(12-09-2014 11:23 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 07:31 AM)mac6115cd Wrote:  I expect the Big12 to maintain their current course for a couple reasons:

1 - Pride/Ego
2 - Lack of vision

#1 is evident in that the Big12 wants to get the other conference commissioners to give them a 10-game CCG. IT WON'T HAPPEN!

Not sure why it won't. ACC is on board and it would provide stability for G5s.

Not about the ACC...the ACC wants it for it own reasons....this comes down to the B1G and SEC...Just have a feeling they want something in return...they give IMO nothing for free...

The fact the big 12 is trying to get a title game with 10 members shows you how poorly run league the big 12 is, they have no vision or leadership. Yet, that has been the case forever. Dodds ran off colorado, neb, texas A&M and missouri than invited wvu but passed on Louisville, WTF. Basically, they are just trying to nitpick the most $ without building a good brand + they should understand they are being overpaid right now. The sad thing for texas is they were making the most $ and had the perfect setup before any big 12 charter school's left. I don't think it make any sense to grant the big 12 a waiver. I could see the ACC get a waiver or any league above 15 teams if they wanted to go with 3 pods of 5 and pick the 2 highest rated pod members to play in a title game.

(12-09-2014 11:09 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  FSU was unbeaten and STILL ranked 3/4 by the committee over the last few weeks. They got little respect because of the constant need for miracle comebacks. I don't think there's any doubt that had FSU lost at any time this year, they don't get in.

This is hard to take seriously from you because you were advocating FSU not being in DESPITE being undefeated. The truth is, while there are certainly scenarios in which a Big 12 team can make the playoffs each year, the committee has shown that all things being equal (all power conference champs with the same number of losses), the Big 12 team will be left out. Thus the Big XII teams, more often then not, will get in not because of what they do, but because of other teams not doing. Yes it can work, but do you want to have to wait for someone else to fail, and not have your destiny in your own hands?

I will take it a step further. Your detailing od FSU's season should be a stern warning. FSU was a power conference team, undefeated, defending national champion, and at 12-0 STILL had to cling on to hold their spot. That means the same thing could happen to a Big 12 team. And as we have seen, the committee is counting wins, not losses. And a 12-1 team can be viewed the same as a 12-0 team. That means, using your own logic, EVEN if a Big 12 team is 12-0, they STILL might have to sweat out a 12-1 team taking their spot, if their last game puts them over the hump.

If I am a Big 12 team, that scares the chit out of me. Doesn't mean you HAVE to make a move, but you do have to weigh the merits of making one or standing pat.

(12-09-2014 10:12 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 09:04 AM)HawkeyeCoug Wrote:  This "Stupid to expand" rationale is very similar to the Big East before the football conference was destroyed. They didn't want to split the money more ways, they didn't want to expand into new markets, and they wanted to keep the BCS bid.

Look what happened - they got picked over, the most valuable properties left, they no longer had the power to get the teams they wanted, and the Big East football conference is now gone.

As a USF fan, I lived through all that, and I disagree. E.g., do you really think that if in 2009 the Big East had added ECU, UCF, Memphis, and Temple to become a 12-team football conference, that this would have prevented Pitt and Cuse and WVU from leaving when the Big 12 and ACC came calling?

Of course not. Those teams leave anyway.

I think he means starting with Penn State in the 80's.

(12-09-2014 11:49 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 11:09 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  FSU was unbeaten and STILL ranked 3/4 by the committee over the last few weeks. They got little respect because of the constant need for miracle comebacks. I don't think there's any doubt that had FSU lost at any time this year, they don't get in.

This is hard to take seriously from you because you were advocating FSU not being in DESPITE being undefeated. The truth is, while there are certainly scenarios in which a Big 12 team can make the playoffs each year, the committee has shown that all things being equal (all power conference champs with the same number of losses), the Big 12 team will be left out. Thus the Big XII teams, more often then not, will get in not because of what they do, but because of other teams not doing. Yes it can work, but do you want to have to wait for someone else to fail, and not have your destiny in your own hands?

