Other College Football

[Barton Fink]

At least seed the best teams accordingly. Just because you won your conference doesn't mean you deserve a higher seed.

[egregious]

Ole Miss, Alabama, and South Carolina would not have beaten any of the teams that ended up winning either.

[Pig Benis]

I'm fine w/ 12 teams because it means more football.

But, it should be the best 12 teams.

Take the top 24 at the end of the season, and let Vegas run their millions of simulations of all of those teams head-to-head and take the best 12. It will never happen because of bullshit committees, but they should let Vegas seed it. SEC would have had 6-8 teams in it this year.

100%. Make it happen

[Lurk]

It was more that they took two from the ACC instead of Alabama or S Carolina or Ole Miss who would beat the shit out of most of the teams in it.

[Doc Hogaday]

Ole Miss, Alabama, and South Carolina would not have beaten any of the teams that ended up winning either.

Maybe not South Carolina, but I think Ole Klan and Bama would certainly have a chance against 3 of the 4 (ND, Penn State, and Texas).

[jdcatty]

Maybe not South Carolina, but I think Ole Klan and Bama would certainly have a chance against 3 of the 4 (ND, Penn State, and Texas).

I'm not sure they would have won, but they damn sure would have been a lot more competitive.  I really think Bama would have beaten either ND or Penn State.

[Hizog]

Ole Miss, Alabama, and South Carolina would not have beaten any of the teams that ended up winning either.

So you believe Penn State, Notre Dame, Texas and Ohio State are better than Georgia?

[Lurk]

Maybe not South Carolina, but I think Ole Klan and Bama would certainly have a chance against 3 of the 4 (ND, Penn State, and Texas).

They were playing really good at the end of the year.

[egregious]

So you believe Penn State, Notre Dame, Texas and Ohio State are better than Georgia?

I did not mention UGAG, they won the conference.  All the 3 conference loss teams were worse than Tennessee.

UGAG only beat GT by 2 in 8 OT's and won't have their QB though, now that you mention it.

[Texzilla]

The conf champs right now are a sore thumb and need to be meaningful.  In football he first determinant should be wins.  Then SoS.  Football is hard.  Winning is harder.  Bama don't get skullfucked by OU.  Klan win your games.  Conf champs should be the byes or top seeds.  In the original plan those four would play for the championship. 

[Hizog]

I did not mention UGAG, they won the conference.  All the 3 conference loss teams were worse than Tennessee.

UGAG only beat GT by 2 in 8 OT's and won't have their QB though, now that you mention it.

I only asked about Georgia because Alabama beat them in addition to 3 other ranked teams. If Bama can beat UGA, I would think they are capable of beating Penn State, Texas and Notre Dame.

[Usafhawg]

I only asked about Georgia because Alabama beat them in addition to 3 other ranked teams. If Bama can beat UGA, I would think they are capable of beating Penn State, Texas and Notre Dame.

Using your logic...Arkansas beat Tennessee. If Arkansas can beat Tennessee, then they are capable of beating...oh nevermind.

[egregious]

I only asked about Georgia because Alabama beat them in addition to 3 other ranked teams. If Bama can beat UGA, I would think they are capable of beating Penn State, Texas and Notre Dame.

If Bama lost to Oklahoma in the last month, they are capable of losing to Indiana, SMU, and Clemson.

Lots of teams "could" do both.  Teams going 5-3 in their conference did not earn a shot at it.

[Hizog]

Let's use your original argument. You don't think Bama or Ole Miss can beat Penn State, Notre Dame or Texas?

Ole Miss, Alabama, and South Carolina would not have beaten any of the teams that ended up winning either.

[Hizog]

Teams going 5-3 in their conference did not earn a shot at it.

I appear to be in the minority on this, but I don't think record should matter more than SOS. More specifically who did a team beat. I would rather see a team like Bama or Ole Miss in the playoff against Penn State than SMU. Bama and Ole Miss proved they can beat good teams. SMU is not capable of beating a good team. They were never going to beat Penn State. Same for Indiana. They got into the playoff by playing a crap schedule. Hell, Indiana's coach took the job BECAUSE it was a crap schedule.

At least pick teams that have a chance to win. Then we get good games.

[DirkPiggler]

I appear to be in the minority on this, but I don't think record should matter more than SOS. More specifically who did a team beat. I would rather see a team like Bama or Ole Miss in the playoff against Penn State than SMU. Bama and Ole Miss proved they can beat good teams. SMU is not capable of beating a good team. They were never going to beat Penn State. Same for Indiana. They got into the playoff by playing a crap schedule. Hell, Indiana's coach took the job BECAUSE it was a crap schedule.

At least pick teams that have a chance to win. Then we get good games.

I can see the argument against SMU.  The ACC is weak top to bottom.  The fact that SMU could come into the league and nearly win it in year one with a AAC roster demonstrates just how far the conference has fallen. 

There is zero chance a ten win team from either the Big 10 or SEC gets left out, regardless of how easy their schedule might have been. 

Texass played a similar schedule to Indiana, and no one had a problem with them getting in. 

The only reason anyone is complaining about Indiana getting in is that they are an interloper into the process.  If a 10-2 Penn State, Michigan, Wisconsin or Nebraska had played the exact same schedule as Indiana and gotten waxed similarly by Notre Dame there would be little to no bitching. 

[Hizog]

I can see the argument against SMU. 

There is zero chance a ten win team from either the Big 10 or SEC gets left out, regardless of how easy their schedule might have been. 

Texass played a similar schedule to Indiana, and no one had a problem with them getting in. 

Agree with you on all of that. I wish there was a better system to evaluate teams with a weak SOS. My main point that I am poorly making is when a team beats 4 ranked teams, they should be in the playoff over a team that is 0'fer against ranked teams.

[DirkPiggler]

Agree with you on all of that. I wish there was a better system to evaluate teams with a weak SOS. My main point that I am poorly making is when a team beats 4 ranked teams, they should be in the playoff over a team that is 0'fer against ranked teams.

Assuming you're arguing in favor of South Carolina...the four ranked teams they beat were:

(10) aTm, which is now unranked

(24) Vandy, now unranked at 6-6.

(24) Missouri, now 23rd.

(12) Clemson, now 13th.

So they only beat two teams who are currently ranked.

[Hizog]

Assuming you're arguing in favor of South Carolina...the four ranked teams they beat were:

(10) aTm, which is now unranked

(24) Vandy, now unranked at 6-6.

(24) Missouri, now 23rd.

(12) Clemson, now 13th.

So they only beat two teams who are currently ranked.

I was arguing in favor of Bama who beat Georgia, USC, Missouri and LSU (although LSU dropped out at the end).

[DirkPiggler]

I was arguing in favor of Bama who beat Georgia, USC, Missouri and LSU (although LSU dropped out at the end).

Alabama's resume is a little better, I'll agree with that. 

Getting housed by a bad OU team kept them out more than anything.