(11-29-2021 08:14 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 07:52 AM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  My four would be:
UGA/Bama winner
Michigan
UGA/Bama loser
Ohio State - might could talk me into Okla St as this one is close to me.

These are the best 5 teams may not have the best record but I prefer to have the best available. At this point it appear UGA is a step above everyone this year but an injury or multiple TOs can change one game.

If this happens, I will not be watching. It will be the lowest rated playoffs ever.

I agree this would likely be very low rated. I have no interest in seeing re-matches in football. When everyone plays so few games in the first place (12) and that almost all play so few teams outside of their own conferences (3-4 games OOC), it seems too "closed" to other schools/conferences to have 2 conferences with 2 teams each and the likelihood of a re-match title game very high.

That said - I haven't watched any CFP title games anyway. The teams that get that far are so loaded with talent, that it's an NFL game (which I also don't watch) ....boring.

(11-29-2021 07:02 AM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 06:59 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  I think the committee has its collective minds made up. Georgia won’t be punished for a CCG flop even to an iffy Alabama. Alabama losing again? Yeah, see ya. Georgia’s a lock.

I think the performance of the field has cemented a multi-bid SEC field, too, if Bama does pull one over on UGA. We see how thin other conferences are, even the Big Ten, and it’s quite easy to choose a potentially blemished UGA.

Bama, if they lose…are they king midget of the two-loss teams? Perhaps. We’d just have to see what kind of depravity the committee has this year to rationalize its choices when it precludes others.

Outside of Georgia, the SEC is as weak as it’s been in decades. If you’re going by overall conference strength Big Ten by that criteria deserves two bids

Computers have SEC #1, although not by a large margin, over the Big 10 and Big 12. I would say the top third of the SEC is very weak by SEC standards this year, but it is stronger from 1 to 13 than it typically is.

(11-29-2021 08:27 AM)JHS55 Wrote:  isn’t it great to have a selection committee

We could be arguing about who is the better team rather than who the committee will allow to play.

(11-29-2021 09:51 AM)VolCajun Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 08:14 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 07:52 AM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  My four would be:
UGA/Bama winner
Michigan
UGA/Bama loser
Ohio State - might could talk me into Okla St as this one is close to me.

These are the best 5 teams may not have the best record but I prefer to have the best available. At this point it appear UGA is a step above everyone this year but an injury or multiple TOs can change one game.

If this happens, I will not be watching. It will be the lowest rated playoffs ever.

That said - I haven't watched any CFP title games anyway. The teams that get that far are so loaded with talent, that it's an NFL game (which I also don't watch) ....boring.

Oh sure. If Tennessee made the title game you wouldnt watch?

Sounds like bitterness at seeing Bama, LSU and Georgia succeed. Conference foes that have won the last 10-15 years. Not to mention Florida or Auburn.

(11-29-2021 07:52 AM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  My four would be:
UGA/Bama winner
Michigan
UGA/Bama loser
Ohio State - might could talk me into Okla St as this one is close to me.

These are the best 5 teams may not have the best record but I prefer to have the best available. At this point it appear UGA is a step above everyone this year but an injury or multiple TOs can change one game.

Ew. That's like the worst scenario out there. Ohio State *should* be done. They're 0-for-2 in the games they needed to build a CFP resume. But, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the CFP committee selects the Buckeyes if Iowa wins the B1G and Baylor wins the B12.

In an only 4-team CFP field, Alabama should be out if Georgia beats them.

Give me Georgia, Michigan, Cincinnati, and Oklahoma State. We need new teams in the CFP.

(11-29-2021 10:24 AM)PicksUp Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 09:51 AM)VolCajun Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 08:14 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 07:52 AM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  My four would be:
UGA/Bama winner
Michigan
UGA/Bama loser
Ohio State - might could talk me into Okla St as this one is close to me.

These are the best 5 teams may not have the best record but I prefer to have the best available. At this point it appear UGA is a step above everyone this year but an injury or multiple TOs can change one game.

If this happens, I will not be watching. It will be the lowest rated playoffs ever.

