Oct 6 | Virginia Tech

[koonja]

I disagree with both of you. What if it comes down to an undefeated UCF who plays no one higher than a team ranked #40 and ND with 1 loss, who played 2-4 top 25 teams.

Undefeated means d1ck if you didn't play anybody. They don't deserve a chance at the throne if they don't clash with the kings.

That basketball analogy is garbage for a number of reasons but the number of games played/losses muddies the water. Keep it related to football and post all of the hypotheticals.

I don't think the 2012 team would've deserved a playoff spot last year even though they were undefeated. The stats would've shown we didn't have the offensive fire power to compete.

It's a difficult task but UCF should never be considered until they scheduled multiple ranked p5 programs and beat them.

To be clear, I am only comparing a 12-0 ND vs. 10-2 Alabama in 2018. I don't care nor would I put 13-0 UCF in.

If ND goes 12-0 and Bama loses 2 games to their schedule which is weaker, not only will ND get in before Bama, but I would bet my own money on ND beating Bama.

Now, for Bama to lose 2 they'd have to show some serious flaws that they don't appear to have right now. But for them to drop 2? Someone's exposing them and in that case, ND >>> Bama.

 

[calvegas04]

I would be down with UCF in the playoffs as long as it isn't ND missing the dance

 

[GowerND11]

I disagree with both of you. What if it comes down to an undefeated UCF who plays no one higher than a team ranked #40 and ND with 1 loss, who played 2-4 top 25 teams.

Undefeated means d1ck if you didn't play anybody. They don't deserve a chance at the throne if they don't clash with the kings.

That basketball analogy is garbage for a number of reasons but the number of games played/losses muddies the water. Keep it related to football and post all of the hypotheticals.

I don't think the 2012 team would've deserved a playoff spot last year even though they were undefeated. The stats would've shown we didn't have the offensive fire power to compete.

It's a difficult task but UCF should never be considered until they scheduled multiple ranked p5 programs and beat them.

Problem with these upstart non p5 teams is a few things:
1, Schedules are made so far in advance, it's hard to get better teams on your schedule within a few years.
2, You schedule a good team... 6 years in advance, now they suck...
3, I see this as the same thing as Boise St. a few years back. They want to schedule big teams, it's hard to convince the big teams to agree. It's to worth the risk to those bigger schools a lot of the time.

 

[RDU Irish]

My larger point - WTF are you bringing a second team from a conference if there is an undefeated out there or a 1 loss independent with a respectable schedule? You had your shot and missed - you just get do overs forever b/c "eye test". Everyone else should need to crap the bed pretty badly before bringing a second person in from a conference.

Why not just have UGA and Bama play 13 weeks in a row and a best of three playoff - they are obviously the best teams.

 

[RDU Irish]

Problem with these upstart non p5 teams is a few things:
1, Schedules are made so far in advance, it's hard to get better teams on your schedule within a few years.
2, You schedule a good team... 6 years in advance, now they suck...
3, I see this as the same thing as Boise St. a few years back. They want to schedule big teams, it's hard to convince the big teams to agree. It's to worth the risk to those bigger schools a lot of the time.

If the bottom 50 are so much worse than the top 60 that they have no chance of competing for a even a seat at the table then cut them loose. Kids and coaches are only playing who is put in front of them. If one of three "doesn't deserve it" we will see the result on the field like when UCF got destroyed by SEC runner-up Auburn - oh wait....

 

[SoDakDomer]

I would be down with UCF in the playoffs as long as it isn't ND missing the dance

I would be down with UCF in the playoffs as long as it meant we get them first round.

 

[OhioIrish31]

I would be down with UCF in the playoffs as long as it meant we get them first round.

I would be down with UCF in the playoffs if the playoffs were 16 teams and they had to play a Play-in game to be one of the 16.

 

[Bishop2b5]

My larger point - WTF are you bringing a second team from a conference if there is an undefeated out there or a 1 loss independent with a respectable schedule? You had your shot and missed - you just get do overs forever b/c "eye test". Everyone else should need to crap the bed pretty badly before bringing a second person in from a conference.

