get 1 point for a win versus a power 5 team, 0.5 points for FBS non-power 5 team, 0 points for FCS win. Points are adjusted based on margin of victory (cuts off at 21 points to avoid running up the score), strength of the opponent, strength of the conference (based on ooc games) and advanced statistics like FEI.

The problem is that there's no such thing (officially) as the "power five." That's just something the media made up. Your system could work if they split the FBS into 1-A and 1-B, then made FCS 1-C or something like that.

 

[BeauBenken]

I think it should be a 6 team playoff.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I really don't like the subjectivity of these asshats running the committee. Their logic is shoddy, confusing, and inconsistent. Frankly, I think the whole thing would be better if they had some points system to determine the four.

For example, you get 1 point for a win versus a power 5 team, 0.5 points for FBS non-power 5 team, 0 points for FCS win. Points are adjusted based on margin of victory (cuts off at 21 points to avoid running up the score), strength of the opponent, strength of the conference (based on ooc games) and advanced statistics like FEI.

On a side note, the ACC had 4 of the top 7 FEI defenses this year. TCU was ranked 6th where as OSU was ranked 12 (OSU also played to teams in the top 10, PSU and VT....Bama is ranked 5th). Overall FEI ratings.....the top 25 conference breakdown:
SEC - 7
Pac 12 - 7
ACC - 5
Big 12 - 4
Big 10 -2

I mentioned a similar point system awhile back and it never really took off. I agree with the premise though. I think anything that makes this entire process more objective will benefit the overall system.

 

[Guest]

The whole reasoning behind the current scheme is to put power back in the hands of the conferences. They were losing credibility with the BCS and other version of the mythical national championships leaving out quality, deserving teams almost on a yearly basis.

So they concocted a playoff scheme that let in only a very few teams, which meant it would emphasize 1) the existing power conferences and 2) the need for conference playoffs, which generates more money and power for the conferences themselves.

They knew they could use the relationship with media (BSPN) to focus on the SEC, or whomever the most powerful conference is at the time, to drive the discussion towards conference allegiances. What they want is fewer, bigger conferences where they can control the revenues and direct the outcomes between an oligopoly of powerful men.

The committee format allows them get rid of independent detractors who had successfully brought the BCS to its knees. Where a few people have the power to pick the tournament participants, regardless of what individual teams do on the field, speaks to the corruption of the system. The conferences now have ALL of the power in college football whereas before they had to worry about the random upstart or the big elephant in the room, Notre Dame.

They know they can force ND into a conference given the current system, or ND will eventually lose their significance. Even with their large following, ND needs to be in the national championship conversation to perpetuate the mystery and intrigue of the current football program.

They are not in a rush to expand the playoff to 8 teams. They want to force all conferences to have championship games first (more revenues), and then consolidate into several power conferences where they have ultimate control of the system.

I believe that was their blueprint all along.

 

[kmoose]

Serious question, who doesn't like the (format) of the new system?

I don't like that, before the first 4 team lineup was even announced, the national conversation is already focused on "We need to expand the number of teams"

 

[wizards8507]

The whole reasoning behind the current scheme is to put power back in the hands of the conferences. They were losing credibility with the BCS and other version of the mythical national championships leaving out quality, deserving teams almost on a yearly basis.

So they concocted a playoff scheme that let in only a very few teams, which meant it would emphasize 1) the existing power conferences and 2) the need for conference playoffs, which generates more money and power for the conferences themselves.

They knew they could use the relationship with media (BSPN) to focus on the SEC, or whomever the most powerful conference is at the time, to drive the discussion towards conference allegiances. What they want is fewer, bigger conferences where they can control the revenues and direct the outcomes between an oligopoly of powerful men.

The committee format allows them get rid of independent detractors who had successfully brought the BCS to its knees. Where a few people have the power to pick the tournament participants, regardless of what individual teams do on the field, speaks to the corruption of the system. The conferences now have ALL of the power in college football whereas before they had to worry about the random upstart or the big elephant in the room, Notre Dame.

