Within the top 10 I think the committee got it mostly right.
The SEC I hate to admit is having a down year, but if Georgia beats LSU, I think we still have a good case for 2 teams. If Georgia loses, then that opens the door for either Alabama or, more likely, Utah/Oregon. In the wild case that Utah/Oregon both end up with 2 losses, there is a chance the Big 10 gets two in. And OK is basically eliminated.
So, in order of likelihood:
One team from each P5 with the Big 12 being left out
SEC gets two
BIG gets two
Clemson losing could even mean two SEC vs two Big 10 in the right circumstances.
I wish they would have left the BCS computer ratings system in place and just added more teams to the playoffs. I really dislike a room full of "experts" deciding this.
I think LSU, Ohio St, and Clemson win out. I think Ohio St adds wins against ranked Michigan and potential top-10 Penn St and Minnesota. I think Oregon wins out as well, giving us:
Peach Bowl: #1 Ohio St vs #4 Oregon
Fiesta Bowl: #2 LSU vs #3 Clemson
Rose Bowl: Minnesota vs Utah
Sugar Bowl: Alabama vs Oklahoma
Orange Bowl: Georgia vs Virginia Tech
Cotton Bowl: Penn St vs Memphis
Wins vs ????????? ?????? Top 25 teams:
- LSU: 3 (#5, #11, #16)
- Georgia: 3 (#11, #15, #16)
- Ohio St: 2 (#12 & #19)
- Baylor: 2 (#21 & #22)
- Penn St: 2 (#13 & #17)
- Oklahoma: 2 (#14 & #22)
- Minnesota: 1 (#8)
- Oregon: 1 (#23)
- Alabama: 0
- Clemson: 0
Found on twitter.
Still two weeks left in season and another week for conference championship games
(11-20-2019 02:23 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote: [ -> ]I wish they would have left the BCS computer ratings system in place and just added more teams to the playoffs. I really dislike a room full of "experts" deciding this.
I would like to see an eight-team playoff but ONLY if a member of the Group of Five is included (assuming, of course, certain requirements are met from that G5 team — such as, say 12 wins and a league title).
Winners of each P5 (though, say, 11 wins is required of each), two at-large teams and the G5 team. Eight teams. It can work.
(11-21-2019 08:59 AM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ] (11-20-2019 02:23 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote: [ -> ]I wish they would have left the BCS computer ratings system in place and just added more teams to the playoffs. I really dislike a room full of "experts" deciding this.
I would like to see an eight-team playoff but ONLY if a member of the Group of Five is included (assuming, of course, certain requirements are met from that G5 team — such as, say 12 wins and a league title).
Winners of each P5 (though, say, 11 wins is required of each), two at-large teams and the G5 team. Eight teams. It can work.
Unless the rules changes on scheduling requirements, this all but guarantees a split between the power schools and non-power schools because no non-power school will then schedule a power school OOC. They will schedule their 1 allowable FCS game plus 2-3 other non-power schools.
If there is a split, this actually may be the one way to do it and not get sued for being anticompetitive.
(11-21-2019 10:18 AM)BePcr07 Wrote: [ -> ] (11-21-2019 08:59 AM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ] (11-20-2019 02:23 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote: [ -> ]I wish they would have left the BCS computer ratings system in place and just added more teams to the playoffs. I really dislike a room full of "experts" deciding this.
I would like to see an eight-team playoff but ONLY if a member of the Group of Five is included (assuming, of course, certain requirements are met from that G5 team — such as, say 12 wins and a league title).
Winners of each P5 (though, say, 11 wins is required of each), two at-large teams and the G5 team. Eight teams. It can work.
Unless the rules changes on scheduling requirements, this all but guarantees a split between the power schools and non-power schools because no non-power school will then schedule a power school OOC. They will schedule their 1 allowable FCS game plus 2-3 other non-power schools.
If there is a split, this actually may be the one way to do it and not get sued for being anticompetitive.
No, autobids would free up the power schools schedule as OOC losses would not matter that much. The focus would shift to winning the conference. Strength of schedule would be factors along with ranking to determine seeding and for picking the two wild card teams. When you consider that fans are staying away from body bag games, putting together a H/H series with a quality opponent is the perfect remedy. What would go away would be the kickoff games.
As for the rankings, I think the committee is hoping desperately that UGA losses again so they can put Oregon into the playoffs.
(11-21-2019 10:18 AM)BePcr07 Wrote: [ -> ] (11-21-2019 08:59 AM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ] (11-20-2019 02:23 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote: [ -> ]I wish they would have left the BCS computer ratings system in place and just added more teams to the playoffs. I really dislike a room full of "experts" deciding this.
I would like to see an eight-team playoff but ONLY if a member of the Group of Five is included (assuming, of course, certain requirements are met from that G5 team — such as, say 12 wins and a league title).
Winners of each P5 (though, say, 11 wins is required of each), two at-large teams and the G5 team. Eight teams. It can work.
Unless the rules changes on scheduling requirements, this all but guarantees a split between the power schools and non-power schools because no non-power school will then schedule a power school OOC. They will schedule their 1 allowable FCS game plus 2-3 other non-power schools.
If there is a split, this actually may be the one way to do it and not get sued for being anticompetitive.
That's a good point. Maybe my approach to this would not work.