The Big Ten is where football programs go to die. Washington, Oregon, and UCLA won’t be able to play physical football for 9 or 10 games a year and will stop being factors once the dust settles in about three years. They have weak to nothing defenses and are used to throwing the ball around like it’s flag football. USC has talent, but they can’t seem to put it together. They’ll be like Penn State.

The Big XII little engine that couldn’t is getting a stark reality check on the grid. I could have trumpeted “I told you so” all season on the realignment board, but alas, why gloat about something you knew was going to happen? They have their new mid-majors getting punched down into place and now have scraped the barrel with some no-defense-let’s-huck-it offenses in the AZ schools and Colorado. Utah is a tough program and I imagine they’ll be battling for the conference’s single bid year in and out.

I wouldn’t even schedule the Big XII, it’s a no win scenario. The Big 10 won’t schedule anyone anyway, especially now they got their new West Coast patsies. Stick to the SEC, it’s a chance to beat the best.

Getting rid of the ACC Atlantic was a key move to ensure that the ACC usually gets two into the playoff.

But the fact is that GT is hurting itself with the UGa game at the end of the season. The same can be said for Louisville. It's the wrong time of the year for the perennially "weaker" team. By weaker I mean less overall talent spread among 85 guys. In a long season, by the time you are at week 13, attrition will advance the team with the greatest depth.

Other issues are nearly specific to certain schools. Some schools massively overschedule. Some have weaker "mini-rivals" they don't really acknowledge and then often fall on their face.

FSU and NC State, and NC State and WF are great examples. UNC and UVa is another example.

The number one goal of the ACC vis a vie scheduling should be to break Florida and South Carolina from the last game of the regular season. Break that, and you break FSU and Clemson from scheduling a chump the week before.

But the fact remains if you are 9-3 in the ACC and two of your losses are to a bad UVa or bad Syracuse team, you ain't making the playoff.

(12-07-2023 10:21 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  It does not mean the CFB Playoff committee will remain consistent. If they see an opportunity to drop an ACC team out of the playoff for a SEC or BigTen team then they will do it. If an ACCCG must be played, then trot out 2 teams that need 1 win to be bowl eligible.

This is the real concern and something that Jim Phillips needs to address. The eye-test is not clearly defined and the CFP ptb (aka, SEC, B1G & ESPN) have more leverage in times of uncertainty. It’s disheartening that Boo Corrigan was the spokesperson for this CFP selection because this committee was rolled in a manner that previous committees were not. Phillips needs to publicly advocate for change.

No doubt that Sankey is comfortable with the current ambiguity in the selection protocol. Phillips needs to advocate for selection of teams with better resumes, and weaken the incessant media refrain for teams with higher recruited talent.

(12-08-2023 12:13 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(12-07-2023 10:21 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  It does not mean the CFB Playoff committee will remain consistent. If they see an opportunity to drop an ACC team out of the playoff for a SEC or BigTen team then they will do it. If an ACCCG must be played, then trot out 2 teams that need 1 win to be bowl eligible.

This is the real concern and something that Jim Phillips needs to address. The eye-test is not clearly defined and the CFP ptb (aka, SEC, B1G & ESPN) have more leverage in times of uncertainty. It’s disheartening that Boo Corrigan was the spokesperson for this CFP selection because this committee was rolled in a manner that previous committees were not. Phillips needs to publicly advocate for change.

No doubt that Sankey is comfortable with the current ambiguity in the selection protocol. Phillips needs to advocate for selection of teams with better resumes, and weaken the incessant media refrain for teams with higher recruited talent.

The only way the ACC gets two teams in the 12-team CFP is if one is undefeated and the other has only one loss and that is a VERY iffy prospect. If those teams are FSU and Clemson, maybe. Other schools will have a hard time overcoming the predetermined perception. It sucks, but it's being forced upon us.

(12-08-2023 12:34 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  

(12-08-2023 12:13 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(12-07-2023 10:21 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  It does not mean the CFB Playoff committee will remain consistent. If they see an opportunity to drop an ACC team out of the playoff for a SEC or BigTen team then they will do it. If an ACCCG must be played, then trot out 2 teams that need 1 win to be bowl eligible.

This is the real concern and something that Jim Phillips needs to address. The eye-test is not clearly defined and the CFP ptb (aka, SEC, B1G & ESPN) have more leverage in times of uncertainty. It’s disheartening that Boo Corrigan was the spokesperson for this CFP selection because this committee was rolled in a manner that previous committees were not. Phillips needs to publicly advocate for change.

No doubt that Sankey is comfortable with the current ambiguity in the selection protocol. Phillips needs to advocate for selection of teams with better resumes, and weaken the incessant media refrain for teams with higher recruited talent.

The only way the ACC gets two teams in the 12-team CFP is if one is undefeated and the other has only one loss and that is a VERY iffy prospect. If those teams are FSU and Clemson, maybe. Other schools will have a hard time overcoming the predetermined perception. It sucks, but it's being forced upon us.

At-larges:

I think an 11-2 team with a CCG loss gets in. Of course, it depends on the season.

Right now 2 losses is the breaking point. I think 4 is the obvious breaking point for everyone and maybe a compelling 3-loss team gets in if they lose their CCG. I don’t see a 9-3 team getting in over an 11-2 ACC team

For instance, where would Louisville be ranked if it weren’t for that absolute stinker vs Pitt? I have to think ahead of 9-3 LSU. Louisville was #10 going into the UK game.

An 11-2 ACC runner up should be firmly in, but that is about as certain as an undefeated ACC team being left out of a 4 team playoff.

(12-07-2023 09:45 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  If the ACC wants to guarantee a 2nd team in the playoff every year, then don’t play the ACCCG. The extra loss will knock you out for sure. Since “opting out” has become en vogue and an upset has only happened once, why do it?

And the decision is simple cost-benefit analysis. How much do you stand to make for your CCG? How much from your playoff shares?