SOS and the CFP Committee

[KansasSooner]

Then they would be ranked higher. And they didn't win their conference with 4 losses if those 4 losses were all in conference unless the better teams they lost to were banned from post season play.

So you really think rankings are be all to end all? How much higher was Alabama ranked than OU before the Sugar Bowl? How'd that work out? The poll rankings are much bigger joke than people realize.

 

[4down20]

I just can't fathom how anybody would want conference losers in a 4 team playoff. What's the point then, just let everybody play an independent schedule and see who looks the best.

Because conferences aren't equal. If they were equal and had the same strength year after year, that would be fine. But that's not the case in college football, it's not the NFL.

 

[4down20]

So you really think rankings are be all to end all? How much higher was Alabama ranked than OU before the Sugar Bowl? How'd that work out? The poll rankings are much bigger joke than people realize.

Alabama beat Ole Miss, who beat Texas, who beat Oklahoma, who beat Alabama. The never ending loop, they must all suck!

Yes, it's all about 1 game!!!!

 

[Lance Armstrong]

There is a difference between a team being good and being deserving. Better teams lose all the time, rankings is a matter of better season.

Or do you believe NCST was a better team than Florida St year before last?

Or if you want to play with Alabama and Oklahoma. Alabama beat Ole Miss, who beat Texas, who beat Oklahoma, who beat Alabama. The never ending loop, they must all suck!

No matter how you slice it, if you don't even win your conference you're not the best team in the country. You can have a fluke loss, but earning a conference title means you still might be the best team in the country. I understand why team SEC hates this, but if you don't like it leave the sec.

 

[WhiteMamba]

Give me a list of teams that have not won their conference, but went on to win the SB or World Series.

they didn't win their division but won the championship of their respective sports...

Same as Alabama, which was the best team that season.
NFL
1980 Raiders
1997 Broncos
2000 Ravens
2005 Steelers
2007 Giants
2010 Packers

MLB (WC came about in 1994)
1997 Marlins
2002 Angels
2004 Red Sox
2011 Cardinals

 

[4down20]

No matter how you slice it, if you don't even win your conference you're not the best team in the country. You can have a fluke loss, but earning a conference title means you still might be the best team in the country. I understand why team SEC hates this, but if you don't like it leave the sec.

You can have a fluke loss, just so long as it's not to the 2nd best team in the country apparently.

Loss to a team that only has a winning record because they beat you - on to the playoffs! Lose to a team that had 0 losses all year by a FG in OT - don't belong!!

 

[Lance Armstrong]

they didn't win their division but won their conference and the championship of their respective sports...

Same as Alabama, which was the best team that season.
NFL
1980 Raiders
1997 Broncos
2000 Ravens
2005 Steelers
2007 Giants
2010 Packers

MLB (WC came about in 1994)
1997 Marlins
2002 Angels
2004 Red Sox
2011 Cardinals

Yes, they won their conferences, all of them. Alabama wasn't the best team that year, LSU clearly had the better resume

Beat big east champ west virginia, who went on and smashed ACC champ in Orange Bowl
Beat PAC 12 champ oregon, who went on to beat big ten champ in Rose Bowl
Beat bama in their house, who went on to come in 3rd in the SEC

LSU was a mess going into the BCS title game, but still had an outstanding resume and was screwed.

 

[Boise4Life]

Yes, I'm against the committee and favor using BCS style rankings and taking the top 4.

Me too. And I think it needs to be the best 4 teams regardless of whether or not they won their conference. So if that means three SEC teams and one Pac 12/Big 12 team or something, then so be it. I'd like to see the BCS decide the top 4 as well as their seeding rather than some stupid 13 person committee with people like Condy Rice and Ty Willingham on it.

 

[Boise4Life]

Yes, they won their conferences, all of them. Alabama wasn't the best team that year, LSU clearly had the better resume

Beat big east champ west virginia, who went on and smashed ACC champ in Orange Bowl
Beat PAC 12 champ oregon, who went on to beat big ten champ in Rose Bowl
Beat bama in their house, who went on to come in 3rd in the SEC

LSU was a mess going into the BCS title game, but still had an outstanding resume and was screwed.

Yes Bama absolutely was the best that year. Well, that's where they ended up. LSU was the best team in the country until they got waxed in the title game.

Look Bama lost in OT to the #1 team in the country mainly because their kickers couldn't hit the broad side of a barn (4 missed field goals). No excuses though. They lost fair and square.

And I'm sorry but OK State lost to 6 and 7 Iowa freaking State. No other team finished undefeated outside of LSU. Everyone else blew it. Bama deserved to be in that game and they proved it by kicking LSU's ass and allowing them to cross midfield one time. And that was after the outcome had already been decided and they were in the prevent.

