Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
CFP committee kills off Cinderella
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
HuronDave Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,719
Joined: Aug 2002
Reputation: 51
I Root For: The MAC
Location:

DonatorsCrappiesCrappies
Post: #1
CFP committee kills off Cinderella
At this time of year, I write my annual "why the CFP is a sham" column. This year, it took a darker turn. LOL. Anyway, just thought I would share it, coming from a mid-major guy in the heart of Big 12 country.

http://www.enidnews.com/sports/local_spo...c4e02.html
12-07-2017 10:01 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

IULurker Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 700
Joined: Jan 2003
Reputation: 8
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #2
RE: CFP committee kills off Cinderella
Thanks for posting. If you haven't done so already, you might want to post it on the AAC board as well.
12-07-2017 10:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
IULurker Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 700
Joined: Jan 2003
Reputation: 8
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #3
RE: CFP committee kills off Cinderella
Edited because the comment was intended for a different thread!
(This post was last modified: 12-07-2017 01:26 PM by IULurker.)
12-07-2017 10:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TheCrumbIsHere Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 333
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 12
I Root For: E. Michigan
Location:
Post: #4
RE: CFP committee kills off Cinderella
It's the only sport that I know of that at the beginning of the year there are a chunk of teams that have 0 shot to win a National Championship. The problem is that it's too much of a money grab for those at the top that they frankly don't care.
12-07-2017 11:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Motown Bronco Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,712
Joined: Jul 2002
Reputation: 176
I Root For: WMU
Location: Metro Detroit
Post: #5
RE: CFP committee kills off Cinderella
I agree that a playoff that includes all 10 conference champions + X at-larges would be ideal. Maybe you scale back the regular season back down to 11 games to help accommodate the extra time, and physical energy, this would require.

But in its current setup, I'll be the first to admit that WMU didn't belong anywhere near the CFP last year. We landed at #15, right where we should've been.

Same with UCF this year, whose non-conference included FIU, (4-8) Maryland, and Austin Peay (a date with Georgia Tech was cancelled due to the hurricane).

Having lived the season last year, I didn't feel any frustration that we weren't in the CF playoff. Maybe I was too easy to please, but I was fine with the Cotton Bowl. Probably a once in a lifetime experience.
12-07-2017 12:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kittonhead Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,177
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 98
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #6
RE: CFP committee kills off Cinderella
G5 schools have tried to put up offers of 3 or 4 million dollars in order for their coaches to stay. But without no access to the playoff it hasn't mattered because they would take less money to go P5.

In basketball there are the Wichita's and the Gonzaga's out there that pay P5 salaries and with NCAA tourney access they're able to build elite programs worthy of Top 10 rankings. There is an ability to be on the scene long term.

G5 should flip the P5 the bird and make their own post season. Do it right with completely objective criteria and none of this committee bs. Create a NFL-AFL situation where some of the great players sign with the G5.
12-07-2017 10:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

Kittonhead Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,177
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 98
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #7
RE: CFP committee kills off Cinderella
I've been an advocate of using a point system that has a schedule component built in and stop it with the subjectivity with the committee.

3 points (victory over winning record>14pts)
2 points (close victory over winning record)
1 points (close loss against winning record)

Applying this to our Top 4 from the CFP...

1. Clemson 20
2. Oklahoma 17
3. Georgia 19
4. Alabama 12
12. Central Florida 13

UCF has more points on schedule than what Alabama did this year and they are in the playoff.

Yes schedule does count for something but its been taken to an extreme level. When you start comparing the very best teams, schedule becomes less of a factor in evaluating because a great team could win on any schedule.

Some of those Boise St teams where they were killing every opponent on the schedule were more than worthy of playoff consideration IMO.
(This post was last modified: 12-08-2017 12:05 AM by Kittonhead.)
12-07-2017 11:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rocket_Fanatic Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,738
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 13
I Root For: Toledo!
Location: Elyria, Oh
Post: #8
RE: CFP committee kills off Cinderella
It is criminal that only in Division 1 FBS football that a team can go undefeated and not have a shot at a national title. Absolutely shameful...
12-07-2017 11:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kittonhead Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,177
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 98
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #9
RE: CFP committee kills off Cinderella
As an OU fan I know a weak schedule when I see one.

Taking this year for the Bobcats had they gone undefeated at won every game by 30 points this would have been the best they could have offered:

+3 Central Michigan 7-5 (8-4)
+3 Toledo 10-2
+3 Toledo 10-3 (11-2)

+9 points. An undefeated OU on this schedule should be no better than Top 12. Akron would no longer count as points because the would have been 6-6 if OU beat them. This is an example of a schedule that is too weak.

Toledo though had playoff potential if undefeated.

+3 Miami FL 9-3 (10-2)
+3 Central Michigan 8-4
+3 Akron 7-5
+3 Northern Illinois 8-4
+3 Ohio 7-5 (8-4)
+3 Akron 7-5

+18 points. More schedule points than the Oklahoma Sooners and they finished #2 in the CFP. Definitely played a playoff worthy schedule.

