(10-13-2021 09:32 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ] (10-12-2021 01:33 PM)Erictelevision Wrote: [ -> ]Does ANYONE actually believe TPTB will allow Cincinnati to get into the playoff?! There’s NO WAY IN HELL A G5 is allowed a shot at a championship!
If they stay unbeaten they are in. Period. But one loss will certainly knock them out.
I don't think so. Imagine if we have unbeaten Oklahoma, unbeaten Michigan, Alabama as 1-loss SEC champ, who beat previously unbeaten Georgia in the SEC title game?
I think Cincy doesn't make it. I also don't think Cincy makes it if Ohio State wins the B1G with one loss.
Cincy IMO needs help, but their weak schedule is a huge advantage, as all the other contenders play much tougher schedules, have losable games.
(10-13-2021 10:14 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ] (10-13-2021 09:32 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ] (10-12-2021 01:33 PM)Erictelevision Wrote: [ -> ]Does ANYONE actually believe TPTB will allow Cincinnati to get into the playoff?! There’s NO WAY IN HELL A G5 is allowed a shot at a championship!
If they stay unbeaten they are in. Period. But one loss will certainly knock them out.
I don't think so. Imagine if we have unbeaten Oklahoma, unbeaten Michigan, Alabama as 1-loss SEC champ, who beat previously unbeaten Georgia in the SEC title game?
I think Cincy doesn't make it. I also don't think Cincy makes it if Ohio State wins the B1G with one loss.
Cincy IMO needs help, but their weak schedule is a huge advantage, as all the other contenders play much tougher schedules, have losable games.
The Big ten champion won't be unbeaten unless it's Iowa. I don't think Michigan is beating Ohio State
The debate will be Cincinnati vs 1 - Loss Conference Champion
(10-13-2021 08:16 AM)goofus Wrote: [ -> ]The CFP could let in a G5... this time. And it will be ok because Cincy is moving to the Big 12 soon.
And next time the argument will be that the SEC will be stronger, the Big 12 gap over the AAC has increased and no G5 conference member will be worthy under the new alignment
I agree. Cincy is a hybrid right now. The rules of the game are different.
(10-13-2021 10:30 AM)Glenn360 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-13-2021 10:14 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ] (10-13-2021 09:32 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ] (10-12-2021 01:33 PM)Erictelevision Wrote: [ -> ]Does ANYONE actually believe TPTB will allow Cincinnati to get into the playoff?! There’s NO WAY IN HELL A G5 is allowed a shot at a championship!
If they stay unbeaten they are in. Period. But one loss will certainly knock them out.
I don't think so. Imagine if we have unbeaten Oklahoma, unbeaten Michigan, Alabama as 1-loss SEC champ, who beat previously unbeaten Georgia in the SEC title game?
I think Cincy doesn't make it. I also don't think Cincy makes it if Ohio State wins the B1G with one loss.
Cincy IMO needs help, but their weak schedule is a huge advantage, as all the other contenders play much tougher schedules, have losable games.
The Big ten champion won't be unbeaten unless it's Iowa. I don't think Michigan is beating Ohio State
The debate will be Cincinnati vs 1 - Loss Conference Champion
Well to me the issue is "if" we have an unbeaten B1G champ.
And if we have an unbeaten B1G champ, or champ of any P5, Cincy does not get in above them.
Basically, these arguments reflect why Cincy doesn't belong: We are all assuming it will be very hard for there to be an unbeaten B1G or ACC or B12 champ, precisely because they have tough games ahead. OTOH, an unbeaten Cincy seems likely, because they do not.
(10-13-2021 12:58 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ] (10-13-2021 10:30 AM)Glenn360 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-13-2021 10:14 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ] (10-13-2021 09:32 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ] (10-12-2021 01:33 PM)Erictelevision Wrote: [ -> ]Does ANYONE actually believe TPTB will allow Cincinnati to get into the playoff?! There’s NO WAY IN HELL A G5 is allowed a shot at a championship!
If they stay unbeaten they are in. Period. But one loss will certainly knock them out.
I don't think so. Imagine if we have unbeaten Oklahoma, unbeaten Michigan, Alabama as 1-loss SEC champ, who beat previously unbeaten Georgia in the SEC title game?
