CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: OrangeAfroMan on December 13, 2020, 06:40:31 PM
-
Rank these teams 1-10 if they were to play each other in a round-robin tomorrow:
Texas A&M
Cincinnati
Indiana
Iowa State
Coastal Carolina
Georgia
Florida
Oklahoma
USC
BYU
-
Rank these teams 1-10 if they were to play each other in a round-robin tomorrow:
Texas A&M
Cincinnati
Indiana
Iowa State
Coastal Carolina
Georgia
Florida
Oklahoma
USC
BYU
1. Georgia
2. Florida
3. Oklahoma
4. A&M
5. Iowa St
6. Indiana
7. USC
8. Cincinnati
9. CC
10. BYU
-
Each team playing nine games in one day would leave most teams pretty thin, I think.
I think that BYU, Coastal Carolina, and Cincinnati would be the bottom three.
I have a different question bouncing around in my head: what separates a 6-0 Ohio State from a 6-0 USC? Everybody'd got tOSU penciled in as the #4 CFP team, barring strange goings-on in the SEC, but nobody's got USC even under consideration.
-
South Carolina is pretty bad this year.
-
The other USC. The one that is 6-0.
Although, come to think of it, the Cocks would be in the picture if they were 6-0.
-
Each team playing nine games in one day would leave most teams pretty thin, I think.
I think that BYU, Coastal Carolina, and Cincinnati would be the bottom three.
I have a different question bouncing around in my head: what separates a 6-0 Ohio State from a 6-0 USC? Everybody'd got tOSU penciled in as the #4 CFP team, barring strange goings-on in the SEC, but nobody's got USC even under consideration.
Where did they start? Who have they beaten?
-
Same order as the OP, only with Florida moved to the bottom.
-
Where did they start? Who have they beaten?
Where they start really isn’t supposed to have any bearing on where the CFP ranks them. For the most part I think the CFP has done a pretty good job in years past of not being influenced by the other polls. This year is just bonkers though.
-
I have a different question bouncing around in my head: what separates a 6-0 Ohio State from a 6-0 USC? Everybody'd got tOSU penciled in as the #4 CFP team, barring strange goings-on in the SEC, but nobody's got USC even under consideration.
did you see the USC/UCLA game last night?
USC was gifted that game
-
1. Oklahoma
2. A&M
5. Indiana
4. Iowa State
5. Georgia
6. Florida
7. USC
8. Cincinnati
9. CC
10. BYU
-
The other USC. The one that is 6-0.
Although, come to think of it, the Cocks would be in the picture if they were 6-0.
To be honest, a lot of it is, as @OrangeAfroMan (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=58) and others referenced:
- Where did they start, and
- Who have they beaten.
However there is also a more legitimate answer. USC is 5-0 with the following wins:
- An extremely close, come from behind, 1 point win over an ASU team that is 1-2.
- A four point come from behind win over an Arizona team that is 0-5 and just lost 70-7 to ASU.
- A 16 point win over a .500 Utah team.
- A 25 point win over 1-2 WSU
- A five point come from behind win over .500 UCLA.
That doesn't look CFP worthy to me or, apparently, the AP or the committee.
-
Here is my guess, if they played tomorrow:
- Oklahoma, I think they might be the most improved team in the country from early season to now.
- aTm, close
- Florida
- Georgia
- Indiana
- Iowa State
- USC
- Cincinnati
- Coastal Carolina
- BYU
-
I’m not goi through the exercise, but I’d have A&M real low. That team is the epitome of just fine.
-
did you see the USC/UCLA game last night?
USC was gifted that game
I don't know about gifted, but UCLA certainly should have won.
And at least two of USC's other games have been squeakers.
So, tOSU's claim is margin of victory?
To be clear, I think tOSU is a better team than USC. But both teams have beaten every team on the schedule. How is it that the CFP Committee doesn't have them in the same set of teams battling it out for the #4 spot? Texas A&M is #5 with a loss. USC is #15 with five 2-loss (as of last Tuesday) teams ahead of them.
-
Maybe more so than at any other time the CFP is leaning on perception and reputation in regards to Ohio St
-
OSU's (limited) outcomes have fallen in line with their perception.
USC's (limited) outcomes have fallen in line with their perception.
All equal W-L records are not equal.
.
It's not really that difficult.
-
https://www.masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm
Next.
-
OSU's (limited) outcomes have fallen in line with their perception.
USC's (limited) outcomes have fallen in line with their perception.
All equal W-L records are not equal.
.
It's not really that difficult.
Yeah, but if you give Maryland those same 5 wins are they ranked 4th right now? My guess would be no.
-
Yeah, but if you give Maryland those same 5 wins are they ranked 4th right now? My guess would be no.
No, but @OrangeAfroMan (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=58) covered that. He noted that tOSU's results were in line with perception.
If Maryland had the same results that would be substantially better than perception which would have improved the perception of Maryland but, you are right, not to the level of tOSU.
It is just tough to rank teams this year. There are almost zero OOC results to help determine league strength and limited total games.
-
No, but @OrangeAfroMan (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=58) covered that. He noted that tOSU's results were in line with perception.
If Maryland had the same results that would be substantially better than perception which would have improved the perception of Maryland but, you are right, not to the level of tOSU.
It is just tough to rank teams this year. There are almost zero OOC results to help determine league strength and limited total games.
I agree with all of that. I guess my point was I think perception and reputation is playing a bigger part than ever before because of smaller sample sizes.
-
I agree with all of that. I guess my point was I think perception and reputation is playing a bigger part than ever before because of smaller sample sizes.
I mean, is Maryland also winning by 23 points a game?
By SRS, which is a bit clunky, Cincy is third, ND fourth, USC fifth, BYU sixth. Granted MOV carries a lot of weight there.
-
Yeah, but if you give Maryland those same 5 wins are they ranked 4th right now? My guess would be no.
No. That's my point.
-
What I’m saying is in years past I think the ratio of results to perception was weighted more heavily to results. This year, especially in Ohio St’s case, perception is playing more of a part.
I think in previous years the committee has had the luxury to grade teams largely on their performance. This year it doesn’t. Ohio St’s results have been good but you could give those same results to many other teams in the nation and not garner a #4 ranking. That ranking is as much about what they expected Ohio St to be as it is what they have been.
-
OSU's perception is obviously strong
mostly from going toe to toe with Clemson last season in the playoff and returning their QB
also 13-0 last season
some don't like the idea of the previous season's performance altering this season's perception, but it does.
_________________
going only on on field performance in 2020
which one of us is going to bet the farm on USC in a game vs OSU?
-
I agree with all of that. I guess my point was I think perception and reputation is playing a bigger part than ever before because of smaller sample sizes.
And I agree with that.
What I’m saying is in years past I think the ratio of results to perception was weighted more heavily to results. This year, especially in Ohio St’s case, perception is playing more of a part.
I think in previous years the committee has had the luxury to grade teams largely on their performance. This year it doesn’t. Ohio St’s results have been good but you could give those same results to many other teams in the nation and not garner a #4 ranking. That ranking is as much about what they expected Ohio St to be as it is what they have been.
I think that is a product of necessity.
If, after one game each year, you ranked teams solely based on that one game all you would have is an ordered list of MOV. However, this would, in almost all cases, be ridiculously wrong. Ie, if Ohio State started a hypothetical year with a 1 point loss to Bama while USC started with a 1 point loss to SJSU, those are not equal. In all probability, tOSU's hypothetical 1 point loss to Bama suggests that tOSU is VERY good while USC's hypothetical 1 point loss to SJSU suggests that USC is terrible.
To get around this issue most voters and computer models use their preseason expectations to evaluate results and, in this hypothetical they would mostly come to the conclusion that:
- Ohio State had a close loss to possibly the best team in the Country, they are probably at least a top-10 team despite the loss.
- USC had a close loss to a bottom-feeder, they are probably not worthy of anything close to the top-25.
However, as this hypothetical season progresses it *COULD* turn out that Bama sucks and tOSU's 1-point loss to them is a REALLY bad reflection on the Buckeyes. It also *COULD* turn out that SJSU is REALLY good and USC's 1-point loss to them reflects pretty well on the Trojans.
Most computer models have an built in algorithm to deal with this issue. A typical example would be:
- 100% preseason expectation for the preseason rankings (obviously).
- 90% preseason expectation and 10% season results for the week #1 rankings.
- 80% preseason expectation and 20% season results for the week #2 rankings.
- 70% preseason expectation and 30% season results for the week #3 rankings.
- 60% preseason expectation and 40% season results for the week #4 rankings.
- 50/50 preseason expectation and season results for the week #5 rankings.
- 40% preseason expectations and 60% season results for the week #6 rankings.
- 30% preseason expectations and 70% season results for the week #7 rankings.
- 20% preseason expectations and 80% season results for the week #8 rankings.
- 10% preseason expectations and 90% season results for the week #9 rankings.
- 100% season results for the week #10 and beyond rankings.
In a normal season this works out fine. Fans of a team like Indiana that substantially exceeded expectations this year would have a complaint for a while but eventually the rankings are based solely on season results so it all works out. In a normal season most teams play 12 games over 13 weeks before the CG's so by this point in the season the rankings are already 100% based on season results and have been for a few weeks.
The problem this year is that teams like tOSU and USC (with only 5 games played so far) are still at a 50/50 balance and even after the CG's (assuming they are played) 40% of their ranking would still be based on preseason expectation.
-
I think it’s a product of necessity too. I’m not criticizing it necessarily. The committee is in an impossible situation. If Ohio St makes the CFP there will be bellyaching over a team that played 6 games getting in as opposed to others that played 10 or 11, and that bellyaching will have some merit.
If they leave Ohio St out then you will have Big Ten/Ohio St fans complaining that they played as many games as they safely could and in the games they did play they looked like a team that deserved to be in the discussion, and that will have merit.
-
This system is about opinions. That’s it. Nothing more need be said.
-
Texas A&M had the chance to play fewer games and not lose to Bama
all they had to do was call COVID
-
I think it’s a product of necessity too. I’m not criticizing it necessarily. The committee is in an impossible situation. If Ohio St makes the CFP there will be bellyaching over a team that played 6 games getting in as opposed to others that played 10 or 11, and that bellyaching will have some merit.
If they leave Ohio St out then you will have Big Ten/Ohio St fans complaining that they played as many games as they safely could and in the games they did play they looked like a team that deserved to be in the discussion, and that will have merit.
Also, you might well put in someone quite stupid. In fact, it's basically guaranteed.
The problem this year is gonna be having enough, not too much. And if the group you're putting in over OSU is one of the deeply flawed SEC teams, meh. (I guess if UF just smothers Bama, there's a case. But if it's 63-60, Meh)
-
Texas A&M had the chance to play fewer games and not lose to Bama
all they had to do was call COVID
Yup, they shoulda called-in COVID for that TAMU-Alabama game, and actually played Ole Miss or some other scrub. In typical aggie fashion, they couldn't even get THAT bit right. ;)
-
Texas A&M had the chance to play fewer games and not lose to Bama
all they had to do was call COVID
I don't know what this means, but I'll take it as another chance to insult A&M's case.
-
I don't know what this means, but I'll take it as another chance to insult A&M's case.
Not sure why you feel the need to insult their case? They're not as the same level as Alabama, obviously, and they're most likely not at the same level as a full-strength Clemson or Ohio State.
Beyond that, I think they have a reasonable case for "best of the rest."
-
I don't want to come off as a simple tOSU homer so I'll preface this by saying that I think that aTm has a valid case and I think there is a decent chance that they will get in.
That said, it isn't JUST their 4TD loss to Bama that is holding them back. They also have:
- A five point win over winless Vandy
- An 11 point win over 3-7 Arkansas
- A 13 point win over an LSU team that looked pathetic until they suddenly beat UF
- A 14 point win over 2-8 MissSt
aTm has played eight games. IMHO, they looked like a CFP team in:
- Their win over UF (doesn't matter that it was close, UF is a high-end team)
- Their 45 point win over USCe (USCe is terrible but this is a blowout)
It is debatable in:
- Their 11 point win over Arky. In aTm's favor they led 42-17 entering the 4th quarter and gave up two late TD's to make it an 11 point game. OTOH, they gave up 460 yards and 31 points to the Razorbacks who, in their very next game, were held to 188 yards and 3 points by an actual CFP team.
- Their 13 point win over LSU. In aTm's favor this is a lot better than UF did but it is also nowhere near as good as Auburn and Bama did against the Tigers.
- Their 11 point win over Auburn. This is a decent win but not nearly what Bama and UGA did to Auburn and only slightly better than a horrible USCe did against Auburn. Auburn is a team that just fired their coach.
They looked like clearly NOT a CFP team in:
- Their 28 point loss to Bama (Bama is great but this is a blowout)
- Their 5 point win over winless Vandy
- Their 14 point win over MissSt, this was a fairly competitive game against a BAD team
The same lists for Ohio State? All except the 13 point win over PSU look CFP and even that is debatable.
-
I think aTm is going to make it based on this:
- I think that #1 Bama is going to throttle UF in the SECCG.
- I think that Clemson is going to throttle ND in the ACCCG.
- I think that tOSU is going to throttle NU in the B1GCG.
- I think aTm is going to throttle TN (provided that they spend the week preparing for TN rather than bellyaching about not being #4).
Thus, I think the CFP match-ups could be:
- #4 aTm vs #1 Bama in the Sugar Bowl
- #3 tOSU vs #2 Clemson in the Rose Bowl
The committee might jump aTm over tOSU just to avoid a rematch in the semi-final but I doubt it because it would look weird to leapfrog aTm over tOSU in a week when tOSU plays a higher ranked opponent AND wins a league title. The committee might also decide to stick ND or Cincinnati at #4. Frankly, I don't think it matters. Bama would beat an all-star team of aTm's, ND's, and Cincinnati's best players with ease. NC is Bama vs tOSU/Clemson winner and Bama will have a significant built-in advantage in coming off of a MUCH easier semi-final.
-
- A 13 point win over an LSU team that looked pathetic until they suddenly beat UF
aTm has played eight games. IMHO, they looked like a CFP team in:
- Their win over UF (doesn't matter that it was close, UF is a high-end team)
can't have it both ways. Either give credit for LSU or don't give as much credit for Florida
even if the stupid kid doesn't throw a shoe and the gators squeeze out a win, it's not a great look for the Gators.
I guess the gators have the chance to prove they are a high end team this weekend
-
I don't know what this means, but I'll take it as another chance to insult A&M's case.
I'm not insulting A&M's case, I'm merely showing that OSU played the games they were able.
Should OSU be penalized for the conference leadership that limited the opportunity to play more games?
If so, then the SEC should have given the Aggies or their programs the opportunity to cancel games to enhance their chances of making the playoff.
-
I think Florida will score on Bama
I think ND/Clemson will be close.
I Think NW will keep OSU game reasonable.
So then who are the 4?
-
I don't want to come off as a simple tOSU homer so I'll preface this by saying that I think that aTm has a valid case and I think there is a decent chance that they will get in.
That said, it isn't JUST their 4TD loss to Bama that is holding them back. They also have:
- A five point win over winless Vandy
- An 11 point win over 3-7 Arkansas
- A 13 point win over an LSU team that looked pathetic until they suddenly beat UF
- A 14 point win over 2-8 MissSt
aTm has played eight games. IMHO, they looked like a CFP team in:
- Their win over UF (doesn't matter that it was close, UF is a high-end team)
- Their 45 point win over USCe (USCe is terrible but this is a blowout)
It is debatable in:
- Their 11 point win over Arky. In aTm's favor they led 42-17 entering the 4th quarter and gave up two late TD's to make it an 11 point game. OTOH, they gave up 460 yards and 31 points to the Razorbacks who, in their very next game, were held to 188 yards and 3 points by an actual CFP team.
