Smoke your cigars and enjoy the band while you can....

[Katpappy]

Just hope the big 10 keeps their greedy ass out of the CFP.  With the Allegiance, they are going to eff up the conference champs model, cause they want their mighty blue bloods in every year.  They'll want as many at large teams as they can get, and the SEC will follow suite. Conference Championships will have close to no meaning, which is what they want. 

[joda]

We really didn’t know how good we had it.

If the OG Big XII had formed just a few years earlier and switched Baylor for Arkansas it really would have been about perfect

[MadCat]

I think Texas is still cancer to other teams that want to be big shots in the conference

[Kat Kid]

We really didn’t know how good we had it.

If the OG Big XII had formed just a few years earlier and switched Baylor for Arkansas it really would have been about perfect

Good Ann Richards— “George was born with a silver foot in his mouth.”

Bad Ann Richards— Baylor is tied to Texas

[Katpappy]

  College Football Playoff: Time to expand the field, make the process more fair
https://foxsports.onelink.me/SY6x/6a5db09                                                                                                 

[CHONGS]

Well no expansion. I don't think it really matters much anymore anyway.

[Katpappy]

Well no expansion. I don't think it really matters much anymore anyway.

I clicked on the link that I posted the other day, but for some reason, it won't load.  It was about expanding theCFP to 12 and have the CCG of the five P5 and 5 G5 conferences along with two at large teams.  It would keep fans' interest in college football like never before the same way the NCAA BB tournament does for basketball.  It has been known for years college football is losing interest among fans as seen by poor attendance at the games.  With the regular season having meaning by giving the conferences a chance to be in the Playoff; the CCG would basically be a part of the CFP.  Fun times if the greedy big 10 and SEC don't screw it up.

[Houstoncat93]

Well no expansion. I don't think it really matters much anymore anyway.

I clicked on the link that I posted the other day, but for some reason, it won't load.  It was about expanding theCFP to 12 and have the CCG of the five P5 and 5 G5 conferences along with two at large teams.  It would keep fans' interest in college football like never before the same way the NCAA BB tournament does for basketball.  It has been known for years college football is losing interest among fans as seen by poor attendance at the games.  With the regular season having meaning by giving the conferences a chance to be in the Playoff; the CCG would basically be a part of the CFP.  Fun times if the greedy big 10 and SEC don't screw it up.

Fixed it for you.

[DQ12]

The 1998 thing is fun to think about.  Following CCGs, here's what the relevant field looked like:

Tennessee - 12-0
KSU - 11-1
FSU - 12-1 (assuming CCG win)
Ohio State/Wisconsin - 11-1 (they'd have a CCG in modern times and one would get to 11-1)
UCLA/Arizona - 11-1 (they'd have a CCG in modern times and one would get to 11-1).

IDK.  Tennessee and FSU would be locks, imo.  FSU had a pretty impressive schedule in 98.  Two OOC wins over ranked opponents (including A&M!).  Probably come down to K-State vs. UCLA/Arizona.  Our weak OOC would probably be used against us, which would be pretty fair imo (without studying relative OOCs of OSU/Wiscy/UCLA/Arizona).

In modern times, getting to the playoffs isn't at all out of the question for a team like K-State.  So long as we have fewer than 2 losses, we are in the conversation.  There really isn't much evidence of non-blueblood prejudice by the selection committee.

[MakeItRain]

The 1998 thing is fun to think about.  Following CCGs, here's what the relevant field looked like:

Tennessee - 12-0
KSU - 11-1
FSU - 12-1 (assuming CCG win)
Ohio State/Wisconsin - 11-1 (they'd have a CCG in modern times and one would get to 11-1)
UCLA/Arizona - 11-1 (they'd have a CCG in modern times and one would get to 11-1).

IDK.  Tennessee and FSU would be locks, imo.  FSU had a pretty impressive schedule in 98.  Two OOC wins over ranked opponents (including A&M!).  Probably come down to K-State vs. UCLA/Arizona.  Our weak OOC would probably be used against us, which would be pretty fair imo (without studying relative OOCs of OSU/Wiscy/UCLA/Arizona).

In modern times, getting to the playoffs isn't at all out of the question for a team like K-State.  So long as we have fewer than 2 losses, we are in the conversation.  There really isn't much evidence of non-blueblood prejudice by the selection committee.

I 100% agree, Dlew. There hasn't been a single case of a non blueblood getting absolutely screwed by the committee. The seeming lack of parity in the CFP actually isn't a lack of parity at all, there's just 5 programs ahead of everyone else right now. Everyone else are beating the hell out of each other.

[Katpappy]

Welp, the big 10 are wanting the 5 P5 Conference Champs and the rest to be at large.  Sweet deal for them and the SEC.  It's all about money... sorry G5.

