Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
Author Message
Frank the Tank Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,551
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 624
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #61
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
Quo - I agree that the NFL is national, but it’s national via its strong (in many cases ironclad) fan bases of the individual teams. I love the NFL overall, too, and I’ll watch all of the playoff games long after the Bears are eliminated. That’s because I’m truly invested in the sport at a personal level. At the same time, there are simply a lot of NFL games that have something at stake in the playoff race in any given week. We saw that firsthand again yesterday with a full slate of games with playoff implications.

Your point about college football being more provincial than national actually makes the case of how the current CFP system is not fulfilling fans’ needs. The way the CFP has shaken out is that at least one of Alabama, Clemson and/or Ohio State has participated in every single national championship game in the CFP era. If college football were a national sport, then that wouldn’t depress interest since those are big brands. However, as you rightly point out, college football is a local/regional fan-driven sport at its core. So, it’s not a surprise that the CFP ratings have been on a downward trend from year one: when the same teams are involved all of the time, the public loses interest. More importantly, this trickles down to the regular season where any game that doesn’t involve that small handful of playoff contenders is rendered meaningless... and fans KNOW it and that’s reflected in ratings and attendance.

In a weird way, the insanely exclusionary ways of crowning a national champion in the past during the poll era and even the BCS era made fans more comfortable with just enjoying their local rivalry games and being satisfied with a good bowl invite. The Big Ten and old Pac-10 teams made the Rose Bowl their goal every season regardless of whether a national championship was on the line. The 1995 Northwestern team simply making the Rose Bowl was a massive sports story (without having any national title implications) in a way that wouldn’t ever happen today.

Whether intentional or not, the CFP format made those “secondary” storylines such as other non-playoff bowl invites and rivalry games (outside of ones with playoff implications) completely irrelevant. It has made the sport into a “playoff or bust” frame of mind... and that is going to cause (and I believe has already caused) problems in a world when there are only 4 playoff spots available. The CFP inherently nationalized college football where it has focused the entire sport on a very small handful of teams that are in the playoff race. This wasn’t entirely clear when the CFP was first formed, but we can see it through 7 seasons. That simply isn’t going to work for the sport long-term when there are 65 P5 schools and many more G5 schools.

Essentially, if you’re going to have a playoff (and to be clear, I’ve always been a playoff proponent), then it needs to be a system where everyone *feels* that they have a chance much longer into the season. Now, that doesn’t mean that lots more teams will do better when the results shake out. The Bears have disappointed me every year since 1985, but I still approach every new season with a sincere belief that the team at least can make the playoffs if things break the right way. That isn’t the case when I watch Illini football (and I’m talking about the actual structural impediment that goes beyond performance on the field). You multiply many others like me (and I’m a sports nut to the core) across all of college football and that is a significant issue for the sport.

Granted, I do think that we all may be overthinking this here. The pandemic has decimated college finances at even the wealthiest schools. An 8-team playoff using the top bowls as quarterfinals is about as easy of a financial boost as you can get without disrupting much else about the sport. That’s going to accelerate playoff expansion more than anything else.
(This post was last modified: 01-05-2021 12:12 AM by Frank the Tank.)
01-05-2021 12:02 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 46,153
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1692
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #62
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-05-2021 12:00 AM)Jared7 Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 07:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 04:37 PM)Jared7 Wrote:  TCU got screwed in 2014 because we aren't a blueblood and Ohio State is.

TCU was not screwed in 2014. TCU had a Baylor problem and a Big 12 problem. The Baylor problem was that nobody could rank TCU ahead of Baylor, because same record and H2H. That means that to put TCU in to the playoffs, you would have to put both TCU and Baylor in the playoffs. But that was untenable, because no way did either of them deserve to be in over FSU, the only unbeaten, and Alabama and Oregon, who had played much tougher schedules.

So the only issue the committee had to address was Baylor vs Ohio State, and Ohio State had a clearly stronger resume than Baylor.

The Big 12 problem was the lack of a CCG. What should have happened is Baylor and TCU should have played again in a Big 12 CCG. The winner would surely have gotten in to the playoffs over Ohio State.

TCU was obviously screwed in 2014. You say that "nobody could rank TCU ahead of Baylor" but the fact is that everyone did, including the AP and the Coaches and the CFI Committee up until the final weekend when TCU won by 52 points over ISU. And then, after the Bowls, they (everybody) did again after TCU torched Mississippi 42-3 and Baylor lost. No school other than TCU has ever been ranked 3rd by the Committee and dumped to 6th after winning by 52. The reason everybody ranked TCU over Baylor was because Baylor lost to WVa., who TCU beat. And, Baylor's SOS was abysmal because they rarely play any other P5 team and didn't that year either.

But the real reason was because Ohio State won the Big10 (with a huge W over Wisky in the CCG) and the Committee just couldn't leave them out in the first year. And FSU wasn't just the only unbeaten, they were also the defending national champ. Even if there had been a Big12 CCG, my view is that Ohio State would still have gotten in - especially over Baylor because of their weak OOC schedule but also over TCU. Ohio State is Ohio State; TCU was a newly promoted non-AQ team with a small alumni base that doesn't necessarily get as high TV ratings.

The Frogs need to go undefeated to make the Invitational. If we have a loss, they will find whatever reasons they can to keep us out. This is not a great situation for us, but we share it with other non-blueblood P5 teams and we're still a bit better off than most G5's who not only need to go undefeated but also to have a bit of luck and an arguably tougher OOC schedule. A 5-2-1 system would be much more fair for schools like TCU and G5 teams.