I think Cincy doesn't make it. I also don't think Cincy makes it if Ohio State wins the B1G with one loss.
Cincy IMO needs help, but their weak schedule is a huge advantage, as all the other contenders play much tougher schedules, have losable games.
The Big ten champion won't be unbeaten unless it's Iowa. I don't think Michigan is beating Ohio State
The debate will be Cincinnati vs 1 - Loss Conference Champion
Well to me the issue is "if" we have an unbeaten B1G champ.
And if we have an unbeaten B1G champ, or champ of any P5, Cincy does not get in above them.
Basically, these arguments reflect why Cincy doesn't belong: We are all assuming it will be very hard for there to be an unbeaten B1G or ACC or B12 champ, precisely because they have tough games ahead. OTOH, an unbeaten Cincy seems likely, because they do not.
I agree with your earlier post. I believe that if Cincy is unbeaten there will be a strong bias to include them, if only to "prove" that they aren't biased against the G5.
(10-13-2021 01:15 PM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ] (10-13-2021 12:58 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ] (10-13-2021 10:30 AM)Glenn360 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-13-2021 10:14 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ] (10-13-2021 09:32 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ]If they stay unbeaten they are in. Period. But one loss will certainly knock them out.
I don't think so. Imagine if we have unbeaten Oklahoma, unbeaten Michigan, Alabama as 1-loss SEC champ, who beat previously unbeaten Georgia in the SEC title game?
I think Cincy doesn't make it. I also don't think Cincy makes it if Ohio State wins the B1G with one loss.
Cincy IMO needs help, but their weak schedule is a huge advantage, as all the other contenders play much tougher schedules, have losable games.
The Big ten champion won't be unbeaten unless it's Iowa. I don't think Michigan is beating Ohio State
The debate will be Cincinnati vs 1 - Loss Conference Champion
Well to me the issue is "if" we have an unbeaten B1G champ.
And if we have an unbeaten B1G champ, or champ of any P5, Cincy does not get in above them.
Basically, these arguments reflect why Cincy doesn't belong: We are all assuming it will be very hard for there to be an unbeaten B1G or ACC or B12 champ, precisely because they have tough games ahead. OTOH, an unbeaten Cincy seems likely, because they do not.
I agree with your earlier post. I believe that if Cincy is unbeaten there will be a strong bias to include them, if only to "prove" that they aren't biased against the G5.
I agree with my earlier post too, and see how the later one could be viewed as contradictory. I guess where we differ is on the strength of that pro-Cincy bias.
I think that bias works for Cincy in a situation where in the past, they would have been ranked behind.
For example, in last year's final CFP, Cincy was ranked behind some multi-loss teams (Oklahoma, Florida) and behind a one-loss team that was not a conference or division champs (TAMU). I don't think that happens this year. I don't see any two-loss team, no matter who they are, ranked ahead of an unbeaten Cincy. Also, I don't think any one-loss ACC or PAC champ gets in ahead of them either. Probably not a one-loss B12 champ either.
But I still think that they lose out to *any* unbeaten P5 champ, even say a Wake Forest or a Kentucky, and they lose out to some one-loss P5 champs, such as a B1G champ and SEC champ, and they do not get in ahead of a Georgia that is unbeaten before losing to Alabama in the SEC CCG.
(10-14-2021 09:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]For example, in last year's final CFP, Cincy was ranked behind some multi-loss teams (Oklahoma, Florida) and behind a one-loss team that was not a conference or division champs (TAMU). I don't think that happens this year. I don't see any two-loss team, no matter who they are, ranked ahead of an unbeaten Cincy. Also, I don't think any one-loss ACC or PAC champ gets in ahead of them either. Probably not a one-loss B12 champ either.
But I still think that they lose out to *any* unbeaten P5 champ, even say a Wake Forest or a Kentucky, and they lose out to some one-loss P5 champs, such as a B1G champ and SEC champ, and they do not get in ahead of a Georgia that is unbeaten before losing to Alabama in the SEC CCG.
I'm with this. Like a 12-1 Georgia, I think a 1-loss at large Michigan would also be in a category ahead of Cincinnati. I'm not yet sold on Harbaugh's ability to get 11 or 12 wins, so it is as likely as an undefeated Kentucky or Wake Forest.
