And the CFP Rigging Begins!

[skip-zip]

15 minutes ago, Balsy said:

 

Get ready for it.

 

It's nearly impossible for the Suckeyes to get in now, if you follow logic.   But, there probably is some scenario that still makes it possible for the committee to sneak them in the back door, if they want them and their fans in the playoff.  

 

But, even if there is an upset in all of the championship games, you'd still have to move them ahead of Alabama probably, who has only 1 loss, to a top team, and spent the entire season at the top of the rankings.   Compared to 2 losses, in blowouts, and one of them was against a dismal team in the latter part of the season.  

 

 

[UAZipster0305]

22 hours ago, skip-zip said:

 

It's nearly impossible for the Suckeyes to get in now, if you follow logic.   But, there probably is some scenario that still makes it possible for the committee to sneak them in the back door, if they want them and their fans in the playoff.  

 

But, even if there is an upset in all of the championship games, you'd still have to move them ahead of Alabama probably, who has only 1 loss, to a top team, and spent the entire season at the top of the rankings.   Compared to 2 losses, in blowouts, and one of them was against a dismal team in the latter part of the season.  

 

 

Last night SportsCenter had a segment on how the dominoes could fall in OSU's favor provided they win the B1GC. It was said that the committee may see OSU's resume as stronger than Alabama's because OSU has some big wins and would have a conference championship. They totally negated the two BIG losses, one to a fairly average P5 Iowa team. They claimed Alabama's only big win was against LSU.

 

I think Penn State has a more credible resume' for the playoffs than OSU...two close road losses (by a total of four points) to top ranked teams. Even if OSU beats Wisconsin, I still believe Alabama > Penn St. > OSU. The mental gymnastics that are necessary to justify otherwise are despicable.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the playoff will eventually be expanded to 16 to include all FBS conference champions and at-large selections.

Edited November 29, 2017 by UAZipster0305

[Balsy]

 

36 minutes ago, UAZipster0305 said:

Last night SportsCenter had a segment on how the dominoes could fall in OSU's favor provided they win the B1GC. It was said that the committee may see OSU's resume as stronger than Alabama's because OSU has some big wins and would have a conference championship. They totally negated the two BIG losses, one to a fairly average P5 Iowa team. They claimed Alabama's only big win was against LSU.

 

I think Penn State has a more credible resume' for the playoffs than OSU...two close road losses (by a total of four points) to top ranked teams. Even if OSU beats Wisconsin, I still believe Alabama > Penn St. > OSU. The mental gymnastics that are necessary to justify otherwise are despicable.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the playoff will eventually be expanded to 16 to include all FBS conference champions and at-large selections.

 

Great post.  Hopefully Wisconsin can just win the darn thing and silence the OSU conversation.

 

The only thing I see never happening is the 16-team field with all-10 Conference champions.  It SHOULD be that way, but I don't believe the Big-Boys would ever let the MACs and Sun Belts of the world have a seat at the table.  There may be an "at-large" slot reserved for the best of the G5 teams, but no way they would give 5-spots to 5 "lesser" teams.  Because the arguments would be made that a second place SEC team still deserves to get in the Top MAC team.

[zippy5]

1 hour ago, UAZipster0305 said:

Last night SportsCenter had a segment on how the dominoes could fall in OSU's favor provided they win the B1GC. It was said that the committee may see OSU's resume as stronger than Alabama's because OSU has some big wins and would have a conference championship. They totally negated the two BIG losses, one to a fairly average P5 Iowa team. They claimed Alabama's only big win was against LSU.

 

I think Penn State has a more credible resume' for the playoffs than OSU...two close road losses (by a total of four points) to top ranked teams. Even if OSU beats Wisconsin, I still believe Alabama > Penn St. > OSU. The mental gymnastics that are necessary to justify otherwise are despicable.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the playoff will eventually be expanded to 16 to include all FBS conference champions and at-large selections.

The mental gymnastics to ignore the fact that OSU beat PSU are something, too.

[zippy5]

29 minutes ago, Balsy said:

 

 

Great post.  Hopefully Wisconsin can just win the darn thing and silence the OSU conversation.

