"For the first time in the 10-year history of the College Football Playoff, an undefeated Power Five conference team was left out of the Top Four."
My biggest question is simple: "So what?"
My biggest question is simple: "So what?"
CFN: Florida State and the "Rigged" College Football Playoff: Daily Cavalcade
- Thread starter crimsonaudio
- Start date
For the first time in the 10-year history of the CFP, a #1 team fell out of the top four in the last weekend of games.
There’s like 3 of those this year…
Bingo, new things happens all the time. Last year a team lost their final game and didn't drop a single spot.
The only reason we have polls from, well, February 1 through the rest of the year is because fans want polls.
You can't realistically skip a week, not in football that is played once a week.
People aren't accepting the brutal reality they're fiction except for two of them: the selection one and the final one. The rest are just there because fans like to crow about their team in comparison to others - or complain how blind the voters are - or both.
If we had the four-team BCS - WHICH WAS FINE WITH ME btw - FSU would be in the playoff.
If the ACC commish had voted for it a couple of years ago - FSU would be in the playoff.
We went with a system and rules everyone agreed to play under for a 12-year trial period back in 2014, a system that could only be changed with the unanimous consent of the Power 5.
Florida State's real problem is with the SYSTEM, not with Alabama, not with Texas.
A system they agreed to play under.
If the ACC commish had voted for it a couple of years ago - FSU would be in the playoff.
We went with a system and rules everyone agreed to play under for a 12-year trial period back in 2014, a system that could only be changed with the unanimous consent of the Power 5.
Florida State's real problem is with the SYSTEM, not with Alabama, not with Texas.
A system they agreed to play under.
I just noticed the point spread in the Georgia- FSU game is Georgia -14. Maybe the FSU supporters need to explain how a supposed Top 4 team is a 2 TD dog to the # 6 team.
Not only did they agree to the current system, as you point out, they prevented a proposed revision that would have put them in.
Their real problem is in the mirror.
I remember Bob Stoops in an interview at that national title game his team had no business playing against LSU in the 2003 season, and he made his point simply but brutally - if you want to require a team to win their conference to win the BCS, simply make that the rule. He went further and said he endorsed that idea himself - but don't get mad at him and his team for benefiting from the rules as they were in place.
As much as I hated Oklahoma (still do), he wasn't wrong. Saban later got put in the same shoes with the LSU rematch, people suddenly deciding that even though "you have to win your conference" should be some sort of block, it didn't happen in 2001 or 2003....so someone made up a quote and put it on the internet, and Alabama fans have been debunking it ever since.
Like it or not:
- 2001 Nebraska was in the title game because of the system
- 2003 Oklahoma was in the title game because of the system
- 2004 Auburn was left out of the title game because of the system
- 2008 Texas was left out of the title game because of the system (H2H win over Oklahoma)
- 2009 Cincinnati/TCU/Boise State were left out because of the system
- 2010 TCU was left out because of the system
- 2017 UCF was left out because of the system
- 2022 Alabama was left out because of the system
Don't hate the play-uhs, hate the game (e.g. the system).
It's delicious irony, the system that would have gotten them in is the very system they voted against. Life can have a twisted sense of humor sometimes.
FSU probably should have NEVER HAVE BEEN RANKED IN THE TOP 4.
FIFY
Committee boxed themselves into this dilemma when they moved FSU up after the Travis injury and they looked very beatable with that backup QB against Florida. If they had simply made the call then that FSU was NOT in the best 4 at that time the outrage would have been much less on selection day and they would have established the bar for what it took to get into the 4.
Heres' what I find so funny about this objection: some of the people making it are the same people who thought UCF should "have a chance." So they're NOW using "Power 5" to make an objection when they don't even see a difference in P5 and G5.
A lot of this crying is nothing but attention - and I hate to bear the bad news, but it isn't going away next year, either.
Just watch: we'll have TWO G5 teams go undefeated, one will get the playoff, and the whining will be "but both should be included" and somehow I suspect it's going to involve either Alabama, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Michigan or Georgia getting in over them.
The most delicious irony of all would be a one-loss Florida State getting in over an unbeaten G5.
This exactly - I have only seen this pointed out by 1 media outlet, thinking that was the SEC network....
Erase all the politics and the 4 best teams are OBVIOUS.
1. Bama
2. Georgia
3. Texas
4. Michigan
1. Bama
2. Georgia
3. Texas
4. Michigan
One thing I don't get about the debate between "Best" team and "Most Deserving" team...in the context of the CFP, aren't the 4 "Best" teams the "Most Deserving" teams if the point of the CFP is to put the 4 best teams in the tournament?
Yep. And the whole foundation of the angst is that they thought "most deserving" and "four best" meant the same thing. It's an entitlement mindset. The same thing absolutely will happen with the expanded field. Probably not next year but sooner or later a G5 champ or runner up is gonna cry about being almost good enough.
The four best are the most deserving, yes. The reverse is not always true. What's happening here is a lot of noise from folks who don't get that.
That’s my whole thing. Would they rather leave out the SEC champion? Get bent…
Hello. I don't comment much, except when the subject becomes philosophical, then I can't resist. 
Good to see the good folks on here attempt to clear away the fog which arises when the terms "best" and "most deserving" are used over and over again, when no one wants to define what those terms mean, and the automatic presumption that these terms are mutually exclusive, when this isn't necessarily the case.
Another thing that should be pointed out is the fancy titles that are given to make something appear greater than what it actually is:
POWER FIVE
OOOHHHHHHH!!! AWWWW!!!!
As if there is some inherent merit in the title alone.
If I went undefeated against mostly average teams, slapping a fancy "SUPER DUPER INTER-GALACTIC CONFERENCE" title over the top of it adds no merit to the accomplishment whatsoever. It may appear as silver, but is in actuality dross.
Forgot the name and category of your conference. Look within at the underlying metrics. That's when the case for FSU begins to break down.
Good to see the good folks on here attempt to clear away the fog which arises when the terms "best" and "most deserving" are used over and over again, when no one wants to define what those terms mean, and the automatic presumption that these terms are mutually exclusive, when this isn't necessarily the case.
Another thing that should be pointed out is the fancy titles that are given to make something appear greater than what it actually is:
POWER FIVE
OOOHHHHHHH!!! AWWWW!!!!
As if there is some inherent merit in the title alone.
If I went undefeated against mostly average teams, slapping a fancy "SUPER DUPER INTER-GALACTIC CONFERENCE" title over the top of it adds no merit to the accomplishment whatsoever. It may appear as silver, but is in actuality dross.
Forgot the name and category of your conference. Look within at the underlying metrics. That's when the case for FSU begins to break down.
Last edited:
Seems to me the reverse is also true...if the Best teams are the Most Deserving, then the Most Deserving are also the best teams.
For a lot of fans and fortunately for the majority of the CFP committee the answer is yes, the 4 best are the most deserving. But some in the media (like Booger McFarland) think an undefeated team in the P5 is always more deserving over a 1 loss team regardless of the difference in talent. His argument is "Why play the season if teams like Alabama, Georgia, Michigan, Ohio State and Texas always have the most talent and thus are the best teams?" The simple answer of course is to see if those teams can play at a high enough level with the talent they have. If they have only 1 loss I think that's a high enough level of success IMO to justify taking the 1 loss team with more talent over the less talented team that happens to be undefeated.
New Posts
-
-
-
-
-
Joke thread - including cartoons, memes, and misc - Part IX- Latest: DzynKingRTR
Latest threads
-
-
-
-
Alabama’s Lebron Named Brooks Wallace Award Player of the Week
- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
-
