Never Listen To Playoff Pundits Who Emphasize That Conference Title Thing

colbysullivan

Hall of Fame
Dec 12, 2007
16,697
13,612
187
Gulf Breeze, FL
Did we know who the best 2 teams were in 2014?
Well I did say "usually", and 2014 is the only year that provided good semifinal matchups IMO. It was the first year the playoffs came out and it ended up proving itself almost immediately but it appears to be the exception rather than the rule.
 

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
45,503
46,848
187
Well I did say "usually", and 2014 is the only year that provided good semifinal matchups IMO. It was the first year the playoffs came out and it ended up proving itself almost immediately but it appears to be the exception rather than the rule.
I agree. But I am happy that, three years in, we still have not seen a "feel good" entry into this pool. So far it has been about play on the field, not politics. But with every change in committee membership we run the risk of seeing that change. That is why I am opposed to the committee. Eventually we will get a bad group in there and then it all goes to hell.
 

colbysullivan

Hall of Fame
Dec 12, 2007
16,697
13,612
187
Gulf Breeze, FL
I agree. But I am happy that, three years in, we still have not seen a "feel good" entry into this pool. So far it has been about play on the field, not politics. But with every change in committee membership we run the risk of seeing that change. That is why I am opposed to the committee. Eventually we will get a bad group in there and then it all goes to hell.
Definitely, the committee needs to go. Just go back to the BCS formula and take the top 4.
 

UntouchableCrew

All-SEC
Nov 30, 2015
1,530
338
102
I don't think you can write off the idea that semifinal games won't be competitive just because we've had a few blowouts. Other New Years Six games between top programs have been lopsided (TCU/Ole Miss) and exceptional (USC/Penn State.) I think that trend will continue -- we'll have some years where the games stink and some where they're great. Same happened with BCS title games -- for every Auburn/Florida State or USC/Texas we had a Bama/Notre Dame or Ohio State/Florida.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
Did we know who the best 2 teams were in 2014?
I'm not trying to follow you around and harass you about your posts, honest I'm not, heh...

But, this gets into what I said early on the subject. There's who the "best" team is, and then there is also who the team that has the resume and is the most deserving. In 2014, Ohio State's loss to Virginia Tech at home was darn near unforgivable. It was a pretty ugly mark on the resume, and to me this is always about the best resume (trying to look past results and saying who is best is inappropriate in my mind). Now, the playoff gave them a second chance, but I would argue that second chance wasn't their inherent right (I'd say the same about 2011 Alabama and have). They proved they were probably the best team, but they didn't have one of the top two resumes.

In truth, we can go through and find teams left out of the BCS, of the playoffs, what ever, that were better than teams that made it in. That's going to make things convoluted if you go by "best", I think it always has to be body of work. One issue I have with the playoff is it can toss that body of work out somewhat, and given a completely undeserving team a second chance. Now, I won't call Ohio State completely undeserving though, I always argued they earned their way into the playoff (they had a conference championship game that the Big 12 didn't have). But, I do contend that Ohio State didn't outright deserve a shot at a championship under any circumstance, because that loss to Virginia Tech should matter, even if they were actually the best team.
 
Last edited:

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
45,503
46,848
187
I'm not trying to follow you around and harass you about your posts, honest I'm not, heh...

But, this gets into what I said early on the subject. There's who the "best" team is, and then there is also who the team that has the resume and is the most deserving. In 2014, Ohio State's loss to Virginia Tech at home was darn near unforgivable. It was a pretty ugly mark on the resume, and to me this is always about the best resume (trying to look past results and saying who is best is inappropriate in my mind). Now, the playoff gave them a second chance, but I would argue that second chance wasn't their inherent right (I'd say the same about 2011 Alabama and have). They proved they were probably the best team, but they didn't have one of the top two resumes.

In truth, we can go through and find teams left out of the BCS, of the playoffs, what ever, that were better than teams that made it in. That's going to make things convoluted if you go by "best", I think it always has to be body of work. One issue I have with the playoff is it can toss that body of work out somewhat, and given a completely undeserving team a second chance. Now, I won't call Ohio State completely undeserving though, I always argued they earned their way into the playoff (they had a conference championship game that the Big 12 didn't have). But, I do contend that Ohio State didn't outright deserve a shot at a championship under any circumstance, because that loss to Virginia Tech should matter, even if they were actually the best team.
I have said many times that I would have understood if we were left out in 2014 because of that loss, but the Big 12 made it easy for the committee to put us in. But history has shown us that the OSU 2014 team was absolutely loaded with talent. The number of NFL players who started in that game with Alabama is insane - reminds me of the 2011 Alabama/LSU match-up when looking at players on both teams who went on to the NFL.
I
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
12 for 12?

