It's hard to say how Tennessee, Indiana, SMU and Clemson stack up against one another after yesterday's play.

[CJFisJoePaII]

The one thing we know for sure is that SEC 3rd Place 10-2 Tennessee just got absolutely hammered by B1G 3rd Place 10-2 duhO$U. Keep in mind that Tennessee was #7 in the Final CFP Rankings, while Indiana, SMU and Clemson were 8, 10 and 16 respectively in the Final CFP Rankings. Of the 4 losers, #16 in Final CFP Rankings, 10-3 Clemson gave #3 in Final CFP Rankings, 11-2 Texas (#2 SEC) the best game of the day. Keep in mind that Tennessee beat both Alabama and 'Ole Miss and finished the regular season in front of them in the SEC at #3.

None of these facts bodes well for FeinSlime's incessant boorish argument that more SEC teams deserved to be in the CFP Playoffs. Tennessee didn't look like they deserved to be in the playoffs any more than Indiana, SMU or even Clemson for that matter (who only made it as the 5th highest ranked Conference and was outside the CFP Final Rankings top 12 at #16.

 

[billrag]

Well, we do know that Clemson and SMU are probably more or less interchangeable given their recent head to head contest........

 

[LandoComando]

Tennessee was the best...then Clemson...then SMU barely on Indiana since Indiana didn't even play to win

Best thing that happened to Ohio State in terms of motivation was losing to Michigan and Tennessee paid the price for that. I said all year (well since October) they didn't have an offense and we saw that yesterday

 

[AWS1022]

With the way college football is set up, there’s no completely fair way to set it up. There will always be teams and broadcasters complaining. I think 12 teams is too many…I would prefer four P4 conference winners only or at the most 8. There will always be second guessing after the fact. Until they can come up with a way to completely eliminate the eye test, there will always be arguments.

 

[19333lion]

With the way college football is set up, there’s no completely fair way to set it up. There will always be teams and broadcasters complaining. I think 12 teams is too many…I would prefer four P4 conference winners only or at the most 8. There will always be second guessing after the fact. Until they can come up with a way to completely eliminate the eye test, there will always be arguments.

I have always thought an eight team playoff would be best, 1v 8, 2v7 etc in the traditional bowls.

 

[LandoComando]

With the way college football is set up, there’s no completely fair way to set it up. There will always be teams and broadcasters complaining. I think 12 teams is too many…I would prefer four P4 conference winners only or at the most 8. There will always be second guessing after the fact. Until they can come up with a way to completely eliminate the eye test, there will always be arguments.

Why? You want us out for Clemson and Arizona State when we're a threat. This is the dumbest concept ever
Thankfully we'll get way more teams not less...unless the SEC/Big Ten have their own playoff and even then we'll have 12 teams.

 

[LandoComando]

FCS does the playoff correctly
We'll get there. We'll have 24 teams.with the higher seed hosting until at least the semis if not finals within 10 years

People just hate change. It's absurd

 

[PAgeologist]

I do think the game got to the SMU and Indiana teams. Those programs (defintely the current players and staff) haven't been relevant in forever (if ever). They looked lost out on the field. There's the old saying "act like you have been there." Well, these guys haven't been there. I lean towards giving them a pass. Now let's see if the can replicate this year in the next few. SMU has a chance just cause of the money. Not sure about Indiana.

Clemson has played in high stakes games and it showed. They by far had the best showing of the losers.

No idea what happened to Tennessee. It looked like they were the team that actually didn't belong.

 

[LandoComando]

I do think the game got to the SMU and Indiana teams. Those programs (defintely the current players and staff) haven't been relevant in forever (if ever). They looked lost out on the field. There's the old saying "act like you have been there." Well, these guys haven't been there. I lean towards giving them a pass. Now let's see if the can replicate this year in the next few. SMU has a chance just cause of the money. Not sure about Indiana.

Clemson has played in high stakes games and it showed. They by far had the best showing of the losers.

