The entire playoff committee needs to be drawn & disemboweled

[fordman84]

Meh. Can I have recent history, reputation and brand name for $400 Alex?

That is already happening, which is why I chuckle at your comment that Jexas is out with a loss to A&M. A&M could beat Auburn and then beat Jexas and still would be ranked below Jexas. And I hope we put the committee in that situation to prove me wrong.

 

[Brutus]

I really do think they get rid of the Committee in 2026 and go with a formula. The BCS is still weighted toward WL record, but at least puts some weight behind SOS.

Someone posted the Massey Composite the other day. This seems better than the Committee and the BCS, and not just because it has UGA higher. It appears to give deference to SOS and WL record. My guess is that Indiana will plummet if they lose, Texas, too. I am trying to figure out the Texas v. PSU placement.

View attachment 128313

So even the best metric you can find has IU #5

I don't think they are a top 10 team either but when you win all your games in a P4 conference, you are going to be ranked high even if you played no one, it seems.

 

[Deep Creek]

Nah.

 

[fordman84]

So even the best metric you can find has IU #5

I don't think they are a top 10 team either but when you win all your games in a P4 conference, you are going to be ranked high even if you played no one, it seems.

Another way, a simpler way, to say that is "no one will be scheduling tough OOC opponents anymore". Hell ND shows us even losing to an easy OOC won't hurt you.
inb4 "derp ND beat A&M"

 

[Brutus]

We will drop one of those games in 2027, and certainly drop at least one in 2030. Same in 2033.

Bro we don't even know who is going to be on the field in 2027, 2030, 2033. Wild prediction!

It makes no sense for teams in the B1G and SEC to play ANYONE OOC. Every OOC should be a cupcake, as their conference schedules are going to be brutal.

Agree with the SEC. B1G is a cakewalk unless USC, Wisky, UW, UM, MSU get their heads out of their asses.

 

[Brutus]

Another way, a simpler way, to say that is "no one will be scheduling tough OOC opponents anymore". Hell ND shows us even losing to an easy OOC won't hurt you.
inb4 "derp ND beat A&M"

Hard to see incentive to schedule tough opponents. It hasn't hurt the Buckeyes this year.

Now there is something to be said about being battle tested and also the national exposure... but how much are programs even looking at that?

We need to see how it plays out this year and a few years after. Maybe a tough OOC win helps teams get that 10, 11, 12 seed instead of being left out? Flip side is a tough OOC loss might keep a team out and they wished they would have played a cupcake instead.

 

[Deep Creek]

The playoffs will handle frauds.

They definitely have most of the time. There were a few “frauds” that have gotten in. But if they had replaced them with the next one it would have been replacing one fraud with another.

With a few obvious exceptions, the two best teams did make it to the final. Obvious exception was TCU. Georgia vs Ohio State was the final that year.

Less obvious was the first one Ohio State/Bama semi was the final. LSU’s year it didn’t matter. They’d have whipped them all. Last year Bama/ Michigan was probably closer o the final but Washington, Texas and Bama were probably interchangeable.

We’ll see how many blowouts we have in the first three rounds with 12.

 

[fordman84]

Hard to see incentive to schedule tough opponents. It hasn't hurt the Buckeyes this year.

Now there is something to be said about being battle tested and also the national exposure... but how much are programs even looking at that?

We need to see how it plays out this year and a few years after. Maybe a tough OOC win helps teams get that 10, 11, 12 seed instead of being left out? Flip side is a tough OOC loss might keep a team out and they wished they would have played a cupcake instead.

My view is that if A&M had played Directional Louisiana in game 1 and won we would be squarely in the playoff standings right now. As is we have 2 losses and are barely in the "first 4 out" conversation.

 

[Brutus]

My view is that if A&M had played Directional Louisiana in game 1 and won we would be squarely in the playoff standings right now. As is we have 2 losses and are barely in the "first 4 out" conversation.

Not only in the playoff standings right now, but you would also possibly have the leeway to lose to Jexas and still get in

But there is no way to tell if that ND game shaped the team to become what they are today. That was a grinder of a game and the Aggies seemingly grew a lot from that experience.