[Kid In the Hall]

The 1998 thing is fun to think about.  Following CCGs, here's what the relevant field looked like:

Tennessee - 12-0
KSU - 11-1
FSU - 12-1 (assuming CCG win)
Ohio State/Wisconsin - 11-1 (they'd have a CCG in modern times and one would get to 11-1)
UCLA/Arizona - 11-1 (they'd have a CCG in modern times and one would get to 11-1).

IDK.  Tennessee and FSU would be locks, imo.  FSU had a pretty impressive schedule in 98.  Two OOC wins over ranked opponents (including A&M!).  Probably come down to K-State vs. UCLA/Arizona.  Our weak OOC would probably be used against us, which would be pretty fair imo (without studying relative OOCs of OSU/Wiscy/UCLA/Arizona).

In modern times, getting to the playoffs isn't at all out of the question for a team like K-State.  So long as we have fewer than 2 losses, we are in the conversation.  There really isn't much evidence of non-blueblood prejudice by the selection committee.

I 100% agree, Dlew. There hasn't been a single case of a non blueblood getting absolutely screwed by the committee. The seeming lack of parity in the CFP actually isn't a lack of parity at all, there's just 5 programs ahead of everyone else right now. Everyone else are beating the hell out of each other.

For the sake of argument, I don't think it's unreasonable to say that TCU got the shaft in 2014. You can certainly argue that Ohio State clobbering Wisconsin meant they should have leapfrogged TCU (which destroyed Iowa State that same weekend). But, I think you can also make the argument that TCU did what they were supposed to do, should have stayed where they were, etc.

Personally, I think if the roles had been reversed (Ohio State was No. 3 and clobbered a terrible team and TCU was No. 5 and destroyed a ranked team) that Ohio State gets the benefit of the doubt due to the status of their program (and, you could argue that status is earned).

An after-the-fact recap of that weekend/decision-making for the committee:
https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/24638416/when-ohio-state-kept-tcu-big-12-2014-playoff

[Katpappy]

Oh gees, now you're rough ridin' with MIR's fine memory.   

[Cire]

The 1998 thing is fun to think about.  Following CCGs, here's what the relevant field looked like:

Tennessee - 12-0
KSU - 11-1
FSU - 12-1 (assuming CCG win)
Ohio State/Wisconsin - 11-1 (they'd have a CCG in modern times and one would get to 11-1)
UCLA/Arizona - 11-1 (they'd have a CCG in modern times and one would get to 11-1).

IDK.  Tennessee and FSU would be locks, imo.  FSU had a pretty impressive schedule in 98.  Two OOC wins over ranked opponents (including A&M!).  Probably come down to K-State vs. UCLA/Arizona.  Our weak OOC would probably be used against us, which would be pretty fair imo (without studying relative OOCs of OSU/Wiscy/UCLA/Arizona).

In modern times, getting to the playoffs isn't at all out of the question for a team like K-State.  So long as we have fewer than 2 losses, we are in the conversation.  There really isn't much evidence of non-blueblood prejudice by the selection committee.

I 100% agree, Dlew. There hasn't been a single case of a non blueblood getting absolutely screwed by the committee. The seeming lack of parity in the CFP actually isn't a lack of parity at all, there's just 5 programs ahead of everyone else right now. Everyone else are beating the hell out of each other.

For the sake of argument, I don't think it's unreasonable to say that TCU got the shaft in 2014. You can certainly argue that Ohio State clobbering Wisconsin meant they should have leapfrogged TCU (which destroyed Iowa State that same weekend). But, I think you can also make the argument that TCU did what they were supposed to do, should have stayed where they were, etc.

Personally, I think if the roles had been reversed (Ohio State was No. 3 and clobbered a terrible team and TCU was No. 5 and destroyed a ranked team) that Ohio State gets the benefit of the doubt due to the status of their program (and, you could argue that status is earned).

An after-the-fact recap of that weekend/decision-making for the committee:
https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/24638416/when-ohio-state-kept-tcu-big-12-2014-playoff

That was 1 million percent a tv decision


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Katpappy]

Yep.

[MakeItRain]

Bullshit. TCU didn't even have a claim to the best team in the league. They were the only team among those three to lose to one of the others, they were the third best choice. Before that Big 10 championship game, I thought Baylor should have been picked, they had a much more impressive win against us than TCU did over flood aggie. Then OSU went on national television and beat a top 15 team 59-0. All three of those teams went into that week as essentially equal, Ohio State had far and away the best win.

Even given retrospect I'm stunned this is still being talked about, they won the national championship for heavens sake. Also I will always and forever completely dismiss talk of teams being selected for TV. That's a ridiculous conspiracy theory that requires a lot of people with a lot of different interests colluding, in some cases against their best interest. Y'all really think Oliver Luck was going to participate in an activity that took money out of his athletic department's office because some person on the committee thought OSU would get better ratings? Come on guys.

