Just get rid of the rankings system and come up with an objective way of entering the playoffs just like every other damn sports league in the world.

wbt5845 said:

---

If the favorites all win this weekend, there will never have been a clearer CFP field of four - GA, UM, TCU and USC.

Yet #5 - probably tOSU, but it doesn't matter who it is - will complain. And that's because - first man out always complains since many like to complain.

If the field was 16, #17 would complain

If the field was 64, #65 would complain.

Keep this in mind when anyone uses complaining as a justification for CFP expansion - if the field were 128, #129 would complain.

Making post season games more entertaining? - valid reason. Someone getting left out? - not so much.

---

OSU is allowed to complain. They are also allowed to play a tougher schedule.

Jarrin' Jay said:

---

Right now there are legitimate reasons and arguments every year for 1 or 2 teams that did not make the 4 team field, primarily having to do with strength of schedule and games played.

There is almost no chance tcu goes 12-0 or even 11-1 playing Bama's schedule this season. But an expanded playoff would still include Bama this season, and likely tcu as well even if they lose the Big 12 champ. game.

Nobody will have legit reasons to complain with an expanded playoff, they may complain but will have no right to complain and nobody will care about their complaints or rationale for it.

We certainly deserved a top 4 spot in 2020. As an A&M fan we should all support the CFP expansion as a field of 12 is likely the only way we ever get in to have a legit chance.

---

This right here.

it's going to take us winning the SEC with 1 or 0 losses to make a 4 team playoff, but with 12 teams we will have a much better chance at getting in.

then once you are in anything can happen

wbt5845 said:

---

If the favorites all win this weekend, there will never have been a clearer CFP field of four - GA, UM, TCU and USC.

Yet #5 - probably tOSU, but it doesn't matter who it is - will complain. And that's because - first man out always complains since many like to complain.

If the field was 16, #17 would complain

If the field was 64, #65 would complain.

Keep this in mind when anyone uses complaining as a justification for CFP expansion - if the field were 128, #129 would complain.

Making post season games more entertaining? - valid reason. Someone getting left out? - not so much.

---

4 preselected teams by a committee is still not a playoff.

Why is it that in every other sport, there is a legit playoff that everybody recognizes as a playoff and the winner is the champion...but in D1 football, somehow it can't work?

Well said and cogent.

I'd add - after the 2020 debacle - the most realistic way for us to be included in the 4-team playoff is to go undefeated so that the CFPC has no plausible reason to exclude us.

Otherwise, I think we're SOL with a 4-team playoff and a CFPC which clearly uses whatever measuring stick it wants to get to the desired result ratings-wise.

wbt5845 said:

---

If the favorites all win this weekend, there will never have been a clearer CFP field of four - GA, UM, TCU and USC.

Yet #5 - probably tOSU, but it doesn't matter who it is - will complain. And that's because - first man out always complains since many like to complain.

If the field was 16, #17 would complain

If the field was 64, #65 would complain.

Keep this in mind when anyone uses complaining as a justification for CFP expansion - if the field were 128, #129 would complain.

Making post season games more entertaining? - valid reason. Someone getting left out? - not so much.

---

Really? You don't think #5s argument is much more valid than #17 or #65?

rootube said:

---

wbt5845 said:

---

If the favorites all win this weekend, there will never have been a clearer CFP field of four - GA, UM, TCU and USC.

Yet #5 - probably tOSU, but it doesn't matter who it is - will complain. And that's because - first man out always complains since many like to complain.

If the field was 16, #17 would complain

If the field was 64, #65 would complain.

Keep this in mind when anyone uses complaining as a justification for CFP expansion - if the field were 128, #129 would complain.

Making post season games more entertaining? - valid reason. Someone getting left out? - not so much.

---

OSU is allowed to complain. They are also allowed to play a tougher schedule.

---

They were also allowed to beat Michigan, but they declined.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

rootube said:

---

wbt5845 said:

---

If the favorites all win this weekend, there will never have been a clearer CFP field of four - GA, UM, TCU and USC.

