2014 NCAA Football Thread

[dfwabel]

Benjamin Franklin said that only death and taxes are certain... and maybe bracket creep.

I'm not in favor of expanding playoffs for the sake of expansion alone, but an 8-team model does offer the advantage of guaranteeing each Power 5 Champ a seat at the table, plus you could reasonably guarantee a spot for the best team from the Mid-Majors (Marshall, ECU, etc) as well. Either way, you're still left with 2 (or 3) at-large spots so the SEC can still feel superior.

It's a bit of a shame that you have to (absolutely) leave at least one major conference champ out every year, and (possibly) be leaving out teams like Notre Dame or some of the better-performing Cinderella teams like a Boise State, Northern Illinois or Arkansas State.

It is not a shame when it is the Power 5 who created the playoff in the first place. This is their doing and they decided to take the $$$.

[See Red]

Benjamin Franklin said that only death and taxes are certain... and maybe bracket creep.

I'm not in favor of expanding playoffs for the sake of expansion alone, but an 8-team model does offer the advantage of guaranteeing each Power 5 Champ a seat at the table, plus you could reasonably guarantee a spot for the best team from the Mid-Majors (Marshall, ECU, etc) as well. Either way, you're still left with 2 (or 3) at-large spots so the SEC can still feel superior.

It's a bit of a shame that you have to (absolutely) leave at least one major conference champ out every year, and (possibly) be leaving out teams like Notre Dame or some of the better-performing Cinderella teams like a Boise State, Northern Illinois or Arkansas State.

You really think either of those teams not only belong in the top 25 (which is reasonable), but deserve a spot in a would-be eight team playoff?

I have no problem with not every power 5 conference champion. Pick the four best teams.

[Balu the Bare]

Nebraska's "signature" moment was a loss to Michigan State, the committee only screwed up your ranking 2 weeks ago. Now they've given you a much more, fair, accurate ranking. Behind Michigan St and in between all the other Big Ten teams.

I'm not even disagreeing with this statement, but I thought the whole point of a committee was to have them actually review tape and more accurately forecast where teams are ranked than the BCS did. So far, in three weeks it seems like it's a case of "what have you done for me lately?"

Somebody mentioned the case for Marshall. If you're going to discount Marshall for having a terribly easy schedule and remaining undefeated, then surely you could apply the same standard to Texas A&M? The Aggies have been terrible this year against any halfway decent team (see: Arkansas overtime) yet they cling to a Top 25 ranking with 3 losses. Sure, they've played some stronger teams, but they've also collapsed under that competition.

Ah yes, but you forget that A&M is in the SEC and the SEC is the best conference in the land without question so they will all be ranked if they manage to have a winning record (with apologies to Missouri). My issue with this current system has been something that I've heard very little about recently, and that's Mississippi State's out-of-conference schedule. I only bring it up because it seems to be the main talking point when it comes to putting teams ahead of one or two loss SEC teams. I mean sure, other people might be impressed with wins over the likes of Southern Miss, UAB, South Alabama, and Tennessee Martin, but I'd say those four together are not as impressive as Clemson, Oklahoma State, and Notre Dame with the Citadel being the only real "cupcake" on Florida State's schedule.

.

It's all very well having a go at Mississippi State's non-conf schedule compared to Florida State's, but that ignores the fact that in their actual conference schedule FSU play the kinda ho-hum ACC whereas MSU have to play not just the SEC, but the SEC West, which all sarcastic disparaging aside is far and away the strongest division in the country.

There's my rub. Based on what is the SEC West the best division in the country? Outside of the SEC West, there are only two wins vs. top 25 teams in the country and those two are Wisconsin(@LSU) and Kansas St (Auburn). This season has all the makings of a self-fulfilling prophecy. The SEC West is far and away the strongest division because you say so, but this year, who have the top teams in west beaten of worth besides themselves?

[Still MIGHTY]

I have no doubts this thing will go to eight (or at least six, top two with byes) as soon as they can. Power 5 Champs + Best Group of 5 Champ + Two At-Larges. It makes too much damn sense.

It comes with two positives: there's too much money to be made and, IMO, it's the best way to decide a champion.

