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

There are some really good bowl matchups this year, and all the talking heads can mention is the 4 teams in the playoff.

I absolutely HATE this.

The secret, don’t care what the talking heads say. 

We live in a glorious age for content. You can find great stuff about every bowl.

There are now two possibilities, either LSU or Clemson will win:

If LSU wins:
Clemson and Bama will be exactly tied in CFP performance.  Each will have five appearances.  Each will be 4-1 in semi-finals, and each will be 2-2 in Championships for a total of 6-3 in nine CFP games each.  

Behind them will be tOSU and then LSU.  Each will have two CFP wins and a CFP Championship but tOSU will have an edge because they have two additional appearances while LSU has none.  Additionally, the three years in which tOSU did not appear in the CFP they were at least close enough to be in the discussion while LSU's non-appearance years were:

• 9-3 with no SECCG in 2018
• 9-3 with no SECCG in 2017
• 7-4 with no SECCG in 2016
• 8-3 with no SECCG in 2015
• 8-4 with no SECCG in 2014

Next is the curious question of how to compare Oklahoma to UGA and Oregon.  Oklahoma has four CFP appearances which is even better than Ohio State and much better than LSU but they are 0-4 in CFP games.  UGA and Oregon each only have one appearance but they each won the semi-final when they got there so they are 1-1 in CFP games compared to OU's 0-4.  

After them come the four teams that have made the CFP only once and lost in the semi-final (FSU, MSU, ND, Washington).  

If Clemson wins:
Clemson will pull ahead of Bama in CFP wins and Championships but it will still be close, 7-6 in wins and 3-2 in Championships.  

Behind them will be tOSU alone.  

Next is the curious question of how to compare Oklahoma to UGA, Oregon, and LSU.  Oklahoma has four CFP appearances which is even better than Ohio State and much better than UGA, Oregon, and LSU but they are 0-4 in CFP games.  UGA, Oregon, and LSU would each only have one appearance but they each won the semi-final when they got there so they are 1-1 in CFP games compared to OU's 0-4.  

After them come the four teams that have made the CFP only once and lost in the semi-final (FSU, MSU, ND, Washington).  

As an Ohio State fan I'm honestly not sure which I should cheer for.  

Good part of LSU winning:

• It keeps Clemson within striking distance.  A CFP Championship next year would be enough to catch the co-leaders.  

Good part of Clemson winning:

• It keeps LSU from tying tOSU in Championships thus making Ohio State a completely undisputed #3 behind Clemson and Bama.  
• It makes tOSU's close game with Clemson look better.  If LSU wallops Clemson the way they did Oklahoma then the Buckeyes look like third fiddle this year.  If Clemson wallops LSU then Ohio State might even get #2 in the final AP poll.  

I'm currently watching a couple Western directional programs

Well first-off, I think college football players want to beat the other team no matter what.  And the bigger and badder the opponent, the more they want to win.  So I don't think there's much risk of those becoming exhibition games.

And second, I think the seeding will matter a GREAT deal because I think the first round is going to end up being played on the home team's campus.  So seeding will be based on W/L as well as SOS, which will also encourage teams to schedule TOUGH OOC matchups rather than layups.

Are you not the same utee94 who has posted comments for over a decade and a half saying that most bowl games are just meaningless exhibitions?  

Just because it's a conference rule doesn't mean it's not a bad luck, especially if it's stupid and completely correctable rule.

The absolute tiebreaker was BCS ranking, yes.  But at the time, the SEC and ACC both used a rule where BCS ranking was used to eliminate the bottom team of a 3-way tie, and after that it reverted to head-to-head. 

The weird thing was, Texas was the only team of the three tied teams, that hadn't played either opponent as a home game.  Texas beat OU by 2 scores on a neutral field and lost an away game to Tech by one score, and OU lost to Texas on the neutral site by 2 scores but blew out Tech at home, and Tech of course beat Texas at home by one score but lost by numerous scores to OU in Norman.  So Texas had no home games, and both Tech and OU had one home game. 

The voters and BCS ranking had Tech well below Texas and OU, so if you eliminated them, and reverted to head-to-head, then Texas' 2-score win over OU would have carried the day.  Alas, the B12 had stupid rules. 

That was a deserving Texas team that got bad-lucked out of a shot, which was my point, and in light of the half-dozen mulligans Alabama has gotten in the past decade, I'm gonna go ahead and continue thinking it's a hard luck deal.

It was an arbitrary rule that happened to work against Texas.  It could have worked against another team, but there was no repeat of that situation.  The also-arbitrary rule that the Big 12 adopted the next year could have just as easily worked against Texas at some future point.
What you have proven is why you have a different perspective than tOSU fans, or Bama fans, or even OU fans.  But it doesn't mean you're right (or wrong).  It just means that there is an explanation for why you see it as you do.

I was partially listening to the three ESPN dudes sitting in the Rose Bowl, one of them is the former Dawg, and I was thinking of making a list of tried and true "sayings" from whatever they were saying.  In their defense, there really is nothing novel one can say about a bowl game at this point (unless there is new information).  And they had to say something.

I also saw Saban being interviewed about being in the bowl game and I think I've never seen him so bored with it.  He clearly did not want to be there.  I imagine for him he thinks a win over Auburn puts them in the playoff where they clearly belong, not some Citrus whatever Bowl, and he thinks the refs jobbed him.  He should talk to Day over a beer.