Yet #5 - probably tOSU, but it doesn't matter who it is - will complain. And that's because - first man out always complains since many like to complain.

If the field was 16, #17 would complain

If the field was 64, #65 would complain.

Keep this in mind when anyone uses complaining as a justification for CFP expansion - if the field were 128, #129 would complain.

Making post season games more entertaining? - valid reason. Someone getting left out? - not so much.

---

OSU is allowed to complain. They are also allowed to play a tougher schedule.

---

They were also allowed to beat Michigan, but they declined.

---

I totally agree. They only played two good football teams. They were 1-1. Personally I would put TCU in over OSU even if they lose the champ game because the B12 is a much better conference than the B10. Of course that won't happen because OSU it treated differently than the rest.

BigOil said:

---

wbt5845 said:

---

If the favorites all win this weekend, there will never have been a clearer CFP field of four - GA, UM, TCU and USC.

Yet #5 - probably tOSU, but it doesn't matter who it is - will complain. And that's because - first man out always complains since many like to complain.

If the field was 16, #17 would complain

If the field was 64, #65 would complain.

Keep this in mind when anyone uses complaining as a justification for CFP expansion - if the field were 128, #129 would complain.

Making post season games more entertaining? - valid reason. Someone getting left out? - not so much.

---

Really? You don't think #5s argument is much more valid than #17 or #65?

---

Why would it be? They're all the last man out. It's not how close they are to #1, it's how close they are to n-1. The argument isn't that they should be in over the #4 team, but the, #16, #32, #64, #128, etc.

agnerd said:

---

Jarrin' Jay said:

---

But Bama and UT (the real UT) have strength of schedules much better / harder than tcu..........

---

No they don't.
http://powerrankingsguru.com/college-football/strength-of-schedule.php

---

I know nothing about that website but 7 of the top 10 teams are from the Big 12.

wbt5845 said:

---

If the favorites all win this weekend, there will never have been a clearer CFP field of four - GA, UM, TCU and USC.

Yet #5 - probably tOSU, but it doesn't matter who it is - will complain. And that's because - first man out always complains since many like to complain.

If the field was 16, #17 would complain

If the field was 64, #65 would complain.

Keep this in mind when anyone uses complaining as a justification for CFP expansion - if the field were 128, #129 would complain.

Making post season games more entertaining? - valid reason. Someone getting left out? - not so much.

---

I have never heard "complaining" as justification for CFP expansion.

jsmc71 said:

---

Well said and cogent.

I'd add - after the 2020 debacle - the most realistic way for us to be included in the 4-team playoff is to go undefeated so that the CFPC has no plausible reason to exclude us.

Otherwise, I think we're SOL with a 4-team playoff and a CFPC which clearly uses whatever measuring stick it wants to get to the desired result ratings-wise.

---

Yes.

Txmoe said:

---

agnerd said:

---

Jarrin' Jay said:

---

But Bama and UT (the real UT) have strength of schedules much better / harder than tcu..........

---

No they don't.
http://powerrankingsguru.com/college-football/strength-of-schedule.php

---

I know nothing about that website but 7 of the top 10 teams are from the Big 12.

---

"Conference parity"

OP is not wrong, but 90% of the fanbase will agree that 12 is still substantively different than 4.

When you are left out at 5, you very well may be a team that has a solid chance to win the thing. If you are left out at 13, that's rarely going to be true. Of course they will complain, but the playoffs ought to include all the teams that have a real chance to win it. There are typically only about 5-6 teams that can legitimately claim that.

Txmoe said:

---

agnerd said:

---

Jarrin' Jay said:

---

But Bama and UT (the real UT) have strength of schedules much better / harder than tcu..........

---

No they don't.
http://powerrankingsguru.com/college-football/strength-of-schedule.php

---

I know nothing about that website but 7 of the top 10 teams are from the Big 12.

---

There is a huge point that no one brings up. The discussion shouldn't be "who's number 4/5?" The question is "what teams can argue they are #1?" Georgia, Michigan - and I'll give you TCU - are THE only teams that can argue they are the best in the country.

