This conference champion getting an automatic bid

[tc1]

Yes, I get it, CFB different than the pro sports as more teams.....but realistically, many of those 134 know they have no shot nor should they.

One would be extremely hard-pressed to find anyone -- even on the teams -- who would have seriously suggested last August that SMU, Indiana, Arizona State, or Boise State had a shot at a championship. And here they are, with precisely that. Just a few years ago, no less than Eric Dickerson was suggesting that SMU should stop playing football entirely. Very recently, SMU didn't even have a conference to play in.

I doubt you'd have found anyone who believed that UCF could be a national champion. Or TCU. Or Utah. Yet all have shares.

Cool....let Oregon claim their fake title if they want should that happen.

It's not a fake title. It is recognized by the NCAA, and recorded in their official record book. Why is this so difficult for a few people here to grasp?

OSU for sure could claim a stronger resume in that situation, among a few others. Hell, it's fair to say nearly anyone who ran the gauntlet could make a stronger case than Oregon, especially if Oregon lost in their first game.

I flatly disagree. The resumes just do not support this claim.

A shame for whom?

For Oregon, certainly. But also for everyone who is invested in seeing college football teams properly rewarded for their accomplishments. If we don't really care about that -- and maybe we don't -- let's abolish the whole playoff idea, and go back to a couple dozen bowl games so that more teams can finish undefeated and claim whatever they like.

Would think most get where we are in CFB now. But again by all means recognize what would be a fake title however they want if it makes them happy.

Again, still not a fake title.

 

[dtgold88]

One would be extremely hard-pressed to find anyone -- even on the teams -- who would have seriously suggested last August that SMU, Indiana, Arizona State, or Boise State had a shot at a championship. And here they are, with precisely that. Just a few years ago, no less than Eric Dickerson was suggesting that SMU should stop playing football entirely. Very recently, SMU didn't even have a conference to play in.

I doubt you'd have found anyone who believed that UCF could be a national champion. Or TCU. Or Utah. Yet all have shares.



It's not a fake title. It is recognized by the NCAA, and recorded in their official record book. Why is this so difficult for a few people here to grasp?



I flatly disagree. The resumes just do not support this claim.



For Oregon, certainly. But also for everyone who is invested in seeing college football teams properly rewarded for their accomplishments. If we don't really care about that -- and maybe we don't -- let's abolish the whole playoff idea, and go back to a couple dozen bowl games so that more teams can finish undefeated and claim whatever they like.



Again, still not a fake title.

Totally agree with your first comment and walked back my comment. That's what one does when he/she realizes might have made a mistake or used faulty logic. You know, like thinking a champ should be decided by resume and not an actual playoff.

That's cool about those with shares but in many cases those shares were worthless.

It's a fake title....same as the potential Oregon fake title.

If OSU beats TN, Oregon, Texas and UGA (along with CFP teams PSU and IU) that's not a better resume than Oregon who would have beaten OSU (home, not neutral) and PSU (neutral while OSU won AT PSU)? At this point you have to be joking.

Again...still fake or not a title if you prefer that wording. Just curious.....do you see Oregon losing and if that happens their coaches, players and fans being excited about said fake title or resume title?

 

[tc1]

How does your scenario make it rigged?

Well again, that was not a case that I was trying to make. Last year, yes, definitely rigged.

With respect to this season, this playoff bracket is highly questionable. I'm sure that google can find you any number of articles illustrating how the tournament seeding has resulted in Oregon facing arguably the toughest path, when the opposite should be the case.

Yes, it is the first season this has happened....likely because the format has been changed and it's been long overdue. Are you just among the many who have railed for years over a playoff and never wanting one?

No, I am not. I think a playoff is a good idea -- but, if the implementation of a good idea turns out to be impossible, that good idea might be better left alone. I'm not certain that it is impossible to design a playoff system for college football that works every season, but I'm becoming increasingly convinced that it is either impossible, or the universe simply hates the Committee and keeps conspiring to break each new design they invent.

