Posted by Vitamin_C on 12/8/2017 10:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/8/2017 8:59:00 AM (view original):
I'd like 8 but, as it stands, a 2 loss team has never made the CFB playoffs. That indicates that the regular season does matter. If it was 8, 2 loss OSU/USC are in as conference champs. I guess the argument would have been WI/Auburn for the final spot. If it's Auburn, that's 3 two loss teams. And, with that, Wisconsin is raising holy hell. And people will begin to clamor for 16 teams. Then you may begin to say "12% is watering down? That's absurd!!!"

If you could point to any season where there were more than 8 teams who you could legitimately argue should have had a shot at the title based on their regular season, I will concede your point.

Otherwise it is simply a "slippery slope" type of argument that really holds no water.

Even at 8 Auburn wouldn't have been invited. This is the same faulty type argument as your other. No two loss team has ever made it, but if we go to eight, a 3 loss non-conference champ Auburn would get in? I doubt it.

There's no way they get in over Wisconsin. Even in the CFP final rankings Wisc was ahead of Auburn. No scenario puts a 3-loss Auburn in over Wisconsin. Possibly Penn St or Washington, but not a 3 loss Auburn.

Well, hell, you're demanding that UCF be included. Do you want me to point to a season where 8 teams were better than 2017 UCF? That's easy. Damn near all of them. I take 3 loss Auburn on a neutral field all day over UCF. My guess is Auburn would be a touchdown+ favorite.

For the record, in this day and age I actually think Utah would have had a great shot at making the 2008 playoffs if it was a 4 team (again under the current system). Utah had victories over two teams ranked in the top 16 of the final BCS rankings (TCU at 11 and BYU at 16) and opened the season winning at Michigan (though they finished 3-9) and also beat Oregon St. at home. Oregon State finished 7-2 in the Pac 10 (and 9-4 overall after winning its bowl) and was ranked 17th until it lost to Oregon in its last game of the regular season. They always played Utah St. who was down, but did have FCS Weber St. as its final non-con. Had Weber St. been replaced with a good FBS program, even way back then, it might have elevated Utah to a much higher ranking.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/8/2017 10:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Vitamin_C on 12/8/2017 10:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/8/2017 8:59:00 AM (view original):
I'd like 8 but, as it stands, a 2 loss team has never made the CFB playoffs. That indicates that the regular season does matter. If it was 8, 2 loss OSU/USC are in as conference champs. I guess the argument would have been WI/Auburn for the final spot. If it's Auburn, that's 3 two loss teams. And, with that, Wisconsin is raising holy hell. And people will begin to clamor for 16 teams. Then you may begin to say "12% is watering down? That's absurd!!!"

If you could point to any season where there were more than 8 teams who you could legitimately argue should have had a shot at the title based on their regular season, I will concede your point.

Otherwise it is simply a "slippery slope" type of argument that really holds no water.

Even at 8 Auburn wouldn't have been invited. This is the same faulty type argument as your other. No two loss team has ever made it, but if we go to eight, a 3 loss non-conference champ Auburn would get in? I doubt it.

There's no way they get in over Wisconsin. Even in the CFP final rankings Wisc was ahead of Auburn. No scenario puts a 3-loss Auburn in over Wisconsin. Possibly Penn St or Washington, but not a 3 loss Auburn.

Well, hell, you're demanding that UCF be included. Do you want me to point to a season where 8 teams were better than 2017 UCF? That's easy. Damn near all of them. I take 3 loss Auburn on a neutral field all day over UCF. My guess is Auburn would be a touchdown+ favorite.

That bet is available. Auburn -9.5.

However that does nothing to further your slippery slope argument which was predictable, because it is nothing more than that.

Fact is 8 NEVER leaves out a team who should have a shot, but may occasionally let in a team that isn't quite as deserving on paper (2012 Wisconsin).

Simple yes or no question here:

If we did go to 8 would any of you argue that UCF still doesn't belong?

They are ranked 12th (which I think is about right), so no they wouldn't belong if you went by that. However, I assume there would be some sort of guarantee that if a non-power 5 champion meets certain qualifications they would be automatically in and I would imagine that UCF would meet those qualifications and thus be automatically in.

Posted by moranis on 12/8/2017 10:29:00 AM (view original):
For the record, in this day and age I actually think Utah would have had a great shot at making the 2008 playoffs if it was a 4 team (again under the current system). Utah had victories over two teams ranked in the top 16 of the final BCS rankings (TCU at 11 and BYU at 16) and opened the season winning at Michigan (though they finished 3-9) and also beat Oregon St. at home. Oregon State finished 7-2 in the Pac 10 (and 9-4 overall after winning its bowl) and was ranked 17th until it lost to Oregon in its last game of the regular season. They always played Utah St. who was down, but did have FCS Weber St. as its final non-con. Had Weber St. been replaced with a good FBS program, even way back then, it might have elevated Utah to a much higher ranking.