No idea what happened to Tennessee. It looked like they were the team that actually didn't belong.

I think "talent" got to SMU and Indiana
We were better across the board. ND was better across the board.
Tennessee ran into a pissed off Ohio State team coming off that loss to Michigan. Tennessee is also overrated IMO--Nico regressed as the year went on and they basically didn't have an offense.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

With the way college football is set up, there’s no completely fair way to set it up. There will always be teams and broadcasters complaining. I think 12 teams is too many…I would prefer four P4 conference winners only or at the most 8. There will always be second guessing after the fact. Until they can come up with a way to completely eliminate the eye test, there will always be arguments.

Disagree, this set up is far fairer to legitimate contenders like PSU and duhO$U who should be in the Playoff. What is a bit "stoooopid" imho is limiting it to 12 teams with the absurd byes for 4 highest ranked Conference Champions regardless of Final CFP Ranking (moving #12 ASU to #4 Seed and #9 Boise State to #3)??? This makes zero sense as does artificially limiting a 16 Team Playoff to 12 teams - what precisely does doing this really accomplish??? There is absolutely no reason to eliminate 4 teams with this silly artificial structure. Just run a straight 16 Team Playoff with 1 v 16, 2 v 15, etc... Guarantee the 5 highest ranked Conference Champions since there is so little inter-conference play and let them settle it on the field.... Then we don't have a situation where #12 Ranked Alabama is taken out of the Playoff by a #16 Ranked Clemson because of an upset in ACC CCG. Just let the top 16 play it out at field of higher ranked team (it doesn't require any more time).

There is no legit reason to limit the field to 12 teams and the bye for the highest 4 ranked Conference Champions is beyond stooooopid.

 

[diontechristmas]

SEC idiots will just focus on Indiana. They will say Tenn played the BIG’s best team blah blah.

 

[lazydave841]

Talent prevailed in every game. My only complaints is waited this long for playoff football and it should have started last week.

 

[PAgeologist]

I'll be interested if the long layoff affects any of the bye teams. It will be the better part of a month since they have played.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

SEC idiots will just focus on Indiana. They will say Tenn played the BIG’s best team blah blah.

But they factually did not - Tennessee (who was #3 in SEC and beat both Alabama [#4 SEC] and 'Ole Miss [#5 SEC] ) lost to the team that finished 4th in B1G play and was CFP Ranked as 3rd highest B1G team. There is absolutely nothing in the results of 1st RD that suggest the 4th best team in SEC deserved to be in the 12-Team Bracket.

Having said that - the 12-Team Bracket is stupid and makes zero logical sense. Just let the top 16 CFP Final Ranked teams play it out on the field of the top 8's home fields.

 

[lazydave841]

I'll be interested if the long layoff affects any of the bye teams. It will be the better part of a month since they have played.

Oregon and UGA, not so much. UGA probably happy with the long bye if Beck can play.

Boise and Arizona State, I do think it can hurt them. Sun Devils in particular. Late season momentum run is over for them and they will have to turn it back on.

 

[LandoComando]

The only advantage for Boise State and ASU is they had a month to prepare for us and Texas. They weren't wasting time on SMU or Clemson

 

[Rip_E_2_Joe_PA]

I do think the game got to the SMU and Indiana teams. Those programs (defintely the current players and staff) haven't been relevant in forever (if ever). They looked lost out on the field. There's the old saying "act like you have been there." Well, these guys haven't been there. I lean towards giving them a pass. Now let's see if the can replicate this year in the next few. SMU has a chance just cause of the money. Not sure about Indiana.

Clemson has played in high stakes games and it showed. They by far had the best showing of the losers.

No idea what happened to Tennessee. It looked like they were the team that actually didn't belong.

Tennessee played to their abilities... Volunteers that seldom show up. The program lacks leadership from the top down through the coaching staff to the players. That is their tradition. They have the talk but not gut to get through the tough spots.

