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

[The Authority]

Not all conference champs are created equal.

So I guess you would have been alright with an 11-2 Va Tech team that lost to James Madison and won the ACC that was terrible that year get selected over an 11-1 Ohio State who finished as the "runner up" in a better conference and played a tougher SOS?

Yes as long as I know going in that winning your conference is a criteria.

If Ohio state didn't win the B1G then no they shouldn't go.

 

[The Authority]

I would agree if a 5-loss Wisconsin team didn't win the Big 10 a couple years ago.

Imagine if that happened in a couple Conferences in the same season. They'd then be left with being forced to take a 5-loss team into the playoffs over possibly a 1-loss SEC team for instance.

There are holes in this idea.

It only happend in one conference because of one reason. TWO teams were ineligible. Having it happen in two conferences is pretty much impossible and even it it did. Chalk it up to a crazy year.

 

[ericd7633]

Yes as long as I know going in that winning your conference is a criteria.

If Ohio state didn't win the B1G then no they shouldn't go.

So if it came down to that Va Tech team and that Ohio State team you are selecting Va Tech then I take it?

 

[The Authority]

So if it came down to that Va Tech team and that Ohio State team you are selecting Va Tech then I take it?

There wouldn't be any selecting to do. Ohio State wouldn't have met the criteria.

And chances are VT wouldn't be one of the Conference champs to be selected either based on who they lost too.

 

[ericd7633]

There wouldn't be any selecting to do. Ohio State wouldn't have met the criteria.

That's not answering the question. And nobody knows what the criteria is. You think conference champs are the way to go, so you obviously think that 2010 Va Tech team that lost to JMU was better than that 2010 Ohio State team, correct?

 

[ericd7633]

There wouldn't be any selecting to do. Ohio State wouldn't have met the criteria.

And chances are VT wouldn't be one of the Conference champs to be selected either based on who they lost too.

Yeah no shit VT wouldn't have been selected that year. They weren't that good and the ACC sucked that year. That's my point.

 

[The Authority]

That's not answering the question. And nobody knows what the criteria is. You think conference champs are the way to go, so you obviously think that 2010 Va Tech team that lost to JMU was better than that 2010 Ohio State team, correct?

If they don't play I have no idea who is better. Especially at the end of the season.

 

[The Authority]

Yeah no shit VT wouldn't have been selected that year. They weren't that good and the ACC sucked that year. That's my point.

Your point is that you are trying to add in more than just conference champs to the mix.

I'm saying that makes it too much more of a guessing game.

 

[The Authority]

Was Florida better than Louisville (who had lost to UCONN) in 2012?

 

[Used 2 B Hu]

Do you think there is a better team than Michigan State in the b1g?

A simple yes or no will do.

I think 99% of cfb fans would agree that MSU is the best in the b1g.

They are the reigning champ and look pretty tough.

Honestly, I think the Badgers are better.

 

[WhiteMamba]

Honestly, I think the Badgers are better.

Ok. Respect that.

You may very well be right.

MSU and Wisky appear to be 1 and 2 in any order IMO.

 

[rmilia1]

FWIW I do not think ONLY conference champions should be eligible for playoffs but I 100% think that that should be a big criteria when evaluating teams. We are selecting 4 teams to compete for a national title. The ability to win a title should certainly be a part of the criteria and while it isnt the number 1 thing Id look at I cant fathom people who find it insignificant. Probably more importantly I dont want to see a 12-0 conference title game loser penalized for losing to another great team in favor of a 11-1 team who didnt have to play that extra game. IE

11-1 Auburn with an SOS of 13 and their loss to number 1 Bama should NOT go ahead of 12-1 Oregon with an SOS of 25 and their loss to number 4 UCLA. Should NOT happen. EVER, If the numbers are even remotely close then preference should always be given to the team that had to play that extra game even if they lost it.

 

[ericd7633]

If they don't play I have no idea who is better. Especially at the end of the season.

Alright taking out of the equation who's better, who's more deserving? That's what the committee will be doing. Looking at resumes. The only thing Va can claim is they won a shitty conference that year and lost to JMU on top of it.

And I'm not even going to include the fact that Va Tech got their ass whooped in the Orange Bowl and Ohio State won the Sugar Bowl that year.

 

[WhiteMamba]

Was Florida better than Louisville (who had lost to UCONN) in 2012?

"Yes, Florida was better than Ville that year. Florida just didn't want to be there."

~Team SEC

 

[The Authority]

Alright taking out of the equation who's better, who's more deserving? That's what the committee will be doing. Looking at resumes. The only thing Va can claim is they won a shitty conference that year and lost to JMU on top of it.

And I'm not even going to include the fact that Va Tech got their ass whooped in the Orange Bowl and Ohio State won the Sugar Bowl that year.

I think I have already made my position clear. I believe that being a conference winner should be a criteria and I guess by that stance I am saying conference winners are more deserving.

and Again, in your scenario Va tech more than likely wouldn't be going. The conference winners of the other conferences would be.

 

[WhiteMamba]

Agree rmilia

You shouldn't get a pass for winning a bad conference. The reality is, all conferences are not equal like we all know.

But it certainly should be a part of an equation. Not a be all requirement however.

 

[ericd7633]

Was Florida better than Louisville (who had lost to UCONN) in 2012?

Going into bowl season Florida was more deserving than Louisville that's for damn sure.

Florida SOS: 6
Top 25 wins: 4
Top 50 wins: 5

Louisville SOS: 144
Top 25 wins: 0
Top 50 wins: 2

But the committee should have selected Louisville because they won their shitty conference?

Also Florida was 11-1 and Louisville was 10-2.

Quite frankly that's a weak example.

 

[The Authority]

Going into bowl season Florida was more deserving than Louisville that's for damn sure.

Florida SOS: 6
Top 25 wins: 4
Top 50 wins: 5

Louisville SOS: 144
Top 25 wins: 0
Top 50 wins: 2

But the committee should have selected Louisville because they won their shitty conference?

Also Florida was 11-1 and Louisville was 10-2.

Quite frankly that's a weak example.

And who won the head to head, and By how much ?

That just proves that your more deserving argument doesn't mean jack shit.

 

[ericd7633]

I think I have already made my position clear. I believe that being a conference winner should be a criteria and I guess by that stance I am saying conference winners are more deserving.

and Again, in your scenario Va tech more than likely wouldn't be going. The conference winners of the other conferences would be.

Then if it's clear you would have taken FSU over Florida in 2012 even though Florida beat the shit out of them one week prior to the CCG.

And Wisconsin won the B1G that year at 8-5 so FSU would have been the next logical choice as conference champion criteria.

 

[Used 2 B Hu]

Ok. Respect that.

You may very well be right.

MSU and Wisky appear to be 1 and 2 in any order IMO.

Hopefully that's the B1G title game we get to see in December. But they both have some tough games coming up. If not for that fourth quarter against Loser State U...