What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

2017 College Football Thread: Hawaiian QB devastated to find out Jesus was "kinda rooting for Georgia" (3 Viewers)

No SEC team should get in till they play someone out of conference.  It's a f joke!  Let alone 2 SEC teams getting in every other year the whole system needs scrapped!  They play no one SEC is a joke.

 
bucksoh said:
No SEC team should get in till they play someone out of conference.  It's a f joke!  Let alone 2 SEC teams getting in every other year the whole system needs scrapped!  They play no one SEC is a joke.
Click to expand...
What?

Auburn and Georgia played Clemson and ND out of conference.  Bama scheduled FSU who obviously flopped but was supposed to be a playoff quality team.

 
Politician Spock said:
And so does USC. Lots of teams do. Alabama did NOT get in because of their win resume, nor winning a conference championship. They got in by only losing once. 
Click to expand...
They got in because their name is Alabama.  I already said I agree with you that they shouldn't have gotten in.  You won't actually answer the question only because you know that no matter what you answer, it shows that you're being a huge hypocrite and how terrible your whole argument in this thread has been.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited by a moderator:
FreeBaGeL said:
They got in because their name is Alabama.  I already said I agree with you that they shouldn't have gotten in.  You won't actually answer the question only because you know that no matter what you answer, it shows that you're being a huge hypocrite.
Click to expand...
Here is the criteria I'm using:

  • Championships won
  • Strength of schedule
  • Head to head competition (if it occurred)
  • Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory)
Using that criteria, numerous teams are more deserving of getting in than Alabama. 

In fact, the committee's protocol says this:

Under the current construct, polls (although well-intended) have not expressed these values; particularly at the margins where teams that have won head-to-head competition and championships are sometimes ranked behind non-champions and teams that have lost in head-to-head competition. Nuanced mathematical formulas ignore some teams who "deserve" to be selected. 
Click to expand...
 By selecting Alabama who didn't win a championship and had fewer big wins than two teams that did win championships (OSU and USC), the committee just did exactly what they were created to avoid doing. 

THAT is hypocrisy. 

 
FreeBaGeL said:
What?

Auburn and Georgia played Clemson and ND out of conference.  Bama scheduled FSU who obviously flopped but was supposed to be a playoff quality team.
Click to expand...
Auburn play f in Mercer Georgia southern, Louisiana Monroe,. Georgia played app state and Samford and son along with their cupcake schedule really freaking rough!  Lol

 
Politician Spock said:
Here is the criteria I'm using:

  • Championships won
  • Strength of schedule
  • Head to head competition (if it occurred)
  • Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory)
Using that criteria, numerous teams are more deserving of getting in than Alabama. 

In fact, the committee's protocol says this:

 By selecting Alabama who didn't win a championship and had fewer big wins than two teams that did win championships (OSU and USC), the committee just did exactly what they were created to avoid doing. 

THAT is hypocrisy. 
Click to expand...
This is bizarre.  You're sitting here arguing that Alabama should not be in with a bunch of people that agree that Alabama should not be in.  Meanwhile you went on a 3 page rant about how teams should be rewarded for scheduling strong OOC games and should be rewarded for big wins while trying to avoid saying what we all know, that given the chance to pick 4 teams you would leave out the team that scheduled the toughest OOC game and had the most big wins.

 
FreeBaGeL said:
This is bizarre.  You're sitting here arguing that Alabama should not be in with a bunch of people that agree that Alabama should not be in.  Meanwhile you went on a 3 page rant about how teams should be rewarded for scheduling strong OOC games and should be rewarded for big wins while trying to avoid saying what we all know, that given the chance to pick 4 teams you would leave out the team that scheduled the toughest OOC game and had the most big wins.
Click to expand...
I would have no problem if Auburn was selected. Selecting Auburn would be consistent with the committees criteria. So would selecting USC. So would selecting OSU. Selecting Alabama is not. 

 
Politician Spock said:
You and others keep saying this, but it's simply not true.

From: http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/documents/2017/10/20//CFP_Selection_Committee_Protocol.pdf?id=23

This is the narrative that they publish.... but their actions ignore it. 
Click to expand...
You can consider all of those things and still think Bama is the right pick. 

