8/30/2014 7:23 AM
Posted by moranis on 8/29/2014 10:41:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/29/2014 3:29:00 PM (view original):
Isn't the objective of this playoff to pit the 4 best teams against one another?
we go through this every year, it is about the most deserving based on the season and certain criteria, not necessarily the best. It is that way in every single sport (i.e. the Suns were 10 wins better than the Hawks in the NBA last year, Hawks were in the playoffs, Suns were not - 10-6 Arizona missed the playoffs while 8-7-1 Green Bay made them - it is why every conference champion makes the NCAA tournament). Now sure ideally the most deserving are in fact the best, but it doesn't have to be that way. If you are coming off of a loss in your conference title game you don't deserve to be in a 4 team college football playoff. That is just my opinion. I'd have a hard time putting a team in there that lost its last game period so like if Auburn loses to Alabama in the last game of the season, I would have difficulty putting Auburn in the 4 team playoff (I wouldn't foreclose that possibility, but it would be a special circumstance).

The Best Four Teams

The selection committee will choose the four teams for the playoff based on strength of schedule, head-to-head results, comparison of results against common opponents, championships won and other factors.


http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/overview


As I understand it, they are supposed to figure out the 4 BEST teams.    I've heard that injuries will be a factor.   IOW, if FSU beats everyone but Winston breaks his leg in the ACC Champ, they would be charged with determining if FSU is still one of the 4 best.    IMO, if OSU wins every game by 3 or less, there's the very real possibility that they're not one of the top 4.   I don't think it will work that way, I think we're going to get 4 conference champions, but I don't think that was the initial design.

8/30/2014 10:30 AM
But if you look at their criteria for the "best" teams it has all kind of factors, including championships.  That is what I'm getting at.  It will be the most deserving based on the entire season, which is why an unbeaten mid-major actually has a decent shot at the 4 team playoff (even though they likely wouldn't be one of the 4 best teams), especially in years where there are major conference champions with 2 (or more) losses. 

Last year, It would have been FSU v. MSU and Auburn v. Alabama.  though I'm sure it would have been an interesting discussion regarding Stanford.  

2012 would have been very interesting though.  ND and Bama were pretty clearly 1 and 2 but you had 4 viable options for 3 and 4 in Florida, Oregon, Kansas st., and stanford.  I mean it would have been very interesting what the committee did.  Do you go with the Pac 12 champion stanford, even though they had 2 losses (including a bad one to Washington)?  Do you go with the one loss Big 12 champion even though they had an awful schedule and an overall lesser conference and a complete destruction in their loss?  Or do you go with the one loss non-conference champions in Florida and Oregon (who actually lost to Stanford).  That would have been a very interesting discussion for the committee and there was no clear cut right answer as to who the "best" team was.  If I was voting I would have had ND v. Kansas St. and Alabama v. Stanford, but that is just me.
8/31/2014 7:51 AM
Was ND clearly #2?    Could they have beaten any of the 4 you listed at 3-4?
8/31/2014 8:39 AM
Posted by moranis on 8/29/2014 10:41:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/29/2014 3:29:00 PM (view original):
Isn't the objective of this playoff to pit the 4 best teams against one another?
we go through this every year, it is about the most deserving based on the season and certain criteria, not necessarily the best. It is that way in every single sport (i.e. the Suns were 10 wins better than the Hawks in the NBA last year, Hawks were in the playoffs, Suns were not - 10-6 Arizona missed the playoffs while 8-7-1 Green Bay made them - it is why every conference champion makes the NCAA tournament). Now sure ideally the most deserving are in fact the best, but it doesn't have to be that way. If you are coming off of a loss in your conference title game you don't deserve to be in a 4 team college football playoff. That is just my opinion. I'd have a hard time putting a team in there that lost its last game period so like if Auburn loses to Alabama in the last game of the season, I would have difficulty putting Auburn in the 4 team playoff (I wouldn't foreclose that possibility, but it would be a special circumstance).
Your first sentence is liberal bunk. It most certainly IS who is the best of the best, not who "deserves" it most. This is sports, not everyone gets a ribbon soccer.
8/31/2014 10:27 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/31/2014 7:51:00 AM (view original):
Was ND clearly #2?    Could they have beaten any of the 4 you listed at 3-4?
probably not, but they were clearly in the top 2 (in fact they probably would have been the 1st seed).  and your question aside you know this.

Wisconsin is up big last night when Melvin Gordon has to leave the game and barely plays the rest of the game.  Do you really think the committee is going to take that into account at the end of the year.  I mean what if Wisconsin goes unbeaten the rest of the way.  Will they be treated like an unbeaten team or a team with one loss?
8/31/2014 10:27 AM
Posted by hogdaddy on 8/31/2014 8:39:00 AM (view original):
Posted by moranis on 8/29/2014 10:41:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/29/2014 3:29:00 PM (view original):
Isn't the objective of this playoff to pit the 4 best teams against one another?
we go through this every year, it is about the most deserving based on the season and certain criteria, not necessarily the best. It is that way in every single sport (i.e. the Suns were 10 wins better than the Hawks in the NBA last year, Hawks were in the playoffs, Suns were not - 10-6 Arizona missed the playoffs while 8-7-1 Green Bay made them - it is why every conference champion makes the NCAA tournament). Now sure ideally the most deserving are in fact the best, but it doesn't have to be that way. If you are coming off of a loss in your conference title game you don't deserve to be in a 4 team college football playoff. That is just my opinion. I'd have a hard time putting a team in there that lost its last game period so like if Auburn loses to Alabama in the last game of the season, I would have difficulty putting Auburn in the 4 team playoff (I wouldn't foreclose that possibility, but it would be a special circumstance).
Your first sentence is liberal bunk. It most certainly IS who is the best of the best, not who "deserves" it most. This is sports, not everyone gets a ribbon soccer.
but that just doesn't happen in sports.
8/31/2014 12:50 PM
Posted by moranis on 8/31/2014 10:27:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/31/2014 7:51:00 AM (view original):
Was ND clearly #2?    Could they have beaten any of the 4 you listed at 3-4?
probably not, but they were clearly in the top 2 (in fact they probably would have been the 1st seed).  and your question aside you know this.