That said - I haven't watched any CFP title games anyway. The teams that get that far are so loaded with talent, that it's an NFL game (which I also don't watch) ....boring.

Oh sure. If Tennessee made the title game you wouldnt watch?

Sounds like bitterness at seeing Bama, LSU and Georgia succeed. Conference foes that have won the last 10-15 years. Not to mention Florida or Auburn.

No - I said I haven't watched (and I haven't watched any CFP finals, nor a BCS championship since Ohio State won back in 2003?) - not that I wouldn't watch under any circumstances.

The point was that if many are like me, then it would be a low-rated playoff when you start limiting it to just 2 conferences - especially with teams that have already played one another in the regular season. Great for the fans of a few schools - not that interesting to the rest of the nation.

If Georgia wins the SEC championship (which I will be watching, by the way - and rooting for Georgia because I want to see someone else get to the CFP championship game - just my opinion: dynasties are boring and bad for the sport), I'm not interested in seeing a re-match between those 2 schools just a few weeks later.

Michigan won their game against Ohio State - I don't want to see that one again either (OK - I didn't watch that one because I was at a Cajun game with my freshman kid at UL), but I still don't want to see the re-match.

What if the final CFP rankings were such that the semi-finals were Alabama-Georgia and Michigan-Ohio State? These games would both be re-matches of some of the last games played during the year - and they were decided in favor of Michigan and whoever wins the SEC championship. Why do the winners have to play those opponents again to decide who gets to play the champion of the other conference? You notice that the presumption is that the champ of one plays the also ran of the other - not two re-matches. Why? Unless you're a fan of the school that lost the first game (to whom it'll seem like a chance at redemption), it'll seem like it negates what happened on the field - so it turns neutral fans away.

It's like when the SWC conference had it's big tilts - the rest of the nation didn't care about what was effectively the Texas state championship - especially if it was always the winner of the Texas/Texas A&M game. A CFP of Alabama, Ohio State, Georgia and Michigan would be a Big 10 / SEC championship.

(11-29-2021 08:26 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-28-2021 11:43 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  To me, these CCGs are like play in games. whoever loses between Georgia and Alabama on a neutral field has no business in a playoff, especially if we’ve got an undefeated P5 and two 12-1 P5 champs.

Why set them up for a potential rematch when we’ve already seen them meet on a natural field a month prior? There’s simply too few data points involved to say that the loser passes the “eye test” and disregard what the other conference champions achieved.

And let’s not pull the tough conference card—the SEC was 7-7 against P5 OOC competition and those 13 bowl eligible teams are a product of a 39-2 record against FCS and G5 competition. That’s a lot of cupcakes.

I disagree, because the quality of CCG opponents isn't equal. For example, why should Georgia have to beat computers #3 Alabama to make the playoffs, while Cincy gets to feast on computers #27 Houston to make the playoffs?

The computers say the SEC is far and away the best conference. The SEC was 9-6 OOC vs P5 competition this year. The AAC isn't even the top G5 conference, and is 3-11 vs P5 this year. The SEC is 23-1 vs G5, the AAC is 9-5 vs G5. They are not equal in strength in any way, so why should winning the far weaker conference be equal to winning the far stronger one?

This just shows how far from reality the computers are. No way is the SEC stronger than the B1G top to bottom, and Alabama is barely a top 10 team.

SEC had a winning record against the ACC (7-3) and Big 12 (1-0, future mate Texas). Losing record against Pac 12 (1-2) and Big 10 (0-1)

(11-29-2021 12:41 PM)VolCajun Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 10:24 AM)PicksUp Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 09:51 AM)VolCajun Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 08:14 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 07:52 AM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  My four would be:
UGA/Bama winner
Michigan
UGA/Bama loser
Ohio State - might could talk me into Okla St as this one is close to me.

These are the best 5 teams may not have the best record but I prefer to have the best available. At this point it appear UGA is a step above everyone this year but an injury or multiple TOs can change one game.

If this happens, I will not be watching. It will be the lowest rated playoffs ever.

That said - I haven't watched any CFP title games anyway. The teams that get that far are so loaded with talent, that it's an NFL game (which I also don't watch) ....boring.