1. Championships won - Ohio State won the Big Ten, who's doesn't look be particularly strong this year. Alabama finished second in the SEC west with he same record as Auburn, who they lost to. Probably toughest division in football. You could argue that one really isn't that much more impressive than the other. Definitely not some overwhelming thing for OSU. 

2. SOS - I haven't checked but I'm sure OSU's rates much better. If the two teams swapped schedules I think Bama finishes with a before record in both scenarios. OSU's is better (mostly because of the extra conference games and their big ooc team ended up being good) Not overwhelming for OSU

H2H and competitive outcomes pretty much irrelevant. 

There is definitely still a solid case for OSU and perhaps others at 4. It's fun to talk about that stuff. You're getting too caught up in the other stuff. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Moe. said:
You can consider all of those things and still think Bama is the right pick. 

1. Championships won - Ohio State won the Big Ten, who's doesn't look be particularly strong this year. Alabama finished second in the SEC west with he same record as Auburn, who they lost to. Probably toughest division in football. You could argue that one really isn't that much more impressive than the other. Definitely not some overwhelming thing for OSU. 

2. SOS - I haven't checked but I'm sure OSU's rates much better. If the two teams swapped schedules I think Bama finishes with a before record in both scenarios. OSU's is better (mostly because of the extra conference games and their big ooc team ended up being good) Not overwhelming for OSU

H2H and competitive outcomes pretty much irrelevant. 

There is definitely still a solid case for OSU and perhaps others at 4. It's fun to talk about that stuff. You're getting too caught up in the other stuff. 
Click to expand...
It's the "other stuff" that got Alabama in. 

 
Politician Spock said:
I would have no problem if Auburn was selected. Selecting Auburn would be consistent with the committees criteria. So would selecting USC. So would selecting OSU. Selecting Alabama is not. 
Click to expand...
Nobody cares what you would "have a problem with".  We asked you to pick 4.

So you pick Auburn as #4 and leave OSU out. 

OMG OMG Politician Spock doesn't care about conference championships!!!  He's saying that conference championships are irrelevant.  He thinks teams should just skip their conference championship game and stay home that week.  He's being totally inconsistent with what he said matters!!

Stop telling us about Alabama.  You're like Trump with Hillary, you can't get through a sentence without saying it.  We all agree.  There's a reason Alabama got in and not Wisconsin.  It's not because they both had 1 loss, it's because their name is Alabama.  They screwed that one up.  No one is arguing that.  But that doesn't make any of the other arguments you've made in this thread any less silly, like the notion that conference titles are totally irrelevant, nor the notion that difficult games are totally irrelevant, the notion that the committee is "telling us" stuff with their selection, or any of the others.

 
bucksoh said:
Auburn play f in Mercer Georgia southern, Louisiana Monroe,. Georgia played app state and Samford and son along with their cupcake schedule really freaking rough!  Lol
Click to expand...
LOL Auburn played Clemson and overall played four games against playoff teams.  Georgia played ND and GT out of conference (App. State pretty good for a G5 team too).

 
FreeBaGeL said:
Nobody cares what you would "have a problem with".  We asked you to pick 4.

So you pick Auburn as #4 and leave OSU out. 

OMG OMG Politician Spock doesn't care about conference championships!!!  He's saying that conference championships are irrelevant.  He thinks teams should just skip their conference championship game and stay home that week.  He's being totally inconsistent with what he said matters!!
Click to expand...
Selecting Auburn is consistent with the committee's criteria because of this: 

  • Strength of schedule
Click to expand...


FreeBaGeL said:
Stop telling us about Alabama.  You're like Trump with Hillary, you can't get through a sentence without saying it.  We all agree.  There's a reason Alabama got in and not Wisconsin.  It's not because they both had 1 loss, it's because their name is Alabama.  They screwed that one up.  No one is arguing that.  But that doesn't make any of the other arguments you've made in this thread any less silly, like the notion that conference titles are totally irrelevant, nor the notion that difficult games are totally irrelevant, the notion that the committee is "telling us" stuff with their selection, or any of the others.
Click to expand...
So you agree with me, but you just want me to accept it and move on. 

Thanks for the request, but I'm not letting it go. We need a real playoff system, and the committee screwing this up is the perfect conditions for that change to happen. 

