82 Frog Fever
Active Member
You must be joking. In 2014 we were ranked 3rd going into the last week; then we curb stomp Iowa St. by 50+ points the final week. ......and we fall to 6th????? That was a crapshow ranking.
4 team playoff was implemented to keep more teams out, not let more teams in
- Thread starter LVH
- Start date
You must be joking. In 2014 we were ranked 3rd going into the last week; then we curb stomp Iowa St. by 50+ points the final week. ......and we fall to 6th????? That was a crapshow ranking.
TxFrog1999
The Man Behind The Curtain
When someone else in the top 4 the week before the final ranking wins by 50+ and is dropped out of the top 4 final vote I'll believe the committee is consistent.
#NotHoldingMyBreath
#NotHoldingMyBreath
Why? Do you even know who they play next year? Why should this year have anything to do with next year?
Zubaz
Member
A major factor in UCF staying so low this year is where they started. Which was unranked. An undefeated team that just beat Auburn and returns a lot of their talent, including their QB, should start in the Top 10-15, as we did in both 2009 and 2010. Given that starting position, if they 27 straight games and they still say "you're not getting in", especially if 4 1-losss teams get in over them, then sorry just call them different divisions and be done with it.
If that doesn’t happen the same week a 1-loss conference champion wins their CCG by 50+ poInts you might be on to something. But that did happen.
Ok, but what happens in one year shouldn’t have any impact on what happens the next. And I don’t think it does. UCF needs to beat some really good teams in OOC if they expect a playoff bid.
Zubaz
Member
Of course it matters if the core of the team remains. See FSU in 2014, you don't think they were given a benefit of the doubt in no small part because they were coming off an undefeated NC year? No chance.
No, I thought they were given the benefit of the doubt because they beat Notre Dame and Florida in OOC and were the ONLY P5 undefeated team in the country.
TxFrog1999
The Man Behind The Curtain
If we were 4 you might have a point had we dropped a spot to 5, but to drop from being considered the 3rd best team in the country to the 6th your argument fails.
Spike
Full Member
Just curious how many butts in seats the 2 SEC teams brought. Also the differential in TV ratings.
Froggy Style
Active Member
The whole point is keeping a playoff to 4 teams is that ESPN/Wexyahoo's of the world can "argue" about why certain teams didn't get in. This is obviously preferable instead of having a true playoff that allows conferences to have representation. True sports fans understand sports aren't a beauty pageant (for all other major sports but college football).
Arguing about who you think was the best team means your system is broken. That's the point of the freaking playoff. There has never been one argument AFTER the season is over for baseball or basketball. You either won or you didn't and conference champions are part of the playoff.
The system has been set up in both the BCS and now the committee system to "pick" who they want. They tried with the polls, then computers, to slant the playing field with natural biases. When those couldn't keep everyone out, but didn't provide a true championship, people stopped watching, and yes, that's why they changed. They could have gone to a true playoff, but that would have allowed the TCU's or UCF's and equal shot rather than talking heads trying to influence others or committees having a weekly spin press conference.
No need to argue with Wexahu about scenarios. Anyone can argue any school in the top 10 could beat another team in the top 10. He's simply a tshirt fan of OSU that benefits from the system.
Arguing about who you think was the best team means your system is broken. That's the point of the freaking playoff. There has never been one argument AFTER the season is over for baseball or basketball. You either won or you didn't and conference champions are part of the playoff.
The system has been set up in both the BCS and now the committee system to "pick" who they want. They tried with the polls, then computers, to slant the playing field with natural biases. When those couldn't keep everyone out, but didn't provide a true championship, people stopped watching, and yes, that's why they changed. They could have gone to a true playoff, but that would have allowed the TCU's or UCF's and equal shot rather than talking heads trying to influence others or committees having a weekly spin press conference.
No need to argue with Wexahu about scenarios. Anyone can argue any school in the top 10 could beat another team in the top 10. He's simply a tshirt fan of OSU that benefits from the system.
I should have started at your last sentence and I would’ve ignored the rest. Besides, OSU has now missed the playoffs as both a conference champion and as a 1-loss team just like TCU did in 2014, in two separate years.
froginaustin
Active Member
I’m not sure I like a system where we have a 3 week post season with 120 teams sitting on couches watching 8 play.
I realize FCS essentially does that, but no one pays any more attention to FCS than fans do, to AA baseball.
I suppose the 120 could be playing bowl games during those 3 weeks, but would all bowls become minor bowls with the ESPiN grinding on the playoff games?
I realize FCS essentially does that, but no one pays any more attention to FCS than fans do, to AA baseball.
I suppose the 120 could be playing bowl games during those 3 weeks, but would all bowls become minor bowls with the ESPiN grinding on the playoff games?
Froggy Style
Active Member
Why wouldn't you continue with bowls with an expanded playoff, just as they do today?
Zubaz
Member
To be fair, the circumstances surrounding 2014 were so unique that they literally can't be duplicated anymore, specifically the situation surrounding the "true" Big 12 champion. While it's possible for there to be 5 P5 conference champs in contention, it's not possible for there to be six as there were in 2014, nor does the Big 12 have to deal with the fact that a shared title at 11-1 is not as good as good as an outright title at 12-1. That situation hasn't been rectified and therefore would be hard to get an apples-to-apples comparison. That's before you get in to strength of schedule arguments that did not work in TCUs factor.
The only real wildcard would be if Notre Dame gets in to contention, and if 11-1 Notre Dame could get picked over a 12-1 conference champ. I don't see that happening if the committee wants to stay consistent.
Hoosierfrog
Tier 1
Again, Wisconsin lost to Northwestern and lost their coach. I don’t think beating that team should have moved anyone up, especially someone that was already there. But that’s just me and most everyone on this board, in the media and outside of Ohio...
The Artist Formerly Known as PhormerPhrog
Full Member
Well, if you sum the scores OU had 12 and UGA only had 9. So there's that.
Zubaz
Member
1). Wisconsin did not lose their coach until after the game.
2). Arguing that a big win over a ranked team to win a conference title shouldn't count, but a win over one of the worst teams in college football that year to split a conference title should is a bit contradictory.
Ok, but I’ll just say there is no scenario, no matter what happens with any other teams or conferences, in which we go 12-1, undefeated in the Big 12, and win the B12 CCG in completely dominating fashion.....don’t make the playoffs, and we aren’t saying it wasn’t a total screw job and that everyone is out to get TCU. And that’s basically what we’re saying should have happened to OSU.
Latest posts
-
-
On3: TCU QB Grant Tisdale enters NCAA transfer portal
- Latest: FrogPreacher
-
-
-
