BCS playoff

[catfaninin]

UCF defense looks like they have no business playing anything above peewee football. Given up over 350 yards and 27 points in the first half against Temple.

Check that. Over 450 yards and 34 points in the first half. To Temple..

[Westtncat]

Wouldn't you agree though, that, say, it's generally going to be fair to consider a 12-1 Alabama team with a one score loss to a ranked SEC opponent with a winning record as a better team than, say, an 11-1 or 12-1 Big Ten team with a loss to an unranked opponent without a winning record?

Just so you know, I enjoy this so this thread can go on forever!

Ok lets look at your hypothetical scenario first. In this scenario then yes, I absolutely agree with you but its made up. The example I gave you is exactly the same except its reversed. I take you are partial to the SEC, I dont blame you I am too but you have to be able to look at this objectively.

Think about this. In the year I gave you, Alabama, Iowa, and Ohio St. all had one loss. Which team had the worst one loss? Alabama, they lost to Ole Miss. Ole Miss was ranked but they had three losses that year. Iowa and Ohio St. both lost to Michigan State which ended up being in the playoffs. Now you have already said the big ten sucked that year but we dont really know that. Mich St. did lose their bowl game pretty bad but Ohio St. won theirs big. Who won or lost after the fact doesnt really matter. You have to be able to look at the records in that moment in time and be fair about it. To be fair that year Alabama had the worst loss. Their schedule was probably stronger and I understand that but in reality its all an educated guess.

Think about this, the committee picks the final four teams correct? Think about how close their rankings are to the AP and coaches poll. They take a lot of their information about who is a stronger team (IE schedules etc) from the opinions of other sports writers. Its all originally based on opinion. A good example was that it was a consensus opinion that UCF was not what they were cracked up to be. You have made it clear you feel this way and I actually agreed at one point in time. BUT>>> what if our opinions are wrong? To be the best team doesn't mean you have to have the toughest schedule. Everyone assumed UCF would get beat by Auburn, including me. I was wrong. Yea it was one game but if you want to call that a fluke then so could any game. Thats why we play them and thats why I want to play a few more.

Now I actually do understand what you are saying and I think many times 4 can cover it and in most years its not really even 8 teams that can claim anything. Its more to the tune of 6 but if we are gonna go, might as well get a couple more and make it fun. The interest level would be high as would the revenue.

To be clear I dont want a meaningless bunch of teams in a playoff. We already have teams with .500 records in blow games with I think is insane. Eight teams would be the maximum I would ever want to go because your original argument has more merit outside of 8 teams. This year Alabama will win it, I feel 99.99% positive of this but a playoff will still be fun because you never know. In some years 4 might suffice but some years it will be up for grabs, wouldn't any hardcore football fan love to see them battle it out??

One more thing. I hope you dont think Im getting at you or anything, I actually just love taling about this subject. IF anything I have said has been offense to you, thats not how I wanted it to be. I respect your opinion and to me its just a discussion so I wont want to come off as an A hole. Cheers!

[catfaninin]

Think about this. In the year I gave you, Alabama, Iowa, and Ohio St. all had one loss. Which team had the worst one loss? Alabama, they lost to Ole Miss. Ole Miss was ranked but they had three losses that year. Iowa and Ohio St. both lost to Michigan State which ended up being in the playoffs. Now you have already said the big ten sucked that year but we dont really know that. Mich St. did lose their bowl game pretty bad but Ohio St. won theirs big. Who won or lost after the fact doesnt really matter. You have to be able to look at the records in that moment in time and be fair about it. To be fair that year Alabama had the worst loss. Their schedule was probably stronger and I understand that but in reality its all an educated guess.

Wasn't Michigan States loss in the bowl game to that same Alabama team? Something like 35-0 if I recall? That's a pretty good indication the big 10 wasn't real great.

[Old School]

Just so you know, I enjoy this so this thread can go on forever!

. . .

One more thing. I hope you dont think Im getting at you or anything, I actually just love taling about this subject. IF anything I have said has been offense to you, thats not how I wanted it to be. I respect your opinion and to me its just a discussion so I wont want to come off as an A hole. Cheers!