 
This should be five conference champions:  Clemson, Oklahoma, Georgia, Ohio State, and USC.   Then three at-large teams:  Alabama, Wisconsin, and Auburn according to the rankings.  Put UCF in for Wisconsin/Auburn if you want this isn't a G5 post. 

1. Clemson vs 8. Southern Calif.

4. Alabama vs 5 Ohio State

3  Georgia vs 6 Wisconsin

2 Oklahoma vs 7 Auburn

Who doesn't want to see these games?  Everyone (in P5 conferences) has a chance to play their way in.  The whining would just be about seeding but Penn State, Miami, Washington, TCU, and Notre Dame have zero argument to get in over these teams.

 
Ramblin Wreck said:
This should be five conference champions:  Clemson, Oklahoma, Georgia, Ohio State, and USC.   Then three at-large teams:  Alabama, Wisconsin, and Auburn according to the rankings.  Put UCF in for Wisconsin/Auburn if you want this isn't a G5 post. 

1. Clemson vs 8. Southern Calif.

4. Alabama vs 5 Ohio State

3  Georgia vs 6 Wisconsin

2 Oklahoma vs 7 Auburn

Who doesn't want to see these games?  Everyone (in P5 conferences) has a chance to play their way in.  The whining would just be about seeding but Penn State, Miami, Washington, TCU, and Notre Dame have zero argument to get in over these teams.
Click to expand...
I've said from the beginning that I think 8 is the sweet spot.  With 8 though I think we definitely need to make a spot for these undefeated small conference teams.  There is room for them at that point.

My only concern with going to 8 (other than whatever lame ### auto-bid scenario ND would get at that point) is that people still won't be satisfied and we'll end up going bigger, which I would hate.  As much as people like to say yeah we'd be arguing about the 8th and 9th place teams but at that point if you didn't get in it's your own fault, I remember when people were saying the same about the 4th/5th best team.  I also remember people laying out exactly these kind of "what if" matchups for "if we had a 4 team playoff look at the games we would get".

 
FreeBaGeL said:
I've said from the beginning that I think 8 is the sweet spot.  With 8 though I think we definitely need to make a spot for these undefeated small conference teams.  There is room for them at that point.

My only concern with going to 8 (other than whatever lame ### auto-bid scenario ND would get at that point) is that people still won't be satisfied and we'll end up going bigger, which I would hate.  As much as people like to say yeah we'd be arguing about the 8th and 9th place teams but at that point if you didn't get in it's your own fault, I remember when people were saying the same about the 4th/5th best team.  I also remember people laying out exactly these kind of "what if" matchups for "if we had a 4 team playoff look at the games we would get".
Click to expand...
Clemson-Alabama is a great game on paper.  But Alabama doesn't belong in a 4 team playoff this year based on committee criteria.  Many of us said this wasn't a real playoff until conference champions are all included.  

Again, I don't care about the G5.  Though if you included them we would be having a pretty good Wisconsin over Auburn debate today where Auburn clearly has a better resume, IMO, but Wisconsin gets in over them.

 
Mediocre Stanford could have won the other night and made the playoff by the conference champ criteria. That's stupid. :shrug:  

 
Ramblin Wreck said:
Clemson-Alabama is a great game on paper.  But Alabama doesn't belong in a 4 team playoff this year based on committee criteria.  Many of us said this wasn't a real playoff until conference champions are all included.  

Again, I don't care about the G5.  Though if you included them we would be having a pretty good Wisconsin over Auburn debate today where Auburn clearly has a better resume, IMO, but Wisconsin gets in over them.
Click to expand...
Did you watch that game last night? Wisconsin doesn't deserve to be in the mix for an 8-team playoff.They suck.

 
What is the argument for "too many" college football teams making the playoffs?    Upsets?  Too many games?      If too many games I would rather see Alabama play USC, OKlahoma, Ohio State, Clemson, or another D1 team than Mercer at the end of the season.     Can't be because of too much time needed since they have a ####### month off until they play again.  The money that 8 teams would generate has to be huge.   Seeing every Okie spend their fortunes on 2 or 3 playoff games would be sweet.   

8 vs 1 on  December 9th

7 vs 2 

6 vs 3

5 vs 2    Maybe this game can turn into the 11th seed in the NCAA tourney?  

I just love CFB and watching the best teams play extra games against each other is the cherry on top.    

