College Football 2018 - minus the troll

[anonymoose]

The only thing I would change is to put Georgia at #9 and shift Florida, LSU and UCF up one spot. The Dogs were terrible in the Sugar Bowl.

Sucks to be in a consolation game.
LSU woulda been there had the refs ended the A&M game in regulation like it shoulda been. Maybe a blessing for them though.
Too many defensive players heading to the NFL sat out for them to have beaten a team as motivated as Texas plus they got the chance to play a higher ranked but outmatched team.

 

[Mason Michaels]

My final college football ranking prediction.

1,2. Alabama, Clemson No prediction as to who will win that one, just that both will be either 1 or 2.
3. Ohio St. 13-1
4. Oklahoma 12-2
5. ND 12-1
6. Georgia 11-3
7. Florida 10-3
8. LSU 10-3
9. UCF 12-1
10. Texas 10-4
11. Kentucky 10-3
12. Washington St. 11-2
13. Michigan 10-3
14. Washington 10-4
15. Texas A&M 9-4
16.Syracuse 10-4
17. Fresno St. 12-2
18. Northwestern 9-5
19. Penn St. 9-4
20 Boise St. 10-3

Pretty good list

 

[archives]

Bubba and Clemson aren't responsible for the running down of academic standards. They have merely taken advantage of it. Academia has chosen to dramatically water down educational standards independent of athletics as it is.

True, and those two schools have taken full advantage, but it is more about the money than academics. If you have the bucks and allocate those bucks to pay million dollar coaching staffs, construct five star athlete dorms, plan extensive recruiting budgets, etc., you are going to be a top level program. I didn't think colleges nor universities existed to create semipro sports teams

But to get back to my point, it has gotten so out of control that as I said you are going to see the same two or three teams always playing in the playoffs. The beauty of any amateur sport is the potential of a "Hossiers" scenario occurring, a Loyola of Chicago, happens rarely, but there is always the excitement that it could, that is absent in college football today, and eventually it will minimalize interest

 

[archives]

Pretty good list

How many private schools are on that list, and how many of those actually have the potential to be included in any kind of playoff?

Does that tell you something?

 

[anonymoose]

Pretty good list

It'll be fun to see how close it will be to the actual final rankings.

 

[anonymoose]

How many private schools are on that list, and how many of those actually have the potential to be included in any kind of playoff?

Does that tell you something?

ND and Northwestern as far as I know. ND seems to have had a pretty good potential to be in the playoff. They were there this yr. Besides what's the ratio of private schools to public schools in Div. 1 anyway? Stanford usually does well also.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Looks like Washington's Rose Bowl drought is extended by another year. Well, it was progress, because the Huskies hadn't even appeared in the greatest game since 2002.

Yup...proved for the second year in a row that OSU should have been in the playoff but the SEC wants a beauty contest instead of a true National Championship. OSU looked better than ND, OK and Clemson.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

The only thing I would change is to put Georgia at #9 and shift Florida, LSU and UCF up one spot. The Dogs were terrible in the Sugar Bowl.

Un huh....weren't you one of the ones tooting the beauty contest horn about how UGA a better team than the Buckeyes even though the Bucks were only a 1 loss team and a conference champ and UGA was neither? Willing to admit you were wrong about UGA being ranked higher than OSU?

OSU clearly was a better team than OK, ND and GA as was proven on the field. As an OSU fan and having been screwed two years in a row and having to watch the CFP selection committee undermine conference championships and get it wrong three years in a row and turn the CFP into a political beauty contest instead of a true national championship tournament it's time to go to an 8 team playoff where it's earned on the field with no selection or ranking committees what so ever to screw it up.

We, ideally, need 8 conferences, with 8 conference champions going to the playoff with rankings based on over all record and other objective tie breakers. No polls, no talking heads, no opinions, do it on the field or go home. This current systems is a joke and isn't worth watching unless you're a personal stake holder in a team that's playing. It has little appeal to a national audience as it is. Ratings will continue to decline as long as we continue to have this beauty contest shoved down our throats instead of a true play off/championship tournament like every major college sport but Div 1 football has.

 

[anonymoose]

Un huh....weren't you one of the ones tooting the beauty contest horn about how UGA a better team than the Buckeyes even though the Bucks were only a 1 loss team and a conference champ and UGA was neither? Willing to admit you were wrong about UGA being ranked higher than OSU?

OSU clearly was a better team than OK, ND and GA as was proven on the field. As an OSU fan and having been screwed two years in a row and having to watch the CFP selection committee undermine conference championships and get it wrong three years in a row and turn the CFP into a political beauty contest instead of a true national championship tournament it's time to go to an 8 team playoff where it's earned on the field with no selection or ranking committees what so ever to screw it up.