(10-14-2021 09:44 AM)Crayton Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]For example, in last year's final CFP, Cincy was ranked behind some multi-loss teams (Oklahoma, Florida) and behind a one-loss team that was not a conference or division champs (TAMU). I don't think that happens this year. I don't see any two-loss team, no matter who they are, ranked ahead of an unbeaten Cincy. Also, I don't think any one-loss ACC or PAC champ gets in ahead of them either. Probably not a one-loss B12 champ either.
But I still think that they lose out to *any* unbeaten P5 champ, even say a Wake Forest or a Kentucky, and they lose out to some one-loss P5 champs, such as a B1G champ and SEC champ, and they do not get in ahead of a Georgia that is unbeaten before losing to Alabama in the SEC CCG.
I'm with this. Like a 12-1 Georgia, I think a 1-loss at large Michigan would also be in a category ahead of Cincinnati. I'm not yet sold on Harbaugh's ability to get 11 or 12 wins, so it is as likely as an undefeated Kentucky or Wake Forest.
This is why conference champions must be the driving factor instead of this bogus ranking system. Let the ranking be determined on the field.
(10-14-2021 09:47 AM)kdblazer Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:44 AM)Crayton Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]For example, in last year's final CFP, Cincy was ranked behind some multi-loss teams (Oklahoma, Florida) and behind a one-loss team that was not a conference or division champs (TAMU). I don't think that happens this year. I don't see any two-loss team, no matter who they are, ranked ahead of an unbeaten Cincy. Also, I don't think any one-loss ACC or PAC champ gets in ahead of them either. Probably not a one-loss B12 champ either.
But I still think that they lose out to *any* unbeaten P5 champ, even say a Wake Forest or a Kentucky, and they lose out to some one-loss P5 champs, such as a B1G champ and SEC champ, and they do not get in ahead of a Georgia that is unbeaten before losing to Alabama in the SEC CCG.
I'm with this. Like a 12-1 Georgia, I think a 1-loss at large Michigan would also be in a category ahead of Cincinnati. I'm not yet sold on Harbaugh's ability to get 11 or 12 wins, so it is as likely as an undefeated Kentucky or Wake Forest.
This is why conference champions must be the driving factor instead of this bogus ranking system. Let the ranking be determined on the field.
Agreed but that is effectively impossible with 130 schools unless you begin an elimination tournament like mid-season.
(10-14-2021 09:50 AM)BePcr07 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:47 AM)kdblazer Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:44 AM)Crayton Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]For example, in last year's final CFP, Cincy was ranked behind some multi-loss teams (Oklahoma, Florida) and behind a one-loss team that was not a conference or division champs (TAMU). I don't think that happens this year. I don't see any two-loss team, no matter who they are, ranked ahead of an unbeaten Cincy. Also, I don't think any one-loss ACC or PAC champ gets in ahead of them either. Probably not a one-loss B12 champ either.
But I still think that they lose out to *any* unbeaten P5 champ, even say a Wake Forest or a Kentucky, and they lose out to some one-loss P5 champs, such as a B1G champ and SEC champ, and they do not get in ahead of a Georgia that is unbeaten before losing to Alabama in the SEC CCG.
I'm with this. Like a 12-1 Georgia, I think a 1-loss at large Michigan would also be in a category ahead of Cincinnati. I'm not yet sold on Harbaugh's ability to get 11 or 12 wins, so it is as likely as an undefeated Kentucky or Wake Forest.
This is why conference champions must be the driving factor instead of this bogus ranking system. Let the ranking be determined on the field.
Agreed but that is effectively impossible with 130 schools unless you begin an elimination tournament like mid-season.
It's possible...div II and div III make it work. Don't see why Div I can't as well.
(10-14-2021 09:47 AM)kdblazer Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:44 AM)Crayton Wrote: [ -> ]Like a 12-1 Georgia, I think a 1-loss at large Michigan would also be in a category ahead of Cincinnati. I'm not yet sold on Harbaugh's ability to get 11 or 12 wins, so it is as likely as an undefeated Kentucky or Wake Forest.
This is why conference champions must be the driving factor instead of this bogus ranking system. Let the ranking be determined on the field.
I agree with this sentiment. I think if it were still a 2-team playoff you could/should do something like that; maybe a WCG for independents or non-division champs to be "eligible" for that playoff.