Oh sure. If Tennessee made the title game you wouldnt watch?

Sounds like bitterness at seeing Bama, LSU and Georgia succeed. Conference foes that have won the last 10-15 years. Not to mention Florida or Auburn.

No - I said I haven't watched (and I haven't watched any CFP finals, nor a BCS championship since Ohio State won back in 2003?) - not that I wouldn't watch under any circumstances.

The point was that if many are like me, then it would be a low-rated playoff when you start limiting it to just 2 conferences - especially with teams that have already played one another in the regular season. Great for the fans of a few schools - not that interesting to the rest of the nation.

If Georgia wins the SEC championship (which I will be watching, by the way - and rooting for Georgia because I want to see someone else get to the CFP championship game - just my opinion: dynasties are boring and bad for the sport), I'm not interested in seeing a re-match between those 2 schools just a few weeks later.

Michigan won their game against Ohio State - I don't want to see that one again either (OK - I didn't watch that one because I was at a Cajun game with my freshman kid at UL), but I still don't want to see the re-match.

What if the final CFP rankings were such that the semi-finals were Alabama-Georgia and Michigan-Ohio State? These games would both be re-matches of some of the last games played during the year - and they were decided in favor of Michigan and whoever wins the SEC championship. Why do the winners have to play those opponents again to decide who gets to play the champion of the other conference? You notice that the presumption is that the champ of one plays the also ran of the other - not two re-matches. Why? Unless you're a fan of the school that lost the first game (to whom it'll seem like a chance at redemption), it'll seem like it negates what happened on the field - so it turns neutral fans away.

It's like when the SWC conference had it's big tilts - the rest of the nation didn't care about what was effectively the Texas state championship - especially if it was always the winner of the Texas/Texas A&M game. A CFP of Alabama, Ohio State, Georgia and Michigan would be a Big 10 / SEC championship.

Well do you like the NCAA tournament? Because rematches aren't that rare. In the last 12 years, 3 of the national title games have been rematches of regular season games, and 7 of the 24 Final 4 (semifinal) games have been rematches of regular season games.

In contrast, under the CFP, none of the 21 playoff games have been rematches. Heck, none of the 42 NY6 bowls have been rematches.

In the entire history of college football bowls, there have been only 24 rematch bowl games, the last being the 2016 Heart of Dallas Bowl. That was a good game, btw - Army lost to North Texas 35-18 during the season, but beat them 38-31 in overtime.

So I'm not sure we should get all upset if we have a CFP playoff game that involves a rematch.

(11-29-2021 12:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 12:41 PM)VolCajun Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 10:24 AM)PicksUp Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 09:51 AM)VolCajun Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 08:14 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  If this happens, I will not be watching. It will be the lowest rated playoffs ever.

That said - I haven't watched any CFP title games anyway. The teams that get that far are so loaded with talent, that it's an NFL game (which I also don't watch) ....boring.

Oh sure. If Tennessee made the title game you wouldnt watch?

Sounds like bitterness at seeing Bama, LSU and Georgia succeed. Conference foes that have won the last 10-15 years. Not to mention Florida or Auburn.

No - I said I haven't watched (and I haven't watched any CFP finals, nor a BCS championship since Ohio State won back in 2003?) - not that I wouldn't watch under any circumstances.

The point was that if many are like me, then it would be a low-rated playoff when you start limiting it to just 2 conferences - especially with teams that have already played one another in the regular season. Great for the fans of a few schools - not that interesting to the rest of the nation.

If Georgia wins the SEC championship (which I will be watching, by the way - and rooting for Georgia because I want to see someone else get to the CFP championship game - just my opinion: dynasties are boring and bad for the sport), I'm not interested in seeing a re-match between those 2 schools just a few weeks later.

Michigan won their game against Ohio State - I don't want to see that one again either (OK - I didn't watch that one because I was at a Cajun game with my freshman kid at UL), but I still don't want to see the re-match.