 

[fordman84]

Not only in the playoff standings right now, but you would also possibly have the leeway to lose to Jexas and still get in

But there is no way to tell if that ND game shaped the team to become what they are today. That was a grinder of a game and the Aggies seemingly grew a lot from that experience.

For sure, that ND game might have been the wakeup call. Or Weigman was hurt during it and that's why he wasn't very good. I don't want to change this season for the reason you said, but going forward it is going to make the P4 teams think about the value of scheduling another P4 (plus independents) vs a powder puff for OOC.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

I think Indiana and Texas are similar EXCEPT, if Texas loses to A&M they are out. If Indiana loses a close game to Ohio State they are in.

The interesting thing is how ccg losers get treated compared to similar teams that played one less game.

I have been convinced they would be protected. But I also thought the Committee would take SOS into consideration more and they arent doing that. So who knows. I am going to quit bitching, at a certain level, and try to do a devil's advocate look at things later.

 

[Deep Creek]

That is already happening, which is why I chuckle at your comment that Jexas is out with a loss to A&M. A&M could beat Auburn and then beat Jexas and still would be ranked below Jexas. And I hope we put the committee in that situation to prove me wrong.

If Texas loses to you guys and Indiana loses to Ohio State, neither will have beaten a ranked team. If that happens Penn State will join them to comprise 25% of the CFP field not having beaten ranked teams…unless some of the teams they beat show up in the final rankings. Such doesn’t seem to matter to this year’s CFP.

I would say this would be the end of the committee because the B1G and SEC wouldn’t stand for such resumes. But all three are their teams so all will be well in Mr Roger’s neighborhood.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

So even the best metric you can find has IU #5

I don't think they are a top 10 team either but when you win all your games in a P4 conference, you are going to be ranked high even if you played no one, it seems.

I indirectly mentioned that. The polls still are skewed for WL when the conferences were more even. I think that is the issue - now that the P2 has separated itself from the others, they are going to have to weigh SOS more heavily. For now they still are too heavy with simple WL record which was what the BCS really was.

I don't think most polls take into consideration that you would have such disparate schedules between conferences and within conferences. That's how you explain Indian, PSU, and Texas. The Committee's job was to do that, and they have failed, IMO.

At the end of the day, we have to win the games we are going to play to show they were wrong. But, when you have teams and schools actively discussing the idea of paring back on OOC schedules, you have a problem on your hands.

I saw a UGA guy put it well. The TV guys and conferences (B1G and SEC) worked to get all the high value properties in the same conference to drive big games and TV numbers. It worked, especially in the SEC. The problem is that the Committee didn't get the message that SOS matters and that has to be taken into consideration or else it will have negative consequences on the TV guys and conferences. For example, there is no way the SEC will go to the 9th game after this. That's not good for TV, its not good for the fans who want better games. That B1G v. SEC scheduling agreement - nah, we're good. Why risk an OOC loss when it may keep you out of the CFP.

Think about this ...

- if Clemson had played Ga Southern instead of UGA, they would likely be ranked ahead of UGA. Why would they play out the 5 OOC games we have scheduled with them in the future?

- if TAMU had not played ND, they would be in the top 5.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Bro we don't even know who is going to be on the field in 2027, 2030, 2033. Wild prediction!


Agree with the SEC. B1G is a cakewalk unless USC, Wisky, UW, UM, MSU get their heads out of their asses.

See my post above about Clemson and TAMU. There is no incentive to play OOC.

Candidly, I think this will force the 4 AQs where each conference chooses the 4 teams that get in without regard to OOC. TAMU will be in the SECCG if they beat Texas, and would barely move into the top 12 in the CFP if they do.

 

[Deep Creek]

Agree with the SEC. B1G is a cakewalk unless USC, Wisky, UW, UM, MSU get their heads out of their asses.

Those aren’t any worse than some of the other B1G bottom feeders or bottom feeders from other conferences. But the are impacting the SOS of the better B1G schools for sure. Question though. Is it fair to punish or reward a team because of how shitty their conference brethren are?

