Georgia came up short vs Alabama. So it looks like Washington, Michigan, and 2 of Florida State, Georgia, Alabama, Texas.

There is no decision the committee can make that satisfies everyone.

Does the backlash cause The Powers That Be to revive the BCS rankings? Point the finger at a faceless mob of voters and computers. [/i]

No. Perfect reason why they are expanding

Expand it this year to these 6 (assuming Florida State and Michigan win tonight). 1 and 2 seeds get byes into the currently scheduled playoff games. Have 3 versus 6 and 4 versus 5 play before Christmas for the right to face the 1 and 2 seeds.

(12-02-2023 08:00 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  No. Perfect reason why they are expanding

Yep.

They can cry all they want. But they did not advocate for us to expand the playoff to 12 teams this season so boo hoo. Ohio State is getting left out also.

(12-03-2023 09:40 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  They can cry all they want. But they did not advocate for us to expand the playoff to 12 teams this season so boo hoo. Ohio State is getting left out also.

Well, depends on exactly who they are. SEC SEC SEC and Big 12 wanted 12 for this year. (Bowlsby was on the 4 man committee, I don't think Big 12 ever changed their position.)

If they is the ACC and Florida State, that's true. I don't think there's any chance of they being Washington or Michigan. Sometimes There Aint No Justice.

BCS >>>>>>>> Committee

Hope this is the impetus to bring back BCS rankings. A small group of people, where groupthink is prone to be prevalent, should not hold this much power.

Florida State, Michigan, Washington and Texas in the playoffs. I would love to see an SEC be excluded this year. There is way too much love for the SEC which is wrong.

(12-03-2023 10:15 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  BCS >>>>>>>> Committee

Hope this is the impetus to bring back BCS rankings. A small group of people, where groupthink is prone to be prevalent, should not hold this much power.

I tend to agree, which is why I posted the thread. Not that the BCS rankings are objectively better -- the blackpill secret is there's no such thing.

But the BCS rankings are easier to point to and blame, it's diffuse enough that it's like the weather, it's nobody's fault.

Right now, there is no objectively correct answer to which 4 teams belong. But we're moving to 12 teams, so it's a lower-temperature question whether Ole Miss, Penn STate or Oklahoma get left out. Shouldn't have lost two games, too bad so sad.

(12-02-2023 07:55 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Georgia came up short vs Alabama. So it looks like Washington, Michigan, and 2 of Florida State, Georgia, Alabama, Texas.

There is no decision the committee can make that satisfies everyone.

Does the backlash cause The Powers That Be to revive the BCS rankings? Point the finger at a faceless mob of voters and computers. [/i]

Well they have to ask themselves if their champion is legitimate if they leave unbeaten FSU out and if they put in Alabama over a team with a stronger schedule who beat them on their home field.

(12-03-2023 10:15 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  BCS >>>>>>>> Committee

Hope this is the impetus to bring back BCS rankings. A small group of people, where groupthink is prone to be prevalent, should not hold this much power.

I thought the committee would be better than the mindless politically correct computers (no MOV) and stupid pollsters. But I was mistaken. The committee is worse because of groupthink. Polls at least let people vote independently.

(12-03-2023 10:26 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-02-2023 07:55 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Georgia came up short vs Alabama. So it looks like Washington, Michigan, and 2 of Florida State, Georgia, Alabama, Texas.

There is no decision the committee can make that satisfies everyone.

Does the backlash cause The Powers That Be to revive the BCS rankings? Point the finger at a faceless mob of voters and computers. [/i]

Well they have to ask themselves if their champion is legitimate if they leave unbeaten FSU out and if they put in Alabama over a team with a stronger schedule who beat them on their home field.

IMO, the committee is, in the final analysis, supposed to put the four best teams as of the time of the selection in the playoffs.

To me, there are four teams that are clear-cut above the rest: Alabama, Texas, Michigan and Washington. So to me there's no need to decide between TX and Alabama, both belong.

Even many FSU supporters are saying things like "sure, FSU isn't one of the four best, wouldn't have beaten Oregon or Georgia, but they are an unbeaten P5 champ", etc. IMO that is just an admission that FSU doesn't belong.

If the CFP can keep 13-0 Liberty out they can keep 13-0 FSU out. Since they lost their star QB, FSU just isn't as good as the four I mentioned.

Of course, the CFP doesn't necessarily do what I think, LOL. We'll see soon enough.

(12-03-2023 10:30 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-03-2023 10:26 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-02-2023 07:55 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Georgia came up short vs Alabama. So it looks like Washington, Michigan, and 2 of Florida State, Georgia, Alabama, Texas.

There is no decision the committee can make that satisfies everyone.