Another reason for a 5-1-2. It is a huge benefit to 40-45 P5 teams who are extremely unlikely to sniff the playoffs without an autobid.
01-05-2021 12:12 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 46,153
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1692
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #63
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-05-2021 12:02 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Quo - I agree that the NFL is national, but it’s national via its strong (in many cases ironclad) fan bases of the individual teams. I love the NFL overall, too, and I’ll watch all of the playoff games long after the Bears are eliminated. That’s because I’m truly invested in the sport at a personal level. At the same time, there are simply a lot of NFL games that have something at stake in the playoff race in any given week. We saw that firsthand again yesterday with a full slate of games with playoff implications.

Your point about college football being more provincial than national actually makes the case of how the current CFP system is not fulfilling fans’ needs. The way the CFP has shaken out is that at least one of Alabama, Clemson and/or Ohio State has participated in every single national championship game in the CFP era. If college football were a national sport, then that wouldn’t depress interest since those are big brands. However, as you rightly point out, college football is a local/regional fan-driven sport at its core. So, it’s not a surprise that the CFP ratings have been on a downward trend from year one: when the same teams are involved all of the time, the public loses interest. More importantly, this trickles down to the regular season where any game that doesn’t involve that small handful of playoff contenders is rendered meaningless... and fans KNOW it and that’s reflected in ratings and attendance.

In a weird way, the insanely exclusionary ways of crowning a national champion in the past during the poll era and even the BCS era made fans more comfortable with just enjoying their local rivalry games and being satisfied with a good bowl invite. The Big Ten and old Pac-10 teams made the Rose Bowl their goal every season regardless of whether a national championship was on the line. The 1995 Northwestern team simply making the Rose Bowl was a massive sports story (without having any national title implications) in a way that wouldn’t ever happen today.

Whether intentional or not, the CFP format made those “secondary” storylines such as other non-playoff bowl invites and rivalry games (outside of ones with playoff implications) completely irrelevant. It has made the sport into a “playoff or bust” frame of mind... and that is going to cause (and I believe has already caused) problems in a world when there are only 4 playoff spots available. The CFP inherently nationalized college football where it has focused the entire sport on a very small handful of teams that are in the playoff race. This wasn’t entirely clear when the CFP was first formed, but we can see it through 7 seasons. That simply isn’t going to work for the sport long-term when there are 65 P5 schools and many more G5 schools.

Essentially, if you’re going to have a playoff (and to be clear, I’ve always been a playoff proponent), then it needs to be a system where everyone *feels* that they have a chance much longer into the season. Now, that doesn’t mean that lots more teams will do better when the results shake out. The Bears have disappointed me every year since 1985, but I still approach every new season with a sincere belief that the team at least can make the playoffs if things break the right way. That isn’t the case when I watch Illini football (and I’m talking about the actual structural impediment that goes beyond performance on the field). You multiply many others like me (and I’m a sports nut to the core) across all of college football and that is a significant issue for the sport.

Granted, I do think that we all may be overthinking this here. The pandemic has decimated college finances at even the wealthiest schools. An 8-team playoff using the top bowls as quarterfinals is about as easy of a financial boost as you can get without disrupting much else about the sport. That’s going to accelerate playoff expansion more than anything else.

On the other thread I posted the top watched BCS and playoff games. The top 8 all involved Texas, Ohio St. or Oregon. It demonstrates the importance of getting teams from around the country and not just getting teams from the most fervent college football viewing area (Baton Rouge to Knoxville to Miami)
01-05-2021 12:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jared7 Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 60
Joined: Apr 2019
Reputation: 20
I Root For: TCU
Location:
Post: #64
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-05-2021 12:12 AM)bullet Wrote:  Another reason for a 5-1-2. It is a huge benefit to 40-45 P5 teams who are extremely unlikely to sniff the playoffs without an autobid.

Exactly. To take Frank's example, if a ticket to the Playoffs had been on the line this year for a P5 conference champ, then the CCG's between Northwestern and Ohio State and Iowa State and OU would have drawn huge national interest. Iowa State hasn't won a conference title since 1912 and the MildCats' record (1995 excepted) isn't all that much different. But what if they both had had a shot at the playoffs (in addition to the usual Bama, Clemson and Ohio State playoff teams)? I think it'd be big money and big TV ratings. As it was, "everyone" knew that if either had won, it would just have been a non-playoff "minor" bowl, which is what they got anyway with L's. Non-blueblood P5's, in addition to G5's, would get a shot in the arm with a 5-1-2 system because then at least there would be a chance...
01-05-2021 12:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
The Colonel Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,132
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation: 31
I Root For: WMU Broncos
Location: Jefferson City, MO
Post: #65
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-04-2021 03:55 PM)Eldonabe Wrote:  The odd man out always has a legitimate argument why they should be included instead of the last man in. I watch the Basketball Selection show every year and it is the same thing. The major difference is that they have auto bids but the simple fact is that there is enough room to fit all the conference champs in AND and the teams who are good enough to be there as well. Even with 68 teams the teams on the bubble complain they got screwed.

Football does not have that luxury. There is a finite ceiling as to how many teams you can add to a tournament format and not kill 18-22 year old kids and keep the regular season meaningful and not last longer than the NFL season all at the same time. These are still college students.

Unless you have a 16 team football tournament you are not going to be able to satisfy the vast majority. Anything less than 16 has to omit all FBS conference champs as auto-bids. At least with 16 you have 6 wild cards who will normally be filled out by the remainder of the top 8 ranked teams who are not already in.

I'll take a crack at it with 14 teams which would include all conference champions and only one major modification to the current schedule: to be included, G5 conferences would have to conclude their seasons on Thanksgiving weekend (one week earlier).

Thanksgiving weekend:
- G5 conference championship games (autobids). Highest-rated G5 champion is guaranteed a spot in CFP Round 2 (not guaranteed a home game, although it could be as determined by selection committee).

First weekend in December:
- CFP Round 1: the two higher-seeded remaining G5 champions as determined by committee host the two lower-seeded remaining G5 champions. Winners advance to CFP Round 2, with reseeding.
(14) Ball State at (11) Coastal Carolina
(13) UAB at (12) San Jose State.
- P5 conference championship games (autobids). Top four seeds as determined by committee receive A) a bye to the quarterfinals and B) a home quarterfinal game.
- Seeds 5-10 include the lowest-seeded P5 champion, the highest-rated G5 champion, and four at-large (seeds 5-8 will host a CFP Round 2 game).

Second weekend in December:
CFP Round 2 (on-campus sites). Winners advance to CFP quarterfinals, with reseeding.
(14) Ball State at (5) Texas A+M
(12) San Jose State at (6) Oklahoma
(10) Iowa State at (7) Florida
(9) Georgia at (8) Cincinnati

Third weekend of December:
CFP quarterfinals (on-campus sites). Winners advance to CFP semifinals, with reseeding.
(10) Iowa State at (1) Alabama
(8) Cincinnati at (2) Clemson
(6) Oklahoma at (3) Ohio State
(5) Texas A+M at (4) Notre Dame

New Year's Day:
CFP semifinals at two NY6 bowls.
(6) Oklahoma vs. (1) Alabama
(5) Texas A+M vs. (2) Clemson

Monday 10 days or so after New Year's:
CFP National Championship
(6) Oklahoma vs. (2) Clemson

For almost all teams involved, this format likely only adds one additional game. There are possible exceptions. If Oklahoma made this run, they'd play two additional games (though, to do this, they'd have to win a road quarterfinal game AND beat a higher-seeded team on a neutral field). If a G5 team made a Cinderella run, they'd also play multiple additional games (though the interest generated would more than offset this).

I'm not arguing that 14 is the "best" way to determine a true champion. With this model, though, every FBS team would theoretically have the opportunity to compete without causing significant changes to the current schedule and, in almost all cases, avoiding adding more than one additional game to a team's schedule (which would happen anyway if the CFP is expanded to eight).

I do think, as it appears most here do, that an eight-team playoff (at least) is coming. Going into almost every season, Alabama is favored to win the SEC, Ohio State is favored to win the B1G, Oklahoma is favored to win the XII, and Clemson is favored to win the ACC. That's problematic if the goal is to attract and/or grow interest in the sport.
(This post was last modified: 01-05-2021 01:21 AM by The Colonel.)
01-05-2021 01:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Eldonabe Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,590
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 373
I Root For: All but Uconn
Location: Van by the River
Post: #66
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-04-2021 04:46 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Give me one reason why a top 6 ranked conference champs + 2 at large model can't work.

I say a top 6 ranked champs model, because if a conference has the #7 or 8 highest ranked champ, do they really deserve to get in over a higher ranked champion.

The main issue I have with the 5-1-2 model is that it allows a 25th ranked Pac 12 champ to get in automatically over a #12 ranked Sun Belt for example.

If you allow 8 teams to play in the tournament - all the deserving P5 champs will be included without an auto bid qualification. Oregon simply has no right to be there this year and they would be pushing out a team (like Cincy) if they had to be included. Likewise, any deserving G5 will get in with 8 teams as well (Like Cincy this year) under a committee scenario.

The cynicism over humans choosing with logic and analysis instead of some unbending rules is crazy to me.


The rules say I have to wear a mask even if I have already had the rona and I can no longer spread it. That is a dumb rule. Just like a rule that forces you to give a very unqualified team a chance to win the Natty in football.


The bottom line is that more "deserving" teams will get screwed in an auto-bid scenario than will if a human committee picks the final 8. This year is example #1. The PAC 12 has sucked for a few years (let alone this year) - they should not be rewarded for sucking.....
01-05-2021 08:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CoastalJuan Offline
Business Drunk
*

Posts: 4,340
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation: 196
I Root For: ECU
Location: Right near da beeech
Post: #67
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-05-2021 08:31 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 04:46 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Give me one reason why a top 6 ranked conference champs + 2 at large model can't work.

I say a top 6 ranked champs model, because if a conference has the #7 or 8 highest ranked champ, do they really deserve to get in over a higher ranked champion.

The main issue I have with the 5-1-2 model is that it allows a 25th ranked Pac 12 champ to get in automatically over a #12 ranked Sun Belt for example.

If you allow 8 teams to play in the tournament - all the deserving P5 champs will be included without an auto bid qualification. Oregon simply has no right to be there this year and they would be pushing out a team (like Cincy) if they had to be included. Likewise, any deserving G5 will get in with 8 teams as well (Like Cincy this year) under a committee scenario.

The cynicism over humans choosing with logic and analysis instead of some unbending rules is crazy to me.


The rules say I have to wear a mask even if I have already had the rona and I can no longer spread it. That is a dumb rule. Just like a rule that forces you to give a very unqualified team a chance to win the Natty in football.


The bottom line is that more "deserving" teams will get screwed in an auto-bid scenario than will if a human committee picks the final 8. This year is example #1. The PAC 12 has sucked for a few years (let alone this year) - they should not be rewarded for sucking.....

I'd argue that the auto-bid for conference champs scenario solves for any real or perceived flaws in the current eye test. Someone above mentioned a scenario where a 25th-ranked USC would get in over a team like Georgia. The "25th ranked" part is where I see the issue. We're anchoring to these rankings that, especially this year, are completely arbitrary.

All these conferences don't play enough OOC games against each other for anyone to really know whether a team like Oregon or USC, for instance, could play a competitive game against a team like Alabama. Even when conferences DO play OOC against each other, there's always a "well that was week 2" when the results don't meet the historical expectation.

We either need to systemically assign OOC games between conferences to get a better idea of their comparative strength, or incorporate conference champs into the playoff bids.
01-05-2021 08:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,606
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 570
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #68
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-05-2021 12:02 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Your point about college football being more provincial than national actually makes the case of how the current CFP system is not fulfilling fans’ needs. The way the CFP has shaken out is that at least one of Alabama, Clemson and/or Ohio State has participated in every single national championship game in the CFP era. If college football were a national sport, then that wouldn’t depress interest since those are big brands. However, as you rightly point out, college football is a local/regional fan-driven sport at its core. So, it’s not a surprise that the CFP ratings have been on a downward trend from year one: when the same teams are involved all of the time, the public loses interest. More importantly, this trickles down to the regular season where any game that doesn’t involve that small handful of playoff contenders is rendered meaningless... and fans KNOW it and that’s reflected in ratings and attendance.

Your post makes many valid and cogent points. What I don't really see is how expanding the CFP, regardless of the format that ultimately holds sway, will have any significant impact on the dominance of a handful of teams.

In the absence of any other structural changes to college football, tweaking the CFP won't really change anything. The only thing that might reduce the dominance of those few teams is the elimination of any national playoff to determine a champion, and returning to the status quo ante BCS.

As long as there is an "official" champion, the best high school players are going to assemble at only a few schools, just as they do now. They all want to be "the champion" to burnish their credentials for the NFL draft.

Note that I said "In the absence of any other structural changes to college football". If we want to minimize the dominance of a few schools, we must have major changes to the scholarship limitation rules. And again, I'm not talking about tweaking the rules. I'm talking radical changes.

I would propose a scholarship limit for all of D-I of 60 full-time equivalents, with a maximum number of athletes receiving either a part or full scholarship of 80 per school. At the same time, make the entrance requirements for D-I the same for all schools (which would likely cause an exodus of the poorer schools to D-II) and eliminate the distinction between FBS and FCS. Make the highest goal a school can strive for be its conference championship.

Make no mistake. These changes won't elevate G5 conferences to where they are equivalent to P5's. Nothing will do that. Those P5 conferences have built in structural advantages developed over a century or more that aren't going away. What it will do, IMO, is dramatically increase the number of schools who would have a shot at a mythical national championship from a half dozen to 30 or more. And we would always have a mythical championship poll. The need to rank everything is a part of Americans' DNA.

It would also increase controversy over who deserves those "championships". That's a good thing. The more controversy the better, if your goal is expanding interest in the sport, or at least slowing its decline.
(This post was last modified: 01-05-2021 09:43 AM by ken d.)
01-05-2021 09:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Eldonabe Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,590
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 373
I Root For: All but Uconn
Location: Van by the River
Post: #69
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-05-2021 08:45 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 08:31 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 04:46 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Give me one reason why a top 6 ranked conference champs + 2 at large model can't work.

I say a top 6 ranked champs model, because if a conference has the #7 or 8 highest ranked champ, do they really deserve to get in over a higher ranked champion.

The main issue I have with the 5-1-2 model is that it allows a 25th ranked Pac 12 champ to get in automatically over a #12 ranked Sun Belt for example.

If you allow 8 teams to play in the tournament - all the deserving P5 champs will be included without an auto bid qualification. Oregon simply has no right to be there this year and they would be pushing out a team (like Cincy) if they had to be included. Likewise, any deserving G5 will get in with 8 teams as well (Like Cincy this year) under a committee scenario.

The cynicism over humans choosing with logic and analysis instead of some unbending rules is crazy to me.


The rules say I have to wear a mask even if I have already had the rona and I can no longer spread it. That is a dumb rule. Just like a rule that forces you to give a very unqualified team a chance to win the Natty in football.


The bottom line is that more "deserving" teams will get screwed in an auto-bid scenario than will if a human committee picks the final 8. This year is example #1. The PAC 12 has sucked for a few years (let alone this year) - they should not be rewarded for sucking.....

I'd argue that the auto-bid for conference champs scenario solves for any real or perceived flaws in the current eye test. Someone above mentioned a scenario where a 25th-ranked USC would get in over a team like Georgia. The "25th ranked" part is where I see the issue. We're anchoring to these rankings that, especially this year, are completely arbitrary.

All these conferences don't play enough OOC games against each other for anyone to really know whether a team like Oregon or USC, for instance, could play a competitive game against a team like Alabama. Even when conferences DO play OOC against each other, there's always a "well that was week 2" when the results don't meet the historical expectation.

We either need to systemically assign OOC games between conferences to get a better idea of their comparative strength, or incorporate conference champs into the playoff bids.


If you start "mandating" schedules in that way for that purpose you can kiss the G5 and those couple of indy's goodbye...... They will never get P5 matchups and will then never get the SOS needed for any critical consideration.

Phuck it - lets just have a 6 game regular season then a 130 team tournament that starts on the 1st weekend of November. There is no F-ing scenario that will please everyone unless every single team gets a phukin' trophy 03-banghead.



Why is it so f-ing hard to understand that most people want to see the best teams possible play for the Natty.

Frank I respect your opinion and I can wrap my head around it, but the NFL and College are just not the same thing.
01-05-2021 10:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,744
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1156
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #70
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-05-2021 12:00 AM)Jared7 Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 07:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 04:37 PM)Jared7 Wrote:  TCU got screwed in 2014 because we aren't a blueblood and Ohio State is.

TCU was not screwed in 2014. TCU had a Baylor problem and a Big 12 problem. The Baylor problem was that nobody could rank TCU ahead of Baylor, because same record and H2H. That means that to put TCU in to the playoffs, you would have to put both TCU and Baylor in the playoffs. But that was untenable, because no way did either of them deserve to be in over FSU, the only unbeaten, and Alabama and Oregon, who had played much tougher schedules.

So the only issue the committee had to address was Baylor vs Ohio State, and Ohio State had a clearly stronger resume than Baylor.

The Big 12 problem was the lack of a CCG. What should have happened is Baylor and TCU should have played again in a Big 12 CCG. The winner would surely have gotten in to the playoffs over Ohio State.

TCU was obviously screwed in 2014. You say that "nobody could rank TCU ahead of Baylor" but the fact is that everyone did, including the AP and the Coaches and the CFI Committee up until the final weekend when TCU won by 52 points over ISU.

Baylor moved ahead of TCU in the final CFP and AP and Coaches polls because they beat a ranked KSU team. That gave them enough of a schedule to merit it based on H2H. H2H is always the first tie-breaker.

There was no CFP conspiracy against TCU in 2014. The AP had TCU out of the playoffs, the Coaches had them out of the playoffs, the old BCS formula had them out of the playoffs.

The Frogs can make the CFP with a loss. It just has to be the right set of circumstances, like it does for everyone. In 2018 Ohio State was 12-1 and undisputed B1G champ, and they didn't go to the playoffs either.
(This post was last modified: 01-05-2021 11:45 AM by quo vadis.)
01-05-2021 10:41 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,744
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1156
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #71
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-05-2021 12:02 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Your point about college football being more provincial than national actually makes the case of how the current CFP system is not fulfilling fans’ needs. The way the CFP has shaken out is that at least one of Alabama, Clemson and/or Ohio State has participated in every single national championship game in the CFP era. If college football were a national sport, then that wouldn’t depress interest since those are big brands. However, as you rightly point out, college football is a local/regional fan-driven sport at its core. So, it’s not a surprise that the CFP ratings have been on a downward trend from year one: when the same teams are involved all of the time, the public loses interest.

If the issue is TV ratings and interest for the entire sport, season-long, the best evidence for that is TV deals, and all the recent TV deals have been for more money, not less. In the past year, even the AAC and MW, conferences where everyone says they have no hope of playing for a national title, signed for double (or more) of the money they were getting at the start of the CFP era. The SEC is getting a whopping new deal for its old CBS package, etc.

If it is about championship ratings, then among sports with elaborate inclusive playoffs:

1) Even throwing out this past year because of the virus, NBA Finals ratings are down 5 straight years.

2) World Series ratings have been sloping down forever, with the one big exception of the Cubs in 2016.

3) And even the mighty Super Bowl rating has been on a downward trend the past several years. Here are the ratings:

2020: 41.6 (KC vs SF)
2019: 41.1
2018: 43.1
2017: 45.3
2016: 46.6
2015: 47.5 (NE vs Seattle)

That's a drop from the 47s to the 41s just since Seattle vs New England.

4) In contrast, it seems like CFP title game ratings have been pretty consistent, as BCS title game ratings were before. Yes, the first CFP game in 2014 brought a huge audience, but we can chalk that up to the novelty of it. Since then, the viewership has been (expressed in ratings):

2020: 14.3
2019: 13.8
2018: 15.6 (UGA vs Alabama)
2017: 14.2
2016: 15.0

That seems pretty steady to me. Note that the highest rating, the 15.6 was for Georgia vs Alabama, which is clubby and regional as you can get.

By comparison, the last few BCS title games:

2013: 14.8 (FSU vs Auburn)
2012: 15.1
2011: 14.0
2010: 15.3

Again, a very tight range. Even the allegedly "disastrous" ratings for LSU vs Alabama in 2011 doesn't stand out.

BTW, someone said Texas is a big draw. They are, the two BCS title games with Texas, in 2009 and 2005, are big ratings outliers in a positive direction.

So I'm not sure a more elaborated playoff model will cause ratings to rise. But no question, if the big-wigs think it will, then we will get it.
(This post was last modified: 01-05-2021 11:45 AM by quo vadis.)
01-05-2021 11:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,744
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1156
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #72
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-05-2021 08:45 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  I'd argue that the auto-bid for conference champs scenario solves for any real or perceived flaws in the current eye test. Someone above mentioned a scenario where a 25th-ranked USC would get in over a team like Georgia. The "25th ranked" part is where I see the issue. We're anchoring to these rankings that, especially this year, are completely arbitrary.

First, do you think the eye test is 'completely arbitrary'? The eye test tells us that Alabama is one of the very best teams, that Coastal Carolina was a good team, that Virginia Tech was a mediocre team and USF was a lousy team. Do you doubt that this is pretty darn accurate? College football isn't rocket science. Our eyes can see a lot, LOL.

As for auto-bids correcting for the eye test, how would that be? Look at Oregon - they were "eye test" ranked at #24 yet got in to an NY6 bowl on a free pass thanks to being PAC champ. And what happened? They got soundly beat by a 10th ranked Big 12 also-ran, just as the "eye test" predicted they would. So how was it a good thing that they got in to the Fiesta Bowl over a bunch of teams that were ranked higher? That it was more valid that they got in over Northwestern or Coastal or Liberty or BYU and other higher-ranked teams?
(This post was last modified: 01-05-2021 12:01 PM by quo vadis.)
01-05-2021 11:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 46,153
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1692
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #73
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-05-2021 08:45 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 08:31 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 04:46 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Give me one reason why a top 6 ranked conference champs + 2 at large model can't work.

I say a top 6 ranked champs model, because if a conference has the #7 or 8 highest ranked champ, do they really deserve to get in over a higher ranked champion.

The main issue I have with the 5-1-2 model is that it allows a 25th ranked Pac 12 champ to get in automatically over a #12 ranked Sun Belt for example.

If you allow 8 teams to play in the tournament - all the deserving P5 champs will be included without an auto bid qualification. Oregon simply has no right to be there this year and they would be pushing out a team (like Cincy) if they had to be included. Likewise, any deserving G5 will get in with 8 teams as well (Like Cincy this year) under a committee scenario.

The cynicism over humans choosing with logic and analysis instead of some unbending rules is crazy to me.


The rules say I have to wear a mask even if I have already had the rona and I can no longer spread it. That is a dumb rule. Just like a rule that forces you to give a very unqualified team a chance to win the Natty in football.


The bottom line is that more "deserving" teams will get screwed in an auto-bid scenario than will if a human committee picks the final 8. This year is example #1. The PAC 12 has sucked for a few years (let alone this year) - they should not be rewarded for sucking.....

I'd argue that the auto-bid for conference champs scenario solves for any real or perceived flaws in the current eye test. Someone above mentioned a scenario where a 25th-ranked USC would get in over a team like Georgia. The "25th ranked" part is where I see the issue. We're anchoring to these rankings that, especially this year, are completely arbitrary.

All these conferences don't play enough OOC games against each other for anyone to really know whether a team like Oregon or USC, for instance, could play a competitive game against a team like Alabama. Even when conferences DO play OOC against each other, there's always a "well that was week 2" when the results don't meet the historical expectation.

We either need to systemically assign OOC games between conferences to get a better idea of their comparative strength, or incorporate conference champs into the playoff bids.

Agreed. Anyone who has paid any attention to rankings over the years knows they are not logical. They are based on human biases. And they are often wrong, no matter how logical. "Everyone" knew Alabama and Oregon were the two best teams in 2014. In reality, Ohio St. and TCU were probably the two best teams. And TCU didn't even get in the top 5. "Everyone" knew USC was the best team of all time in 2005. Vince Young had something to say about that. "Everyone" knew Ohio St. and Michigan were the two best teams in 2006. Florida 41-14 said different. There are endless examples of the "experts" being wrong. And not just in football.

Have so called "experts" make the decision instead of the teams deciding it on the field is totally illogical.
01-05-2021 12:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 46,153
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1692
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #74
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-05-2021 10:19 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 08:45 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 08:31 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 04:46 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Give me one reason why a top 6 ranked conference champs + 2 at large model can't work.

I say a top 6 ranked champs model, because if a conference has the #7 or 8 highest ranked champ, do they really deserve to get in over a higher ranked champion.

The main issue I have with the 5-1-2 model is that it allows a 25th ranked Pac 12 champ to get in automatically over a #12 ranked Sun Belt for example.

If you allow 8 teams to play in the tournament - all the deserving P5 champs will be included without an auto bid qualification. Oregon simply has no right to be there this year and they would be pushing out a team (like Cincy) if they had to be included. Likewise, any deserving G5 will get in with 8 teams as well (Like Cincy this year) under a committee scenario.

The cynicism over humans choosing with logic and analysis instead of some unbending rules is crazy to me.


The rules say I have to wear a mask even if I have already had the rona and I can no longer spread it. That is a dumb rule. Just like a rule that forces you to give a very unqualified team a chance to win the Natty in football.


The bottom line is that more "deserving" teams will get screwed in an auto-bid scenario than will if a human committee picks the final 8. This year is example #1. The PAC 12 has sucked for a few years (let alone this year) - they should not be rewarded for sucking.....

I'd argue that the auto-bid for conference champs scenario solves for any real or perceived flaws in the current eye test. Someone above mentioned a scenario where a 25th-ranked USC would get in over a team like Georgia. The "25th ranked" part is where I see the issue. We're anchoring to these rankings that, especially this year, are completely arbitrary.

All these conferences don't play enough OOC games against each other for anyone to really know whether a team like Oregon or USC, for instance, could play a competitive game against a team like Alabama. Even when conferences DO play OOC against each other, there's always a "well that was week 2" when the results don't meet the historical expectation.

We either need to systemically assign OOC games between conferences to get a better idea of their comparative strength, or incorporate conference champs into the playoff bids.


If you start "mandating" schedules in that way for that purpose you can kiss the G5 and those couple of indy's goodbye...... They will never get P5 matchups and will then never get the SOS needed for any critical consideration.

Phuck it - lets just have a 6 game regular season then a 130 team tournament that starts on the 1st weekend of November. There is no F-ing scenario that will please everyone unless every single team gets a phukin' trophy 03-banghead.



Why is it so f-ing hard to understand that most people want to see the best teams possible play for the Natty.

Frank I respect your opinion and I can wrap my head around it, but the NFL and College are just not the same thing.
You operate under the fallacy that people actually know who the best teams are. Oregon is #25, but I would bet they would beat #12 Coastal Carolina at least 7 out of 10 times.
(This post was last modified: 01-05-2021 12:41 PM by bullet.)
01-05-2021 12:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PicksUp Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 159
Joined: Mar 2018
Reputation: 26
I Root For: UTEP
Location:
Post: #75
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-05-2021 12:25 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 08:45 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 08:31 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 04:46 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Give me one reason why a top 6 ranked conference champs + 2 at large model can't work.

I say a top 6 ranked champs model, because if a conference has the #7 or 8 highest ranked champ, do they really deserve to get in over a higher ranked champion.

The main issue I have with the 5-1-2 model is that it allows a 25th ranked Pac 12 champ to get in automatically over a #12 ranked Sun Belt for example.

If you allow 8 teams to play in the tournament - all the deserving P5 champs will be included without an auto bid qualification. Oregon simply has no right to be there this year and they would be pushing out a team (like Cincy) if they had to be included. Likewise, any deserving G5 will get in with 8 teams as well (Like Cincy this year) under a committee scenario.