Honestly, only one semi-final match has been a good game - Alabama vs Ohio State in 2014. The last two years Alabama and Clemson have won their semifinal matchups by an average of 33-6, and if throw in the Oregon vs FSU matchup from 2014, it's 38-9. The closest margin was 17 points.
Yeah, a crying shame the committee didn't take into account games that had yet to be played, right?





Based on the actual games, the only ones we know they got right were Alabama (2014-16), OSU (2014), Clemson (2015-16)

I'm not saying there were more qualified teams out there. I'm just saying that we cannot be certain they get all 12 right if so many of the matchups are so lopsided (including the fact that none of the losing teams ever scored more than 20 - while all winning teams scored at least 24 - and there were two shutouts and another where the losing team only had one score).
If there weren't more qualified teams out there - then they got it right.

The fact the game was a stinker is irrelevant as to who should get to play in it.

USC 55 Oklahoma 19
Nebraska 62 Florida 24
Alabama 34 Miami 13

Those don't mean the championship matchups were wrong. In fact, it was assumed prior to the 93 Sugar Bowl that Miami was going to roll Alabama into a ball and punt them out of the solar system.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
2015 - ohio state. just a close loss to MSU and a way, way better team.
Here's the problem: while I think you're probably right and if Michigan St and Ohio St played ten times the Buckeyes that year beat the eight, you simply cannot dismiss the head-to-head match up.

But the bigger problem is that Michigan St not only played a tougher schedule but a MUCH tougher schedule.

Both were 2-0 against the top ten.
Michigan St was 3-0 against the top 30 while Ohio St was 2-1.


COMMON OPPONENTS
Penn St - Michigan St won by 39 at home, Ohio St by 28 at home
Maryland - Sparty by 17 at home, Buckeyes by 21 at home
Indiana - Sparty by 26 at home, Buckeyes by 7 on the road
Rutgers - Sparty by 7 on the road, Ohio St by 42 on the road
W Michigan - Sparty by 13 on the road, Ohio St by 26 at home

So the common opponents are close to a wash, maybe a tiny advantage for Ohio St

Out of conference, Michigan St took on Oregon and Air Force, Ohio St took on Hawaii and Va Tech.
Oregon >>>> Va Tech, AFA >>>>> Hawaii (as in beat them 58-7)


So Mich St beats them handily OOC, it's maybe a slight advantage for Ohio St on the commons, and while the score in the Ohio St/Mich St game was close.......the Buckeyes had five first downs and 132 yards offense.

And then you throw in that Michigan St won the conference by knocking off an unbeaten Iowa team. Was Iowa overrated? I thought so.

But I don't see how in the world one can argue for Ohio State over Mich St when looking not just at the head-to-head but at the overall work.





2016 - hate to say it, but chokelahoma would have provided a better matchup.

But they lost by 21 points to Ohio St (who did make it) AT HOME......they had more losses AND a head-to-head loss.


Saying OU plays Clemson better doesn't justify selecting them over Ohio State in any way.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
I still say that they will put 4 teams from 4 different conferences in there. Case and point is Oklahoma over tosu in 2015. There was no reason that Oklahoma should have been there over a defending national champ.

OU played a more difficult schedule as they were 4-0 against the Top 30 and Ohio St was 2-1. I don't actually disagree with you regarding the four conference thing at all, but the selection of OU over Ohio St was eminently defensible.

Then you get another interesting situation in 2014 in which TCU actually had a stronger schedule going into to selection Sunday than tosu.

My point is they will always spread the wealth and make money the tie breaker.
We're in agreement on two points here: 1) the money aspect driving it; and 2) the plasticity of their arguments, which change based on who they want to include.

However, the Ohio St selection, which in my view was the only one possibly questionable, was not wrong. If TCU wanted to be included, they should have beaten Baylor. Once they left it in the hands of the committee.....
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
Definitely, the committee needs to go. Just go back to the BCS formula and take the top 4.
And you think TCU and Cincinnati were actually two of the four best teams in the country that year?

The same Cincinnati who got blown away by Aaron Hernandez????

The same TCU who couldn't beat Boise?

You don't think that there's at least one more blowout semi-final right there? Notre Dame Coach Brian Kelly probably doesn't leave at that point, and he's already demonstrated how awful he is in the post-season.

Btw - I don't actually disagree with your statement, I agree with it totally. But a look at a couple of the BCS seasons shows they would really have had to modify their formula a bit.