[Kid In the Hall]

Bullshit. TCU didn't even have a claim to the best team in the league. They were the only team among those three to lose to one of the others, they were the third best choice. Before that Big 10 championship game, I thought Baylor should have been picked, they had a much more impressive win against us than TCU did over flood aggie. Then OSU went on national television and beat a top 15 team 59-0. All three of those teams went into that week as essentially equal, Ohio State had far and away the best win.

Even given retrospect I'm stunned this is still being talked about, they won the national championship for heavens sake. Also I will always and forever completely dismiss talk of teams being selected for TV. That's a ridiculous conspiracy theory that requires a lot of people with a lot of different interests colluding, in some cases against their best interest. Y'all really think Oliver Luck was going to participate in an activity that took money out of his athletic department's office because some person on the committee thought OSU would get better ratings? Come on guys.

I know it's your deal to decree in the absolute, but TCU and Baylor did, in fact, have reasonable cases to be included.

To that point...

-Entering the playoff, the Big Ten was the fifth rated conference that year (Big 12 was actually No. 1).
-Ohio State lost its only Power 5 non-conference game that year to a completely mediocre Va Tech team that finished 6-6
-TCU beat Minnesota in the non-conference 30-7 (Ohio State squeaked by 31-24)
-The Big Ten was 2-9 against the Big 12/Pac-12/SEC that year (the three best conferences) and was 0-3 against the Big 12
-That mighty Wisconsin team had exactly one quality win entering the game against Ohio State (a 34-24 win against Minnesota)

The fact that Ohio State won the title is actually irrelevant to this discussion - the question is whether or not they should have been competing for it in the first place. And, you can argue that they should have and that's fine. But to say that TCU/Baylor didn't have a reasonable argument? Well, that's just, to use your words, "bullshit."

[ChiComCat]

TCU/Baylor screwed by the Big 12 not having a conference championship game as much as anything.  I think it was close between the teams and the brand name is going to win that argument due to an "eye test" that is mostly the committee's biases.  Ohio State has elite recruiting, national star players, coaches that have done it before, nationally televised games weekly, and a giant fanbase that would be upset so the committee perceives them as more deserving.

[Rage Against the McKee]

TCU/Baylor screwed by the Big 12 not having a conference championship game as much as anything.  I think it was close between the teams and the brand name is going to win that argument due to an "eye test" that is mostly the committee's biases.  Ohio State has elite recruiting, national star players, coaches that have done it before, nationally televised games weekly, and a giant fanbase that would be upset so the committee perceives them as more deserving.

They would have been out, anyway. With the same record, Ohio State gets picked over TCU or Baylor every time. The only exception might be if TCU or Baylor actually beat Ohio State on the field, but even then, I'm not sure they get in.

[MakeItRain]

Bullshit. TCU didn't even have a claim to the best team in the league. They were the only team among those three to lose to one of the others, they were the third best choice. Before that Big 10 championship game, I thought Baylor should have been picked, they had a much more impressive win against us than TCU did over flood aggie. Then OSU went on national television and beat a top 15 team 59-0. All three of those teams went into that week as essentially equal, Ohio State had far and away the best win.

Even given retrospect I'm stunned this is still being talked about, they won the national championship for heavens sake. Also I will always and forever completely dismiss talk of teams being selected for TV. That's a ridiculous conspiracy theory that requires a lot of people with a lot of different interests colluding, in some cases against their best interest. Y'all really think Oliver Luck was going to participate in an activity that took money out of his athletic department's office because some person on the committee thought OSU would get better ratings? Come on guys.

I know it's your deal to decree in the absolute, but TCU and Baylor did, in fact, have reasonable cases to be included.

But to say that TCU/Baylor didn't have a reasonable argument? Well, that's just, to use your words, "bullshit."

Uh, I didn't say that, like at all. I was pretty clear that I thought Baylor should have been selected until the end of the Big 10 championship.

[MakeItRain]

TCU/Baylor screwed by the Big 12 not having a conference championship game as much as anything.  I think it was close between the teams and the brand name is going to win that argument due to an "eye test" that is mostly the committee's biases.  Ohio State has elite recruiting, national star players, coaches that have done it before, nationally televised games weekly, and a giant fanbase that would be upset so the committee perceives them as more deserving.

They would have been out, anyway. With the same record, Ohio State gets picked over TCU or Baylor every time. The only exception might be if TCU or Baylor actually beat Ohio State on the field, but even then, I'm not sure they get in.

This is that conspiracy theory stuff again. If Baylor won the Big 12 championship they would have been 3-0 against top 11 teams in the last CFP and two of those wins would have come in the last two weeks of the season. If TCU beats the #6 team you'd have to think they hold. In this scenario you'd have to think #4 Florida State would have been the most vulnerable team to get jumped by OSU.

