The non conference football schedule

[NittanyIllinois]

So basically you’re saying the system is the same as the old AP poll days except they take four teams instead of two….doesn’t seem to be much of an improvement.

The system is spitting out the best 4 teams -- "best" being determined by human beings, which means it's imperfect and subjective.

But the BCS computer model was also imperfect seeing as though it basically devalued margin of victory/defeat which resulted in teams like 2003 Oklahoma playing for a title (over USC) even though Oklahoma got destroyed by 28 points by Kansas State.

There is no perfect system. But the fact that Alabama and Georgia and Ohio State and Clemson and Oklahoma keep making it is less about bias and more about them winning. Don't like it? Maybe we ought to start beating Ohio State. And when we do, let's not lose to Pitt that same year or lose by 39 to Michigan.

And frankly, until we start taking care of business in conference play, our OOC is pretty irrelevant to the CFP discussion anyway. We're not exactly in the thick of the CFP hunt these days.

 

[JWB389]

I am in the camp that with a 4 team format there should never be two teams from the same conference in the finals. If you're not good enough to win your conference, you're not good enough to occupy one of the 4 spots. There are enough other teams to make it interesting.

 

[LandoComando]

So basically you’re saying the system is the same as the old AP poll days except they take four teams instead of two….doesn’t seem to be much of an improvement.

It isn't and that's why we need at least a 16 team playoff with all conference winners--until then it's a sham

 

[LandoComando]

I am in the camp that with a 4 team format there should never be two teams from the same conference in the finals. If you're not good enough to win your conference, you're not good enough to occupy one of the 4 spots. There are enough other teams to make it interesting.

That would be great if conferences were even close to being comparable.

 

[JWB389]

That would be great if conferences were even close to being comparable.

The 5 majors are close. The purpose of the committee is to crown a champion. Once you've lost your conference, you can't be a champion.

 

[NittanyIllinois]

The 5 majors are close. The purpose of the committee is to crown a champion. Once you've lost your conference, you can't be a champion.

I disagree that the 5 majors are close. The SEC #2 is almost always better than the Pac-12 champion. And if not for Clemson lately, almost always better than the ACC champion.

Hell, I'd say the SEC #3 is usually better than the Pac-12 champion.

The SEC is a clear #1, and the Big Ten a clear #2. The gap between those conferences and the rest is enormous. Clemson and Oklahoma represent their conferences well, but those conferences are so weak top to bottom otherwise.

This year is a great example. Imagine UGA not making the CFP because they didn't win the SEC. Instead, Pitt or Utah goes to the CFP. That's fine if you're looking for a tournament of conference champions. If you're looking for a tournament of the 4 best teams in the country, having an occasional second team from the SEC (or Big Ten) is the better option.

 

[LandoComando]

The 5 majors are close. The purpose of the committee is to crown a champion. Once you've lost your conference, you can't be a champion.

They aren't. They aren't even remotely close. And, yes, once you've lost your conference you absolutely can be a champion. See ever other collegiate sport. None have your requirement.

Once OU and Texas move to the SEC we'll get closer to where we need to be--which is only the SEC/Big Ten exist.

 

[PSUSignore]

I disagree that the 5 majors are close. The SEC #2 is almost always better than the Pac-12 champion. And if not for Clemson lately, almost always better than the ACC champion.

Hell, I'd say the SEC #3 is usually better than the Pac-12 champion.

The SEC is a clear #1, and the Big Ten a clear #2. The gap between those conferences and the rest is enormous. Clemson and Oklahoma represent their conferences well, but those conferences are so weak top to bottom otherwise.

This year is a great example. Imagine UGA not making the CFP because they didn't win the SEC. Instead, Pitt or Utah goes to the CFP. That's fine if you're looking for a tournament of conference champions. If you're looking for a tournament of the 4 best teams in the country, having an occasional second team from the SEC (or Big Ten) is the better option.

