|
Replies: 37
| visibility 1
|
All-Pro [694]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 388
Joined: 6/8/00
|
The CFP has the right idea but the wrong philosophy.
Jan 4, 2018, 3:29 PM
|
|
IMO I think the Committee’s stated charter is wrong. They keep saying that they are trying to get the 4 best teams in the playoff, but I think this the wrong criteria. Their goal should be to select 4 teams that will result in a consensus champion. Meaning that if any of the 4 teams win out there should be a clear consensus from the masses as to that team being the National Champion. If putting a team in has the possibility of creating a controversial champion then that team should be left out.
My opinion is that any late season losses by a potential final-4 team should be considered the same as a as playoff loss. Not doing this creates a double standard. If you lose in the playoff you’re out! But if you lose right before the playoff the loss can be reconciled and you get another chance. I realize season losses have to be factored in, but if the loss is to one of the other playoff contenders, then it should be treated the same as the playoff (didn’t Auburn get left out partly because they lost to Georgia). The idea that Bama was let in because they might be better than Auburn should have been overruled by the fact that they lost to Auburn in their last game of the season, Auburn got left out, and there was no real controversy over the SEC champion. So Bama had no business being in the playoff!! The logic used by the committee to put Bama in is inconsistent with the desired playoff result in that, if their logic was extended into the playoff, our loss and Oklahoma’s loss, doesn’t really mean Bama and Georgia were the better teams. (and if Bama wins it all it doesn’t mean some other team could not have done the same thing if they had been allowed the chance; Penn St, Ohio St and Wisconsin all come to mind).
When the committee selected Alabama this year they did not consider the current controversy that should have been logically foreseen (creating a logical 3-way tie). That is; if Alabama wins the playoff, we’re left with a team (Bama) that beat the team (Georgia) that loss to the team (Auburn) that also beat Alabama ( who did not even win their own conference and played one less game). So this leaves us with the situation where Alabama beat Georgia, Georgia beat Auburn, and Auburn beat Alabama in the last three games these teams played each other+. So how can there be a consensus that Alabama is the best team this year. Logic would say that Auburn is the best of the 3 because they beat both Bama and Georgia.
So all I’m saying is that the committee should have a 2-part charter. First, determine who are the best teams, and second, select 4 teams where whoever wins it will create a consensus champion. This criteria should mostly eliminate selecting 2 teams from the same conference, but would still allow a multiple loss Conference champion to be left out in favor of a better team from the same conference.
In conclusion, I think If Georgia wins there can be a consensus that they are the National Champs, even though the deck was stacked in the SEC’s favor (How did one of the weakest conferences this year end up with 3 teams ranked in the top 6, and two of them put in the playoff???). However, if Bama wins logic can only support that they are in a three way tie with Georgia and Auburn. In this case, I am in support of UCF being the National Champion since they are undefeated, they were not given the chance to play in the playoff, and they beat the team that beat both playoff contenders.
P.S. The committee could have at least put Bama and Georgia in the same bracket to simulate a six team playoff.
|
|
|
|
 |
Orange Blooded [2033]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4010
Joined: 6/29/01
|
lol...wait until next year
Jan 4, 2018, 3:34 PM
|
|
when an undefeated Alabama and Georgia meet for the SEC championship game and they both get into the final 4... again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8681]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8888
Joined: 10/19/11
|
Re: lol...wait until next year
Jan 4, 2018, 3:37 PM
|
|
UGA's schedule gets expopentially harder with Mullen at UF and Pruitt at UT. Those coaching changes combined with losing an insane amount of seniors will result in multiple losses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83625]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63724
Joined: 12/31/06
|
yep...this year's team is loaded with seniors
Jan 4, 2018, 3:38 PM
|
|
31 I think
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10824]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13439
Joined: 10/13/14
|
Re: yep...this year's team is loaded with seniors
Jan 4, 2018, 5:40 PM
|
|
Woh! The Doggies are losing 40% of their team.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [23112]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 19812
Joined: 1/15/11
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [767]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 2217
Joined: 8/3/04
|
Re: LSU & Auburn
Jan 4, 2018, 4:57 PM
|
|
Crazy that UGA plays both of these teams and USuCk doesn't get either one, or Bama.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6692]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11164
Joined: 10/14/07
|
I don't think Mullen and Pruitt are going to be able to put
Jan 4, 2018, 4:30 PM
[ in reply to Re: lol...wait until next year ] |
|
out those dumpster fires that quickly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8049]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6808
Joined: 10/16/09
|
Re: lol...wait until next year
Jan 4, 2018, 4:49 PM
[ in reply to Re: lol...wait until next year ] |
|
but you didnt say anything about USuCk. Nevermind, your right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Cub [13]
TigerPulse: 61%
Posts: 89
Joined: 6/6/10
|
Re: The CFP has the right idea but the wrong philosophy.
