Clemson is 13 but is in being the ACC champ so will bump them out.
OT: NCAA College Football Games Thread (Championship Weekend) 12/6-12/7 Fri-Sat
- Thread starter rutgersguy1
- Start date
If it was structural and resource related than the conference AQs would be based on that.
The 5 conference with the most resources get AQs.
But that's not the case. Almost had the AAC and MWC among the 5.
Did ACC/Big 12 lose resources?
Either say resources matter and identify the conferences that matter.
Or say all conferences are the same and include everyone.
It's the half measure that's dumb.
It's a half measure because it has to be half measure because of the structure.
I just gave percentages of teams that make the post season in both FCS and CBB vs. FBS CFB. You didn't address that difference which is a big one.
If they want to do autobids, shouldn't it be the top teams from 5 conferences?
Not restricted to "conference champions".
If the CFP itself still thinks SMU is better than Clemson (ranks them 12 and 13 like the AP poll) then why would Clemson deserve a bid over SMU?
Not restricted to "conference champions".
If the CFP itself still thinks SMU is better than Clemson (ranks them 12 and 13 like the AP poll) then why would Clemson deserve a bid over SMU?
Army was #24. They beat an unranked Tulane team. That win will likely jump them into the 17-19 range. But a quantum leap to #12? Don't see it. Neither will the committee.
Boise State is where they are largely because they were very competitive against Oregon.
Army is where they are largely because they were very non-competitive against Notre Dame.
That is the curse of the G5 program. You get very few opportunities to prove how good you are. Maybe one per year. When you get it, better take advantage.
Shouldn’t be that close. Oil money still getting thrown around down there I see.
agree and think some of the projections here have PSU too low. PSU played Oregon tough and came back, psu is legit
That is a great question, and it does harken back to the FSU snub last year, but putting that aside, the short answer is: "Because these are the rules-the conference champion gets the nod, despite the ranking."
Hyman Roth said it best:
And Johnny Ola:
Last edited:
One last thought on the Army to CFP discussion. I am willing to bet that the USMA institution (not necessarily coaches and players) is just as happy not being selected. Their national championship is Saturday. I strongly suspect that they would be quite content to beat Army, win a mid-level bowl game, and call it a day.
Stop saying there is a "structural issue".
12 team playoff - 10 conferences
12 > 10
No structural issue for conference AQs.
Literally no "space" issues.
4 team playoff was a structural issue for conference AQs.
4 < 10
It's a resource issue? OK then designated the conferences that get an AQ.
Big Ten, SEC, ACC, Big 12 and AAC or MWC get an AQ every year.
You can't say it's a resource issue so only some conferences can get an AQ but then say "any conference can get an AQ".
Its a pure subjective issue because
you want to treat based on who "deserves" it.
Just leave it at that.
Want more teams in? Sure then do that.
Make it 24 teams and no AQs.
The number isn't the issue.
Any number 10 or over removes the "structural issue".
Sagarin's ratings vary greatly from the upcoming committee selections.
He still has ND at #1 despite their horrendous loss to NIU and BSU at #30.
His Top 30:
ND,OR,OSU,TX,GA,AL,MISS,PSU,TENN,SMU,IND,ASU,SCAR,,COL,MIA,LOU,LSU,CLEM,TXA&M,FLA,MICH,BAY,MO,KSU,IOWA,USC,IAST,OK,BYU,BSU.
We're up to #46,going 3-2 vs teams ahead of us MN,VT,and WASH,losing to NEB.,while dropping games to UCLA and WI,2 teams below.
He still has ND at #1 despite their horrendous loss to NIU and BSU at #30.
His Top 30:
ND,OR,OSU,TX,GA,AL,MISS,PSU,TENN,SMU,IND,ASU,SCAR,,COL,MIA,LOU,LSU,CLEM,TXA&M,FLA,MICH,BAY,MO,KSU,IOWA,USC,IAST,OK,BYU,BSU.
We're up to #46,going 3-2 vs teams ahead of us MN,VT,and WASH,losing to NEB.,while dropping games to UCLA and WI,2 teams below.
Take away the auto-bids, and more importantly the auto-byes, and the conference championships become meaningless. I doubt that the conferences and their sponsoring TV networks would stand for that.
What's the point of a conference championship if SMU can lose it but still be considered the best team in the ACC?
Note - Agree about the TV partners. I couldn't care less about the monetary concerns.
The general answer to every recommendation about making college athletics more about actual sports and merit seems to be "but money!".
I agree. I think that Clemson will be seeded ahead of SMU. My prediction is Clemson 10, SMU 11, Indiana 12.
That's exactly what makes it fun and what they want. If people are debating and discussing that generates and means there's interest.
Psu is solid, top 5/6 team in the nation thaf can win the natty if things break right
Seeing Clemson at 12 makes me wonder if PSU and/or Texas stay in front of ND despite losses in champ games.
There you go. Texas is 5. Let's see if PSU stays in front too.
Yup PSU stayed in front too.
So I'd guess ND is at 7 and OSU at 8.
3 games up in the colder weather.
OSU, PSU, ND....wont matter for IU. In state rivalry game though. Tenn and SMU will have to go to places they might not want to play in the winter.
It would be nice to put the 2nd round in the home stadiums too and that might help even out the unbalanced part of it with 3 and 4 being "weaker" bye teams. PSU and Texas might have better odds to the semis than Oregon and UGA. Don't think it will happen because they want the bowls involved.
OSU, PSU, ND....wont matter for IU. In state rivalry game though. Tenn and SMU will have to go to places they might not want to play in the winter.
It would be nice to put the 2nd round in the home stadiums too and that might help even out the unbalanced part of it with 3 and 4 being "weaker" bye teams. PSU and Texas might have better odds to the semis than Oregon and UGA. Don't think it will happen because they want the bowls involved.
I'd be surprised if it ever got beyond 16. 14 is possible very soon as it's in the new CFP tv contract if they choose to expand.
conference championship games are dumb.
Just crown the regular season conference champions based on results, use the old BCS formula to rank the top 25, select the top 5 highest ranked conference champions, and fill the rest of the playoff field based on the BCS rankings. No selection committee BS, just straight metrics
Just crown the regular season conference champions based on results, use the old BCS formula to rank the top 25, select the top 5 highest ranked conference champions, and fill the rest of the playoff field based on the BCS rankings. No selection committee BS, just straight metrics
Last edited:
Man Penn State got a ridiculously lucky draw. Won't be easy but definitely as fortunate as you could hope for.
It turns out that the committee was as good as its word. They said they weren't going to penalize teams for losing their conference championship. They didn't.
Clemson was a bid thief. They stole Alabama's bid. It happens to basketball bubble teams, and now it has happened in football. Don't like it? Then stay off the bubble.
Clemson was a bid thief. They stole Alabama's bid. It happens to basketball bubble teams, and now it has happened in football. Don't like it? Then stay off the bubble.
How so?
A) If you are a 5/6 seed, you have to win four games to win the natty,
B) If you are a 1/4 seed, you have to win three games to win the natty,
IMO, A is NEVER better than B.
I wouldn't speak in absolutes like that.
Many seem to disagree when considering the strength of opponents in the 3 games vs. the 4.
Latest posts
-
FB Recruiting Quick update on Transfer DT target Owen Wafle....- Latest: JudgeSmails56
-