That's why I'd like to see a mix of both. Automatic berths for each P5 champ, then 1 at large berth. If a G5 or independent meets some predetermined ranking criteria (e.g. are in the top 6 or something) they automatically get the at large. Otherwise do the committee dog and pony show for the last spot. Seed per committee rankings. Top 2 get a bye, 3 hosts 6, 4 hosts 5. Then use bowls to play the semis and finals similar to the current format.

If you insist on expanding to 8 then it's 2 more at large spots voted on by the committee, but again guaranteed spots for G5s and independents if predetermined criteria are met. 1 hosts 8, 2 hosts 7, and so on for first round. Then when down to 4 teams revert to the current structure using bowl sites.

I prefer only 6 teams because the college regular season is so important and I'd like to keep that. But if hosting playoff games is on the line, every game would still be important even with 8. Regardless, I want the subjective crap to end and want expectations to be clear and obvious to all teams before the season begins, like every other sport imaginable. It's impossible to accurately and fairly rank teams from different conferences when they play vastly different schedules and don't even follow basic standards such as having the same number of conference games. The only solutions are to standardize scheduling requirements for all conferences to improve the rankings, or to give conference champs an automatic berth.

 

[LandoComando]

That's why I'd like to see a mix of both. Automatic berths for each P5 champ, then 1 at large berth. If a G5 or independent meets some predetermined ranking criteria (e.g. are in the top 6 or something) they automatically get the at large. Otherwise do the committee dog and pony show for the last spot. Seed per committee rankings. Top 2 get a bye, 3 hosts 6, 4 hosts 5. Then use bowls to play the semis and finals similar to the current format.

If you insist on expanding to 8 then it's 2 more at large spots voted on by the committee, but again guaranteed spots for G5s and independents if predetermined criteria are met. 1 hosts 8, 2 hosts 7, and so on for first round. Then when down to 4 teams revert to the current structure using bowl sites.

I prefer only 6 teams because the college regular season is so important and I'd like to keep that. But if hosting playoff games is on the line, every game would still be important even with 8. Regardless, I want the subjective crap to end and want expectations to be clear and obvious to all teams before the season begins, like every other sport imaginable. It's impossible to accurately and fairly rank teams from different conferences when they play vastly different schedules and don't even follow basic standards such as having the same number of conference games. The only solutions are to standardize scheduling requirements for all conferences to improve the rankings, or to give conference champs an automatic berth.

6 doesn't work at all--that should be 3-5 teams from the Big Ten/SEC. 16 is the least that works. 24 works the best

 

[SheldonJoe2215]

Once OU and Texas move to the SEC we'll get closer to where we need to be--which is only the SEC/Big Ten exist.

You mean the part where they finish off ruining college football?

 

[AWS1022]

And how many times has the Big Ten had 2 of the top 4 teams in the country?

I get it. We want to play the victim and allege some kind of conspiracy against us and/or the Big Ten, but I can't think of a single instance in which two Big Ten teams deserved to get in the CFP the same season.

No?

You went a bit over the top when you mentioned a conspiracy….it’s not a conspiracy, it’s a belief by many of the decision makers that the SEC is head and shoulders above every other conference….and that bias has been out there for ever.

And 2016 there could have been two Big teams, or the year MSU made it, there could have been two teams.

 

[NittanyIllinois]

You went a bit over the top when you mentioned a conspiracy….it’s not a conspiracy, it’s a belief by many of the decision makers that the SEC is head and shoulders above every other conference….and that bias has been out there for ever.

And 2016 there could have been two Big teams, or the year MSU made it, there could have been two teams.

The SEC IS head and shoulders above every other conference.

The SEC has won 12 of the last 16 national titles. The other 4? Clemson (twice), Florida State, and Ohio State. And they were runner-ups in 3 of those 4 other seasons (Auburn losing to FSU, Bama losing to Clemson both times).

