1. The KillerFrogs

Was 2014 CFP Snub Pivotal Long Term?

Discussion in 'Scott & Wes Frog Fan Forum' started by Hoosierfrog, Dec 3, 2019 at 8:10 AM.

  1. How much would being in the first CFP have changed TCU’s recruiting, perception, etc?
    Just wondering how much of a profound affect that snub had on TCU’s trajectory...
     
  2. That team very easily could have won it all. Such a shame they didn't get an opportunity. The baylor loss that year forever haunts. If they somehow get it this year then the kick in the nuts will have been even harder knowing we had every chance to beat them this year.
     
  3. This will probably get a lot of hate and derision, but I see it as our last best chance. Same as our Rose Bowl year. I don't see us getting another shot until the system is changed once again. Maybe that's an expanded playoff system, but I just don't see us being at that level again anytime soon. I think we've blown our (Gary's) wad already.

    I seriously hope I'm wrong and will gladly eat crow if that's the case. Bring it on, feathers and all!
     
    Volare, berryfrog95, nwlafrog and 3 others like this.
  4. Even worse than the Baylor loss was Baylor acting like a bunch of little babies anytime we were ranked ahead of them. I think their behavior "poisoned the well" for the Big XII that year, leading the committee to leave us both out.
     
  5. B12 teams will always be at a disadvantage under this system due to the round robin, need to win twice championship path we’ve created. Don’t get me wrong, I LOVE our conference as it is and don’t want to expand, but until the playoffs include 8 instead of 4 we’ll always be at a disadvantage.
     
    OmniscienceFrog and CountryFrog like this.
  6. Hard to say. 3 of the 4 teams that made the first playoff already have new coaches (one of them was even fired), as do OU and Washington which made it subsequent years. That said, if we had won it all, which we very well might have, would GP still be here or would he have felt he accomplished everything he set out to accomplish?

    Not sure it would have had that big an impact on recruiting. We proved we could be among the elite and be in line for a shot. That's a far cry from recruiting at a place like SMU or UCF where they know their peak is a Fiesta / Peach Bowl bid.
     
  7. Logic and reason are not tolerated here. Change your tone and message, or risk being censured. You've been warned.
     
  8. #8 frog-hat, Dec 3, 2019 at 8:50 AM
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2019 at 9:29 AM
    We didn’t really lose to Baylor that year. We won time of possession. And if Mallett hadn’t scored so quickly on the 4th quarter pick 6, we could have given the defense some rest. That, and we got jobbed by the refs.
     
    HFrog12 and Big Frog II like this.
  9. I think the round robin and the top two teams playing each other is an advantage this year. It gives both teams a highly ranked opponent to beat which should put them in 4th place.
     
  10. Baylor was not allowed to lose a home game in their new stadium that year, as mandated by the league. The evidence was obvious.
     
    Volare, Froginbedford and BrewingFrog like this.
  11. This is true, but I don't think having a team in the CFP is the be-all, end-all for conferences. I'd much rather have the current round robin system in play EVERY YEAR and maybe forego having a CFP representative, say, one out of three or four years than the other way around. By and large, who makes the CFP is an individual team thing anyway. The ACC is garbage but since Clemson is so dominant they are in every year, and they'd be in every year even if the ACC played a round robin.

    By the way, the reason there's a decent chance the Big 12 won't have a representative this year is not so much because of the format, but because Baylor and Oklahoma played nobody in OOC and have won a few close games against very average teams and the teams (Georgia and Utah) ahead of them have better overall resumes. We're gonna end up with a one-loss champ which is about all you can ask for in terms of the CFP.

    The public narrative changes every year, but in the end it remains the same. Win games, don't lose more than one, and if you do lose one hope you've scheduled well enough in OOC and played well enough to have a better resume than any other one loss teams out there.
     
    TxFrog1999 likes this.
  12. We chose the wrong 15-minute stretch to melt down in. Lose any other game (except perhaps OU--we needed that win on the resume) and we'd have been in with the exact same record. Baylor may find themselves in the same position. They've been solid all year except for an awful half against OU. Even if they beat OU on Saturday I think they'll be passed over for 12-1 Utah. 12-1 Oklahoma wouldn't, because they're Oklahoma. That's the injustice--you get more credit for being the blue-bloods than for beating them, which of course the blue-bloods don't have to do: the Big XII is a whole lot easier for Oklahoma, because they don't ever have to play Oklahoma.
     
  13. Who did Utah play that was so great? They’ve played one ranked team and it’s #24USC
     
  14. Nobody really. Who have OU and Baylor played that's so great?

    Utah's is outscoring their opponents 427-135. OU is 532-296. Baylor is 434-221. There's your answer right there as to why Utah is ahead of them. Not that complicated.
     
    texpat-ute and Limey Frog like this.
  15. With you up until this point. I don't think Utah gets in over OU if OU wins out, for precisely the reason you mention that OU would have a better schedule. Utah would have 1 ranked win on their schedule (Oregon, if they beat them), OU would have 4, including two wins against Top 10 Baylor (again assuming OU wins). In this sense, the CCG rematch plays to the Big 12's advantage.
     
  16. I would bet you about anything that if Utah beats Oregon and OU beats Baylor this weekend that Utah is getting in over OU.
     
    texpat-ute likes this.
  17. You said OU and Baylor played nobody - and I countered that Utah has played nobody. And my mistake, Utah hasn’t beaten anyone ranked. They lost to the only ranked teamed they played. OU beat a top 10 team. I bet OU goes over Utah is they both win their conference.
     
  18. I don't think having played one ranked team overrides the fact that Utah has dominated their opponents much more handlly than OU has. And if OU beats Baylor again, you're right that will be two ranked teams they've played. The same one. Still think Utah is in if they win barring an OU blowout or Utah barely winning.

    Sometimes IMO people put too much stock on "ranked" teams. How much difference really is there between the #20 team and the #30 team. Or the #24 and #27 team? The bottom line is the schedule strengths are similar and Utah has beaten teams by an average of 27 ppg, which is significantly better than both OU and Baylor.
     
    texpat-ute likes this.
  19. Again, OU would have FOUR ranked wins, as both Iowa State and Okie State are both ranked as well.

    Meanwhile, they both lost to 8-4 teams by 7 on the road, so that's basically a wash.
     
    Casey8Ball likes this.
  20. If Utah wins the committee will put the team they feel is the best at #4, whether that be Utah, OU or (gag) Baylor. Best win/best loss/resume is all a bunch of window dressing.

    There’s also the interesting scenario of Georgia winning the SEC champ game, which almost guarantees the PAC and Big 12 are left out

    Overall I hope Utah gets in. scheiss Baylor and I don’t mind OU getting screwed
     
    texpat-ute likes this.

Share This Page