Why not just have UGA and Bama play 13 weeks in a row and a best of three playoff - they are obviously the best teams.

Because it's about the committee determining the 4 best teams, not the 4 teams with the prettiest record, best resume, or anything else. Who cares if they won their conference, are all from the same conference, or have already faced each other in the regular season? Are they still the four best teams in the country? That's the committee's first, last, and only job... to determine who those four teams are. In fact, it would be statistically unlikely that over a given span of time, say 10 years, you wouldn't have the 2 best teams or at least 2 of the best 4 from the same conference in some years.

An exaggerated hypothetical to make my point:

What if you took the rosters of the top 4 NFL teams and put them on 4 teams from the same division in college. We can all agree that those 4 teams would be the undisputable best 4 teams in college football. They'd all beat each other up during conference play, only one (and probably none) would be undefeated, and only one would win that division and go to its conference championship game, which it would win easily. The other three would have at least 1 loss, probably 2, and one of them might even have 3 losses. Would they not still be the best 4 teams in all of college football? That they had blemished records and had all already faced each other wouldn't change that fact.

 

[greyhammer90]

Because it's about the committee determining the 4 best teams, not the 4 teams with the prettiest record, best resume, or anything else. Who cares if they won their conference, are all from the same conference, or have already faced each other in the regular season? Are they still the four best teams in the country? That's the committee's first, last, and only job... to determine who those four teams are. In fact, it would be statistically unlikely that over a given span of time, say 10 years, you wouldn't have the 2 best teams or at least 2 of the best 4 from the same conference in some years.

An exaggerated hypothetical to make my point:

What if you took the rosters of the top 4 NFL teams and put them on 4 teams from the same division in college. We can all agree that those 4 teams would be the undisputable best 4 teams in college football. They'd all beat each other up during conference play, only one (and probably none) would be undefeated, and only one would win that division and go to its conference championship game, which it would win easily. The other three would have at least 1 loss, probably 2, and one of them might even have 3 losses. Would they not still be the best 4 teams in all of college football? That they had blemished records and had all already faced each other wouldn't change that fact.

If you're not basing your decision of who is the "best" on the prettiest record or best resume you are essentially left with inherent bias and "eye-test" as your drivers. It absolutely should be resume based and teams that don't win their division should be essentially eliminated. As to your example, I could stretch the "best" line of thinking with an equally absurd scenario where it would be incredibly beneficial for a team with a lot of hype to lose their division so they can't lose a second ga- OH WAIT THAT'S REALITY

 

[ACamp1900]

If you're not basing your decision of who is the "best" on the prettiest record or best resume you are essentially left with inherent bias, and "eye-test" as your drivers. It absolutely should be resume based. As to your example, I could stretch the "best" line of thinking with an equally absurd scenario where it would be incredibly beneficial for a team with a lot of hype to lose their division so they can't lose a second ga- OH WAIT THAT'S REALITY

This... 'best team' regardless of accomplishments is such a garbage and self serving argument...

 

[RDU Irish]

Koon for Playoff Committee. All about the eye test.

 

[Bishop2b5]

If you're not basing your decision of who is the "best" on the prettiest record or best resume you are essentially left with inherent bias and "eye-test" as your drivers. It absolutely should be resume based and teams that don't win their division should be essentially eliminated. As to your example, I could stretch the "best" line of thinking with an equally absurd scenario where it would be incredibly beneficial for a team with a lot of hype to lose their division so they can't lose a second ga- OH WAIT THAT'S REALITY

This... 'best team' regardless of accomplishments is such a garbage and self serving argument...

Nobody, least of all me, is saying accomplishments, resume, SOS, W/L record, or conference championships don't matter. I've consistently said that none of those things are the ONLY thing. They're all important, but there are, as the committee has frequently said, LOTS of important factors that all have to be weighed, and the eye test is one of them. If not, we could do away with polls and a playoff committee and just let a computer crunch numbers and rank everyone.

 

[RDU Irish]

Bish - Committee and rankings are inherently biased for your home team. 8 SEC teams in the AP Top 25 right now - 1/3rd.