---

There's my rub. Based on what is the SEC West the best division in the country? Outside of the SEC West, there are only two wins vs. top 25 teams in the country and those two are Wisconsin(@LSU) and Kansas St (Auburn). This season has all the makings of a self-fulfilling prophecy. The SEC West is far and away the strongest division because you say so, but this year, who have the top teams in west beaten of worth besides themselves?

Based on watching the games. You watch those games and those teams and you can tell the quality of competition. You don't need a mathematic formula or a poll or even head to head. I watch the games and I see that the SEC and specifically the West is the best in college football.

Since it sounds like you disagree, who do you think is the best? Personally, I think top to bottom the Pac 12 has more quality, but at the top, the SEC is better.

[pianoknight]

I have no doubts this thing will go to eight (or at least six, top two with byes) as soon as they can. Power 5 Champs + Best Group of 5 Champ + Two At-Larges. It makes too much damn sense.

It comes with two positives: there's too much money to be made and, IMO, it's the best way to decide a champion.

Exactly. Once they realize that a 4 Team yields X dollars, they'll quickly realize that an 8 Team yields XX dollars.

Also, consider the raw percentages of teams in the sport versus teams making the playoff:

NBA: 30 Teams, 16 make the playoff (53%)

NFL: 32 Teams, 12 make the playoff (38%)

MLB: 30 Teams, 10 make playoff w/ Wild Cards (30%)

College Baseball: 304 Teams, 64 make playoff (11%)

College Basketball: 351 Teams, 64+4 make March Madness (19%)

FCS Football: 124 Teams, 24 make playoff (19%)

FBS Football: 128 Teams, 4 make playoff (3%)

They say that the Bowl System awards mediocrity, yet the in the 3 pro sports listed at least a third of the league makes a post-season of some kind. That's not a knock on pro leagues, but the NBA currently allows more teams INTO their playoff than they deny. Statistically, it's harder to NOT make the NBA playoffs. For FBS Football to reach that level of egregiousness, we'd need a 70-team bracket and the playoffs would take at least 6-8 weeks. to complete.

[DS729]

College Football is different in that the regular season has more emphasis on the sport than any other in North America. Two losses and your out in the NCAA, in the NFL two losses will more than likely get home field in the playoffs. Sure, they may play more games, but teams that have gone .500 have gotten in before. It's an integral part of the sport, I wouldn't be for a playoff that de-emphasizes the importance of the regular season. I think 8 is about the maximum you can go to keep that standard.

But I think four is perfect anyway, you won't see many blowouts in playoff games because the gap between 1 and 4 will be a lot closer than the gap between 1 and 8. I wouldn't mind if they expanded it, but they don't need to fix something if we don't even know it's even broken. A 16-team playoff is jumping the shark for sure.

Re: UCLA. I think they actually got the Bruins ranking right for once. UCLA not only has a resume worthy of that spot, but can you significantly tell me Michigan State is better than UCLA? Kansas State? I don't think so. Florida State doesn't look like the number 3 team in the country every week, yet they still are rated their because they're undefeated. Can't the same go for UCLA? They may have two losses, but they were against good teams (current top 25 opponents, including the #2 team) and they have some pretty solid wins. They've dominated in their two Top 25 wins this year. Does ASU win that game if they have Taylor Kelly? Maybe. Bercovici isn't the worst backup I've ever seen, and the ASU defense didn't stop the Bruins in that game anyway.

[Balu the Bare]

I have no doubts this thing will go to eight (or at least six, top two with byes) as soon as they can. Power 5 Champs + Best Group of 5 Champ + Two At-Larges. It makes too much damn sense.

It comes with two positives: there's too much money to be made and, IMO, it's the best way to decide a champion.

---

There's my rub. Based on what is the SEC West the best division in the country? Outside of the SEC West, there are only two wins vs. top 25 teams in the country and those two are Wisconsin(@LSU) and Kansas St (Auburn). This season has all the makings of a self-fulfilling prophecy. The SEC West is far and away the strongest division because you say so, but this year, who have the top teams in west beaten of worth besides themselves?

Based on watching the games. You watch those games and those teams and you can tell the quality of competition. You don't need a mathematic formula or a poll or even head to head. I watch the games and I see that the SEC and specifically the West is the best in college football.