Basically, if we have all this sturm and drang over a tournament intended to produce an undisputed champion, then it should do that. I'm not sure this one will. If such cannot be built, maybe the old "bowls-and-polls" system was, in fact, superior.

if up to you just hand the trophy to Oregon now and be done?

Like I said, I think they've already earned the various math-based titles -- barring, I guess, an unprecedented string of blowouts by one team. I think many scenarios should result in split polls come January 21st.

Put another way, if Oregon does finish this season 16-0, having successfully navigated the arguably-unfair path they've been "awarded" in this tournament, they are definitely in the conversation for "Best Team Ever".

 

[dtgold88]

Well again, that was not a case that I was trying to make. Last year, yes, definitely rigged.

With respect to this season, this playoff bracket is highly questionable. I'm sure that google can find you any number of articles illustrating how the tournament seeding has resulted in Oregon facing arguably the toughest path, when the opposite should be the case.



No, I am not. I think a playoff is a good idea -- but, if the implementation of a good idea turns out to be impossible, that good idea might be better left alone. I'm not certain that it is impossible to design a playoff system for college football that works every season, but I'm becoming increasingly convinced that it is either impossible, or the universe simply hates the Committee and keeps conspiring to break each new design they invent.

Basically, if we have all this sturm and drang over a tournament intended to produce an undisputed champion, then it should do that. I'm not sure this one will. If such cannot be built, maybe the old "bowls-and-polls" system was, in fact, superior.



Like I said, I think they've already earned the various math-based titles -- barring, I guess, an unprecedented string of blowouts by one team. I think many scenarios should result in split polls come January 21st.

Put another way, if Oregon does finish this season 16-0, having successfully navigated the arguably-unfair path they've been "awarded" in this tournament, they are definitely in the conversation for "Best Team Ever".

This is still not something that qualifies as rigged (nor was last year). I'm thinking what you think should have happened would have been closer to it being rigged. Sounds like you are suggesting that even though the CFP ranks OSU and TN as their 8-9th seeds who would then play #1 if they win you think they should have redone the entire field to make sure Oregon was taken care of?

You sound like while you rail against a rigged system you want them to rig the system.

To you it might not be undisputed but to most they get it.....no playoff system is perfect. But the winner of a playoff is the champ. You think voting for a champ is more fair than playing it out on the field?

That's cool you think that and of course your right to that opinion.....my right to think it's kooky talk.

Personally, I don't think this Oregon team is in the conversation for best team ever no matter what they do. Hard to believe better than the Miami OR OSU teams who matched up in 2002 on a field littered with future NFL stars. That Bama team from a few years ago might be in the conversation, as well. But, sure, would be impressive if OU finished 16-0 for sure. And, yeah, the toughest road to a title ever so far. But you wantr them to be one and done and rewarded.

 

[tc1]

Totally agree with your first comment and walked back my comment. That's what one does when he/she realizes might have made a mistake or used faulty logic. You know, like thinking a champ should be decided by resume and not an actual playoff.

This is not "me thinking" that -- again, for the nth time, the NCAA officially recognizes a dozen different championship selectors, and a bunch of them consider the entire season, not just the last game.

If you don't like this, fine -- take your dispute up with the NCAA and/or the owners of those selection mechanisms. But your continued inability to process this information is borderline cognitive dissonance.

It's a fake title....same as the potential Oregon fake title.

See above re: cognitive dissonance.

If OSU beats TN, Oregon, Texas and UGA (along with CFP teams PSU and IU) that's not a better resume than Oregon who would have beaten OSU (home, not neutral) and PSU (neutral while OSU won AT PSU)? At this point you have to be joking.

If you leave out half of one team's resume, that effects your analysis -- Oregon would also have wins over Boise State, and Illinois. Oregon would have also not lost to Michigan (at home). In fact, Oregon beat Michigan by 3 touchdowns in the Big House.