But with a 4-team playoff I think the most you could do is guarantee 3 spots to Champs. Some years the 4th champ has 3 losses and you don't want them winning the "tournament" while the #2 12-1 team beats the #5 11-2 team to claim the AP crown.
Unless you mean, a 10+6 tournament. That is looking less and less like a possible future. The only way we get all 10 champs is a 10+14; barf.
(10-14-2021 09:47 AM)kdblazer Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:44 AM)Crayton Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]For example, in last year's final CFP, Cincy was ranked behind some multi-loss teams (Oklahoma, Florida) and behind a one-loss team that was not a conference or division champs (TAMU). I don't think that happens this year. I don't see any two-loss team, no matter who they are, ranked ahead of an unbeaten Cincy. Also, I don't think any one-loss ACC or PAC champ gets in ahead of them either. Probably not a one-loss B12 champ either.
But I still think that they lose out to *any* unbeaten P5 champ, even say a Wake Forest or a Kentucky, and they lose out to some one-loss P5 champs, such as a B1G champ and SEC champ, and they do not get in ahead of a Georgia that is unbeaten before losing to Alabama in the SEC CCG.
I'm with this. Like a 12-1 Georgia, I think a 1-loss at large Michigan would also be in a category ahead of Cincinnati. I'm not yet sold on Harbaugh's ability to get 11 or 12 wins, so it is as likely as an undefeated Kentucky or Wake Forest.
This is why conference champions must be the driving factor instead of this bogus ranking system. Let the ranking be determined on the field.
Agree. As the number of teams in the CFP expands, rankings should be de-emphasized and conference champions should be promoted. In the CFP era, the selections have averaged 3.5 conference champions and 0.5 at large selections per year. As you get a larger number of teams in the playoffs, it’s more difficult to objectively differentiate the final deserving teams. Best to let conference champions fill the final slot(s).
Rankings still work for seedings, but not for selection.
(10-14-2021 09:54 AM)kdblazer Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:50 AM)BePcr07 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:47 AM)kdblazer Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:44 AM)Crayton Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]For example, in last year's final CFP, Cincy was ranked behind some multi-loss teams (Oklahoma, Florida) and behind a one-loss team that was not a conference or division champs (TAMU). I don't think that happens this year. I don't see any two-loss team, no matter who they are, ranked ahead of an unbeaten Cincy. Also, I don't think any one-loss ACC or PAC champ gets in ahead of them either. Probably not a one-loss B12 champ either.
But I still think that they lose out to *any* unbeaten P5 champ, even say a Wake Forest or a Kentucky, and they lose out to some one-loss P5 champs, such as a B1G champ and SEC champ, and they do not get in ahead of a Georgia that is unbeaten before losing to Alabama in the SEC CCG.
I'm with this. Like a 12-1 Georgia, I think a 1-loss at large Michigan would also be in a category ahead of Cincinnati. I'm not yet sold on Harbaugh's ability to get 11 or 12 wins, so it is as likely as an undefeated Kentucky or Wake Forest.
This is why conference champions must be the driving factor instead of this bogus ranking system. Let the ranking be determined on the field.
Agreed but that is effectively impossible with 130 schools unless you begin an elimination tournament like mid-season.
It's possible...div II and div III make it work. Don't see why Div I can't as well.
Because in D-II and D-III nobody is watching those early round games. In D-I the economics of a playoff requires that the games be reasonably competitive and attractive to a large number of fans. You aren't going to get that if you give an autobid to a five-loss MAC team.
(10-14-2021 09:54 AM)kdblazer Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:50 AM)BePcr07 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:47 AM)kdblazer Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:44 AM)Crayton Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]For example, in last year's final CFP, Cincy was ranked behind some multi-loss teams (Oklahoma, Florida) and behind a one-loss team that was not a conference or division champs (TAMU). I don't think that happens this year. I don't see any two-loss team, no matter who they are, ranked ahead of an unbeaten Cincy. Also, I don't think any one-loss ACC or PAC champ gets in ahead of them either. Probably not a one-loss B12 champ either.
But I still think that they lose out to *any* unbeaten P5 champ, even say a Wake Forest or a Kentucky, and they lose out to some one-loss P5 champs, such as a B1G champ and SEC champ, and they do not get in ahead of a Georgia that is unbeaten before losing to Alabama in the SEC CCG.