 
Capella said:
Mediocre Stanford could have won the other night and made the playoff by the conference champ criteria. That's stupid. :shrug:  
Click to expand...
No it's not.  They were 12 last week and had they won they would have been in the top 10 today most likely.  But they would have played their way in instead of having a bunch of dorks in a hotel decides who the prettiest girls are.

 
LOL this guy wasn't giving up the Auburn gig for freaking Arkansas.

FootballScoop Staff‏ @FootballScoop 2m2 minutes ago

Brandon Marcello is reporting Gus Malzahn has agreed to a new deal with Auburn

 
SHIZNITTTT said:
What is the argument for "too many" college football teams making the playoffs?    Upsets?  Too many games?      If too many games I would rather see Alabama play USC, OKlahoma, Ohio State, Clemson, or another D1 team than Mercer at the end of the season.     Can't be because of too much time needed since they have a ####### month off until they play again.  The money that 8 teams would generate has to be huge.   Seeing every Okie spend their fortunes on 2 or 3 playoff games would be sweet.   

8 vs 1 on  December 9th

7 vs 2 

6 vs 3

5 vs 2    Maybe this game can turn into the 11th seed in the NCAA tourney?  

I just love CFB and watching the best teams play extra games against each other is the cherry on top.    
Click to expand...
I think NCAA football is by far the best regular season sport. Adding more and more playoff teams would devalue the regular season. I’ll admit that if I had a choice between 4 and 8, I’d probably rather it be 8 as I don’t think 4 is enough. Any more than 8 is overkill IMO. 

 
Fat Drunk and Stupid said:
:kicksrock:
Click to expand...
Malzahn has agreed to a deal that will keep him at Auburn after overtures from Arkansas. The numbers are not yet clear, but the deal will stretch at least five years and could include a raise to as much as $7 million, the source said.

Coaches using these lesser programs to up their salaries is Brilliant!     DILLY DILLY

 
SHIZNITTTT said:
What is the argument for "too many" college football teams making the playoffs?    Upsets?  Too many games?      If too many games I would rather see Alabama play USC, OKlahoma, Ohio State, Clemson, or another D1 team than Mercer at the end of the season.     Can't be because of too much time needed since they have a ####### month off until they play again.  The money that 8 teams would generate has to be huge.   Seeing every Okie spend their fortunes on 2 or 3 playoff games would be sweet.   

8 vs 1 on  December 9th

7 vs 2 

6 vs 3

5 vs 2    Maybe this game can turn into the 11th seed in the NCAA tourney?  

I just love CFB and watching the best teams play extra games against each other is the cherry on top.    
Click to expand...
Some of the "too many games" people have also said that bowl games with 6-6 teams are a good thing because "what's wrong with more football?"

Personally I'd rather see the best teams play 3 or 4 more games that mean something, than watch a bunch of 6-6 and 7-5 teams play one more meaningless game. 

One of the biggest arguments against a playoff is it would kill the bowl system. But with ESPN moving so many of the traditional New Years Day bowl games to other days, and the number of bowls growing to what it is now, the bowl system has already been killed for other reasons. I usually forget to watch a lot of the bowls on during the week, because... well... it's during the week and I'm focused on other things. The worst was when they played them on New Years Eve when I had more fun things to do then to stay home and watch football. But yet when I sit down on New Years day to watch football like I always have in the past (and one of the things I enjoyed most about New Years Day), it's hard to even find one on. They've killed what was once great about the bowls. And don't get me started about how they've killed the conference ties to bowls. Going to the Rose Bowl used to be talked about non-stop during the season in Columbus. Now it's never even mentioned. The traditional Bowl system. Meh. It's already a thing of the past. 

Time to replace it with a real playoff. I wouldn't forget #5 is playing #4 at 8 PM on December 9th, or #7 who upset #2 is playing #3 at 4:30 on December 16th. 6-6 Whoever Tech vs 7-5 Noname State on December 23rd however is a  :yawn:  that I easily forget and really don't give a #### about. 

 
The Commish said:
Well, it was a pretty rhetorical question.  I didn't expect an answer.  But to be clear, you believe it's a significant accomplishment because of where the committee had them ranked?  If there were no rankings, can you see the reality of what Wisconsin really is?
Click to expand...
This is really odd, even for you. They're ranked 6th now. 