Last bowl season your boys outside the Playoffs -

SEC Runner up Auburn LOST to UCF
LSU lost to Notre Dame
Mizzou lost to Texas
TAMU lost to WAKE FOREST
Kentucky lost to Northwestern

MSST beat Louisville and
So Car beat Meatchicken (thank you for that)

Outside your top tier - ain't all that. But 8 teams in the Top 25? What a joke. Gotta pump up those rankings to get that schedule ranking up. But please, let us know how the Mercer game goes late in the season.

 

[ACamp1900]

Bish - Committee and rankings are inherently biased for your home team. 8 SEC teams in the AP Top 25 right now - 1/3rd.

Last bowl season your boys outside the Playoffs -

SEC Runner up Auburn LOST to UCF
LSU lost to Notre Dame
Mizzou lost to Texas
TAMU lost to WAKE FOREST
Kentucky lost to Northwestern

MSST beat Louisville and
So Car beat Meatchicken (thank you for that)

Outside your top tier - ain't all that. But 8 teams in the Top 25? What a joke. Gotta pump up those rankings to get that schedule ranking up. But please, let us know how the Mercer game goes late in the season.

They schedule a self fulfilling prophecy every year...

 

[NDRock]

Because it's about the committee determining the 4 best teams, not the 4 teams with the prettiest record, best resume, or anything else. Who cares if they won their conference, are all from the same conference, or have already faced each other in the regular season? Are they still the four best teams in the country? That's the committee's first, last, and only job... to determine who those four teams are. In fact, it would be statistically unlikely that over a given span of time, say 10 years, you wouldn't have the 2 best teams or at least 2 of the best 4 from the same conference in some years.

An exaggerated hypothetical to make my point:

What if you took the rosters of the top 4 NFL teams and put them on 4 teams from the same division in college. We can all agree that those 4 teams would be the undisputable best 4 teams in college football. They'd all beat each other up during conference play, only one (and probably none) would be undefeated, and only one would win that division and go to its conference championship game, which it would win easily. The other three would have at least 1 loss, probably 2, and one of them might even have 3 losses. Would they not still be the best 4 teams in all of college football? That they had blemished records and had all already faced each other wouldn't change that fact.

If that is such a great plan, why doesn’t the SEC do that? If all the best teams are in one division, is it fair the championship game includes a team from the weaker side? Just use the eye ball test. Bama was the better team, why did Auburn got to the SEC CG?

 

[koonja]

Koon for Playoff Committee. All about the eye test.

I think we're crossing wires. I'm certainly not a proponent of the eye test.

I'm simply saying that if ND goes 12-0 and Bama loses 2 of it's next 6 games, ND is the better team. Not just on resume, but a Bama team going 4-2 down the stretch against that schedule has serious holes.

 

[NDRock]

I think we're crossing wires. I'm certainly not a proponent of the eye test.

I'm simply saying that if ND goes 12-0 and Bama loses 2 of it's next 6 games, ND is the better team. Not just on resume, but a Bama team going 4-2 down the stretch against that schedule has serious holes.

How bout 5-1 and 2nd in the West?

 

[ulukinatme]

I think we're crossing wires. I'm certainly not a proponent of the eye test.

I'm simply saying that if ND goes 12-0 and Bama loses 2 of it's next 6 games, ND is the better team. Not just on resume, but a Bama team going 4-2 down the stretch against that schedule has serious holes.

How bout 5-1 and 2nd in the West?

Either of these scenarios would be a dream come true this year. I like our chances in a playoff without Alabama. OSU would be very tough, as would Clemson or a few other teams...but we would at least have a puncher's chance if not be favored against some other opponents.

 

[Bishop2b5]

Bish - Committee and rankings are inherently biased for your home team. 8 SEC teams in the AP Top 25 right now - 1/3rd.

Last bowl season your boys outside the Playoffs -

SEC Runner up Auburn LOST to UCF
LSU lost to Notre Dame
Mizzou lost to Texas
TAMU lost to WAKE FOREST
Kentucky lost to Northwestern

MSST beat Louisville and
So Car beat Meatchicken (thank you for that)

Outside your top tier - ain't all that. But 8 teams in the Top 25? What a joke. Gotta pump up those rankings to get that schedule ranking up. But please, let us know how the Mercer game goes late in the season.