 

[wilbury]

But they factually did not - Tennessee (who was #3 in SEC and beat both Alabama [#4 SEC] and 'Ole Miss [#5 SEC] ) lost to the team that finished 4th in B1G play and was CFP Ranked as 3rd highest B1G team. There is absolutely nothing in the results of 1st RD that suggest the 4th best team in SEC deserved to be in the 12-Team Bracket.

Having said that - the 12-Team Bracket is stupid and makes zero logical sense. Just let the top 16 CFP Final Ranked teams play it out on the field of the top 8's home fields.

16? If yesterday proved anything it's that there aren't even 12 legitimate teams.

 

[LandoComando]

16? If yesterday proved anything it's that there aren't even 12 legitimate teams.

It didn't prove that
It proved that the committee likely missed so as we add teams there will be less good teams left out for those teams that are never going to win like SMU, Indiana and Clemson--probably ASU and Boise too
16 isn't enough--everyone needs to prepare to go to 14 then 16 then 20 then 24--we might even hit 28
See March Madness adding--it's not like 16 seeds are winning titles.

 

[PAgeologist]

16? If yesterday proved anything it's that there aren't even 12 legitimate teams.

If they're going to get rid of the byes, I'd go 16. But only if the first 2 rounds are at home stadiums. And seeing the atmospheres at those games, it wouldn't surprise me if that is what happens.

 

[AWS1022]

Disagree, this set up is far fairer to legitimate contenders like PSU and duhO$U who should be in the Playoff. What is a bit "stoooopid" imho is limiting it to 12 teams with the absurd byes for 4 highest ranked Conference Champions regardless of Final CFP Ranking (moving #12 ASU to #4 Seed and #9 Boise State to #3)??? This makes zero sense as does artificially limiting a 16 Team Playoff to 12 teams - what precisely does doing this really accomplish??? There is absolutely no reason to eliminate 4 teams with this silly artificial structure. Just run a straight 16 Team Playoff with 1 v 16, 2 v 15, etc... Guarantee the 5 highest ranked Conference Champions since there is so little inter-conference play and let them settle it on the field.... Then we don't have a situation where #12 Ranked Alabama is taken out of the Playoff by a #16 Ranked Clemson because of an upset in ACC CCG. Just let the top 16 play it out at field of higher ranked team (it doesn't require any more time).

There is no legit reason to limit the field to 12 teams and the bye for the highest 4 ranked Conference Champions is beyond stooooopid.

And who decides the 16 that get in and how? The eye test will still be in play, so be ready for 8-9 SEC teams, some with 5 losses.

 

[doctornick]

I'll be interested if the long layoff affects any of the bye teams. It will be the better part of a month since they have played.

It’s interesting that the opening games featured either teams that were both in CCGs or neither were. So all teams had the same layoff since the last game.

The next round will obviously be different in that regard so will be neat to see any trends.

 

[Westcoast24]

Disagree, this set up is far fairer to legitimate contenders like PSU and duhO$U who should be in the Playoff. What is a bit "stoooopid" imho is limiting it to 12 teams with the absurd byes for 4 highest ranked Conference Champions regardless of Final CFP Ranking (moving #12 ASU to #4 Seed and #9 Boise State to #3)??? This makes zero sense as does artificially limiting a 16 Team Playoff to 12 teams - what precisely does doing this really accomplish??? There is absolutely no reason to eliminate 4 teams with this silly artificial structure. Just run a straight 16 Team Playoff with 1 v 16, 2 v 15, etc... Guarantee the 5 highest ranked Conference Champions since there is so little inter-conference play and let them settle it on the field.... Then we don't have a situation where #12 Ranked Alabama is taken out of the Playoff by a #16 Ranked Clemson because of an upset in ACC CCG. Just let the top 16 play it out at field of higher ranked team (it doesn't require any more time).

There is no legit reason to limit the field to 12 teams and the bye for the highest 4 ranked Conference Champions is beyond stooooopid.

Why limit it to 16? Do you think 16 should be the most it should ever be?

