We better not get screwed out of the Texas Bowl

[Pharm Frog]

Which is why it’s so important to beat those middle of the road teams come Bowl time

Means nothing

 

[Dr. Rumack]

You have to ask the question though....which teams ranked below those SEC teams should be ranked ahead of them. Look at their total resumes and let me know.

#11 Washington - has lost to three unranked teams (Cal, Oregon, and 10th place SEC team Auburn)
#12 - Penn State - I don't even think I need to argue this, everyone here seems to think they suck
#13 - Washington State - played absolutely nobody in OOC, lost to 5-7 USC and to #11 Washington at home by a couple TDs
#14 - Texas - lost to Maryland and 5-7 Okie State, barely beat a big group of other bad teams.
#15 - Kentucky - SEC team
#16 - West Virginia - lost to Iowa State by a couple TDs, lost to 5-7 Okie State

That's 11-16. So if those SEC teams don't deserve to be in the Top 10, which of the next teams do?

Not that it dramatically changes anything but Okie State is 6-6 with 3 very close losses

 

[Wexahu]

Not that it dramatically changes anything but Okie State is 6-6 with 3 very close losses

My bad, but yep, that doesn't really change things. Still waiting for someone who complains about those teams that are in the Top 10 to tell me who should be instead of them.

 

[Eight]

Both could happen Saturday night.



You learn from history to avoid bad outcomes that might happen.

Let’s look at 2009. The champions from the Big 12 and SEC (unbeaten UT and Bama) get in on their own merits. Three other P5 champs would be getting in with two losses and pushing one of four deserving teams out.

Should we potentially exclude one of the following so that a two loss Ohio State gets in? What about having two loss Oregon automatically advance while the unbeaten Boise team who beat them is left out? How about the average GT team that won the ACC with two losses.

I have zero reason to beleive they wouldn’t bs the eye test to keep UF in and screw one of three unbeatens.

Unbeaten TCU
Unbeaten Cincinnati
Unbeaten Boise
One Loss UF

With five slots automatically spoken for they’d only take three.

If you did loose criteria favoring league champs from the P5 and G5 unbeatens you’d get Bama, Texas, Cincinnati, TCU, Florida, Boise, Oregon, and Ohio state. GT would be the odd one out.

i could get hit by a bus today so i better not get out of bed

jesus we are in a day and age where we are in so constant fear of what MIGHT HAPPEN that we forget to actually enjoy life

 

[Dr. Rumack]

i could get hit by a bus today so i better not get out of bed

jesus we are in a day and age where we are in so constant fear of what MIGHT HAPPEN that we forget to actually enjoy life

So you’re ok with unbeaten 2009 TCU getting left out of an eight team playoff so two loss teams can get in? Good to know

 

[Dogfrog]

So far through 4 years I've been right 100% in knowing who the teams were going to be on Sunday morning before the selection show. The parameters are pretty clear for anyone that doesn't just want to complain about [ steaming pile of Orgeron ] just because you don't get your way. Not saying it doesn't have flaws, no system is 100% perfect, but a flawed system that doesn't work is one where we'd have, say, Ohio State, Alabama, Florida and Washington in the Top 4 right now. But they aren't, the teams in the Top 4 are about as close to exactly where they should be as you can get. If OU wants to complain about being #5, sorry, don't lose to Texas and don't have a sieve of a defense. If OSU wants to complain about being #6, sorry, don't get your ass kicked by Purdue. If Michigan wants to complain about being #7, sorry, don't get your ass kicked by Ohio State in your CCG. If UCF wants to complain about being #8, sorry, schedule someone with a pulse in OOC.

Can we at least let the games play out and see who the teams are before calling BS on everything?

Who cares about your predictions? Your thought processes are as flawed as the committee’s. Because you seem to be highly motivated to defend / justify their flaws. What most people want is a system that allows teams to play their way in with a consistent system. Most fans don’t care about the TV ratings, or creating fake controversy, nor are they invested in the bloviating committee / network cluster scheiss.

 

[Eight]

So you’re ok with unbeaten 2009 TCU getting left out of an eight team playoff so two loss teams can get in? Good to know

if you keep living life in fear and looking backwards you usually miss what is in front of you.

i do not want a system built on avoiding one time situations. doesn't work in government, general life, or college football at this level.

what does work at every level it is used in college football is a true play off system and if the sport is so damn good it doesn't need fake drama.

finally, the rose bowl team under a system that takes the conference champs and the next 3 at large teams would have had a better chance playing for the title in 2009, and a similar mwc team today.

 

[Dr. Rumack]

if you keep living life in fear and looking backwards you usually miss what is in front of you.

i do not want a system built on avoiding one time situations. doesn't work in government, general life, or college football at this level.

what does work at every level it is used in college football is a true play off system and if the sport is so damn good it doesn't need fake drama.

So “win it on the field” can potentially exclude teams that haven’t lost? Stupid to see a problem coming and not address it.

finally, the rose bowl team under a system that takes the conference champs and the next 3 at large teams would have had a better chance playing for the title in 2009, and a similar mwc team today.

Rose Bowl team was 2010.

Fiesta was 09.

Fiesta team may have been left out in your model despite winning all its games.

 

[Wexahu]

Who cares about your predictions? Your thought processes are as flawed as the committee’s. Because you seem to be highly motivated to defend / justify their flaws. What most people want is a system that allows teams to play their way in with a consistent system. Most fans don’t care about the TV ratings, or creating fake controversy, nor are they invested in the bloviating committee / network cluster scheiss.

I think you're pretty wrong about that. I think the current system has created a TON of interest and talk, just take a look at any fan of a contending team's message board, and even those of non-contending teams. Maybe most fans don't "like" it, but they definitely care about it.

 

[Eight]

So “win it on the field” can potentially exclude teams that haven’t lost? Stupid to see a problem coming and not address it.



Rose Bowl team was 2010.

Fiesta was 09.

Fiesta team may have been left out in your model despite winning all its games.

so only answer for you is the mike leach model

 

[Dr. Rumack]

so only answer for you is the mike leach model

No, cap it at 8 but don’t give 4 and 5 loss teams a pass in

Loosely the same criteria as now but protect G5 unbeatens. Solves virtually every year of the last 30

 

[Dogfrog]

I think you're pretty wrong about that. I think the current system has created a TON of interest and talk, just take a look at any fan of a contending team's message board, and even those of non-contending teams. Maybe most fans don't "like" it, but they definitely care about it.

Correct. They don’t like it. And they care enough to want it changed.

 

[Eight]

No, cap it at 8 but don’t give 4 and 5 loss teams a pass in

Loosely the same criteria as now but protect G5 unbeatens. Solves virtually every year of the last 30

no because now you get into the argument of which is better.

an undefeated team with a weak schedule or a 1-loss p5 team facing a much more difficult schedule.

the more complicated the process the more mistakes.

you are worried about the exception and i just want a simple rule

 

[LSU Game Attendee]

please tell me when a 4-loss northwestern and a 5-loss pit won their conference championship game?

i hate when people say we shouldn't do things because what might happen?

seriously are there a bunch of underwriters on this site?

if you give auto bids there is no reason for a conference championship game unless you have put together a conference so freaking large you actually don't play a full schedule.

Yep. 4 or 5 loss [ Finebaum ] teams entering an eight team tourney would be on their respective conferences. Conferences could potentially suffer the consequences of playing a minimum number of intra-conference games to fluff their winning percentages and rankings.

 

[Dr. Rumack]

no because now you get into the argument of which is better.

an undefeated team with a weak schedule or a 1-loss p5 team facing a much more difficult schedule.

the more complicated the process the more mistakes.

you are worried about the exception and i just want a simple rule

A one loss champ is in under every circumstance I’ve looked at in the last 30 seasons.

A one loss P5 runner up would be excluded rarely. 2008 Tech is the only one that comes to mind with 4 P5 champs (OU, UF, USC, PSU) and 2 G5 unbeatens (Utes and Boise) with three one loss runner ups for two spots. Texas and Bama go, Tech who got blown out doesn't.

Maybe 2007 KU who didn't play a top 80 SOS and didn’t even win its division.

 

[Eight]

A one loss champ is in under every circumstance I’ve looked at in the last 30 seasons.

A one loss P5 runner up would be excluded rarely. 2008 Tech is the only one that comes to mind with 4 P5 champs (OU, UF, USC, PSU) and 2 G5 unbeatens (Utes and Boise) with three one loss runner ups for two spots. Texas and Bama go, Tech who got blown out doesn't.

Maybe 2007 KU who didn't play a top 80 SOS and didn’t even win its division.

i truly am lost at what you are arguing for or against at this point in this rube goldberg menagerie of dates, facts, and opinions.

simply for me i am not worried about what might happen, i am not worried about correcting the wrongs of the past.

i don't like the current system due to the fake hype and the the fact it does diminish the season for p5 conferences regardless of the the argument to the contrary.

 

[Dogfrog]

A one loss champ is in under every circumstance I’ve looked at in the last 30 seasons.

A one loss P5 runner up would be excluded rarely. 2008 Tech is the only one that comes to mind with 4 P5 champs (OU, UF, USC, PSU) and 2 G5 unbeatens (Utes and Boise) with three one loss runner ups for two spots. Texas and Bama go, Tech who got blown out doesn't.

Maybe 2007 KU who didn't play a top 80 SOS and didn’t even win its division.

Allow the participants to qualify on the field regardless their record. ESPN, the CFP over in Irving and their acolytes would hate it but it would restore integrity to the process and most fans would be jubilant.

 

[Dr. Rumack]

i truly am lost at what you are arguing for or against at this point in this rube goldberg menagerie of dates, facts, and opinions.

simply for me i am not worried about what might happen, i am not worried about correcting the wrongs of the past.

i don't like the current system due to the fake hype and the the fact it does diminish the season for p5 conferences regardless of the the argument to the contrary.

I have two points-

1- If you win all your games you deserve a shot
2- Loose preference for a P5 champ works usually like an autobid but doesn’t tie up spots when a sub-par champ emerges like the ACC and B1G could surprise us with should upsets happen Saturday.

Ends up with the best 8 while still placing some value on titles and unbeaten seasons.

 

[Eight]

I have two points-

1- If you win all your games you deserve a shot
2- Loose preference for a P5 champ works usually like an autobid but doesn’t tie up spots when a sub-par champ emerges like the ACC and B1G could surprise us with should upsets happen Saturday.

Ends up with the best 8 while still placing some value on titles and unbeaten seasons.

why do you keep worrying about what MIGHT and COULD happen when there is no history of it being a recurrent problem.

as far as #1 who you play matters and ucf has basically played no one this year other than wait for it ........a pitt team you say don't belong anywhere near the play off's and cincinnait

 

[Wexahu]

You contradicted yourself. Face it. Bama, Clem and ND are in. That leaves either tOSU or OU. I believe your latter statement. Big 10 will not be left out. tOSU will make it again.

If OU beats Texas handily there is ZERO percent chance OSU passes them. They can't. OSU plays an inferior opponent, they aren't going to jump OU after OU beats a better team. And spare me the comparisons to 2014 because these situations aren't comparable no matter how much people try to force them to be.

The only way OU doesn't stay ahead of OSU is if they play a really close game with UT and OSU blows out NW. For the 100th time, if the committee was hell bent on keeping the Big 10 in, they'd have ranked OSU ahead of OU this week.