 

The only thing I see never happening is the 16-team field with all-10 Conference champions.  It SHOULD be that way, but I don't believe the Big-Boys would ever let the MACs and Sun Belts of the world have a seat at the table.  There may be an "at-large" slot reserved for the best of the G5 teams, but no way they would give 5-spots to 5 "lesser" teams.  Because the arguments would be made that a second place SEC team still deserves to get in the Top MAC team.

My vote is an 8 team playoff - 5 P5 champs, the highest rated G5 team and 2 at larges.

[UAZipster0305]

4 minutes ago, zippy5 said:

The mental gymnastics to ignore the fact that OSU beat PSU are something, too.

 

PSU isn't in the conversations, so it's moot, but I will defend this by saying that PSU only lost by 1 AT OSU and won at Iowa where OSU got blown out. Penn State also lost another close game (by three) on the road to a top team (Michigan State). OSU got blown out at home by Oklahoma. These circular arguments can be made ad naseum though. To me, it is simply that PSU is a consistently solid top 4-10 team whereas OSU can be a top 5 or only a top 25 team due to inconsistency.

[UAZipster0305]

52 minutes ago, Balsy said:

 

 

Great post.  Hopefully Wisconsin can just win the darn thing and silence the OSU conversation.

 

The only thing I see never happening is the 16-team field with all-10 Conference champions.  It SHOULD be that way, but I don't believe the Big-Boys would ever let the MACs and Sun Belts of the world have a seat at the table.  There may be an "at-large" slot reserved for the best of the G5 teams, but no way they would give 5-spots to 5 "lesser" teams.  Because the arguments would be made that a second place SEC team still deserves to get in the Top MAC team.

 

If it is ever expanded to 16, I expect all ten conference champions will be granted automatic bids. This is consistent with the NCAA basketball tournament even though the P5 schools dominate the at-large selections.

 

It gives every FBS school an opportunity to play for the national championship while pretty much guaranteeing that any team worthy of winning the national championship will have the opportunity to do so on the field.

Edited November 29, 2017 by UAZipster0305

[UAZipster0305]

16 minutes ago, zippy5 said:

My vote is an 8 team playoff - 5 P5 champs, the highest rated G5 team and 2 at larges.

 

This is precisely the problem with the 8 vs. 16 team tournament. Conference champions and legitimate national championship contenders would still be excluded in the 8 team format.

Edited November 29, 2017 by UAZipster0305

[zippy5]

4 minutes ago, UAZipster0305 said:

 

PSU isn't in the conversations, so it's moot, but I will defend this by saying that PSU only lost by 1 AT OSU and won at Iowa where OSU got blown out. Penn State also lost another close game (by three) on the road to a top team (Michigan State). OSU got blown out at home by Oklahoma. These circular arguments can be made ad naseum though. To me, it is simply that PSU is a consistently solid top 4-10 team whereas OSU can be a top 5 or only a top 25 team due to inconsistency.

Oh what the heck

 

What's PSU's best win? Ignoring the fact that OSU would be a conference champ with 11 wins, and PSU wouldn't be and would have 10 wins.. There's a simple way to tell who is better - play it on the field! It's exactly why Clemson is ranked over Auburn. OSU would have two top ten wins. I don't believe PSU has a win over a ranked team. It's really not even an argument. The argument comes down to OSU vs Bama if Wisconsin and Oklahoma go down. 

[zippy5]

2 minutes ago, UAZipster0305 said:

 

This is precisely the problem with the 8 vs. 16 team tournament. Conference champions and legitimate national championship contenders would be excluded.

Conference champions /= national championship contenders. I'd love to see all conference champs in, but the best we have to hope for is a shot at one spot, in my opinion. Toledo or Akron, Fresno, North Texas, Troy would be 30 pt dogs to P5 champs and would draw peanuts in TV ratings. It's just not realistic

[UAZipster0305]

2 minutes ago, zippy5 said:

Conference champions /= national championship contenders. I'd love to see all conference champs in, but the best we have to hope for is a shot at one spot, in my opinion. Toledo or Akron, Fresno, North Texas, Troy would be 30 pt dogs to P5 champs and would draw peanuts in TV ratings. It's just not realistic

 

The same thing could be said about the NCAA basketball tournament, but upsets happen and that is one of the most thrilling aspects of it to casual fans.