What if the final CFP rankings were such that the semi-finals were Alabama-Georgia and Michigan-Ohio State? These games would both be re-matches of some of the last games played during the year - and they were decided in favor of Michigan and whoever wins the SEC championship. Why do the winners have to play those opponents again to decide who gets to play the champion of the other conference? You notice that the presumption is that the champ of one plays the also ran of the other - not two re-matches. Why? Unless you're a fan of the school that lost the first game (to whom it'll seem like a chance at redemption), it'll seem like it negates what happened on the field - so it turns neutral fans away.

It's like when the SWC conference had it's big tilts - the rest of the nation didn't care about what was effectively the Texas state championship - especially if it was always the winner of the Texas/Texas A&M game. A CFP of Alabama, Ohio State, Georgia and Michigan would be a Big 10 / SEC championship.

Well do you like the NCAA tournament? Because rematches aren't that rare. In the last 12 years, 3 of the national title games have been rematches of regular season games, and 7 of the 24 Final 4 (semifinal) games have been rematches of regular season games.

In contrast, under the CFP, none of the 21 playoff games have been rematches. Heck, none of the 42 NY6 bowls have been rematches.

In the entire history of college football bowls, there have been only 24 rematch bowl games, the last being the 2016 Heart of Dallas Bowl. That was a good game, btw - Army lost to North Texas 35-18 during the season, but beat them 38-31 in overtime.

So I'm not sure we should get all upset if we have a CFP playoff game that involves a rematch.

The distaste for re-matches in FB is not CFP or BCS based, it's based on playing very few games in a FB season - and each is supposed to mean something. Would Ohio State really be the national champion if they beat Michigan in the title game (especially by less than they lost in the game this last weekend)? Would Alabama really be the national champion if they lost to Georgia and then a few weeks later beat Georgia? These are just re-hashed conference tilts. A national championship involves teams from something other than your own conference.

Even having the same teams play in the title game in separate years gets stale pretty fast. I had literally no interest in the second Clemson-Alabama CFP championship game.

But this is what made college FB better than the NFL: you lose your great recruiting class soon after they became starters because they graduate - opening the door for other schools to rise up for a year or two and then fade just enough to allow another school's senior class to have it's moment in the sun. I repeat - dynasties are boring. Alabama's dominance for the past ump-teen years is bad for college football, so I root for Georgia in the SEC championship. To a lesser extent - so is Ohio State's dominance in the Big 10, so it's good that they occasionally lose the Big 10 bid to the CFP to other Big 10 schools. It's not that I hate those schools (I don't) - I like the mystery and competitiveness of the carousel that is college football. And because of that - a game shouldn't be repeated in the same season - where the results of the first head-to-head are nullified and reduced to meaningless by the second meeting.

When Georgia or Alabama beats Tennessee - that seals that rivalry for the year. We'll try again next year - with a different line-up against their different line-up. I don't want a second chance to get "even" this year that gets my team declared the champion because my team's win was the later one in the year.

(11-29-2021 12:54 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 08:26 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-28-2021 11:43 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  To me, these CCGs are like play in games. whoever loses between Georgia and Alabama on a neutral field has no business in a playoff, especially if we’ve got an undefeated P5 and two 12-1 P5 champs.

Why set them up for a potential rematch when we’ve already seen them meet on a natural field a month prior? There’s simply too few data points involved to say that the loser passes the “eye test” and disregard what the other conference champions achieved.

And let’s not pull the tough conference card—the SEC was 7-7 against P5 OOC competition and those 13 bowl eligible teams are a product of a 39-2 record against FCS and G5 competition. That’s a lot of cupcakes.

I disagree, because the quality of CCG opponents isn't equal. For example, why should Georgia have to beat computers #3 Alabama to make the playoffs, while Cincy gets to feast on computers #27 Houston to make the playoffs?

The computers say the SEC is far and away the best conference. The SEC was 9-6 OOC vs P5 competition this year. The AAC isn't even the top G5 conference, and is 3-11 vs P5 this year. The SEC is 23-1 vs G5, the AAC is 9-5 vs G5. They are not equal in strength in any way, so why should winning the far weaker conference be equal to winning the far stronger one?

This just shows how far from reality the computers are. No way is the SEC stronger than the B1G top to bottom, and Alabama is barely a top 10 team.