I'm with this. Like a 12-1 Georgia, I think a 1-loss at large Michigan would also be in a category ahead of Cincinnati. I'm not yet sold on Harbaugh's ability to get 11 or 12 wins, so it is as likely as an undefeated Kentucky or Wake Forest.
This is why conference champions must be the driving factor instead of this bogus ranking system. Let the ranking be determined on the field.
Agreed but that is effectively impossible with 130 schools unless you begin an elimination tournament like mid-season.
It's possible...div II and div III make it work. Don't see why Div I can't as well.
It's not the same for FBS. The disparity between the P5 and G5 is not found in another level of college athletics. Because of that, giving equal access will never happen and should never happen.
A similar comparison would be the Champions League in Europe. Of the 55 nations whose leagues send teams to the Champions League, the 6 top leagues (England, France, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Spain) hold more than 25% of the 80 bids to the tournament. The other 49 nations share less than 75% of the bids.
(10-14-2021 09:47 AM)kdblazer Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:44 AM)Crayton Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]For example, in last year's final CFP, Cincy was ranked behind some multi-loss teams (Oklahoma, Florida) and behind a one-loss team that was not a conference or division champs (TAMU). I don't think that happens this year. I don't see any two-loss team, no matter who they are, ranked ahead of an unbeaten Cincy. Also, I don't think any one-loss ACC or PAC champ gets in ahead of them either. Probably not a one-loss B12 champ either.
But I still think that they lose out to *any* unbeaten P5 champ, even say a Wake Forest or a Kentucky, and they lose out to some one-loss P5 champs, such as a B1G champ and SEC champ, and they do not get in ahead of a Georgia that is unbeaten before losing to Alabama in the SEC CCG.
I'm with this. Like a 12-1 Georgia, I think a 1-loss at large Michigan would also be in a category ahead of Cincinnati. I'm not yet sold on Harbaugh's ability to get 11 or 12 wins, so it is as likely as an undefeated Kentucky or Wake Forest.
This is why conference champions must be the driving factor instead of this bogus ranking system. Let the ranking be determined on the field.
If you want to have every conference champion in a playoff, then you must first eliminate from the division the conferences that aren't competitive at the highest level. Cut back to six conferences and this works.
(10-14-2021 09:47 AM)kdblazer Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:44 AM)Crayton Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]For example, in last year's final CFP, Cincy was ranked behind some multi-loss teams (Oklahoma, Florida) and behind a one-loss team that was not a conference or division champs (TAMU). I don't think that happens this year. I don't see any two-loss team, no matter who they are, ranked ahead of an unbeaten Cincy. Also, I don't think any one-loss ACC or PAC champ gets in ahead of them either. Probably not a one-loss B12 champ either.
But I still think that they lose out to *any* unbeaten P5 champ, even say a Wake Forest or a Kentucky, and they lose out to some one-loss P5 champs, such as a B1G champ and SEC champ, and they do not get in ahead of a Georgia that is unbeaten before losing to Alabama in the SEC CCG.
I'm with this. Like a 12-1 Georgia, I think a 1-loss at large Michigan would also be in a category ahead of Cincinnati. I'm not yet sold on Harbaugh's ability to get 11 or 12 wins, so it is as likely as an undefeated Kentucky or Wake Forest.
This is why conference champions must be the driving factor instead of this bogus ranking system. Let the ranking be determined on the field.
This position erroneously presupposes that is it a universal truth that a team who wins a given league, by virtue of that fact alone, is objectively more ‘deserving’ of a CFP slot than a team who finishes second in another conference, irrespective of league-to-league talent disparities. A 12-1 Georgia team who loses to a 12-1 Alabama in the SECCG certainly has a stronger claim than Cincy; a 12-1 Iowa whose only loss is in the B1G title game to a 12-1 Ohio State or Penn State or to 13-0 Michigan or Michigan State team likely does as well. If Bama beats UGA, OSU wins the B1G and OU gets its QB situation resolved and finishes undefeated, I’d expect it shake out like #1 OU (13-0); #2 Bama (12-1); #3 OSU (12-1); #4 UGA (12-1) and then outside the playoff #5 Iowa (12-1); #6 Oregon (12-1); and then #7 Cincy (13-0).