We, ideally, need 8 conferences, with 8 conference champions going to the playoff with rankings based on over all record and other objective tie breakers. No polls, no talking heads, no opinions, do it on the field or go home. This current systems is a joke and isn't worth watching unless you're a personal stake holder in a team that's playing. It has little appeal to a national audience as it is. Ratings will continue to decline as long as we continue to have this beauty contest shoved down our throats instead of a true play off/championship tournament like every major college sport but Div 1 football has.

It could be done if the power 5 conference teams would schedule 1 less fluff game per season. That's not asking much when many are scheduling 3 (most notably Alabama).

 

[Mott the Hoople]

It could be done if the power 5 conference teams would schedule 1 less fluff game per season. That's not asking much when many are scheduling 3 (most notably Alabama).

They don't even need to do that. There are all sorts of objective ways in which a national championship could be determined in Div I College football. The current system isn't one of them. I had high hope for it the first two years then the last three years have been just an expanded version of the BCS which isn't a championship game or tournament. It's a beauty contest and you not only have to get it done on the field, you have to look pretty doing it too. LOL

 

[WinterBorn]

Un huh....weren't you one of the ones tooting the beauty contest horn about how UGA a better team than the Buckeyes even though the Bucks were only a 1 loss team and a conference champ and UGA was neither? Willing to admit you were wrong about UGA being ranked higher than OSU?

OSU clearly was a better team than OK, ND and GA as was proven on the field. As an OSU fan and having been screwed two years in a row and having to watch the CFP selection committee undermine conference championships and get it wrong three years in a row and turn the CFP into a political beauty contest instead of a true national championship tournament it's time to go to an 8 team playoff where it's earned on the field with no selection or ranking committees what so ever to screw it up.

We, ideally, need 8 conferences, with 8 conference champions going to the playoff with rankings based on over all record and other objective tie breakers. No polls, no talking heads, no opinions, do it on the field or go home. This current systems is a joke and isn't worth watching unless you're a personal stake holder in a team that's playing. It has little appeal to a national audience as it is. Ratings will continue to decline as long as we continue to have this beauty contest shoved down our throats instead of a true play off/championship tournament like every major college sport but Div 1 football has.

I went back to make sure I didn't post in favor of Georgia in the post-game excitement of the SEC Championship.

No, the first list I made for the playoffs had OU in the #4 spot.

As long as ND was included, by virtue of being undefeated, the only logical choice was Oklahoma. 1 loss and it was to a good team. Being beaten by 29 by a nobody is always going to hurt worse than a good win.

 

[WinterBorn]

Un huh....weren't you one of the ones tooting the beauty contest horn about how UGA a better team than the Buckeyes even though the Bucks were only a 1 loss team and a conference champ and UGA was neither? Willing to admit you were wrong about UGA being ranked higher than OSU?

OSU clearly was a better team than OK, ND and GA as was proven on the field. As an OSU fan and having been screwed two years in a row and having to watch the CFP selection committee undermine conference championships and get it wrong three years in a row and turn the CFP into a political beauty contest instead of a true national championship tournament it's time to go to an 8 team playoff where it's earned on the field with no selection or ranking committees what so ever to screw it up.

We, ideally, need 8 conferences, with 8 conference champions going to the playoff with rankings based on over all record and other objective tie breakers. No polls, no talking heads, no opinions, do it on the field or go home. This current systems is a joke and isn't worth watching unless you're a personal stake holder in a team that's playing. It has little appeal to a national audience as it is. Ratings will continue to decline as long as we continue to have this beauty contest shoved down our throats instead of a true play off/championship tournament like every major college sport but Div 1 football has.

8 conference champions in an 8 game playoff would not give you a champion that earned it on the field. The Washington Huskies were the PAC12 champs with a record of 10-3 before the bowl games. A 10-3 team getting in the playoffs and other teams with better records being left out?

It should be about the entire season of play. Not getting up for one game. A perfect example is the BIG10 championship game. If Northwestern had managed to beat Ohio State in that ONE game, they would be considered one of the best teams in the nation? With a record of 9-4?

 

[Mott the Hoople]

8 conference champions in an 8 game playoff would not give you a champion that earned it on the field. The Washington Huskies were the PAC12 champs with a record of 10-3 before the bowl games. A 10-3 team getting in the playoffs and other teams with better records being left out?

It should be about the entire season of play. Not getting up for one game. A perfect example is the BIG10 championship game. If Northwestern had managed to beat Ohio State in that ONE game, they would be considered one of the best teams in the nation? With a record of 9-4?

They didn't win their conference. This is a playoff and not a beauty contest. If they didn't win their conference they're not the best team in that conference and since we know they are not the best team in that conference and they have failed to meet that objective criteria then they have not, on the field, earned the right to move on. Either a conference championship means something or it doesn't. If they don't, lets just get rid of conferences and play for the best records. What would even be the point of having conferences if wining a conference championship doesn't mean anything?

