Now I have to take it back- they’re coming to East Lansing after all.
Holy crap what a comeback win for MSU. Best game that I’ve seen for quite some time. Walker 5 TDs? Unbelievable.
MU blows a 16-point second-half lead. Harbaugh’s struggles against ranked teams continue.
No. 9 Iowa also lost to an unranked team, too.
Well, there was the small matter of a UofM touchdown that was ruled against. That could have changed the outcome, points wise.
Yeah, that was one call that I was surprised got overturned. And Walker’s near fumble at the goal line was very close as well.
Very long but excellent look at the tragedy of Colt Brennan
That Hawaii team was fun to watch and kept me up on Saturday nights.
This doesn’t quite belong here, but this headline gives me delicious pleasure.
Jimmy Lake: Washington isn’t battling Oregon in recruiting; Huskies competing with ‘more academically prowess teams’
See, Jimmy, “prowess” isn’t an adjective, so you’ve really undermined your assertion.
I’m trying to figure out how Alabama is ranked No. 2 right now. They seemed to have suffered the tiniest penalty a top-ranked team has ever suffered for losing to an unranked team (Texas A&M a few weeks ago.)
Many years ago, when No. 5 Michigan lost to unranked Appalachian State, the pollsters destroyed Michigan so badly as a penalty in the next pollings that Michigan fell entirely out of the Top 25 altogether. Granted, this is an apples and oranges comparison, but why wasn’t Alabama knocked way down the peg to something like No. 11 for having lost to the Aggies? Right now, seeing as where they are at at No. 2, it’s almost as if they’d never lost to TAMU.
It’s likely because currently Texas A&M is ranked 13 in the AP poll. So they are now considered to be drastically underranked at the time of that game.
I’m not sure how anybody can make this claim. At the time of the Bama game, A&M had beaten Kent State, Colorado (barely), and New Mexico. They were 3-2, having lost back-to-back games to Arkansas and Mississippi State. That’s not exactly a top-25 resume after five games.
Because they are Alabama. Seriously, reputation based on many past seasons’ success are a factor in their rankings. I would speculate that even if they had 2 losses currently, they would still be in the top 6.
I’m thinking that a lot of voters are now thinking they were overly harsh in dropping them out of the Top 25 after the second loss. After all, they were ranked #7 before losing to Arkansas.
That’s a great point, as I forgot they had been a Top 10 team; they were ranked #6 in the preseason. They had moved up as high as #5. Then they dropped to #15 after the first loss and out of the rankings after the second loss.
The drop to #15 was a bit strange as they lost to #16 Arkansas in a fairly close game (20-10) at a neutral site. Usually you’d expect a #7 team to drop to… oh, #12 or so, after that. Then the MS State game probably would have dropped them to something like #20-24 generally.
And I wouldn’t be surprised if voters looked back and thought they got it wrong back then and are trying to make it right now.
There are some teams that require three losses to be dropped from playoff consideration- Alabama, Florida, Ohio State, Notre Dame and some others. Others are two losses and out- your mid level power 5 teams- think Michigan State, Tennessee, Georgia Tech. Some are one loss and out- your low prestige power 5 teams and any non-power 5 school- teams like Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Duke. And there are some where even going 12-0 or 13-0 will not get you in- any MAC or Sun Belt team for example.
The 4 team playoff needs to be expanded 16 teams. Every FBS conference should send its champion, that’s 11 teams plus 5 conference runner-ups and/or independents. With the current 4 team limit, they should not consider having more than one team per conference no matter how high up in the caste system they are.
I became disgusted with the current system a few years back when Penn State, a team that had beaten Ohio State head to head during the season and then went on to win the Big Ten Championship, was passed over for - you guessed it - Ohio State.
Every conference should be required to have a title game, which should be considered a tier of the playoffs. You lose that game and you are out, even if that is your only loss. Then, the playoff scheme should be the final 8, not the final 4. I think that would improve things immensely.
There are more than 8 FBS conferences. And a number of independent teams. And I believe all conferences currently have a championship game.
Assume that Alabama and Georgia play the SEC championship game, with 1 loss and zero losses.
If Bama wins, both teams will be in the playoff, because SEC.
If Georgia wins, does Bama still make the playoff with two losses? A one-loss Big 10 champion will surely be in the Final Four. And a one-loss Oregon would have a strong case as well. It would be hard to exclude an undefeated Oklahoma. And what does the committee do with an undefeated Cincinnati?
Granted, this is a lot of hypotheticals, but this might be the year that it becomes apparent that the playoff needs to be expanded.
Ultimately, at the very base line, College Football is entertainment. And the base line of playoffs and championships, as entertainment, are TV shows.
I am warming to the idea that the CFP decisions are primarily about creating the most successful TV entertainment. To them, teams like Alabama and Ohio State are big stars, and who doesn’t like to see big stars? Keep Oregon in the mix to pull in the west coast viewers. Keep an eye out for Oklahoma or Texas teams, to cover that geographic area. And try to keep an eye on Notre Dame (if they’re winning), 'cause Catholics (eastern urban dwellers mostly), yah?
I’m not agreeing with their decisions, but I think this explains a lot.