 

If played today, yes, the G5 champions would probably get beaten soundly. However, I think that over the course of a few seasons, recruits who would otherwise be on a second to fourth string at P5 schools would prefer the opportunity to play for a championship themselves rather than watch from the sidelines. Thus, there'd be a talent equilibration that would enable regular upsets.

[Bruce Willis Drummond]

19 minutes ago, UAZipster0305 said:

 

If it is ever expanded to 16, I expect all ten conference champions will be granted automatic bids. This is consistent with the NCAA basketball tournament even though the P5 schools dominate the at-large selections.

 

It gives every FBS school an opportunity to play for the national championship while pretty much guaranteeing that any team worthy of winning the national championship will have the opportunity to do so on the field.

If your scenario ever happened West Virginia would lobby to join the MAC.  There would be reverse realignment where second tier P5 teams would want to join G5 conferences to get the CFP bid.  I doubt if we live to see that arrangement.

[Bruce Willis Drummond]

@UAZipster0305, your scenario would be great for getting some geographic sense back into conference affiliation that got destroyed by realignment.

[UAZipster0305]

1 minute ago, Bruce Willis Drummond said:

If your scenario ever happened West Virginia would lobby to join the MAC.  There would be reverse realignment where second tier P5 teams would want to join G5 conferences to get the CFP bid.  I doubt if we live to see that arrangement.

 

That is potentially great for fans too. Imagine a conference with WVU, Pitt, Marshall, etc.

 

I do see a 16 team playoff happening, but not sure it would go as far as driving a conference realignment. At-large bids are still strongly flavored by RPI and thus, conference affiliation. It hasn't driven realignment in basketball.

[skip-zip]

1 hour ago, UAZipster0305 said:

Even if OSU beats Wisconsin, I still believe Alabama > Penn St. > OSU. The mental gymnastics that are necessary to justify otherwise are despicable.

 

I think it really is a shame that Penn State lost to the Suckeyes, by 1 point, in their stadium, in a near-miracle comeback.....and that is supposedly the NEGATIVE that's keeping Penn State out of the conversation?   I think that should be a POSITIVE in their favor.  

 

But regardless, it does come down to Alabama.  They've been the top team in the country for 3 months, and just lost ONE game, on the ROAD, to the team who the committee now feels is the 2nd best team in the country.  No way in hell can anyone bend their mind far enough to justify them not claiming any of the available spots that might open up next Saturday. 

 

And it would be the ultimate hypocrisy if they allow the two-blowout-loser Suckeyes in under the same criteria that they used last year to eliminate Penn State.   

[Balsy]

21 minutes ago, UAZipster0305 said:

 

The same thing could be said about the NCAA basketball tournament, but upsets happen and that is one of the most thrilling aspects of it to casual fans.

 

If played today, yes, the G5 champions would probably get beaten soundly. However, I think that over the course of a few seasons, recruits who would otherwise be on a second to fourth string at P5 schools would prefer the opportunity to play for a championship themselves rather than watch from the sidelines. Thus, there'd be a talent equilibration that would enable regular upsets.

 

You'd also get bottom-feeder P5 teams with a name (Purdue comes to mind) who might consider switching conferences because at present moment they stand no chance of getting the the CFP, while on name alone they might be able to recruit better than the other teams in lower conferences, and thus win-out over those teams.  That would put the gravy-train at risk.  Not. Going. To. Happen.

[UAZipster0305]

10 minutes ago, Balsy said:

 

You'd also get bottom-feeder P5 teams with a name (Purdue comes to mind) who might consider switching conferences because at present moment they stand no chance of getting the the CFP, while on name alone they might be able to recruit better than the other teams in lower conferences, and thus win-out over those teams.  That would put the gravy-train at risk.  Not. Going. To. Happen.

 

So why doesn't a school like Purdue just jump to the MAC now then? They aren't winning anything in the B1G in the next decade. Answer: revenue. The B1G has it, the MAC does not. This wouldn't change with my concept of a 16 team playoff either. Again, this also has not happened due to basketball utilizing the same model.

Edited November 29, 2017 by UAZipster0305

[Balsy]

4 hours ago, UAZipster0305 said:

 

So why doesn't a school like Purdue just jump to the MAC now then? They aren't winning anything in the B1G in the next decade. Answer: revenue. The B1G has it, the MAC does not. This wouldn't change with my concept of a 16 team playoff either. Again, this also has not happened due to basketball utilizing the same model.