The cynicism over humans choosing with logic and analysis instead of some unbending rules is crazy to me.


The rules say I have to wear a mask even if I have already had the rona and I can no longer spread it. That is a dumb rule. Just like a rule that forces you to give a very unqualified team a chance to win the Natty in football.


The bottom line is that more "deserving" teams will get screwed in an auto-bid scenario than will if a human committee picks the final 8. This year is example #1. The PAC 12 has sucked for a few years (let alone this year) - they should not be rewarded for sucking.....

I'd argue that the auto-bid for conference champs scenario solves for any real or perceived flaws in the current eye test. Someone above mentioned a scenario where a 25th-ranked USC would get in over a team like Georgia. The "25th ranked" part is where I see the issue. We're anchoring to these rankings that, especially this year, are completely arbitrary.

All these conferences don't play enough OOC games against each other for anyone to really know whether a team like Oregon or USC, for instance, could play a competitive game against a team like Alabama. Even when conferences DO play OOC against each other, there's always a "well that was week 2" when the results don't meet the historical expectation.

We either need to systemically assign OOC games between conferences to get a better idea of their comparative strength, or incorporate conference champs into the playoff bids.

Agreed. Anyone who has paid any attention to rankings over the years knows they are not logical. They are based on human biases. And they are often wrong, no matter how logical. "Everyone" knew Alabama and Oregon were the two best teams in 2014. In reality, Ohio St. and TCU were probably the two best teams. And TCU didn't even get in the top 5. "Everyone" knew USC was the best team of all time in 2005. Vince Young had something to say about that. "Everyone" knew Ohio St. and Michigan were the two best teams in 2006. Florida 41-14 said different. There are endless examples of the "experts" being wrong. And not just in football.

Have so called "experts" make the decision instead of the teams deciding it on the field is totally illogical.

The top level of CFB has never had a true NCAA champion. For decades different polls decided champions and some years multiple teams claimed a National Title. The top 2 teams hardly ever faced-off at the end of the year.

This CFP is an exhibition, an invitational. Its not a true playoff.

If you want 6 or 8 just give it time. We all know money talks.

Still, it wont be about fairness. Keep dreaming if you think money isnt the only thing that matters.
(This post was last modified: 01-05-2021 12:35 PM by PicksUp.)
01-05-2021 12:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jared7 Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 60
Joined: Apr 2019
Reputation: 20
I Root For: TCU
Location:
Post: #76
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-05-2021 10:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Baylor moved ahead of TCU in the final CFP and AP and Coaches polls because they beat a ranked KSU team. That gave them enough of a schedule to merit it based on H2H. H2H is always the first tie-breaker.

There was no CFP conspiracy against TCU in 2014. The AP had TCU out of the playoffs, the Coaches had them out of the playoffs, the old BCS formula had them out of the playoffs.

The Frogs can make the CFP with a loss. It just has to be the right set of circumstances, like it does for everyone. In 2018 Ohio State was 12-1 and undisputed B1G champ, and they didn't go to the playoffs either.

No, the final Coaches and AP polls had TCU at #3, the same position the Frogs had in the weeks leading up to selection weekend. That's because the final polls took the entire season, including the bowl games, into account. Where TCU beat a ranked Mississippi team and Baylor lost to Michigan State. The "final" polls are how history regards an entire season. Why are you ignoring them? Do you honestly believe that "final" means the selection weekend polls? Why? Do you similarly ignore "final" polls in other seasons?

Who alleged a "conspiracy?" Do you argue against strawmen all the time or just now? The "final" polls showed that TCU was #3 for the 2010 season and the Frogs weren't included in a 4-team playoff. That shows that the CFP was wrong.

Non-blueblood P5 teams are at a disadvantage in the current structure as Frank's excellent post demonstrates. The 7-year history of the CFP has borne that out, your assertions to the contrary notwithstanding.
01-05-2021 12:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jared7 Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 60
Joined: Apr 2019
Reputation: 20
I Root For: TCU
Location:
Post: #77
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-05-2021 12:25 PM)bullet Wrote:  "Everyone" knew Alabama and Oregon were the two best teams in 2014. In reality, Ohio St. and TCU were probably the two best teams. And TCU didn't even get in the top 5. "Everyone" knew USC was the best team of all time in 2005. Vince Young had something to say about that. "Everyone" knew Ohio St. and Michigan were the two best teams in 2006. Florida 41-14 said different. There are endless examples of the "experts" being wrong. And not just in football.

Have so called "experts" make the decision instead of the teams deciding it on the field is totally illogical.

Quo apparently believes that committee determinations are sacrosanct and cannot be disagreed with - to do so is a "conspiracy" theory. Quo apparently believes that subsequent bowl games have no bearing on historical determinations of where teams should be ranked - the pre-bowl committee decisions simply cannot be challenged. Ever. For all time.
01-05-2021 12:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CoastalJuan Offline
Business Drunk
*

Posts: 4,340
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation: 196
I Root For: ECU
Location: Right near da beeech
Post: #78
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-05-2021 10:19 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 08:45 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 08:31 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 04:46 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Give me one reason why a top 6 ranked conference champs + 2 at large model can't work.

I say a top 6 ranked champs model, because if a conference has the #7 or 8 highest ranked champ, do they really deserve to get in over a higher ranked champion.

The main issue I have with the 5-1-2 model is that it allows a 25th ranked Pac 12 champ to get in automatically over a #12 ranked Sun Belt for example.

If you allow 8 teams to play in the tournament - all the deserving P5 champs will be included without an auto bid qualification. Oregon simply has no right to be there this year and they would be pushing out a team (like Cincy) if they had to be included. Likewise, any deserving G5 will get in with 8 teams as well (Like Cincy this year) under a committee scenario.

