Four-Team Playoff Vindicated Again

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
42,725
42,051
287
56
Based on the "eye test," I'm guessing most folks probably would have said to themselves that LSU and Ohio State were the two best teams in the country. Some may have argued Clemson since the only actual argument against them was their schedule. What we avoided, however, is what was so often the ultimate frustration of following college football for so long - did the right team win the national championship?

Like it or not, LSU is the undisputed national champion for 2019. They took on and beat all comers, and they deserve absolute respect for the accomplishment.

1) We didn't get stuck with "team with best-known name gets voted title without playing a bowl game."

Looking at you, 1966 Notre Dame

2) We didn't get "well, only two teams can be in the BCS so: a) Clemson can't 'defend their title' or b) LSU or Ohio St got screwed because Clemson....."

3) We didn't get a plethora of bowl games were some average football team lucked into a win over an overrated one and pole vaulted to the title.

Looking at you, 1983 Miami and 1977 Notre Dame


Nobody got hosed this time. All three unbeatens got a fair chance. And ultimately, the eye test (for most of us) was vindicated. LSU was deservedly number one, and the two teams everyone thought were the top contenders (Ohio St and Clemson) played each other and got a deserving winner (outhouse officiating excluded). LSU played a one-loss blue blood conference champion just to even things up in the sense LSU wasn't sitting at home while teams 2 and 3 decided who got to lose to LSU.

Of course, the ONE objection (with minimal merit) is this one - "But Oklahoma wasn't the fourth best team in the country." And that's PROBABLY true given that Oklahoma 2019 version would lose games to Georgia, Florida, Alabama, and Auburn (if the game was in Jordan-Hare). But in all honesty - who else could you have picked? You had a bunch of two-loss teams clustered.


Was Georgia indisputably number four? I mean, could UGA have beaten Alabama? We'll never know. Maybe UGA beats Alabama with Mac Jones, I don't know.

Was Oregon? Would ANYONE here pick Oregon to beat Georgia anywhere in America?

You couldn't possibly take Baylor over Oklahoma under ANY circumstances - not with two losses to them.

Was Wisconsin indisputably number four? Well, does anyone here think Wisky beats Georgia or Alabama? (Serious question).

Was Florida? How can you possibly take Florida ahead of Georgia? Same number of losses and a 7-point head to head win.

Could you take Penn State?

Is Utah the indisputable number four?


So LSU got what amounted to a scrimmage with a team that might not have been the "fourth best," but the problem was the LSU had already beaten THREE other two-loss candidates (Florida, Georgia, Alabama).



I have some serious reservations about what the committee CAN do. But I also can't say they do a bad job, either. What we had yet again was vindication of the PROCESS even if we want to tweak some of the fine points of the process. And I'm with B1G here - I don't want any "automatic qualifiers" unless that qualifier is "went undefeated in a decent conference."
 
Based on the "eye test," I'm guessing most folks probably would have said to themselves that LSU and Ohio State were the two best teams in the country. Some may have argued Clemson since the only actual argument against them was their schedule. What we avoided, however, is what was so often the ultimate frustration of following college football for so long - did the right team win the national championship?

Like it or not, LSU is the undisputed national champion for 2019. They took on and beat all comers, and they deserve absolute respect for the accomplishment.

1) We didn't get stuck with "team with best-known name gets voted title without playing a bowl game."

Looking at you, 1966 Notre Dame

2) We didn't get "well, only two teams can be in the BCS so: a) Clemson can't 'defend their title' or b) LSU or Ohio St got screwed because Clemson....."

3) We didn't get a plethora of bowl games were some average football team lucked into a win over an overrated one and pole vaulted to the title.

Looking at you, 1983 Miami and 1977 Notre Dame


Nobody got hosed this time. All three unbeatens got a fair chance. And ultimately, the eye test (for most of us) was vindicated. LSU was deservedly number one, and the two teams everyone thought were the top contenders (Ohio St and Clemson) played each other and got a deserving winner (outhouse officiating excluded). LSU played a one-loss blue blood conference champion just to even things up in the sense LSU wasn't sitting at home while teams 2 and 3 decided who got to lose to LSU.

Of course, the ONE objection (with minimal merit) is this one - "But Oklahoma wasn't the fourth best team in the country." And that's PROBABLY true given that Oklahoma 2019 version would lose games to Georgia, Florida, Alabama, and Auburn (if the game was in Jordan-Hare). But in all honesty - who else could you have picked? You had a bunch of two-loss teams clustered.


Was Georgia indisputably number four? I mean, could UGA have beaten Alabama? We'll never know. Maybe UGA beats Alabama with Mac Jones, I don't know.

Was Oregon? Would ANYONE here pick Oregon to beat Georgia anywhere in America?

You couldn't possibly take Baylor over Oklahoma under ANY circumstances - not with two losses to them.

Was Wisconsin indisputably number four? Well, does anyone here think Wisky beats Georgia or Alabama? (Serious question).

Was Florida? How can you possibly take Florida ahead of Georgia? Same number of losses and a 7-point head to head win.

Could you take Penn State?

Is Utah the indisputable number four?


So LSU got what amounted to a scrimmage with a team that might not have been the "fourth best," but the problem was the LSU had already beaten THREE other two-loss candidates (Florida, Georgia, Alabama).



I have some serious reservations about what the committee CAN do. But I also can't say they do a bad job, either. What we had yet again was vindication of the PROCESS even if we want to tweak some of the fine points of the process. And I'm with B1G here - I don't want any "automatic qualifiers" unless that qualifier is "went undefeated in a decent conference."
Agreed...I've even come to think that even with a good win (10 points or more) against AU that UA would still not have been selected. Ultimate weakness in our schedule plus Tua's injury plus anti-Bama bias would have destroyed any chance we had.
LSU is the undisputed champion...on to 2020.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Ols
Agreed...I've even come to think that even with a good win (10 points or more) against AU that UA would still not have been selected. Ultimate weakness in our schedule plus Tua's injury plus anti-Bama bias would have destroyed any chance we had.
LSU is the undisputed champion...on to 2020.


You know, I don't know about that. Picking Alabama AGAIN as a non-conference winner might have risked the whole advocacy of the playoff by the other groups.

An argument COULD be made for Alabama in the top four, though, if we'd beaten Auburn at all with a backup QB.

I also think if we'd beaten LSU, the national title game would have been a rematch.
 
You know, I don't know about that. Picking Alabama AGAIN as a non-conference winner might have risked the whole advocacy of the playoff by the other groups.

An argument COULD be made for Alabama in the top four, though, if we'd beaten Auburn at all with a backup QB.

I also think if we'd beaten LSU, the national title game would have been a rematch.

I think at the time of the selection, yes. But I think after the playoffs and other bowls playout we get a better picture of how "right" the committee got it. I think they "missed" on the 4th seed, Oklahoma. NO WAY in hell they were the 4th best team in the country. I get it, the committee couldn't realize until after the fact how undeserving OU was for that 4th spot. But they flubbed the dub on that selection. And I'll go to my grave believing a "13 ranked" Alabama team would have no doubt given LSU more of a game (even with Jones at QB) than OU did.
 
In my opinion, the past two years are perfect examples of why the 4 team playoff has worked. Under the BCS system, we would have had two years in a row of an undefeated team power 5 not getting a shot at the title. As for the fourth team this year, I agree that Oklahoma was the most logical choice and, frankly, most deserving. Honestly, I'm not sure it mattered who put up against LSU in the semis, they weren't winning.
 
In my opinion, the past two years are perfect examples of why the 4 team playoff has worked. Under the BCS system, we would have had two years in a row of an undefeated team power 5 not getting a shot at the title. As for the fourth team this year, I agree that Oklahoma was the most logical choice and, frankly, most deserving. Honestly, I'm not sure it mattered who put up against LSU in the semis, they weren't winning.


But that's not really the point. If that's the line of thinking why not throw a bone to the FCS national champion and let them play in the 4th spot? Oklahoma was an embarrassment and I can just about guarantee you LSU wouldn't have put 60+ on us and the game over midway through the 1st quarter. We would have probably still lost. But not after the 1st quarter.
 