Since it sounds like you disagree, who do you think is the best? Personally, I think top to bottom the Pac 12 has more quality, but at the top, the SEC is better.

If your basis is simply watching two different teams play two different games, you can do little more than assume that the SEC West is the best and no sport can be decided by assumption. My assumption is that the best in the country to this point has been maybe Alabama or Oregon, but since they haven't met on the field -and may never- I can't be sure of that. I also think Ohio State is a good team, Arizona State is a good team, Florida State is due for a loss but you have to admire the way they keep winning, and I do not believe in Michigan State's offense against great-elite defenses. I don't see Mississippi State winning out, the SEC East may spoil everything especially if it's Mizzou, but that's looking like a long shot. I have no idea. If I had to make a top 5 I'd probably say FSU until they actually lose, Mississippi State, Oregon, TCU, Ohio State.

But that's for now. There are still a few games left.

[pianoknight]

College Football is different in that the regular season has more emphasis on the sport than any other in North America. Two losses and your out in the NCAA, in the NFL two losses will more than likely get home field in the playoffs. Sure, they may play more games, but teams that have gone .500 have gotten in before. It's an integral part of the sport, I wouldn't be for a playoff that de-emphasizes the importance of the regular season. I think 8 is about the maximum you can go to keep that standard.

But I think four is perfect anyway, you won't see many blowouts in playoff games because the gap between 1 and 4 will be a lot closer than the gap between 1 and 8. I wouldn't mind if they expanded it, but they don't need to fix something if we don't even know it's even broken. A 16-team playoff is jumping the shark for sure.

Re: UCLA. I think they actually got the Bruins ranking right for once. UCLA not only has a resume worthy of that spot, but can you significantly tell me Michigan State is better than UCLA? Kansas State? I don't think so. Florida State doesn't look like the number 3 team in the country every week, yet they still are rated their because they're undefeated. Can't the same go for UCLA? They may have two losses, but they were against good teams (current top 25 opponents, including the #2 team) and they have some pretty solid wins. They've dominated in their two Top 25 wins this year. Does ASU win that game if they have Taylor Kelly? Maybe. Bercovici isn't the worst backup I've ever seen, and the ASU defense didn't stop the Bruins in that game anyway.

Like you, I think the 4 team model needs to be tested for a few seasons. But in general I'm a fan of an 8 team model because it takes some guesswork out of the picture. Win your (major) conference and you're in. Just like the BCS System - all major conference winners were assured of a big time bowl game, I think that there should be a little certainty to winning your conference. It gives teams something to fight for, but a couple at-Large berths also provides a second route for teams with style points and big time wins.

16 is definitely jumping the shark. It's like jumping the entire roster of the San Jose Sharks, actually. 4 or 8.

[rams80]

Marshall is not ranked at all in the CFB playoff polls...you know, as much as I didn't think I say it, I kinda miss the BCS now. At least they RANKED non-"power conference" teams...

They have one of the worst strength's of schedule in college football. They've played one team with a winning record (Middle Tennessee, 5-4). The committee's job is to rate the 25 best teams and, undefeated or not, Marshall doesn't have a better resume than any of the teams that are ranked. Colorado State deserves to be in the top 25 before Marshall does, in my opinion.

I like that they don't place record above all else, which is the case at the top with FSU at #3 as well.

Personally, I think it should be simple...teams can't choose which conference they play in right before the season, so why punish them just for being loyal to their group?

If you're undefeated at this point, you certainly deserve to be ranked...you may not be in the Top 10, but I doubt there are 25 teams better than you!

You are responsible for your non-conference schedule, and Marshall scheduled 3 bad MAC teams and an awful FCS team. No sympathy for the Herd.

[crashcarson15]

Marshall is not ranked at all in the CFB playoff polls...you know, as much as I didn't think I say it, I kinda miss the BCS now. At least they RANKED non-"power conference" teams...

They have one of the worst strength's of schedule in college football. They've played one team with a winning record (Middle Tennessee, 5-4). The committee's job is to rate the 25 best teams and, undefeated or not, Marshall doesn't have a better resume than any of the teams that are ranked. Colorado State deserves to be in the top 25 before Marshall does, in my opinion.