So on one hand, you have 6 quality wins with two losses, one a bad home loss, and a head-to-head split, versus 4 quality wins, just one very good loss, a head-to-head split. That is, at worst, very close.

Again...still fake or not a title if you prefer that wording. Just curious.....do you see Oregon losing and if that happens their coaches, players and fans being excited about said fake title or resume title?

No idea -- I don't personally know any Oregon coaches, players, or fans.

 

[tc1]

This is still not something that qualifies as rigged (nor was last year).

You are using definitions of these words which do not appear in any English dictionary. This may have something to do with why you are having a hard time understanding the issue(s).

I'm thinking what you think should have happened would have been closer to it being rigged. Sounds like you are suggesting that even though the CFP ranks OSU and TN as their 8-9th seeds who would then play #1 if they win you think they should have redone the entire field to make sure Oregon was taken care of?

No, not remotely. Again, google can find you any number of explanations of the issues with the bracket -- I should not need to explain those to you.

You sound like while you rail against a rigged system you want them to rig the system.

Do better than this, or don't expect further discussion.

To you it might not be undisputed but to most they get it.....no playoff system is perfect. But the winner of a playoff is the champ.

Again, not per the NCAA. I am probably going to have to stop repeating this soon, for the sake of the disks hosting this site.

You think voting for a champ is more fair than playing it out on the field?

It might be -- if whoever is setting up the games on the field is rigging the competition.

And, yeah, the toughest road to a title ever so far. But you wantr them to be one and done and rewarded.

More like "13 or 14 or 15-1" and rewarded -- which again, has historically been sufficient to claim a title share, if accomplished against the toughest schedule.

 

[dtgold88]

This is not "me thinking" that -- again, for the nth time, the NCAA officially recognizes a dozen different championship selectors, and a bunch of them consider the entire season, not just the last game.

If you don't like this, fine -- take your dispute up with the NCAA and/or the owners of those selection mechanisms. But your continued inability to process this information is borderline cognitive dissonance.



See above re: cognitive dissonance.



If you leave out half of one team's resume, that effects your analysis -- Oregon would also have wins over Boise State, and Illinois. Oregon would have also not lost to Michigan (at home). In fact, Oregon beat Michigan by 3 touchdowns in the Big House.

So on one hand, you have 6 quality wins with two losses, one a bad home loss, and a head-to-head split, versus 4 quality wins, just one very good loss, a head-to-head split. That is, at worst, very close.



No idea -- I don't personally know any Oregon coaches, players, or fans.

again for the nth time the NCAA recognizes the winner of the CFP the champ. Something tells me even the team you want to give the fake title to wouldn't care about it.

It's kind of funny you think I need to take my issue up with the NCAA when I'm fine with how things are. Winner on field in CFP is the champ. You want to offer fake resume titles that not even the team you want to give it top would care.

In this scenario Oregon best wins are OSU and BSU (both at home and barely won), along with PSU (neutral) and Illinois.
OSU best wins would be Oregon (neutral...and does it help if by 2-3 scores?), PSU (road), Indiana, UGA, TN and Texas. But losing to their rival jumps Oregon above them?

I don't know them either (well are a couple UO fans here) but my opinion is none would care. I know I would not care about a resume title without actually winning the title. But if that's your dream season that's cool.

 

[dtgold88]

You are using definitions of these words which do not appear in any English dictionary. This may have something to do with why you are having a hard time understanding the issue(s).



No, not remotely. Again, google can find you any number of explanations of the issues with the bracket -- I should not need to explain those to you.


Do better than this, or don't expect further discussion.



Again, not per the NCAA. I am probably going to have to stop repeating this soon, for the sake of the disks hosting this site.



It might be -- if whoever is setting up the games on the field is rigging the competition.




More like "13 or 14 or 15-1" and rewarded -- which again, has historically been sufficient to claim a title share, if accomplished against the toughest schedule.

wait.....so I should use some fake definition of rigged and ignore that you are lobbying for a rigged system while crying about a system as rigged that wasn't?

had to stop reading after that one. It's beyond next level at this point for you.

