I know the final four won’t be decided to next week but I figure some of th talk can start now.
In if Win
Clemson #1
Auburn #2
Oklahoma #3
Wisconsin #4
#5 I want to start this with a rant about Alabama getting in, especially if Auburn loses. The ONLY reason Alabama is being discussed about being in is their name and Sabin’s rep. If Auburn loses to Georgia you cannot possibly give me an argument of why Alabama deserves to be in over Auburn. Plus how do you justify a playoff (as opposed to a popularity) system where one of the four is not only NOT a conference champion but didn’t even play in the game?
#6-8 Georgia, Miami and Ohio State all deserve to get in if they win their championship game.
#12 UCF gets the “Highest Ranked Mid-Major but Fuck You for Thinking We Would Allow You Into the Playoffs” Award. Hey I have no problem with four of the Power 5 conference champions getting in but considering this is (supposedly) a playoff I have a problem when non-conference-champions get in the top 4 and conference champions (power 5 and or top mid) get left out.
Best outcome next Saturday (for those that want an 8 team playoff): Clemson, Auburn, Oklahoma and Wisconsin all lose. Does Alabama get in because they didn’t play? How many of the conference champions get in and how many conference top-losers get in? Does UCF get a NYD Bowl bid?
I’m generally on board with starting the selections with “P5 conference champions with 1 loss”, and going from there. A second or third loss makes it tenuous, especially if you beat an undefeated opponent in a very close game. But in a season where a Mid-Major goes undefeated, if you can’t win your division, you have no place among the top four at the end.
I’d wager Alabama is going to make the playoffs, and the SEC will have two teams. That leaves either Oklahoma or Wisconsin out, who have a total of one fluke-like loss to ISU between them. That’s the same ISU who seemed to get off on beating Top 5 teams all year. The playoffs ARE a popularity contest, and have been for years. The hypocrisy and favoritism of the selection committee has been obvious for years. While I would LOVE an 8 team playoff (who doesn’t love more football), there’s always gonna be worthy teams left out and “unworthy” ones let in. Going to eight gives you room for the champion of each P5, a couple non-winners like Ohio State (yes, that selection still pisses me off), and maybe a flyer on whatever team is UCF that season. Granted, there’s a strong chance they get demolished, but who cares? At least give an undefeated team the chance to continue their streak until they lose.
I disagree. If the Power 5’s are all that and “the regular season matters.” then winning your conference makes you worthy … even USC or Stanford. If the top mid-major gets in then that means they scheduled strong opponents, had a decent conference and then did what they needed to (win) they are worthy. As far as I’m concerned if you cannot win your conference then you are not worthy. Games are won on the field not in Sports Illustrated.
You can’t put a 3 loss Auburn in. And I don’t think Ohio State should be in, nor do I think the committee will put them in based on their current ranking. Clemson has a bad loss, they lost by 3 points at Syracuse on a Friday night with a backup QB. But Ohio State got waxed at Iowa with really no excuse at all. If Clemson loses a close one to Miami, I think they still have a better case than Ohio State.
I’d love to see UCF somehow leapfrog into the playoff, but it won’t happen.
It wouldn’t be the first time a team beat another team late in the season, then lost, and got passed over by the team it beat. In 2007, Missouri beat Kansas in their last regular season game, then lost to Oklahoma in the Big 12 championship a week later, and watched as Kansas got selected over them for a BCS bowl (and, because of the “only two schools per conference in BCS bowls” rule, Missouri ended up in a lower bowl).
As for UCF, assuming they beat Memphis, yes, they get a NYD Bowl bid. Of course, it’s the Peach Bowl, but it’s on January 1… (And we have had the “only undefeated I-A/FBS team in the country deserves a shot at the national championship” discussion before; Hawaii went undefeated in 2007, only to lose 41-10 to Georgia (that didn’t win the SEC) in the Sugar Bowl.)
Let me clarify. If Auburn doesn’t get in by virtue of losing the ConfCship then there is no way Alabama who doesn’t play should get in. In other words if Auburn loses then Georgia should be the only SEC representative.
I thought 2007 Fiesta Bowl would be a better example.
The winner of Clemson - Miami probably gets in, and should.
The winner of UGA - Auburn gets in and should.
If Wisconsin loses, then I don’t think a 2-loss Ohio State or a 1-loss Wisconsin team is necessarily any more deserving than a 1-loss Alabama team. Alabama under Saban has generally proven it can roll with the best in any conference. But if Wisconsin wins, then I’m not in favor of Alabama getting the nod over an undefeated Badgers team. Wisconsin will have done everything possible to deserve a shot.
If Oklahoma loses, then that drops them to a 2-loss also-ran. So Bama could get in that way.