I will take it a step further. Your detailing od FSU's season should be a stern warning. FSU was a power conference team, undefeated, defending national champion, and at 12-0 STILL had to cling on to hold their spot. That means the same thing could happen to a Big 12 team. And as we have seen, the committee is counting wins, not losses. And a 12-1 team can be viewed the same as a 12-0 team. That means, using your own logic, EVEN if a Big 12 team is 12-0, they STILL might have to sweat out a 12-1 team taking their spot, if their last game puts them over the hump.

If I am a Big 12 team, that scares the chit out of me. Doesn't mean you HAVE to make a move, but you do have to weigh the merits of making one or standing pat.

To me, this is the most interesting question is: who wins, 12-1 ACC team or an 11-1 Big XII team? If it's the ACC team, the Big XII could be in trouble.

(12-09-2014 10:24 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 10:02 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 09:56 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 12:31 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Here's why:

1) Nobody available is worth anything like $35 million yearly in CFP and media money.

2) In all probability, the Big 12 did NOT get left out of the CFP because they lacked a CCG. The following are far more likely reasons:

a) Since there are 5 major conferences and only 4 playoff spots, SOMEBODY has to get left out every year. It's inevitable.

In this case, one can make a rational argument for Ohio State > Baylor, whom the committee clearly considered to be the "real" Big 12 champ despite the formal designation. Evaluating Baylor and Ohio State, both teams lost a game but Baylor played the softer schedule. When two teams have the same record, SOS is a rational reason for picking between them, so the committee cannot be faulted for putting OSU > Baylor. Baylor was also inferior to each of the other P5 champs, so they were, objectively, the 5th best of the 5 major champs.

IOW's, there's nothing about the committee's decision that necessarily suggests that a lack of a CCG hurt the Big 12. Baylor's SOS was sunk by their poor OOC schedule. Had they played Minnesota, like TCU did, they probably move past Ohio State. That problem can't be solved by a CCG.

b) TV Politics: Ohio State is a blue-chip name, TCU and Baylor are not. Had the Big 12 champ been a big name, like Oklahoma or Texas, chances are they don't get jumped by Ohio State.

c) Bowlsby stupidly lacked the guts to name Baylor the champ. You don't need a CCG to have a clear-cut champ, just a valid tie-breaker procedure, and H2H was the obvious one. But by not doing this, Bowlsby made it easy for the committee to punt on both them and TCU in favor of a clear-cut champ, OSU. As i noted above, the committee almost certainly went ahead and regarded Baylor as the champ anyway, but Bowlsby's failure to formally name them made the committee's job easier as they knew it would provide them with cover in the media.

None of these problems would be resolved by adding two teams and playing a CCG.

I'll bite for one moment, and take you seriously...which raises this question:

IF what you are saying is accurate, THEN how does it feel to be a TCU or Baylor fan and know that your own conference has thrown you under the bus? Because seriously, if this logic is true, then the B12 has written off anyone without the name "University of Texas" or "The University of Oklahoma." And if your own Conference Commissioner isn't going to stand up and assert the equality of TCU, Baylor, (and presumably Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, etc...) but instead will hold to the line of "Well, our teams got aced out purely because of their lack of glamour..." then y'all are screwed.

Some of his logic is flawed, especially b and c. But a is pretty close- someone is going to be left out and the team the committee regarded as our "champ" had a weaker body of work than the "best" team in the conference did. If Baylor has a nonconference win over a .500+ P5 team, I think they are in. Plus OSU had the ultimate season ending "eye test".

It was a perfect storm against the Big 12 this year.

One of many to follow.

Yep, but for different conferences for different reasons each time.

Confirmation bias is strong in college football fans...

(12-09-2014 10:12 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 09:04 AM)HawkeyeCoug Wrote:  This "Stupid to expand" rationale is very similar to the Big East before the football conference was destroyed. They didn't want to split the money more ways, they didn't want to expand into new markets, and they wanted to keep the BCS bid.

Look what happened - they got picked over, the most valuable properties left, they no longer had the power to get the teams they wanted, and the Big East football conference is now gone.