What do the AP rankings have to do with the playoff committee? They've specifically said they don't follow it and make their own decisions. And you'd be hard pressed to make a serious argument that the SEC teams that have made the playoffs weren't clearly among the top 4. Now if you want to argue that a couple of the SEC teams that are ranked right now shouldn't be, I'll readily agree with you. Auburn and Miss St. don't belong. A&M is borderline. LSU and UF are overranked.

I'll have to disagree with you about the committee and polls being biased. They may very well give undue credit and benefit of the doubt to SEC teams for past accomplishments and overvalue the league, but I don't think committee members or poll voters have any particular bias for us. The AP & Coaches polls are usually very similar and there's no reason to think the coaches from across the country favor us. If anything, you'd expect the opposite. Same with the journalists voting in the AP. The committee doesn't have a dog in the fight. They aren't trying to favor one team or produce matchups that will be exciting or draw large TV audiences. As far as I know, none of its members has any ties to Bama. I don't see any motivation for the committee of the polls to favor Bama or the SEC. What benefit is there for any of them? I don't disagree that they sometimes put too much weight on name brands and the past, but that's a different thing than bias or favoritism, and they tend to do that for OSU, USC, PSU, ND, OK, TEX and all the historically elite programs.

 

[NDRock]

What do the AP rankings have to do with the playoff committee? They've specifically said they don't follow it and make their own decisions. And you'd be hard pressed to make a serious argument that the SEC teams that have made the playoffs weren't clearly among the top 4. Now if you want to argue that a couple of the SEC teams that are ranked right now shouldn't be, I'll readily agree with you. Auburn and Miss St. don't belong. A&M is borderline. LSU and UF are overranked.

I'll have to disagree with you about the committee and polls being biased. They may very well give undue credit and benefit of the doubt to SEC teams for past accomplishments and overvalue the league, but I don't think committee members or poll voters have any particular bias for us. The AP & Coaches polls are usually very similar and there's no reason to think the coaches from across the country favor us. If anything, you'd expect the opposite. Same with the journalists voting in the AP. The committee doesn't have a dog in the fight. They aren't trying to favor one team or produce matchups that will be exciting or draw large TV audiences. As far as I know, none of its members has any ties to Bama. I don't see any motivation for the committee of the polls to favor Bama or the SEC. What benefit is there for any of them? I don't disagree that they sometimes put too much weight on name brands and the past, but that's a different thing than bias or favoritism, and they tend to do that for OSU, USC, PSU, ND, OK, TEX and all the historically elite programs.

Of course it matters. You honestly don’t think they look at how teams do against top 10 opponents, top 25 opponents? Rankings matter, if you don’t realize that you’re lying or ignorant.

 

[Bishop2b5]

If that is such a great plan, why doesn’t the SEC do that? If all the best teams are in one division, is it fair the championship game includes a team from the weaker side? Just use the eye ball test. Bama was the better team, why did Auburn got to the SEC CG?

Wasn't PSU the B1G champ a few years ago, yet the committee put OSU in the playoff over them? They felt based on the entire body of work during the season that OSU was the better team and one of the best 4 in the country. They recognized that one game doesn't necessarily determine which was the better team. It usually does, but can sometimes mean the winner was just the better team that day (which is why 4-7 teams sometimes upset 10-1 teams).

OSU, PSU and UM are all ranked ahead of WI right now and are probably actually better teams. WI will likely go to the B1G championship game while two better teams from the conference sit at home. Also, conference or division championships measure conference play, not overall play. Sometimes the best overall team in a conference doesn't win it. Imagine a team that's 11-1 and dominating most opponents, but lost one conference game to an 8-4 team that won all their conference games, but lost all their OOC games and looked mediocre all season long. Most of us would agree that the 8-4 division champ probably wasn't as good as the 11-1 team overall. They were just better on that one day... maybe they got lucky, maybe the other team was battling the flu or several key injuries (which the committee has said that take into account) or maybe they just played their best game of the year and the other team their worst. This is the sort of stuff the committee considers and why teams that didn't win their conference or even their division can still be regarded by the committee as one of the best 4 teams in the country and get into the playoff.