I'm with you. What makes this site great is the civil, respectful discussions on it. You can just talk about things and share your thoughts and everyone's cool about it instead of getting bent out of shape or something. You can think or post something that other people disagree with and the disagreement is civil. Absolutely no offense taken, at all, and I hope that's reciprocal. It's just a good, positive group or community to be a part of.

[Westtncat]

Wasn't Michigan States loss in the bowl game to that same Alabama team? Something like 35-0 if I recall? That's a pretty good indication the big 10 wasn't real great.

Using hindsight is not really a valid argument. I mean yes they lost, Ohio St. won big . At a particular point in time (before the selection) there were three one loss teams two of which had a better loss than Alabama, even if you use the committee's opinion. So at that moment in time, you cant say the big ten sucks you dont know. Using hindsight we are all experts.

[Old School]

Ok lets look at your hypothetical scenario first. In this scenario then yes, I absolutely agree with you but its made up. The example I gave you is exactly the same except its reversed. I take you are partial to the SEC, I dont blame you I am too but you have to be able to look at this objectively.

It actually isn't hypothetical or made up. This is the 2015 season you mentioned earlier. Alabama lost by one score to a ranked Ole Miss team that was a 10 game winner that season. Michigan State lost to an unranked Nebraska team that finished the season with a 6-7 record. Alabama and Michigan State both made the playoff. But very few people made any sort of argument that any Big Ten team belonged in the same place in the national championship conversation as Alabama did. Alabama then beat Michigan State 38-0. Anyone can assign as much or as little weight to that. I'd say this: foresight and hindsight are two different things, for sure, but in this case, they matched, and I don't think it was coincidental. I also think that when you have a team like Auburn playing UCF last year or Alabama entering the 2008 SEC championship game undefeated hoping to play for the national championship but instead having to play Utah in a bowl game, often you get a huge letdown and the result is unrepresentative of what that team was that year. But I don't think that happens in a game in the playoff.

In that year, 2015, if they had a single championship game instead of a playoff, I think it would've been fair. Alabama and Clemson had built the best resumes and looked head and shoulders above the rest going in. Had the old BCS system still been in place, few if anyone outside of a few hyperpartisan fans would've really claimed with a straight face that that game didn't result in a credible national champion.

If you do go back and look at prior years, I think you'd find it an interesting exercise (and an enjoyable trip down memory lane, where you find yourself thinking several times "oh, yeah, now I remember team/game/result"), and I think at the end of it you'll likely agree that it's very infrequent that you have any year in which a four team playoff is going to exclude someone who has as legit a claim to being there as any other team. (Having said that, I'll also say you'll find one year in there where I'll readily admit that wasn't the case. I think it was one of the most fun and enjoyable seasons in college football in a long, long, long time, with that being just one part of it.)

Think about this. In the year I gave you, Alabama, Iowa, and Ohio St. all had one loss. Which team had the worst one loss? Alabama, they lost to Ole Miss. Ole Miss was ranked but they had three losses that year. Iowa and Ohio St. both lost to Michigan State which ended up being in the playoffs. Now you have already said the big ten sucked that year but we dont really know that. Mich St. did lose their bowl game pretty bad but Ohio St. won theirs big. Who won or lost after the fact doesnt really matter. You have to be able to look at the records in that moment in time and be fair about it. To be fair that year Alabama had the worst loss. Their schedule was probably stronger and I understand that but in reality its all an educated guess.

Back to 2015. Ohio State and Iowa did lose to Michigan State. At the time, there wasn't a stampede to put either of them into the playoff. Ohio State got past Northern Illinois 20-13, Western Michigan 38-12, Indiana 34-27, Minnesota 28-14 and Illinois 28-3 before that loss. None of those Big Ten teams ended up with a winning record and those MAC teams lost 5 and 6 games. (Ohio State was 5-7 against the spread that year; they didn't beat expectations that often, for whatever that's worth - which, if anything, would be an indication that they spent much of the season overrated.) Iowa had a great streak but seemed to have caught a lot of breaks. (Not to get sidetracked too much, but there's one way in which Iowa definitely did not catch a break that year. Iowa entered the Big Ten championship game 12-0, but was unranked for the first five weeks of the season, which speaks volumes about those polls in the early part of the season. Maybe that's a topic for another thread, or maybe this one.) Iowa's wins included 31-14 vs. Illinois State, 27-24 vs. Pitt, 35-27 vs. Indiana, 40-35 vs. Minnesota, 28-20 against Nebraska. I don't know that margin of victory itself sets teams apart, but at the same time, it's fair to consider a team's entire body of work and if a team is playing in a conference that hasn't established itself as that strong, and isn't setting itself apart in games, that probably should count for something. (For instance, this year, the ACC is roundly considered weak, for good reason. If Clemson wasn't beating most of its opponents very badly, would that team be as highly regarded as it is? If Clemson struggled against Wake Forest and/or Louisville this year, wouldn't that plant some fair doubt about that team?