Toledo in reality ended up with 11 points this season by pounding the MAC East champ twice in Akron, clobbering CMU and a close victory over NIU. They should have been ranked within the Top 20 of the final CFP poll.

Boise St was ranked #25 in the final CFP poll.

+2 Troy 24-13 (10-2)
+1 Washington St. (9-3) 44-47
+3 San Diego St. (10-2) 31-14
+2 Wyoming (7-5) 24-14
+2 Colorado St. (7-5) 59-52
+2 Fresno St. (9-4) 17-14

12 points. The same as #4 Alabama and #5 Ohio State.

Don't give me the B1G is a tough league when 5-7 Eastern Michigan defeats 4-8 Rutgers 16-13. Strength of schedule just isn't that much of a factor.
12-08-2017 12:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
wmubroncopilot Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,972
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 63
I Root For: WMU
Location: Anchorage, AK
Post: #10
RE: CFP committee kills off Cinderella
I agree that something needs to be done about access to a national title, even if it's just an 8 team playoff with 1 G5 slot.

That "system" you proposed though, Kittonhead, is completely asinine.
12-08-2017 03:05 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
IULurker Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 700
Joined: Jan 2003
Reputation: 8
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #11
RE: CFP committee kills off Cinderella
The answer is to flip the season. Right now the P5 plays mostly G5 before the season starts but then don't want to play them at the end of the season. Change it to everyone in Div 1A (or whatever it is called now) plays one team from Div 1AA and one team from another conference as a sort of "preseason" and then conference play starts. Everyone, even the worst team in a league, at least then gets 10 games which is what it used to be back in the day.

The P5 sends the league champion and then one team of their choosing to the "playoff". The G5 sends their league champion and there is one at large spot for whomever giving you 16 teams. Divide the 16 teams into pods of 4, which plays a round robin. The winners of the pods then start a 4 team playoff.

The two teams in the championship game would then have played a total of 16 games, which really is not that much given the current environment. The real selling point of this would be the vast amount of money which this would generate, which would be WAY more than the current amount due to the shear volume of games which have impact on who is crowned the NCAA football champion. Even the greedy P5 would have to see the $$$ here.

By the way, I am not guaranteeing any of my numbers are correct, I just thought of this on the spot.
12-08-2017 08:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

CHIPPEWA ENEMA Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,284
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 25
I Root For: CMU CHIPPEWAS
Location: Madison, WI

Crappies
Post: #12
RE: CFP committee kills off Cinderella
(12-07-2017 11:47 AM)TheCrumbIsHere Wrote:  It's the only sport that I know of that at the beginning of the year there are a chunk of teams that have 0 shot to win a National Championship. The problem is that it's too much of a money grab for those at the top that they frankly don't care.

Gee, anyone see any parallels between this statement and our economic system?
12-08-2017 10:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
San Giuseppe Jato Rocket Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,270
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 8
I Root For: il Rockets
Location: 71 Battery St~Boston
Post: #13
RE: CFP committee kills off Cinderella
I have issues with the Big 10 strength of schedule argument. Beating Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, Minnesota, Rutgers, Maryland and Iowa are not quality wins. When a MAC team beats these schools, it's shrugged off as "well that's Nebraska and they're not very good" When another Big 10 beats those schools the media ranks them in the Top 10

Throw away athletic conference altogether and institute "promotion and regulation" system similar to European soccer leagues. Two divisions of 60 teams where football teams only play other teams within its division.
12-08-2017 09:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MaddDawgz02 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 36,932
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation: 99
I Root For: any UT opponent
Location:
Post: #14
RE: CFP committee kills off Cinderella
(12-08-2017 03:05 AM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  I agree that something needs to be done about access to a national title, even if it's just an 8 team playoff with 1 G5 slot.

That "system" you proposed though, Kittonhead, is completely asinine.

I think most agree, the absolutely perfect scenario would be an 8 team playoff with 1 G5 slot. Man that would be entertaining
12-10-2017 12:37 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
emu steve Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 28,176
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation: 64
I Root For: EMU / MAC
Location:
Post: #15
RE: CFP committee kills off Cinderella
(12-10-2017 12:37 AM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  
(12-08-2017 03:05 AM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  I agree that something needs to be done about access to a national title, even if it's just an 8 team playoff with 1 G5 slot.

That "system" you proposed though, Kittonhead, is completely asinine.

I think most agree, the absolutely perfect scenario would be an 8 team playoff with 1 G5 slot. Man that would be entertaining

I agree.

And what it would do is permit schools like say Boise, UCF, and WMU (oops, they've regressed already), to take the next step forward.

If a recruit has an opportunity to play for UCF they could pass up bigger name schools because of the opportunity UCF might offer.

It might lead to a super program in a number of G5 conferences. And would make the G5 football better and more interesting.

I would like a G5 play-in round where the winner of it advances.