See that’s the problem I have with the system. Let’s say a team has two losses because they lost in a conference championship to (we assume) a pretty good opponent. Is it really fair to compare them to a one-loss team that doesn’t play championship weekend (and thus doesn’t take the chance of losing to a top 10 team)?
See, I know the Committee has things they are supposed to take into consideration such as Conference Championship or Head-to-head match-ups. But their mission is to pick the Four BEST Teams and if they think Alabama is one of those four, then let them in.
But that’s the problem - last year they let in tOSU as one of the four best teams, when they didn’t even win their Big 10 division, and they got waxed by Clemson. The Buckeyes had no business being in the playoffs, and the regular season showed that, but their name got them in.
Well sure in retrospect they were a poor choice. I’m not saying the Committee is foolproof and without bias, but if they genuinely thought tOSU was one of the top four teams then that’s all they are tasked with doing. I just don’t understand the argument that they can’t be one of the committee’s top four simply because they’re lost one game that cost them their division and a chance for their conference championship game.
Oddly, I find myself agreeing with this sentiment.
If Alabama is one of the four best teams, it’s almost irrelevant how other conferences do. Head to head on neutral field, I would favor Alabama over many of the conference champions, even Auburn in a rematch.
That’s the committee’s job, not to simply say “Pick one of five P5 conference champions to leave off of the 4 slots?”
Damnit, entire post got ate. They were top four in their conference. It’s a stretch to claim a team that couldn’t win enough games to make their conference championship belongs on the national stage. It was a pick solely based on reputation, which is against the competitive spirit of sport. tOSU got the gold medal after finishing in third place.
It’s just another complaint I have against the NCAA. No other league picks who gets into the postseason. Between the CFB playoffs and March Madness, there’s always some fluky stuff that just gets hand-waved away by “it’s the committee’s selection process”, ignoring the obvious favoritism and hypocrisy.
If you’ve got a conference champ that is wholy uninspiring, as PSU must have been last year, how do you instead pick a team they beat? If you just can’t justify the champion, look to the 2nd place finishers in other conferences. If you can’t win the games that matter, those in-conference and conference championships, you don’t belong with the champions. Expanding the playoffs would go a long way to fixing it, but there needs to be a standard. As it is, it’s whoever 13 dudes in a room decide on, with no objective requirements.
It wasn’t just reputation. OSU beat Oklahoma who won the big 12 on the road and beat the three other top teams in the Big10. Those other teams were also top 10 teams. It was also a flukey year in the Big10 east where the top teams all beat each other and PSU got in because Michigan had the second conference loss.
Alabama this year has beat a few mediocre teams, dominated a bunch of bad ones, and loss to the only legit team they played this year. You can argue that they deserve to be in, but their season is very very different than the one OSU had.
Honestly, the eye test tells me Alabama is a top 4 team this year. However, I’d prefer that there still be some concept of having to earn it. And FWIW I would have left OSU and gone with PSU last year.
I guess it depends on the team(s) involved. If it were up to me, I’d have an 8-team playoff with the big 5 conferences and 3 at large. And each team has to win its conference, regardless of record to get an automatic bid. The three at large bids could be for the 1-loss Alabama or 2-loss OUs (speaking hypothetically). Or it might open up a lane for an undefeated UCF, Memphis, Cincinnati, Houston, or Boise St in another year.
Unfortunately, just like the old BCS, the playoff is flawed - just less so now. One game less flawed, I guess, but we can all agree that an 8-team playoff would be the better route. A shorter regular season with a mostly in-conference schedule.
I was among those who believed that Alabama deserved a rematch with LSU in 2011-12 despite not playing in the conference championship game. And the reason for that was two-fold. Oklahoma St, while impressive, lost to Iowa State; Alabama lost to LSU, in overtime and statistically actually played better than LSU during regulation.
This year I’d be much less likely to support Alabama’s case. If Oklahoma and Wisconsin choke, that’s one thing, but despite knowing all too well how much of a wizard Nick Saban is, I think the fact is that Auburn clearly established itself as the better team this year. There wasn’t a fluke kick-six. No need for it. Auburn outplayed Alabama for most of the game and they outplayed them so much that Alabama actually looked like it was the team that choked in the 4th quarter. In my mind, an Auburn-Alabama rematch isn’t necessary. It’s only necessary if the other teams choke and let Alabama back into the race again.
As it was with Oklahoma State in 2011-12, Oklahoma and Wisconsin are in control of their destiny. Based on everything we’ve seen this year, these two teams should take care of business and win outright. If they don’t, if they allow their record to become no better than Alabama’s, then it’s their play that caused the committee to re-evaluate the situation. But speaking as an S-E-C homer, I don’t think Bama deserves a shot based on reputation alone. If the Sooners and Badgers win this weekend, then the Tide will just have to sit at home and order pizza and watch it on the big screen like the rest of us.