Anyway, I don't think those Big Ten teams stacked up as equals to Alabama or Clemson that year (2015). I also don't think Alabama had the worst loss. Ole Miss was a 10 win team out of the SEC; I don't know that there are many years I'd consider a 10 win team out of the SEC to take a back seat against many Big Ten teams. And I also think going 7-1 in the SEC most years is going to be a more impressive credential than going 7-1 in the Big Ten.

[Old School]

Definitely more to enjoy and to be said on all of this, but I can't tonight. Sorry. I'll sign off for now with this, though: I think there'd be a lot more clarity or consensus about who does and doesn't belong in the playoff if the P5 schools only played each other, so that all teams in each conference were tested against teams from the other P5 conferences. It would make the season a lot more interesting. And it would really be cool if every week of the season had at least a few of those interconference games.

[catfaninin]

Using hindsight is not really a valid argument. I mean yes they lost, Ohio St. won big . At a particular point in time (before the selection) there were three one loss teams two of which had a better loss than Alabama, even if you use the committee's opinion. So at that moment in time, you cant say the big ten sucks you dont know. Using hindsight we are all experts.

True, using those numbers you don't know. But was there really any doubt going into that game regardless of what the numbers said that Bama was far better than Mich State?

[Westtncat]

Anyway, I don't think those Big Ten teams stacked up as equals to Alabama or Clemson that year (2015). I also don't think Alabama had the worst loss. Ole Miss was a 10 win team out of the SEC; I don't know that there are many years I'd consider a 10 win team out of the SEC to take a back seat against many Big Ten teams. And I also think going 7-1 in the SEC most years is going to be a more impressive credential than going 7-1 in the Big Ten.

In my opinion I dont think any conference stacks up to the SEC but if the original consensus is that we are stronger and we only lose to each other without many outside the conferences games you never really know. Also as far as the Big Ten not stacking up, I actually think we agree on that but... If you trust the committee Alabama loss was worse. If you dont trust the committee then its your opinion vs. theirs, just as its mine vs. theirs.

[Westtncat]

True, using those numbers you don't know. But was there really any doubt going into that game regardless of what the numbers said that Bama was far better than Mich State?

I think Bama was far better than anyone most years. I did think Bama was better than Mich state that year too but not sure I knew they were that much better. That still doesn't work for selecting bowl games. Picking a winner and picking by how much or judging an entire conference because of it are two different things.

Does anyone think Bama will lose this year? I dont. Do we skip the playoff? No, because you never know. Although I kinda know

[Westtncat]

It actually isn't hypothetical or made up. This is the 2015 season you mentioned earlier. Alabama lost by one score to a ranked Ole Miss team that was a 10 game winner that season. Michigan State lost to an unranked Nebraska team that finished the season with a 6-7 record. Alabama and Michigan State both made the playoff. But very few people made any sort of argument that any Big Ten team belonged in the same place in the national championship conversation as Alabama did. Alabama then beat Michigan State 38-0. Anyone can assign as much or as little weight to that. I'd say this: foresight and hindsight are two different things, for sure, but in this case, they matched, and I don't think it was coincidental. I also think that when you have a team like Auburn playing UCF last year or Alabama entering the 2008 SEC championship game undefeated hoping to play for the national championship but instead having to play Utah in a bowl game, often you get a huge letdown and the result is unrepresentative of what that team was that year. But I don't think that happens in a game in the playoff.