I like that they don't place record above all else, which is the case at the top with FSU at #3 as well.

Personally, I think it should be simple...teams can't choose which conference they play in right before the season, so why punish them just for being loyal to their group?

If you're undefeated at this point, you certainly deserve to be ranked...you may not be in the Top 10, but I doubt there are 25 teams better than you!

You are responsible for your non-conference schedule, and Marshall scheduled 3 bad MAC teams and an awful FCS team. No sympathy for the Herd.

Yup.

If you know you're gonna be that good, go out and schedule a top program that gives you a chance to make the committee consider you.

Go back and look at those Boise State teams. Once they realized that you needed that signature win to be in the discussion, they started scheduling to get one, that Virginia Tech game in '10 being the most notable.

This year they played Ole Miss, Connecticut, Louisiana, and BYU. If that team runs the table — and Taysom Hill doesn't get hurt — they're right in the discussion.

The point? They gave themselves a chance to have a solid resume. Unlike Marshall.

[Seadragon76]

I get the feeling that the committee is going to have a devil of a time picking the Group of 5 member to play in one of the New Year's Six games.

Right now there are at least six teams worth looking at..

-Marshall: 9-0, but a very godawful SoS that won't get any boost whatsoever the rest of the way (even if they face either Louisiana Tech or Rice in the C-USA Championship Game)

-Colorado State: 9-1. Does have a signature win over Boston College, but the Eagles aren't doing that great. Lone loss was to Boise State

-Boise State: 7-2, with that big win over Colorado State. So far, it's the signature win.

-Northern Illinois: 8-2. Does have a win over Northwestern, but it really kinda reeks.

-Memphis: 6-3. Two losses have come against Top 25 teams (7 point loss to UCLA and 21 point loss to Ole Miss). Currently lead the American and gets to avoid the other contender.

-East Carolina: 6-2, but the wins over Virginia Tech and North Carolina have really bombed since the Hokies and Tar Heels aren't doing so well. Not to mention that last loss to Temple might do more harm then good.

[dfwabel]

I get the feeling that the committee is going to have a devil of a time picking the Group of 5 member to play in one of the New Year's Six games.

Right now there are at least five teams worth looking at..

-Marshall: 9-0, but a very godawful SoS that won't get any boost whatsoever the rest of the way (even if they face either Louisiana Tech or Rice in the C-USA Championship Game)

-Colorado State: 9-1. Does have a signature win over Boston College, but the Eagles aren't doing that great. Lone loss was to Boise State

-Northern Illinois: 8-2. Does have a win over Northwestern, but it really kinda reeks.

-Memphis: 6-3. Two losses have come against Top 25 teams (7 point loss to UCLA and 21 point loss to Ole Miss). Currently lead the American and gets to avoid the other contender.

-East Carolina: 6-2, but the wins over Virginia Tech and North Carolina have really bombed since the Hokies and Tar Heels aren't doing so well. Not to mention that last loss to Temple might do more harm then good.

You (& thus the Committee) still have to consider Boise State since the MWC's Mountain Division is in their control.

[HedleyLamarr]

There's my rub. Based on what is the SEC West the best division in the country? Outside of the SEC West, there are only two wins vs. top 25 teams in the country and those two are Wisconsin(@LSU) and Kansas St (Auburn). This season has all the makings of a self-fulfilling prophecy. The SEC West is far and away the strongest division because you say so, but this year, who have the top teams in west beaten of worth besides themselves?

Well, the fact that the SEC West teams have a total of one loss to any team that's not in the SEC West (and that's last-place Arkansas losing to possibly SEC East champion Georgia). At last count, their record outside the division was 32-1, and that first number has only grown since.

[Balu the Bare]

There's my rub. Based on what is the SEC West the best division in the country? Outside of the SEC West, there are only two wins vs. top 25 teams in the country and those two are Wisconsin(@LSU) and Kansas St (Auburn). This season has all the makings of a self-fulfilling prophecy. The SEC West is far and away the strongest division because you say so, but this year, who have the top teams in west beaten of worth besides themselves?

Well, the fact that the SEC West teams have a total of one loss to any team that's not in the SEC West (and that's last-place Arkansas losing to possibly SEC East champion Georgia). At last count, their record outside the division was 32-1, and that first number has only grown since.