Jan 4, 2018, 4:08 PM
|
|
That makes too much #### sense!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17773]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16662
Joined: 9/1/12
|
Expand the playoff to eight.
Jan 4, 2018, 4:09 PM
|
|
Expand to eight. That will eliminate 99.72546% of the consensus issue you mention.
Of course folks will say that makes it too watered down. And to them I say that we will have to agree to disagree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1124]
TigerPulse: 80%
Posts: 1232
Joined: 9/24/01
|
Re: Expand the playoff to eight.
Jan 4, 2018, 4:48 PM
|
|
As a Mississippi State fan told me today, they play a “brutal” SEC schedule every week. They know nothing other that what Dumbo Finebaum and the other SEC chanters tell them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3244]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 2982
Joined: 8/26/99
|
Re: Expand the playoff to eight.
Jan 4, 2018, 4:50 PM
[ in reply to Expand the playoff to eight. ] |
|
If 68 teams is not perceived to be watered down, then how in the world could 8 be percieved that way?
I vote for 8 playoff spots...
5 for P5 champs.
1 for highest ranked G5 team.
2 at large selections by the committee.
A side effect of this...it doesn't technically force Notre Dame into conference membership, but it would serve to make them SERIOUSLY consider it, seeing as they would be fighting for one of only 2 at-large berths.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6692]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11164
Joined: 10/14/07
|
Re: Expand the playoff to eight.
Jan 4, 2018, 4:55 PM
|
|
Maybe because there are 300+ D1 college basketball schools and 64 Power 5 conference teams?
Honestly there is just no reason for 8 teams to get in, at most I would say 6 teams could be a possibility with the 1 and 2 seeds getting a bye, but 8 is just too much to make those teams play 3 extra games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3244]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 2982
Joined: 8/26/99
|
$$$$$$$ talks...
Jan 4, 2018, 5:00 PM
|
|
...and 4 more playoff games would bring in a sh*t ton of money. Besides, 8 teams would only add 1 week of games to what we already have, and that would be great for the fans who hate waiting a month for more football. They would only have to wait 3 weeks instead of 4.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6692]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11164
Joined: 10/14/07
|
$$$$$ does talk, but how much $$$$$ are fans able to spend
Jan 4, 2018, 5:04 PM
|
|
on 3 separate playoff games?
I would imagine the cost of the trip to New Orleans was at minimum $1,500. Then say we played in Dallas, bit far to drive so you require a plane ticket which makes that more expensive. Then say, like next year, the championship game is in San Francisco.
See how that can add up to probably close to $10,000 in the matter of 3 weeks?
Money talks and they make plenty of money now as it is, hell, they made a ton of money when we had the BCS and it took them forever to implement the 4 team playoff.
Lastly, there have been exactly 2 close (single digit) semi-final games out of the 8 that have been played. What makes you think we need to expand to 8 teams and have more of the same?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3244]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 2982
Joined: 8/26/99
|
Make the first round of CFP home games for the higher seeds.
Jan 4, 2018, 5:09 PM
|
|
Travel problem solved (at least for half the fans of each first round game).
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6692]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11164
Joined: 10/14/07
|
Re: Make the first round of CFP home games for the higher seeds.
Jan 4, 2018, 5:10 PM
|
|
Then venues are losing out on money, you're also still increasing travel for the teams/band/etc. for an additional week during the holidays.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3244]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 2982
Joined: 8/26/99
|
It would be no different than a 13th regular season game...
Jan 4, 2018, 5:21 PM
|
|
...as far as logistics go. Seems to have worked out just fine for a long time in the FCS.
Besides, you'd be hard pressed to find many people who would ever turn down an 8th chance to watch a game in the Valley.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6692]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11164
Joined: 10/14/07
|
Good for the FCS, I'm glad they have a structure that works
Jan 4, 2018, 5:42 PM
|
|
for them, even though they don't have bowl games and the revenue that those bring in they do just fine.
As far as logistics go it isn't about the home teams, as I stated. You're taking revenue away from the venues for the semi-finals, and finals by forcing fans to travel (if away) as well as the home fans having to purchase another $150+ ticket x however many they take and most still have to travel.
And it would certainly be different from a 13th regular season game, because that game would be against Directional State University not Ohio State, Wisconsin, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3244]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 2982
Joined: 8/26/99
|
Re: Good for the FCS, I'm glad they have a structure that works
Jan 4, 2018, 6:05 PM
|
|
All I know is I have seen completely sold out stadiums in every CFP game Clemson has played, and I’ve been to them all. If you add a week to the playoff schedule, I promise you those stadiums will be completely sold out too.
How do you know when the playoff has been watered down? When fans stop traveling to the games. I assure you… That will not happen with eight playoff teams.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3244]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 2982
Joined: 8/26/99
|
Also....
Jan 4, 2018, 5:06 PM
[ in reply to Re: Expand the playoff to eight. ] |
|
Your percentage argument compared to basketball holds no water.
68 NCAA tournament teams out of 337 D1 basketball teams = 20.2%
8 CFP teams out of 120 FBS teams = 6.7%
If 68 teams don't water down March Madness, then I think the CFP can handle 8 just fine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6692]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11164
Joined: 10/14/07
|
Re: Also....
Jan 4, 2018, 5:08 PM
|
|
You're also comparing two separate sports so your argument holds no water.
Also, I see you've included the Group of 5 schools, for your argument to hold water you would need to remove those and use the 64 Power 5 schools, because no Group of 5 team will make a 4 team playoff. Even then, you're still comparing two completely different sports with different costs/travel/time needed between games so it only would hold a slight amount of water.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3244]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 2982
Joined: 8/26/99
|
You have to include the Group of 5.
Jan 4, 2018, 5:15 PM
|
|
Think about how much fans LOVE it when a mid-major team knocks off a giant in the big dance, or the rare occasion when one makes the Final Four (George Mason, VCU recently). You don't think fans would act the same way if a Group of 5 team made it to the CFP semifinals???
And don't dare say they woudn't be able to compete. If you don't think UCF would have held their own in a CFP semifinal this year, you're crazy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6692]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11164
Joined: 10/14/07
|
Re: You have to include the Group of 5.
Jan 4, 2018, 5:19 PM
|
|
I'll say it, UCF would not have held their own against us, Oklahoma, Georgia, Alabama, or Ohio State.
If you think because they beat an Auburn team that was worn down and honestly were over rated due to winning two high profile home games means they should be included in the top 4 then you are entitled to that opinion. However, I do not agree with it.
To add to that, you again are comparing two completely different sports when you are talking about upsets. You cannot compare football and basketball with regards to any aspect of the game due to the physical toll it takes on the players and the financial toll it takes on the fans.
Message was edited by: tiggerz04®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3244]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 2982
Joined: 8/26/99
|
Like I said, you're crazy.***
Jan 4, 2018, 5:22 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6692]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11164
Joined: 10/14/07
|
Like I said, you have your opinion and you're entitled
Jan 4, 2018, 5:24 PM
|
|
to be wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3244]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 2982
Joined: 8/26/99
|
Re: Like I said, you have your opinion and you're entitled
Jan 4, 2018, 5:29 PM
|
|
When you have 5 conference champions and only 4 spots available to compete for the Natty, you have a major problem before you even get started. The playoff must expand, and 8 is the perfect sample size to find a truly deserving champion WITHOUT watering down the product.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6692]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11164
Joined: 10/14/07
|
Re: Like I said, you have your opinion and you're entitled
Jan 4, 2018, 5:38 PM
|
|
First, the past two years only 3 conference champions have made it and being a conference champion is not a requirement (though I am in agreement it should factor in).
When this is the first time that the #3 seed has made it and the second that the #4 seed has made it I think that's a pretty clear indication that there hasn't been a major problem.
Again, when you've had 6/8 semi-final games be blowouts why would you want to put in more teams to get blown out? That just doesn't make sense and effectively will water it down.
Why is 8 the perfect sample size? Based on your percentage argument that was only just above 6% of teams, right?
If you expand it to 8 then you can go ahead and pencil in Bama, Georgia, and the second place SEC West team every year, no G5 team will get in (note that UCF was ranked 10th so even at 8 teams they wouldn't have been in), and you're again adding in another high priced game that will eventually burn fans out.
It isn't plausible to keep the current structure and add one more game to the schedule, I'm sorry, it's just not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3244]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 2982
Joined: 8/26/99
|
Money is the driver of the CFP.
Jan 4, 2018, 5:44 PM
|
|
For that reason alone (forget about all of the other perfectly legitimate reasons I've given to expand the playoff), the CFP will expand to 8 sooner rather than later. Just too much money to be made by teams, conferences, venues, and TV networks.
Mark it down. It's going to happen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6692]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11164
Joined: 10/14/07
|
If money is the driver then why did it take so long to
Jan 4, 2018, 5:52 PM
|
|
implement it? You act like it's a few people just sitting in a room that have to say "Screw it, expand to 8 and lets make money!"
There is also the factor of the contract regarding the CFP that is signed for 4 teams for 8 more years. Sure, they could re-up and change things, but that involves paying more money for it which ESPN appears to be short on at the moment.
You also have to get approval from the conferences, and why would they want to expand the playoff and increase their travel budget even more? You may say to cut out the conference championship games, however, conferences retain 100% of that money and don't have to split it with another team as in a playoff scenario.
You've also changed the aspect of this discussion regarding whether there should be 8 teams to there will be 8 teams, in which I agree will happen eventually although I don't agree with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3244]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 2982
Joined: 8/26/99
|
Re: If money is the driver then why did it take so long to
Jan 4, 2018, 6:13 PM
|
|
Using your argument, why even compete for national championships at all? Why not just compete for conference championships, conferences keep the money, and everyone go home happy? That way you don’t have to worry about travel budgets at all! And fans don’t have to spend a dime. Everyone is richer, and they have more time for the important things in life. Everyone is so much happier right? SMH.
And why did it take so long for college football to implement the playoff system? Because people are stubborn and they fear change. It’s that simple.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2156]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2077
Joined: 8/24/15
|
Re: The CFP has the right idea but the wrong philosophy.
Jan 4, 2018, 5:23 PM
|
|
“Bama has no business being in the playoff”... I disagree. They beat us, the #1 team in the country. Honestly, it would’ve been a shame if they were left out. They were better than us, and maybe if we played again the result might be different, but they came to play and they have just as many losses than the other playoff teams.
It might not be the popular opinion, but even if Bama didn’t “deserve” to be there based on their performance during the regular season, they deserve to be playing for the cfp championship based on their performance in the sugar bowl. They are physical and fast.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6692]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11164
Joined: 10/14/07
|
Re: The CFP has the right idea but the wrong philosophy.
Jan 4, 2018, 5:24 PM
|
|
The issue is, if they didn't deserve to be there based on their resume in the regular season then they can't now deserve to be there based on the fact they were able to get healthy.
That would be discrediting teams that did earn it in the regular season.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3981]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 5094
Joined: 8/23/16
|
Re: The CFP has the right idea but the wrong philosophy.
Jan 4, 2018, 5:24 PM
|
|
Finding 4 best teams is flawed you will never know who is the 4 best. You can only base it off of 4 most deserving resumes
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1806]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1888
Joined: 1/31/12
|
When Bama beats UGA and wins it all... tell me how did the
Jan 4, 2018, 5:48 PM
|
|
committee get it wrong by putting one of the (best) four teams in the initial playoff that ended up running the gauntlet to be declared the (best) team. It sounds like your post is complaining with the current playoff structure because Bama got in and beat us. They clearly were the better team when we lined up last Monday and there really is no disputing that. Ohio State's loss to Iowa was embarrassing and stacked on top of the embarrassing OU loss early, they never really were considered a factor in the playoff race until they won their division. Wisconsin had no ability to throw the ball in the BIG10 title game and are benefitting from a soft BIG10 west slate and a weak OOC schedule. Penn St. is the only team that you could make a case for being left out, but they had 2 losses compared to just 1 for Bama.
It really wasn't very complicated letting Bama in... they were the better team to the committee. They lined up and whooped us, indicating that they must be pretty good.
I'm all for celebrating UCF and its undefeated schedule, but they played 11 regular season games (minus GT due to the hurricane) against mostly inferior talent. At best, UCF had 2 marginal wins with Memphis in the American champ. and South Florida in the final week of the regular season. UCF had 1 quality win against AU in the bowl game. No dispute that was a great win and a huge accomplishment for the program... But it's kind of comparable to Boise State back when they beat Oklahoma... that was the only game they played all year. They can claim a title all they want, but I'll go to my grave in saying UCF didn't belong in the playoff to be considered as one of the nation's "four best teams."
They got a nod from the committee as the highest ranked group of 5 team and were able to play in a New Years' six bowl game... good for them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6692]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11164
Joined: 10/14/07
|
Re: When Bama beats UGA and wins it all... tell me how did the
Jan 4, 2018, 6:00 PM
|
|
Maybe you don't understand that the results in the said playoff game cannot be used as reasoning for the team to be in the playoff.
Yes, Bama beat us, I've moved on. That being said you can't tell me they were one of the 4 best teams prior to being in the playoff based on the fact that they beat no one and were curb stomped in their biggest game of the year right before the conference championship.
Yeah, Ohio State lost to Iowa, big deal. They also beat Penn State (a team you mentioned you could make a case for) and Wisconsin, who you said benefited from a weak schedule (like Bama?) but still beat the ACC runner up's in Miami.
Then, remember that Hocutt stated before the conference championship games that teams 4-7 were "razor thin." After those statements Ohio State played another game against one of those teams and won, while Alabama sat home, rested, and prepared. After the conference championships Hocutt stated that Bama was "unequivocally" better than 5-7, but how can that be if it was "razor thin" and they were the only team that didn't play?
Just saying, hind sight is 20/20 in all cases, including this one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3244]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 2982
Joined: 8/26/99
|
Re: When Bama beats UGA and wins it all... tell me how did the
Jan 4, 2018, 6:23 PM
|
|
Solution: expand the playoffs.
All conference champions compete in playoffs. Guesswork...gone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 37
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