People on here keep talking about "if they scheduled a tougher opponent". Have you ever tried to make a schedule for a college sports team? It's not as easy as we need to play a good team this week.

1. Power 5 teams don't want to play good smaller schools. It's a lose, lose for them.
2. You have to find a team that's willing to play that also has the same open weekend. Schedules are made 3 to 4 years in advance.
3. Logistics play a factor. People on here keep talking about how teams need to play schools from different regions of the country. Kids have class. Getting an AD to approve a game on the West Coast for a SEC is not always a guarantee.
4. Coaching changes happen a lot in college athletics. New coaches will sometimes drop teams from their schedule. This leaves teams scrambling for games.

Posted by Vitamin_C on 12/8/2017 11:12:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/8/2017 10:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Vitamin_C on 12/8/2017 10:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/8/2017 8:59:00 AM (view original):
I'd like 8 but, as it stands, a 2 loss team has never made the CFB playoffs. That indicates that the regular season does matter. If it was 8, 2 loss OSU/USC are in as conference champs. I guess the argument would have been WI/Auburn for the final spot. If it's Auburn, that's 3 two loss teams. And, with that, Wisconsin is raising holy hell. And people will begin to clamor for 16 teams. Then you may begin to say "12% is watering down? That's absurd!!!"

If you could point to any season where there were more than 8 teams who you could legitimately argue should have had a shot at the title based on their regular season, I will concede your point.

Otherwise it is simply a "slippery slope" type of argument that really holds no water.

Even at 8 Auburn wouldn't have been invited. This is the same faulty type argument as your other. No two loss team has ever made it, but if we go to eight, a 3 loss non-conference champ Auburn would get in? I doubt it.

There's no way they get in over Wisconsin. Even in the CFP final rankings Wisc was ahead of Auburn. No scenario puts a 3-loss Auburn in over Wisconsin. Possibly Penn St or Washington, but not a 3 loss Auburn.

Well, hell, you're demanding that UCF be included. Do you want me to point to a season where 8 teams were better than 2017 UCF? That's easy. Damn near all of them. I take 3 loss Auburn on a neutral field all day over UCF. My guess is Auburn would be a touchdown+ favorite.

That bet is available. Auburn -9.5.

However that does nothing to further your slippery slope argument which was predictable, because it is nothing more than that.

Fact is 8 NEVER leaves out a team who should have a shot, but may occasionally let in a team that isn't quite as deserving on paper (2012 Wisconsin).

Do you not think UCF should have a shot? 8 would not include them if the P5 champs and best remaining three were taken.

So I have no idea what your slippery slope is unless you're creating it.

Posted by Vitamin_C on 12/8/2017 11:12:00 AM (view original):
Simple yes or no question here:

If we did go to 8 would any of you argue that UCF still doesn't belong?

Doesn't matter what you, or I, or anyone else thinks: UCF is #12 in the Playoff rankings, so they would not be part of an 8-team Playoff.

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/8/2017 1:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moranis on 12/8/2017 10:29:00 AM (view original):
For the record, in this day and age I actually think Utah would have had a great shot at making the 2008 playoffs if it was a 4 team (again under the current system). Utah had victories over two teams ranked in the top 16 of the final BCS rankings (TCU at 11 and BYU at 16) and opened the season winning at Michigan (though they finished 3-9) and also beat Oregon St. at home. Oregon State finished 7-2 in the Pac 10 (and 9-4 overall after winning its bowl) and was ranked 17th until it lost to Oregon in its last game of the regular season. They always played Utah St. who was down, but did have FCS Weber St. as its final non-con. Had Weber St. been replaced with a good FBS program, even way back then, it might have elevated Utah to a much higher ranking.

People on here keep talking about "if they scheduled a tougher opponent". Have you ever tried to make a schedule for a college sports team? It's not as easy as we need to play a good team this week.

1. Power 5 teams don't want to play good smaller schools. It's a lose, lose for them.
2. You have to find a team that's willing to play that also has the same open weekend. Schedules are made 3 to 4 years in advance.
3. Logistics play a factor. People on here keep talking about how teams need to play schools from different regions of the country. Kids have class. Getting an AD to approve a game on the West Coast for a SEC is not always a guarantee.
4. Coaching changes happen a lot in college athletics. New coaches will sometimes drop teams from their schedule. This leaves teams scrambling for games.

That year Utah played at Michigan and home with Oregon St. though. They found 2 games. Even if they kept the Utah St. rivalry game they didn't have to play FCS Weber St. though because they are in Utah they often do. Replace Weber St. with even a mid tier Big 12 school and they would have had a pretty nice schedule even with Michigan flaming out. Now maybe it wouldn't have mattered or may be it would have

Watching JMU and Weber St. Tell them that their game doesn't matter.