But that's not really the point. If that's the line of thinking why not throw a bone to the FCS national champion and let them play in the 4th spot? Oklahoma was an embarrassment and I can just about guarantee you LSU wouldn't have put 60+ on us and the game over midway through the 1st quarter. We would have probably still lost. But not after the 1st quarter.

I think the single problem with this version of the playoff is that it rewards conferences like the ACC and Big XII.
 
But that's not really the point. If that's the line of thinking why not throw a bone to the FCS national champion and let them play in the 4th spot? Oklahoma was an embarrassment and I can just about guarantee you LSU wouldn't have put 60+ on us and the game over midway through the 1st quarter. We would have probably still lost. But not after the 1st quarter.

I don't disagree with you that we would have put up a better game against LSU, but I do think Oklahoma was the more deserving team to get in the playoff. A two loss non-conference champion getting in over a one loss power 5 conference champion would have led to some real backlash.
 
I think at the time of the selection, yes. But I think after the playoffs and other bowls playout we get a better picture of how "right" the committee got it. I think they "missed" on the 4th seed, Oklahoma. NO WAY in hell they were the 4th best team in the country. I get it, the committee couldn't realize until after the fact how undeserving OU was for that 4th spot. But they flubbed the dub on that selection. And I'll go to my grave believing a "13 ranked" Alabama team would have no doubt given LSU more of a game (even with Jones at QB) than OU did.

OK (pardon the pun), we can agree (and probably thought before the game) that OU wasn't number four.

But we get back to HONORING THE ON THE FIELD RESULTS.

Oklahoma had one loss; everybody else had two or more. And seriously - how do you determine "the best" between Georgia, Florida, Oregon, Penn State, and Alabama?

Does anyone here know who the fourth best team was (and does it really even matter)?

You can't take Baylor ahead of OU. You absolutely CANNOT do that.

So does UGA get a rematch with LSU?

How sure is anyone UGA beats Alabama, when they haven't been able to beat their backup QB despite having double digit leads the last two times they played?

You CANNOT take Florida ahead of Georgia - is there any compelling reason that says, "Yeah, I know, Georgia won, but Florida was INDISPUTABLY better?" Georgia never trailed in that game, and they spent most of it 10-14 points ahead. They had 128 more yards, held the ball 11 minutes longer, and were never in danger of losing (despite getting flagged for more penalties and six more yards). There is ZERO case that can be made with Florida >>>>>> Georgia.


Again - WHO WAS the fourth best team? The argument is so convoluted that any answer given is wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Con and Padreruf
I don't disagree with you that we would have put up a better game against LSU, but I do think Oklahoma was the more deserving team to get in the playoff. A two loss non-conference champion getting in over a one loss power 5 conference champion would have led to some real backlash.

Not if that two-loss team was indisputably better. Auburn was as high as number two back in 2017 - before they lost the Georgia rematch.
 
But that's not really the point. If that's the line of thinking why not throw a bone to the FCS national champion and let them play in the 4th spot?

Because it's about money and ratings at that point. It is anyway, but you know what I mean.

Oklahoma was an embarrassment

They've been an embarrassment in all their playoff appearances save for the first half against UGA a couple of years ago.


and I can just about guarantee you LSU wouldn't have put 60+ on us and the game over midway through the 1st quarter. We would have probably still lost. But not after the 1st quarter.

This is a fair point.


Was Alabama the fourth-best team in the country, though?

Would we beat Georgia with a backup QB? (I know, we've done it twice in a row after spotting them double digit leads).

Should Penn State go? And then how do you take Penn State over Minnesota, who beat them?

there were enough results to cloud the field this year, but I can't even say for sure the committee "got it wrong." The committee was stuck with three unbeatens and a pile of debate.
 
but they would have been a conference champ and not a two loss non-champion

A fair point, although I think it's clear by now that that "conference championship" blurb they put in the selection was basically designed to appease the Big Ten. It's like when the condom manufacturers put that it should only be used for prevention of disease, which is pretty damned good metaphor here. (And don't correct me with the right idea that it's actually a simile, either).
 
Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement