I think he's saying that the second "best" teams in a conference will essentially benefit from not playing in the CCG.
College Football Week 13 - Sparty ain't worried 'bout no clock
- Thread starter Randolph Freelander
- Start date
I think he's saying that the second "best" teams in a conference will essentially benefit from not playing in the CCG.
Randolph Freelander
Member
The only thing I'll cite the FCS for is to discount the people saying "we can't do playoffs because they'll play too many games." Like the FCS doesn't have a 37 round playoff disproving the point.
But I'd never want more than 8 in a college football playoff. And I won't necessarily argue for 8. But if it's not 4, it's 8. I don't want any part of first round bye nonsense.
If it were up to me and it went to 8, I say play the CCGs, take a week off, then start the playoff. This year, it would be 12/19 first round, then play the semis and championship game as presently scheduled.
But I'd never want more than 8 in a college football playoff. And I won't necessarily argue for 8. But if it's not 4, it's 8. I don't want any part of first round bye nonsense.
If it were up to me and it went to 8, I say play the CCGs, take a week off, then start the playoff. This year, it would be 12/19 first round, then play the semis and championship game as presently scheduled.
It's still a first round bye because the conference championships are effectively the first round layoff or not. Why should it be more favorable to not win your conference as long as you get in to the playoff?
See what I mentioned above...a lot of the time the conference championships are the real first round anyway.
serenewarfare
Banned
I think that if you expand to 8 teams, every P5 champ should get in (barring some insane scenario where a champ has 4+ losses) and then you sort the other three spots among the rest of the teams.
So much discussion on the world wide leader on Les Miles coming back. It's a non-story, now. Why not spend 30 minutes talking about how Harbaugh is coming back to Michigan next year.
Joe Schad is such a chode.
GoldenEye 007
Member
Yep. He constantly makes him do the thing he appears to be the least capable of (Throwing bubble/WR screens) and rarely lets him do what he's appeared decent at (10-20 yard intermediate throws and bootleg). He's so fucking horrible at throwing to the sideline, I can't believe those passes haven't been picked off and returned for TD's.
Randolph Freelander
Member
It's either an auto-bid or it isn't.
I agree with those against automatic bids. Take the top teams, and if a conference is left out, so be it. That's the best thing about the 4 team format now, there can't be automatic bids.
serenewarfare
Banned
I don't think it should be auto-bid because anything could happen, but I think winning your conference should mean something. Does in every other sport with a playoff system.
perfectchaos007
Member
In some years, yes. But on average maybe only one team would be in that position. Ohio State is the only team that would be in no matter how the CCG's end up for this year. Keep in mind one of those 4 extra spots would go to the Pac 12 champ this year so there are only 3 at large spots. And if Notre Dame didn't screw up the last minute against Stanford, they would get another spot. That only leaves 2 at large spaces
Dsyndrome
Member
Well they weren't wrong. No one outside of LSU thought it made any sense, except people that wanted to watch LSU struggle for the next 10 years.
Alcibiades
Member
No one with a loss should have a shot unless there is a clear consensus that they have risen above 2nd-tier status (and even then, they should only have a shot if there are less than four undefeated teams).
That is one of the beauties of college football - EVERY GAME MATTERS. Teams can't afford to take weeks off, rest their starters, lay an egg on rivalry week, etc... That is why individual matchups get so much hype. Look at the Clemson-South Carolina game - it wouldn't have nearly the same impact if Clemson was guaranteed a spot by winning the ACC. If they had lost to South Carolina, that would have opened up the possibility to falling out of the Top 4 and maybe not making it back in even with a win next week.
That is the beauty of not rewarding teams simply for winning their conference and one reason I would oppose moving to 8 teams. Too many undeserving teams would make it in at that point. Take the undefeated Power 5 and anyone else that wants a shot can give themselves a chance by scheduling tough OOC, not losing again, and crossing their fingers that the stars align in their favor.
Randolph Freelander
Member
Other sports should revisit that (in fact, the NBA has -- winning your division means nothing this year). There's no glory in winning a bad division in pro sports or a bad conference in college football. Winning means something, but being the least bad team does not.
Affeinvasion
Member
There's only one conference where that is true this year (BIG). BIG XII doesn't even have a championship game but they're a P5 conference. I also would have no problem saying that Ohio State is the second best team in the BIG if Iowa loses. Conference divisions are rarely evenly divided.
GoldenEye 007
Member
It generally does as part of a larger body of work. But let's say if UF beats Bama next week. They can go on to the Peach bowl or whatever isn't in the semifinal that they're contracted to. No way should they sniff a CFP game.
Well I think the committee values big wins over bad losses (which makes sense).
It's all moot anyway, since UNC isn't going to win. Wouldn't put it past them to get blown out either.
serenewarfare
Banned
That's why I said no auto-bids. Bad teams shouldn't make it, I agree. But more often than not I think a conference champ with two losses should get the benefit of the doubt over a one-loss team who didn't even make their CCG.
For example, if Stanford wins next week, I would think they deserve a playoff spot more than OSU.
perfectchaos007
Member
The 5 P5 conference winners + 3 at large teams chosen by the committee or BCS or whatever. Committee/BCS also chooses seedings and therefor homefields for the first round so they feel important. It just makes sense.
I'm okay with conference winner auto bids because we shouldn't punish the winner of a deep conference. This year, the Pac-12 is being punished for being deep. Next year it could be the SEC or B1G.
GoldenEye 007
Member
Nah, should just be a straight top 4,6, or 8. No autobid for any conference. No limit on conference appearances.
