belcherboy
Well-Known Member
Because I'm old and it didn't stick out to me when I looked at their schedule.
Yeah, probably because Oregon St is 2-16 over the last two seasons.
Not all P5's are created equal.
Because I'm old and it didn't stick out to me when I looked at their schedule.
I personally think a G5 team like UCF would need two of three of those type wins to get in...unless their conference ended up have 3-4 teams ranked fairly high. JMO.It depends entirely on three things:
1. Who did they play non-conference? For example, if UCF had played someone last year like USC or Wisconsin non-conference and knocked them off and went unbeaten, things might've been different. Unfortunately, Maryland lost all their QBs and fell apart last year.
2. What's the rest of their conference doing? Are there other ranked teams who have beaten a really good P5 or been competitive with an elite P5?
3. What do the P5 champs look like? Do we have a 2-loss champ or a really uninspiring 1-loss?
I personally think a G5 team like UCF would need two of three of those type wins to get in...unless their conference ended up have 3-4 teams ranked fairly high. JMO.
I understand that. And it could be a bad opinion on my part that I dont consider Lousiville to BIG OOC game either. And that is who Bama chose for this year.Maybe it's just a bad opinion on my part, but I don't consider NC State and Maryland a BIG OOC game. Good games, no doubt, but far from playing a top 25 team (although both have had a good year in the past 4-5 seasons)
Hell no. Their overall schedule has been damn strong thanks to the SEC being strong for a while. Their OOC hasn't been too swift...but most of the time it is not any worse than most P5s. Better than a lot of 'em.So, do you think that Bama's schedule has been traditionally weak, and they need another P5 team on their schedule?
that big OOC win at the beginning of the season.
No they aren't. Truth be told, several of 'em are worse than the top of G5.Not all P5's are created equal.
Sure seems to me like a mixed message to me.It doesn't matter to me, but that is the rule. I'm good with it.
Yep. If you have two or three other conference members that have played very difficult P5 teams on the road and won, beating them might get you some credit too. So to a certain extent a G5 is even more at the mercy of their conference quality than the P5 are.I agree with that. If you are in a G5 conference, you just have to bite the bullet and play at least two TOUGH P5 teams..likely on the road, each season. The other 1-2 OOC games would have to be P5 teams as well.
I understand that. And it could be a bad opinion on my part that I dont consider Lousiville to BIG OOC game either. And that is who Bama chose for this year.
Hell no. Their overall schedule has been damn strong thanks to the SEC being strong for a while. Their OOC hasn't been too swift...but most of the time it is not any worse than most P5s. Better than a lot of 'em.
What I'm saying is if their conference provides a strong enough SOS to get a CFP selection, why risk even scheduling one tough OOC game if that is the thinking? And if you are using the "insurance policy" rationale, then two good OOCs would be better "insurance" than one.
Now that I look at it, those "big OOC wins at the bginning of the season" haven't turned out to be too competitive to be honest. They may have intended for them to be when they scheduled them, but not one of them have been less than double digit wins going back to 2012.
2012 Michigan 41-14
2013 Va Tech 35-10
2014 West Virginia 33-23
2015 Wisconsin 35-17
2016 USC 52-6
2017 Florida State 24-7
2018 Louisville 51-14
No they aren't. Truth be told, several of 'em are worse than the top of G5.
But, they are considered good by association through conference membership with the big boys.
Maybe so, but they didn't even have to play those to have a good enough SOS.I just disagree. Their schedule has been STELLAR the past 8 years. They played Wisconsin, Michigan, Virginia Tech, USC, Florida St, West Virginia just off the top of my head. All those are top notch programs.
Sure seems to me like a mixed message to me.
"We charge you you with selecting the four best teams for the playoffs. However, if the four best teams are from the same conference, please exchange #3 and #4 and place #5 and #6 in their slots. So,really just select the two best and then figure the other two out."
Maybe so, but they didn't even have to play those to have a good enough SOS.
And when you water it down with the rest of the shit they've had OOC, it starts to smell.
But, I ain't blaming Bama. That's the system.
You've lost your mind Wiz. Percpetion becomes reality. Conferences write 'em a big ass check to be a member of that country club. If you are a member at Augusta National, you rank...even if your handicap is 36. Good by association.
There isn't anyone that would deny there are a handful of G5 teams that would mop up a handful of P5 teams. No one considers all P5 teams 'good' by association. What those teams have though is a schedule that is much tougher than pretty much every G5 and so trying to compare record to record to figure out where each ranks is misleading.
There are G5 teams that beat mid/lower tier P5 teams every year.
See, here's the tricky part again...Sure seems to me like a mixed message to me.
"We charge you you with selecting the four best teams for the playoffs. However, if the four best teams are from the same conference, please exchange #3 and #4 and place #5 and #6 in their slots. So,really just select the two best and then figure the other two out."
I'm good with the current set up as well. I personally think they've gotten it right every year.I like the current set up.
Makes total sense...especially the "so little cross conference play." That really puts them in the Sophisticated Wild Ass Guess bind. They do the best they can with that limited data.See, here's the tricky part again...
The P5 conferences are not created equal. Yes, that should be obvious, but it's profound when it comes to doing this top level final 4 selection. There is so little cross conference play that it is mostly eye test from one entirely different group against another.
While I wouldn't have a problem with 3 SEC teams going in if they were indeed seen as 3 of the top 4, I also don't have a big problem with limiting it to 2 with the idea that optics may be skewed drawing too many from one closed pool.
The other way to look at it is you are already taking one team that didn't win their conference so select the best of the ones remaining and tell #3 to do more next year and make at least their top 2.
So you think Rutgers, Oregon State, Vandy, Kansas, Wake, etc... are ALL seen as good teams because of the leagues they are in? Not a chance. All are beat up regularly. Hell, we see some of them as being lucky to beat FCS teams on their slate, more or less looking at them as being automatically better than all G5's simply because of the conference they are in.You've lost your mind Wiz. Percpetion becomes reality. Conferences write 'em a big ass check to be a member of that country club. If you are a member at Augusta National, you rank...even if your handicap is 36. Good by association.
What's pathetic is how bad some of 'em are with all the resources that come with being P5.
That said, I'd agree with you 100% about that schedule. G5s wouldn't survive that grind any better than many of the P5 do. It is highly unlikely UCF would have lost less than two games in every P5 conference last year. (Frost probably knows full well they'd have beaten Nebraska...but I digress.)
It's difficult because Alabama finished 3rd in the conference and didn't even play in the conference title game while Ohio State has one bad loss, yet plays AND WINS their conference title and gets overlooked. If you cant even make it to your own conference title game, I don't think you should make it to the playoff. The committee is setting a precedent where Conference titles mean shit and that's not right in my opinion. If you don't win your division, you shouldn't be considered for a playoff spot.
No, you are just wrong.
As I already laid out, it was to end split championships and also prevent teams like BYU in '84 from being crowned.
And it has done so quite well. We no longer have ties and the winners have all had to prove it on the field. BYU didn't have to prove they were a champion. They played a terrible schedule.
People are bitching over whether #5 or #6 should have been in and that is entirely trivial. Completely.
You get 4 of the top teams in the country playing head to head. You have to beat 2 of the 3 to win a title. You are battle tested in the best possible way and have EARNED that title. Of course some teams make it in and end up being blown out or otherwise not looking like they belong. They are weeded out. It works.