What Are You Thinking About v.CC

[theJ]

3 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

What makes you think that Bama's division/conference is better than Ohio States? If you want to argue losses, especially the second part about losing to an unranked team by 31, then great. But arguing that Bama's division is better is LAUGHABLE.

Bama didn't have a quality game to fumble. A 4 loss Mississippi State or a 3 loss LSU isn't a legitimate tough game. Their only tough game (to a 3 loss team btw) they lost.

I'm hoping that both SEC teams WIN in the 1st round, creating a drama filled rehashing of 2011 debate nationwide with horrific ratings, causing total upheaval in the 4 team playoff a couple of years from now, expanding to an 8 team playoff with set criteria. These ratings are going to be much worse this year than in years past in the Midwest and Pacific regions (shouldn't factor into the decision anyway), and if both SEC teams win they'll go completely in the tank everywhere west of the Mississippi and north of the Mason Dixon line. It took a horrific 2011 ratings/controversy and money loss for major networks/the NCAA to expand this thing, so let's just get it perfect this time.

*Each conference from a Power 5 team gets an automatic playoff birth.

*3 additional "at large" teams will be selected.

Having only 4 playoff teams when you have 5 Power Conferences was confusing from the start. Still better than the BCS but innately flawed. Not having set criteria causes controversy, because some use the "eye test", some use "resumes", some use strength of schedule, some use quality losses as opposed to quality wins, etc. Go ahead and have UCF seeded #8 and have them play Clemson. The always controversial topic of #4 vs. #5 play each other, same conference or not, and this only adds 1 more game to the schedule for 2-4 total teams in the nation. Guess what? High school kids play 15 games if they go to the state championship game. Start the playoff weekend 1 week earlier and let's do this.

I think that makes a whole lot more sense.

Imagine if the NCAA basketball tournament was only opened to 8 teams.  The smaller schools would never get a shot.

[eagles101]

1 minute ago, MWil23 said:

What makes you think that Bama's division/conference is better than Ohio States? If you want to argue losses, especially the second part about losing to an unranked team by 31, then great. But arguing that Bama's division is better is LAUGHABLE.

Bama didn't have a quality game to fumble. A 4 loss Mississippi State or a 3 loss LSU isn't a legitimate tough game. Their only tough game (to a 3 loss team btw) they lost.

Conference being better as in having one lose didnt allow them into the championship while 2 loses and osu still got in. 

The games to fumble was about the teams in the conference. Msu fumbled the NW game. If they didnt osu would be in. Bama wasnt so lucky. 

I dont see as bama being head and shoulders above osu but losing in a big way gives bama the edge.

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

I'm as big of an OSU homer as they come, but I can't reasonably argue that a 2 loss team that got throttled by Iowa deserves a spot in the playoffs.

But Mercer in late November??? Ooof.

[MWil23]

11 minutes ago, eagles101 said:

Conference being better as in having one lose didnt allow them into the championship while 2 loses and osu still got in. 

So the same logic applies in 2015 when a 1 loss OSU with the best talent in the nation didn't get a shot? Meanwhile Alabama completely laid an egg against Ole Miss that year and lost, but was rewarded for their bad loss due to a miracle 4th down lateral fest with Ole Miss against Arkansas? Checking for consistency.

11 minutes ago, eagles101 said:

The games to fumble was about the teams in the conference. Msu fumbled the NW game. If they didnt osu would be in.

Nah. Not at all. The committee even said it was about that 2nd loss AND the fact that they got HOUSED by Iowa. Hard to argue with. The MSU loss to Northwestern didn't factor in whatsoever.

11 minutes ago, eagles101 said:

Bama wasnt so lucky. 

Correct, they were luckier. They one legitimate tough ranked team and lost. They benefited in that regard.

11 minutes ago, eagles101 said:

I dont see as bama being head and shoulders above osu but losing in a big way gives bama the edge.

The committee made a statement by saying that 2 losses>>>>>>>>a resume of big wins and strength of schedule. Alabama beat 2 "Top 25" teams, #16 LSU and #24 4 loss Miss. State.

I have ZERO issue with Alabama getting in, just the logic behind it.

[ET80]

20 minutes ago, domepatrol91 said:

All forms of sugary cereals and gummy/fruit candies are acceptable.

Well of course. But this is the internet. There can only be one.

[cddolphin]

22 minutes ago, domepatrol91 said:

All forms of sugary cereals and gummy/fruit candies are acceptable.

spotted the soy boy

 

Edited December 4, 2017 by cddolphin

[cddolphin]

Do we know if CFB viewership has gone up since the implementation of the playoff system?

Even when I paid more attention to CFB, I never really gave a hoot about the bowl games but I was a very casual fan. Now I actually watch the playoff games despite generally disliking college ball.

If they implemented an 8-game playoff? I would actually watch some of my alma mater's games since a single loss doesn't automatically torpedo 'post-season' hopes.