 

[WhiteMamba]

Yes, they won their conferences, all of them. Alabama wasn't the best team that year, LSU clearly had the better resume

Beat big east champ west virginia, who went on and smashed ACC champ in Orange Bowl
Beat PAC 12 champ oregon, who went on to beat big ten champ in Rose Bowl
Beat bama in their house, who went on to come in 3rd in the SEC

LSU was a mess going into the BCS title game, but still had an outstanding resume and was screwed.

Yes, but aren't you kind of ignoring the obvious?

They won their conference but not their own division. They were given a chance because they earned it and another team that was in that same division had a little bit better a year.

 

[rmilia1]

The ONLY 2 legit ways to do a playof are A) An 8 team playoff with winners of the BCS conferences getting auto bids and selecting 2 at larges OR B) Taking the top 4 teams in the BCS standings at years end BUT not having any kind of rankings until week 8 or 9 at the earliest. The inherent issue with just taking the top 4 is that a preseason bias will effect the outcome EVERY YEAR, which of course is fucking ludicrous. Those are the only 2 acceptable means of a CFB playoff. This committee garbage is going to blow up in their faces. Its different in CBB because while its fun to debate the merits of the bubble teams you really cant complain too much if you dont make a field of 68 teams. In CFB itll be exactly the opposite, with only 4 teams and all that money at stake there will be some crazy shit happening you can guarantee it.

 

[potzer25]

Win your conference or division to even be considered. No one should EVER be rewarded for not winning their division. EVER. End of story.

 

[WhiteMamba]

Win your conference or division to even be considered. No one should EVER be rewarded for not winning their division. EVER. End of story.

Just curious. In all sports or just CFB?

 

[trojanfight]

I think there should be more than 4 team...what college level sport has such a few number of teams in playoff? how much control is this committee going to have? are they going to be able to collectively put a 6 or 7 ranked team in playoff based on opinion. example Michigan st was #4 to end regular season. I don't know if you would get too many arguments if you inserted any team in top 10 over them in a potential playoff. any playoff that doesn't include a opportunity for a boise st type team isn't good enough. over their peak years boise beat Georgia, Oregon, and Oklahoma. just to name a few.

 

[Wild Turkey]

Just curious. In all sports or just CFB?

Life in general no exceptions!

 

[Rolltide94]

No matter how you slice it, if you don't even win your conference you're not the best team in the country. You can have a fluke loss, but earning a conference title means you still might be the best team in the country. I understand why team SEC hates this, but if you don't like it leave the sec.

Lol, yes, because we all know Team Big 12 has never sent anyone to the NC game that didn't win the Big 12 championship...lol, again.

 

[Rolltide94]

I think there should be more than 4 team...what college level sport has such a few number of teams in playoff? how much control is this committee going to have? are they going to be able to collectively put a 6 or 7 ranked team in playoff based on opinion. example Michigan st was #4 to end regular season. I don't know if you would get too many arguments if you inserted any team in top 10 over them in a potential playoff. any playoff that doesn't include a opportunity for a boise st type team isn't good enough. over their peak years boise beat Georgia, Oregon, and Oklahoma. just to name a few.

None of those teams were ranked higher than 6th...and that's 3 teams over 10 years...but who's counting.

 

[4down20]

Me too. And I think it needs to be the best 4 teams regardless of whether or not they won their conference. So if that means three SEC teams and one Pac 12/Big 12 team or something, then so be it. I'd like to see the BCS decide the top 4 as well as their seeding rather than some stupid 13 person committee with people like Condy Rice and Ty Willingham on it.

Yes it would also be fair for teams that aren't in an AQ conference so long as they make the top4. I'll always argue that they should have a good SoS to make it up there, but if they make it up there they should be in the playoffs.

 

[Boise4Life]

Yes it would also be fair for teams that aren't in an AQ conference so long as they make the top4. I'll always argue that they should have a good SoS to make it up there, but if they make it up there they should be in the playoffs.

The Boise and Utah teams wouldn't have gotten there, but the 2009 and 2010 TCU teams probably would have. In '09 TCU was #3 in the polls and 4th in the BCS heading into bowl season. In 2010 they were 3rd in both.

 

[4down20]

The Boise and Utah teams wouldn't have gotten there, but the 2009 and 2010 TCU teams probably would have. In '09 TCU was #3 in the polls and 4th in the BCS heading into bowl season. In 2010 they were 3rd in both.

Well I still think these teams need a little tougher schedules to deserve it. But if they meet that requirement, they should get the chance.