And half would have an additional loss as well.
Finebaum ALREADY BITCHING... 😂
- Thread starter Delcolion915
- Start date
None of them were competitive. Maybe Clemson to a degree
Unless you have an auto bid you're SOS has to be strongly considered. I'm not placing a number on it but 9-3 vs a top 10 schedule is WAY better than 11-2 with a schedule outside the top 50. Should have been a 2 second debate. The last spot needed to be South Carolina or Bama but it worked out best for us so I'm happy they'll fix it next year.
As Saban said...all major conferences should play 10 conference games. The Big Ten/SEC should have 10 plus playing each other in a game for 11.
Reality...Notre Dame needs to join the Big Ten...the playoff should be those two conferences plus any AQ programs.
We also need to accept, as I've said all year, FBS will be like FCS. The home team will typically win BIG
I dug up a photo of Finebaum while watching LSU BAMA for the 3rd week in a row a few years ago.
If you do that you end up valuing a top 15 loss versus a top 30-50 win.
For the record Texas had 2 top 25 games and lost them both. Even if you give them A&M who was in the top 25 before Texas beat them they were 1-2. And the team that beat them twice took 8 OT's to beat Ga Tech.
Also ND had the 86th ranked SoS which was 2nd worse to Indiana. Should they have been kept out. Tennessee had 17th [pretty high] and just got boat raced by tOSU. In hindsight should they be out?
There is no perfect way and with homefield advantage there will always be blow outs
He's got zero to bitch about the way #3 SEC got stomped by #3 B1G duhO$U. Nothing that happened in the 1st RD games suggested #4, #5 or #6 SEC deserved to be in the playoffs given that #3 SEC Tennessee beat both Alabama (#4 SEC) and ''Ole Miss (#5 SEC) - and #3 SEC Tennessee was completely uncompetitive in the Playoffs.
I do value a top 15 loss (especially a competitive one) over a top 30-50 win. Our losses against Oregon and Ohio State are way more impressive than a top 50 win
And the second Texas-Georgia game was huge for Texas. I agree their schedule was weak and we should have been ranked higher than them but with the draw I'm glad we weren't
ND >>>>> Indiana but, I think it's crazy they were ahead of Ohio State. ND is a good debate with USCe/Bama especially with the bad loss
BTW, both sides of the Bracket have gone to chalk.... so it's hard to say that they didn't have the top teams correct outside of the absurd "byes" for 4 highest ranked Conference Champions regardless of CFP Final Ranking. This is the dumbest part of the current system - artificially limiting it to 12 teams with these absurdly stupid byes. Just put the top 16 (Final CFP Rankings) in the 16 Team bracket and make the bottom 8 play at the home stadium of top 8.
SEC and TN were just as overrated as SMU and Indiana. TN got beat like a drum yesterday.
I agree. Especially if they are going to continue using the bigger bowl games as playoffs (as they should). Make the first 2 rounds at higher seed stadiums. Pretty obvious the fans were excited and flocked to the stadiums. I would make every attempt to avoid in conference matchups in the first round.
That's not true at all--Tennessee was overrated but they got the worst possible scenario against the most talented (not the best team) after they lost to Michigan. Ohio State is the one team I don't want to play
True, but if those teams like Alabama and Ole Miss would have replaced some SEC team for the FCS type teams, they play at the end of the year. It would definitely look better.
It was 8 versus 9, should be pretty even if TN had any type of team. Overrated SEC
That's not a sales job anyone is buying that is preaching the SEC
Do you honestly believe that the SEC isn't better than the ACC? I have no doubt Tennessee, Bama and USCe all beat SMU and Clemson. Probably Ole Miss and even someone like A&M that's not even ranked
The ACC is just garbage
It's the SEC/Big Ten then teams just hanging out for the cash they get for losing to real teams
And there were people arguing that Tenn should have ranked higher and been hosting.
Who is to say SMU, Indiana or Clemson couldn’t beat those teams? That the problem everyone always inflates the SEC because of their conference.
While the SEC teams ended up winning, Georgia and USCe played Georgia Tech and Clemson to end the season and either of them could have gone either way. I’m not seeing this alleged massive gulf in talent between the SEC and ACC.
In past years it was different, the top of the SEC clearly is not as strong in 2024.
Have you watched them much this year?