 

[doctornick]

If they're going to get rid of the byes, I'd go 16. But only if the first 2 rounds are at home stadiums. And seeing the atmospheres at those games, it wouldn't surprise me if that is what happens.

I’d only support going to 16 if it means all 1-A conference champs get in. Yes, that means crappy teams get in but that’s fine. It’s not like the #12-16 ranked teams “deserve” anything either. Realistic contenders are going to come from the top 6-8 every year anyway.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

16? If yesterday proved anything it's that there aren't even 12 legitimate teams.

You clearly don't understand the concept of a "Playoff". From the Olympics (which are effectively a world-wide playoff) to world championships, international soccer (including the World Cup), baseball at all levels, basketball at all levels, State Playoffs, etc...., etc..., etc..... - they don't restrict the playoff to 3% of the field (i.e., 3 out of every 100 participating teams) - that is absurdly restrictive and no way could you statistically capture all the teams with a legitimate probability of winning given that you can't legitimately compare each team to another based on their season records as most of the potential playoff teams have played wholly disparate schedules relative to one another. 16 Teams for FBS is only 12% of the FBS Universe (12 of every 100 FBS Teams) - that is not too many teams and would be extremely restrictive compared to virtually every other sport or even every other football playoff at any other level including State HS Playoffs.

 

[LandoComando]

I’d only support going to 16 if it means all 1-A conference champs get in. Yes, that means crappy teams get in but that’s fine. It’s not like the #12-16 ranked teams “deserve” anything either. Realistic contenders are going to come from the top 6-8 every year anyway.

You need 24 for that
16 is
4 auto spots for the Big Ten and SEC
2 auto spots for the Big XII and ACC
top 2 G5 teams
2 at large--which will always be ND, SEC or Big Ten

 

[wilbury]

You clearly don't understand the concept of a "Playoff". From the Olympics (which are effectively a world-wide playoff) to world championships, international soccer (including the World Cup), baseball at all levels, basketball at all levels, State Playoffs, etc...., etc..., etc..... - they don't restrict the playoff to 3% of the field (i.e., 3 out of every 100 participating teams) - that is absurdly restrictive and no way could you statistically capture all the teams with a legitimate probability of winning given that you can't legitimately compare each team to another based on their season records as most of the potential playoff teams have played wholly disparate schedules relative to one another. 16 Teams for FBS is only 12% of the FBS Universe (12 of every 100 FBS Teams) - that is not too many teams and would be extremely restrictive compared to virtually every other sport or even every other football playoff at any other level including State HS Playoffs.

No one is restricted. All teams start with a blank slate every year. In college football the season has always been a part of the playoff. Alabama losing to Oklahoma was an elimination game.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

Why limit it to 16? Do you think 16 should be the most it should ever be?

No that isn't what I'm saying. What I'm saying is the powers that be have already created what is in reality a 16-Team Bracket, but have artificially replaced 4 of the 1st RD games with this absurdly silly "bye" system. Get rid of the silly "bye" system (which is currently giving a 1st RD bye to a 12th and 9th ranked team in the Final CFP Rankings

 

[RickinDayton]

I think "talent" got to SMU and Indiana
We were better across the board. ND was better across the board.
Tennessee ran into a pissed off Ohio State team coming off that loss to Michigan. Tennessee is also overrated IMO--Nico regressed as the year went on and they basically didn't have an offense.

Sampson not being able to play hurt TN some. He is very solid in pass protection as an RB and can wear teams down with his running. OSU was however the better team and would have won by 10-13 points even with Sampson being able to play.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

And who decides the 16 that get in and how? The eye test will still be in play, so be ready for 8-9 SEC teams, some with 5 losses.

