Because the whole system is already under duress. You can justify leaving ND out if the stupid highest ranked conference champions clause didn't exist but it does and the system has to be ready for a court challenge/lawsuit. ND can only complain but can't sue because they agreed to this system and while the committee could have finagled the rankings to include Duke, I wonder if they were worried JMU/Tulane would have sued.

The committee was not willing to include a 8-5 Duke in the playoffs as the ACC champion…let that sink in…they let Miami because ESPN pressured them to do that the ACC had representation.

All this discussion is fun but two things undergird this whole system…1) greed (tv money) and 2) risk (lawsuits)

People complain about being left out of the 68 team field of March Madness.

Just making it will generally be good publicity and a money maker.

It's the inconsistency with the committee. We should use the BCS formula

Quote:

---

You obviously don't watch the bowl games, they are usually good, fun games, compared to the playoff games that are almost always blowouts. Plus bowls were never more than just a bonus at the end of the year.

ND didn't take our playoff spot, Ohio St did.

---

I watched plenty of bowl games, especially back when there were just 2 team in the championship game and bowls were all that was left. Since playoffs and the opt outs, bowl games are less interesting and mean even less than ever before. And many were already uninteresting - seeing 6-6 team play against each other (or hell even some 5-7 teams)...

Quote:

---

This is complete revisionist history. Several times the fourth team who people argued shouldn't be invited won it all. It's highly like a fifth team would have won given a chance. This is way better than it used to be.

---

I am not sure you read my post correctly or understood my point. My point was exactly this. The new system IS better. I even mentioned the 5th and 6th teams could even be better in prior years... but the argument loses when you start complaining about the 12th ranked teams.

JDCAG (NOT Colin) said:

---

RogerFurlong said:

---

The difference is tu and Notre Dame have good athletic directors who do their job and try to get their team in. We didn't have that when we've gotten left out before. This year we haven't had anyone complain about being behind Ole Miss and Oregon even though we did what the committee said and scheduled tough out of conference opponents.

---

I personally do not want our AD publicly arguing that we should be higher.

I think Elko has done a nice job of pointing out that we did what they asked and still keep getting the lowest possible spot, but that we'll play whoever whenever.

Leave it at that.

If we wanted to be guaranteed anything, we should have just won out.

---

I haven't heard a single leader at A&M who is saying otherwise and I'm proud of our university for not looking like ND and the sips.

Hell, BYU has an argument to be in and they haven't whined either.

Nothing will ever top how bad 2023 was when two 1 loss teams got in an undefeated team was left out.

All 0 and 1 loss teams made the playoffs this season, who cares a few 2 loss teams didn't make the cut. Next season don't lose 2 or more games if you want to be in the playoffs.

wangus12 said:

---

Feel like everywhere I turn analysts are wanting expansion to 16. No 3 loss team, that didn't play in a conference championship game, should ever be considered for a National Championship.

---

BrotherChad2 said:

---

wangus12 said:

---

Feel like everywhere I turn analysts are wanting expansion to 16. No 3 loss team should ever be considered for a National Championship.

---

What's the issue with 10 conference championship + 6 at large?

---

In a nutshell, it waters down the whole thing. Year in and year out, there are maybe up to 6 teams that have legit shot to win the whole thing. Some years its only two or three. 16 teams in a tournament with 2/3rds of them having absolutely zero shot at winning it all doesn't make for a better event. In fact, it contributes to people tuning OUT. Nobody outside of New Orleans gives a flying F about Tulane. Nobody outside of Harrisonburg, Virginia gives a flip about JMU. The CFP should be scaled BACK to 8 teams, max.

Get Off My Lawn said:

---

SunrayAg said:

---

Your mistake is believing that they care about the "most deserving " teams or "a true champion".

The cfp exists to create content and make money for Disney.

They don't care who is in, or who wins. They care how many watch.

---

And the more drama in the lead up, the more $ their peripheral content gets.

They've created a "reality tv" overlay to make expand 1 day of sport into 7 days of consumption.

---

Yep. It's like "Dancing with the Stars" for middle-aged men.

RogerFurlong said:

---

The difference is tu and Notre Dame have good athletic directors who do their job and try to get their team in. We didn't have that when we've gotten left out before. This year we haven't had anyone complain about being behind Ole Miss and Oregon even though we did what the committee said and scheduled tough out of conference opponents.

---

Personally, I love being associated with a university/program that isn't ran by a bunch of whiney little and entitled biatches.

But maybe that's just me.


This is still a blue collar culture at A&M. Not a bunch of entitled poosays.

Good job OP. So we shall have an asterisk by our name if we win the natty?

BrotherChad2 said:

---

AgLA06 said:

---

BrotherChad2 said:

---

wangus12 said:

---

Feel like everywhere I turn analysts are wanting expansion to 16. No 3 loss team should ever be considered for a National Championship.

---

What's the issue with 10 conference championship + 6 at large?

---

We almost got 4 loss Duke, James Maddison, and Tulane who already got blown out by Ole Miss this year.

---

If you win your conference championship in any other NCAA sport you're in the post season. Why is football special?

Win your conference, auto bid + 6 at large, solves the issue IMO.

---

The big difference is how many teams are in the postseason. In a 64 team tournament like baseball and basketball, it doesn't really matter if there are 6-10 nobodies, because the percentage is so small. With a 16 team tourney, 5-6 crappy teams are suddenly making up about 1/3 of the playoff. Nobody wants to see that, when it could instead be your fringe but still really good 10-2 or 9-3 teams.