If a team that finishes second in their conference is excluded it's because they have proven that they are not the best team in that conference. Want to advance? Win your conference. Don't like that a team from another conference won with a weaker record? Move to that conference. At least that's objective because the truth is, that as long as Div I football has subjective criteria that are biased and as much about politics and money as the results on the field we will never have a true national championship in Div I football. I'm ok with having wild card teams in a NCAA Div I football playoff...as long as they are selected by objective criteria and absolutely no polls or selection committees are involved to stack the deck.

But the point on conference championship games is you can't have your cake and eat it too. If they don't mean anything get rid of them and select by won-loss records with objective tie breakers. As long as we get rid of polls and selection committees.

Personally I like pitting the different regions of the nation against each other instead of a beauty contest. Win your division and move on to the conference championship game. Win your conference and move on to the playoff and keep moving on as long as you win.

Any other way and you might as well just get rid of conferences. What would be the point of having them? They either mean something or they don't.

This year was a perfect example. We both know that if OK had lost to Texas in the Big12 Championship game the weaker team without a conference championship would have been chosen over the better team, OSU, who actually won their conference based on style points.

I mean I can't tell you how much it sucked going to the BIG conference championship game knowing your team isn't going to make it because they're not pretty enough. It's just laughable but that's exactly what it was and that is beyond stupid as no other major college sport has this problem. None of them use the subjective selection criteria used in Div I football.

To use your NW example. Their regular season record was 9-3 and if they had won the conference championship at 10-3 and went on to win the national championship well good for them. They were better than the other teams with better records cause they won when it counted and they won their conference. It's a silly argument to make. Is an NFL wild card team any less a World Champion for winning the Super Bowl as a wild card team? That's not a logical argument.

So my point remains...do conference championships mean anything or don't they? If only your record matters than why wasn't UCF in the playoff? Because conferences do matter and if conferences matter so should conference championship games.

 

[archives]

ND and Northwestern as far as I know. ND seems to have had a pretty good potential to be in the playoff. They were there this yr. Besides what's the ratio of private schools to public schools in Div. 1 anyway? Stanford usually does well also.

Notre Dame, Northwestern, and Syracuse, with the later two being there rarely. Point being of the 130 schools that play Division I college football, to include twenty five or so private institutions, there are less than a dozen capable of making a playoff, and those schools are State schools, where their is money, taxpayers money. Bottom line, it is all about the money and not athleticism nor the game of amateur football

 

[archives]

They didn't win their conference. This is a playoff and not a beauty contest. If they didn't win their conference they're not the best team in that conference and since we know they are not the best team in that conference and they have failed to meet that objective criteria then they have not, on the field, earned the right to move on. Either a conference championship means something or it doesn't. If they don't, lets just get rid of conferences and play for the best records. What would even be the point of having conferences if wining a conference championship doesn't mean anything?

If a team that finishes second in their conference is excluded it's because they have proven that they are not the best team in that conference. Want to advance? Win your conference. Don't like that a team from another conference won with a weaker record? Move to that conference. At least that's objective because the truth is, that as long as Div I football has subjective criteria that are biased and as much about politics and money as the results on the field we will never have a true national championship in Div I football. I'm ok with having wild card teams in a NCAA Div I football playoff...as long as they are selected by objective criteria and absolutely no polls or selection committees are involved to stack the deck.

But the point on conference championship games is you can't have your cake and eat it too. If they don't mean anything get rid of them and select by won-loss records with objective tie breakers. As long as we get rid of polls and selection committees.

Personally I like pitting the different regions of the nation against each other instead of a beauty contest. Win your division and move on to the conference championship game. Win your conference and move on to the playoff and keep moving on as long as you win.

Any other way and you might as well just get rid of conferences. What would be the point of having them? They either mean something or they don't.

This year was a perfect example. We both know that if OK had lost to Texas in the Big12 Championship game the weaker team without a conference championship would have been chosen over the better team, OSU, who actually won their conference based on style points.

I mean I can't tell you how much it sucked going to the BIG conference championship game knowing your team isn't going to make it because they're not pretty enough. It's just laughable but that's exactly what it was and that is beyond stupid as no other major college sport has this problem. None of them use the subjective selection criteria used in Div I football.

To use your NW example. Their regular season record was 9-3 and if they had won the conference championship at 10-3 and went on to win the national championship well good for them. They were better than the other teams with better records cause they won when it counted and they won their conference. It's a silly argument to make. Is an NFL wild card team any less a World Champion for winning the Super Bowl as a wild card team? That's not a logical argument.

So my point remains...do conference championships mean anything or don't they? If only your record matters than why wasn't UCF in the playoff? Because conferences do matter and if conferences matter so should conference championship games.