Posted by moranis on 12/8/2017 4:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/8/2017 1:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moranis on 12/8/2017 10:29:00 AM (view original):
For the record, in this day and age I actually think Utah would have had a great shot at making the 2008 playoffs if it was a 4 team (again under the current system). Utah had victories over two teams ranked in the top 16 of the final BCS rankings (TCU at 11 and BYU at 16) and opened the season winning at Michigan (though they finished 3-9) and also beat Oregon St. at home. Oregon State finished 7-2 in the Pac 10 (and 9-4 overall after winning its bowl) and was ranked 17th until it lost to Oregon in its last game of the regular season. They always played Utah St. who was down, but did have FCS Weber St. as its final non-con. Had Weber St. been replaced with a good FBS program, even way back then, it might have elevated Utah to a much higher ranking.

People on here keep talking about "if they scheduled a tougher opponent". Have you ever tried to make a schedule for a college sports team? It's not as easy as we need to play a good team this week.

1. Power 5 teams don't want to play good smaller schools. It's a lose, lose for them.
2. You have to find a team that's willing to play that also has the same open weekend. Schedules are made 3 to 4 years in advance.
3. Logistics play a factor. People on here keep talking about how teams need to play schools from different regions of the country. Kids have class. Getting an AD to approve a game on the West Coast for a SEC is not always a guarantee.
4. Coaching changes happen a lot in college athletics. New coaches will sometimes drop teams from their schedule. This leaves teams scrambling for games.

That year Utah played at Michigan and home with Oregon St. though. They found 2 games. Even if they kept the Utah St. rivalry game they didn't have to play FCS Weber St. though because they are in Utah they often do. Replace Weber St. with even a mid tier Big 12 school and they would have had a pretty nice schedule even with Michigan flaming out. Now maybe it wouldn't have mattered or may be it would have

You're missing the point. We don't know that they could find a mid-tier big 12 school to play.

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/8/2017 10:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moranis on 12/8/2017 4:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/8/2017 1:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moranis on 12/8/2017 10:29:00 AM (view original):
For the record, in this day and age I actually think Utah would have had a great shot at making the 2008 playoffs if it was a 4 team (again under the current system). Utah had victories over two teams ranked in the top 16 of the final BCS rankings (TCU at 11 and BYU at 16) and opened the season winning at Michigan (though they finished 3-9) and also beat Oregon St. at home. Oregon State finished 7-2 in the Pac 10 (and 9-4 overall after winning its bowl) and was ranked 17th until it lost to Oregon in its last game of the regular season. They always played Utah St. who was down, but did have FCS Weber St. as its final non-con. Had Weber St. been replaced with a good FBS program, even way back then, it might have elevated Utah to a much higher ranking.

People on here keep talking about "if they scheduled a tougher opponent". Have you ever tried to make a schedule for a college sports team? It's not as easy as we need to play a good team this week.

1. Power 5 teams don't want to play good smaller schools. It's a lose, lose for them.
2. You have to find a team that's willing to play that also has the same open weekend. Schedules are made 3 to 4 years in advance.
3. Logistics play a factor. People on here keep talking about how teams need to play schools from different regions of the country. Kids have class. Getting an AD to approve a game on the West Coast for a SEC is not always a guarantee.
4. Coaching changes happen a lot in college athletics. New coaches will sometimes drop teams from their schedule. This leaves teams scrambling for games.

That year Utah played at Michigan and home with Oregon St. though. They found 2 games. Even if they kept the Utah St. rivalry game they didn't have to play FCS Weber St. though because they are in Utah they often do. Replace Weber St. with even a mid tier Big 12 school and they would have had a pretty nice schedule even with Michigan flaming out. Now maybe it wouldn't have mattered or may be it would have

You're missing the point. We don't know that they could find a mid-tier big 12 school to play.

No you are missing the point which is they didn't bother to try instead playing 2 teams from Utah in their non con. Kansas finished 8-5 that year even played a road game at South Florida but also played LA Tech, FIU, and Sam Houston St. You don't think they would have hosted Utah in 1 of those 4 games

strikeout isn't trying to educate, he's trying to make sure we all know that he is a major college insider that has a perspective beyond what most here can possibly understand...

o

Posted by edsortails on 12/8/2017 11:25:00 PM (view original):
strikeout isn't trying to educate, he's trying to make sure we all know that he is a major college insider that has a perspective beyond what most here can possibly understand...

But he does have a point. Utah can't just call USF, say "Hey, let's play on 9/22 next season" and it happens. Some people on here seem to believe that's how it works.