You make a good case for why Florida State should be #1 until they lose.

*Understand that I don't really disagree with the level of talent in the SEC, I'm just hating the selective use of stats and figures and the reliance of the eyeball test when calling them the best. Yes their record is 32-1 but Ole Miss and Mississippi State this year had a laughable out of conference schedule. For that matter, so did A&M, Arkansas and Alabama to a lesser extent. So we're talking one win for the SEC West vs top 15 teams outside of the SEC, but we're blasting other conferences and saying they should schedule better OOC teams. By contrast, the Pac12 has two wins vs top 10 teams outside of the Pac12 (one in each division) and Florida State has a win over a top 5 team (over a probably overrated #5 Notre Dame). This year, that "far and away" tag is giving the SEC too much credit. But that's just my opinion.

[STL_ArchMadness]

So glad FSU fell down. They are no where near as good as last year, struggling to beat average teams.

Also, Jamies Winston's case hearing has been moved back to December 1st, meaning "if the proceedings conclude on Dec. 5, Major Harding, a former Florida Supreme Court judge who is conducting the investigative hearing, would not be due to render a decision until Jan. 13, one day after the championship game."

You keep doing you Florida State.

[pianoknight]

There's my rub. Based on what is the SEC West the best division in the country? Outside of the SEC West, there are only two wins vs. top 25 teams in the country and those two are Wisconsin(@LSU) and Kansas St (Auburn). This season has all the makings of a self-fulfilling prophecy. The SEC West is far and away the strongest division because you say so, but this year, who have the top teams in west beaten of worth besides themselves?

Well, the fact that the SEC West teams have a total of one loss to any team that's not in the SEC West (and that's last-place Arkansas losing to possibly SEC East champion Georgia). At last count, their record outside the division was 32-1, and that first number has only grown since.

You make a good case for why Florida State should be #1 until they lose.

*Understand that I don't really disagree with the level of talent in the SEC, I'm just hating the selective use of stats and figures and the reliance of the eyeball test when calling them the best. Yes their record is 32-1 but Ole Miss and Mississippi State this year had a laughable out of conference schedule. For that matter, so did A&M, Arkansas and Alabama does the entire SEC, every goddamn year, with minor exceptions to the UGA-GT and Florida-FSU games. to a lesser extent. So we're talking one win for the SEC West vs top 15 teams outside of the SEC, but we're blasting other conferences and saying they should schedule better OOC teams. By contrast, the Pac12 has two wins vs top 10 teams outside of the Pac12 (one in each division) and Florida State has a win over a top 5 team (over a probably overrated #5 Notre Dame). This year, that "far and away" tag is giving the SEC too much credit. But that's just my opinion.

Fixed that for you.

[CLEstones]

There's my rub. Based on what is the SEC West the best division in the country? Outside of the SEC West, there are only two wins vs. top 25 teams in the country and those two are Wisconsin(@LSU) and Kansas St (Auburn). This season has all the makings of a self-fulfilling prophecy. The SEC West is far and away the strongest division because you say so, but this year, who have the top teams in west beaten of worth besides themselves?

Well, the fact that the SEC West teams have a total of one loss to any team that's not in the SEC West (and that's last-place Arkansas losing to possibly SEC East champion Georgia). At last count, their record outside the division was 32-1, and that first number has only grown since.

You make a good case for why Florida State should be #1 until they lose.

*Understand that I don't really disagree with the level of talent in the SEC, I'm just hating the selective use of stats and figures and the reliance of the eyeball test when calling them the best. Yes their record is 32-1 but Ole Miss and Mississippi State this year had a laughable out of conference schedule. For that matter, so did A&M, Arkansas and Alabama does the entire SEC, every goddamn year, with minor exceptions to the UGA-GT and Florida-FSU games. to a lesser extent. So we're talking one win for the SEC West vs top 15 teams outside of the SEC, but we're blasting other conferences and saying they should schedule better OOC teams. By contrast, the Pac12 has two wins vs top 10 teams outside of the Pac12 (one in each division) and Florida State has a win over a top 5 team (over a probably overrated #5 Notre Dame). This year, that "far and away" tag is giving the SEC too much credit. But that's just my opinion.

Fixed that for you.

I initially read that wrong. I thought you were saying aTm, Arkansas and Alabama played heavy OOC games. I looked, between the 3 teams, they played West Virginia and Texas Tech that were worth taking note of. The rest are filled D-II/FCS schools... not even mid-majors.

[Balu the Bare]

There's my rub. Based on what is the SEC West the best division in the country? Outside of the SEC West, there are only two wins vs. top 25 teams in the country and those two are Wisconsin(@LSU) and Kansas St (Auburn). This season has all the makings of a self-fulfilling prophecy. The SEC West is far and away the strongest division because you say so, but this year, who have the top teams in west beaten of worth besides themselves?

Well, the fact that the SEC West teams have a total of one loss to any team that's not in the SEC West (and that's last-place Arkansas losing to possibly SEC East champion Georgia). At last count, their record outside the division was 32-1, and that first number has only grown since.

You make a good case for why Florida State should be #1 until they lose.

*Understand that I don't really disagree with the level of talent in the SEC, I'm just hating the selective use of stats and figures and the reliance of the eyeball test when calling them the best. Yes their record is 32-1 but Ole Miss and Mississippi State this year had a laughable out of conference schedule. For that matter, so did A&M, Arkansas and Alabama does the entire SEC, every goddamn year, with minor exceptions to the UGA-GT and Florida-FSU games. to a lesser extent. So we're talking one win for the SEC West vs top 15 teams outside of the SEC, but we're blasting other conferences and saying they should schedule better OOC teams. By contrast, the Pac12 has two wins vs top 10 teams outside of the Pac12 (one in each division) and Florida State has a win over a top 5 team (over a probably overrated #5 Notre Dame). This year, that "far and away" tag is giving the SEC too much credit. But that's just my opinion.

Fixed that for you.

I initially read that wrong. I thought you were saying aTm, Arkansas and Alabama played heavy OOC games. I looked, between the 3 teams, they played West Virginia and Texas Tech that were worth taking note of. The rest are filled D-II/FCS schools... not even mid-majors.

Exactly my point. Maybe in past years we could make that far and away claim, but this year, not so much.

[hailstateunis]

There's my rub. Based on what is the SEC West the best division in the country? Outside of the SEC West, there are only two wins vs. top 25 teams in the country and those two are Wisconsin(@LSU) and Kansas St (Auburn). This season has all the makings of a self-fulfilling prophecy. The SEC West is far and away the strongest division because you say so, but this year, who have the top teams in west beaten of worth besides themselves?

Well, the fact that the SEC West teams have a total of one loss to any team that's not in the SEC West (and that's last-place Arkansas losing to possibly SEC East champion Georgia). At last count, their record outside the division was 32-1, and that first number has only grown since.

You make a good case for why Florida State should be #1 until they lose.

*Understand that I don't really disagree with the level of talent in the SEC, I'm just hating the selective use of stats and figures and the reliance of the eyeball test when calling them the best. Yes their record is 32-1 but Ole Miss and Mississippi State this year had a laughable out of conference schedule. For that matter, so did A&M, Arkansas and Alabama does the entire SEC, every goddamn year, with minor exceptions to the UGA-GT and Florida-FSU games. to a lesser extent. So we're talking one win for the SEC West vs top 15 teams outside of the SEC, but we're blasting other conferences and saying they should schedule better OOC teams. By contrast, the Pac12 has two wins vs top 10 teams outside of the Pac12 (one in each division) and Florida State has a win over a top 5 team (over a probably overrated #5 Notre Dame). This year, that "far and away" tag is giving the SEC too much credit. But that's just my opinion.

Fixed that for you.

I initially read that wrong. I thought you were saying aTm, Arkansas and Alabama played heavy OOC games. I looked, between the 3 teams, they played West Virginia and Texas Tech that were worth taking note of. The rest are filled D-II/FCS schools... not even mid-majors.

Not sure where you're getting that last part. Each SEC team played one FCS school. The rest were mid-majors. No D2 opponents.

[DS729]

But here's the question: Can you blame a Mississippi State or a Texas A&M for not scheduling marquee non-conference opponents when they play the gauntlet that is the SEC West? Even without it, their's still has more meat than anybody else's.