Mark Dantonio only wants conference champs in play-offs...

[The Authority]

did you just ask yourself a question?

lol, no. it was directed to the person I was conversing with.

 

[gpm1976]

FWIW I would have chosen Oklahoma State over Alabama that year.

OSU resume:
Record: 11-1
SOS: 5
Top 25 wins: 4
Top 50 wins: 7

Bama resume
Record: 11-1
SOS: 26
Top 25 wins: 2
Top 50 wins: 5

However, with that said Bama still would have deserved a spot in the playoff if there were one.

I disagree. They were a good team, but not only did they not win the conf, they didn't even win their division. They are automatically out. Regular season conf play has to count for something.

 

[ericd7633]

You are still rewarding Florida for losing to Georgia and at the same time punishing Georgia for beating UF.

Whoever lost that game and in turn lost the division would be better off.

That makes no sense.

Your way makes it way more complicated

Had UGA beaten South Carolina in the regular season they would have gone to the SEC CG unbeaten and no matter what happened they would have been in a 4 team playoff. Or had they beaten Bama they would have been included. It gave them another opportunity to make it. Like I said, IMO Florida had a better resume heading into the SEC CG. UGA needed that win to enhance their resume. If there was no SEC CG all 3 would have been in the playoff more than likely. They were ranked 2, 3, and 4 respectively heading into that week.

I just want the most deserving teams. Sure it's going to make it harder for the committee. But it should be, it's their job. I don't want them to only have to choose between 5 teams when it'll be obvious who the best 4 teams will be who won their conference. It's just really lame to do it that way.

Had MSU and Wisconsin ended up in the B1G CG 12-0 the loser of that game more than likely would have deserved to be in the discussion. Why automatically eliminate them just to make room for a 2 loss conference champ? That's dumb. Who cares if we get an MSU/Wisconsin rematch.

 

[ericd7633]

Care to address this flaw in your logic?

See below. Going in order here.

 

[ericd7633]

I disagree. They were a good team, but not only did they not win the conf, they didn't even win their division. They are automatically out. Regular season conf play has to count for something.

Then we'll have to disagree. In no way did the B1G or the ACC deserve a team in the playoff that year.

 

[The Authority]

Had UGA beaten South Carolina in the regular season they would have gone to the SEC CG unbeaten and no matter what happened they would have been in a 4 team playoff. Or had they beaten Bama they would have been included. It gave them another opportunity to make it. Like I said, IMO Florida had a better resume heading into the SEC CG. UGA needed that win to enhance their resume. If there was no SEC CG all 3 would have been in the playoff more than likely. They were ranked 2, 3, and 4 respectively heading into that week.

I just want the most deserving teams. Sure it's going to make it harder for the committee. But it should be, it's their job. I don't want them to only have to choose between 5 teams when it'll be obvious who the best 4 teams will be who won their conference. It's just really lame to do it that way.

Had MSU and Wisconsin ended up in the B1G CG 12-0 the loser of that game more than likely would have deserved to be in the discussion. Why automatically eliminate them just to make room for a 2 loss conference champ? That's dumb. Who cares if we get an MSU/Wisconsin rematch.

You are side stepping your flawed logic by bringing up more hypothetical outcomes that didn't happen.

That doesn't fly. The bottom line is that your logic is rewarding teams for losing. And to me, That is even dumber.

Its not dumb at all to eliminate non conference winners. It's a specific goal that each team has to achieve.

More deserving is just a subjective cluster fuck. even the data you are using to determine who is more deserving is subjective.

Every other playoff scenario works by way of conference winners. Why should CFB be different?

 

[The Authority]

Why automatically eliminate them just to make room for a 2 loss conference champ? That's dumb. Who cares if we get an MSU/Wisconsin rematch.

because we don't know if the 2 loss team is better than the 1 loss team.

The bottom line is that the 1 loss CCG loser didn't do what was needed to be done to make it to the playoff and if this was the criteria going in they couldn't complain to anyone but themselves for losing.

 

[ericd7633]

You are side stepping your flawed logic by bringing up more hypothetical outcomes that didn't happen.

That doesn't fly. The bottom line is that your logic is rewarding teams for losing. And to me, That is even dumber.

Its not dumb at all to eliminate non conference winners. It's a specific goal that each team has to achieve.

More deserving is just a subjective cluster fuck. even the data you are using to determine who is more deserving is subjective.

Every other playoff scenario works by way of conference winners. Why should CFB be different?

Then we'll just have to let it play out and see what the committee does. I want them best teams. You don't. And that's fine. I don't think it's really hard to determine if a 1 loss team is better than a 2 loss conference champion. Just like in 2006 when Michigan at 11-1 clearly would have deserved to get chosen over a 2 loss Wake Forest(ACC Champ) and a 2 loss OU(Big 12 Champ)

 

[gpm1976]

Then we'll have to disagree. In no way did the B1G or the ACC deserve a team in the playoff that year.

Ok, so because we think they're the best two teams, we have to keep watching that crap until one of them wins and we call it a year?

I don't wanna see the same boring games again and again. I don't care anyone thinks the better team is being left out.. I just don't wanna keep watching those same teams over and over again. You had your shot and you came up short. Tough $hit!

 

[ericd7633]

Ok, so because we think they're the best two teams, we have to keep watching that crap until one of them wins and we call it a year?

I don't wanna see the same boring games again and again. I don't care anyone thinks the better team is being left out.. I just don't wanna keep watching those same teams over and over again. You had your shot and you came up short. Tough $hit!