Does the backlash cause The Powers That Be to revive the BCS rankings? Point the finger at a faceless mob of voters and computers. [/i]

Well they have to ask themselves if their champion is legitimate if they leave unbeaten FSU out and if they put in Alabama over a team with a stronger schedule who beat them on their home field.

IMO, the committee is, in the final analysis, supposed to put the four best teams as of the time of the selection in the playoffs.

To me, there are four teams that are clear-cut above the rest: Alabama, Texas, Michigan and Washington. So to me there's no need to decide between TX and Alabama, both belong.

Even many FSU supporters are saying things like "sure, FSU isn't one of the four best, wouldn't have beaten Oregon or Georgia, but they are an unbeaten P5 champ", etc. IMO that is just an admission that FSU doesn't belong.

If the CFP can keep 13-0 Liberty out they can keep 13-0 FSU out. Since they lost their star QB, FSU just isn't as good as the four I mentioned.

Of course, the CFP doesn't necessarily do what I think, LOL. We'll see soon enough.

Well why not Michigan, Texas, Alabama and Georgia?

(12-03-2023 10:26 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-02-2023 07:55 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Georgia came up short vs Alabama. So it looks like Washington, Michigan, and 2 of Florida State, Georgia, Alabama, Texas.

There is no decision the committee can make that satisfies everyone.

Does the backlash cause The Powers That Be to revive the BCS rankings? Point the finger at a faceless mob of voters and computers. [/i]

Well they have to ask themselves if their champion is legitimate if they leave unbeaten FSU out and if they put in Alabama over a team with a stronger schedule who beat them on their home field.

Someone is going to argue that the champion is not legitimate, is the point. Can you have a legitimate champion without an SEC squad?
Can you have a legitimate champion without the No. 1 team all season in the AP and Coaches polls, and for the last three weeks after they lose by 3?
Can you have a legitimate champion without a 13-0 ACC champ FSU?
Can you have a legitmate champ if you put in Georgia but not Alabama who beat them?

(12-03-2023 10:24 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-03-2023 10:15 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  BCS >>>>>>>> Committee

Hope this is the impetus to bring back BCS rankings. A small group of people, where groupthink is prone to be prevalent, should not hold this much power.

I tend to agree, which is why I posted the thread. Not that the BCS rankings are objectively better -- the blackpill secret is there's no such thing. But the BCS rankings are easier to point to and blame, it's diffuse enough that it's like the weather, it's nobody's fault.

There is no perfect system. I have been extremely critical of the committee over the years, but I would say that the top 12 system plus the mandate of the top 5 conference champs qualifying largely mitigates the issues that I had with the CFP committee in the top 4 system with no guardrails at all (outside of picking the “best” teams). All of the power conference champs are going to get in (at least in practicality if not officially), which is the one tangible accomplishment that all teams (outside of the independents) can control, so the chances of a legitimately deserving team getting left out is a lot lower. Talking about leaving out a P5 champ of arguably the toughest conference because they’re ranked #5 is totally different than leaving out an at-large non-champ at #13.

So, it’s not so much the committee itself that bothered me, but rather they really didn’t have any clear guardrails or criteria that they needed to follow, which allowed for subjective eye tests (or the perception that they were using subjective eye tests) to start being more important than actual results or conference titles. They’re at least having to commit 5 spots to conference champs, which makes the playoff a little more “idiot proof”.

(12-03-2023 10:36 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-03-2023 10:30 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-03-2023 10:26 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-02-2023 07:55 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Georgia came up short vs Alabama. So it looks like Washington, Michigan, and 2 of Florida State, Georgia, Alabama, Texas.

There is no decision the committee can make that satisfies everyone.

Does the backlash cause The Powers That Be to revive the BCS rankings? Point the finger at a faceless mob of voters and computers. [/i]

Well they have to ask themselves if their champion is legitimate if they leave unbeaten FSU out and if they put in Alabama over a team with a stronger schedule who beat them on their home field.

IMO, the committee is, in the final analysis, supposed to put the four best teams as of the time of the selection in the playoffs.

To me, there are four teams that are clear-cut above the rest: Alabama, Texas, Michigan and Washington. So to me there's no need to decide between TX and Alabama, both belong.

Even many FSU supporters are saying things like "sure, FSU isn't one of the four best, wouldn't have beaten Oregon or Georgia, but they are an unbeaten P5 champ", etc. IMO that is just an admission that FSU doesn't belong.

If the CFP can keep 13-0 Liberty out they can keep 13-0 FSU out. Since they lost their star QB, FSU just isn't as good as the four I mentioned.

Of course, the CFP doesn't necessarily do what I think, LOL. We'll see soon enough.

Well why not Michigan, Texas, Alabama and Georgia?