It's not inflating them because they're in the SEC -- the same is true for the top of the Big Ten
Then we disagree--weren't both of those on the road as well--strange things can happen in true rivalry games--see Michigan/Ohio State
I actually think after this weekend that it’s more evident that the SEC is not as strong as in the past and the Committee got the picks right. If the SEC were as strong as the Finebaums of the world claim then I would have expected Tennessee to be competitive or Texas to blow out the weakest team in the CFP. Or Georgia - clearly the strongest team in the SEC - to not need multiple OTs to defeat middling Georgia Tech.
Would Bama or USCe have done better in the playoffs than SMU? Maybe, I don’t know. But it certainly isn’t clear and obvious. The Bama team that showed up versus Oklahoma would have looked crappier than Indiana or SMU did.
Absolutely correct. In theory, it should have been the tightest game of the day. We all need to wake up to the fact that the bottom 6 teams aren't going to compete well with the top 6 teams on average. Probably should have started with an 8 team playoff.
This seems like a reasoned look at the system as it is now.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...owouts-12-team-format-does-not-need-overhaul/
College Football Playoff overreactions: Despite first-round blowouts, 12-team format does not need overhaul
And yes, we think the CFP Selection Committee got it right
By Will Backus
He's wrong as we'll see the committee fix it next year but he's entitled to his opinionThis seems like a reasoned look at the system as it is now.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...owouts-12-team-format-does-not-need-overhaul/
College Football Playoff overreactions: Despite first-round blowouts, 12-team format does not need overhaul
And yes, we think the CFP Selection Committee got it right
By Will Backus
By the way. Fixing it next year helps us.
Sure but it’s a matter of opinion. I don’t think a team that couldn’t score a touchdown against Oklahoma and lost to a Vanderbilt team that lost to Georgia State should have been in any sort of playoff just because they beat Georgia.
The blowouts don’t mean teams shouldn’t have been in. Blowouts happen in playoffs and championships all the time, doesn’t mean every fringe team needs to be re-litigated post mortem. If we want to draw broad conclusions on small sample sizes, the Tennessee result was proof that there were probably too many sec teams included if anything… definitely wouldn’t want a team that couldn’t even beat the Vols based on what we all witnessed.
The real answer is you don’t need 12 teams, but it’s not shrinking.
Of course he is, in your biased point of view. And he has more cred than you do.
Yet you think SMU who beat no one with a pulse should be in?
I agree--see FCS--the blowouts don't mean anything. Home teams usually win big. But SMU shouldn't have been in because they don't have the talent to compete and didn't actually beat anything. I'm thrilled they were in because we basically got a practice to help prepare for UGa or ND
We need 24 teams like FCS and we'll get there--the "competitiveness" of the games isn't the key--it's including all conference winners and anyone with a reasonable shot.
Penn State and Texas shouldn't have even played this weekend--that's the first thing they have to fix if it's going to stay at 12 but then we'd be playing ND instead of a weak Boise so it worked out well
How so? Because CBS pays him?
Backus wrote for Tennessee's school paper just 6 years ago and has zero credentials--he's just a fan that gets paid to write
Holy shit..... A baloney ass on a free message board is questioning a paid professional. I've seen it all now.
Isn't this entire thread questioning Finebaum---a paid professional?
I know you're stupid but this is new level stupid
Paid professionals are questioned all the time. You probably didn't know Backus existed until 3 minutes ago or that he's a Tennessee guy
24 teams is garbage and the season is already too long. The only thing they need to fix is the auto byes which totally bastardize the bracket.
Neither SMU or Alabama should have been in, but when you have 12 slots you have to fill them. There’s an entitlement for whatever reason with the SEC.
Since everything is hypotheticals, if Arizona State beats Texas, then big 12 should have gotten more teams than they did.
I don’t feel the need to stump for teams with multiple bad losses including blowouts needing a ticket to the dance, nor the need to expand it so they have access.
I completely disagree--FCS is already almost done--24 is easy
The reality is--if the committee does this again the Big Ten and SEC won't be around much longer and will have their own league hurting all others so we'll see it fixed as it is currently a problem
It's a playoff, not a beauty pageant ... it's about winning. The more we focus on "did you win?" rather than "I think you look better" factors, the better.
In the NFL, or any playoff system, you don't get to cry your way into the playoffs because your season was hard. You don't get to jump another team because "I bet I'd beat them ... just look at this analytic!" At the end of this, the team that wins all its playoff games will be crowned the National Champion. It won't be the team that played the hardest SOS in the playoffs, even if they lost more than another team.
