Oct 6 | Virginia Tech

ickythump1225

New member
Messages
4,036
Reaction score
323
Any system that has to rely on a playoff system is always going to suck and is not going to reward the "best" team all the time or even most of the time. Playoffs are good for entertainment and excitement and keep fans from all over tuned in because they are a crapshoot (see the undefeated Patriots losing to the shitty Giants team that backed into the playoffs).

The European soccer leagues that play a round robin actually do the best job determining the "best team" and rewarding them. Obviously that's not possible for CFB.
 

Veritate Duce Progredi

A man gotta have a code
Messages
9,358
Reaction score
5,352
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.

Yes but the NFL plays NFL teams. What you're suggesting, I think, is the Cardinals would qualify for the playoffs after beating CFL teams.

College football can't equate to the NFL because there are more teams and thus, more variables.

Should every 12-0 FBS CFB team qualify for the playoffs? Are all wins equal? Are road wins equal to home wins? Brownie pts for scheduling OOC opponents? How should elite defenses be graded vs. elite offenses? What about a 12-0 teams with SOS where 1 averages a margin of victory 2.5 pts/game and the other 18.5 pts/game?
 
Last edited:

NDRock

Well-known member
Messages
7,489
Reaction score
5,448
Yes but the NFL plays NFL teams. What you're suggesting, I think, is the Cardinals would qualify for the playoffs after beating CFL teams.

College football can't equate to the NFL because there are more teams and thus, more variables.

Should every 12-0 FBS CFB team qualify for the playoffs? Are all wins equal? Are road wins equal to home wins? Brownie pts for scheduling OOC opponents? How should elite defenses be graded vs. elite offenses? What about a 12-0 teams with SOS where 1 averages a margin of victory 2.5 pts/game and the other 18.5 pts/game?

I understand that it’s really impossible to do it in college without wholesale changes. I’m sure some people love the playoffs as it is now. To me, the regular season is so much fun but then they take off 3-4 weeks before the big bowls/playoffs. Committees get involved and the whole thing unravels, for me anyway. That’s when I get into the NFL. I’m sure many disagree.

Personally, I’d be happy with 5 conference champs and 3 at large teams.
 

RDU Irish

Catholics vs. Cousins
Messages
8,616
Reaction score
2,713
I understand that it’s really impossible to do it in college without wholesale changes. I’m sure some people love the playoffs as it is now. To me, the regular season is so much fun but then they take off 3-4 weeks before the big bowls/playoffs. Committees get involved and the whole thing unravels, for me anyway. That’s when I get into the NFL. I’m sure many disagree.

Personally, I’d be happy with 5 conference champs and 3 at large teams.

It seems obvious this is where it is going and I agree it is most logical. Making conference championships mean something is important, IMO. Even if that means some 7-5 teams sneaking in periodically you just seed them at 8 and the #1 team should have an easier path (which they earned).

Also leaves plenty of room for the UCFs of the world - think you need to make room for the best of the non-P5 schools if they have an extraordinary season. Same as weak conference champ - seed them at 7/8 and let them get exposed.

Last year would have seen OSU and USC earn a bid - give the other two at large to Wisconsin and UCF. That seems pretty fair to me.
 

NDRock

Well-known member
Messages
7,489
Reaction score
5,448
It seems obvious this is where it is going and I agree it is most logical. Making conference championships mean something is important, IMO. Even if that means some 7-5 teams sneaking in periodically you just seed them at 8 and the #1 team should have an easier path (which they earned).

Also leaves plenty of room for the UCFs of the world - think you need to make room for the best of the non-P5 schools if they have an extraordinary season. Same as weak conference champ - seed them at 7/8 and let them get exposed.

Last year would have seen OSU and USC earn a bid - give the other two at large to Wisconsin and UCF. That seems pretty fair to me.

I think allowing conference champs in, makes it easier for teams to schedule good OOC games. Look at last year for example. Bama goes 11-1, doesn't win their division, and makes the playoffs. Schedule includes:
-8 SEC games
-FSU
-Fresno St.
-Colorado St.
-Mercer

9 Power 5 teams
2 Low level FBS teams
1 FCS team

USC goes 11-2 and wins the PAC-12 and doesn't get in. If they would have scheduled like Bama, they probably go 12-1 and are in the playoffs. Their schedule includes"
-9 PAC-12 games + CCG
-Notre Dame
-Texas
-Western Michigan

12 Power 5 schools
1 Low level FBS team

By scheduling Notre Dame, they miss out on the playoffs. No way Bama would ever play 12 straight Power 5 teams in a row like USC did. Honestly, I don't blame Bama, they care about winning championships and do what they have to, to win them.
 