I'm anti-committee because I think they're a bunch of conference stooges who can teach the world is either round OR flat, depending on who they're wanting to persuade. They argue in circles - if they want a conference champion in there they tout that as being important but if they want a non-conference champion, they don't even mention WHY team X over team Y, who beat them and won the conference.
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
OU played a more difficult schedule as they were 4-0 against the Top 30 and Ohio St was 2-1. I don't actually disagree with you regarding the four conference thing at all, but the selection of OU over Ohio St was eminently defensible.



We're in agreement on two points here: 1) the money aspect driving it; and 2) the plasticity of their arguments, which change based on who they want to include.

However, the Ohio St selection, which in my view was the only one possibly questionable, was not wrong. If TCU wanted to be included, they should have beaten Baylor. Once they left it in the hands of the committee.....
But it goes back to the argument "are all losses equal?" I think if you really break it down then TCU would've been in 2014 and tosu in 2015. I've always questioned the committee's ability to assess those things. I mean you really can't say getting blown out on a neutral site by a bad Texas team is better than losing on the last play of the game against a top 5 team. I get the feeling that anytime ND and Oklahoma are in sniffing range they are going to get bumped up over a better team.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
But it goes back to the argument "are all losses equal?"
Actually, it goes back to "even if all losses are NOT equal, the wins count more."


I think if you really break it down then TCU would've been in 2014 and tosu in 2015. I've always questioned the committee's ability to assess those things. I mean you really can't say getting blown out on a neutral site by a bad Texas team is better than losing on the last play of the game against a top 5 team.
That's correct.

The argument then becomes:
Oklahoma 4-0 vs Top 30
Ohio St 1-1 vs Top 30 (Mich St was the first ranked opponent they played)

And while the game never felt that close, the fact is with 8 minutes left it was a one possession game, so it's kinda stretching it to say OU got blown out.

I think there was ANOTHER problem in 2015 with selecting Ohio State - the fact Iowa was undefeated. How can you possibly pick one-loss Ohio St over one-loss Iowa when the game came down to the last play, the margin of victory was the same, and unlike Ohio St, Iowa actually won their division?

Well, you can pick the Buckeyes IF you argue SOS......but then you kinda have to pick OU, whose SOS was MUCH better (including their final games of the year, OU/Clemson and Ohio St vs 10-2 Notre Dame, the Sagarin rankings were OU 21, Ohio St 46.......both would be lower if not for the last game but Ohio St wouldn't even be close to OU strength wise).


I'll grant you the TCU one in 2014 is harder to fathom. I was absolutely shocked when that happened, and it gives credence to our mutual suspicion.


I get the feeling that anytime ND and Oklahoma are in sniffing range they are going to get bumped up over a better team.
I sorta feel the same way so let's take a look....


No real evidence in 2014 for either team, they weren't that good.

2015 - Oklahoma began at 15 with NINE unbeaten teams above them. Four lost that first week and they moved up to 12, but behind LSU, whose loss was to us. They beat Baylor (10) and moved to seven. When they came from ahead to damn near lose to TCU - a team so unimpressive to the committee that after BEATING Kansas while ranked #15 (and possibly looking ahead to OU, the committee dropped them as the lowest rated one-loss to #18.

And then losing their senses, the committee turned right around the next week and when OU blew leads of 23-7 and 30-13 against a third-string QB and won a missed two-point PAT....the committee was so impressed by this poor showing that they turned right around and pole vaulted OU from 7 to 3, where they remained.


THIS is why you and I both think that. Ever heard of a team scraping out a home win against a team so lowly regarded by the committee and with a third-string QB......and it IMPRESSING the committee so much they put them in the mix? A week after TCU dropped three spots for struggling against Kansas?????

2015 - Notre Dame started at 5 with one loss, moved to four, fell to six when Mich St beat Ohio St despite winning, fell only to 8 with their second loss, and finished eighth.


2016 - Notre Dame stunk. OU began with two losses in the first poll at 16. They scrape by 3-9 Iowa State by ten.....and jump to 11....but part of that was because Florida got blown out by Arky, Alabama beat LSU, and Nebraska lost. They then went 9-8-9-7 (Wisky dropped with the Penn St loss).


So there is SOME evidence to validate the idea the pollsters look the other way with OU, but they got stuck in one of those MLB wildcard clusters when the teams 5-8 were all playing each other and boosting the winner without hurting the loser too much.

That jump in 2015, though, is ridiculous. TCU went from being terrible one week (worst one-loss team) to being good enough while crippled that it was a better win for OU than Alabama beating LSU that same month.
 

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.