Not one time since the inception of the playoff system has any team ranked below #3 had a valid argument that they were the best in the country. The whole point of the CFP was to resolve the 2/3 dilemma of the BCS system. 4 teams does that perfectly.

This is why the 4 team playoff is fine and why we did not "get screwed" in 2020. Want to make the playoffs? Don't lose.

Iowaggie said:

---

wbt5845 said:

---

If the favorites all win this weekend, there will never have been a clearer CFP field of four - GA, UM, TCU and USC.

Yet #5 - probably tOSU, but it doesn't matter who it is - will complain. And that's because - first man out always complains since many like to complain.

If the field was 16, #17 would complain

If the field was 64, #65 would complain.

Keep this in mind when anyone uses complaining as a justification for CFP expansion - if the field were 128, #129 would complain.

Making post season games more entertaining? - valid reason. Someone getting left out? - not so much.

---

I have never heard "complaining" as justification for CFP expansion.

---

What do you call what the Big-12 and PAC-12 do when they're left out???

The expansion is to ensure more conferences are represented and to provide at least one Go5 team a spot every. single. year.

It has the added benefit by emphasizing conference champions of focusing on the conference season (ignore the cupcakes since they don't cause more schedule imbalance…)

Suggesting that the expansion occurred without complaints about the "best four" system is pretty dismissive of the evidence we have. Warren already is hyping Ohio State for an extra slot and if TCU or USC don't both win they likely will get it.

Now I personally think the best six conference champs and best six remaining at large is also an anti-trust defense for the CFP. But that's a separate thread…

Wish the big 12 and pac would have gone through with the merger and we could just let the 4 conference champs Duke it out. Didn't win your conference? Sorry. Won your crappy and got a shot at the playoffs anyway? Then the top seed gets a de facto bye week.

Objectivity in this would be nice. Tired of the "selecting"

The Banned said:

---

Wish the big 12 and pac would have gone through with the merger and we could just let the 4 conference champs Duke it out. Didn't win your conference? Sorry. Won your crappy and got a shot at the playoffs anyway? Then the top seed gets a de facto bye week.

Objectivity in this would be nice. Tired of the "selecting"

---

Conference champions is not best four and never has been and never will be. Excluding Go5 is an anti-trust suit waiting to happen.

Dumping teams was unpossible and exiting the Big12 Grant of Rights was expensive. Notice Texas and OU still haven't left…

greg.w.h said:

---

Iowaggie said:

---

wbt5845 said:

---

If the favorites all win this weekend, there will never have been a clearer CFP field of four - GA, UM, TCU and USC.

Yet #5 - probably tOSU, but it doesn't matter who it is - will complain. And that's because - first man out always complains since many like to complain.

If the field was 16, #17 would complain

If the field was 64, #65 would complain.

Keep this in mind when anyone uses complaining as a justification for CFP expansion - if the field were 128, #129 would complain.

Making post season games more entertaining? - valid reason. Someone getting left out? - not so much.

---

I have never heard "complaining" as justification for CFP expansion.

---

What do you call what the Big-12 and PAC-12 do when they're left out???

The expansion is to ensure more conferences are represented and to provide at least one Go5 team a spot every. single. year.

It has the added benefit by emphasizing conference champions of focusing on the conference season (ignore the cupcakes since they don't cause more schedule imbalance…)

Suggesting that the expansion occurred without complaints about the "best four" system is pretty dismissive of the evidence we have. Warren already is hyping Ohio State for an extra slot and if TCU or USC don't both win they likely will get it.

Now I personally think the best six conference champs and best six remaining at large is also an anti-trust defense for the CFP. But that's a separate thread…

---

Schools have been complaining about post-season outcomes and 'championships' since college football started selecting a championship. The changes that have happened in post-season are because more football means more money, not to stop complaining. The complaining won't stop, even if football expanded to 16 or 32 (see every college post-season tournament that relies on "Selection").


For example, do you believe the new playoff format with the 6 champions is because of complaining or anit-trust?
I think the anti-trust perspective is quite valid, but someone else will point to all the complaining that has happened. Which is it?