 

[Bishop2b5]

Of course it matters. You honestly don’t think they look at how teams do against top 10 opponents, top 25 opponents? Rankings matter, if you don’t realize that you’re lying or ignorant.

I don't think they entirely tune out what the AP or Coaches polls say, but they have strongly stated and frequently claimed that they do their own analysis and rankings, and basically start over from scratch each week.

 

[ACamp1900]

If the PO committee has made anything clear to me,... it's that they don't really care about 'best team' or 'deserve' or whatever... they want the biggest match-ups possible. That usually requires apologizing for bigger programs as they have done... it's also the biggest reason I tend to laugh at "Would ND be left out if..." discussions.

 

[NDRock]

I don't think they entirely tune out what the AP or Coaches polls say, but they have strongly stated and frequently claimed that they do their own analysis and rankings, and basically start over from scratch each week.

Yeah, sure. I’m sure Condi Rice was breaking down film at 4 am. I’ll put you down for ignorant then.

 

[T Town Tommy]

It's way too early and there's too much football left to be played to worry about "what if" scenerios. Just keep winning and the rest will take care of itself.

 

[Bishop2b5]

Yeah, sure. I’m sure Condi Rice was breaking down film at 4 am. I’ll put you down for ignorant then.

I simply told you what the committee has frequently said. Whether you believe them or not is up to you.

 

[Bishop2b5]

If the PO committee has made anything clear to me,... it's that they don't really care about 'best team' or 'deserve' or whatever... they want the biggest match-ups possible. That usually requires apologizing for bigger programs as they have done... it's also the biggest reason I tend to laugh at "Would ND be left out if..." discussions.

Maybe, but why? They don't answer to ESPN or any of the networks who broadcast the playoff games. If they were looking for big matchups to bring in big viewing audiences, last year was a CF. They selected 3 teams from the same region and 1 from just outside it. I still think they've gotten it right each year so far. You'd be hard pressed to make a convincing case for any team that got left out. At most you might could quibble a bit about the #4 & #5 teams being interchangeable.

 

[NDRock]

Wasn't PSU the B1G champ a few years ago, yet the committee put OSU in the playoff over them? They felt based on the entire body of work during the season that OSU was the better team and one of the best 4 in the country. They recognized that one game doesn't necessarily determine which was the better team. It usually does, but can sometimes mean the winner was just the better team that day (which is why 4-7 teams sometimes upset 10-1 teams).

OSU, PSU and UM are all ranked ahead of WI right now and are probably actually better teams. WI will likely go to the B1G championship game while two better teams from the conference sit at home. Also, conference or division championships measure conference play, not overall play. Sometimes the best overall team in a conference doesn't win it. Imagine a team that's 11-1 and dominating most opponents, but lost one conference game to an 8-4 team that won all their conference games, but lost all their OOC games and looked mediocre all season long. Most of us would agree that the 8-4 division champ probably wasn't as good as the 11-1 team overall. They were just better on that one day... maybe they got lucky, maybe the other team was battling the flu or several key injuries (which the committee has said that take into account) or maybe they just played their best game of the year and the other team their worst. This is the sort of stuff the committee considers and why teams that didn't win their conference or even their division can still be regarded by the committee as one of the best 4 teams in the country and get into the playoff.

All this is why the college football playoff sucks. Give me the NFL playoffs any day where you get in based on what you did on the field. "Sorry NFC West, the committee decided to leave you out of the playoffs this year".

Of course, you're a Bama fan that still claims the '73 championship. You're able to overlook on-field results.

 

[Irish YJ]

It's way too early and there's too much football left to be played to worry about "what if" scenerios. Just keep winning and the rest will take care of itself.

but that wouldn't be fun 3T...

don't be a downer and say "hey fans, you just need to focus on next week. make sure you practice your TV watching skills, so that you are ready and focused while sitting in front of your TV when game time comes. Don't get caught up in this rat poison. "

 

[Bishop2b5]

The NFL version has some advantages, but you also end up with some shitty 9-7 teams in while much better teams sit at home. No system is going to make everyone happy.