RogerFurlong said:

---

T and scheduled tough out of conference opponents.

---

Who did we schedule that I missed?

JDCAG (NOT Colin) said:

---

I personally do not want our AD publicly arguing that we should be higher.

---

Correct. I want our AD to be arranging decapitation of prize horses, compilation of kompromat, and all sizes of wire transfers, as appropriate to getting our boys a level playing field. All with ample deniability of course.

I'm even OK if Trev has to foment revolution in a few third world countries to get what we need.

NIL folks. They are pissed in many instances.



Many for very good reason.

It is, but it is important to remember this is a giant reality show, all here for our entertainment, and it always delivers

JPAggie2010 said:

---

Quote:

---

This is complete revisionist history. Several times the fourth team who people argued shouldn't be invited won it all. It's highly like a fifth team would have won given a chance. This is way better than it used to be.

---

I am not sure you read my post correctly or understood my point. My point was exactly this. The new system IS better. I even mentioned the 5th and 6th teams could even be better in prior years... but the argument loses when you start complaining about the 12th ranked teams.

---

In that case I agree with you 100% and I misunderstood your point.

Just keep in mind that last year representatives for every league (and Notre Dame) were in a room considering if they wanted to expand to 16 teams and they voted to stay at 12. So the Notre Dame AD can go jump in a lake.

This is so easy.

Just remove all auto bids for conference champions.

IMO go to an agreed upon computer ranking system like BCS and get rid of the committee.

RogerFurlong said:

---

The difference is tu and Notre Dame have good athletic directors who do their job and try to get their team in. We didn't have that when we've gotten left out before. This year we haven't had anyone complain about being behind Ole Miss and Oregon even though we did what the committee said and scheduled tough out of conference opponents.

---

LOL

Big swing and miss.

These are the two of the biggest spoiled rotten schools and the ND AD and Sark have looked like crybabies. Especially Sark.

I don't understand the whining and crying. Expanding the playoffs is great for college football. The anticipation in this year's playoff games is unmatched.

The problem is we are trying to find a champion of a sport that wasn't really designed to produce a champion.

It's easy to fix. All p4 teams with 10 or more wins at the end of the regular season are in. A committee can decide the seeding but not seed any 2 loss above a 1 loss etc. If this adds up to 16 it's the field. No BYES Just 16 at 1 etc.

If the 16 team field isn't full then all 3 loss p4 teams plus all G5 conference champs are in a pool for the committe to select to Total 16. These teams are seeded after all of the 0-1-2 loss teams.

If conferences want to have champioship games they can but these extra games don't impact the field or the seeding.

This year this same committee would have ended up with>
12-0 Indiana and Ohio State
11-1 Georgia, Texas Aggies, Ole Miss, Oregon, Tech, BYU
12-2 ou, Bama, ND, Miami, Vandy, Virginia

All of the 9-3 teams like tu, Michigan, and all of the G5 teams would be eligible for one of those last 2 spots
If they selected tu and Mich the pairing would have been:

16 Tu at 1 OSU
15 Michigan at 2 Indiana
14 Virginia at 3 Georgia
13 Vandy at 4 Texas Tech
12 ND at 5 Oregon
11 Miami at 6 Ole Miss
10 Bama at 7 Texas Aggies
9 ou at 8 BYU

1 OSU vs 8 OU
4 Vandy vs 5 Oregon
2 Indiana vs 7 Texas Aggies
3 Georgia vs 6 Ole Miss

The G5 should probably just have their own 8 team playoff because they likely wouldn't make this field often.

Georgia vs Indiana… no expansion needed!

Vintage bowl games:
Rose Bowl: OSU vs Oregon
Sugar Bowl: tu vs Bama
Orange Bowl: Miami vs OU
Cotton Bowl: Ole Miss vs A&M
Peach Bowl: Duke vs Vandy
Fiesta Bowl: TT vs ND

I'd watch all those games.

wangus12 said:

---

Feel like everywhere I turn analysts are wanting expansion to 16. No 3 loss team should ever be considered for a National Championship.

---

What about super bowl champs? How about the team playing the best football at end of the year wins? Whether thats an undefeated team playing cupcakes or a 3 loss sec team that had injuries earlier and has found their mojo and beats the undefeated team playing cupcakes.

College football diesnt have parity and its hard to rank teams based on schedule due to so many teams and conferences. Best way is playoffs decide, not money picking some brands to play that have same tshirt following, that keeps the talent because always has notoriety and the same loop continues another 50 years.... or we let more teams get exposure, more nil donors to schools now that donors believe their team has a real shot and better college games for longer in the season

JPAggie2010 said:

---

Now we have 12 teams. Let's be honest, this was to make sure that no matter what, the true top 6 teams or so that deserve consideration as the best team of the year have the ability to play for it all.

---

LOL no it wasn't.

The playoff expansion is about having more top tier sports content the networks can use to sell ad space.

Nonsense. We have had a national champion every year for more than a century.

Encouragement to Schedule tough out of conference games was only to make the committee's job easier by ensuring more losses among stronger teams. They struggle with dropping undefeated teams. Losses simply gives them an easier way of justifying whatever it was that they wanted in the first place.

I think tu and ND should play in the Johnson and Johnson's "no more tears baby shampoo" bowl.