This is the first time the BCS formula differed from the CFP final four...

[crimsonaudio]

if they somehow beat uga, they will never shut up about it. Will probably throw a parade and hang a banner.

I guarantee they will be UCF 2.0.

And I'll continue to point and laugh.

 

[teamplayer]

While a 4-team playoff is much better than the old BCS 2-team, it still has the possibility of teams getting left out that have an argument to be in it. Still can be seen as a beauty contest.

Next year, with the expanded playoff, it's going to be much harder for the #13 team to complain about not getting last slot. Right now, if it was in place today, LSU(#13) and Arizona(#14) would be on the outside. Both would have very weak arguments. Arizona lost to Mississippi State. LSU has 3 losses.

Tongue-in-cheek: I'm surprised that they didn't give ND an automatic bid just because they are Notre Dame.

I'm pretty sure that Oklahoma would be ticked that Liberty got to go instead of them since they are ranked number 12. Then people would also wonder about politics. If they put OU at 11 and Ole Miss at 12, for instance, so it was Ole Miss who was left out for Liberty. There will still be people who get their panties in a bunch. Regardless, I am glad that Bama got in this year, and I am looking forward to playing Michigan. I just hope our guys stay focused on Michigan and don't start listening to some people who are talking about a rematch with Texas. Roll Tide!

 

[crimsonaudio]

Haha, Free Shoes Uni fans are going to be salty about his for decades. Not even joking.

Shannon Sharpe FTW

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1732104166741356885

 

[GulfCoastTider]

A couple of thoughts:

Next year Texas will not have the luxury of beating one team and losing to another and them squeaking by with some very bad performances against weaker conference teams. Texas and OU will learn that's not the way it works in the SEC. You have to bring it every week or you get beat!

I think that's why the Georgia win streak is relevant to te discussion. Yeah, the previous two years don't matter this year except the 12 wins they accrued this year were on top of those two previous NC years. It's all generated by the media; it's a narrative; but it also speaks to their short term dominance of the most competitive conference in college football so it is somewhat relative.

It's why our win is so big in the context of the big picture of college football. The previous narrative was Georgia was KING and Kirby had become the SEC's top coach. All that got changed with their streak ending when it did on the biggest stage possible. That's how it's relevant IMO.

Also from the "It shouldn't matter but it does" department, Alabama was the last team to beat them, and that it was in the same venue with (nearly) the same stakes, AND that UGA's shine has always been less bright when they have to get past or avoid having played Alabama. In all but once, having to get past Bama has been heartbreaking. That goes way back, too. Richt had his butt handed to him a lot, too.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

A little off topic, but has any team ever faced two number one ranked, undefeated teams in a row at the end of the season? Did they win both games?

A couple of things along the lines of what you're talking about - but the way you just described it?
No.

Remember - polls PRIOR to 1958 were NOT very structured where you had a set number of voters and ballots, which enabled teams to fly up and down the polls based upon which region sent in their ballots.

So we can only do this post-1957...and I didn't verify UPI polls, I used AP/BCS/CFP.

Interesting events but not like you described them.

1) 1975
Michigan loses to #1 Ohio State in the finale - and then to the team that rose to #1 Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl, but the Sooners were #3 going INTO the game.

2) 1996
#1 Florida played (and lost to) #2 Florida State, beat Alabama in the SECCG, beat #1 FSU

3) 2009
Alabama beat #1 Florida in the SECCG and then #2 Texas in the BCSNCG

3) 2013
Auburn beat #1 Alabama in the Iron Bowl, 11-1 Mizzou in the SECCG, and lost to #1 FSU in the final 12 seconds.

4)2017
Auburn beat #1 UGA then ULM then #1 Alabama in three weeks of home games.

 

[Its On A Slab]

I'm pretty sure that Oklahoma would be ticked that Liberty got to go instead of them since they are ranked number 12. Then people would also wonder about politics. If they put OU at 11 and Ole Miss at 12, for instance, so it was Ole Miss who was left out for Liberty. There will still be people who get their panties in a bunch. Regardless, I am glad that Bama got in this year, and I am looking forward to playing Michigan. I just hope our guys stay focused on Michigan and don't start listening to some people who are talking about a rematch with Texas. Roll Tide!

I sincerely hope that awful "Group of 5" inclusion doesn't factor into the 12-team playoff. Tulane or Liberty might get a bowl, but have no right to be in the playoff unless they are ranked high enough.

 

[colbysullivan]

I don't know why that Georgia's 29 win streak was being brought up. That is impressive, but this year's team didn't play all those games. It's college football, each year it's a new team.

Agreed. I have never liked the “If you’re the defending champs, you should be #1 until you lose” crowd. Sorry, defending WHAT? UGA isn’t defending anything. Every season is different and this year’s UGA team was very good, but they were one tier below the previous ones.

 

[colbysullivan]

I'm pretty sure that Oklahoma would be ticked that Liberty got to go instead of them since they are ranked number 12. Then people would also wonder about politics. If they put OU at 11 and Ole Miss at 12, for instance, so it was Ole Miss who was left out for Liberty. There will still be people who get their panties in a bunch. Regardless, I am glad that Bama got in this year, and I am looking forward to playing Michigan. I just hope our guys stay focused on Michigan and don't start listening to some people who are talking about a rematch with Texas. Roll Tide!

I said this last week to a bunch of people online and they were like “lOl liBeRtY wOuLdN’t Be In ThE 12 tEaM pLaYoFf EiThEr” and then I explained to them how the 12 team format actually works and they were like “huh?” These damn casuals fans have got to go. They’re killing my favorite sport.

And yes, you can absolutely bet the committee will do some creative rankings with the 12 team playoff. This is what happens you have stupid automatic qualifiers for HALF THE FIELD.