Is there any realistic momentum that could cause the committee to go from 4 to 8 sometimes over the next few years?

[MWil23]

6 minutes ago, cddolphin said:

Do we know if CFB viewership has gone up since the implementation of the playoff system?

Even when I paid more attention to CFB, I never really gave a hoot about the bowl games but I was a very casual fan. Now I actually watch the playoff games despite generally disliking college ball.

If they implemented an 8-game playoff? I would actually watch some of my alma mater's games since a single loss doesn't automatically torpedo 'post-season' hopes.

Is there any realistic momentum that could cause the committee to go from 4 to 8 sometimes over the next few years?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/ct-college-football-national-championship-tv-ratings-spt-20170110-story.html

Even though the last 2 years has been a little down, they're still WAY up since the implementation of the system in 2014. Part of the "down" reason could be geographically with 2 southern teams the last 2 years, whereas the OSU/Oregon National Title was more geographically invested with a east/midwest to west draw. Plus the 'Bama and FSU games were both southern invested in the semi-finals as well.

[eagles101]

19 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

So the same logic applies in 2015 when a 1 loss OSU with the best talent in the nation didn't get a shot? Meanwhile Alabama completely laid an egg against Ole Miss that year and lost, but was rewarded for their bad loss due to a miracle 4th down lateral fest with Ole Miss against Arkansas? Checking for consistency.

Nah. Not at all. The committee even said it was about that 2nd loss AND the fact that they got HOUSED by Iowa. Hard to argue with. The MSU loss to Northwestern didn't factor in whatsoever.

Correct, they were luckier. They one legitimate tough ranked team and lost. They benefited in that regard.

The committee made a statement by saying that 2 losses>>>>>>>>a resume of big wins and strength of schedule. Alabama beat 2 "Top 25" teams, #16 LSU and #24 4 loss Miss. State.

I have ZERO issue with Alabama getting in, just the logic behind it.

if msu won then they would have been in the championship not osu. So osu wouldnt have won the championship, there only point in why they should make it. 

2015 osu and bama had one loss. So its not the same since your comparing a two lose team to a one lose. 

Albama only benifits if they would have lost there championship. 

 

There are always going to be issues as you can never level out SOS since there are a billion teams. But its a hard argument that a two lose team deserves it better because they are able to go to a championship and a one lose wasnt able to.

[MWil23]

2 minutes ago, eagles101 said:

if msu won then they would have been in the championship not osu.

Are you feeling OK? OSU THROTTLED MSU head to head and had 1 conference loss. If both teams have only 1 conference loss, the tiebreaker is head to head. OSU still obviously goes to the B1G title game.

2 minutes ago, eagles101 said:

So osu wouldnt have won the championship, there only point in why they should make it. 

2 minutes ago, eagles101 said:

2015 osu and bama had one loss. So its not the same since your comparing a two lose team to a one lose. 

I'm comparing a 1 loss team who is CLEARLY one of the best four teams in the nation (OSU) that didn't win their division to another team that is in the same boat in Alabama in 2017. I've stated over and over (I notice you ignored my 3 paragraphs in my original post) that a 2 loss OSU team shouldn't be in. I'm arguing for consistency and logic.

2 minutes ago, eagles101 said:

Albama only benifits if they would have lost there championship. 

They benefit from not having to play a Top 5 team. 

2 minutes ago, eagles101 said:

There are always going to be issues as you can never level out SOS since there are a billion teams. But its a hard argument that a two lose team deserves it better because they are able to go to a championship and a one lose wasnt able to.

My point

 

 

 

Your head

[eagles101]

4 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

Are you feeling OK? OSU THROTTLED MSU head to head and had 1 conference loss. If both teams have only 1 conference loss, the tiebreaker is head to head. OSU still obviously goes to the B1G title game.

I'm comparing a 1 loss team who is CLEARLY one of the best four teams in the nation (OSU) that didn't win their division to another team that is in the same boat in Alabama in 2017. I've stated over and over (I notice you ignored my 3 paragraphs in my original post) that a 2 loss OSU team shouldn't be in. I'm arguing for consistency and logic.

They benefit from not having to play a Top 5 team. 

My point

 

 

 

Your head

You are correct. I thought osus second lose was in conference. Not sure why i thought that. 

 

But i dont see how having two one lose teams being judge about championships is the same as a two lose team vs a one lose. The situation are not the same. 

[showtime]

I read this thread pretty often.  Today I am disappointed to see cereal and candy discussion being dwarfed by discussion of college football.  Woof.

[MWil23]

11 minutes ago, showtime said:

I read this thread pretty often.  Today I am disappointed to see cereal and candy discussion being dwarfed by discussion of college football.  Woof.

Hard to argue with.

[eagles101]

2 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

Hard to argue with.

[MWil23]

Just now, eagles101 said: