National Champion in college football should go to a team that wins during the regular season. Allowing a 3 loss Alabama team a chance to win reduces the playoff to just a holiday tournament
College Football Playoff Diminished by Allowing a 3 Loss Team
- Thread starter Iowa Hog
- Start date
ditto.
I have known since before Day 1 that this is a bastardized system. it is ending up just like Baseball, the NFL, etc. sooner or later you are going to get a "champion" with very very dubious credentials, and the whole thing is going to be exposed as the joke that it is.
there are still we purists around, even if the system is far from pure. It should be the top four teams, every year, to avoid the illegetimate "champions."
so only the teams with the easiest schedules should get in?
If you are going to base it off record then there should be flex scheduling to ensure the playoff contenders in 18 team leagues have to play the other play other playoff contenders.
If you are going to base it off record then there should be flex scheduling to ensure the playoff contenders in 18 team leagues have to play the other play other playoff contenders.
Unfotunately true says this "bring back the old days" "which isn't going to happen Hawk fan.
If they are going to use rankings to get the final 7 teams or so picked for this tourney they need to show people what metrics they are using.
Pts for winning on the road, progressive pts for defeating teams with top 25 offensive or defensive rankings at the end of the year, etc etc., point differential against common opponents
I know Alabama was 3-1 against top 25 teams while Miami was 0-2. But which teams are these? Definitely Bama withstood that late comeback by Georgia when Georgia was highly ranked, maybe number 1, but we know Georgia is not as strong this year.
Miami lost to two pretty good teams on the road late in the year but Miami's only good win is the Florida win.
But they need to find usable metrics, publish what they are, and let everyone see the process.
College football fans - "The 12 best teams need to be in the CFP"
Also college football fans - "The program that has dominated college football for the past 15 years, which is ranked 4th in Power Index, 9th in Massey composite, 10th in Strength of Record, and 11th in Committee/AP/Coaches, shouldn't be in the CFP"
Also college football fans - "The program that has dominated college football for the past 15 years, which is ranked 4th in Power Index, 9th in Massey composite, 10th in Strength of Record, and 11th in Committee/AP/Coaches, shouldn't be in the CFP"
Western Kentucky
South Florida
Vanderbilt
Mercer
Oklahoma 6-6
oh yea Wisconsin
Killer schedule.
Last edited:
No. This is simple minded and irrational in the era of super conferences and unbalanced schedules. IU has a worse resume than all of those 3 loss teams. You can’t rely on a fraudulent record and schedule when other teams might have a couple more losses but much better and more quality wins.
IU avoided playing all the other top 6 teams in the Big 10 this year except OSU. Who dominated them. Look at the resumes.
IU avoided playing all the other top 6 teams in the Big 10 this year except OSU. Who dominated them. Look at the resumes.
Beat #5 Georgia, Beat #14 South Carolina, beat #19 Missouri and also won @Wisconsin and @LSU
This is not sane.
Iowa may have been the best team ISU played this year, and they went 10-2. That should get in over Alabama?
Get out of here.
Iowa may have been the best team ISU played this year, and they went 10-2. That should get in over Alabama?
Get out of here.
Yes, because conference championships should matter. Plus, they won't be getting in over Alabama. Bama will be an 11 seed, Big 12 champion a 12 seed.
Agree with your overall sentiment, but the bolded part should play no part in the decision making.
Yes, but that has absolutely nothing to do the point.
The OP is suggesting a team like ISU should get an at large bid over a team like Alabama.
3 loss SEC team > 2 loss Big12 team > 1 loss AAC team
I've been saying this the last several weeks when people were praising Cignetti as the next big thing. Lets see how he does over a 3 or 4 year span playing all the top teams and in recruiting before we get too carried away. Indiana better hope they don't get burnt like MSU did with Tucker, one good year with half the team were transfers, and then crash and burn.
I don’t disagree, but remember that Tucker had other ‘phone’ issues as well….😉
Which became MSU saving grace and allowed them to recover from that horrible decision to sign him to a 90 million$ contract....
No Iowa was not the best team on Clones schedule ... flip schedules and Hawks struggle to score enough and that soft weak D wasn't stopping any team with talent on O in any league
See Sparty and crappy UCLA, plenty of those types in Big 12
NFL does it year after year after year. It's all about the $$$$$$$$$$$$ if you ain't figured it out.
Iowa would run the table in the Big MAC I mean the Big12.
Also have to remember most of the top 12 teams started there, so they just shuffled around the top rankings with wins and losses, SOS should take into account that GA placed Mercer 2nd to last game. they need to make it a rule that after the 2nd week, all games must be played against P4 teams.
Fans will argue about who's in and who's out no matter how many teams are included. 68 teams in CBB and it's still a source of controversy.
Personally I have always thought conference champions should get it. So, I'm happy about the change. So once ISU or ASU gets in you've got some contenders for the last spot.
Alabama 9-3
Miss 9-3
Miami 10-2
So Carolina 9-3
BYU 10-2
All teams with flaws, which was going to happen when you go to 12 teams.
So who should get in?
Personally I have always thought conference champions should get it. So, I'm happy about the change. So once ISU or ASU gets in you've got some contenders for the last spot.
Alabama 9-3
Miss 9-3
Miami 10-2
So Carolina 9-3
BYU 10-2
All teams with flaws, which was going to happen when you go to 12 teams.
So who should get in?
So much wrong here. The first CFP rankings didn’t come out until Nov 5th (week 10) after 2/3 of the season had played out, so it’s not like pre season rankings had anything to do with CFP rankings.
UGa didn’t play Mercer this season and secondly, had they did, it would account for playing them the second to last game of the year. Why wouldn’t it? Speaking of UGa, they played the 10th ranked SOS this year. It was Alabama (14th ranked SOS) that played Mercer, which is ranked higher than: Purdue, all three of IU’s non conference opponents, North Dakota who Iowa State played, and several other Non Conference opponents of those in the CFP.
Last edited:
Except the metrics will change every year to justify putting certain teams in.
expanding it to 12 teams already did that. I put Alabama, Miami, ISU and ASU at about even anyway
I know we can't put the genie back in the bottle, but this is why I knew there should never have been a national championship tournament in college football. Unlike basketball, there is no way in a sport like football where teams can only play once a week, to fairly crown a champion. You have over 130 teams scattered all around the country, playing extremely varied schedules in varied conditions and you have teams who are able to recruit 5 star players every year competing against smaller lesser talented teams. (That would be like giving 5 or 6 NFL teams all the first round draft choices every year.) The NFL only has 32 teams and the schedules are set-up to be fair based on the prior years results and the draft is determined by the prior years records.
The old way where the coaches and media looked at every teams results and schedule and how they won, etc. was much fairer and actually gave teams who were not blue bloods a chance to claim the title. Iowa in the 50's, BYU, Colorado, Minnesota, etc. giving all fan bases hope. Today the national champion can be whittled down to about 6 or 7 teams before the season even starts.
The old way where the coaches and media looked at every teams results and schedule and how they won, etc. was much fairer and actually gave teams who were not blue bloods a chance to claim the title. Iowa in the 50's, BYU, Colorado, Minnesota, etc. giving all fan bases hope. Today the national champion can be whittled down to about 6 or 7 teams before the season even starts.
No we don't. We are currently arguing if a 3 loss team should be in at 12 spots, we don't need to let even more in.
Na. Any of these schools bitching about the 12 spot has nobody to blame but themselves
If you start based on the premise that SEC teams are overrated to begin the season, and benefit from that position all year long, then it is not surprising at all to see them benefit again in the selection of the post-season. College football is putting one foot in the grave, IMO.