In that year, 2015, if they had a single championship game instead of a playoff, I think it would've been fair. Alabama and Clemson had built the best resumes and looked head and shoulders above the rest going in. Had the old BCS system still been in place, few if anyone outside of a few hyperpartisan fans would've really claimed with a straight face that that game didn't result in a credible national champion.

If you do go back and look at prior years, I think you'd find it an interesting exercise (and an enjoyable trip down memory lane, where you find yourself thinking several times "oh, yeah, now I remember team/game/result"), and I think at the end of it you'll likely agree that it's very infrequent that you have any year in which a four team playoff is going to exclude someone who has as legit a claim to being there as any other team. (Having said that, I'll also say you'll find one year in there where I'll readily admit that wasn't the case. I think it was one of the most fun and enjoyable seasons in college football in a long, long, long time, with that being just one part of it.)



Back to 2015. Ohio State and Iowa did lose to Michigan State. At the time, there wasn't a stampede to put either of them into the playoff. Ohio State got past Northern Illinois 20-13, Western Michigan 38-12, Indiana 34-27, Minnesota 28-14 and Illinois 28-3 before that loss. None of those Big Ten teams ended up with a winning record and those MAC teams lost 5 and 6 games. (Ohio State was 5-7 against the spread that year; they didn't beat expectations that often, for whatever that's worth - which, if anything, would be an indication that they spent much of the season overrated.) Iowa had a great streak but seemed to have caught a lot of breaks. (Not to get sidetracked too much, but there's one way in which Iowa definitely did not catch a break that year. Iowa entered the Big Ten championship game 12-0, but was unranked for the first five weeks of the season, which speaks volumes about those polls in the early part of the season. Maybe that's a topic for another thread, or maybe this one.) Iowa's wins included 31-14 vs. Illinois State, 27-24 vs. Pitt, 35-27 vs. Indiana, 40-35 vs. Minnesota, 28-20 against Nebraska. I don't know that margin of victory itself sets teams apart, but at the same time, it's fair to consider a team's entire body of work and if a team is playing in a conference that hasn't established itself as that strong, and isn't setting itself apart in games, that probably should count for something. (For instance, this year, the ACC is roundly considered weak, for good reason. If Clemson wasn't beating most of its opponents very badly, would that team be as highly regarded as it is? If Clemson struggled against Wake Forest and/or Louisville this year, wouldn't that plant some fair doubt about that team?

Anyway, I don't think those Big Ten teams stacked up as equals to Alabama or Clemson that year (2015). I also don't think Alabama had the worst loss. Ole Miss was a 10 win team out of the SEC; I don't know that there are many years I'd consider a 10 win team out of the SEC to take a back seat against many Big Ten teams. And I also think going 7-1 in the SEC most years is going to be a more impressive credential than going 7-1 in the Big Ten.

Very good points. I agree. Thats why I would love to see more cross conference competition (I think you said the same) Just not enough time in a season.

Heres another crazy Idea, let the NCAA or some independent body do the scheduling some sort of rotation. A couple of cupcakes and 1 other power conference. Rotate the teams so no one gets hosed. Lots of ideas there.

[catfaninin]

This could easily be the year when there is a deserving team that does get left out. If things were to play out right we could have Clemson and Notre Dame undefeated. Michigan, Bama and UGA with one loss. I do expect all of those to happen with the exception of UGA beating Bama. But it would make for a good discussion if it did happen.

I'm sure most would say Notre Dame should be left out, (weak schedule, one less game). But if they are undefeated it's not happening. But the weak schedule would certainly apply to Clemson as well. Their's is probably worse than Notre Dame. The ACC is a complete dumpster fire.

[KevinHall]

Clemson's schedule is worse than ND's. Texas A&M is the best team Clemson has beat by far. Notre Dame's win over Michigan is looking better and better too. ND still has to go to USC on Thanksgiving weekend. USC isn't all that good but ND has always had trouble winning out in LA. Plenty of time for a lot chaos in the playoff picture.

[Westtncat]

Clemson's schedule is a joke. If strength of schedule is a big factor then there are one loss or even two-loss SEC teams that should be getting more consideration. Clemson barely beat A&M I would like to see them play Georgia or LSU.