I'd hate to see an 8 team playoff and the G5 team in the first round faces Alabama. We already see 1 / 16 mis-matches in March Madness.

Or a 6 team playoff with two teams given a bye and the other four play each other to advance. One of the six would be a G5 or independent.
(This post was last modified: 12-10-2017 04:42 AM by emu steve.)
12-10-2017 04:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,029
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 105
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #16
RE: CFP committee kills off Cinderella
(12-08-2017 03:05 AM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  I agree that something needs to be done about access to a national title, even if it's just an 8 team playoff with 1 G5 slot.
While the Go5 (formerly "Non AQ") conferences have been making steady headway ever since the low spot of access represented by the first version of the BCS, I worry that a guaranteed Go5 spot in an 8-school playoff may be a step too far.

So I'm thinking the way that the Go5 sneak it in is as an "Best of Independents / Go5 champions" spot, in which case it is "Best Go5 champion primarily if they can beat out Notre Dame (secondarily BYU)"

Quote: That "system" you proposed though, Kittonhead, is completely asinine.
03-lmfao
12-10-2017 06:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

Love and Honor Offline
Skipper
*

Posts: 4,980
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 133
I Root For: Miami, MACtion
Location: Chicagoland
Post: #17
RE: CFP committee kills off Cinderella
(12-10-2017 12:37 AM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  
(12-08-2017 03:05 AM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  I agree that something needs to be done about access to a national title, even if it's just an 8 team playoff with 1 G5 slot.

That "system" you proposed though, Kittonhead, is completely asinine.

I think most agree, the absolutely perfect scenario would be an 8 team playoff with 1 G5 slot. Man that would be entertaining

If you want the 'perfect' scenario imo it'd be a twelve-team playoff in which all conference champs plus two at-large teams get in, where the top four seeds have byes with the first round played at home with major bowl sites for the remaining games. But that has no shot of happening.
12-10-2017 11:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MaddDawgz02 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 36,932
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation: 99
I Root For: any UT opponent
Location:
Post: #18
RE: CFP committee kills off Cinderella
(12-10-2017 11:47 AM)Love and Honor Wrote:  
(12-10-2017 12:37 AM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  
(12-08-2017 03:05 AM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  I agree that something needs to be done about access to a national title, even if it's just an 8 team playoff with 1 G5 slot.

That "system" you proposed though, Kittonhead, is completely asinine.

I think most agree, the absolutely perfect scenario would be an 8 team playoff with 1 G5 slot. Man that would be entertaining

If you want the 'perfect' scenario imo it'd be a twelve-team playoff in which all conference champs plus two at-large teams get in, where the top four seeds have byes with the first round played at home with major bowl sites for the remaining games. But that has no shot of happening.

The only thing that might help is if people stop watching and attending bowl games
12-10-2017 12:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MidnightBlueGold Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,120
Joined: May 2007
Reputation: 40
I Root For: TOL-EDO
Location: The Glass Bowl
Post: #19
RE: CFP committee kills off Cinderella
(12-10-2017 12:04 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  
(12-10-2017 11:47 AM)Love and Honor Wrote:  
(12-10-2017 12:37 AM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  
(12-08-2017 03:05 AM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  I agree that something needs to be done about access to a national title, even if it's just an 8 team playoff with 1 G5 slot.

That "system" you proposed though, Kittonhead, is completely asinine.

I think most agree, the absolutely perfect scenario would be an 8 team playoff with 1 G5 slot. Man that would be entertaining

If you want the 'perfect' scenario imo it'd be a twelve-team playoff in which all conference champs plus two at-large teams get in, where the top four seeds have byes with the first round played at home with major bowl sites for the remaining games. But that has no shot of happening.

The only thing that might help is if people stop watching and attending bowl games

People have stopped attending, but they continue to watch.
12-10-2017 12:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NIUfilmmaker Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,553
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation: 21
I Root For: NIU!
Location: Wicker Park, Chicago
Post: #20
RE: CFP committee kills off Cinderella
(12-10-2017 11:47 AM)Love and Honor Wrote:  
(12-10-2017 12:37 AM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  
(12-08-2017 03:05 AM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  I agree that something needs to be done about access to a national title, even if it's just an 8 team playoff with 1 G5 slot.

That "system" you proposed though, Kittonhead, is completely asinine.

I think most agree, the absolutely perfect scenario would be an 8 team playoff with 1 G5 slot. Man that would be entertaining

If you want the 'perfect' scenario imo it'd be a twelve-team playoff in which all conference champs plus two at-large teams get in, where the top four seeds have byes with the first round played at home with major bowl sites for the remaining games. But that has no shot of happening.

Would this scenario work with 16 teams? If there were 6 at large openings, and most/all of these slots went to P5 conferences as you would expect, then most P5 conferences would have 2 horses in the race as opposed to the Mac's one. Might seem more "fair" to them by their currently crooked standards, but at least we'd have better access.
(This post was last modified: 12-10-2017 12:32 PM by NIUfilmmaker.)
12-10-2017 12:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.