- Their 13 point win over LSU. In aTm's favor this is a lot better than UF did but it is also nowhere near as good as Auburn and Bama did against the Tigers.
- Their 11 point win over Auburn. This is a decent win but not nearly what Bama and UGA did to Auburn and only slightly better than a horrible USCe did against Auburn. Auburn is a team that just fired their coach.
They looked like clearly NOT a CFP team in:
- Their 28 point loss to Bama (Bama is great but this is a blowout)
- Their 5 point win over winless Vandy
- Their 14 point win over MissSt, this was a fairly competitive game against a BAD team
The same lists for Ohio State? All except the 13 point win over PSU look CFP and even that is debatable.
Neither conference played any OOC games so there's just no way to compare their wins, losses, or MOV. What if the B1G is just really, really crappy this year? What if Ohio State is beating the snot out of B1G teams because they're so very, very bad?
Anyway, I'm not saying the ags should get in over Ohio State. I am saying it's possible they should be the #4 team ahead of Notre Dame, or USC, or Cincy, or whoever else is in that slot. I am saying it's reasonable to make an argument for them in that slot.
Sheeh, and now I just feel dirty for defending my own school's hated rival. ;)
Anyway, I have no idea whether or not they'll get selected. They always find some way to tank their season, so it's entirely possible they'll lose to the Vols this weekend and that will be the end of that.
-
I think the 3 as usual will be Bama, Clemson, Ohio St.
it's the 4th that is the question
A&M probably gets in over ND - because SEC
I suppose most of us would love to see some carnage / some true 2020 stuff, like NW upset OSU. Gators upset Bama. Notre Dame upset Clemson.
some new blood in there
-
I think the 3 as usual will be Bama, Clemson, Ohio St.
it's the 4th that is the question
A&M probably gets in over ND - because SEC
I suppose most of us would love to see some carnage / some true 2020 stuff, like NW upset OSU. Gators upset Bama. Notre Dame upset Clemson.
some new blood in there
For sure, that could make for some fun!
-
Sheeh, and now I just feel dirty for defending my own school's hated rival. ;)
you're slipping or just plain losing it. 2020 has been rough on everyone
-
you're slipping or just plain losing it. 2020 has been rough on everyone
Nah, I've just watched them a lot this season. They're actually, legitimately good. Not great by any stretch, but a good, solid team, all the way around, for the first time in a long time. Even their 2012 team with Johnny Football was more of a gunslinging, gambling team, than a solid football team.
I don't really want to see two teams from ANY conference in the 4-team playoff, and I certainly don't want to see the ags get blasted by Alabama again which is exactly what would happen. Additionally, the ags going to the CFP would be directly, measurably, immediately bad for my own school, since we recruit head-to-head against them so often. But all that said, I just don't think they can be dismissed so easily from that final slot.
-
I haven't watched the Aggies much at all this season
I have watched the Buckeyes quite a bit. The Buckeyes look like the Buckeyes from the past few seasons. Maybe w/o the all world DE or the RB that is destined for NFL greatness, but a team that can stand up to Clemson and possibly even Bama.
-
I've watched Bama, OSU, and Clemson. I think you could throw a hat over them. Bama's D has looked better of late. Fields gives OSU an edge that can be critical in games at this level, but so does Lawrence. I would probably give a slight edge to Clemson. Very slight.
A&M has solid lines and a decent QB. They might be the best of the rest. UGA with JT Daniels at the helm is a different animal, now.
-
I haven't watched the Aggies much at all this season
I have watched the Buckeyes quite a bit. The Buckeyes look like the Buckeyes from the past few seasons. Maybe w/o the all world DE or the RB that is destined for NFL greatness, but a team that can stand up to Clemson and possibly even Bama.
Well unless they poop the bed on Saturday, we'll find out in a couple of weeks.
-
I suppose most of us would love to see some carnage / some true 2020 stuff, like NW upset OSU. Gators upset Bama. Notre Dame upset Clemson.
some new blood in there
If they'd eliminate Bama/Bucks/Tiges I'd be all for it.Or maybe 2 of the 3
-
If you get a great QB, and have an otherwise sound team, you should be competitive at the elite level. The difference is HUGE (duh), in college anyway.
UGA last year with Fields at QB is probably a playoff team. OSU without Fields would have been a very good team but probably not playoff caliber.
Clemson, same story. Bama is obviously sound and deep and has a very competent QB who runs their offense well, he's not so obviously talented but might make the best NFL qb.
-
Not sure why you feel the need to insult their case? They're not as the same level as Alabama, obviously, and they're most likely not at the same level as a full-strength Clemson or Ohio State.
Beyond that, I think they have a reasonable case for "best of the rest."
Because I think it's a bad case.
Their best wins are shootout win vs. an 8-2 Florida team with a real suspect defense.
Their second-best win is 6-4 Auburn that probably isn't much stronger than their record.
They've not really dominated anyone outside South Carolina, and even in that game, they needed a really nice drive just to get to 21 points at halftime vs an abysmal defense. Neither their offense nor their defense is special.
The case is basically one win, a nice close one against a good team, and going 8-1 in a conference that's usually good. That might well be enough. But they've not at any point really played like a really good team. I just don't see much there there. And without much there, give me someone at least interesting who got shelled.
-
A lot of these second tier teams on the list have suspect records, no great looking wins and some close wins over suspect opponents.
-
Nah, I've just watched them a lot this season. They're actually, legitimately good. Not great by any stretch, but a good, solid team, all the way around, for the first time in a long time. Even their 2012 team with Johnny Football was more of a gunslinging, gambling team, than a solid football team.
I think this is were we mostly agree. They are good. I don't think just good but great at nothing gets you in, especially if your main chip is depreciating.
-
I think ND gets in over A&M even with a loss.
-
I think this is were we mostly agree. They are good. I don't think just good but great at nothing gets you in, especially if your main chip is depreciating.
But "greatness" isn't going to be required for the CFP. In "the rest" who do you think is "great?"
Notre Dame looks "solid" as well, but not great by any stretch. I don't think they'll stay within 2 TDs of a full-strength Clemson.
Are USC or Cincy or any of the other potential #4 teams "great?" I don't see it.
-
ND beat Clemson of course and UNC, and that's about it for them as well.
I'd like to see Cincy get a shot.
-
ND beat Clemson of course and UNC, and that's about it for them as well.
I'd like to see Cincy get a shot.
For sure I'd like to see that, too. I don't think it'll happen but it would be interesting.
-
I think ND gets in over A&M even with a loss.
I think ND gets in obviously if they win, but even if they loose it close. There is NO way that the CFP committee leaves them out with a close game.
If ND/Clemson is close with a Clemson win, Bama and tOSU both win, it will probably be:
1. Bama
2. Clemson
3. tOSU
4. ND
This will prevent yet a third matchup of ND/Clemson along with a back to back game between the two. It also gives the rematch from last years semi final game that a lot of people said was the best game of the playoffs last year.
If Clemson looses, they are out. Provided that Bama, tOSU and A&M all win, it would be:
1. Bama
2. ND
3. tOSU
4. A&M
If Bama and tOSU lose, who knows.
-
It is funny, I think all of this tOSU vs aTm discussion is missing the point. IMHO, if tOSU beats NU, they are in. Assuming favorites win the ACC, B1G, and SEC CG's, the top three will be:
Further, as far as tOSU is concerned the B1GCG is win or go home. If they lose, they are out. In a normal, full year if the Buckeyes were undefeated at this point at 12-0 and had looked generally like a CFP team in doing so, the Buckeyes would have at least a modicum of a chance with a close loss in the CG. THEN we'd debate 1-loss tOSU vs 1-loss aTm.
In this case with the Buckeyes at 5-0 heading to the CG, it is win = in, lose = out.
Assuming the top three laid out above, the real debate is going to be at #4 between:
- 8-1 aTm (assuming they beat TN)
- 10-1 Notre Dame
- 9-0 Cincy (assuming they beat Tulsa)
You could make a case for one of the other P5 Champs if it is:
- 9-2 ISU with a win over OU, or
- 8-2 OU with a win over ISU, or
- 6-0 USC with a win over UW
However, I think the two losses would knock out ISU/OU and USC is pretty far back with a whole bunch of closer-than-they-should-have-been wins. I just don't think they'll get in.
Finally, I think this whole debate is academic because, as I said upthread, I would take Bama against an all-star team made up of the best players from aTm, ND, and Cincy. Thus, the debate is simply over which team gets to get drilled by Bama in the Sugar Bowl.
-
If Bama and tOSU lose, who knows.
I know.
1. Bama
2. Georgia
3. aTm
4. Florida
-
Pot stirrer
-
I think Florida will score on Bama
I think ND/Clemson will be close.
I Think NW will keep OSU game reasonable.
So then who are the 4?
IMHO:
FWIW, I think the best scenario for tOSU would be for ND to upset Clemson. Then (all other favorites win) I would guess:
That creates a semi-final rematch between Bama/aTm so maybe the committee would jump Cincy over them to avoid that, I don't know.
I think the committee will want to avoid rematches if at all possible. It isn't just the general dislike for them that a lot of us share but also the fact that I think it would be terrible for ratings to have two conference-mates play each other.
-
But "greatness" isn't going to be required for the CFP. In "the rest" who do you think is "great?"
Notre Dame looks "solid" as well, but not great by any stretch. I don't think they'll stay within 2 TDs of a full-strength Clemson.
Are USC or Cincy or any of the other potential #4 teams "great?" I don't see it.
Cincy has a great defense and squished a pretty good SMU offense. Their schedule has been worse, but they've been notably more dominant. To qualify, they'll have a conference title and no losses, which is usually a tad overrated, but in a case where you're scraping, it helps.
Notre Dame has top-10 quality offense and defense. It also has a second-best win of the No. 10 team in SP+ (A&M's is 32) and a second-best of 31 (A&M's is 58th).
USC has a top-10 quality offense. The rankings are wildly hard to read for such a small schedule. They have good SP+ wins, but I don't know what to take from that. Still, I'm tie breaking with the conference title, which some years doesn't mean much, but this year, every chip counts.
Whoever gets that spot is gonna get slugged, no way around that. But if I'm picking, the team that does nothing super, has a one-game resume (and it's a tight home win) and can't claim a piece of hardware falls in my estimation, as least right now. Things will change Saturday and maybe my thoughts will.
-
Likely results:
Bama wins.
OSU wins
Clemson/ND win (Clemson I think)
Cincy wins.
That's my four. I don't see anyone else with a proper claim.
-
If Bama and tOSU lose, who knows.
Assuming Clemson over ND, my guess would be:
Only they would probably flip those bottom two to avoid rematches so it would actually be:
-
It is funny, I think all of this tOSU vs aTm discussion is missing the point. IMHO, if tOSU beats NU, they are in. Assuming favorites win the ACC, B1G, and SEC CG's, the top three will be:
Further, as far as tOSU is concerned the B1GCG is win or go home. If they lose, they are out. In a normal, full year if the Buckeyes were undefeated at this point at 12-0 and had looked generally like a CFP team in doing so, the Buckeyes would have at least a modicum of a chance with a close loss in the CG. THEN we'd debate 1-loss tOSU vs 1-loss aTm.
In this case with the Buckeyes at 5-0 heading to the CG, it is win = in, lose = out.
Assuming the top three laid out above, the real debate is going to be at #4 between:
- 8-1 aTm (assuming they beat TN)
- 10-1 Notre Dame
- 9-0 Cincy (assuming they beat Tulsa)
You could make a case for one of the other P5 Champs if it is:
- 9-2 ISU with a win over OU, or
- 8-2 OU with a win over ISU, or
- 6-0 USC with a win over UW
However, I think the two losses would knock out ISU/OU and USC is pretty far back with a whole bunch of closer-than-they-should-have-been wins. I just don't think they'll get in.
Finally, I think this whole debate is academic because, as I said upthread, I would take Bama against an all-star team made up of the best players from aTm, ND, and Cincy. Thus, the debate is simply over which team gets to get drilled by Bama in the Sugar Bowl.
I might have missed it, but I don't see anyone debating A&M versus tOSU. I'm certainly not. My assumptions are that Alabama, Clemson, and Ohio State are in. So I'm debating A&M versus ND, USC, Cincy, etc. as being a discussion of "the best of the rest."
And despite medina's opinions, I continue to see that as a reasonable debate. I'm not stating the ags are undoubtedly #4, I just think their case isn't particularly worse than any of the other contenders.
-
I might have missed it, but I don't see anyone debating A&M versus tOSU. I'm certainly not. My assumptions are that Alabama, Clemson, and Ohio State are in. So I'm debating A&M versus ND, USC, Cincy, etc. as being a discussion of "the best of the rest."
And despite medina's opinions, I continue to see that as a reasonable debate. I'm not stating the ags are undoubtedly #4, I just think their case isn't particularly worse than any of the other contenders.
I don't see any way the committee keeps ND out if they lose a close game to Clemson. If they are blown out by double digits, maybe. But a close game, I think they are in.
-
I don't see any way the committee keeps ND out if they lose a close game to Clemson. If they are blown out by double digits, maybe. But a close game, I think they are in.
Well sure.
And my assumption-- that I've already stated-- is that ND is going to lose to a full-strength Clemson by at least 2 TDs.
-
If Clemson wins a close one, and they include ND, they have to slot Clemson #2 or #3 in effect.
I don't see it.
-
If Clemson wins a close one, and they include ND, they have to slot Clemson #2 or #3 in effect.
I don't see it.
I do. Despite Clemson's recent success, Notre Dame is far more important with respect to turning on television sets, than Clemson is. I do agree that if Clemson just barely squeaks out a victory over ND, it gives ESPN's selection committee all the excuses they need to include Notre Dame.
I just don't think that's going to happen. I think Clemson at full strength is a much better team than Notre Dame, and they'll prove it with a 2+ TD win on Saturday.
-
Well sure.
And my assumption-- that I've already stated-- is that ND is going to lose to a full-strength Clemson by at least 2 TDs.
I just see everyone here assuming that ND will get blown out Saturday. They won the last matchup and not because Sunshine was out. The Tigers backup QB held his own. The problem for Clemson that night was the defense gave up a ton of points. And I don't see why that would change this time.
I could be completely wrong about this, but I just don't see this being a blowout. I think ND and Clemson are neck and neck and on a neutral field, it could go either way. But we'll see.
-
I just see everyone here assuming that ND will get blown out Saturday. They won the last matchup and not because Sunshine was out. The Tigers backup QB held his own. The problem for Clemson that night was the defense gave up a ton of points. And I don't see why that would change this time.
I could be completely wrong about this, but I just don't see this being a blowout. I think ND and Clemson are neck and neck and on a neutral field, it could go either way. But we'll see.
Clemson also had three key defenders out for that game.
-
I might have missed it, but I don't see anyone debating A&M versus tOSU. I'm certainly not. My assumptions are that Alabama, Clemson, and Ohio State are in. So I'm debating A&M versus ND, USC, Cincy, etc. as being a discussion of "the best of the rest."
And despite medina's opinions, I continue to see that as a reasonable debate. I'm not stating the ags are undoubtedly #4, I just think their case isn't particularly worse than any of the other contenders.
Agreed. You are not disagreeing with any of what I meant. I might have said it wrong, but this is where I am.
Ohio State has been a part of a LOT of CFP debates through the years but they were not last year and I don't think they will be this year either. They will be either clearly in (with a win over NU) or clearly out (with a loss to NU) and not part of any debates.
-
Clemson also had three key defenders out for that game.
Are they back for this game? From what I recall, a couple may have had season ending injuries, but I am not sure of that. I really haven't followed them much, nor anyone this year.
Disclaimer: This doesn't even feel like a real CFB season at this point. I am so ready for this to be over and get on with next year. With all of the games that were cancelled for my favorite team, I haven't really gotten into this season much. So I could be completely missing the boat on this one.
-
I don't see any way the committee keeps ND out if they lose a close game to Clemson. If they are blown out by double digits, maybe. But a close game, I think they are in.
