We are going to have to get used to the fact that if SMU was left out, that would've delegitimized the Conference Championship games and put $$$$ in danger.
Average FPI and Average SOS by conference
- Thread starter Cruloc
- Start date
What $? You're talking about the ACC, not the SEC. This is the conference that FSU was begging to get out of, because the lack of said dollars, and Clemson and Miami would like to join them in exiting. To put a dollar amount on the difference, SECCG tickets cost like 6 times as much and that's just on the low end.
This is the problem actually. The inability to differentiate between the SEC and the ACC. There is no comparison, yet people keep pretending for some reason.
The ACC championship game was a ranked too high #8 team (that went 0-2 against ranked teams) vs. a #17 team that went 0-2 against the SEC. That in no way compares to the SECCG, which featured a team that blew out the ACC champion and two teams ranked in the top top 5. Why do people keep conflating things that are not in any way similar?
Edit: To put this another way, the difference between playing an extra game against a top 5 team and the conclusion that if you were obviously a top 12 program beforehand you shouldn't be heavily penalized after, and playing the #17 team, when you already had a dubious resume and the earned consequences of not beating a top 25 team all season... it should be easy to differentiate.
Last edited:
Honestly, this was the year to get screwed
Now bama bias is dead. They owe us next time. In theory
Now bama bias is dead. They owe us next time. In theory
That’s a poor view of the championship games in my opinion. Some were lamenting them for the sec, since we’re talking about two teams now with strong resumes and high sos. Same argument big 10. Effectively this year those games were seeding games and not elimination games.
But the same games in lesser conferences, should be viewed moreso as an opportunity for weak sos teams to show if they can beat someone with a pulse - of course weak points to that are could be seeing two similarly weak teams facing off ala acc this year. The weak sauce championship games should be expected to be elimination games.
Doesn't sound like this is a popular opinion but I believe like Slowpoke that the committee was ultimately worried about undermining the conference championship games. If they dropped a top ten team out of the playoffs (who would clearly be in the playoffs if they don't play in the championship game) after a loss in the championship game, then there would be way less desire to play in the conference championship. I'm not saying this is the right approach, but as we've said many time on here - - follow the money.
The quicker everyone realizes that the CFP isn't a NC tournament but rather an invitational, the easier it will be to understand. Even last year they wanted 'the four best teams', but this year that's obviously out the window.
I think we're focusing too much on the last week. Problem with that is the committee's mistake wasn't in the last week. IF (two huge letters) you buy into the rankings leading into the CCGs, they did follow their stated criteria. That week, anyway.
Their initial mistake was in week 11, when they leaped SMU from 20 to 13 as a reward for beating Pitt. Then they compounded that mistake a few weeks later by leaping them from 13 to 9 as a reward for something I can't identify.
Both of those moves were based on SMU's flashy Ws and Ls. Thing is, those rankings ignored SOS and SOR. That's where the committee deviated from their stated process, and it had huge implications for the final decision.
Nobody in their right mind thinks SMU is the 8th or 9th or 10 best team in the country. Neither their SOS nor SOR comes close to meriting the position they ended up in.
My point is that the committee actually did follow their stated process on the last weekend. They didn't follow it in the weeks leading up to the last weekend. And once they deviated from the process, especially since they did it twice, it was impossible to walk back.
I think the BCS got it right -- computers providing objectivity and humans providing the eye test. Go back to the BCS rankings, seed the Top 12 teams accordingly, and tee it up.
Their initial mistake was in week 11, when they leaped SMU from 20 to 13 as a reward for beating Pitt. Then they compounded that mistake a few weeks later by leaping them from 13 to 9 as a reward for something I can't identify.
Both of those moves were based on SMU's flashy Ws and Ls. Thing is, those rankings ignored SOS and SOR. That's where the committee deviated from their stated process, and it had huge implications for the final decision.
Nobody in their right mind thinks SMU is the 8th or 9th or 10 best team in the country. Neither their SOS nor SOR comes close to meriting the position they ended up in.
My point is that the committee actually did follow their stated process on the last weekend. They didn't follow it in the weeks leading up to the last weekend. And once they deviated from the process, especially since they did it twice, it was impossible to walk back.
I think the BCS got it right -- computers providing objectivity and humans providing the eye test. Go back to the BCS rankings, seed the Top 12 teams accordingly, and tee it up.
Last edited:
I agree, but for a different reason.
This team was far too inconsistent to win more than one game in the playoff. And it's perfectly capable of losing its first game in a nasty fashion.
Yeah, you might get the team that boat-raced Georgia in the first half, or the one that skull-drug LSU in Baton Rouge. But pretty soon the team that got physically beaten by Vanderbilt (can't believe I typed those words) and embarrassed in Norman is going to show up.
I still think they should only release the final rankings. I don't think it helps their case to release rankings before the final weekend. It's hard to fix mistakes when rankings are public
As long as the best 4-6 teams get in each year, I can live with it. These other teams get a pice of the $$$ pie, but have no chance of winning a trophy.
I'm mostly okay with it if they fix the byes. Those should just go to the top 4 ranked teams not top 4 conference champions
The acc championship was "delegitimized" by the shear fact that not many people paid $ to watch that nonsense, ABC/ESPN wouldn't even show the upper bowl because of how poorly the game was attended. As I said on another thread, if the cfp gave you $500 to bet straight up on the winner of SMU vs LSU at Baton Rouge, who are you taking? I bet I know.
Last edited:
That's why I'm so disgusted with the whole thing. The premise for a playoff all along was to get the most deserving teams in. No one ever at any point sold the playoff or a playoff as this is to be inclusive. I said it would be that, but also kicking and screaming the whole way. I know I might come off as someone that loves to be right or always thinks he's right, but as a pessimist I often very much like to be proven wrong.
I love the idea that all the things I worry about might be just in my head. It would help put my mind at ease even generally speaking if that happened more often. But, it's pretty darn irritating to see this train wreck for a decade or so out and have to watch it slowly unfold. I just wish I was wrong and this was actually the 12 most deserving teams because I'm watching something I really like a lot being destroyed.
You can’t operate an enterprise of this magnitude that way. There was a lot of money and prestige misappropriated. In addition bad precedents were established as well as a bad atmosphere created.
They are changing future of college football where SOS has been diminished such that programs are fools to schedule tough. ESPN has shot itself in the foot. I urge Alabama to cancel their OSU series and any other where there is a serious chance to incur a loss with little reward for winning. Individuals, programs, etc. act based on incentive and the CFPC has made their real criteria known.
The thought that the SEC got 3 teams, the ACC 2/3 and the B10 4 is so wrong. (Again, 7 teams 9-3 or better.)
I agree, but my point is that it isn't worth allowing myself to get aggravated over.
New Posts
-
-
-
-
-
-
JessN: Potential transfer portal targets as Bama remakes its roster
- Latest: Evil Crimson Dragon
Latest threads
-
-
-
Stuff you think about when you're bored by yourself..- Started by TideMan09
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
Bama Game Thread: MBB Bama at A&M - Sat 1.11 - 7p CST ESPN- Started by CajunCrimson
- Replies: 343