Wisconsin is up big last night when Melvin Gordon has to leave the game and barely plays the rest of the game.  Do you really think the committee is going to take that into account at the end of the year.  I mean what if Wisconsin goes unbeaten the rest of the way.  Will they be treated like an unbeaten team or a team with one loss?
As I understand it, the committee is charged with determining the 4 best teams not just saying "Well, here's 4 conference champs" or "Here's 4 undefeated or one loss teams."   Do I think they'll take a 2 loss Oregon over a 1 loss Michigan State?  No.   However, if Oregon suffered two close losses to UCLA and Stanford while MSU's lone loss was a 58-10 thrashing from Oregon, they should.

As I said, I'm pretty sure we get 4 conference winners from the big 5 even if they aren't the 4 best. 
9/2/2014 1:15 PM
What's funny is the Big 12 doesn't even have a conference championship anymore, and it is very much by design.  I think them NOT having a championship should factor into them not getting in the playoff.
9/2/2014 1:52 PM
They play a full round-robin, a conference title game doesn''t really make sense, and they would need a special waiver to have one since they only have 10 teams.
9/2/2014 2:00 PM
I'm not sure it's so much by design as much as it is schools saying "**** you, Texas.  You're not the boss of me!!!"
9/2/2014 2:08 PM
That may have been what caused them to drop to 10, but most of the remaining schools are clinging to Texas for dear life at this point.  I think the conference could certainly go grab two schools to get back to 12 if they wanted to, but they obviously don't see anyone out there right now that would expand the overall pie by enough to maintain/grow the slices of the current members.
9/2/2014 2:16 PM (edited)
Posted by AlCheez on 9/2/2014 2:08:00 PM (view original):
That may have been what caused them to drop to 10, but most of the remaining schools are clinging to Texas for dear life at this point.  I think the conference could certainly go grab two schools to get back to 12 if they wanted to, but they obviously don't see anyone out there right now that would expand the overall pie by enough to maintain/grow the slices of the current members.
Exactly.  Frankly I'm surprised they added TCU.  I don't really see the benefit there.  They could have just added West Virginia and stayed at 9.  

That said I think they could add some schools for football only, like Boise State and BYU, and go back to 12.  I could also see them consider some more eastern schools like Cincinnati or Memphis, but I just don't think at the end of the day, they will add enough in football to make it worthwhile (Louisville and Pittsburgh would have, but that ship is sailed) so I think they stay at 10 for the foreseeable future.

Frankly I think it is more likely the conference splits up and disbands with Texas and Oklahoma going to the Big Ten, West Virginia and Oklahoma St. going to the SEC, and the remaining schools joining up with the American Conference (or something like that).
9/2/2014 2:36 PM
Probably depends on how much they think a conference championship would bring in compared to paying the two new schools.  And I think they added TCU because they saw how quickly the Big East fell apart.  You don't want to be sitting around with 8-9 schools because it can quickly become 5-6 and that's not a conference.

I'll add that we tend to look at things from a football POV while the schools/conferences have plenty of other factors to consider.
9/2/2014 3:08 PM
We look at it from a football perspective because it is the football money that drove the last round of conference moves.  And as we saw from the Big Ten, football money doesn't necessarily mean elite football programs, it means expanding footprints (it certainly helps if you expand the footprint and bring in a good program - see SEC with Texas A&M).  

If the Power 5 do decide to break away, I think the Power 5 might become the Super 4 with 16 teams each (it just so happens the Power 5 have 64 teams - though that would leave ND out) with a 4 team playoff comprising the 4 conference champions.  I could certainly see that happen where the Pac 12 adds Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma St.,  the Big Ten adds North Carolina and Georgia Tech, the SEC adds West Virginia and Baylor, and the ACC adds Kansas, Kansas St., TCU, and Iowa St. (or one of them gets squeezed out for a full conference member in ND) - or something like that.
9/2/2014 3:10 PM
Posted by moranis on 9/2/2014 2:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by AlCheez on 9/2/2014 2:08:00 PM (view original):
That may have been what caused them to drop to 10, but most of the remaining schools are clinging to Texas for dear life at this point.  I think the conference could certainly go grab two schools to get back to 12 if they wanted to, but they obviously don't see anyone out there right now that would expand the overall pie by enough to maintain/grow the slices of the current members.
Exactly.  Frankly I'm surprised they added TCU.  I don't really see the benefit there.  They could have just added West Virginia and stayed at 9.  

That said I think they could add some schools for football only, like Boise State and BYU, and go back to 12.  I could also see them consider some more eastern schools like Cincinnati or Memphis, but I just don't think at the end of the day, they will add enough in football to make it worthwhile (Louisville and Pittsburgh would have, but that ship is sailed) so I think they stay at 10 for the foreseeable future.

Frankly I think it is more likely the conference splits up and disbands with Texas and Oklahoma going to the Big Ten, West Virginia and Oklahoma St. going to the SEC, and the remaining schools joining up with the American Conference (or something like that).
Well, there was a time when everyone thought the Big 12 was going to implode this time, so I wouldn't find it that surprising if it happens.  That being said, it was kept together because Texas got a sweetheart of a deal that they probably can't replicate elsewhere, so I think it'll be a while.
of 5

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.