SEC had a winning record against the ACC (7-3) and Big 12 (1-0, future mate Texas). Losing record against Pac 12 (1-2) and Big 10 (0-1)

Reality is the SEC once again had the best ooc record:
SEC 35-7 83.3%
Big 10 26-9 74.3%
Big 12 15-6 71.4%
MWC 21-17 55.3%
ACC 21-19 52.5%

Is you who is out of touch with reality. Maryland, Rutgers, Indiana, Illinois, Northwestern, Nebraska are not even close to Missouri, South Carolina, Florida, Vanderbilt, LSU, Auburn. The top half of the Big 10 is competitive with the SEC this year, but not the bottom half.

(11-29-2021 01:38 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 12:54 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 08:26 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-28-2021 11:43 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  To me, these CCGs are like play in games. whoever loses between Georgia and Alabama on a neutral field has no business in a playoff, especially if we’ve got an undefeated P5 and two 12-1 P5 champs.

Why set them up for a potential rematch when we’ve already seen them meet on a natural field a month prior? There’s simply too few data points involved to say that the loser passes the “eye test” and disregard what the other conference champions achieved.

And let’s not pull the tough conference card—the SEC was 7-7 against P5 OOC competition and those 13 bowl eligible teams are a product of a 39-2 record against FCS and G5 competition. That’s a lot of cupcakes.

I disagree, because the quality of CCG opponents isn't equal. For example, why should Georgia have to beat computers #3 Alabama to make the playoffs, while Cincy gets to feast on computers #27 Houston to make the playoffs?

The computers say the SEC is far and away the best conference. The SEC was 9-6 OOC vs P5 competition this year. The AAC isn't even the top G5 conference, and is 3-11 vs P5 this year. The SEC is 23-1 vs G5, the AAC is 9-5 vs G5. They are not equal in strength in any way, so why should winning the far weaker conference be equal to winning the far stronger one?

This just shows how far from reality the computers are. No way is the SEC stronger than the B1G top to bottom, and Alabama is barely a top 10 team.

SEC had a winning record against the ACC (7-3) and Big 12 (1-0, future mate Texas). Losing record against Pac 12 (1-2) and Big 10 (0-1)

Reality is the SEC once again had the best ooc record:
SEC 35-7 83.3%
Big 10 26-9 74.3%
Big 12 15-6 71.4%
MWC 21-17 55.3%
ACC 21-19 52.5%

Is you who is out of touch with reality. Maryland, Rutgers, Indiana, Illinois, Northwestern, Nebraska are not even close to Missouri, South Carolina, Florida, Vanderbilt, LSU, Auburn. The top half of the Big 10 is competitive with the SEC this year, but not the bottom half.

Feasting on bad FCS teams (13-1) and bad G5 teams. Other than Georgia, the SEC only played 9 P5 games.

You have to look beyond the records.

Vandy? LOL. Both Auburn and Illinois went to Happy Valley. Only Illinois came away with a win. If Rutgers had done what the 6-6 SEC teams did (one P5 OOC, one FCS, two weak G5's) they'd be at 6-6. If Illinois had done 9 P5's, they'd be 6-6 as well.

My biggest concern - but it's a big one - is that the SEC is highly motivated to make sure the Tide win the SEC CG (attention SEC referees!). If Georgia loses on a controversial call or a series of 50/50 calls that all go Bama's way, I think we must consider the possibility that the game was rigged.

A 2nd concern: if big money bets on the Tide, and Bama wins, I'd be very, VERY suspicious!

A 3rd concern: let's face it - the SEC CG means very little to Georgia if they are guaranteed a CFP slot win or lose. That gives us a game where one team wants to win, the other NEEDS to win.

The SEC needs to go to 9 conference games. I won’t argue any further than that.

(11-29-2021 01:58 PM)AuzGrams Wrote:  The SEC needs to go to 9 conference games. I won’t argue any further than that.

They probably will, but... how will that affect this discussion?

(11-29-2021 02:02 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 01:58 PM)AuzGrams Wrote:  The SEC needs to go to 9 conference games. I won’t argue any further than that.

They probably will, but... how will that affect this discussion?

Overall SOS arguments over rankings?

I mean, the ACC does the same thing with eight, but, there is the ND rotation to consider in addition to some having yearly P5 rivalry games. With the SEC, they get the latter (to complement the ACC usually), but not the former.

Yeah...this "unpopular opinion" actually seems like the prevalent, popular opinion.

An unpopular opinion would be: the ACC and P12 Champs deserve auto-bids over Cincy and any at-large

-or-

San Diego State and Louisiana should be in the picture over any 2-loss teams

Quick edit to add: I hold neither of these example unpopular opinions. I was just providing examples of an actual unpopular opinion for the OP

(11-29-2021 12:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 12:41 PM)VolCajun Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 10:24 AM)PicksUp Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 09:51 AM)VolCajun Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 08:14 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  If this happens, I will not be watching. It will be the lowest rated playoffs ever.

That said - I haven't watched any CFP title games anyway. The teams that get that far are so loaded with talent, that it's an NFL game (which I also don't watch) ....boring.

Oh sure. If Tennessee made the title game you wouldnt watch?

Sounds like bitterness at seeing Bama, LSU and Georgia succeed. Conference foes that have won the last 10-15 years. Not to mention Florida or Auburn.

No - I said I haven't watched (and I haven't watched any CFP finals, nor a BCS championship since Ohio State won back in 2003?) - not that I wouldn't watch under any circumstances.

The point was that if many are like me, then it would be a low-rated playoff when you start limiting it to just 2 conferences - especially with teams that have already played one another in the regular season. Great for the fans of a few schools - not that interesting to the rest of the nation.

If Georgia wins the SEC championship (which I will be watching, by the way - and rooting for Georgia because I want to see someone else get to the CFP championship game - just my opinion: dynasties are boring and bad for the sport), I'm not interested in seeing a re-match between those 2 schools just a few weeks later.

Michigan won their game against Ohio State - I don't want to see that one again either (OK - I didn't watch that one because I was at a Cajun game with my freshman kid at UL), but I still don't want to see the re-match.

What if the final CFP rankings were such that the semi-finals were Alabama-Georgia and Michigan-Ohio State? These games would both be re-matches of some of the last games played during the year - and they were decided in favor of Michigan and whoever wins the SEC championship. Why do the winners have to play those opponents again to decide who gets to play the champion of the other conference? You notice that the presumption is that the champ of one plays the also ran of the other - not two re-matches. Why? Unless you're a fan of the school that lost the first game (to whom it'll seem like a chance at redemption), it'll seem like it negates what happened on the field - so it turns neutral fans away.

It's like when the SWC conference had it's big tilts - the rest of the nation didn't care about what was effectively the Texas state championship - especially if it was always the winner of the Texas/Texas A&M game. A CFP of Alabama, Ohio State, Georgia and Michigan would be a Big 10 / SEC championship.

Well do you like the NCAA tournament? Because rematches aren't that rare. In the last 12 years, 3 of the national title games have been rematches of regular season games, and 7 of the 24 Final 4 (semifinal) games have been rematches of regular season games.

In contrast, under the CFP, none of the 21 playoff games have been rematches. Heck, none of the 42 NY6 bowls have been rematches.

In the entire history of college football bowls, there have been only 24 rematch bowl games, the last being the 2016 Heart of Dallas Bowl. That was a good game, btw - Army lost to North Texas 35-18 during the season, but beat them 38-31 in overtime.

So I'm not sure we should get all upset if we have a CFP playoff game that involves a rematch.

I don't think you can compare basketball & football games where rematches are concerned, the number of games per season in basketball makes each game inherently less important to your overall season. And in most if not all conferences, you already play your conference mates at least twice during the regular season in basketball so the whole "you get one shot at team x for the year and live with the consequences" doesn't apply. The stakes simply aren't as high.

I think rematches in football these days should be avoided when at all possible, for instance the Big XII title game which they had enough sense not to bother having until it cost them a playoff spot. So I completely understand why they are doing it again now, but it isn't nearly as interesting as the other CCGs. At least with OU's Bedlam loss this year we aren't getting the exact same matchup for two straight weeks, the ultimate in ill-conceived rematches.

Rematches used to be fun under very specific conditions, before we had overtime. When the first game ended in a tie then the rematch offered a chance to resolve unfinished business - after the Choak at Doak in 1994 the FSU-Florida rematch in the Sugar Bowl made sense and was of high interest.

(11-29-2021 08:44 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 08:27 AM)JHS55 Wrote:  isn’t it great to have a selection committee

Well, in past years, the Simulated BCS Standings haven't been very different, if they were different at all.

My wild-and-crazy scheme would be to officially adopt the Simulated BCS standings (bring back the fake AP poll, HArris I think), and then let the committee bump teams up or down one notch max for playoff spots (give them guidelines about avoiding rematches before the semifinals, etc). But this would cost ESPN a half-dozen hours of programming for the CFP ranking shows.

If the simulated BCS uses the AP and coaches polls as part of the formula, then it's bunk. It's well demonstrated at this point that the polls start to mirror the CFP rankings once CFP rankings are released.

(11-29-2021 01:55 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 01:38 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 12:54 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(11-29-2021 08:26 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-28-2021 11:43 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  To me, these CCGs are like play in games. whoever loses between Georgia and Alabama on a neutral field has no business in a playoff, especially if we’ve got an undefeated P5 and two 12-1 P5 champs.

Why set them up for a potential rematch when we’ve already seen them meet on a natural field a month prior? There’s simply too few data points involved to say that the loser passes the “eye test” and disregard what the other conference champions achieved.

And let’s not pull the tough conference card—the SEC was 7-7 against P5 OOC competition and those 13 bowl eligible teams are a product of a 39-2 record against FCS and G5 competition. That’s a lot of cupcakes.

I disagree, because the quality of CCG opponents isn't equal. For example, why should Georgia have to beat computers #3 Alabama to make the playoffs, while Cincy gets to feast on computers #27 Houston to make the playoffs?

The computers say the SEC is far and away the best conference. The SEC was 9-6 OOC vs P5 competition this year. The AAC isn't even the top G5 conference, and is 3-11 vs P5 this year. The SEC is 23-1 vs G5, the AAC is 9-5 vs G5. They are not equal in strength in any way, so why should winning the far weaker conference be equal to winning the far stronger one?

This just shows how far from reality the computers are. No way is the SEC stronger than the B1G top to bottom, and Alabama is barely a top 10 team.

SEC had a winning record against the ACC (7-3) and Big 12 (1-0, future mate Texas). Losing record against Pac 12 (1-2) and Big 10 (0-1)

Reality is the SEC once again had the best ooc record:
SEC 35-7 83.3%
Big 10 26-9 74.3%
Big 12 15-6 71.4%
MWC 21-17 55.3%
ACC 21-19 52.5%

Is you who is out of touch with reality. Maryland, Rutgers, Indiana, Illinois, Northwestern, Nebraska are not even close to Missouri, South Carolina, Florida, Vanderbilt, LSU, Auburn. The top half of the Big 10 is competitive with the SEC this year, but not the bottom half.

Feasting on bad FCS teams (13-1) and bad G5 teams. Other than Georgia, the SEC only played 9 P5 games.

You have to look beyond the records.

Vandy? LOL. Both Auburn and Illinois went to Happy Valley. Only Illinois came away with a win. If Rutgers had done what the 6-6 SEC teams did (one P5 OOC, one FCS, two weak G5's) they'd be at 6-6. If Illinois had done 9 P5's, they'd be 6-6 as well.

Bowling Green, 10th in the MAC beat Minnesota, 2nd in the Big 10 West. Illinois lost to a CUSA team and beat a bottom feeder in CUSA. Rutgers won its 3 ooc games against an FCS, bad G5 and one ACC team. You should look up teams records before making yourself look ridiculous with your claims.

Believe I won the unpopular response.

I just want to see the 4 best teams not concerned with the conference affiliation or record.
FBS needs to expand to 24 at the minimum in the playoffs. Every conference champ then At Larges for the balance. FCS crowns the correct team every year.