ND a one loss ACC not conference champ vs A&M a one loss SEC not conference champ
-
ND a one loss ACC not conference champ vs A&M a one loss SEC not conference champ
ND current #2 in the CFP poll vs A&M currently #5 in the CFP poll. Unless ND gets blown out, why would the committee jump A&M over them? ESPiN has contracts with both the ACC and the SEC, so the talking heads are good either way. :)
-
we would all like to believe this
SEC SEC SEC
-
I think the committee is more independent than most and not worrying about ratings, but I could be wrong. I don't think A&M has a realistic chance. I don't think ND with a loss has much chance either if Cincy wins. Including a G5 is a something some folks want to see of course. So, my guess is Bama Clemson OSU Cincy.
I'm OK with that.
-
ND current #2 in the CFP poll vs A&M currently #5 in the CFP poll. Unless ND gets blown out, why would the committee jump A&M over them? ESPiN has contracts with both the ACC and the SEC, so the talking heads are good either way. :)
It does not have a contract with ND, who still plays its home games on NBC. I don't think the ESecPN crowd will cater to ND.
-
It does not have a contract with ND, who still plays its home games on NBC. I don't think the ESecPN crowd will cater to ND.
Disney makes its money solely on who turns on televisions to watch their CFP. They're not about to scrap millions of Notre Dame viewers simply because ND usually plays on NBC. In fact, this is one of their limited chances to get Notre Dame on their own network rather than a competitor's-- you better believe they'll jump at the chance if there's any way they can rationalize it.
-
I dunno. aTm has a lot of fans too.
-
I dunno. aTm has a lot of fans too.
Bwahahahhahaha
No... they really don't.
-
UGA-Vandy game is cancelled, UGA is said to be looking for another opponent, including A&M as an option, in Athens. That would be interesting. Would A&M vie for a shot by perhaps beating another ranked opponent?
-
SI ranked fanbases last year and aTm was #12. ND was #18.
-
SI ranked fanbases last year and aTm was #12. ND was #18.
Bwahahahahahaha
SI is full of shit as usual.
You can't seriously believe that A&M turns on anywhere near as many TV sets as ND does? I mean, you know you're making a really weird argument here, right???
-
I think the committee is more independent than most and not worrying about ratings, but I could be wrong. I don't think A&M has a realistic chance. I don't think ND with a loss has much chance either if Cincy wins. Including a G5 is a something some folks want to see of course. So, my guess is Bama Clemson OSU Cincy.
I'm OK with that.
Cincy has no chance
not P5
not invited to the party
-
Bwahahahahahaha
SI is full of shit as usual.
You can't seriously believe that A&M turns on anywhere near as many TV sets as ND does? I mean, you know you're making a really weird argument here, right???
ratings also take into account how many fans would like to watch a certain team lose
many more fans hate Notre Dame than the Aggies
-
Bwahahahahahaha
SI is full of shit as usual.
You can't seriously believe that A&M turns on anywhere near as many TV sets as ND does? I mean, you know you're making a really weird argument here, right???
I don't like ND. I'm sure many would like to see them get their asses kicked though. I would.
-
ratings also take into account how many fans would like to watch a certain team lose
many more fans hate Notre Dame than the Aggies
Exactly.
It's like when CBS or Disney gets the chance to broadcast a Dallas Cowboys game. They absolutely love it, because so many people love to watch the Cowboys lose.
-
I don't like ND. I'm sure many would like to see them get their asses kicked though. I would.
Right... exactly... so you're making my point for me. Thanks?
-
Right... exactly... so you're making my point for me. Thanks?
That is the thing. If you are selling advertising you care about eyeballs. Whether those eyeballs are lovers or haters is irrelevant.
-
But beyond that, Notre Dame also has more fans than A&M by orders of magnitude. They don't have to be rabid fans, they just have to be fans that turn on their TVs to watch Notre Dame. Notre Dame absolutely dominates the "casual fan" market because every Catholic out there roots for them, even if they have another rooting interest like Texas or LSU or Oklahoma or whoever.
I have a friend that went to UT with me, he's from Houston and was born and raised a Longhorn fan by Longhorn graduate parents, just like me. But he's also Catholic, and he wears Notre Dame gear almost as much as he wears UT gear and when Texas plays ND, he says things like, "Well, I'm torn on who to root for. I just hope it's a good game with no injuries."
I mean, WTF? How can you be a fan of one school, and say stuff like that?
It makes me hate Notre Dame even more!
-
I don't have much passionate dislike of Notre Dame like I do for say Eastern Michigan.
-
or Wofford
-
Right... exactly... so you're making my point for me. Thanks?
Well, not really. I'm a small sample size.
-
Well, not really. I'm a small sample size.
Ahh, don't sell yourself short. You're a tremendous sample size!
-
Used to be. 40+ pounds later and with a goal of 60, well...
-
Hopefully that's 40- pounds later, or you're going the wrong way lol!
-
Used to be. 40+ pounds later and with a goal of 60, well...
I didn't mean it that way, my old friend. ;)
-
https://www.masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm
Next.
The computers are a bit short on data this year. Their rankings get more valid the more games are played.
Most (all?) of them start with ranking biased toward last year's final results, and they get more "accurate" as they get more data.
Remember the bruhaha in 2014 about needing "one more data point" being the rationale for Baylor and TCU both getting passed by, was it Ohio State?, because the Big 12 didn't have a CCG?
As I said, I think Ohio State is better than USC. But I don't understand the large disparity in their CFP rankings.
-
I think the 3 as usual will be Bama, Clemson, Ohio St.
it's the 4th that is the question
A&M probably gets in over ND - because SEC
I suppose most of us would love to see some carnage / some true 2020 stuff, like NW upset OSU. Gators upset Bama. Notre Dame upset Clemson.
some new blood in there
I would definitely like to see Notre Dame beat Clemson. Again.
And then listen to all the explanation about how the first meeting shouldn't be held against Clemson because Lawrence didn't play in that game.
-
ND beat Clemson of course and UNC, and that's about it for them as well.
I'd like to see Cincy get a shot.
I'd like to see Tulsa beat Cincy. Cincy dodged 'em twice with COVID issues and got out of playing in Tulsa (where 25% occupancy of Skelly Field would have looked like a normal crowd). Or maybe it was Tulsa's problem first and Cincy's second.
Tulsa woulda/coulda/shoulda beaten FoSu in the season opener. If they had, Tulsa-Cincy in the AAC CCG would be a reasonably important game.
OTOH, if frogs had wings . . . .
-
The computers are a bit short on data this year. Their rankings get more valid the more games are played.
Most (all?) of them start with ranking biased toward last year's final results, and they get more "accurate" as they get more data.
Remember the bruhaha in 2014 about needing "one more data point" being the rationale for Baylor and TCU both getting passed by, was it Ohio State?, because the Big 12 didn't have a CCG?
As I said, I think Ohio State is better than USC. But I don't understand the large disparity in their CFP rankings.
I still think that was because they didn't like Baylor, couldn't put in TCU and OSU allowed them to dodge the question. (OSU was obviously quite good, but didn't seem so at the time)
-
I just see everyone here assuming that ND will get blown out Saturday. They won the last matchup and not because Sunshine was out. The Tigers backup QB held his own. The problem for Clemson that night was the defense gave up a ton of points. And I don't see why that would change this time.
Ummm.....
the backup QB played well....so imagine what Sunshine would do
the defense gave up a ton of points...because the offense wasn't consistently holding the ball on long drives
.
The reason it would change is because it's all connected. Clemson couldn't run the ball because that's all ND had to key on. And that's what led to the backup QB putting up good numbers. They held Etienne down (career 7.2 ypc).
-
All the haves are wanting to avoid the 4 seed. The have-nots want it.
I guess they're masochists.
-
I still think that was because they didn't like Baylor, couldn't put in TCU and OSU allowed them to dodge the question. (OSU was obviously quite good, but didn't seem so at the time)
Ding, ding, ding! Me too. I’ve always thought the committee liked TCU better than Ohio St and Baylor but couldn’t justify putting them in.
-
Ding, ding, ding! Me too. I’ve always thought the committee liked TCU better than Ohio St and Baylor but couldn’t justify putting them in.
I believe TCU won 49-3 and moved down 2 spots? Ugh.
The ultimate injustice was pitting TCU vs Boise State that one year. Because of that bit of nonsense, we still have people wanting Cincinnati in this year's playoff.
-
4 spots, 5 Big boy conferences
Cincy - no chance
undefeated USC would have a better chance
-
Ding, ding, ding! Me too. I’ve always thought the committee liked TCU better than Ohio St and Baylor but couldn’t justify putting them in.
TCU had a much better argument against tOSU than Baylor did. They had to treat Baylor as the B12's #1 and that made it pretty easy.
-
TCU had a much better argument against tOSU than Baylor did. They had to treat Baylor as the B12's #1 and that made it pretty easy.
Yep
-
The committee makes their choice based on opinion, and reverse engineers the narrative to rationalize it.
Every time. And not just the 4 teams- the order as well to ensure they get the matchups they want.
This year will be no different.
-
the truth
-
Evidence against Cincinnati: a game against Tulsa improves their schedule.
No. No, no, no. That should be like the 6th or 8th or 10th-best team you play in a year. Tulsa should never be a big feather in your cap.
-
The committee makes their choice based on opinion, and reverse engineers the narrative to rationalize it.
Every time. And not just the 4 teams- the order as well to ensure they get the matchups they want.
This year will be no different.
I think that is true to a certain extent, but results trump opinion sometimes. I really believe a lot of committee members in an honest moment would have told you they really thought TCU deserved to be in the top 4 but couldn’t rationalize doing it based on the results of the season. I think a lot of them probably were of the opinion in 2015 that Ohio St was one of the four best teams in the country but couldn’t put them there based on the results of the season.
So, I don’t entirely accept they do what they want and reverse engineer their rationale.
-
If Cincy gets in and the loses 63-3, the next few years could change.
-
Damn right, um hum.
-
Evidence against Cincinnati: a game against Tulsa improves their schedule.
No. No, no, no. That should be like the 6th or 8th or 10th-best team you play in a year. Tulsa should never be a big feather in your cap.
both statements are true
-
If Cincy gets in and the loses 63-3, the next few years could change.
They already "got in" last year.
42 Ohio State
3 Cincinnati
-
In 02, Cincinnati was one dropped TD pass away from upsetting the NC Buckeyes.
-
Evidence against Cincinnati: a game against Tulsa improves their schedule.
No. No, no, no. That should be like the 6th or 8th or 10th-best team you play in a year. Tulsa should never be a big feather in your cap.
Would be fourth for A&M, same for Florida once they play Bama. Fifth for Bama, however.
-
In 02, Cincinnati was one dropped TD pass away from upsetting the NC Buckeyes.
... wasn't like every team that year?
-
yeah, I always referred to that team as the Luckeyes
-
... wasn't like every team that year?
Naw, just six or seven teams that year. They smoked Texas Tech, Kent State and Washington State to open the season, then the Cincinnati game was the first of several close games. All told they won 7 games by double digits, most of which were rather one sided.
-
Naw, just six or seven teams that year. They smoked Texas Tech, Kent State and Washington State to open the season, then the Cincinnati game was the first of several close games. All told they won 7 games by double digits, most of which were rather one sided.
(That was meant to be lighthearted. I liked that 2002 team a good bit)
-
When I get some time, maybe around Christmas, I'll go through and see what teams in Whoa Nellie are most similar throughout history, in terms of per-play. Might find some surprises.
A lot of pass-happy teams were very pedestrian per attempt.
-
I don't see a "legit" Number Four that is much different from Cincinnati. At least they undefeated in this scenario. Is there some other team with a decent chance to upset Alabama right now?
Meh, bring in the the new guy and let him get trounced.
-
I'm ok with that, as long as he gets trounced
-
Yeah, well who isn't going to get trounced in that 4 spot? Iowa State? A&M?
-
speaking of Iowa st. If ND beats Clemson and Ohio St. is upset by Northwestern
A&M and ISU could be in
-
Assume Iowa State makes it in, is that any better than putting Cincinnati in if they are undefeated?
Maybe the score is 42-14 instead of 63-3?
-
Assume Iowa State makes it in, is that any better than putting Cincinnati in if they are undefeated?
Maybe the score is 42-14 instead of 63-3?
It's 2020. Let's let a G5 get massacred for once.
Hell, it's 2020. Maybe they'll win.
-
the Bear just had nice things to say about the Cyclones on the committee ranking show
in one metric, Cyclones better than A&M and just a bit off from Clemson
maybe the Birds in a blender would give Bama a helluva game
I know onw thing, the Cyclone fans would just love to be in. Ass whippin or not
-
It's kind of sad the playoff committee clearly had no intent to put any G5 team anywhere near the playoff, no matter what they do on the field. Makes the whole enterprise less legitimate and less fun. But it does help the bottom line for the power conferences.
-
https://twitter.com/DanWetzel/status/1339035949167243265?s=19
-
It's kind of sad the playoff committee clearly had no intent to put any G5 team anywhere near the playoff, no matter what they do on the field. Makes the whole enterprise less legitimate and less fun. But it does help the bottom line for the power conferences.
what have they done on the field?
the G5 team with the most impressive resume is probably Coastal Carolina.
beat Kansas by 15 and BYU by 5. Any other P5 wins?
Cincy? any wins over P5 teams?
LOUISIANA of course has a great win over ISU and a loss to Coastal.
Did any of these G5 teams play the type of schedule as Iowa State, A&M, Florida, Georgia, Oklahoma, Indiana???
-
schedule schedule schedule schedule schedule
Maybe Cincinnati is great. But we still wouldn't know it, even if COVID hadn't screwed everyone's schedules up. The lone P5 game the Bearcats scheduled originally was Nebraska.
I mean shit. If you don't schedule (much less play) a team in the preseason top 50, what's with all the bitching and moaning about fairness?
Everyone - the media, the fans, their OWN fans would obliterate a USC or Michigan or Auburn if their toughest scheduled game was vs Nebraska in 2020. It would be impossible, thanks to P5 conference scheduling. But imagine if Notre Dame came up with an independent schedule whose toughest test was Nebraska.
It would be a joke. What's the difference?
-
Let's edit Cinci's original schedule to merit consideration into the playoff, if they'd manage to get through it unscathed:
- 09/03 – Austin Peay
- 09/11 –
Western Michigan - 09/19 – at Miami
(OH) (FL) - 09/26 – at Nebraska
- 10/03 –
South Florida - 10/17 – at Tulsa
- 10/24 – at
SMU TCU - 10/31 – Memphis
- 11/07 – Houston
- 11/12 –
East North Carolina - 11/21 – at UCF
- 11/28 – at Temple
There we go, that's better. Go undefeated with Michigan, Miami, Florida, TCU, and UNC in there, THEN we'll talk. But sorry/not sorry, there's way too many cardinal directions and piles of crap in the real one to complain about a goddamn thing.
-
what have they done on the field?
the G5 team with the most impressive resume is probably Coastal Carolina.
beat Kansas by 15 and BYU by 5. Any other P5 wins?
Cincy? any wins over P5 teams?
LOUISIANA of course has a great win over ISU and a loss to Coastal.
Did any of these G5 teams play the type of schedule as Iowa State, A&M, Florida, Georgia, Oklahoma, Indiana???
Iowa State got blown out by Louisiana and is ranked above Cincinnati and Coastal Carolina.
-
Let's edit Cinci's original schedule to merit consideration into the playoff, if they'd manage to get through it unscathed:
- 09/03 – Austin Peay
- 09/11 –
Western Michigan - 09/19 – at Miami
(OH) (FL) - 09/26 – at Nebraska
- 10/03 –
South Florida - 10/17 – at Tulsa
- 10/24 – at
SMU TCU - 10/31 – Memphis
- 11/07 – Houston
- 11/12 –
East North Carolina - 11/21 – at UCF
- 11/28 – at Temple
There we go, that's better. Go undefeated with Michigan, Miami, Florida, TCU, and UNC in there, THEN we'll talk. But sorry/not sorry, there's way too many cardinal directions and piles of crap in the real one to complain about a goddamn thing.
This isn't even criticism. This is the Dr. Suess style of criticism, where you can't be in the playoffs if you don't play the right teams and you can't play the right teams if you aren't in the right group.
-
OMFG.
ISU...............Cinci...........Coastal Silliness
Louisiana.....Austin Peay?.....@Kansas
@TCU..........Army.............Campbell?
OU..............S Fla...............Ark St
TexasTech....@SMU.............@Louisiana
@Okla St.......Memphis.........GA Southern
@Kansas.......Houston..........@GA State
Baylor............ECU...............South AL
K-State...........@UCF............App St
@Texas...........-------............@Texas St
WV.................-------............BYU
----...............--------...........Troy
I'm going to bold the "decent and tougher" games. You know, the games an average team might lose. The games a UCLA or Kentucky or a Virginia might lose.
Then, I'll mark in red the crap-fest dead weight games. Then we'll all open our eyes big and wide and see what's there. And then the Bearcats can go away.
.
Cincinnata?
Fewer games.
3 crap games
1 game against a team with a pulse. ONE
.
Meanwhile, ISU is playing 8 teams that could easily beat it. Yeah, it lost to 2 of them, BUT IT BEAT 6 OF THEM. 6 wins over genuine threats vs 1.
.
The Myrtle Beach Spring Breakers have a crap schedule, too, obviously, and shouldn't be taken seriously. And aren't.
-
Iowa State got blown out by Louisiana and is ranked above Cincinnati and Coastal Carolina.
I have no problem with this and the committee agrees
because, since the first game of the season, Iowa State has been impressive with an impressive schedule
-
This isn't even criticism. This is the Dr. Suess style of criticism, where you can't be in the playoffs if you don't play the right teams and you can't play the right teams if you aren't in the right group.
You can play the right teams if you schedule them.
COVID happened, no OOC games (for the most part). Bad luck.
Want citations?
1976 Florida State - crap sandwich independent, now in the ACC with 3 national championships
1984 Louisville - considered dropping down to I-AA, hired a name HC, joined Conf USA, then Big East, now in the ACC
1995 TCU - conference disbanded, was part of the have-nots, joined the WAC, then Conf USA, MWC, and now the Big 12
1990 Rutgers - joined the Big East, was its whipping boy for a decade, then a year in the AAC, now in the Big Ten
1998 Utah - longtime WAC member, moved up to new MWC, did well, now in the PAC-12
.
It takes time and luck and vision and patience and a willingness to schedule above your weight class over and over and over, but if you're able to do that, then you get to earn your seat at the table.
.
This one-good-year whining is bullshit
-
what have they done on the field?
the G5 team with the most impressive resume is probably Coastal Carolina.
beat Kansas by 15 and BYU by 5. Any other P5 wins?
Cincy? any wins over P5 teams?
LOUISIANA of course has a great win over ISU and a loss to Coastal.
Did any of these G5 teams play the type of schedule as Iowa State, A&M, Florida, Georgia, Oklahoma, Indiana???
Fearless. There are almost no non-conferece games. There's a pandemic.
There were like what? 25 P5-G5 games total?
-
schedule schedule schedule schedule schedule
Maybe Cincinnati is great. But we still wouldn't know it, even if COVID hadn't screwed everyone's schedules up. The lone P5 game the Bearcats scheduled originally was Nebraska.
I mean shit. If you don't schedule (much less play) a team in the preseason top 50, what's with all the bitching and moaning about fairness?
Everyone - the media, the fans, their OWN fans would obliterate a USC or Michigan or Auburn if their toughest scheduled game was vs Nebraska in 2020. It would be impossible, thanks to P5 conference scheduling. But imagine if Notre Dame came up with an independent schedule whose toughest test was Nebraska.
It would be a joke. What's the difference?
Cool, we can eliminate A&M. Sounds great.
-
OMFG.
ISU...............Cinci...........Coastal Silliness
Louisiana.....Austin Peay?.....@Kansas
@TCU..........Army.............Campbell?
OU..............S Fla...............Ark St
TexasTech....@SMU.............@Louisiana
@Okla St.......Memphis.........GA Southern
@Kansas.......Houston..........@GA State
Baylor............ECU...............South AL
K-State...........@UCF............App St
@Texas...........-------............@Texas St
WV.................-------............BYU
----...............--------...........Troy
I'm going to bold the "decent and tougher" games. You know, the games an average team might lose. The games a UCLA or Kentucky or a Virginia might lose.
Then, I'll mark in red the crap-fest dead weight games. Then we'll all open our eyes big and wide and see what's there. And then the Bearcats can go away.
.
Cincinnata?
Fewer games.
3 crap games
1 game against a team with a pulse. ONE
.
Meanwhile, ISU is playing 8 teams that could easily beat it. Yeah, it lost to 2 of them, BUT IT BEAT 6 OF THEM. 6 wins over genuine threats vs 1.
.
The Myrtle Beach Spring Breakers have a crap schedule, too, obviously, and shouldn't be taken seriously. And aren't.
I think the most hilarious thing is that just last year, Clemson went to the playoffs despite playing a terrible schedule. The ACC was worse than the AAC if you removed Clemson (and of course you must do that when looking at their schedule). It was historically bad. Of course, no one questioned Clemson getting into the playoffs, because we aren't idiots. Unless of course you are in the wrong conference, and then we must question everything, no matter how little sense it makes.
Not to mention, OSU's schedule sucks this year too. Apparently they should be out. Since the actual results of games no longer matters, we can just pick whatever teams played the toughest schedule.
-
Cool, we can eliminate A&M. Sounds great.
Yeah, you haven't seen the SOS rankings, have you. LOL
-
I think the most hilarious thing is that just last year, Clemson went to the playoffs despite playing a terrible schedule. The ACC was worse than the AAC if you removed Clemson (and of course you must do that when looking at their schedule). It was historically bad. Of course, no one questioned Clemson getting into the playoffs, because we aren't idiots. Unless of course you are in the wrong conference, and then we must question everything, no matter how little sense it makes.
Not to mention, OSU's schedule sucks this year too. Apparently they should be out. Since the actual results of games no longer matters, we can just pick whatever teams played the toughest schedule.
Clemson had a track record of recent greatness. Tell us about Cincinnati's track record. And despite a weak-ass ACC, they still played Texas A&M and South Carolina OOC and Virginia in-conference. 3 more threatening teams than anyone Cincinnati has played this year.
There is no argument here. You're providing zero substance.
-
Presuming no upsets, Bama and OSU are in, plus the ACC champ. Upsets are unlikely. It would be fun if every team got upset (Bama/OSU) to see what happened.
But it's unlikely. Clemson/ND winner is in, and then a pastry for Bama to hammer like a RHSC.
-
If everyone is upset, I think nothing changes. The same 4 that would get in do get in. A&M is a literal place-holder.
-
Yeah, you haven't seen the SOS rankings, have you. LOL
OAM, this is the strangest thing. You talk about wanting to look past the surface so often. You whined and moaned when rankings stacked up losses. If they were that, they were instantly not acceptable. You get bent out of shape when someone dares to say a small school guy's NFL success can tell us about the numbers he piled up in college.
And then you come with this. This flattened out number, and tell me it tells me something about what you've said is a vital part of a team's playoff case. By this logic, if Cincy signs up to get shithoused by Bama, well that's a net positive, because it's gonna boost that SOS. Golly Gee. Isn't that convenient.
Right now, going 9-1 against that awesome SOS means one top-30 win and two top-55 wins per SP+. Two wins against winning teams. If that's the mark of a strong SOS, it can eff right off. Maybe A&M gets in on the strength of "We beat UF and had Bama on the schedule." At times, you've argued it's about letting the "best teams" in, and even on that measure, A&M ain't that close to top five.
(It's also perhaps the most CFB world view that the most important thing is the one a team has to rely on other to do, but such is life)
-
I was just saying you were wrong about A&M's SOS this season.
I agree with you that it's not very impressive, but we're comparing it to the norm. This season, it is impressive, as it's ranked highly. In a vacuum, A&M's schedule is crap. But when half the teams played fewer than 8 games (just a random guess to make the point), an unimpressive 9-game schedule becomes impressive in the context of this season.
.
So no, stating the fact that A&M's 2020 SOS is ranked highly doesn't go against any prior points I've made. It's just stating what is.
-
Rutgers and Illinois almost always have great SOS.
-
Rutgers and Illinois almost always have great SOS.
Right, because they can't play themselves, lol.
-
If everyone is upset, I think nothing changes. The same 4 that would get in do get in. A&M is a literal place-holder.
I think OSU would drop out. Bama is probably still in. ND would be in obviously. Then you would have controversy.
-
If everyone is upset, I think nothing changes. The same 4 that would get in do get in.
In a normal year where "undefeated heading into the B1GCG" meant 12-0 I would agree with you. In this odd year where Ohio State is undefeated heading into the B1GCG at just 5-0, I don't think the Buckeyes can get in with a loss but in your completely chaos hypothetical maybe. I also think that Clemson with two losses is a stretch. Their best win would be over a Miami team that just got curb-stomped by UNC.
Assume all P5 CG's result in upsets:
- UF over Bama: UF is 8-2 SEC Champs, Bama is 10-1.
- ND over Clemson: ND is 11-0 ACC Champs, Clemson is 9-2.
- NU over tOSU: NU is 7-1 B1G Champs, tOSU is 5-1.
- ISU over OU: ISU is 9-2 B12 Champs, OU is 7-3.
- Ore over USC: Ore is 4-2 P12 Champs, USC is 5-1.
Notre Dame would get the #1 seed for sure. After that . . .
Contenders for 2-4:
- 10-1 Bama with a blowout win over aTm and only loss in SECCG to UF.
- 9-2 Clemson with two losses both to ND and best win is Miami, FL.
- 5-1 tOSU whose best win is IU.
- 8-1 aTm with a blowout loss to Bama, best win is UF.
- 9-2 UF with a win over Bama but a loss to aTm and a loss to a sub .500 team.
- 7-2 UGA with best win over Auburn. Losses were to good teams but neither was close.
- 9-0 Cincy best win is . . . Tulsa?
- 12-0 CCU best win is . . . BYU or Louisiana?
- 7-1 Northwestern best win is tOSU, loss is to a horrible MSU team.
I think Bama would pretty clearly be in.
I think aTm and UGA are completely out because they wouldn't even be top-2 in their own conference behind UF/Bama.
I don't think Cincy or CCU gets there because the schedules are too soft.
After ND an Bama I'm thinking the other two come from UF/Clemson/tOSU so you could be right but I just don't see it. I don't think you can take 2-loss non-Champion Clemson while leaving a 2-loss SEC Champion out. Thus, I think UF is in and the fourth spot might be between tOSU and Clemson.
-
I was just saying you were wrong about A&M's SOS this season.
I agree with you that it's not very impressive, but we're comparing it to the norm. This season, it is impressive, as it's ranked highly. In a vacuum, A&M's schedule is crap. But when half the teams played fewer than 8 games (just a random guess to make the point), an unimpressive 9-game schedule becomes impressive in the context of this season.
.
So no, stating the fact that A&M's 2020 SOS is ranked highly doesn't go against any prior points I've made. It's just stating what is.
If that's impressive, it is not worth considering. We can consider something else, something that might tell us something.
If it's schedule schedule schedule schedule schedule, we should either find a metric that tells us something, not just shout out stuff we don't believe in. Shoot, A&M's schedule was probably much tougher if you're the No. 40 team in the country. But we ain't talking about that team.
-
Clemson had a track record of recent greatness. Tell us about Cincinnati's track record. And despite a weak-ass ACC, they still played Texas A&M and South Carolina OOC and Virginia in-conference. 3 more threatening teams than anyone Cincinnati has played this year.
There is no argument here. You're providing zero substance.
My argument is games should matter. SOS is a great tiebreaker. I can buy that you give teams a mulligan when playing a tough schedule. But your argument and the committee are saying it literally doesn't matter what Cincy or anyone in the wrong conference does on the field. This makes the games pointless.
-
My argument is games should matter. SOS is a great tiebreaker. I can buy that you give teams a mulligan when playing a tough schedule. But your argument and the committee are saying it literally doesn't matter what Cincy or anyone in the wrong conference does on the field. This makes the games pointless.
Schedule really matters, except when your program did something before, then schedule doesn't matter.
I honestly don't even mind if "they kicked the hell out of most teams" is a metric, as you can apply that in a lot of spots.
-
I suspect this year if we line up how many decent teams any of these guys have played it's a short list.
-
My argument is games should matter. SOS is a great tiebreaker. I can buy that you give teams a mulligan when playing a tough schedule. But your argument and the committee are saying it literally doesn't matter what Cincy or anyone in the wrong conference does on the field. This makes the games pointless.
I agree with you. Certain schools can look at their schedules for the upcoming year and understand that even if they win all of their games, they won't be national champs or in the playoff. UCF knows this, Utah learned it. Tulane, Boise State, and others have learned it. My point is that this is already known. You're acting like it's a surprise situation we've never faced before, when it actually happens every 2-3 years or so.
So for these programs, it's up to them to schedule above their weight class OOC while vying to move up to a better conference. That's what the list of teams I previously provided did. So now, when FSU or TCU or Louisville wins all their games, they WILL be included. It took years and years, but they did what they had to do.
If Cincinnati wants things to change, they have to do what I laid out. It's that simple.
-
How many decent to very good P5 teams want to schedule Cincy?
Until they get to P5, they have limited options. They might schedule Vandy, maybe.
-
My argument is games should matter. SOS is a great tiebreaker. I can buy that you give teams a mulligan when playing a tough schedule. But your argument and the committee are saying it literally doesn't matter what Cincy or anyone in the wrong conference does on the field. This makes the games pointless.
This season, maybe. With so few OOC opportunities, the G5's didn't have much of a chance.
The argument is simple. G5's week-in and week-out play VASTLY weaker opposition than P5's. Top five teams in the SEC, B1G, AAC, and SunBelt (per Massey's composite (https://www.masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm)):
- #1 Bama, #3 tOSU, #5 Cincy, #14 CCU: Ok, not too far off
- #6 aTm, #10 IU, #22 Tulsa, #20 LA: Bigger spread
- #7 UGA, #15 IA, #25 UCF, #34 ApSt: bigger spread
- #13 UF, #18 NU, #50 Memphis, #72 GaSo: Humongous spread
- #27 Auburn, #31 UW, #51 SMU, #76 GaSt: Still larger
The worst team in the SEC and B1G is #120 Vandy but they are a serious outlier. The next worst in the SEC is #101 USCe while the two worst teams in the B1G are #93 IL and #85 RU: There are four Sun Belt teams and two AAC teams 101+ but no B1G teams and only two SEC teams.
-
Schedule really matters, except when your program did something before, then schedule doesn't matter.
I honestly don't even mind if "they kicked the hell out of most teams" is a metric, as you can apply that in a lot of spots.
The thing that gets me is why rank G5 teams at all. Is there any consistent reason to not rank LSU above Cincinnati? They hit all the same criteria - tougher schedule, better win, losses are irrelevant.
-
There are four Sun Belt teams and two AAC teams 101+ but no B1G teams and only two SEC teams.
-
How many decent to very good P5 teams want to schedule Cincy?
Until they get to P5, they have limited options. They might schedule Vandy, maybe.
No one said it's easy. Cinci needs to swallow its pride and play 2-for-1s. They need to do whatever they have to do in order to move on up to that deluxe apartment in the sky.
-
The thing that gets me is why rank G5 teams at all. Is there any consistent reason to not rank LSU above Cincinnati? They hit all the same criteria - tougher schedule, better win, losses are irrelevant.
Boo-hoo. You're acting like a little kid now.
-
This season, maybe. With so few OOC opportunities, the G5's didn't have much of a chance.
The argument is simple. G5's week-in and week-out play VASTLY weaker opposition than P5's.
Shhhhh, simple people are only able to recall the ends of the spectrum: good wins and bad losses. The, you know - 90% in the middle, is hush-hush.
-
Boo-hoo. You're acting like a little kid now.
Man, that’s honestly an uncalled for reaction to a legitimate question. You mentioned those criteria as a reason a team like Iowa St should be ranked over Cincinnati. He correctly points out it can be used for a team with a losing record like LSU to be ranked over them, too.
How is that acting like a kid?
-
No one said it's easy. Cinci needs to swallow its pride and play 2-for-1s. They need to do whatever they have to do in order to move on up to that deluxe apartment in the sky.
true, all the G5 teams know the reality.
They are all hoping to catch that one season in a decade or two where there are only a few one loss or undefeated P5 teams
then an undefeated G5 team with a "decent" schedule, perhaps a couple solid P5 wins, not Kansas. will be enough to get them past the 2 loss P5 schools and into the top 4.
obviously this is not likely. If they want their shot, they know how to get in the top 4. Play a top 4 schedule and win the games.
Play Texas or Oklahoma from the Big 12 or Ohio St. or Penn St or Wisconsin from the Big Ten. Play Clemson or Auburn or Georgia.
no, those teams have little reason to play a really good G5 team. Play those P5 teams in their house and don't ask for a check.
Otherwise the G5 teams can continue to whine and bitch this time of year.
-
Boo-hoo. You're acting like a little kid now.
Well it's a kids' game. But it's a real question. Iowa State unquestionably played a tougher schedule than Cincinnati. They also lost 2 games. Where is the line? 3 games? 4 games? 5 games? They beat Baylor and Texas by a combined 10 points. If they lose those games, why shouldn't they still be ranked ahead of Cincinnati?
-
Presuming no upsets, Bama and OSU are in, plus the ACC champ. Upsets are unlikely. It would be fun if every team got upset (Bama/OSU) to see what happened.
But it's unlikely. Clemson/ND winner is in, and then a pastry for Bama to hammer like a RHSC.
even before the playoff, many or most fans rooted for multiple upsets this week
it's only happened a few times - 1998? K-state lost
-
Man, that’s honestly an uncalled for reaction to a legitimate question. You mentioned those criteria as a reason a team like Iowa St should be ranked over Cincinnati. He correctly points out it can be used for a team with a losing record like LSU to be ranked over them, too.
How is that acting like a kid?
Becausssssssse LSU isn't ranked. And guess why? Because of its losses!
-
Becausssssssse LSU isn't ranked. And guess why? Because of its losses!
Well, and because it’s mostly been bad, which contributes to losses.
-
Becausssssssse LSU isn't ranked. And guess why? Because of its losses!
But they played a tough schedule.
-
I understand youse guys are having a helluva good time arguing
but, we could just wait until Saturday night after the games have been played
-
Well it's a kids' game. But it's a real question. Iowa State unquestionably played a tougher schedule than Cincinnati. They also lost 2 games. Where is the line? 3 games? 4 games? 5 games? They beat Baylor and Texas by a combined 10 points. If they lose those games, why shouldn't they still be ranked ahead of Cincinnati?
The votes dictate where the line is. Obviously, if Iowa State lost to either Baylor or Texas (very unequal losses, btw), they'd be ranked lower and probably lower than Cincinnati.
I've talked about this at length previously. There is a real, factual chasm between P5 and G5. You asked why even rank G5 teams at all, and you're right - to not rank them would be more honest. But to provide the illusion of equality, G5 teams are ranked in the top 15 around the middle of the season if they're undefeated. And if they're up there, they get a crumb from the big kids' table in their bowl game. And then they go away.
It would be more fair and honest to tell G5 programs that they're in limbo and don't have a realistic shot at the national championship. Because they're not FCS and not P5, they literally cannot win any national championship (unless they invent their own, like UCF did). They are in purgatory. It sucks. It's dishonest to pretend they have a shot, because they very much do not.
But bringing it up year after year is boring. It is what it is. There are other schools with much more to gripe about than Cincinnati. Do what Utah did, and until you do, deal with the reality.
-
We usually have more data by now.
-
But they played a tough schedule.
You're being obtuse on purpose. Stop.
-
We usually have more data by now.
and we always still argue about it
-
Obviously, there is overlap between G5 teams and P5 teams. Some P5s are clearly better than some G5s.
-
true, all the G5 teams know the reality.
They are all hoping to catch that one season in a decade or two where there are only a few one loss or undefeated P5 teams
then an undefeated G5 team with a "decent" schedule, perhaps a couple solid P5 wins, not Kansas. will be enough to get them past the 2 loss P5 schools and into the top 4.
obviously this is not likely. If they want their shot, they know how to get in the top 4. Play a top 4 schedule and win the games.
Play Texas or Oklahoma from the Big 12 or Ohio St. or Penn St or Wisconsin from the Big Ten. Play Clemson or Auburn or Georgia.
no, those teams have little reason to play a really good G5 team. Play those P5 teams in their house and don't ask for a check.
Otherwise the G5 teams can continue to whine and bitch this time of year.
The demand will always outpace the reality.
1. Schedule like nobody does
2. Get the right year when you are awesome
3. Win all the those games or you’re out
Amd most years, I don’t totally care. Hell, this year there will probably be not much good reason to put Cincy in. But I shrug at this rush to say, “we don’t have enough good teams, let us lower the standard until we let in this other team.” In the end, whose ass gets kicked isn’t the biggest deal, but as long as we all agree some people are unable to earn the spot no matter what, then we’re probably on equal ground. (The follow would be to say if you can’t earn the spot no matter what, there’s not much need for it to be a referendum on that team, but I know that would irk some).
-
and we always still argue about it
No we don't, we never argue about rankings here, except this year.
-
You're being obtuse on purpose. Stop.
He’s stealing your move!
-
Obviously, there is overlap between G5 teams and P5 teams. Some P5s are clearly better than some G5s.
Sure.
But the problem with that is those G5 teams play MUCH weaker schedules every year than the lowly P5 programs. So they still lose in the end.
-
He’s stealing your move!
I'm only acute on purpose.
-
Over my winter break, I'm going to go back 30-40 years and find the toughest schedule by a G5 team. I can basically promise it won't be higher than 30th or 40th.
-
The demand will always outpace the reality.
1. Schedule like nobody does
2. Get the right year when you are awesome
3. Win all the those games or you’re out
Amd most years, I don’t totally care. Hell, this year there will probably be not much good reason to put Cincy in. But I shrug at this rush to say, “we don’t have enough good teams, let us lower the standard until we let in this other team.” In the end, whose ass gets kicked isn’t the biggest deal, but as long as we all agree some people are unable to earn the spot no matter what, then we’re probably on equal ground. (The follow would be to say if you can’t earn the spot no matter what, there’s not much need for it to be a referendum on that team, but I know that would irk some).
there is history to show it can be done
respect is earned by your performance on the field. Sometimes this takes many many years to prove.
Bobby Bowden built FSU out of nothing. But, he did it by traveling to Lincoln, NE and Norman, OK and winning.
The spot can be earned, but it won't be easy.
Obviously, the committee doesn't think Coastal or Cincy has done enough for long enough to earn their respect.
I agree
-
I guess there are people who don't know this, but FSU was a random-ass independent in 1981. They had just tasted success in 1980. Sure, they were independent, but so is BYU today. Their schedule sucks, too.
Here's what FSU scheduled in 1981 to get on the map. In consecutive weeks:
@ 17 Nebraska
@ 7 Ohio State
@ Notre Dame
@ 3 Pitt
@ LSU
They went 10-2 the previous year, but they knew they weren't in the "in" group. So they scheduled like that the following year. They went 3-2 in those games. They also played 13 Miami and 14 So. Miss later in the year, going 6-5. But they earned respect.
3 years later, they were ranked in the preseason and kept scheduling tough.
1984: @ 4 Miami, 16 Auburn, @ 5 S.Carolina, 3 Florida
Of course, they played Memphis and Tulane and East Wherever, but they scheduled 4-5 big-boy teams, understanding that they had to in order to eventually get a seat at the table.
The Bearcats have one good year and want it all. Screw that. Utah went 12-0 TWICE and was still left out. So they were proactive and joined the PAC-10. NOW if Utah goes 12-0, they're in the party. NOW there is no doubt.
-
there is history to show it can be done
respect is earned by your performance on the field. Sometimes this takes many many years to prove.
Bobby Bowden built FSU out of nothing. But, he did it by traveling to Lincoln, NE and Norman, OK and winning.
The spot can be earned, but it won't be easy.
Obviously, the committee doesn't think Coastal or Cincy has done enough for long enough to earn their respect.
I agree
FSU played a top-10 schedule two years before Bowden arrived. His team played an Orange Bowl and reached the top 6 before it played a top-30 schedule. They didn't win a big ranked road game until the year after that (unless you count at BC). And it didn't win a title until it joined a power conference.
Again, most years, I don't care. And this year, I probably won't. But christ, if we're gonna fall all over ourself to pump someone up that we'd normally side eye. Let em in, let em get housed, it'll be fine.
-
the Bearcats could certainly be an independent if they think their conference and conference schedule are holding them back
-
Again, most years, I don't care. And this year, I probably won't. But christ, if we're gonna fall all over ourself to pump someone up that we'd normally side eye. Let em in, let em get housed, it'll be fine.
but, if we let them in to get housed, they take some $$$ away from the P5
-
Over my winter break, I'm going to go back 30-40 years and find the toughest schedule by a G5 team. I can basically promise it won't be higher than 30th or 40th.
Well, it could well be some team that went 2-8 for the season and played as a pastry for the money. Tulane comes to mind as a possible. Southern Mississippi?
Does Georgia Tech count 1964-1982? Pittsburg? Penn State? It gets a bit fuzzy going back maybe.
-
In any event, right now, Cincinnati is a better team than Iowa State by the fancystats, and has a better record. It's feels pretty wild that ISU is above them in any ranking.
-
Tulane in 1970 was 8-4 and all but two opponents were P5, Air Force and Cincinnati were the exceptions. They played UGA and won.
-
Well, it could well be some team that went 2-8 for the season and played as a pastry for the money. Tulane comes to mind as a possible. Southern Mississippi?
Does Georgia Tech count 1964-1982? Pittsburg? Penn State? It gets a bit fuzzy going back maybe.
Pssst, lol, 30-40 years only goes back to 1980. I don't need to wade in the waist-deep muck before then. :)
-
In any event, right now, Cincinnati is a better team than Iowa State by the fancystats, and has a better record. It's feels pretty wild that ISU is above them in any ranking.
The fact that you're still posting the same line of thinking is pretty wild.
Let me guess: you're not easily swayed by reasoned argument and evidence. AmIright?
-
FSU played a top-10 schedule two years before Bowden arrived. His team played an Orange Bowl and reached the top 6 before it played a top-30 schedule. They didn't win a big ranked road game until the year after that (unless you count at BC). And it didn't win a title until it joined a power conference.
How'd they do vs that top 10 schedule? lol
We're chiding Bobby Bowden now??? Sheesh.
The point is, to beat good teams, you have to play them. And when you initially play them, you'll get stomped. But you keep playing them and start winning some. Then, if you've got a good HC and support for your program, you'll start willing more of those games than you lose. And then, eventually, finally, when you win them all (or nearly all), you'll be on top of the mountain.
Cincinnati scaled the monkey bars at their local park and want a medal for it. Nuh uh.
-
Comparing BCS standings to fourth CFB Playoff rankings
https://247sports.com/college/nebraska/LongFormArticle/College-football-playoff-rankings-BCS-standings-conference-championship-weekend-Alabama-Florida-Clemson-Notre-Dame-157041685/#157041685_1 (https://247sports.com/college/nebraska/LongFormArticle/College-football-playoff-rankings-BCS-standings-conference-championship-weekend-Alabama-Florida-Clemson-Notre-Dame-157041685/#157041685_1)
-
Comparing BCS standings to fourth CFB Playoff rankings
https://247sports.com/college/nebraska/LongFormArticle/College-football-playoff-rankings-BCS-standings-conference-championship-weekend-Alabama-Florida-Clemson-Notre-Dame-157041685/#157041685_1 (https://247sports.com/college/nebraska/LongFormArticle/College-football-playoff-rankings-BCS-standings-conference-championship-weekend-Alabama-Florida-Clemson-Notre-Dame-157041685/#157041685_1)
The compromised, no MOV BCS rankings? Bleh.
The Colley Index is fun:
1 - Alabama
2 - Coastal Myrtle Bch
3 - Cinci
4 - ND
5 - UL - Lafayette
6 - Clemson
7 - BYU
8 - San Jose St
9 - Ohio St
10 - USC
Exhibit A on why the computers were nixed. Jesus F-ing Christ.
-
Here, I've changed my mind.
Because it's 2020 and all bets are off, I DEMAND we have an 8-team playoff.
1 vs 8, 2 vs 7, and on. And the seedings must be:
1 Alabama vs 8 San Jose St
2 Notre Dame vs 7 BYU
3 Ohio State vs 6 Coastal Whathaveyou
4 Clemson vs 5 Cincinnati
After they count up the dead bodies, once and for all the P5 can shut the hell up.
-
I guess there are people who don't know this, but FSU was a random-ass independent in 1981. They had just tasted success in 1980. Sure, they were independent, but so is BYU today. Their schedule sucks, too.
Here's what FSU scheduled in 1981 to get on the map. In consecutive weeks:
@ 17 Nebraska
@ 7 Ohio State
@ Notre Dame
@ 3 Pitt
@ LSU
They went 10-2 the previous year, but they knew they weren't in the "in" group. So they scheduled like that the following year. They went 3-2 in those games. They also played 13 Miami and 14 So. Miss later in the year, going 6-5. But they earned respect.
3 years later, they were ranked in the preseason and kept scheduling tough.
1984: @ 4 Miami, 16 Auburn, @ 5 S.Carolina, 3 Florida
Of course, they played Memphis and Tulane and East Wherever, but they scheduled 4-5 big-boy teams, understanding that they had to in order to eventually get a seat at the table.
The Bearcats have one good year and want it all. Screw that. Utah went 12-0 TWICE and was still left out. So they were proactive and joined the PAC-10. NOW if Utah goes 12-0, they're in the party. NOW there is no doubt.
I'm sure it pains you to use a bitter rival as the example but FSU 1980 is my stock answer to any G5 fan that thinks their team deserves a shot. Go to Lincoln, go to Columbus, go to South Bend, go to (then not now) Pittsburg, go to Baton Rouge.
A G5 team that wants a seat at the CFP table needs to play the best possible P5 opponents in ALL of their OOC games because they have to make up for the humongous difference between their conference SoS and a typical P5 conference SoS.
For an example from another sport, look at Gonzaga's OOC schedule. It includes:
- Kansas
- Auburn
- WVU
- Baylor
- Iowa
Last year it included:
- aTm
- Oregon
- Michigan
- Washington
- Arizona
- UNC
I still think their schedule overall isn't up to P5 standards but they play enough P5 OOC that we are able to have some idea of whether or not they are any good. That doesn't come from one game.
-
I agree with a lot of what OAM is saying. It can’t be all about record, schedule has to be factored in. It’s just a gray fuzzy area where there is no line clear line of separation. A lot of people can stomach ranking a one loss P5 over an undefeated G5 but 2 losses starts to make us uneasy. Three losses gets us firmly into the “do games even matter?!” Territory.
At some point for all of us record starts to trump schedule in how we rank these teams but there is nothing definitive about where that line is.
-
The fact that you're still posting the same line of thinking is pretty wild.