 

[tusks_n_raider]

A little off topic, but has any team ever faced two number one ranked, undefeated teams in a row at the end of the season? Did they win both games?

I’m not sure but CNS at Bama is 7-1 vs the #1 ranked team and has won 6 straight since the reg season loss to LSU in 2011.

If anyone can beat 2 in a row it’s CNS.

 

[Power Eye]

4)2017
Auburn beat #1 UGA then ULM then #1 Alabama in three weeks of home games.

I did not remember that UGA was #1, ahead of us, when Auburn beat them that year. As much as I dislike Auburn football, that was an impressive stretch of games, though it just speaks to how different of a team they can be in JHS versus away from JHS.

 

[BamaMoon]

Being an outsider looking in and genuinely unsure.

How could Georgia drop to 7th purely on the basis of a 3pt loss to the team placed 3rd overall.

And if I'm understanding it properly, Ohio State gain an advantage by not playing an extra game because they didn't make it to their conference final?

I think it basically comes down to "when" they lost. Timing in this matters significantly.

I’m not sure but CNS at Bama is 7-1 vs the #1 ranked team and has won 6 straight since the reg season loss to LSU in 2011.

If anyone can beat 2 in a row it’s CNS.

Right, that bodes well for the next game, doesn't it?

 

[Al A Bama]

I guarantee they will be UCF 2.0.

And I'll continue to point and laugh.

I've NEVER pulled for the Dawgs, but I will make an exception in this case. I hope the Dawgs win by 4+ TD's. I also hope the Dawgs defense does not allow FSU to score, even FGs.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

How many times did anyone bring up UT barely getting by a 5-7 TCU? By 3.

To me, this is more relevant than losing to a two-loss team. It just reinforces the point made above that it's doubtful that UT would have been a one-loss team in the SEC...

 

[TideEngineer08]

I sincerely hope that awful "Group of 5" inclusion doesn't factor into the 12-team playoff. Tulane or Liberty might get a bowl, but have no right to be in the playoff unless they are ranked high enough.

Oh but it will. In fact, as the rules are currently written, two group of five champions are guaranteed playoff spots.

The top 6 conference champions get automatic berths. Since the PAC 12 is dead next year, that means two group of five teams are automatically chosen, regardless of rank!

 

[B1GTide]

Oh but it will. In fact, as the rules are currently written, two group of five champions are guaranteed playoff spots.

The top 6 conference champions get automatic berths. Since the PAC 12 is dead next year, that means two group of five teams are automatically chosen, regardless of rank!

all about inclusion.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

The problem with any of these systems is they try but just can't account for who you lost to. There are just too many variables for SW to handle it well. For example, in 2011, Ark lost badly twice (LSU and Bama). They beat everyone else pretty solidly. A knowledgeable person could make a reasonable argument when seeing them that they were the 3rd best team that year. Those two teams were light years ahead of everyone else, but now you have 2 losses, regardless of the records of the teams that beat you.
The next year, at the end of the year there were 6 SEC teams with 2 losses, all to each other, in addition to 1 loss Bama. Again, you could argue that those 6 were 2-7 in any particular order. (several took their bowl games off, but I always argue you cannot always count bowls because if they are not playoff the level of care can often vary drastically).
A computer system can account for the variables its told to consider, and we are all aware how many competing things make up this, and I'm not sure I could even make a complete list of everything that should be considered, much less figure out how to weight it in a way a computer come to a good answer, and I've worked in the industry for almost 30 years.
What this showed is that even at a top level, it was pretty obvious that FSU was iffy in belonging in the playoff, even without considering injury.
IMHO, it was very apparent that including them, regardless of deserving, was just going to provide another TCU situation all over again.

I think the TCU debacle is exactly the reason FSU didn't get in with the "most deserving" argument this year...

 

[B1GTide]

I think the TCU debacle is exactly the reason FSU didn't get in with the "most deserving" argument this year...

That is also my thought.

 

[colbysullivan]

Oh but it will. In fact, as the rules are currently written, two group of five champions are guaranteed playoff spots.

The top 6 conference champions get automatic berths. Since the PAC 12 is dead next year, that means two group of five teams are automatically chosen, regardless of rank!

Crap you’re right. I hadn’t even considered that. They will have to adjust the format. Automatic qualifiers for half the field is dumb enough as it is.

 

[TideEngineer08]

Crap you’re right. I hadn’t even considered that. They will have to adjust the format. Automatic qualifiers for half the field is dumb enough as it is.

I remain skeptical that anything will change.

The PAC 12 brand may yet survive. I do not know the actual rules of maintaining power 5 status and whether or not there would be a grandfather clause.

What you’re looking at, if the PAC 12 name survives, is the MWC and Oregon State/Washington State. I don’t know if that’s still on the table or not. IF that mash up maintains power 5 status, that’s a P5 in name only with a guaranteed playoff spot every year.

Yeah they have to rewrite the rules. But what kind of legal hang ups are coming when they try to? This is why full separation is the only way. It blows my mind they haven’t already done it.

 

[colbysullivan]

I remain skeptical that anything will change.

The PAC 12 brand may yet survive. I do not know the actual rules of maintaining power 5 status and whether or not there would be a grandfather clause.

What you’re looking at, if the PAC 12 name survives, is the MWC and Oregon State/Washington State. I don’t know if that’s still on the table or not. IF that mash up maintains power 5 status, that’s a P5 in name only with a guaranteed playoff spot every year.

Yeah they have to rewrite the rules. But what kind of legal hang ups are coming when they try to? This is why full separation is the only way. It blows my mind they haven’t already done it.

Well there really is no such thing as P5 or G5. It’s just a designation that fans and pundits made up. Even if the Pac12 survives, it will still be a clownshow like it has been for a while.