The SEC has played for a national title in 15 of the last 16 years. Most impressively -- 5 different schools represented in those games. Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, Florida, and LSU.

Only one Big Ten program has played for a title this century. Ohio State. Yes, Michigan and MSU both made playoff games, but both were completely humiliated by SEC teams. OSU is the only program in our conference that can compete with the SEC at the national level.

At the top at least, it's not even close.

 

[AWS1022]

The system is spitting out the best 4 teams -- "best" being determined by human beings, which means it's imperfect and subjective.

But the BCS computer model was also imperfect seeing as though it basically devalued margin of victory/defeat which resulted in teams like 2003 Oklahoma playing for a title (over USC) even though Oklahoma got destroyed by 28 points by Kansas State.

There is no perfect system. But the fact that Alabama and Georgia and Ohio State and Clemson and Oklahoma keep making it is less about bias and more about them winning. Don't like it? Maybe we ought to start beating Ohio State. And when we do, let's not lose to Pitt that same year or lose by 39 to Michigan.

And frankly, until we start taking care of business in conference play, our OOC is pretty irrelevant to the CFP discussion anyway. We're not exactly in the thick of the CFP hunt these days.

My opinions have nothing to do with PSU. The system was supposed to be different and it’s not. It falls into the same old biases and subjective decisions. It’s impossible to prove who the four “best” teams are, so it’s an unrealistic goal. Until they get objective criteria (like needing to win your conference), it will continue to be a popularity contest with an SEC slant.

 

[AWS1022]

It isn't and that's why we need at least a 16 team playoff with all conference winners--until then it's a sham

16 teams won’t solve it either because the human biases will still come into play when they pick the at large teams.

 

[AWS1022]

I disagree that the 5 majors are close. The SEC #2 is almost always better than the Pac-12 champion. And if not for Clemson lately, almost always better than the ACC champion.

Hell, I'd say the SEC #3 is usually better than the Pac-12 champion.

The SEC is a clear #1, and the Big Ten a clear #2. The gap between those conferences and the rest is enormous. Clemson and Oklahoma represent their conferences well, but those conferences are so weak top to bottom otherwise.

This year is a great example. Imagine UGA not making the CFP because they didn't win the SEC. Instead, Pitt or Utah goes to the CFP. That's fine if you're looking for a tournament of conference champions. If you're looking for a tournament of the 4 best teams in the country, having an occasional second team from the SEC (or Big Ten) is the better option.

Please explain how you’re determining who the best teams are.

 

[AWS1022]

The SEC IS head and shoulders above every other conference.

The SEC has won 12 of the last 16 national titles. The other 4? Clemson (twice), Florida State, and Ohio State. And they were runner-ups in 3 of those 4 other seasons (Auburn losing to FSU, Bama losing to Clemson both times).

The SEC has played for a national title in 15 of the last 16 years. Most impressively -- 5 different schools represented in those games. Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, Florida, and LSU.

Only one Big Ten program has played for a title this century. Ohio State. Yes, Michigan and MSU both made playoff games, but both were completely humiliated by SEC teams. OSU is the only program in our conference that can compete with the SEC at the national level.

At the top at least, it's not even close.

Getting in is the first and most important step and the SEC always has a team in it….that gives them a big edge from the start. They also get two teams sometimes…two out of four gives you a pretty big advantage. And having the champion doesn’t make you the strongest league, it means you are the league with the best team. They also only play 8 conference games, so being in that conference isn’t working against a team like it does being in the Big Ten or being in the Big 12.

 

[NittanyIllinois]

Getting in is the first and most important step and the SEC always has a team in it….that gives them a big edge from the start. They also get two teams sometimes…two out of four gives you a pretty big advantage. And having the champion doesn’t make you the strongest league, it means you are the league with the best team. They also only play 8 conference games, so being in that conference isn’t working against a team like it does being in the Big Ten or being in the Big 12.

So just to set the record straight.......you're saying the SEC is NOT the best conference?