Let me guess: you're not easily swayed by reasoned argument and evidence. AmIright?
Lol I understand the argument. It's just silly. Right now, as we speak, Cincinnati would likely be favored over Iowa State on a neutral field. Also Cincinnati is undefeated, and ISU is 2 losses away from that. Simply claiming ISU's schedule is tougher is true, but if that's the criteria then what is the point of playing the games? Why go through the whole song and dance in the first place?
-
How'd they do vs that top 10 schedule? lol
We're chiding Bobby Bowden now??? Sheesh.
The point is, to beat good teams, you have to play them. And when you initially play them, you'll get stomped. But you keep playing them and start winning some. Then, if you've got a good HC and support for your program, you'll start willing more of those games than you lose. And then, eventually, finally, when you win them all (or nearly all), you'll be on top of the mountain.
Cincinnati scaled the monkey bars at their local park and want a medal for it. Nuh uh.
Not chiding the man. He also had a different situation. He could actually schedule 11 games, not just four. And other teams weren't looking out to protect their playoff paths.
Let's put it this way. If you came to me and just said, the have nots ain't allowed. That I can live with. But this idea where we create more and more elaborate things. The 7-year FSU build? That's a relic of a different world. Teams that want to host a Cincinnati aren't that common. Bobby was great, but he could lose 3-5 games a year at a teachers college and not create issues.
This nonsense where we turn it into blame, that's silly as hell. You're saying, "Why isn't Cincy going 8-4 every year so some kids in middle school can play in the playoff? They haven't earned it." Just say they're not allowed. These things are out of their hands. They could be as good as the situation the players and for the most part coaches can possibly be, and they're not allowed in. They've done nothing to not "earn it." They just can't break in, and based on this year, they can't even help kids five years down the road with the fantasy approach.
-
I understand youse guys are having a helluva good time arguing
but, we could just wait until Saturday night after the games have been played
Are you asking them to get along all week?well that's no Fun
-
8 teams.
- 5 P5 champs
- 2 at-large selections
- 1 top G5
Solved. G5 gets a seat at the table. See if they do anything with it.
-
No 8 teams it's already been explained - Sunday bound Guys will sit for stretching it out.And I don't blame them
-
I sorta want Cincy in the mix to shut them up for a while. The UCF thing got on my nerves a bit at times.
-
Not chiding the man. He also had a different situation. He could actually schedule 11 games, not just four. And other teams weren't looking out to protect their playoff paths.
Let's put it this way. If you came to me and just said, the have nots ain't allowed. That I can live with. But this idea where we create more and more elaborate things. The 7-year FSU build? That's a relic of a different world. Teams that want to host a Cincinnati aren't that common. Bobby was great, but he could lose 3-5 games a year at a teachers college and not create issues.
This nonsense where we turn it into blame, that's silly as hell. You're saying, "Why isn't Cincy going 8-4 every year so some kids in middle school can play in the playoff? They haven't earned it." Just say they're not allowed. These things are out of their hands. They could be as good as the situation the players and for the most part coaches can possibly be, and they're not allowed in. They've done nothing to not "earn it." They just can't break in, and based on this year, they can't even help kids five years down the road with the fantasy approach.
Solid point regarding Bowden and the scheduling. Teams were more willing to schedule tougher OOC then. Bowden had the flexibility being an independent to schedule 5 tough road games but still get in 6 home dates that the AD budget probably required. Fickell has at least 4 conference road dates to honor every year. He can’t just schedule 4 additional road dates OOC and only play 4 home games a year.
-
You need to be independent to schedule up, it's a must.
-
This nonsense where we turn it into blame, that's silly as hell. You're saying, "Why isn't Cincy going 8-4 every year so some kids in middle school can play in the playoff? They haven't earned it." Just say they're not allowed. These things are out of their hands. They could be as good as the situation the players and for the most part coaches can possibly be, and they're not allowed in. They've done nothing to not "earn it." They just can't break in, and based on this year, they can't even help kids five years down the road with the fantasy approach.
but, they've done nothing to earn it.
I've heard enough of, "no good teams want to play us, because we might beat them"
cincy can absolutely put better competition on the schedule, but they are not doing it.
The schedule doesn't even have to be as good as an SEC team or a B1G team, but it needs to be MUCH better than is was this season. They aren't even trying.
Nebraska is a good "name" to have on the schedule, but Ohio St. isn't getting credit for beating Nebraska. Why should Cincy?
-
I know it's been stated, but the issue for Cincy (and Boise, and other teams like that in the past) is getting a P5 to even put you on the schedule. It's a no-win for a school like Michigan to schedule Cincy, or Appy State.
-
Solid point regarding Bowden and the scheduling. Teams were more willing to schedule tougher OOC then. Bowden had the flexibility being an independent to schedule 5 tough road games but still get in 6 home dates that the AD budget probably required. Fickell has at least 4 conference road dates to honor every year. He can’t just schedule 4 additional road dates OOC and only play 4 home games a year.
he can't, or he chooses not too?
my take is they don't want it bad enough. If they don't want it enough to go prove it on the field, then they can quit whining.
-
I know it's been stated, but the issue for Cincy (and Boise, and other teams like that in the past) is getting a P5 to even put you on the schedule. It's a no-win for a school like Michigan to schedule Cincy, or Appy State.
it's not easy, but it can be done
go 2 for 1
if that won't fly go 2 for 1 neutral
or 3-1
or 2 for 0 like FSU did back in the day
just excuses
like I said, they don't want it bad enough, they'd like someone to give it to them.
-
I know it's been stated, but the issue for Cincy (and Boise, and other teams like that in the past) is getting a P5 to even put you on the schedule. It's a no-win for a school like Michigan to schedule Cincy, or Appy State.
Well, usually what IMHO scuttles it for many of these teams is that the G5 wants a home and home, or at least a 2 for 1, and if they're not getting a return game in their own stadium they want a paycheck.
What do you think a typical P5 team would do if Cincy or any other high-end G5 said "we'll come play, in your stadium, free, no strings or return game requirements attached"?
Against a team like that you're going to get a sellout in your stadium, rather than the lukewarm response you get when you bring in a pastry, you might get showcased on a better TV network than FS2 or BTN-alternate, and you earn an extra ~$1M against todays paycheck game rates because you don't need to pay them off.
Would Michigan be more willing to schedule Cincinnati if it cost them zero and they never had to worry about a return game? How many P5 teams would jump at the chance of having 8+ home games nearly every year?
-
but, they've done nothing to earn it.
I've heard enough of, "no good teams want to play us, because we might beat them"
cincy can absolutely put better competition on the schedule, but they are not doing it.
The schedule doesn't even have to be as good as an SEC team or a B1G team, but it needs to be MUCH better than is was this season. They aren't even trying.
Nebraska is a good "name" to have on the schedule, but Ohio St. isn't getting credit for beating Nebraska. Why should Cincy?
I can't find their schedule for 2020 before Covid wrecked everything. Last season they played UCLA and at OSU. In 2018 they played at UCLA. Next year they play at Indiana and at Notre Dame. 2022 they play at Arky and they play Indiana.
I'd say they are trying.
-
Would Michigan be more willing to schedule Cincinnati if it cost them zero and they never had to worry about a return game? How many P5 teams would jump at the chance of having 8+ home games nearly every year?
ED Zachery!!!
-
I can't find their schedule for 2020 before Covid wrecked everything. Last season they played UCLA and at OSU. In 2018 they played at UCLA. Next year they play at Indiana and at Notre Dame. 2022 they play at Arky and they play Indiana.
I'd say they are trying.
good try, now if you'd like to take it up a notch
-
They are in a conference. They have to play those games first and foremost, or go independent. The latter is not going to happen. BYU has a hard time getting games, and they have more cache than Cincy.
-
it's not easy, but it can be done
go 2 for 1
if that won't fly go 2 for 1 neutral
or 3-1
or 2 for 0 like FSU did back in the day
just excuses
like I said, they don't want it bad enough, they'd like someone to give it to them.
They still have an athletic budget though that home football games play a big part in meeting. You can’t just give up home games several years in a row in the hopes you get lucky one year and land in the playoff or that you get a P5 invite.
-
UC's shot is to do well enough at G5 to get invited, just as Louisville did, and others.
-
They still have an athletic budget though that home football games play a big part in meeting. You can’t just give up home games several years in a row in the hopes you get lucky one year and land in the playoff or that you get a P5 invite.
then they really don't want to be with the big boys enough to be one of the big boys
just be a little boy and cry about being left out
-
UC's shot is to do well enough at G5 to get invited, just as Louisville did, and others.
yup, they will need to get VERY lucky and have only 3 undefeated or 1-loss P5 teams
and then they will have to go undefeated and have some luck as to the strength of their schedule
probably never happen
a helluva long shot
-
he can't, or he chooses not too?
my take is they don't want it bad enough. If they don't want it enough to go prove it on the field, then they can quit whining.
Yes, but that take is easy. It ignores the fact that these teams are not playing to lose three games a year on the off chance a gatekeeper will say at the end "OK, now you've done enough."
Now if the standard is, they must earn it, but the other half of the schools get to inherit what someone else earned, well it means that word "earn" is hollow as a dump.
Football teams can't play four home games a year. If the answer is the only way to earn that is to do something fantastical for years and years, then it can't really be earned at all. Might as well just convince donors to give $500 million to buy their way into the Big 12. And all of a sudden, they'd have "earned" their way in.
-
Frankly, I find it amazing that people are actually rooting for college football's power structure. Like how dare a team be good despite not playing in the Big 12.
-
UC's shot is to do well enough at G5 to get invited, just as Louisville did, and others.
Which means it's not really earned at all. IF you're G5, you're not allowed. And that's fine, but don't throw around "earn" like the players or coaches could be doing a damn thing more.
-
I'm for including an undefeated Cincy. Better them than UGA.
-
then they really don't want to be with the big boys enough to be one of the big boys
just be a little boy and cry about being left out
I can see it now: "Well our conference can't take them, they're broke. They don't have the good sense to actually schedule enough home football games to pay the bills. But man, they were impressive going 8-4 four years in a row before finally going 10-2."
-
I think it they win 10+ games a year for 2-3 years the B12 will come calling.
-
I think it they win 10+ games a year for 2-3 years the B12 will come calling.
Why?
-
B12 just went through the exercise of looking for expansion candidates about 2-3 years ago. They determined that all existing applicants were more likely to dilute their conference rather than strengthen it.
I don't think a few years of strong play by Cincinnati, particularly if they might be subject to getting their coach [who got them there] poached at any moment, to be something that would have the B12 "come calling".
-
then they really don't want to be with the big boys enough to be one of the big boys
just be a little boy and cry about being left out
You’re essentially saying unless they are willing to do away with all practicality and common sense that they just don’t want it enough.
-
Well, it's possible the B12 is going to stand pat no matter what. I think UC fits in pretty well overall if they can bring a pretty decent product to the field of play.
Why not?
-
Well, it's possible the B12 is going to stand pat no matter what. I think UC fits in pretty well overall if they can bring a pretty decent product to the field of play.
Why not?
For the reasons that bwar pointed out-- they're a net negative to the conference.
The only reason for expansion/realignment, is to make more money. UC would not generate more money for the conference, than they took away. So every school would actually make less.
The B12 currently distributes more money per school than all but the SEC and the B1G, and that's not even counting the Tier3 rights which B12 schools retain.
There's no financial reason to expand, which means there's no reason to expand.
-
I think UC fits in pretty well overall if they can bring a pretty decent product to the field of play.
Why not?
I don't think a few years of strong play by Cincinnati, particularly if they might be subject to getting their coach [who got them there] poached at any moment, to be something that would have the B12 "come calling".
There you have it
-
It's a no-win for a school like Michigan to schedule Cincy, or Appy State.
Or Toledo. Or the Utes.
-
there is history to show it can be done
respect is earned by your performance on the field. Sometimes this takes many many years to prove.
Bobby Bowden built FSU out of nothing. But, he did it by traveling to Lincoln, NE and Norman, OK and winning.
The spot can be earned, but it won't be easy.
Obviously, the committee doesn't think Coastal or Cincy has done enough for long enough to earn their respect.
I agree
Bowden never won in Norman. He never beat OU period. FSU beat OU in the 1964 (season) Gator Bowl in the first meeting of the two programs. Since then, it's been 6-0 OU. 2 wins in Norman, 1 in Tallahassee, 3 in the Orange Bowl. Bowden was 0-4 in the middle of all that.
-
The Bearcats have one good year and want it all. Screw that. Utah went 12-0 TWICE and was still left out. So they were proactive and joined the PAC-10. NOW if Utah goes 12-0, they're in the party. NOW there is no doubt.
Cincinnati went 33-7 in one three year stretch.
They've won 30 games the past three seasons.
(The idea that Utah was simply "proactive" and suddenly got the golden ticket seems ... simplified to the point of lacking meaning)
-
I sorta want Cincy in the mix to shut them up for a while. The UCF thing got on my nerves a bit at times.
I want Tulsa to beat them. That ends the yammering.
The playoff seems to be doing more harm than good to the sport of college football.
I read all through the thread about how the P5 teams won't schedule a strong G5 like Cincinnati. That's the playoff talking. Teams have to schedule their way to the CFP.
College football has lost more than it has gained from this system that was supposed to fix everything wrong with the game.
Give me bowls and polls.
-
B12 just went through the exercise of looking for expansion candidates about 2-3 years ago. They determined that all existing applicants were more likely to dilute their conference rather than strengthen it.
I don't think a few years of strong play by Cincinnati, particularly if they might be subject to getting their coach [who got them there] poached at any moment, to be something that would have the B12 "come calling".
I was hoping that the Big 12 would add two "eastern" teams to give WVU some conference neighbors. Cincinnati was a possibility. So was Louisville before they got into the ACC.
And, yeah, the financials weren't promising. Not in the short term, anyway.
But it seems like short-term thinking is part of the reason there are aren't still 12 teams in the Big 12.
TCU is a good example of a mid-major that played its way into a P5 conference.
But they don't really bring financial benefits to the Big 12 either, from what I can tell.
-
Frankly, I find it amazing that people are actually rooting for college football's power structure. Like how dare a team be good despite not playing in the Big 12.
You're completely missing the point.
I don't care if Cincinnati is good or not. I'm happy for any team that does well (and isn't a rival of Florida's).
The point is a team going 9-0 vs a shit schedule wanting a shot at the national championship. No. Of course, no.
-
Lol I understand the argument. It's just silly. Right now, as we speak, Cincinnati would likely be favored over Iowa State on a neutral field. Also Cincinnati is undefeated, and ISU is 2 losses away from that. Simply claiming ISU's schedule is tougher is true, but if that's the criteria then what is the point of playing the games? Why go through the whole song and dance in the first place?
You'd have to ask the voters that. I didn't rank ISU 6th, they did. And even if Cincinnati would be favored over ISU tomorrow, how many teams ranked below Cincinnati would be favored against the Bearcats?
.
Part of the ISU being ranked 6th is WHEN you lose mattering. Another silly relic from simple-minded voters.
.
And now people are bitching about Florida only moving down 1 spot. It throws out the WHEN you lose mattering, but brings up a different point: the gap between each ranking spot is not equal. There are narrow gaps between #2 and #3 or there can be a wide gap between the same 2 spots. Obviously, Florida was ahead of 7th-ranked ISU by a wide margin (and thus, all others below it) so that a loss only dropped the Gators 1 spot.
.
All of this has to be taken into consideration.
-
Here, I've changed my mind.
Because it's 2020 and all bets are off, I DEMAND we have an 8-team playoff.
1 vs 8, 2 vs 7, and on. And the seedings must be:
1 Alabama vs 8 San Jose St
2 Notre Dame vs 7 BYU
3 Ohio State vs 6 Coastal Whathaveyou
4 Clemson vs 5 Cincinnati
After they count up the dead bodies, once and for all the G5 can shut the hell up.