I think Washington is the third-best team right now, behind only Texas and Alabama (I think both will beat Michigan in a playoff game). I have liked Washington all year, I picked them to beat Oregon yesterday.

So to me, if Georgia was going to get in, it would have to be over Alabama or Texas, not Washington.

(12-03-2023 10:40 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-03-2023 10:36 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-03-2023 10:30 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-03-2023 10:26 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-02-2023 07:55 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Georgia came up short vs Alabama. So it looks like Washington, Michigan, and 2 of Florida State, Georgia, Alabama, Texas.

There is no decision the committee can make that satisfies everyone.

Does the backlash cause The Powers That Be to revive the BCS rankings? Point the finger at a faceless mob of voters and computers. [/i]

Well they have to ask themselves if their champion is legitimate if they leave unbeaten FSU out and if they put in Alabama over a team with a stronger schedule who beat them on their home field.

IMO, the committee is, in the final analysis, supposed to put the four best teams as of the time of the selection in the playoffs.

To me, there are four teams that are clear-cut above the rest: Alabama, Texas, Michigan and Washington. So to me there's no need to decide between TX and Alabama, both belong.

Even many FSU supporters are saying things like "sure, FSU isn't one of the four best, wouldn't have beaten Oregon or Georgia, but they are an unbeaten P5 champ", etc. IMO that is just an admission that FSU doesn't belong.

If the CFP can keep 13-0 Liberty out they can keep 13-0 FSU out. Since they lost their star QB, FSU just isn't as good as the four I mentioned.

Of course, the CFP doesn't necessarily do what I think, LOL. We'll see soon enough.

Well why not Michigan, Texas, Alabama and Georgia?

I think Washington is the third-best team right now, behind only Texas and Alabama (I think both will beat Michigan in a playoff game). I have liked Washington all year, I picked them to beat Oregon yesterday.

So to me, if Georgia was going to get in, it would have to be over Alabama or Texas, not Washington.

I didn't believe in Washington. They kept having close games. I was certain their defense would let them down somewhere and they would drop one. But they have managed to keep winning.

(12-03-2023 10:43 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-03-2023 10:40 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-03-2023 10:36 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-03-2023 10:30 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-03-2023 10:26 AM)bullet Wrote:  Well they have to ask themselves if their champion is legitimate if they leave unbeaten FSU out and if they put in Alabama over a team with a stronger schedule who beat them on their home field.

IMO, the committee is, in the final analysis, supposed to put the four best teams as of the time of the selection in the playoffs.

To me, there are four teams that are clear-cut above the rest: Alabama, Texas, Michigan and Washington. So to me there's no need to decide between TX and Alabama, both belong.

Even many FSU supporters are saying things like "sure, FSU isn't one of the four best, wouldn't have beaten Oregon or Georgia, but they are an unbeaten P5 champ", etc. IMO that is just an admission that FSU doesn't belong.

If the CFP can keep 13-0 Liberty out they can keep 13-0 FSU out. Since they lost their star QB, FSU just isn't as good as the four I mentioned.

Of course, the CFP doesn't necessarily do what I think, LOL. We'll see soon enough.

Well why not Michigan, Texas, Alabama and Georgia?

I think Washington is the third-best team right now, behind only Texas and Alabama (I think both will beat Michigan in a playoff game). I have liked Washington all year, I picked them to beat Oregon yesterday.

So to me, if Georgia was going to get in, it would have to be over Alabama or Texas, not Washington.

I didn't believe in Washington. They kept having close games. I was certain their defense would let them down somewhere and they would drop one. But they have managed to keep winning.

I agree, and their great "wins" were against the PAC. They didnt really play anyone OOC. Neither did Michigan. Neither did Georgia.

Give credit to FSU, Alabama, and Texas for scheduling a real OOC. I have a really good idea where those teams are at. So should the committee. I dont know where Michigan, Washington, or Georgia are at, although I have a better idea about Georgia than Washington or Michigan.

ZIf there were two teams that could easily get their butts handed to them in the playoff, it would be definitely Washington, and possibly Michigan.

The BCS simulators are waiting on the Coaches Poll....

The simulated BCS rankings are out.

Their top four: Michigan, Washington, Alabama, FSU.

Their 6+6 playoff:
Conference champs with byes: 1. Michigan, 2. Washington, 3. Alabama, 4. FSU.
Hosting first round games: 5. Texas, 6. Georgia, 7. Ohio State, 8. Oregon.
In the playoffs: 9. Penn STate, 10. Mizzou, 11. Ole Miss, #17 Liberty

For the last 9 years, the simulated BCS has matched the CFP committee's top four. Will it happen again this year? We'll know in an hour or so.

https://twitter.com/BCSKnowHow/status/17...7468788004