How about placing some blame on the ACC for having a 3 loss champion? Or on the B1G for having a 2 loss champion? Both of those teams had their shot and came up short multiple times. Or the fact that Wisconsin didn't play anybody of note that year OOC? Neither the ACC or B1G champion was considered a top 15 team that year according to the computers.

 

[gpm1976]

How about placing some blame on the ACC for having a 3 loss champion? Or on the B1G for having a 2 loss champion? Both of those teams had their shot and came up short multiple times. Or the fact that Wisconsin didn't play anybody of note that year OOC? Neither the ACC or B1G champion was considered a top 15 team that year according to the computers.

Don't need to blame anyone. It's college football, this stuff is supposed to happen. Sounds to me like you just want to grab the top 4 or 5 loaded/athletic teams(No matter how they do in the regular season) and watch them go at it. If this is the case, you need to switch over and just start watching the NFL. College is more fun when you mix it up and watch teams like Boise and Utah come in and win games against team they have no business winning. I still don't like the idea of playoff in CFB and in the end it will solve nothing. We'll all still be in here bitching that the best team didn't win it all + plus we'll be pissed when other teams w/late season surges didn't get in.

 

[ericd7633]

Don't need to blame anyone. It's college football, this stuff is supposed to happen. Sounds to me like you just want to grab the top 4 or 5 loaded/athletic teams(No matter how they do in the regular season) and watch them go at it. If this is the case, you need to switch over and just start watching the NFL. College is more fun when you mix it up and watch teams like Boise and Utah come in and win games against team they have no business winning. I still don't like the idea of playoff in CFB and in the end it will solve nothing. We'll all still be in here bitching that the best team didn't win it all + plus we'll be pissed when other teams w/late season surges didn't get in.

That is the exact opposite of what I want to happen. I want the most deserving teams to make it. If Boise State or Utah(in the past) is deemed most deserving based on the results from the regular season, I'm fine with them being including. I don't want to see a 3/4 loss team make it in over a 1 loss team, and I doubt we'll ever see that.

 

[gpm1976]

That is the exact opposite of what I want to happen. I want the most deserving teams to make it. If Boise State or Utah(in the past) is deemed most deserving based on the results from the regular season, I'm fine with them being including. I don't want to see a 3/4 loss team make it in over a 1 loss team, and I doubt we'll ever see that.

But when you start tossing in SOS and all that other stuff, you're going to eliminate the smaller teams. I'm not in favor of having any conf. send more than one team... There's just no room.

 

[ericd7633]

But when you start tossing in SOS and all that other stuff, you're going to eliminate the smaller teams. I'm not in favor of having any conf. send more than one team... There's just no room.

Then blame those small schools for not scheduling tougher OOC opponents, or in BYU's case schedule tougher opponents overall since they are an independent program. And if those small schools do schedule tough opponents they have to win them, and win them all. I give great credit to East Carolina for scheduling South Carolina, Va. Tech and UNC. However, for them to have any hope they have to win them all. A 12-0 East Carolina would be an interesting conversation, but they aren't, so it won't.

 

[gpm1976]

Then blame those small schools for not scheduling tougher OOC opponents, or in BYU's case schedule tougher opponents overall since they are an independent program. And if those small schools do schedule tough opponents they have to win them, and win them all. I give great credit to East Carolina for scheduling South Carolina, Va. Tech and UNC. However, for them to have any hope they have to win them all. A 12-0 East Carolina would be an interesting conversation, but they aren't, so it won't.

But that's just it. You can't say my conf is tough and not play anyone decent OOC... which is what you have a LOT of happening lately.

 

[The Authority]

Then we'll just have to let it play out and see what the committee does. I want them best teams. You don't. And that's fine. I don't think it's really hard to determine if a 1 loss team is better than a 2 loss conference champion. Just like in 2006 when Michigan at 11-1 clearly would have deserved to get chosen over a 2 loss Wake Forest(ACC Champ) and a 2 loss OU(Big 12 Champ)

If a team doesn't win their conference let alone their division they are obviously not the best teams.

 

[The Authority]

How about placing some blame on the ACC for having a 3 loss champion? Or on the B1G for having a 2 loss champion? Both of those teams had their shot and came up short multiple times. Or the fact that Wisconsin didn't play anybody of note that year OOC? Neither the ACC or B1G champion was considered a top 15 team that year according to the computers.

Why do you keep referring to an anomaly year.

You keep using the same example based on a one year event that will likely never happen again.

That is a failed argument.

 

[ericd7633]

But that's just it. You can't say my conf is tough and not play anyone decent OOC... which is what you have a LOT of happening lately.

What conference has done that though? All the conferences for the most part play about the same P5 schools:

ACC: 30% of OOC games are against P5 schools
Big 12: 30% of OOC games are against P5 schools
B1G: 30% of OOC games are against P5 schools
SEC: 20% of OOC games are against p5 schools - Vandy, Ole Miss, Miss State and Texas A&M play zero
Pac 12: 32% of OOC games are against P5 schools

The SEC has played roughly 10-12% less P5 schools this year, but the other conferences were all about the same.

 

[ericd7633]

If a team doesn't win their conference let alone their division they are obviously not the best teams.

Don't have to be the most deserving team, just one of the top 4, which Michigan was, and Wake Forest and OU were not.

 

[The Authority]

Don't have to be the most deserving team, just one of the top 4, which Michigan was, and Wake Forest and OU were not.

Michigan didn't do what it needed to. ITs black and white.

You want all this Grey Bullshit.