What??? The Final CFP Rankings determine the 16 and the seedings (just as the Final CFP Rankings determined the 12 teams this year). Had they just done a straight 16 team bracket with 1-8 hosting 9-16 instead of this wack-a-doodle 12-Team system with 4 1st RD byes wiping out 4 of the 1st RD games and giving byes to undeserving #12 and #9 Final CFP Ranked ASU and Boise State in the 1st RD, you would have wound up with #16 Clemson (10-3) playing #1 Oregon (13-0), #15 USCe (9-3) vs #2 UGa (11-2), #14 'Ole Miss (9-3) vs #3 Texas (11-2), #13 Miami (10-2) vs #4 PSU (11-2), #12 ASU (11-2) vs #5 ND (11-1), #11 Alabama (9-3) vs #6 duhO$U, #10 SMU (11-2) vs #7 Tennessee (10-2) and #8 Indiana (11-1) vs Boise State (12-1).

I see neither "8 or 9 SEC teams" or teams with 7-5 records. WTH are you talking about???

 

[Westcoast24]

No that isn't what I'm saying. What I'm saying is the powers that be have already created what is in reality a 16-Team Bracket, but have artificially replaced 4 of the 1st RD games with this absurdly silly "bye" system. Get rid of the silly "bye" system (which is currently giving a 1st RD bye to a 12th and 9th ranked team in the Final CFP Rankings

That makes sense. I agree with the bye stuff. Need that to go away for sure.

 

[doctornick]

To understand the bye set up, it’s worth noting that the concept was developed when the PAC-12 was a power conference (and the Big 12 still had Texas and Oklahoma during the discussion stage but they had already been invited to the SEC when it became official). It was a lot easier to understand the champions getting byes when you figured there would be four good teams from among the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12, ACC and PAC-12 most years

 

[PAgeologist]

It’s interesting that the opening games featured either teams that were both in CCGs or neither were. So all teams had the same layoff since the last game.

The next round will obviously be different in that regard so will be neat to see any trends.

It can't be any worse than the first couple rounds in the basketball or wrestling tournaments.

 

[OzLion]

People need to remember that if we were using last year's system there would have been a massive argument over the four teams chosen: I'm guessing Oregon, Georgia, Texas, and ND would have been the picks after extensive pontificating. And that would really suck. OSU would play ASU in the Rose Bowl, PSU would play Boise in the Cotton bowl or something, and there would be opt-outs all over the place.

 

[AWS1022]

What??? The Final CFP Rankings determine the 16 and the seedings (just as the Final CFP Rankings determined the 12 teams this year). Had they just done a straight 16 team bracket with 1-8 hosting 9-16 instead of this wack-a-doodle 12-Team system with 4 1st RD byes wiping out 4 of the 1st RD games and giving byes to undeserving #12 and #9 Final CFP Ranked ASU and Boise State in the 1st RD, you would have wound up with #16 Clemson (10-3) playing #1 Oregon (13-0), #15 USCe (9-3) vs #2 UGa (11-2), #14 'Ole Miss (9-3) vs #3 Texas (11-2), #13 Miami (10-2) vs #4 PSU (11-2), #12 ASU (11-2) vs #5 ND (11-1), #11 Alabama (9-3) vs #6 duhO$U, #10 SMU (11-2) vs #7 Tennessee (10-2) and #8 Indiana (11-1) vs Boise State (12-1).

I see neither "8 or 9 SEC teams" or teams with 7-5 records. WTH are you talking about???

Bet we get more SEC teams with three losses in next year. Allow the eye test, you allow certain conferences to have more influence.

 

[doctornick]

Bet we get more SEC teams with three losses in next year. Allow the eye test, you allow certain conferences to have more influence.

Let’s see how Texas and Georgia perform next round. I’m not sure the SEC will get much cred unless they play well

 

[AWS1022]

Let’s see how Texas and Georgia perform next round. I’m not sure the SEC will get much cred unless they play well

Doesn’t matter, it’s the SEC.

 

[roswelllion]

Tennessee was the best...then Clemson...then SMU barely on Indiana since Indiana didn't even play to win

Best thing that happened to Ohio State in terms of motivation was losing to Michigan and Tennessee paid the price for that. I said all year (well since October) they didn't have an offense and we saw that yesterday

There was zero that Tennessee showed last night to say they were the best.