Just keep winning, if Cincinnati can manage to continue to win impressively over the AAC and ND finishes the season with only 1 loss and a top 10 ranking, anything is possible.
(10-14-2021 10:34 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:54 AM)kdblazer Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:50 AM)BePcr07 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:47 AM)kdblazer Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:44 AM)Crayton Wrote: [ -> ]I'm with this. Like a 12-1 Georgia, I think a 1-loss at large Michigan would also be in a category ahead of Cincinnati. I'm not yet sold on Harbaugh's ability to get 11 or 12 wins, so it is as likely as an undefeated Kentucky or Wake Forest.
This is why conference champions must be the driving factor instead of this bogus ranking system. Let the ranking be determined on the field.
Agreed but that is effectively impossible with 130 schools unless you begin an elimination tournament like mid-season.
It's possible...div II and div III make it work. Don't see why Div I can't as well.
Because in D-II and D-III nobody is watching those early round games. In D-I the economics of a playoff requires that the games be reasonably competitive and attractive to a large number of fans. You aren't going to get that if you give an autobid to a five-loss MAC team.
This argument is so tired and old school, moldy too
Economics of a playoff needs to be competitive?, sorry but conference champs is a real playoff , i like 10 conferences as is now, a 3 loss MAC champ is great with me, Oh but a one loss second place georgia is more deserving because they recruited better, so what your saying is teams with the best recruiting classes should be the deciding factor in getting into the playoffs, see how stupid that is ?
(10-14-2021 10:56 AM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:47 AM)kdblazer Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:44 AM)Crayton Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2021 09:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]For example, in last year's final CFP, Cincy was ranked behind some multi-loss teams (Oklahoma, Florida) and behind a one-loss team that was not a conference or division champs (TAMU). I don't think that happens this year. I don't see any two-loss team, no matter who they are, ranked ahead of an unbeaten Cincy. Also, I don't think any one-loss ACC or PAC champ gets in ahead of them either. Probably not a one-loss B12 champ either.
But I still think that they lose out to *any* unbeaten P5 champ, even say a Wake Forest or a Kentucky, and they lose out to some one-loss P5 champs, such as a B1G champ and SEC champ, and they do not get in ahead of a Georgia that is unbeaten before losing to Alabama in the SEC CCG.
I'm with this. Like a 12-1 Georgia, I think a 1-loss at large Michigan would also be in a category ahead of Cincinnati. I'm not yet sold on Harbaugh's ability to get 11 or 12 wins, so it is as likely as an undefeated Kentucky or Wake Forest.
This is why conference champions must be the driving factor instead of this bogus ranking system. Let the ranking be determined on the field.
This position erroneously presupposes that is it a universal truth that a team who wins a given league, by virtue of that fact alone, is objectively more ‘deserving’ of a CFP slot than a team who finishes second in another conference, irrespective of league-to-league talent disparities. A 12-1 Georgia team who loses to a 12-1 Alabama in the SECCG certainly has a stronger claim than Cincy; a 12-1 Iowa whose only loss is in the B1G title game to a 12-1 Ohio State or Penn State or to 13-0 Michigan or Michigan State team likely does as well. If Bama beats UGA, OSU wins the B1G and OU gets its QB situation resolved and finishes undefeated, I’d expect it shake out like #1 OU (13-0); #2 Bama (12-1); #3 OSU (12-1); #4 UGA (12-1) and then outside the playoff #5 Iowa (12-1); #6 Oregon (12-1); and then #7 Cincy (13-0).
Yes, it makes no sense to prioritize conference champs when conferences may be very unequal.
Going 9-3 vs Arkansas's schedule is likely a more worthy achievement than going 12-0 vs Cincy's schedule.
(10-13-2021 08:30 AM)CliftonAve Wrote: [ -> ] (10-12-2021 10:26 PM)Erictelevision Wrote: [ -> ]I’m a UConn hoops fan. Grew up a Penn St football fan
Are you that UConn fan/Barstool guy who went on air and said at the start of this season UC FB was overrated? The one who got invited to go on air by one of the Cincinnati ESPN Radio guys to articulate the reasons why UC is overrated, only to come up with “Mick Cronin is a jerk” and ours fans think too highly of themselves?
Nope, not that plugged in