What is your evidence for your argument?

The Big Ten has had a team in the CFP in 2015, 2015, 2016, 2019, 2020, and 2021. We have one title to show for it -- and a bunch of lopsided losses.

UGA beat the brakes off of Big Ten champion Michigan. Alabama shut out the best MSU team in recent history. Bama beat Ohio State by 4 TDs in the 2020 title game -- although in fairness to OSU, that was at least in part impacted by the way OSU's schedule was all jacked up due to COVID start-stop-start.

You cannot honestly tell me with a straight face that the Big Ten is on par with the SEC. You think the extra conference game matters when you have a league that routinely features 5 of the most talented 10 or so teams in the country?

I'm an SEC hater. Graduate of two Big Ten schools. But it's not even close. Trophies speak for themselves. They have them. We don't.

 

[psugisher]

So just to set the record straight.......you're saying the SEC is NOT the best conference?

What is your evidence for your argument?

The Big Ten has had a team in the CFP in 2015, 2015, 2016, 2019, 2020, and 2021. We have one title to show for it -- and a bunch of lopsided losses.

UGA beat the brakes off of Big Ten champion Michigan. Alabama shut out the best MSU team in recent history. Bama beat Ohio State by 4 TDs in the 2020 title game -- although in fairness to OSU, that was at least in part impacted by the way OSU's schedule was all jacked up due to COVID start-stop-start.

You cannot honestly tell me with a straight face that the Big Ten is on par with the SEC. You think the extra conference game matters when you have a league that routinely features 5 of the most talented 10 or so teams in the country?

I'm an SEC hater. Graduate of two Big Ten schools. But it's not even close. Trophies speak for themselves. They have them. We don't.

The top of the conference is lopsided and it continues to be largely because there are limited teams invited to the table. Throughout the 2000s it was predetermined that the SEC was the best conference and they almost always had a team in the title game. That influenced recruiting greatly allowing Bama to separate themselves further from the rest of the country. And it's Bama then everyone else even in the SEC. There have been other great teams within the SEC but nowhere near as consistent as Bama. The SEC teams have gotten a pass every time they lose. LSU even got to the title game with two losses in the past. LSU-Bama played a rematch from the regular season in the national title game. What we get is a small sample size of games a month after the regular season with a guaranteed spot or two for the SEC. Bama, Clemson, Oklahoma have all taken absolute beatings in the playoffs or championship games. They were never questioned as not being deserving to be there. Michigan gets blown out once and they're a fraud. Cincy didn't deserve to be there because they got blown out in one game. Notre Dame.. well maybe they don't ever deserve to be there.. point is that if there are other teams invited to the party regularly, they will have success and the perceived gap between the SEC and the rest of the country will decrease quickly.

 

[NittanyIllinois]

The top of the conference is lopsided and it continues to be largely because there are limited teams invited to the table. Throughout the 2000s it was predetermined that the SEC was the best conference and they almost always had a team in the title game. That influenced recruiting greatly allowing Bama to separate themselves further from the rest of the country. And it's Bama then everyone else even in the SEC. There have been other great teams within the SEC but nowhere near as consistent as Bama. The SEC teams have gotten a pass every time they lose. LSU even got to the title game with two losses in the past. LSU-Bama played a rematch from the regular season in the national title game. What we get is a small sample size of games a month after the regular season with a guaranteed spot or two for the SEC. Bama, Clemson, Oklahoma have all taken absolute beatings in the playoffs or championship games. They were never questioned as not being deserving to be there. Michigan gets blown out once and they're a fraud. Cincy didn't deserve to be there because they got blown out in one game. Notre Dame.. well maybe they don't ever deserve to be there.. point is that if there are other teams invited to the party regularly, they will have success and the perceived gap between the SEC and the rest of the country will decrease quickly.

5 different SEC schools account for 12 titles over the past 15 years. Ignoring Bama for a moment, both LSU and Florida have multiple titles. Auburn was damn close to getting a second title.