As a USF fan, I lived through all that, and I disagree. E.g., do you really think that if in 2009 the Big East had added ECU, UCF, Memphis, and Temple to become a 12-team football conference, that this would have prevented Pitt and Cuse and WVU from leaving when the Big 12 and ACC came calling?

Of course not. Those teams leave anyway.

I don't disagree that those teams would leave anyway, but it's also obvious that UC, USF, and UConn would have been a lot better off had this situation occurred rather than being absolutely gutted in the end. The holdovers would have had more exit fee money, more power, slightly more stability, and it might have led to keeping Boise St in the fold which could have turned into a best of the rest G5 conference (one that would have likely secured a much better monetary TV deal).

The Big 12 situation is so much like the BE situation it's scary. Are you worried if you are Texas and Oklahoma? Of course not? Are you worried if you're KSU,ISU, Baylor, TCU, etc.? I would think so. If you aren't, then you are playing russian roulette with your athletic future.

(12-09-2014 11:18 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 11:09 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 10:28 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 10:18 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 07:07 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  Want to know WHY the Big XII doesn't have a team in the CFP?

12-1>11-1.

It's really that simple. There's no complicated conspiracy.

12-1>11-1.

Not so, and here's why: Does FSU get the 4th playoff spot if they lose a game this year? Not a chance.

FSU needed to be unbeaten to get past TCU and Baylor. Had FSU lost any of those close games - to ND, Miami, the Ville, Georgia Tech, you name it - they are sitting on the outside looking in at Baylor, even though they would be 12-1 and Baylor 11-1. That's because FSU's schedule, despite the CCG, was weak, and because they barely beat teams.

So obviously, having a CCG wasn't decisive. What was decisive were things I mentioned.

Well....you can argue when FSU lost that one game...Ohio State lost at home early and they had a weaker SoS according to the CFP....Virginia Tech which went 6-6 beat Ohio State early yet the Buckeyes still got in with 12 wins and they played 11 P5 opponents and both Ohio State and Florida State played 3 schools that finished in the Final CFP Top 25 and they played 12 P5 Opponents...Baylor beat Two Top 25 Ranked Schools and TCU only 1 with one few win at 11 in regards to Alabama, Oregon, Florida State and Ohio State...

FSU was unbeaten and STILL ranked 3/4 by the committee over the last few weeks. They got little respect because of the constant need for miracle comebacks. I don't think there's any doubt that had FSU lost at any time this year, they don't get in.

That is just your opinion...many thought and the initial Rankings from the CFP suggested that Ohio State was done after losing at Home to Virginia Tech...remember these are the same folks that dropped TCU 3 spots after they won by 50 points....But we have an idea on what the issue with the Big XII and if media reports are correct they are working hard to fix their issue...quite sure Oliver Luck is giving them guidance ....

If the issue here is how much "respect" the various conferences are getting, I'd be far more worried if i was an ACC fan than a Big 12 fan.

The ACC champ was the ONLY unbeaten team in all of FBS, a team that was last year's undefeated BCS champ and the biggest football name in the ACC, and yet that team was ranked 3rd behind the one-loss champs of two other P5 conferences. That's hard to fathom except as a big sign of disrespect.

In contrast, there really wasn't anything disrespectful towards the Big 12 about Baylor and TCU being left out.

(12-09-2014 11:49 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 11:09 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  FSU was unbeaten and STILL ranked 3/4 by the committee over the last few weeks. They got little respect because of the constant need for miracle comebacks. I don't think there's any doubt that had FSU lost at any time this year, they don't get in.

This is hard to take seriously from you because you were advocating FSU not being in DESPITE being undefeated. The truth is, while there are certainly scenarios in which a Big 12 team can make the playoffs each year, the committee has shown that all things being equal (all power conference champs with the same number of losses), the Big 12 team will be left out.

I don't think we can conclude that the committee has shown that in any kind of general sense. What we have in one data point, one year. No reason for the Big 12 to knee-jerk react to that.

E.g., had FSU lost any of those close games to Miami, Florida, BC, or GT, do they get in ahead of Baylor or TCU? I don't think so. Do you?