If you are asking if I know that teams can be overrated, yes I know that. Michigan is notorious for being overrated.

That said, I think Wisconsin is better than any team Alabama beat.

 
SHIZNITTTT said:
Malzahn has agreed to a deal that will keep him at Auburn after overtures from Arkansas. The numbers are not yet clear, but the deal will stretch at least five years and could include a raise to as much as $7 million, the source said.

Coaches using these lesser programs to up their salaries is Brilliant!     DILLY DILLY
Click to expand...
I choose to not believe this.

 
SHIZNITTTT said:
What is the argument for "too many" college football teams making the playoffs?    Upsets?  Too many games?      If too many games I would rather see Alabama play USC, OKlahoma, Ohio State, Clemson, or another D1 team than Mercer at the end of the season.     Can't be because of too much time needed since they have a ####### month off until they play again.  The money that 8 teams would generate has to be huge.   Seeing every Okie spend their fortunes on 2 or 3 playoff games would be sweet.   

8 vs 1 on  December 9th

7 vs 2 

6 vs 3

5 vs 2    Maybe this game can turn into the 11th seed in the NCAA tourney?  

I just love CFB and watching the best teams play extra games against each other is the cherry on top.    
Click to expand...
Partially playing devil's advocate here, because I do like the idea of an 8 team playoff.  But as for the reasons I wouldn't want it any larger than that...

For all the arguing about college football, I think it typically does the best job of getting a champion who is actually the best team.  Single elimination single game playoffs aren't a particularly good method for finding the actual best team, but rather just the team that happens to get hot at the right time.

Additionally, as someone else pointed out CFB has far and away the best regular season, mostly because there are such a limited number of teams that get into the real postseason.  OSU vs. OU is so amazing to see on the schedule because it matters so much.  If we had a 16 team playoff would that game really even matter?  They'd both be a lock for the playoff anyway.  All of these great games the last few weeks would have been essentially meaningless other than some minor seeding changes.  Auburn/Alabama, Auburn/Georgia, OSU/Wisconsin, Clemson/Miami, USC/Stanford, OU/TCU.  All fairly meaningless, all of them are in a 16 team playoff anyway.  By adding more playoff elimination games we'd actually be creating FEWER incredible, meaningful college football games.  We'd essentially be getting rid of 10 elimination games to add 4 elimination games.

The NFL regular season would basically be unwatchable were it not for fantasy.  I don't want to see CFB turn into that.

 
SHIZNITTTT said:
What is the argument for "too many" college football teams making the playoffs?    Upsets?  Too many games?      If too many games I would rather see Alabama play USC, OKlahoma, Ohio State, Clemson, or another D1 team than Mercer at the end of the season.     Can't be because of too much time needed since they have a ####### month off until they play again.  The money that 8 teams would generate has to be huge.   Seeing every Okie spend their fortunes on 2 or 3 playoff games would be sweet.   

8 vs 1 on  December 9th

7 vs 2 

6 vs 3

5 vs 2    Maybe this game can turn into the 11th seed in the NCAA tourney?  

I just love CFB and watching the best teams play extra games against each other is the cherry on top.    
Click to expand...
The argument against it is the players still aren't getting paid. 

 
SECRant is talking that Norvell is out for some reason.  I choose to not believe that either.  They also said Venables is a candidate.  I'd be happy with that.

 
SHIZNITTTT said:
Malzahn has agreed to a deal that will keep him at Auburn after overtures from Arkansas. The numbers are not yet clear, but the deal will stretch at least five years and could include a raise to as much as $7 million, the source said.

Coaches using these lesser programs to up their salaries is Brilliant!     DILLY DILLY
Click to expand...
:shrug: nothing wrong with it imo. Why not get more money from your employer when another employer expresses interest?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Wingnut
Daniel Day-Lewis is back! The GOAT seeks fourth Oscar for Best Actor in new film Anenome
Replies
0
Views
124
Wingnut
Wingnut
Chadstroma
Brain Storm Help with a Youth Football Program
Replies
28
Views
827
Chadstroma
Chadstroma
General Malaise
Can you remember a time in your life when you were totally free of stress? - White Lotus Inspired
2 3
Replies
120
Views
4K
General Malaise
General Malaise

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top