Your leaning on the basketball model, which will not work with college football. To begin, for the eight teams, considering their conference championship game, you are asking them to play more games, the winner four more, against top level competition. Other than the big money schools none of the rest would have the rosters considering injuries to compete, their not the NFL

Currently, conferences is the only fan invested thing college football has to offer, as you noted above, current system which favors big money schools "isn't worth watching unless you're a personal stake holder in a team that's playing."

 

[WinterBorn]

They didn't win their conference. This is a playoff and not a beauty contest. If they didn't win their conference they're not the best team in that conference and since we know they are not the best team in that conference and they have failed to meet that objective criteria then they have not, on the field, earned the right to move on. Either a conference championship means something or it doesn't. If they don't, lets just get rid of conferences and play for the best records. What would even be the point of having conferences if wining a conference championship doesn't mean anything?

If a team that finishes second in their conference is excluded it's because they have proven that they are not the best team in that conference. Want to advance? Win your conference. Don't like that a team from another conference won with a weaker record? Move to that conference. At least that's objective because the truth is, that as long as Div I football has subjective criteria that are biased and as much about politics and money as the results on the field we will never have a true national championship in Div I football. I'm ok with having wild card teams in a NCAA Div I football playoff...as long as they are selected by objective criteria and absolutely no polls or selection committees are involved to stack the deck.

But the point on conference championship games is you can't have your cake and eat it too. If they don't mean anything get rid of them and select by won-loss records with objective tie breakers. As long as we get rid of polls and selection committees.

Personally I like pitting the different regions of the nation against each other instead of a beauty contest. Win your division and move on to the conference championship game. Win your conference and move on to the playoff and keep moving on as long as you win.

Any other way and you might as well just get rid of conferences. What would be the point of having them? They either mean something or they don't.

This year was a perfect example. We both know that if OK had lost to Texas in the Big12 Championship game the weaker team without a conference championship would have been chosen over the better team, OSU, who actually won their conference based on style points.

I mean I can't tell you how much it sucked going to the BIG conference championship game knowing your team isn't going to make it because they're not pretty enough. It's just laughable but that's exactly what it was and that is beyond stupid as no other major college sport has this problem. None of them use the subjective selection criteria used in Div I football.

To use your NW example. Their regular season record was 9-3 and if they had won the conference championship at 10-3 and went on to win the national championship well good for them. They were better than the other teams with better records cause they won when it counted and they won their conference. It's a silly argument to make. Is an NFL wild card team any less a World Champion for winning the Super Bowl as a wild card team? That's not a logical argument.

So my point remains...do conference championships mean anything or don't they? If only your record matters than why wasn't UCF in the playoff? Because conferences do matter and if conferences matter so should conference championship games.

UCF didn't make it because their schedule strength was shit.

Mott, are you saying that Purdue is a better team than Ohio State? Because they won that one game. Just like Northwestern could have won that one game for the conference championship.

 

[WinterBorn]

As for the championship game only being interesting for those who follow those 2 teams, I don't think that is the case. College football fans will always watch good football games.

And unless you know how to put more than 2 teams in a game, it will always be more interesting to the fan base for the 2 teams involved.

And anyone who doesn't want to see Clemson and Alabama play, isn't interested in seeing the best or in watching an excellent college football game.

 

[anonymoose]

8 conference champions in an 8 game playoff would not give you a champion that earned it on the field. The Washington Huskies were the PAC12 champs with a record of 10-3 before the bowl games. A 10-3 team getting in the playoffs and other teams with better records being left out?

It should be about the entire season of play. Not getting up for one game. A perfect example is the BIG10 championship game. If Northwestern had managed to beat Ohio State in that ONE game, they would be considered one of the best teams in the nation? With a record of 9-4?

That's how it works in the NFL. You strive to get into the playoffs and once there you have an equal chance on the field to win it all. The advantage of having the best record is home field advantage. I see no problem with this. The playoffs are a different season which starts all over.
In college, the playoffs start with the first game.

 

[WinterBorn]

Also, the plan to have 8 conferences and have an 8 team playoff based on the conference champions means that all nonconference games are meaningless. Completely meaningless.

I like the idea of an 8 team playoff, but dislike the idea that only conference champions are allowed. A team can not be the best team in their conference and still be the 6th, 7th, or 8th best team in the nation.

 

[archives]

As for the championship game only being interesting for those who follow those 2 teams, I don't think that is the case. College football fans will always watch good football games.

And unless you know how to put more than 2 teams in a game, it will always be more interesting to the fan base for the 2 teams involved.

And anyone who doesn't want to see Clemson and Alabama play, isn't interested in seeing the best or in watching an excellent college football game.

Really, so are you going to make a point of watching the FCS Championship Game this Saturday? It is on all the ESPN channels, and given it is the end of a sixteen team nationwide playoff it is "excellent college football," will you be watching?