It's not just Alabama.

That 2-loss LSU team you mentioned......they beat Big Ten Ohio State in the title game. By 2 TDs.

Bama, Clemson, Oklahoma have all taken absolute beatings in the playoffs or championship games. They were never questioned as not being deserving to be there.

Oklahoma is routinely questioned for exactly this reason. Weak Big XII and consistent beatdowns in the CFP. Oklahoma doesn't have the same level of respect that the SEC powers have.

Alabama and Clemson get benefits of the doubt because they each have multiple titles. They've earned that benefit of the doubt. Michigan, Michigan State, Oklahoma, Notre Dame.......they may have been deserving in their instances, but it was clear they were not up to the challenge.

 

[AWS1022]

So just to set the record straight.......you're saying the SEC is NOT the best conference?

What is your evidence for your argument?

The Big Ten has had a team in the CFP in 2015, 2015, 2016, 2019, 2020, and 2021. We have one title to show for it -- and a bunch of lopsided losses.

UGA beat the brakes off of Big Ten champion Michigan. Alabama shut out the best MSU team in recent history. Bama beat Ohio State by 4 TDs in the 2020 title game -- although in fairness to OSU, that was at least in part impacted by the way OSU's schedule was all jacked up due to COVID start-stop-start.

You cannot honestly tell me with a straight face that the Big Ten is on par with the SEC. You think the extra conference game matters when you have a league that routinely features 5 of the most talented 10 or so teams in the country?

I'm an SEC hater. Graduate of two Big Ten schools. But it's not even close. Trophies speak for themselves. They have them. We don't.

You ignored everything I posted….to win it, you have to get in first and the SEC has a huge advantage in that area. The SEC has the best team in it most years, but top to bottom it is not head and shoulders above every other conference. The Big 10 East is a stronger division than either division in the SEC, especially the SEC East. The Big 10 West is not that strong, but neither is the SEC East minus Georgia. I think both conferences are strong with some years the SEC being better and some years the Big being better regardless of who wins the championship. The Big has as much depth as the SEC for sure.

 

[LandoComando]

You mean the part where they finish off ruining college football?

Ruin/fix--fine line

 

[LandoComando]

16 teams won’t solve it either because the human biases will still come into play when they pick the at large teams.

Which is true in all collegiate sports...but as long as all conference champs are involved I'm fine with the at large process. And if they go to 24, as they should, we're golden because if you're 20-28 range and you get left out that's on you.

 

[Cowbell Man]

You mean tbe one crafted by Sandy - supposed AD of year? Yeah - it’s a joke!

You can’t blame her. She was busy “successfully negotiating” a coaching contract while walking out the door.

 

[dailybuck777]

And I know a few Buckeye fans that consider that 2015 team better than the one that won the NC in 2014. Many will tell you that Urban's decisions in the OSU-MSU game were "sorry" at best

The OSU team was uber talented in 2015 but poorly coached offensively after Tom Herman left. (The offensive line coach was elevated to offensive coordinator) Michigan State's first team qb was out. OSU flat out stunk on offense and MSU deserved to make the playoff although they didn't have the talent to match up with top SEC teams. If OSU had made the playoff, it would have lost to the SEC team by something like 28 to 15 because the offense simply couldn't move the ball because of poor coaching.

 

[SheldonJoe2215]

And if they go to 24, as they should...

I can't think of a more horrific idea.

 

[LandoComando]

I can't think of a more horrific idea.

See FCS--it works perfectly

 

[SheldonJoe2215]

See FCS--it works perfectly

Because nobody really cares about the FCS.

 

[LandoComando]

Because nobody really cares about the FCS.

Because it's lacking the top programs not because of the format. There's 131 teams--there's no reason there shouldn't be a 24 team playoff. 23 playoff games is far superior to 44 bowl games of which 41 mean absolutely nothing.