RDU Irish

Catholics vs. Cousins
Messages
8,616
Reaction score
2,713
I think allowing conference champs in, makes it easier for teams to schedule good OOC games. Look at last year for example. Bama goes 11-1, doesn't win their division, and makes the playoffs. Schedule includes:
-8 SEC games
-FSU
-Fresno St.
-Colorado St.
-Mercer

9 Power 5 teams
2 Low level FBS teams
1 FCS team

USC goes 11-2 and wins the PAC-12 and doesn't get in. If they would have scheduled like Bama, they probably go 12-1 and are in the playoffs. Their schedule includes"
-9 PAC-12 games + CCG
-Notre Dame
-Texas
-Western Michigan

12 Power 5 schools
1 Low level FBS team

By scheduling Notre Dame, they miss out on the playoffs. No way Bama would ever play 12 straight Power 5 teams in a row like USC did. Honestly, I don't blame Bama, they care about claiming championships and do what they have to, to win them.

FIFY
 

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,544
Reaction score
28,990
I think allowing conference champs in, makes it easier for teams to schedule good OOC games. Look at last year for example. Bama goes 11-1, doesn't win their division, and makes the playoffs. Schedule includes:
-8 SEC games
-FSU
-Fresno St.
-Colorado St.
-Mercer

9 Power 5 teams
2 Low level FBS teams
1 FCS team

USC goes 11-2 and wins the PAC-12 and doesn't get in. If they would have scheduled like Bama, they probably go 12-1 and are in the playoffs. Their schedule includes"
-9 PAC-12 games + CCG
-Notre Dame
-Texas
-Western Michigan

12 Power 5 schools
1 Low level FBS team

By scheduling Notre Dame, they miss out on the playoffs. No way Bama would ever play 12 straight Power 5 teams in a row like USC did. Honestly, I don't blame Bama, they care about winning championships and do what they have to, to win them.

This is 100% what will happen. By having an automatic path for conference champions, teams will stop scheduling to "avoid a loss."

Instead, you have incentive to play big OOC games because if you finish 2nd in your conference you will need those resume boosters to get in over comparable other teams that came up just short. And if you lose the OOC games, it doesn't matter because you can still get in by handling business in your conference.
 

Sea Turtle

Slow and steady wins the race
Messages
5,634
Reaction score
3,478
I think allowing conference champs in, makes it easier for teams to schedule good OOC games. Look at last year for example. Bama goes 11-1, doesn't win their division, and makes the playoffs. Schedule includes:
-8 SEC games
-FSU
-Fresno St.
-Colorado St.
-Mercer

9 Power 5 teams
2 Low level FBS teams
1 FCS team

USC goes 11-2 and wins the PAC-12 and doesn't get in. If they would have scheduled like Bama, they probably go 12-1 and are in the playoffs. Their schedule includes"
-9 PAC-12 games + CCG
-Notre Dame
-Texas
-Western Michigan

12 Power 5 schools
1 Low level FBS team

By scheduling Notre Dame, they miss out on the playoffs. No way Bama would ever play 12 straight Power 5 teams in a row like USC did. Honestly, I don't blame Bama, they care about winning championships and do what they have to, to win them.

I don't get this. Don't we care about winning championships? Don't most teams care about winning championships? Shouldn't everybody do what they have to do within the confines of the rules to win championships?
 
Last edited:

Irish YJ

Southsida
Messages
25,888
Reaction score
1,444
I don't get this. Don't we care about winning championships? Don't most teams care about winning championships? Shouldn't everybody do what they have to do within the confines of the rules to win championships?

I think we care about academics, and other things, more than championships.

As far as the schedule goes, we care about loyalty (Navy), and giving NBC ($$$) a good slate of opponents, as much as championships.

If all we cared about were NCs, we'd relax our academic requirements, and join a conference.
 

ACamp1900

Counting my ‘bet against ND’ winnings
Messages
48,944
Reaction score
11,224
I think we care about academics, and other things, more than championships.

As far as the schedule goes, we care about loyalty (Navy), and giving NBC ($$$) a good slate of opponents, as much as championships.

If all we cared about were NCs, we'd relax our academic requirements, and join a conference.

Pretty much this... Bama has a myopic focus and everything else be damned...
 

Irish YJ

Southsida
Messages
25,888
Reaction score
1,444
Pretty much this... Bama has a myopic focus and everything else be damned...

And don't get me wrong... I'd be perfectly fine with relaxing some academics. For instance, I definitely kick the foreign language requirement to the curb. I'd also be perfectly fine with allowing let's say, 2 recruits per year to come in with lower SAT/ACT scores.
 

Rack Em

Community Bod
Messages
7,089
Reaction score
2,727
And don't get me wrong... I'd be perfectly fine with relaxing some academics. For instance, I definitely kick the foreign language requirement to the curb. I'd also be perfectly fine with allowing let's say, 2 recruits per year to come in with lower SAT/ACT scores.

Basically every recruit comes in with lower SAT/ACT scores....much lower.
 

Bishop2b5

SEC Exchange Student
Messages
8,927
Reaction score
6,154
I don't get this. Don't we care about winning championships? Don't most teams care about winning championships? Shouldn't everybody do what they have to do within the confines of the rules to win championships?