[Kid In the Hall]

Bullshit. TCU didn't even have a claim to the best team in the league. They were the only team among those three to lose to one of the others, they were the third best choice. Before that Big 10 championship game, I thought Baylor should have been picked, they had a much more impressive win against us than TCU did over flood aggie. Then OSU went on national television and beat a top 15 team 59-0. All three of those teams went into that week as essentially equal, Ohio State had far and away the best win.

Even given retrospect I'm stunned this is still being talked about, they won the national championship for heavens sake. Also I will always and forever completely dismiss talk of teams being selected for TV. That's a ridiculous conspiracy theory that requires a lot of people with a lot of different interests colluding, in some cases against their best interest. Y'all really think Oliver Luck was going to participate in an activity that took money out of his athletic department's office because some person on the committee thought OSU would get better ratings? Come on guys.

I know it's your deal to decree in the absolute, but TCU and Baylor did, in fact, have reasonable cases to be included.

But to say that TCU/Baylor didn't have a reasonable argument? Well, that's just, to use your words, "bullshit."

Uh, I didn't say that, like at all. I was pretty clear that I thought Baylor should have been selected until the end of the Big 10 championship.

Great - then it's not bullshit after all. Common ground is wonderful.

[Rage Against the McKee]

TCU/Baylor screwed by the Big 12 not having a conference championship game as much as anything.  I think it was close between the teams and the brand name is going to win that argument due to an "eye test" that is mostly the committee's biases.  Ohio State has elite recruiting, national star players, coaches that have done it before, nationally televised games weekly, and a giant fanbase that would be upset so the committee perceives them as more deserving.

They would have been out, anyway. With the same record, Ohio State gets picked over TCU or Baylor every time. The only exception might be if TCU or Baylor actually beat Ohio State on the field, but even then, I'm not sure they get in.

This is that conspiracy theory stuff again. If Baylor won the Big 12 championship they would have been 3-0 against top 11 teams in the last CFP and two of those wins would have come in the last two weeks of the season. If TCU beats the #6 team you'd have to think they hold. In this scenario you'd have to think #4 Florida State would have been the most vulnerable team to get jumped by OSU.

It's not a conspiracy. OSU simply has name recognition that TCU and Baylor don't. As long as a human committee is doing the seeding, Ohio State's wins are going to be perceived to be better and their terrible loss to Virginia Tech can be ignored because Virginia Tech also has some level of name recognition despite being terrible.

[MakeItRain]

Bullshit. TCU didn't even have a claim to the best team in the league. They were the only team among those three to lose to one of the others, they were the third best choice. Before that Big 10 championship game, I thought Baylor should have been picked, they had a much more impressive win against us than TCU did over flood aggie. Then OSU went on national television and beat a top 15 team 59-0. All three of those teams went into that week as essentially equal, Ohio State had far and away the best win.

Even given retrospect I'm stunned this is still being talked about, they won the national championship for heavens sake. Also I will always and forever completely dismiss talk of teams being selected for TV. That's a ridiculous conspiracy theory that requires a lot of people with a lot of different interests colluding, in some cases against their best interest. Y'all really think Oliver Luck was going to participate in an activity that took money out of his athletic department's office because some person on the committee thought OSU would get better ratings? Come on guys.

I know it's your deal to decree in the absolute, but TCU and Baylor did, in fact, have reasonable cases to be included.

But to say that TCU/Baylor didn't have a reasonable argument? Well, that's just, to use your words, "bullshit."

Uh, I didn't say that, like at all. I was pretty clear that I thought Baylor should have been selected until the end of the Big 10 championship.

Great - then it's not bullshit after all. Common ground is wonderful.

There was a reason that I didn't quite your post when I replied. The bullshit wasn't really directed at you, although there are some minor points you've made that I don't agree with. I actually agree with your larger point that if the roles were reversed that TCU or Baylor may not have jumped OSU. I took more of an exception to the posts that followed yours. I think OSU getting the benefit of the doubt that Baylor and TCU wouldn't have isn't about some moronic television or brand preference, but it's more about confirmation bias. OSU has a recent history of being elite, they earned that, and it matters when the eye test is part of the equation. People also conveniently forget that Baylor and TCU played a 71-68, or whatever game, again not great when considering the eye test. It's also very relevant that if the committee either consciously or unconsciously applied confirmation bias, they were right. All four of those CFP teams were better than Baylor and TCU.

As long as we have four team playoffs the eye test will have a role and upstarts will have a much harder time unseating established programs.

I think you, me, and RATM are pretty close here. There are some, maybe even most, college football fans who refuses to apply nuance to this conversation and want to chalk it up to ESPN.

[DQ12]

i think there were fair arguments to be made for TCU and Ohio State and Baylor.  That the committee chose Ohio State in that instance doesn't necessarily mean the committee based its decision on the brand name.