Seriously, let's do this and then the charade of G5 programs having a shot can be put to rest.
They don't have a shot, but they're told they do. It's dishonest. They're in purgatory. It's 2020, everything is upside-down. Give the G5 half the spots and watch the carnage.
-
Last year, Utah got up to 5th and were 11-1. Why? They were in the Pac-12 and played a P5 schedule.
In 2008, Utah got up to 8th and were 12-0. Why? They were in the MWC and played a G5 schedule.
In 2004, Utah got up to 5th in the regular season and were 11-0. Why? They were in the MWC and played a G5 schedule.
Utah got up to 5th WITH A LOSS because their schedule didn't have 2 losable games on it, but 6+. It had depth. They earned their ranking by playing a viable schedule.
Teams they played OOC in 08 and 04: Michigan, Texas A&M, Arizona, UNC, Oregon State......some good names there. But they also played Utah State twice and Weber State.
But in-conference, when some of your games are against UNLV, New Mexico, and Wyoming...that's the issue. Maybe Cincinnati does have to go independent. Maybe they do have to screw up their budget.
.
I feel for these programs, believe it or not. But they're ignoring the reality of the situation. Whatever steps they take, the only answer to real change is to force your way into the party. Whether that means going undefeated 5 straight years or going independent or playing 4 OOC games on the road vs 'likely to be ranked' P5 teams, then do it.
.
Conference affiliation is just like home values - location really matters. If you have the nicest house in your neighborhood, it puts a ceiling on the value. IF Cincinnati is the nicest program in the conference, it needs to hire a real estate agent. I'm not exactly sure it is the nicest program in their conference, but that's a whole other discussion.
.
It also probably doesn't help that when the Bearcats got to play in NY6 bowls, they stunk (08 season Orange Bowl, 09 season Sugar). It shouldn't matter, but it might.
-
Bowden never won in Norman. He never beat OU period. FSU beat OU in the 1964 (season) Gator Bowl in the first meeting of the two programs. Since then, it's been 6-0 OU. 2 wins in Norman, 1 in Tallahassee, 3 in the Orange Bowl. Bowden was 0-4 in the middle of all that.
yup, he only got one win in Lincoln. He knew he wouldn't win them all, but he was building street cred with the losses to the helmets.
People respected him for that
I'm sure he cashed a few nice checks along the way
-
You’re essentially saying unless they are willing to do away with all practicality and common sense that they just don’t want it enough.
yes
-
I feel for these programs, believe it or not. But they're ignoring the reality of the situation. Whatever steps they take, the only answer to real change is to force your way into the party. Whether that means going undefeated 5 straight years or going independent or playing 4 OOC games on the road vs 'likely to be ranked' P5 teams, then do it.
I think all the suggestions point to the simple answer, there isn't such a way, short of bankrolling something that if you could reasonably bankroll it, you wouldn't need to do this in the first place (or just win and win and hope someone lets you in).
Utah did most of the same things as Cincy (did beat Bama once, tho), they just were in the right spot when a desperate and badly run P5 wanted a boost, plus they were a state flagship. FSU had a team at No. 2 heading into the bowls before the great drive for attention.
They're not allowed because of structural reasons. At a point, it is what it is. So no need to say, "What if they could design a whole schedule out of Nebraska games?" Keep winning, hope a spot in the club opens and understand the rankings are just adornments.
-
With all the conference realignment that has occurred from the formation of the Big 12 to today, very little has changed with regards to BCS/P5 membership.
The only net gains (mid-major in 96, P5 today) have been Utah, Louisville and Texas Christian.
The only net loss (BCS in 96, G5 today) was Temple.
The rest of the original Big East are all in P5 conferences today. There were a few teams with a brief stint at the BCS level in the revamped Big East, but they all wound up right back where they started when the Big East became the American following its demotion from P5 to G5. A few like Cincy, USF and UConn were able to make the most of it while it lasted, and make a little noise.
-
I think all the suggestions point to the simple answer, there isn't such a way, short of bankrolling something that if you could reasonably bankroll it, you wouldn't need to do this in the first place (or just win and win and hope someone lets you in).
Utah did most of the same things as Cincy (did beat Bama once, tho), they just were in the right spot when a desperate and badly run P5 wanted a boost, plus they were a state flagship. FSU had a team at No. 2 heading into the bowls before the great drive for attention.
They're not allowed because of structural reasons. At a point, it is what it is. So no need to say, "What if they could design a whole schedule out of Nebraska games?" Keep winning, hope a spot in the club opens and understand the rankings are just adornments.
That's a big thing. Cincinnati will NEVER be the draw that Utah is, because it's not a flagship, or even a "flagship-equivalent", i.e. one of two schools in a state that might be considered on par (IU/Purdue, UNC/NCSt, Iowa/ISU, etc).
With all the conference realignment that has occurred from the formation of the Big 12 to today, very little has changed with regards to BCS/P5 membership.
The only net gains (mid-major in 96, P5 today) have been Utah, Louisville and Texas Christian.
The only net loss (BCS in 96, G5 today) was Temple.
The rest of the original Big East are all in P5 conferences today. There were a few teams with a brief stint at the BCS level in the revamped Big East, but they all wound up right back where they started when the Big East became the American following its demotion from P5 to G5. A few like Cincy, USF and UConn were able to make the most of it while it lasted, and make a little noise.
And I think those are worth looking at.
Utah I don't think was a desperation play by the PAC-12. In many ways both they and Colorado "fit" the profile of the PAC-12, both are flagship universities in their state, and were pretty natural fits.
TCU and WVU were a desperation play by the Big 12. They had already lost Nebraska and Colorado to be down to 10, and were losing A&M and Mizzou the next year. They would have been down to 8 and it would have killed the conference IMHO. TCU doesn't improve the footprint of the conference and WVU isn't even remotely close to a geographic fit, so that was purely a numbers play.
Louisville was also a bit of a numbers game. They were a Big East school that was probably going to be left out of the conference realignment when the Big East fell apart. The teams the ACC wanted when it went to 14 (Pitt/Syracuse, plus ND as a special scheduling arrangement) were invited for 2013. But Maryland ditched the ACC to the B1G and opened up an extra spot. If Maryland hadn't left the ACC, I definitely don't think that Louisville would have been invited to the B1G, so I doubt they would have found a home in the ACC. I'm not sure they would have landed in P5.
So what will get Cincy a potential spot somewhere? Someone else vacating a spot or some conference wanting to increase their numbers further. The Big 12 is out IMHO because they realize that Cincy will dilute them, not improve them, unless someone leaves the conference. Which means unless the B1G and SEC start raiding the ACC [or Big 12] to get to 16, and the ACC [or Big 12] starts considering Cincy just to remain alive, they don't have a home.
-
Rutgers has a spot. Hmm.
-
Rutgers has a spot. Hmm.
I know how much you hate Rutger, but would you really ditch them to pick up Cincinnati? It's not even close.
-
Cincinnati may have to do what Gonzaga did in basketball.
Seriously schedule road games vs top 10 teams and start winning them. And keep doing that until you're in. The Zags didn't suddenly start winning more games, but they started winning games vs legit opponents, so they went from being a 12 seed to a 9 to a 4 and now no one bats an eye if they're a 1 seed.
-
I know how much you hate Rutger, but would you really ditch them to pick up Cincinnati? It's not even close.
I'd rather go back to 11.
-
Cincinnati is 0-8 vs ranked OOC teams the past 12 years. That might have something to do with the lack of respect for this year's squad, who couldn't play any OOC games (and thus, has a high school schedule).
-
I'd rather go back to 11.
Not 10? Aside from being a helmet program, had Penn State made itself at home and belong in the B1G?
-
I know how much you hate Rutger, but would you really ditch them to pick up Cincinnati? It's not even close.
If that trade was offered, I’d take it.
-
Maybe UC is dilutive NOW but perhaps not in the future? Imagine the B12 invites say Houston and decides they need an even number of teams. Memphis? Cincy? I could envision a situation where a conference would look for a team to round things out.
Maybe.
But it might take a situation where said conference is desperate as happened last time with UL et al.
-
Cincinnati is 0-8 vs ranked OOC teams the past 12 years. That might have something to do with the lack of respect for this year's squad, who couldn't play any OOC games (and thus, has a high school schedule).
It doesn’t. You’ve done more thinking than they have. And for working in a school, you don’t seem to ever know how they work.
-
It doesn’t. You’ve done more thinking than they have. And for working in a school, you don’t seem to ever know how they work.
What's the connection between the playoff committee and a school again? Or how college athletic department scheduling and financing compares to teaching in an elementary school? I'm all ears.
-
Not 10? Aside from being a helmet program, had Penn State made itself at home and belong in the B1G?
PSU can stay. 11 is a good number to play 10 conference games.
-
Seriously, let's do this and then the charade of G5 programs having a shot can be put to rest.
They don't have a shot, but they're told they do. It's dishonest. They're in purgatory. It's 2020, everything is upside-down. Give the G5 half the spots and watch the carnage.
It wouldn't differ much from the playoffs now. Have we had one year where at least one game wasn't a blowout?
-
If that trade was offered, I’d take it.
I wouldn't.
-
It wouldn't differ much from the playoffs now. Have we had one year where at least one game wasn't a blowout?
Ok, but they haven't all or even nearly all been blowouts. I'll ignore the NC games because any team that got there already won a semi-final. In the semis we have had:
- 39 point win (Oregon over FSU in 2014)
- 38 point win (Bama over MSU in 2015)
- 35 point win (LSU over OU in 2019)
- 31 point win (Clemson over tOSU in 2016)
- 27 point win (Clemson over ND in 2018)
- 20 point win (Clemson over OU in 2015)
- 18 point win (Bama over Clemson in 2017)
- 17 point win (Bama over Washington in 2016)
- 11 point win (Bama over OU in 2018)
- 7 point win (tOSU over Bama in 2014)
- 6 point win (Clemson over tOSU in 2019)
- OT win (UGA over OU in 2017)
So in 12 semi-finals we have:
- 4 five+ possession games
- 1 four possession game
- 3 three possession games
- 1 two possession games
- 3 one possession games
That isn't all that bad. One quarter of the games have been great. UGA's and OU's OT thriller along with tOSU's one TD win over Bama and six point loss to Clemson were all great games. Even the four two and three possession games aren't all that bad. Those, for the most part, represent reasonably competitive games where the loser wasn't all that far off. Less than half have been just complete blowouts.
-
If we think a 17 point win is a noncompetitive game (arguably), more than half fall into that group.
-
If we think a 17 point win is a noncompetitive game (arguably), more than half fall into that group.
You are right at least some of the time. I didn't dig into it. Obviously a 17 point game could be either of two extremes (highly competitive, winner scored a bunch right at the end or not competitive at all, loser scored a bunch right at the end) or anything in between.
The examples I always use when we talk MOV are two Ohio State games that I attended:
- In 2006 the Buckeyes beat Penn State by 22 points, 28-6. Sounds like a blowout, right? Not so fast. The Buckeyes trailed at the half (3-0) and led by just four points (7-3) entering the fourth quarter. In the fourth quarter the Buckeyes scored a second TD to stretch their lead to 14-3 but PSU answered with another FG to make it a one-possession game at 14-6 mid-way though the final period. The game was a fairly evenly matched defensive struggle and with a little over two minutes remaining PSU was driving near midfield. At that point it still could have gone either way. Then PSU threw pick-6's on back-to-back possessions and the Buckeyes won by the comfortable-looking final score of 28-6.
- Way back in 1995 while I was a student the Buckeyes beat Iowa by 21 points, 56-35. Sounds closer than the aforementioned PSU game, right? Not so fast. The Buckeyes absolutely obliterated Iowa in that game. Shortly before halftime the Buckeyes led 56-0 and HC John Cooper started pulling starters. That year's Heisman winner didn't see the field again after scoring Ohio State's eighth TD of the game. The starting QB, TE, and a starting WR also didn't play for Ohio State in the second half and it showed. After building up a 56-0 lead the Buckeyes got outscored 35-0 in the final 31 minutes to win by the much-closer-than-it-was score of 56-35.
The actual game in question is Bama's 17 point win over Washington in 2016. Washington scored first and it was tied going into the second quarter. Bama scored a TD late in the second quarter to take a 10 point lead into halftime (17-7) and that carried though the scoreless third quarter. The stats are pretty lopsided but watching it live I didn't feel like Washington was completely hopeless until Bama scored their final TD early in the fourth quarter. Ie, it seemed reasonably competitive to me.
The 18 point win (Bama over Clemson) also felt reasonably competitive to me. Bama opened up a 10-0 lead early but Clemson clawed their way back to within four points (10-6) early in the third quarter. Bama scored a TD late in the third quarter to stretch their lead out to 11 points (17-6) but it still didn't feel completely hopeless until Clemson threw a Pick-6 on the ensuing possession and fell behind by the 24-6 final score.
I would consider both of those games to be "reasonably competitive". FWIW, I define "reasonably competitive basically by asking the question:
- If you were a neutral fan watching the game (I was for both of those), at what point would you have decided that it was hopeless for team that eventually lost.
The answer to that question defines blowout, reasonably competitive game, or thriller:
- Before halftime or early in the third quarter: Blowout.
- Mid-third to early fourth quarter: Reasonably competitive game.
- Later in the fourth quarter: Good game.
Those two games became hopeless for the eventual loser late in the third (Clemson) and early in the fourth (Washington) so I consider both to be reasonably competitive.
-
Perhaps we might agree half the games were not very competitive, it's not a bright line distinction.
-
I'd rather go back to 11.
So that makes life even harder on Cincinnati (and other G5 programs trying to get into the P5), which is the point.
Unless somehow the B12 finds that it's only way back to 12 is to take Nebraska and Cincinnati is the best second team to pair with Nebraska. It's also assuming that Nebraska wants to go crawling back to Texas the Big 12. I think they'd go independent for a while before they did that.
Maybe conferences start contracting as a whole, and then we have room for a P6 again. Maybe Cincinnati finds a home there?
-
If that trade was offered, I’d take it.
Not a chance. Rutgers is a fine academic institution. 63rd in the US News & World Reports ranking. Flagship state university of NJ. Fits academically in the B1G. Has history--was the birthplace of college football, even if it appears stillborn now.
Cincinnati is 143rd in the national rankings. Not a flagship in their own state. Not academically or culturally a fit for the conference, despite being in OH.
Maybe Cincy has more recent football relevance, but they're not B1G material.
Maybe UC is dilutive NOW but perhaps not in the future? Imagine the B12 invites say Houston and decides they need an even number of teams. Memphis? Cincy? I could envision a situation where a conference would look for a team to round things out.
Maybe.
But it might take a situation where said conference is desperate as happened last time with UL et al.
Exactly. Cincinnati won't get into P5 "by winning a lot". They might get into P5 by winning a lot in the situation where some P5 conference is desperate to add teams, and Cincinnati is the best fit of the premier G5 schools.
And even then, it depends on the conference. Let's say that Northwestern, as a private liberal arts school, decides to cancel their football program due to CTE. Do you think the B1G would rather ask Cincinnati to join, or play with only 13 teams? I'm guessing they'd look for a MUCH better fit to stay at 14, and if they couldn't get anyone, would live with 13 rather than accept Cincy.
If the whole system blows up, and let's say TX/OU go to the SEC to get to 16, and KS/ISU go to the B1G to get to 16, and suddenly the B12 is looking for Cincy (and several other teams) to come keep their conference alive? Well then Cincy won't end up in the P5, they'll end up in the G6 while the SEC/ACC/B1G/PAC will become the P4.
Cincy dilutes a conference. Nobody is salivating to add them, even if they string together a decade of good seasons. Boise State strung together a decade of good seasons, but they don't have the academics for the PAC and weren't a good fit for the B12. Hence on the field results didn't overcome everything else.