 

[osubuckeye89]

Those aren’t any worse than some of the other B1G bottom feeders or bottom feeders from other conferences. But the are impacting the SOS of the better B1G schools for sure. Question though. Is it fair to punish or reward a team because of how shitty their conference brethren are?

I think sometimes it has to be taken into account

obviously the ACC and Big 12 are quite behind the SEC and B1G, the committee seems to be treating that as so at the moment.

 

[fordman84]

I indirectly mentioned that. The polls still are skewed for WL when the conferences were more even. I think that is the issue - now that the P2 has separated itself from the others, they are going to have to weigh SOS more heavily. For now they still are too heavy with simple WL record which was what the BCS really was.

I don't think most polls take into consideration that you would have such disparate schedules between conferences and within conferences. That's how you explain Indian, PSU, and Texas. The Committee's job was to do that, and they have failed, IMO.

At the end of the day, we have to win the games we are going to play to show they were wrong. But, when you have teams and schools actively discussing the idea of paring back on OOC schedules, you have a problem on your hands.

I saw a UGA guy put it well. The TV guys and conferences (B1G and SEC) worked to get all the high value properties in the same conference to drive big games and TV numbers. It worked, especially in the SEC. The problem is that the Committee didn't get the message that SOS matters and that has to be taken into consideration or else it will have negative consequences on the TV guys and conferences. For example, there is no way the SEC will go to the 9th game after this. That's not good for TV, its not good for the fans who want better games. That B1G v. SEC scheduling agreement - nah, we're good. Why risk an OOC loss when it may keep you out of the CFP.

Think about this ...

- if Clemson had played Ga Southern instead of UGA, they would likely be ranked ahead of UGA. Why would they play out the 5 OOC games we have scheduled with them in the future?

- if TAMU had not played ND, they would be in the top 5.

I think this guy really needs to take me off ignore

 

[Deep Creek]

I think sometimes it has to be taken into account

obviously the ACC and Big 12 are quite behind the SEC and B1G, the committee seems to be treating that as so at the moment.

Yet they are not punishing Texas, Indiana, or Penn State for such. Hell, they aren’t really even one of those two conferences teams either…. Miami. Look at their schedule.

What the ACC and B1G are both lacking are “top” teams. Their middle/bottoms are similar to middle/lower BIG and SEC teams. Some head to head meeting this year among those tell us so. Others the opposite.

Examples:

For Big12/ACC
Winless Big 12 Okie Lite beats Arkansas
Iowa State beats Iowa (Close every year lately)
North Carolina beat Minnesota

Against Big13/ACC
Nebraska just crushed Big 12 leader Colorado

However, the case against the ACC/Big 12 is at the top. I don’t think their top teams (Miami/SMU/Clem, Colorado/BYU/ASU) can beat the top teams in the B1G or SEC. Only indicator they might have a puncher’s chance is the Oregon/Boise game. But Boise may be better than the ACC or Big 12 champ.

 

[TheReal_NU]

Agree with the SEC. B1G is a cakewalk unless USC, Wisky, UW, UM, MSU get their heads out of their asses.

Hey!!!

What about Nebraska?

We have our head in our ass too.

 

[Collegefbfan]

I think sometimes it has to be taken into account

obviously the ACC and Big 12 are quite behind the SEC and B1G, the committee seems to be treating that as so at the moment.

Totally this. We can call it P4 or, in reality, the P2. We can fuss about the CFP ranking certain SEC teams in the 22-25 spots just to say the top level SEC teams beat a CFP top 25 team. But these factors do not have any relation to what the ACC is throwing out there on the field. Stanford has gotten their clock cleaned by almost every ACC school, but decides to up and beat 7 win Syracuse and 6 win Louisville. That is some shitty showing. Yeah, I know Vandy beat Alabama, but Alabama has some really quality wins. Clemson has played 7 teams that are 0.500 or worse. And Duke has played 4 teams that are 0.500 or worse, and DAMN, Duke is 7-3.

Now, I wonder since the B1G and SEC in conference schedules are so tough, and the ACC and BIG XII aren't, if they will try to schedule tougher mid majors and no FCS teams in the future.