(12-09-2014 11:49 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 11:09 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  FSU was unbeaten and STILL ranked 3/4 by the committee over the last few weeks. They got little respect because of the constant need for miracle comebacks. I don't think there's any doubt that had FSU lost at any time this year, they don't get in.

This is hard to take seriously from you because you were advocating FSU not being in DESPITE being undefeated. The truth is, while there are certainly scenarios in which a Big 12 team can make the playoffs each year, the committee has shown that all things being equal (all power conference champs with the same number of losses), the Big 12 team will be left out. Thus the Big XII teams, more often then not, will get in not because of what they do, but because of other teams not doing. Yes it can work, but do you want to have to wait for someone else to fail, and not have your destiny in your own hands?

I will take it a step further. Your detailing od FSU's season should be a stern warning. FSU was a power conference team, undefeated, defending national champion, and at 12-0 STILL had to cling on to hold their spot. That means the same thing could happen to a Big 12 team. And as we have seen, the committee is counting wins, not losses. And a 12-1 team can be viewed the same as a 12-0 team. That means, using your own logic, EVEN if a Big 12 team is 12-0, they STILL might have to sweat out a 12-1 team taking their spot, if their last game puts them over the hump.

If I am a Big 12 team, that scares the chit out of me. Doesn't mean you HAVE to make a move, but you do have to weigh the merits of making one or standing pat.

I'm not scared at all, and my team was on the short end this year. Every year is different. Heck, we almost got TWO teams in. I saw several articles talking about how the Big 12 model is superior and that CCG aren't worth the risk. We were that close to a completely different narrative going on.

College football fans have trouble understanding chance. They look at events that have occurred and overgeneralize that they will occur every year. They then use confirmation bias to interpret/explain what happened.

(12-09-2014 12:29 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  E.g., had FSU lost any of those close games to Miami, Florida, BC, or GT, do they get in ahead of Baylor or TCU? I don't think so. Do you?

To answer your last question, no to Georgia Tech or Flroida because they were so late in the year. One of the earlier ones? Maybe. But their issue wasn't a SOS issue, it was performance. In any event, you are escaping the point: the Big 12is relying on other teams losing, as opposed to being able to control their own destiny. Here is a better question: had TCU been able to play Baylor again, or Baylor able to be playing K State for the second time (likely matchups if a CCG exsited), do you think they are still in?

(12-09-2014 12:32 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 12:29 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  E.g., had FSU lost any of those close games to Miami, Florida, BC, or GT, do they get in ahead of Baylor or TCU? I don't think so. Do you?

To answer your last question, no to Georgia Tech or Flroida because they were so late in the year. One of the earlier ones? Maybe. But their issue wasn't a SOS issue, it was performance. In any event, you are escaping the point: the Big 12is relying on other teams losing, as opposed to being able to control their own destiny. Here is a better question: had TCU been able to play Baylor again, or Baylor able to be playing K State for the second time (likely matchups if a CCG exsited), do you think they are still in?

Should have been in, yes. In, no.

(12-09-2014 12:31 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  College football fans have trouble understanding chance. They look at events that have occurred and overgeneralize that they will occur every year. They then use confirmation bias to interpret/explain what happened.

No one is "overgeneralizing." They are taking the words of the people in charge of the playoffs. It would be different if they offered no explanation and we were left o assume: but they straight told us the 13th game made the difference. Now granted the committee makeup can change over time, and then their priorities, but right now, they flat out are saying they value the 13th game, meaning the Big 12 team has to be "better" than everyone else, as opposed to simply not being the worst. That means you are taking chances EVERY year, that the other teams do not lose as much as you. As shown with FSU, it is even possible that 12-0 is not enough. And it doesn't matter who you try to schedule OOC - you can't really do better than Notre Dame, Florida, and Oklahoma State out of conference in once season on paper (meaning you try to schedule tough all you want: there is no guarantee it will pan out) - you may still be vulnerable to another team who has a chance at a 13th game. The only other immediate option I see, is to start playing games @ Hawaii.

That is what the committee said: that is not college football fans jumping the gun, overgeneralizing, or using confirmation bias.