Cincy's best opportunity is a restart of truly disruptive conference realignment -- and even that doesn't guarantee that the conference they land in doesn't get decimated to the point where it's no better than where they are now.
-
KS/ISU go to the B1G to get to 16
no, No, and NO!
Kansas BB is great but this is about money, academics, money, fit, money, football, and did I mention money?
Kansas is #124 in the USNWR rankings. Not even close.
On the money side, Kansas is a state of <3M people. That isn't enough to move the needle. It would dilute the pool. The pie would get bigger but each slice would get smaller.
Iowa State is #118 in the USNWR rankings, no.
Iowa is a state of just over 3M people but we already have the flagship school from that state. It would never make sense to add a second school from Iowa. It already arguably doesn't make sense to have two schools each from Indiana (pop 6.7M), Michigan (pop 9.9M), and Illinois (pop 12.7M) and those states are twice, three times, and four times as populous as Iowa. Same as Kansas, the pie would get bigger (maybe, I'm not even sure of that) but the slices would get smaller.
The B1G already effectively turned down Mizzou and they are the flagship in a state of 6.1M. If we didn't want Mizzou, there is no way we'd want Kansas of ISU. If and when we expand it will be either to get Texas (and maybe Oklahoma along with) or to a fast-growing Atlantic Coast State to the South of Maryland (UVA, VaTech, UNC, NCST, GaTech).
-
Hey look, y'all created a realignment thread!
-
Fair enough.
So how's this... If the ACC decides to get greedy and dilute themselves by adding Cincinnati, I could actually see UVA/UNC jumping to the B1G in disgust, Clemson and VaTech jumping to the SEC, and the rest of the deck chairs shuffling to the Big 12 who decide they can add more eastern teams from the ACC to match up with WVU and just be a geographic monster.
And then the ACC becomes G6.
-
Yeah, some of these posts are showing how some of us haven't gone down the realignment rabbit hole. It's all about expanding footprint and academics (if that's your thing).
ISU isn't moving up the totem pole, ever.
KU has the AAU but lacks the football or borders with a B1G state.
KU is sort of in a purgatory, unless the SEC made a move west and added an OK school with it.
.
Clemson wouldn't jump into the SEC, as good a program as they are.
It would be UNC and a VA team, or if UNC's academics got it into the B1G with UVA, then NC State and VT would join the SEC.
Hell, in either of these cases, the Big 12 others and the ACC others would join to form a very good conference. Both cannot go on existing on a long timeline.
-
Rather than hopping on one foot and reciting the alphabet backwards, they will probably just carry on being the Bearcats; part of a select group of upper tier G5 teams; Houston, Memphis, Boise, BYU, and a few others.
-
Rather than hopping on one foot and reciting the alphabet backwards, they will probably just carry on being the Bearcats; part of a select group of upper tier G5 teams; Houston, Memphis, Boise, BYU, and a few others.
All of which will continue being second-class citizens.
-
Rather than hopping on one foot and reciting the alphabet backwards, they will probably just carry on being the Bearcats; part of a select group of upper tier G5 teams; Houston, Memphis, Boise, BYU, and a few others.
Yeah. Who cares what conference these teams are in. The G5 has some good teams this year. The P5...not so much. It's fun when teams can crack through. If there is some arrival barrier keeping them out, it's a hell of a lot less fun.
-
IF?
2020 Cincinnati and Coastal Carolina
2018 UCF
2017 UCF
2016 Western Michigan
2010 TCU
2009 TCU, Cincinnati, and Boise State
2008 Utah and Boise State
2007 Hawai'i
2006 Boise State
2004 Utah and Boise State (and Auburn, actually - left out behind 2 helmets)
1999 Marshall
1998 Tulane
1993 West Virginia (left out in lieu of 2 helmet programs)
1992 Texas A&M (champ of weak-ass SWC)
1987 Syracuse (independent w/ weak-ass schedule)
1985 Bowling Green (undefeated, barely ranked (#20))
It's not an "if," it's a certainty.
The crumb the NCAA (or whoever decides these things) was to allow the highest-ranked G5 champ into one of the New Year's Six bowl games. That crumb was the compromise between being totally neglected (see above) and actually being given a seat at the table.
They have no seat at the table. This year's Cincinnati is just the 20th or so version. Yawn.
-
I know how much you hate Rutger, but would you really ditch them to pick up Cincinnati? It's not even close.
It is close.
-
IF?
2020 Cincinnati and Coastal Carolina
2018 UCF
2017 UCF
2016 Western Michigan
2010 TCU
2009 TCU, Cincinnati, and Boise State
2008 Utah and Boise State
2007 Hawai'i
2006 Boise State
2004 Utah and Boise State (and Auburn, actually - left out behind 2 helmets)
1999 Marshall
1998 Tulane
1993 West Virginia (left out in lieu of 2 helmet programs)
1992 Texas A&M (champ of weak-ass SWC)
1987 Syracuse (independent w/ weak-ass schedule)
1985 Bowling Green (undefeated, barely ranked (#20))
It's not an "if," it's a certainty.
The crumb the NCAA (or whoever decides these things) was to allow the highest-ranked G5 champ into one of the New Year's Six bowl games. That crumb was the compromise between being totally neglected (see above) and actually being given a seat at the table.
They have no seat at the table. This year's Cincinnati is just the 20th or so version. Yawn.
Yes. That's the criticism.
-
Cincinnati is 143rd in the national rankings. Not a flagship in their own state. Not academically or culturally a fit for the conference, despite being in OH.
KS/ISU go to the B1G to get to 16, and suddenly the B12 is looking for Cincy (and several other teams) to come keep their conference alive? Well then Cincy won't end up in the P5, they'll end up in the G6 while the SEC/ACC/B1G/PAC will become the P4.
You're whole argument kinda implodes when stating that Cincinnati isn't good enough, but offer Iowa State as a theoretical option.
-
Way back in 1995 while I was a student the Buckeyes beat Iowa by 21 points, 56-35. Sounds closer than the aforementioned PSU game, right? Not so fast. The Buckeyes absolutely obliterated Iowa in that game. Shortly before halftime the Buckeyes led 56-0 and HC John Cooper started pulling starters. That year's Heisman winner didn't see the field again after scoring Ohio State's eighth TD of the game. The starting QB, TE, and a starting WR also didn't play for Ohio State in the second half and it showed. After building up a 56-0 lead the Buckeyes got outscored 35-0 in the final 31 minutes to win by the much-closer-than-it-was score of 56-35.
I went to that game. I picked up a friend from his house and headed down to the stadium. We parked behind a frat house off of High Street and walked down. I don't remember exactly what happened, but we got into the stadium just after kick off and were sitting in the bleachers at the south end of the field. By the time we got to our seats, there were a couple of mins into the 1st qtr and it was already 14-0.
We left after half time and headed to a bar.
-
So you missed 2/3rds of the Game?I always stuck around the whole 5 times I made it too the 'Shoe for a game
-
So you missed 2/3rds of the Game?I always stuck around the whole 5 times I made it too the 'Shoe for a game
I generally do stay until the bitter end, my friend was really getting on my nerves wanting to leave and hit the bar. It was just easier to do that than to listen to him complain for another hour and a half.
-
I generally do stay until the bitter end, my friend was really getting on my nerves wanting to leave and hit the bar. It was just easier to do that than to listen to him complain for another hour and a half.
That’s why you always go to games and watch games with people who have the same level of commitment and passion that you do. That’s also why I watch a lot of games alone. Lol.
-
Hey look, y'all created a realignment thread!
I did some scrolling
-
I don't see much pressure now for conference changes, maybe I miss something, and of course we can see one domino change that causes a reaction.
-
I don't see much pressure now for conference changes, maybe I miss something, and of course we can see one domino change that causes a reaction.
That was my point. This conversation started with "how does a G5 team get in the playoff?" and the answer was "you never will unless you find your way into a P5 conference, and if you're good at football for enough years, you'll eventually be P5."
My point was that if you take a team like Cincinnati, we rule out the PAC right away due to geography. So you have 4 potential conferences. ACC/SEC/B1G all have 14 teams and Cincinnati would be dilutive and isn't a good academic or cultural fit.
That leaves the B12, which went through the "should we add teams" bit two years ago and said "none of the available applicants improve our product rather than dilute it, so we'll stand pat at 10."
All this while the cable TV subscription model is being completely destroyed, so the "let's take a team in order to get their TV market eyeballs" rationale is falling apart too.
So my point is that other that disruptive conference realignment chaos, G5 can't get into P5 just by being good at football for a number of consecutive years. There is literally no way for G5 teams to get into the P5 world based on performance--it requires chaos.
-
Yeah, I concur.
-
If you were to construct a nationwide "conference" with the top G5s available, what would it look like?
Geographically sound "divisions" or "pods" would be needed, imo.
-
If you were to construct a nationwide "conference" with the top G5s available, what would it look like?
Geographically sound "divisions" or "pods" would be needed, imo.
Here are the best winning percentages for current non-P5 teams for the 20 years from 2000-2019 (I'll stop at 16 assuming we don't need more than that for a "conference"). The rank is overall national ranking so all teams not listed are P5 already. Also, I only included teams that were in D1 for at least 18 of the 20 years:
- #1 Boise, .83588
- #24 Toledo, .63200
- #26 No. IL, .62109
- #27 BYU, .61961
- #29 Cincy, .61811
- #38 UCF, .57769
- #39 Marshall, .57540
- #41 Fresno, .57308
- #44 Navy, .56917
- #46 Air Force, .56400
- #47 USF, .56034
- #48 Houston, .55556
- #51 Troy, .54077
- #52 So. MS, .53360
- #55 Ohio, .52191
- #56 LaTech, .52000
That would be a WAY better conference than any of the G5 now, but it wouldn't even touch the weakest P5. Plus, remember that they built up those gaudy records playing mostly horrible teams in their weak conferences. If you lumped the best of them together each of their SoS would go up a LOT so it would be unlikely that they could maintain anywhere near that winning percentage.
Pods:
- Western: Boise, BYU, Fresno, Air Force
- SE: UCF, USF, So. MS, LaTech
- MAC: Toledo, No. IL, Ohio, Navy
- South: Houston, Troy, Marshall, Cincy
Navy, Marshall, and Cincy are obviously geographically misplaced but I had to stick each somewhere to make the example complete.
-
Rank these teams 1-10 if they were to play each other in a round-robin tomorrow:
Texas A&M
Cincinnati
Indiana
Iowa State
Coastal Carolina
Georgia
Florida
Oklahoma
USC
BYU
I'd put most of the P5s together in the top group, UGA with the new QB is a pretty good team I think. I have no clue about USC or Iowa State really.
-
Here are the best winning percentages for current non-P5 teams for the 20 years from 2000-2019 (I'll stop at 16 assuming we don't need more than that for a "conference"). The rank is overall national ranking so all teams not listed are P5 already. Also, I only included teams that were in D1 for at least 18 of the 20 years:
- #1 Boise, .83588
- #24 Toledo, .63200
- #26 No. IL, .62109
- #27 BYU, .61961
- #29 Cincy, .61811
- #38 UCF, .57769
- #39 Marshall, .57540
- #41 Fresno, .57308
- #44 Navy, .56917
- #46 Air Force, .56400
- #47 USF, .56034
- #48 Houston, .55556
- #51 Troy, .54077
- #52 So. MS, .53360
- #55 Ohio, .52191
- #56 LaTech, .52000
That would be a WAY better conference than any of the G5 now, but it wouldn't even touch the weakest P5. Plus, remember that they built up those gaudy records playing mostly horrible teams in their weak conferences. If you lumped the best of them together each of their SoS would go up a LOT so it would be unlikely that they could maintain anywhere near that winning percentage.
Pods:
- Western: Boise, BYU, Fresno, Air Force
- SE: UCF, USF, So. MS, LaTech
- MAC: Toledo, No. IL, Ohio, Navy
- South: Houston, Troy, Marshall, Cincy
Navy, Marshall, and Cincy are obviously geographically misplaced but I had to stick each somewhere to make the example complete.
This is generally correct. Going to 16 does make the optics look worse. Also worth noting, "their SoS would go up a LOT so it would be unlikely that they could maintain anywhere near that winning percentage." is in fact a truism. If I talk a batch of teams and make them play each other a lot, their raw winning percentages trend toward .500 on average. SOS has nothing to do with that.
Anywho, we're talking about like, less than a team a year that would get much argument. An actual answer would be promotion and relegation, but that's only slightly less feasible than some of the fantasy solutions we've had.
Anyway, Coastal and Cincy are both fun teams this year. I look forward to their bowl swoons when they have their bigger goals denied and can't get up for the games (the secret is that inside all football buildings, expectations are unreasonably high).
-
Boise State, American Athletic Conference evaluating Broncos joining league as 12th football member
https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/boise-state-american-athletic-conference-evaluating-broncos-joining-league-as-12th-football-member/
The American Athletic Conference has discussed adding Boise State as a 12th football member, sources tell CBS Sports. Documents obtained by CBS Sports also indicate these conversations have taken place.
-
Gonna need some gas money.
-
Here are the best winning percentages for current non-P5 teams for the 20 years from 2000-2019 (I'll stop at 16 assuming we don't need more than that for a "conference"). The rank is overall national ranking so all teams not listed are P5 already. Also, I only included teams that were in D1 for at least 18 of the 20 years:
- #1 Boise, .83588
- #24 Toledo, .63200
- #26 No. IL, .62109
- #27 BYU, .61961
- #29 Cincy, .61811
- #38 UCF, .57769
- #39 Marshall, .57540
- #41 Fresno, .57308
- #44 Navy, .56917
- #46 Air Force, .56400
- #47 USF, .56034
- #48 Houston, .55556
- #51 Troy, .54077
- #52 So. MS, .53360
- #55 Ohio, .52191
- #56 LaTech, .52000
That would be a WAY better conference than any of the G5 now, but it wouldn't even touch the weakest P5. Plus, remember that they built up those gaudy records playing mostly horrible teams in their weak conferences. If you lumped the best of them together each of their SoS would go up a LOT so it would be unlikely that they could maintain anywhere near that winning percentage.
Pods:
- Western: Boise, BYU, Fresno, Air Force
- SE: UCF, USF, So. MS, LaTech
- MAC: Toledo, No. IL, Ohio, Navy
- South: Houston, Troy, Marshall, Cincy
Navy, Marshall, and Cincy are obviously geographically misplaced but I had to stick each somewhere to make the example complete.
If I were tasked with "saving" 16 G5s from FCS relegation, I don't think I would go purely on recent results myself. Rather it would be a mix of recent results, markets, stadiums, recruiting, history, tradition etc. For instance I wouldn't "save" Navy and Air Force, while hanging Army out to dry. I would make room for all three.
Pods
Northeast: Army, Navy, Cincinnati, one of Temple/Toledo?
Southeast: Memphis, Tulane, one of Houston/SMUw?, one of UCF/USF?
Inland West: Boise, BYU, Air Force, UNLV
West Coast: Hawaii, Fresno, SDSU, oh I dunno... San Jose? Nevada?
-
Both UCF and South Florida would be included. They're both big, growing, and in fertile recruiting grounds.
-
Yeah, but they are never both good at the same time. USF was a top ten team for a while, while UCF was going winless in the MAC. Then UCF started raking in National Championships under Scott Frost, while USF went six feet under. Plus you'd have to bump Tulane, and lose New Orleans as a destination, along with their stored SEC! SEC! SEC! history.
-
If you're dropping all but 16 P5 programs, both UCF and South Florida would do well. I wonder if Florida's big 3 would try to limit them to only 1 included, though.
-
They probably would.
Honestly Houston and Southern Methodist might have a stronger case for co-inclusion, due to their SWC ties. I could see bumping Tulane but not Memphis, so either Florida or Texas would have to roll solo under my format. Easier to just have each state pick one, and roll with it.