They know they can force ND into a conference given the current system, or ND will eventually lose their significance. Even with their large following, ND needs to be in the national championship conversation to perpetuate the mystery and intrigue of the current football program.

They are not in a rush to expand the playoff to 8 teams. They want to force all conferences to have championship games first (more revenues), and then consolidate into several power conferences where they have ultimate control of the system.

I believe that was their blueprint all along.

Who's "they"? You talk about ESPN, the committee, the conferences, the power programs, and the NCAA as if they're all one entity.

I don't like that, before the first 4 team lineup was even announced, the national conversation is already focused on "We need to expand the number of teams"

I don't like that the conversation after every loss (and sometimes even BEFORE a big game, like ND-FSU) was what it means in the context of the playoff. Everything is playoff playoff playoff playoff. Regular season games still matter, but the regular season conversation has suffered. We've all turned into the Dr. Pepper guy.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/1FnmC3fhFkM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[koonja]

I don't like that, before the first 4 team lineup was even announced, the national conversation is already focused on "We need to expand the number of teams"

Why not though? Regardless of who was selected at #4, we know two teams were getting screwed.

Why not expand it to 8 so that doesn't happen. "Well koon, then you'd just have the same argument for the 9/10 teams".

No.

Look at the 4/5/6 teams this year. Each one has a legit argument to be in the 4 team playoff. Look at the 9/10 teams. Do they really deserve a chance to be number 1? I don't think so. They've already shown enough flaw to not deserve a chance. The 7/8 spots can basically be looked at as 'lucky' to be selected rather than 'deserving'.

Yes, teams 7/8 might not be as deserving as 1/2/3, but is leaving Baylor/TCU out this year a bigger travesty than giving the 7/8 team a chance to compete? I definitely think so.

 

[wizards8507]

Why not though? Regardless of who was selected at #4, we know two teams were getting screwed.

Why not expand it to 8 so that doesn't happen. "Well koon, then you'd just have the same argument for the 9/10 teams".

No.

Look at the 4/5/6 teams this year. Each one has a legit argument to be in the 4 team playoff. Look at the 9/10 teams. Do they really deserve a chance to be number 1? I don't think so. They've already shown enough flaw to not deserve a chance. The 7/8 spots can basically be looked at as 'lucky' to be selected rather than 'deserving'.

Yes, teams 7/8 might not be as deserving as 1/2/3, but is leaving Baylor/TCU out this year a bigger travesty than giving the 7/8 team a chance to compete? I definitely think so.

Because an 8 versus 1 matchup means a big pile of bullshit can happen. Does anyone really think that Michigan State is better than Alabama? I doubt it. But what if they beat them in the first round on some flukey plays? That loss for Alabama because more important than their loss earlier in the year to Ole Miss, and that's not how college football is supposed to work. EVERY game matters.

 

[koonja]

Because an 8 versus 1 matchup means a big pile of bullshit can happen. Does anyone really think that Michigan State is better than Alabama? I doubt it. But what if they beat them in the first round on some flukey plays? That loss for Alabama because more important than their loss earlier in the year to Ole Miss, and that's not how college football is supposed to work. EVERY game matters.

As opposed to screwing over 2 of TCU/Baylor/OSU? It's not perfect, but what's the lesser evil? Going to 8 IMO.

6 team playoff gives way too much advantage for the 1/2 team with a bye, which has proven already is a very debatable difference (FSU really 3 over Oregon? Not to me).

 

[Guest]

Who's "they"? You talk about ESPN, the committee, the conferences, the power programs, and the NCAA as if they're all one entity.


I don't like that the conversation after every loss (and sometimes even BEFORE a big game, like ND-FSU) was what it means in the context of the playoff. Everything is playoff playoff playoff playoff. Regular season games still matter, but the regular season conversation has suffered. We've all turned into the Dr. Pepper guy.