The cynicism over humans choosing with logic and analysis instead of some unbending rules is crazy to me.


The rules say I have to wear a mask even if I have already had the rona and I can no longer spread it. That is a dumb rule. Just like a rule that forces you to give a very unqualified team a chance to win the Natty in football.


The bottom line is that more "deserving" teams will get screwed in an auto-bid scenario than will if a human committee picks the final 8. This year is example #1. The PAC 12 has sucked for a few years (let alone this year) - they should not be rewarded for sucking.....

I'd argue that the auto-bid for conference champs scenario solves for any real or perceived flaws in the current eye test. Someone above mentioned a scenario where a 25th-ranked USC would get in over a team like Georgia. The "25th ranked" part is where I see the issue. We're anchoring to these rankings that, especially this year, are completely arbitrary.

All these conferences don't play enough OOC games against each other for anyone to really know whether a team like Oregon or USC, for instance, could play a competitive game against a team like Alabama. Even when conferences DO play OOC against each other, there's always a "well that was week 2" when the results don't meet the historical expectation.

We either need to systemically assign OOC games between conferences to get a better idea of their comparative strength, or incorporate conference champs into the playoff bids.


If you start "mandating" schedules in that way for that purpose you can kiss the G5 and those couple of indy's goodbye...... They will never get P5 matchups and will then never get the SOS needed for any critical consideration.

Phuck it - lets just have a 6 game regular season then a 130 team tournament that starts on the 1st weekend of November. There is no F-ing scenario that will please everyone unless every single team gets a phukin' trophy 03-banghead.



Why is it so f-ing hard to understand that most people want to see the best teams possible play for the Natty.

Frank I respect your opinion and I can wrap my head around it, but the NFL and College are just not the same thing.

That's exactly how the NCAA basketball tournament works, and how the NFL works. No one chooses their opponents.

In the NFL, a team plays their own division, another in-conference division, an out of conference division, and 2 "placer" games from the remaining two in-conference divisions (i.e. if you finished 3rd last year you play the remaining two 3rd place teams). They don't just pick teams to play.
01-05-2021 01:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CoastalJuan Offline
Business Drunk
*

Posts: 4,340
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation: 196
I Root For: ECU
Location: Right near da beeech
Post: #79
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-05-2021 11:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 08:45 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  I'd argue that the auto-bid for conference champs scenario solves for any real or perceived flaws in the current eye test. Someone above mentioned a scenario where a 25th-ranked USC would get in over a team like Georgia. The "25th ranked" part is where I see the issue. We're anchoring to these rankings that, especially this year, are completely arbitrary.

First, do you think the eye test is 'completely arbitrary'? The eye test tells us that Alabama is one of the very best teams, that Coastal Carolina was a good team, that Virginia Tech was a mediocre team and USF was a lousy team. Do you doubt that this is pretty darn accurate? College football isn't rocket science. Our eyes can see a lot, LOL.

As for auto-bids correcting for the eye test, how would that be? Look at Oregon - they were "eye test" ranked at #24 yet got in to an NY6 bowl on a free pass thanks to being PAC champ. And what happened? They got soundly beat by a 10th ranked Big 12 also-ran, just as the "eye test" predicted they would. So how was it a good thing that they got in to the Fiesta Bowl over a bunch of teams that were ranked higher? That it was more valid that they got in over Northwestern or Coastal or Liberty or BYU and other higher-ranked teams?

The eye test in your example successfully created 4 general buckets out of 130 teams. If 32 teams made the playoff, then the eye test is fine. When it's 4, or even 8, the eye test has proven to be not as good at differentiating between 4 and 6 or 7 and 10.

Putting more rules, at at-large selections, in lowers the amount of scrutiny that the committee is getting. No, Washington might not make it far in the playoffs as a poor-record division champ. That's why there are wild cards. Having both keeps things interesting across the entire league (not just among 4-5 teams), and makes people feel like the world makes sense.
01-05-2021 01:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,744
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1156
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #80
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-05-2021 12:34 PM)Jared7 Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 10:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Baylor moved ahead of TCU in the final CFP and AP and Coaches polls because they beat a ranked KSU team. That gave them enough of a schedule to merit it based on H2H. H2H is always the first tie-breaker.

There was no CFP conspiracy against TCU in 2014. The AP had TCU out of the playoffs, the Coaches had them out of the playoffs, the old BCS formula had them out of the playoffs.

The Frogs can make the CFP with a loss. It just has to be the right set of circumstances, like it does for everyone. In 2018 Ohio State was 12-1 and undisputed B1G champ, and they didn't go to the playoffs either.

No, the final Coaches and AP polls had TCU at #3, the same position the Frogs had in the weeks leading up to selection weekend. That's because the final polls took the entire season, including the bowl games, into account. Where TCU beat a ranked Mississippi team and Baylor lost to Michigan State. The "final" polls are how history regards an entire season. Why are you ignoring them?

Since we are talking about what happened *before* the bowls, teams getting in or being left out of the playoffs and bowls, not what happened in them, obviously by "final" I meant the last polls before the bowls/playoffs. That's why I included "CFP" when I mentioned them, as there is no CFP poll after the bowls. Obviously, after the bowls, the polls would change again based on bowl results, but that has zero to do with this discussion.

As for TCU, it is IMO a kind of sour grapes to take the results of one year, 2014, and claim that a one-loss TCU will never make the CFP. Other one-loss teams have also not made the CFP, such as big name Ohio State in 2018.

It is funny watching you talk about TCU as if TCU is a MAC or MW team and not a member of The Club. You are a member of The Club and have all the advantages of that.
(This post was last modified: 01-05-2021 06:46 PM by quo vadis.)
01-05-2021 01:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2021 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, © 2002-2021 MyBB Group.