(09-13-2018 11:17 AM)Wedge Wrote:  This is all about teams like Ohio State and TCU wanting to minimize the number of challenging non-conference games they play, because they know the CFP committee has never selected a team with more than one loss. The committee has never rewarded a two-loss team for having a more challenging schedule than a one-loss team. So, TCU and Ohio State converted a two-game series into a one-game series, and got paid for doing it.

So let's just go to conference games and rivalry games. The teams obviously dont want to play this game so why bother? Save it for the playoff.

(09-18-2018 04:09 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(09-13-2018 11:17 AM)Wedge Wrote:  This is all about teams like Ohio State and TCU wanting to minimize the number of challenging non-conference games they play, because they know the CFP committee has never selected a team with more than one loss. The committee has never rewarded a two-loss team for having a more challenging schedule than a one-loss team. So, TCU and Ohio State converted a two-game series into a one-game series, and got paid for doing it.

So let's just go to conference games and rivalry games. The teams obviously dont want to play this game so why bother? Save it for the playoff.

At some point someone needs to step back and ask the CFP committee "is this the result we really wanted?" - I contend that we should want MORE great OOC games in the regular season. After all, why have ONE great OOC (bowl) game at the end of the year when I could have 1 or 2 more in the regular season (and STILL have the bowl game)? But to get that the CFP must STOP treating losses as the end-all-be-all and give more weight to actual strength of schedule - something they SAID they were going to do, but their actions betray them.

(09-18-2018 04:09 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(09-13-2018 11:17 AM)Wedge Wrote:  This is all about teams like Ohio State and TCU wanting to minimize the number of challenging non-conference games they play, because they know the CFP committee has never selected a team with more than one loss. The committee has never rewarded a two-loss team for having a more challenging schedule than a one-loss team. So, TCU and Ohio State converted a two-game series into a one-game series, and got paid for doing it.

So let's just go to conference games and rivalry games. The teams obviously dont want to play this game so why bother? Save it for the playoff.

At some point someone needs to step back and ask the CFP committee "is this the result we really wanted?" - I contend that we should want MORE great OOC games in the regular season. After all, why have ONE great OOC (bowl) game at the end of the year when I could have 1 or 2 more in the regular season (and STILL have the bowl game)? But to get that the CFP must STOP treating losses as the end-all-be-all and give more weight to actual strength of schedule - something they SAID they were going to do, but their actions betray them.

(09-19-2018 09:29 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(09-18-2018 04:09 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(09-13-2018 11:17 AM)Wedge Wrote:  This is all about teams like Ohio State and TCU wanting to minimize the number of challenging non-conference games they play, because they know the CFP committee has never selected a team with more than one loss. The committee has never rewarded a two-loss team for having a more challenging schedule than a one-loss team. So, TCU and Ohio State converted a two-game series into a one-game series, and got paid for doing it.

So let's just go to conference games and rivalry games. The teams obviously dont want to play this game so why bother? Save it for the playoff.

At some point someone needs to step back and ask the CFP committee "is this the result we really wanted?" - I contend that we should want MORE great OOC games in the regular season. After all, why have ONE great OOC (bowl) game at the end of the year when I could have 1 or 2 more in the regular season (and STILL have the bowl game)? But to get that the CFP must STOP treating losses as the end-all-be-all and give more weight to actual strength of schedule - something they SAID they were going to do, but their actions betray them.

You're wrong on that. They put IMO too much emphasis on quality wins.

And there are more marquee games being played than 10 years ago. I don't know if it is motivated by the CFP or solely by the $$s dangled by Atlanta, Dallas and Orlando for neutral site games.