I think we care about academics, and other things, more than championships.

As far as the schedule goes, we care about loyalty (Navy), and giving NBC ($$$) a good slate of opponents, as much as championships.

If all we cared about were NCs, we'd relax our academic requirements, and join a conference.

My $.02 worth from an outsider's POV.

There's nothing wrong with putting academics first of course, but academics and success in football aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. There are good football teams with high academics. You guys certainly had loads of success in football during the 60's & 70's without sacrificing academics.

I know that many of you have complained that the powers that be at ND don't really care about football, but I think that's a huge mistake. Football is your calling card to much of the country. I'll guarantee you that a LOT more people across the entire country know about ND football than know about ND academics. ND having a nationally prominent, successful football team that's constantly in the news and winning championships is a HUGE boost to getting your name in front of the type of kids you want in the classroom. We can all think of a handful of private, top-tier academic schools that most people don't even know exist or at least couldn't tell you anything about. ND football is why you aren't one of them.

I don't see anything wrong with lowering admission standards slightly in a few cases to greatly help the football program. The success it would bring about on the field would be a big boost to the university as a whole. Most universities have a "Special Admissions" loophole (they call it different things at different schools, but it's all basically the same principle). It allows a school to admit someone who brings something special to the table even though they may not fully qualify academically. You deem their contribution to the university or the program they're going into as worthy of making an exception, then work to get them up to speed in the academic areas where they're lacking. A super

I'd argue that a football player who is capable of doing university level work, but doesn't completely meet all of ND's academic standards (but is capable of being brought up to speed) should be a good candidate for special admission due to being able to contribute to the university. I'm not advocating that you accept kids that can barely do HS work but are freak athletes. I'm talking about kids who would do fine at most universities and are capable of succeeding at ND with some extra help. Their contribution to the football team and making you a consistent national powerhouse would be an overall plus for ND.
 

ickythump1225

New member
Messages
4,036
Reaction score
323
I think allowing conference champs in, makes it easier for teams to schedule good OOC games. Look at last year for example. Bama goes 11-1, doesn't win their division, and makes the playoffs. Schedule includes:
-8 SEC games
-FSU
-Fresno St.
-Colorado St.
-Mercer

9 Power 5 teams
2 Low level FBS teams
1 FCS team

USC goes 11-2 and wins the PAC-12 and doesn't get in. If they would have scheduled like Bama, they probably go 12-1 and are in the playoffs. Their schedule includes"
-9 PAC-12 games + CCG
-Notre Dame
-Texas
-Western Michigan

12 Power 5 schools
1 Low level FBS team

By scheduling Notre Dame, they miss out on the playoffs. No way Bama would ever play 12 straight Power 5 teams in a row like USC did. Honestly, I don't blame Bama, they care about winning championships and do what they have to, to win them.
This is why I have a fundamental level of respect for USC that I don't for a program like Alabama. I mean obviously what they've done over the last decade is outstanding anyway you slice it but they've scheduled..."smartly" I'll say.
 

NDRock

Well-known member
Messages
7,489
Reaction score
5,448
I don't get this. Don't we care about winning championships? Don't most teams care about winning championships? Shouldn't everybody do what they have to do within the confines of the rules to win championships?

I think Notre Dame would like to win a national championship but not at all costs. Alabama has shown that the only thing they care about is winning. They are so maniacal about it that they claim to have won even when everyone knows they didn't. They literally claim a National Championship during a year they finished 3rd in the SEC (1941). They have no honor or shame. They remind me of the Russian or East German Olympic teams. Systemic cheating from the top down and a win at all cost attitude. It often works.
 

Bishop2b5

SEC Exchange Student
Messages
8,927
Reaction score
6,154
This is why I have a fundamental level of respect for USC that I don't for a program like Alabama. I mean obviously what they've done over the last decade is outstanding anyway you slice it but they've scheduled..."smartly" I'll say.

I and most other Bama fans would like to see more top OOC opponents. When I was a freshman at Bama, we played Nebraska, Missouri (a solid OOC team at the time), Washington and USC in the first 5 weeks of the season. We almost always had 2 (and sometimes 3) OOC games against major programs such as ND, OK, USC, PSU, OSU, GaTech, Miami, BC (the year Flutie won the Heisman), Washington, UCLA, etc., etc during the 70's & 80's. I miss those days of playing a few top programs from across the country. I understand why scheduling is different today and I realize it's effective, but I'd still like to go back to scheduling like we did a few decades ago.
 

ickythump1225

New member
Messages
4,036
Reaction score
323
USC sucks in so many ways... but yeah, I totally get this.
I don't truly hate USC. I truly hate Michigan. Can't stand that program in any way. I also really resent Stanford, hate Shaw and his smug face, and can't wait for them to return to their rightful mediocrity. I don't truly hate USC for whatever reason, I root against them but don't hate them. Like I don't hate the Mets, I don't cheer for them but I truly hate Philly and the gNats.
 
Top