The talk has been about the conferences not needing the NCAA anymore, so the NCAA has very little to do with establishing anything on their own. They don't have the power they once had.

 

[Irish#1]

I really don't like the subjectivity of these asshats running the committee. Their logic is shoddy, confusing, and inconsistent. Frankly, I think the whole thing would be better if they had some points system to determine the four.

For example, you get 1 point for a win versus a power 5 team, 0.5 points for FBS non-power 5 team, 0 points for FCS win. Points are adjusted based on margin of victory (cuts off at 21 points to avoid running up the score), strength of the opponent, strength of the conference (based on ooc games) and advanced statistics like FEI.

On a side note, the ACC had 4 of the top 7 FEI defenses this year. TCU was ranked 6th where as OSU was ranked 12 (OSU also played two teams in the top 10, PSU and VT....Bama is ranked 5th). Overall FEI ratings.....the top 25 conference breakdown:
SEC - 7
Pac 12 - 7
ACC - 5
Big 12 - 4
Big 10 -2

With the exception of having teams actually playing for the title, it was obvious before we got to this point that this wasn't going to be much better than the BCS. This was supposed to eliminate controversy, but it didn't. This will definitely be expanded to 8 teams. They might go to 6 then 8, but it will grow just like the B-Ball tournament did.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Because an 8 versus 1 matchup means a big pile of bullshit can happen. Does anyone really think that Michigan State is better than Alabama? I doubt it. But what if they beat them in the first round on some flukey plays? That loss for Alabama because more important than their loss earlier in the year to Ole Miss, and that's not how college football is supposed to work. EVERY game matters.

Then tough for Bama. They should have won in your scenerio. I am for one less regular season game, a nine game conference schedule, the Power Five conference champs (with CCGs) and three at large bids. If you are #9 then tough. You just don't make it and can't claim you didn't have the chance to.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

As opposed to screwing over 2 of TCU/Baylor/OSU? It's not perfect, but what's the lesser evil? Going to 8 IMO.

6 team playoff gives way too much advantage for the 1/2 team with a bye, which has proven already is a very debatable difference (FSU really 3 over Oregon? Not to me).

But they've theoretically earned that advantage. And that would give the "best" teams a better chance of winning the whole thing (wizards' concern).

I'd take 8 teams though.

 

[wizards8507]

As opposed to screwing over 2 of TCU/Baylor/OSU? It's not perfect, but what's the lesser evil? Going to 8 IMO.

Nobody gets screwed because there shouldn't BE a playoff. The very notion that you can crown a decisive "national champion" from a field of over 100 teams playing a minuscule sample of games is absurd. The more "perfect" of a system you try to devise, the more apparent the flaw in the very premise becomes.

 

[wizards8507]

Then tough for Bama. They should have won in your scenerio. I am for one less regular season game, a nine game conference schedule, the Power Five conference champs (with CCGs) and three at large bids. If you are #9 then tough. You just don't make it and can't claim you didn't have the chance to.

This requires a huge amount of top-down meddling, whether it's the NCAA or whatever apparatus the power five try to install. You'd need uniform conferences and conference rules. You'd lose independent scheduling and traditional rivalries.

 

[Guest]

Because an 8 versus 1 matchup means a big pile of bullshit can happen. Does anyone really think that Michigan State is better than Alabama? I doubt it. But what if they beat them in the first round on some flukey plays? That loss for Alabama because more important than their loss earlier in the year to Ole Miss, and that's not how college football is supposed to work. EVERY game matters.

No it doesn't. The games didn't matter for TCU and Baylor. What about Mich State and Miss State who both had really good years? I would take both of them over Ohio State, which I think is a fraud.

The problem with your argument is scheduling. The number of games won by itself does not tell you who the best team is. In addition, even conference championship games are flawed due to the heavyweight nature of some of the conferences themselves or where the two best teams are in the same division (SEC East, ACC Atlantic, Big10 East).