Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

I'd be fine with 5+3, or even 5+1, or whatever else really.  But we're at 12, and I can deal with it I reckon, having no real choice in the matter.

I actually wouldn't like 5+3 after all the conference realignment. As I've said elsewhere, with 18 conference teams, no divisions, and the CCG being "best two teams", my team is effectively locked out of the playoff. 5+3 with the old conference alignment my team could at least hope to squeak into the B1G CCG as the West winner and hope for an upset. 

And that same issue exists for my team in the 12-team system. With MAYBE an outside chance that one year out of 30 my team sneaks into the 10 or 11 seed before getting squashed. 

So as I've said, my way to "deal with it" is to retract from the sport. It doesn't want me (or my team), so I don't have to watch it. 

I actually wouldn't like 5+3 after all the conference realignment. As I've said elsewhere, with 18 conference teams, no divisions, and the CCG being "best two teams", my team is effectively locked out of the playoff. 5+3 with the old conference alignment my team could at least hope to squeak into the B1G CCG as the West winner and hope for an upset.

And that same issue exists for my team in the 12-team system. With MAYBE an outside chance that one year out of 30 my team sneaks into the 10 or 11 seed before getting squashed.

So as I've said, my way to "deal with it" is to retract from the sport. It doesn't want me (or my team), so I don't have to watch it.

Shouldn't have squandered the previous 50 years, I guess....when it was wide open for ya'll.

But here's the bit of why people needle you on this...

The CFP committee is made up of legitimate college football "experts". People who have spent much of their adult lives as part of the sport. People whose combined decades of experience is a multiple of your lifespan. And it's set up as a committee to ensure that multiple competing voices are heard and the rankings they end up with are a consensus of the group's expertise and opinion.

You've never played nor coached college football. This isn't a criticism, but your adult life has been spent as a schoolteacher. Your expertise regarding college football is that of being an interested fan, the creator of a college football historically-based board game, and arguing with yahoos like us on the internet.

So the CFP, a group of legitimate experts, comes to the conclusion that TCU is the #3 team in the country, despite a loss. And you, a yahoo on the internet, say: "Well, I know better! They're so obviously wrong and stupid! Why doesn't everyone listen to me?"

Which is why I say that it's all just a beauty pageant, and you're pissed off that they don't share your aesthetic taste.

It's less "I know better" and more "why be inconsistent now (2022)?!?"

But also, the committee isn't just ranking the teams.  They're judged by the public and have to face the masses.  That's why the FSU thing this year was a big hullabaloo.  They kept TCU ranked (likely) due to 'deserve' over 'belong' and then the next year did the opposite for the Noles.

Issue of consistency.
Like a team not dropping 1 spot after a loss to a lower-ranked team.  I'm still not sure that had ever happened before.  Ever.  
Inconsistent.
.
It's not about my ego or SEC teams being benefitted.  

Any time 2 people disagree each thinks they're right.  Hence the disagreement.


You're way too focused on me and not on the matter at hand.
You could probably shut me up by finding an example of a team losing to a lower-ranked team and not moving down even 1 spot in the rankings......

Wow, 8 years ago and to an unranked team.  I guess the committee is consistent after all. 

I stand corrected.  They really do know what they're doing.

I'm hearing 4 auto bids each for the B1G and SEC.  8 out of 12 or 14 right off the bat, then whoever else is ranked highly enough.

Any time 2 people disagree each thinks they're right.  Hence the disagreement.

Yes, that's true. People should come into a disagreement with the humility to know that they MIGHT be wrong, though. And generally with the charity of mind to believe that the other side is reasonably intelligent and is honestly believing in their opinion. 

And then you say things like this: 

Wow, 8 years ago and to an unranked team.  I guess the committee is consistent after all.

I stand corrected.  They really do know what they're doing.

Dismissive and sarcastic, suggesting that you think the committee is a bunch of know-nothing idjits. Or alternatively that they're dishonest about their goals to pick the best four teams and therefore unethical. 

You've stated that just ranking teams by number of losses is stupid and the province of 4th graders. And you applaud the committee for coming to the same conclusion as you did in 2023 and dropping FSU out of the top 4 despite FSU continuing to win games. But then you turn around and criticize the committee for appearing to use the same idea (quality of team is not just a function of number of losses) in 2022 when they kept TCU in the top 4 despite the loss. 

Which all boils down to the same thing... YOU know who should be in the playoff, and everyone who comes to a different conclusion is either stupid or dishonest. Because that's the only way they could come to a conclusion different from yours.