 

[tc1]

So am I to assume that if ND beats Oregon, in your world Oregon is still the champion (or just the resume champ)?

In that scenario, Oregon would almost-certainly take home all of the math-based championships, like Colley Matrix. They would have a vastly better resume, as previously detailed, so unless the game was 50-0 Notre Dame or something, yes, I believe 15-1 Oregon would deserve at least a share of the title.

Otherwise, they would be the only team in history, as far as I know, to win 15 or more games in a season and not win a championship -- and they'd have done it against the toughest schedule by far.

 

[tc1]

again for the nth time the NCAA recognizes the winner of the CFP the champ.

No, the NCAA does not. College football national championships in NCAA Division I FBS - Wikipedia

Something tells me even the team you want to give the fake title to wouldn't care about it.

Well, something also apparently tells you definitions of words that do not exist anywhere else, so maybe we shouldn't worry too much about the voices in your head. Jus' sayin'.

In this scenario Oregon best wins are OSU and BSU (both at home and barely won), along with PSU (neutral) and Illinois.
OSU best wins would be Oregon (neutral...and does it help if by 2-3 scores?), PSU (road), Indiana, UGA, TN and Texas. But losing to their rival jumps Oregon above them?

Oh, so now we start discounting Ohio State losses because they are "to a rival"? Sure, if you ignore a few games here and there, you can spin it however you like -- doesn't make that intellectually honest, or valid, but you do you.

 

[tc1]

wait.....so I should use some fake definition of rigged and ignore that you are lobbying for a rigged system while crying about a system as rigged that wasn't?

had to stop reading after that one. It's beyond next level at this point for you.

Yes, please stop reading -- if you even have been. It is a waste of my time to continue writing words that you either cannot, or just don't want to, understand.

Have a good one.

 

[Nat Mann]

No, they precisely did not suffer the same fate. Florida State did everything they possibly could. Georgia lost. Those are completely different situations.

They suffered exactly the same fate: They didn't get to go to the playoffs. Their circumstances were slightly different; Georgia did have one loss, by 3 points to Alabama. Florida State was unbeaten and would normally have gotten in, but their star QB was out. Still the same fate.

Again, Florida State sent their second and third string to that game, for a variety of reasons. Even those backups proved nearly as good as #20 Kentucky and #9 Mississippi, both of whom played their full rosters against Georgia and experienced a similar result.

For the last time: Even though both deserved to be in the playoffs and didn't get to go, Georgia rose to the occasion and won and Florida State sulked and tanked the entire program.

 

[dtgold88]

No, the NCAA does not. College football national championships in NCAA Division I FBS - Wikipedia


Well, something also apparently tells you definitions of words that do not exist anywhere else, so maybe we shouldn't worry too much about the voices in your head. Jus' sayin'.



Oh, so now we start discounting Ohio State losses because they are "to a rival"? Sure, if you ignore a few games here and there, you can spin it however you like -- doesn't make that intellectually honest, or valid, but you do you.

That second comment is just priceless. Think a nonrigged playoff is rigged and you want to make changes that would rig the system. It's really hard to take you seriously but I tried. At this point for your sake I hope you are just messing with me.

as to OSU not trying to discount anything. I'm going to wait to watch the CFP and hope they win it. You can watch it in the hope Oregon gets some kind of title....real or imagined.

 

[dtgold88]

They suffered exactly the same fate: They didn't get to go to the playoffs. Their circumstances were slightly different; Georgia did have one loss, by 3 points to Alabama. Florida State was unbeaten and would normally have gotten in, but their star QB was out. Still the same fate.


For the last time: Even though both deserved to be in the playoffs and didn't get to go, Georgia rose to the occasion and won and Florida State sulked and tanked the entire program.

Can't they use the Saban "we didn't want to be there" excuse?