I'm not saying I'm against 8 just that I don't think teams should be able to play one less game and get in. So I'd want Ohio state to at least have to play another team to get in this year if there were 8.
And yes this means a big 12 championship game too.
FloydtheFathead
Member
GoldenEye 007
Member
chaosblade
Unconfirmed Member
Too much possibility for a conference winner to be a 4+ loss team or otherwise clearly not one of the best teams in the country.
I don't really like the idea of expanding the playoff because the more you do it the more impact it removes from events during the regular season. I'd be fine expanding it to 6 with byes, but more than that and I'll grumble.
And that field looked like they soaked it before the game or something.
Randolph Freelander
Member
The selection committee is not full of automatons, their process should be free to determine between deep versus bad. Two-loss Stanford will be top 8 this year -- assuming they win next week -- so they don't need an automatic bid in a hypothetical 8 team playoff, they'll get in on their own merits.
perfectchaos007
Member
I think the damage has already been done. There were decommitments last week, but now that he's safe we shouldn't see many more.
serenewarfare
Banned
The only reason a two-loss Stanford will be in the top 8 is the timing of their losses. Had tonight been their second loss in three games, there's no way they'd be top eight, but they would still be in the CCG. Just because the situation didn't present itself this year doesn't mean in never has or never will.
To be fair the Feleipe Franks decommit, probably the most high profile one, was known for a little while before it became public. It was happening with or without the Les drama.
Affeinvasion
Member
I'm not sure this can be said definitively. They could also possibly be Reptilians.
sonycowboy
Member
This isn't discussed enough... If you let teams in that didn't make it to the conference championship, it becomes silly. That extra game is going penalize teams that actually won their division.
So Ohio State in my book is out. Michigan State should be in over them even if they lose that game.
Their opponent records are 54-66, with 2 FCS teams that I'm not going to bother looking up for wins and loss records, while Clemson's is 67-64, with Appy State being included (9-2).
For giggles, Alabama's are 80-50, counting a bad 1-10 La Monroe team.
ACC surks
Affeinvasion
Member
When was the last time a 4 loss team won a conference championship? I legitimately don't know.
FloydtheFathead
Member
2012 Wisconsin Badgers..
And that was only because of Bowl Bans for Ohio State and Penn State.
serenewarfare
Banned
VA Tech won the ACC with 4 losses in 2008. Also Wiscy but theirs kinda doesn't count because it was due to bans.
I mean...there's almost en entire month between Championship week and the playoff semifinals. I don't think an extra week is going to make much of a difference, even though they'd be starting a week earlier if they expanded. CCGs would be the weekend of Dec. 4th, and the playoff quarterfinals would be Christmas weekend. That's still three weeks off in the worst case scenario of playing a CCG and playing the first weekend of the playoffs, unless they wanted to move them back to avoid playing on Christmas or something.
We certainly had that possibility a few years ago with an awful, awful UCLA team playing for it, if I recall correctly.
Edit: guess they only had 3 regular season losses.
Edit the 2nd: lol had the wrong season. As Cyan points out, they were even worse.
Randolph Freelander
Member
Florida State had 4 losses entering the 2005 ACC CCG, won.
Virginia Tech had 4 losses entering the 2008 ACC CCG, won.
Clemson had 3 losses when they won the ACC in 2011, took a 4th loss in the bowl game.
USC (8-4) plays for the Pac-12 title this year.
The 3 aforementioned ACC champions and the possible USC as Pac-12 champion would have no business anywhere near an expanded CFP.
perfectchaos007
Member
Well, if the NCAA agrees not to hand out any more post-season bans going forward, I guess we can discount UCLA and Wisconsin.
serenewarfare
Banned
I think there are just enough exceptions to not have auto-bids, but not enough of them to say that conference champs shouldn't essentially always be in. Leave wiggle room, but not too much.
Affeinvasion
Member
It's just weird to see the statements of "winning your conference is the most important thing" and the hand wringing over "what if a 4 loss team wins the conference" come into contact. So it's only important to win your conference if you have 1 or fewer losses, otherwise it doesn't matter?
sonycowboy
Member
i'm not talking about the timing of the games (an extra week of no rest). I'm talking about the fact that ~if you lose the CCG that you could be out in favor of a team that didn't even make it. That you beat head to head to win your division. (E.G Michigan State & Ohio State this year and famously Alabama / LSU back in 2011).
It shouldn't be possible to benefit from you not playing in a CCG over a team that actually made it (assuming they're ranked higher than you going into a CCG).
Randolph Freelander
Member
The only thing I think we can all agree on is that for Notre Dame to be in, they have to win a conference. For everyone else, it's optional.
chaosblade
Unconfirmed Member
If a better team is ineligible to be the conference champ that shouldn't override an inferior team winning the conference and getting an auto-bid into a playoff. Conference champ is the conference champ regardless of the circumstances that result in it.
The best teams don't always win their conference, auto-bids aren't an ideal solution for placement.
I don't think winning a conference should be necessary, but it's added value for a team that does.
Affeinvasion
Member
lol. ACC full time members here we come. I honestly think it could have happened if we'd been left out with 1 or 0 losses.
serenewarfare
Banned
If a team is clearly a bad team and wins a conference due the conference being terrible or because of a bowl ban on the superior teams, they should be left out because common sense. If a team is in a tough conference and wins a CCG with two or three losses, they should get in over a one-loss team that didn't win their conference. It's not that complicated.
FloydtheFathead
Member
well.. that means they join the ACC.. You ready for the Irish to join? Blame Michigan for it, Randy...
Similar threads
- Locked