(12-09-2014 12:47 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  The only other immediate option I see, is to start playing games @ Hawaii.

I pondered this yesterday as well...

(12-09-2014 12:53 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 12:47 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  The only other immediate option I see, is to start playing games @ Hawaii.

I pondered this yesterday as well...

Hmm. That could be one way to get Hawaii to go Indy.

(12-09-2014 12:47 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 12:31 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  College football fans have trouble understanding chance. They look at events that have occurred and overgeneralize that they will occur every year. They then use confirmation bias to interpret/explain what happened.

No one is "overgeneralizing." They are taking the words of the people in charge of the playoffs. It would be different if they offered no explanation and we were left o assume: but they straight told us the 13th game made the difference. Now granted the committee makeup can change over time, and then their priorities, but right now, they flat out are saying they value the 13th game, meaning the Big 12 team has to be "better" than everyone else, as opposed to simply not being the worst. That means you are taking chances EVERY year, that the other teams do not lose as much as you. As shown with FSU, it is even possible that 12-0 is not enough. And it doesn't matter who you try to schedule OOC - you can't really do better than Notre Dame, Florida, and Oklahoma State out of conference in once season on paper (meaning you try to schedule tough all you want: there is no guarantee it will pan out) - you may still be vulnerable to another team who has a chance at a 13th game. The only other immediate option I see, is to start playing games @ Hawaii.

That is what the committee said: that is not college football fans jumping the gun, overgeneralizing, or using confirmation bias.

They said that, and in this particular year it did make a difference since everybody won. But some years that 13th game is going to result in a loss that knocks a team out. Upsets happen; the typical chance the best team wins in a CCG is only 60-70%, so most years there will be 1-2 upsets in championship games.

Chalk is not going to happen every year. There will be years where leagues are cross-cut and the "best" and champion are two different teams.

(12-09-2014 12:59 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  They said that, and in this particular year it did make a difference since everybody won. But some years that 13th game is going to result in a loss that knocks a team out. Upsets happen; the typical chance the best team wins in a CCG is only 60-70%, so most years there will be 1-2 upsets in championship games.

We are going in circles. I keep saying you it puts you in a position to wait for others to lose and you can't control your own destiny. You keep saying that's not true, then you circle around to upsets which... means you don't control your own destiny, which is what you are supposedly disagreeing with. Yet you are disagreeing, by.. agreeing. I don't get it?

(12-09-2014 12:47 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  No one is "overgeneralizing." They are taking the words of the people in charge of the playoffs. It would be different if they offered no explanation and we were left o assume: but they straight told us the 13th game made the difference. Now granted the committee makeup can change over time, and then their priorities, but right now, they flat out are saying they value the 13th game, meaning the Big 12 team has to be "better" than everyone else, as opposed to simply not being the worst. That means you are taking chances EVERY year, that the other teams do not lose as much as you. As shown with FSU, it is even possible that 12-0 is not enough. And it doesn't matter who you try to schedule OOC - you can't really do better than Notre Dame, Florida, and Oklahoma State out of conference in once season on paper (meaning you try to schedule tough all you want: there is no guarantee it will pan out) - you may still be vulnerable to another team who has a chance at a 13th game. The only other immediate option I see, is to start playing games @ Hawaii.

(1) I don't think it's the 13th game so much as the additional quality win. A Big 12 team can "compensate" for not having the opportunity to get an extra quality win in a conference title game, by playing a stronger non-con schedule. If you play 2 P5 non-con games (at least one against a very good team) plus your 9 conference games then you'll have as many quality win opportunities as a team that played a conference title game. But if you have no conference title game, and your non-con schedule is an FCS team plus two 4-8 G5 teams....

(2) As I've said before, I think that the "disrespecting" of FSU this year in spite of having a tough non-con schedule is a combination of having several narrow wins plus having a star QB who is widely disliked, leading people to overreach for reasons to push FSU farther down in the rankings. I think it's very unlikely that this will happen to another undefeated P5 team in another season.