 

[dtgold88]

Yes, please stop reading -- if you even have been. It is a waste of my time to continue writing words that you either cannot, or just don't want to, understand.

Have a good one.

sure thing, sport.

 

[Ron G]

In that scenario, Oregon would almost-certainly take home all of the math-based championships, like Colley Matrix. They would have a vastly better resume, as previously detailed, so unless the game was 50-0 Notre Dame or something, yes, I believe 15-1 Oregon would deserve at least a share of the title.

Otherwise, they would be the only team in history, as far as I know, to win 15 or more games in a season and not win a championship -- and they'd have done it against the toughest schedule by far.

Now I get it. Head to Head with equal won loss records does not count.

In that scenario, Oregon would almost-certainly take home all of the math-based championships, like Colley Matrix. They would have a vastly better resume, as previously detailed, so unless the game was 50-0 Notre Dame or something, yes, I believe 15-1 Oregon would deserve at least a share of the title.

Otherwise, they would be the only team in history, as far as I know, to win 15 or more games in a season and not win a championship -- and they'd have done it against the toughest schedule by far.

Just wondering how much credit do you give Oregon for that 24-14 home victory over FCS Idaho.

 

[dtgold88]

Now I get it. Head to Head with equal won loss records does not count.

Just wondering how much credit do you give Oregon for that 24-14 home victory over FCS Idaho.

was excited for Saturday night, but not even sure it's worth watching the CFP knowing that apparently the team I cheer for cannot win the resume title.

 

[Ron G]

Now I get it. Head to Head with equal won loss records does not count.

Just wondering how much credit do you give Oregon for that 24-14 home victory over FCS Idaho.

I wanted to add this:

By the way, math-based championships for teams that did not win a championship of the field are only of interest to the fans of that team. The concept of losing the championship to a team and then claiming you are deserving a share of the championship because your loss is better than theirs is just convoluted twisted logic.

Kind of like those claiming Kamala Harris ran a flawless campaign. After all, she actually got all the democratic delegates (Trump did not get all the Republican delegates) and she was leading in the published polls and claims to have won the debate. And yet she is not president.

If Oregon wins out, they will rank with the best teams of all time, if not they will enter the dust bowl of history with the rest of the also rans. If Oregon loses, ten years from now only the fans of the winner and of Oregon will remember who lost '24-'25 championship.

 

[Picklerick 2.0]

1. And again, tell that to Florida State. If FSU had fielded its actual team in the Orange Bowl last year, and beaten Georgia, they would have had an extremely-strong case to be co-Champions -- being 14-0 and having beaten the two-time defending champs head-to-head.

2. No, the NCAA does not agree with you. I already explained this several teams. You'd do better in this discussion if you read the comments, and the references. The NCAA officially recognizes twelve different national champion selectors -- only one is the College Football Playoff. There is recent precedent for those selectors disagreeing and awarding multiple teams with national championships. If Oregon wins only 2 more games, I think they are guaranteed to collect most or all of the math-based national championships, regardless of what occurs in the final game.

3. Again, to put it bluntly, no. You are describing some fantasy, that is explicitly not in effect in the NCAA's FBS right now.

You keep talking about Florida state from last year as some convoluted excuse for why you want to crown Oregon with the championship even if they lose. Look, the NCAA FINALLY changed formats to allow a true playoffs and championship, and you want to now discuss flaws from the older format that they just scrapped as an excuse for ignoring the current one. I think you just like to argue.

 

[dtgold88]

You keep talking about Florida state from last year as some convoluted excuse for why you want to crown Oregon with the championship even if they lose. Look, the NCAA FINALLY changed formats to allow a true playoffs and championship, and you want to now discuss flaws from the older format that they just scrapped as an excuse for ignoring the current one. I think you just like to argue.

Not even bothered if it' a "just like to argue' scenario is that's not abnormal at all in forums like this. But the entire argument is pretty much precrying over a team in a playoff not winning the playoff and not being rewarded?

That's just kooky talk.