TCU should get left out...win or lose.

their schedule is a joke.

the Frogs' marquee non-conference opponent went 1-11 (Colorado)

they beat a collection of underwhelming 8-4 and 7-5 teams

2 was enough. Screw #3 and #5.

The expansion to 4 was and is the slippery slope to 32, 64 ridiculousness

Iowaggie said:

---

greg.w.h said:

---

Iowaggie said:

---

wbt5845 said:

---

If the favorites all win this weekend, there will never have been a clearer CFP field of four - GA, UM, TCU and USC.

Yet #5 - probably tOSU, but it doesn't matter who it is - will complain. And that's because - first man out always complains since many like to complain.

If the field was 16, #17 would complain

If the field was 64, #65 would complain.

Keep this in mind when anyone uses complaining as a justification for CFP expansion - if the field were 128, #129 would complain.

Making post season games more entertaining? - valid reason. Someone getting left out? - not so much.

---

I have never heard "complaining" as justification for CFP expansion.

---

What do you call what the Big-12 and PAC-12 do when they're left out???

The expansion is to ensure more conferences are represented and to provide at least one Go5 team a spot every. single. year.

It has the added benefit by emphasizing conference champions of focusing on the conference season (ignore the cupcakes since they don't cause more schedule imbalance…)

Suggesting that the expansion occurred without complaints about the "best four" system is pretty dismissive of the evidence we have. Warren already is hyping Ohio State for an extra slot and if TCU or USC don't both win they likely will get it.

Now I personally think the best six conference champs and best six remaining at large is also an anti-trust defense for the CFP. But that's a separate thread…

---

Schools have been complaining about post-season outcomes and 'championships' since college football started selecting a championship. The changes that have happened in post-season are because more football means more money, not to stop complaining. The complaining won't stop, even if football expanded to 16 or 32 (see every college post-season tournament that relies on "Selection").


For example, do you believe the new playoff format with the 6 champions is because of complaining or anit-trust?
I think the anti-trust perspective is quite valid, but someone else will point to all the complaining that has happened. Which is it?

---

Both. Big 12 and Pac-12 were complaining about being repeatedly left out. Go5 had one representative in.

Artorias said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

So a 1-loss OSU should not be able to complain about losing a spot to 1-loss USC?

---

USC will be Pac 12 champ, if they win. So no.

Also, their 1 loss was by 1 point, on the road, to the #11 team in the country.

tOSU got the doors blown off them at home by Michigan.

---

AND they get a Chance to Avenge that Loss this weekend. And they are 3-1 against Ranked teams this year.

In the past, recent losses were viewed as MORE Harmful to your viability than early losses. tOSU just lost last weekend. They only played 3 ranked teams and had a cr@ppy half against the Arch Rival AT HOME. Had this game been close, maybe. But a 2nd half drumming. They get to 'Wait Until Next Year!"

Bama played 5 ranked teams. And while it's MY Opinion they would probably beat or at least scare the cr@p out of playoff ranked teams 3, 4 & 5. Their 1 losses has them playing somewhere else.

InMyOpinion said:

---

wbt5845 said:

---

If the favorites all win this weekend, there will never have been a clearer CFP field of four - GA, UM, TCU and USC.

---

Well TCU and USC have the best opportunity to lose - that would be awesome !!

---

The committee would HATE this. That would leave 2 SEC teams and 2 B1G Teams.

Think they honestly want 4 teams from 4 conferences, almost every year. TV ratings and all.

Without looking it up, didn't USC have some close wins (less than 1 score) against several non world beaters? That would tell me they were not all that impressive in those wins.

In any event, the committee is not charged with picking conference champions but the 4 best teams. Saying one cannot argue that OSU is better than USC doesn't seem logical to me. Gotta look at entire resume.

Yes, OSU lost by more points to Michigan than USC did to Utah. But Michigan is the number 2 team in the country and much better than Utah. If we were comparing a common opponent maybe things would be easier.