 

Because there's more money in the Big-10, prestige w/e.  If each conference has equal chance (1 bid) to get a shot at the national championship, theres a greater incentive.

[Bruce Willis Drummond]

Purdue couldn’t win the MAC.

[skip-zip]

4 hours ago, UAZipster0305 said:

So why doesn't a school like Purdue just jump to the MAC now then? They aren't winning anything in the B1G in the next decade. Answer: revenue. The B1G has it, the MAC does not.

 

Great post.  

 

Being the ugly duckling who gets no respect, and gets beaten up repeatedly has far more benefits than winning.  It's amazing, isn't it?

[UAZipster0305]

1 hour ago, Balsy said:

 

Because there's more money in the Big-10, prestige w/e.  If each conference has equal chance (1 bid) to get a shot at the national championship, theres a greater incentive.

 

Conference champions plus at-larges would get bids. P5 programs would be heavily favored for the at-large positions. That together with the prestige and money of the P5 conferences would keep schools like Purdue right where  they are.

 

Indeed, skip-zip, it is amazing.

Edited November 30, 2017 by UAZipster0305

[kreed5120]

16 teams is too many. It would make the entire regular season mean less. Part of what makes college football great is every game matters. The last thing I want to do is watch conference championship games at the end of the season and think well this game is irrelevant, both these teams are already going to make the playoffs. The playoffs shouldn't expand beyond 8 IMO and I'd be fine with the top ranked G5 champ being included.

 

Edit: Also, of note a 16 team playoff would require 15 games. This means it will fill 15 TV slots. The current playoff system only takes up 2. That alone could reduce the demand for postseason teams by 26. Many of those teams would probably be the 6-7 win G5 progams.

Edited November 30, 2017 by kreed5120

[UAZipster0305]

19 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

16 teams is too many. It would make the entire regular season mean less. Part of what makes college football great is every game matters. The last thing I want to do is watch conference championship games at the end of the season and think well this game is irrelevant, both these teams are already going to make the playoffs. The playoffs shouldn't expand beyond 8 IMO and I'd be fine with the top ranked G5 champ being included.

 

And four full weeks of meaningful games would dilute that how? I could argue that most bowl games are meaningless. And nearly the entire OOC schedule is meaningless. And half the teams in FBS start the season with no chance of winning a national championship because they are G5 and not P5. Talk about meaningless.

[kreed5120]

16 minutes ago, UAZipster0305 said:

 

And four full weeks of meaningful games would dilute that how? I could argue that most bowl games are meaningless. And nearly the entire OOC schedule is meaningless. And half the teams in FBS start the season with no chance of winning a national championship because they are G5 and not P5. Talk about meaningless.

I agree most bowl games are meaningless. What do you expect when you match a 7-5 team up against a 6-6 team? OOC means a lot in the current format. Weak OOC scheduling has hindered the B12 in getting teams in the playoffs in the past. The Oklahoma-OSU had huge playoff implications this year. It's why Oklahoma is in and OSU is out. Had the game swung the other way, the story would be flipped flopped. Under a 16 team playoff that game would be irrelevant because both teams would be locks at this stage. College basketball has a 68 playoff field and half the teams have no chance of winning a national championship. The reason being talent disparity. As I've said an 8 team playoff with 1 guaranteed G5 team is fine by me. Expanding anymore is overkill.

Edited November 30, 2017 by kreed5120

[UAZipster0305]

1 minute ago, kreed5120 said:

I agree most bowl games are meaningless. What do you expect when you match a 7-5 team up against a 6-6 team? OOC means a lot in the current format. Weak OOC scheduling has hindered the B12 in getting teams in the playoffs in the past. The Oklahoma-OSU had huge playoff implications this year. It's why Oklahoma is in and OSU is out. Had the game swung the other way, the story would be flipped flopped. Under a 16 team playoff that game would be irrelevant because both teams would be locks at this stage. College basketball has a 68 playoff field and half the teams have no chance of winning a national championship. The reason being talent disparity. As I've said an 8 team playoff with 1 guaranteed G5 team is fine by me. Expanding anymore is overkill.

 

I've made my points, and you've made yours. I agree to disagree.