The college football playoff already has a beauty pageant aspect to it, and we should be looking for ways to get rid of as much of that as possible, not add to it.
Tennessee had the 7th hardest SOS and only 2 losses. They got absolutely curbstomped by a 2 loss squad with the 18th hardest SOS.
And how do you weigh SOS v. things like ... oh, you know, actually winning? LSU is 8-4 and has the 10th hardest SOS ... where does that sit them compared to a 3 loss Alabama team with the 22nd hardest SOS?
It's nonsense. No one gives a sh!t who YOU (the generic "you") think should be in, or who would win. Prove it on the field. The more we focus on proof and not who thinks what, the better.
In the NFL, or any playoff system, you don't get to cry your way into the playoffs because your season was hard. You don't get to jump another team because "I bet I'd beat them ... just look at this analytic!" At the end of this, the team that wins all its playoff games will be crowned the National Champion. It won't be the team that played the hardest SOS in the playoffs, even if they lost more than another team.
The college football playoff already has a beauty pageant aspect to it, and we should be looking for ways to get rid of as much of that as possible, not add to it.
Tennessee had the 7th hardest SOS and only 2 losses. They got absolutely curbstomped by a 2 loss squad with the 18th hardest SOS.
And how do you weigh SOS v. things like ... oh, you know, actually winning? LSU is 8-4 and has the 10th hardest SOS ... where does that sit them compared to a 3 loss Alabama team with the 22nd hardest SOS?
It's nonsense. No one gives a sh!t who YOU (the generic "you") think should be in, or who would win. Prove it on the field. The more we focus on proof and not who thinks what, the better.
12 is actually a solid number of teams. You want a number of teams so that the last teams in and the first teams out have a pretty slim chance of winning but where all teams that are realistic contenders make it in.
4 teams was too small because teams that were around 5 or 6 had good arguments to be in. 8 would probably be a good number but the fringe candidates for the last spot would plausibly be contenders some years plus it would exclude some teams that deserve a shot based on their performance but would get excluded based on pedigree (e.g. 2024 Boise St likely would have excluded in an 8 team playoff but absolutely deserve a chance to prove they belong).
12 is a good number because no SMU doesn't "really" deserve a shot - but neither does Bama, Miami-FL or USCe. If you want to ensure that all worthy teams are in, you inevitably will need to have a buffer of teams that really aren't expected to do anything. More expansion doesn't really achieve anything in that regard because no one things that the next 4+ teams are "really" deserving. All you do is shift the argument to whether Iowa St or Ole Miss deserves the last spot, etc. The only thing more teams in achieves is more games and more money but not a more deserving or "better" championship.
4 teams was too small because teams that were around 5 or 6 had good arguments to be in. 8 would probably be a good number but the fringe candidates for the last spot would plausibly be contenders some years plus it would exclude some teams that deserve a shot based on their performance but would get excluded based on pedigree (e.g. 2024 Boise St likely would have excluded in an 8 team playoff but absolutely deserve a chance to prove they belong).
12 is a good number because no SMU doesn't "really" deserve a shot - but neither does Bama, Miami-FL or USCe. If you want to ensure that all worthy teams are in, you inevitably will need to have a buffer of teams that really aren't expected to do anything. More expansion doesn't really achieve anything in that regard because no one things that the next 4+ teams are "really" deserving. All you do is shift the argument to whether Iowa St or Ole Miss deserves the last spot, etc. The only thing more teams in achieves is more games and more money but not a more deserving or "better" championship.
The byes exist to give a benefit from to conference championships (and to a lesser extent screw ND for them not joining a conference). I could see a modification to perhaps give conference champs either a bye or a home playoff game but I think there will continue to be some sort of perk to winning a CCG over not doing so.
I could also see some sort of modification to how the brackets are set up. Re-seeding after the first round might make the most sense.
I don't expect any chances in how teams are selected/qualifed though in the short term.
Reseeding wouldn't have helped at all unless you're saying Boise State and ASU aren't 3/4 but then the bye doesn't make sense
2 main takeaways from this weekend.
SEC is undefeated in hypothetical matchups against anyone outside the SEC
blowouts mean less if you play in the SEC
SEC is undefeated in hypothetical matchups against anyone outside the SEC
blowouts mean less if you play in the SEC
Similar threads