It just seems recency bias and conference championship would be the difference maker. I don't know if USC is better than OSU.

Wining the National Championship doesn't mean you are the best team.

Winning the National Championship means you won a tournament of 4 beauty contest winners.

cevans_40 said:

---

Artorias said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

So a 1-loss OSU should not be able to complain about losing a spot to 1-loss USC?

---

USC will be Pac 12 champ, if they win. So no.

Also, their 1 loss was by 1 point, on the road, to the #11 team in the country.

tOSU got the doors blown off them at home by Michigan.

---

So Utah is as good as Michigan

---

Who cares? Ohio State lost by 3 scores at home. They have no business in the playoffs.

True that, BUT, to quote Colonel Jessup, "deep down in places you don't talk about at parties", millions would love to cash a ticket on a four-team money line parlay. KSU, LSU, Utah and Purdue. Sure, I could use the money, but that would sure throw a monkey wrench in the system.

W said:

---

TCU should get left out...win or lose.

their schedule is a joke.

the Frogs' marquee non-conference opponent went 1-11 (Colorado)

they beat a collection of underwhelming 8-4 and 7-5 teams

---

Lolz…thought you were serious for a minute there.

Go took a look at tOSUs schedule, or hell, even UGA. The BigTen was really, really bad this year. But you're just absolutely kidding yourself if you truly believe an undefeated Big12 team doesn't deserve a spot.

IF all of the favorites win this weekend AND we had the expected 12 team playoff, then we would get

#12 Tulane (highest group of 5) @ #5 Ohio State
#11 Florida State @ #6 Bama
#10 Washington @ #7 Tennessee
#9 Clemson @ #8 Penn State

So we would get four extra big time match-ups ON college campuses in iconic stadiums, and the reward of finishing in the top 4 (Georgia, Michigan, TCU and USC) is a bye week to get healthy. I would much rather watch those games that have meaning to a bunch of bowl games that upperclassmen are going to sit out.

The A&M win over LSU STILL matters because it knocked them out of the playoffs (a loss to UGA may have allowed them to stay in the top 12).
The Michigan win over Ohio State STILL matters because now they have an extra game to play.
The conference championship games still matter because of the ability to miss the extra game.

On top of this schools in the future may be encouraged to strengthen out of conference schedules because one or two early losses does not end your season in September.

If you don't like it, don't watch it as it becomes the norm in two years.

Quote:

---

The A&M win over LSU STILL matters because it knocked them out of the playoffs

---

It didn't knock them out completely in a 12 teams playoff, because if they beat UGA they would be in.

TyperWoods said:

---

Anytime you have judges, it's subjective.

Bigger sample = less subjective


Frankly, if you don't win your conference you don't deserve to be in.

---

Tell it to the defending National Champs.

TyperWoods said:

---

Wining the National Championship doesn't mean you are the best team.

Winning the National Championship means you won a tournament of 4 beauty contest winners.

---

Best 16 based on full-season including ooc is VASTLY superior to any conference champions. The 6/6 is a great compromise even if not everyone loves it.

greg.w.h said:

---

TyperWoods said:

---

Wining the National Championship doesn't mean you are the best team.

Winning the National Championship means you won a tournament of 4 beauty contest winners.

---

Best 16 based on full-season including ooc is VASTLY superior to any conference champions. The 6/6 is a great compromise even if not everyone loves it.

---

Maybe.

I think one needs to win their way into it. Whether that means conference champlonship, or at least 2nd place, I don't care.

What it doesn't mean is a selection committee, polls, computers, or anything like that.

If you go undefeated, you should be in. If you go undefeated and aren't in because you're in a lesser conference like the Sunbelt for example, your conference needs to be in a different division.

I'm all for the championship being limited to the SEC, B1G, ACC, B12, and PAC12. ND can get in a conference or SAD. So can the Sunbelt, AAC, Mountain West, etc...

I used to be a proponent of a 16 team playoff. But, if you consider conference championship games de facto playoff games, 8 is plenty. I don't like 12 because I don't like granting byes; but I suppose byes to conference champs (only and all) would be ok.