(12-09-2014 12:31 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 11:49 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 11:09 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  FSU was unbeaten and STILL ranked 3/4 by the committee over the last few weeks. They got little respect because of the constant need for miracle comebacks. I don't think there's any doubt that had FSU lost at any time this year, they don't get in.

This is hard to take seriously from you because you were advocating FSU not being in DESPITE being undefeated. The truth is, while there are certainly scenarios in which a Big 12 team can make the playoffs each year, the committee has shown that all things being equal (all power conference champs with the same number of losses), the Big 12 team will be left out. Thus the Big XII teams, more often then not, will get in not because of what they do, but because of other teams not doing. Yes it can work, but do you want to have to wait for someone else to fail, and not have your destiny in your own hands?

I will take it a step further. Your detailing od FSU's season should be a stern warning. FSU was a power conference team, undefeated, defending national champion, and at 12-0 STILL had to cling on to hold their spot. That means the same thing could happen to a Big 12 team. And as we have seen, the committee is counting wins, not losses. And a 12-1 team can be viewed the same as a 12-0 team. That means, using your own logic, EVEN if a Big 12 team is 12-0, they STILL might have to sweat out a 12-1 team taking their spot, if their last game puts them over the hump.

If I am a Big 12 team, that scares the chit out of me. Doesn't mean you HAVE to make a move, but you do have to weigh the merits of making one or standing pat.

I'm not scared at all, and my team was on the short end this year. Every year is different. Heck, we almost got TWO teams in. I saw several articles talking about how the Big 12 model is superior and that CCG aren't worth the risk. We were that close to a completely different narrative going on.

College football fans have trouble understanding chance. They look at events that have occurred and overgeneralize that they will occur every year. They then use confirmation bias to interpret/explain what happened.

The CFP would not include both Baylor and TCU. With the current committee, it will be hard for ANY conference to have two teams in a four team playoff. Only realistic chance would be for a conference to have two undefeated teams playing each other in a CCG. Even then, it would be iffy.

(12-09-2014 01:13 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 12:31 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 11:49 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 11:09 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  FSU was unbeaten and STILL ranked 3/4 by the committee over the last few weeks. They got little respect because of the constant need for miracle comebacks. I don't think there's any doubt that had FSU lost at any time this year, they don't get in.

This is hard to take seriously from you because you were advocating FSU not being in DESPITE being undefeated. The truth is, while there are certainly scenarios in which a Big 12 team can make the playoffs each year, the committee has shown that all things being equal (all power conference champs with the same number of losses), the Big 12 team will be left out. Thus the Big XII teams, more often then not, will get in not because of what they do, but because of other teams not doing. Yes it can work, but do you want to have to wait for someone else to fail, and not have your destiny in your own hands?

I will take it a step further. Your detailing od FSU's season should be a stern warning. FSU was a power conference team, undefeated, defending national champion, and at 12-0 STILL had to cling on to hold their spot. That means the same thing could happen to a Big 12 team. And as we have seen, the committee is counting wins, not losses. And a 12-1 team can be viewed the same as a 12-0 team. That means, using your own logic, EVEN if a Big 12 team is 12-0, they STILL might have to sweat out a 12-1 team taking their spot, if their last game puts them over the hump.

If I am a Big 12 team, that scares the chit out of me. Doesn't mean you HAVE to make a move, but you do have to weigh the merits of making one or standing pat.

I'm not scared at all, and my team was on the short end this year. Every year is different. Heck, we almost got TWO teams in. I saw several articles talking about how the Big 12 model is superior and that CCG aren't worth the risk. We were that close to a completely different narrative going on.

College football fans have trouble understanding chance. They look at events that have occurred and overgeneralize that they will occur every year. They then use confirmation bias to interpret/explain what happened.

The CFP would not include both Baylor and TCU. With the current committee, it will be hard for ANY conference to have two teams in a four team playoff. Only realistic chance would be for a conference to have two undefeated teams playing each other in a CCG. Even then, it would be iffy.

Oh, I think it would have been a certainty the Big 12 would have gotten two teams in with two CCG losses. The committee said as much by calling them 3a, 3b, 3c, 3d.