(01-07-2019 02:46 PM)Vobserver Wrote: (01-07-2019 12:37 PM)ericsaid Wrote: I would argue that this doesn't change a thing. Last year UGA was blown out at Auburn, making it seem like they didn't belong in the playoff much less like they could possibly win the SEC. Final week rolls around, Auburn also beats Alabama securing their spot in the Championship game against UGA. By the logic utilized by OP, you'd think Georgia didn't belong. However, UGA came back and defeated Auburn quite easily.
The reasoning for this is as Brian Kelly put it (paraphrase), "...there was no talent disparity in this game. It was a tactile issue and there were things we could've done differently to produce a different outcome". People would seem to see this as coach speak but UGA is a perfect example of this. Notre Dame showed that there isn't much difference between them and the other contenders last season by nearly knocking off Georgia as well.
They were outcoached in the Clemson game. They weren't beat physically.
ROFLMFAO at this. If the four playoff teams this year had played a full season of 12 games in a home-road neutral neutral rotation with each other, Notre Dame would have been lucky to be 2-10. They would have been 0-8 vs Clemson and Alabama, and might have split with Oklahoma if three of the four games were played in either a blizzard or a monsoon.
I'm sure many people said the same about Georgia after they lost to Auburn in 2017. I assumed it was a fluke, and this happens in the NFL at times where a coaching staff simply drops the ball in their game planning rather than on the field.
You can suggest Notre Dame would've been winless but the truth is that if they played again the game would either be much closer or a Notre Dame win.
With the premise of some being "well the semi-final games weren't close, why have a playoff?", that could be taken further to say, "well the national championship game wasn't even close, why even have the game?". The fact of the matter is that football is a game of match-ups and preperation. There are plenty of examples proving the preparation issue in Georgia v. Auburn in 2017, and MTSU v. UAB in 2018. Teams of a similar talent level can be blown out and the fault be on coaching rather than on the players.
Coaches lose, players win. There is no such thing as a bad team, only a bad leader.
Kelly admitted as much. In watching the game, I only saw issues with the game plan and execution and not the ability of the players, in a vacuum. I also believe that Oklahoma and Texas are both much better than they are given credit for. If not for the slow start, Oklahoma might have actually won that game; Texas went out and beat Georgia.
If anyone was left out of the playoff, it was Ohio State. They were curbstomped and embarrassed by Purdue but again, that falls on coaching. No one is going to say that Purdue was more talented than Ohio State. At the end of the season, coaching had caught up to the ability of the players and I think Ohio State could've competed well with Alabama or Clemson.
Georgia lost their shot in the SEC Championship Game, as they should have. That was their second loss and everyone knew it was a playoff game for them. Win and your in, lose and go to a NY6 Bowl. Their loss to Texas only verified that they weren't playoff material. Don't go and say "Well they didn't have anything to play for or motivation". You play to win the game. You play to win every game. You play for your school, fans, employees, your childhood dreams, and for pride. If Georgia couldn't get up to play Texas, they didn't deserve to be in the playoff to begin with.
Expand the playoff to 6 teams and have a play in game for 2019-2020. If that goes well, expand to 8. If you want to do away with Conference Championship games, expand to 16, force regional alignment for conferences, reduce the number of teams per conference, and create more interest in college football in general. Maintain Bowl Games to the best extent possible.