2022 Miscellaneous College News

[wildcat83]

Now I think it’s pretty cut and dry, USC and TCU win next week they’re in.  If one loses then OSU is in.  
 

That’s a brutal loss for LSU.

[UpandIn]

15 hours ago, wildcat83 said:

Now I think it’s pretty cut and dry, USC and TCU win next week they’re in.  If one loses then OSU is in.  
 

That’s a brutal loss for LSU.

And USC has a rematch with Utah...who handed them their only loss 43-42 in a game in which I THINK they went for 2 at the end of it. 

I'm kinda conflicted here. Two B1G teams would be good...and this looks like a year in which the games would be pretty competitive. Assuming one of those two teams loses, you'd probably have GA vs OSU and then Mich vs the other. 

Then again, it'd kinda be like 3 B1G teams if TCU losses and USC, Mich and OSU get in. 

[DuWayne Steurer]

I'm gonna laugh my buttski off if the unthinkable happens and Michigan loses in the Big 10 title game.

[yourout]

USC might have just put on the worst tackling display I've seen in quite a while.

I really like Utah and Kyle whittingham but holy crap was that awful by USC.

[HarryDoyle]

You mean to tell me a Lincoln Riley led team lost a big game????

Sounds like he'd be the perfect Badgers head coach.

 

 

[CheeseheadInQC]

I don’t trust the committee to not take Alabama if TCU loses, but the four spots really should be locked right now. If KSU beats TCU, that automatically makes their earlier game a better win than any Bama has and TCU also beat the highest ranked team Bama has beaten.

[Fear The Chorizo]

So far NCAAF Conference Championship weekend and results from last weekend really point to the CFP to be reduced to 2 teams and definitely not expanded to 12.  

[wildcat83]

My guess is Georgia, Michigan, TCU, Ohio St.

 

My honest opinion of who’s the top 4:  Georgia, Alabama, Michigan, USC.  On Vegas odds I think Bama would be favored over anyone except Georgia.

[MrTPlush]

20 hours ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

So far NCAAF Conference Championship weekend and results from last weekend really point to the CFP to be reduced to 2 teams and definitely not expanded to 12.  

Really? Cause it kinda points to the opposite. The apparent top teams losing to other Top 15ish teams. #11 seed just beat a #4 seed and the #3 seed lost to the #10 seed. Not to mention, since expansion, the entire thing has been won by a #3 or #4 seed three times.

It is for entertainment…not making sure to crown the #1 team. It is most certainly more entertaining now and I bet people will think it is even more so when expanded again.

I never understand why people are so anti expansion. What is there to lose?

[Fear The Chorizo]

43 minutes ago, MrTPlush said:

Really? Cause it kinda points to the opposite. The apparent top teams losing to other Top 15ish teams. #11 seed just beat a #4 seed and the #3 seed lost to the #10 seed. Not to mention, since expansion, the entire thing has been won by a #3 or #4 seed three times.

It is for entertainment…not making sure to crown the #1 team. It is most certainly more entertaining now and I bet people will think it is even more so when expanded again.

I never understand why people are so anti expansion. What is there to lose?

I look at it differently - now the debate about who's taking the #4 spot for this year's playoff is probably among USC, who lost twice to another team in their conference who lost 3 other games; Alabama, who already lost head to head against UGA and didn't even win their conference division; and Ohio State, who just got beaten down at home by Michigan last weekend.  Those teams all had their chance to make a case for being the best team in the country in games already played, and they proved not up to the task so I think they don't deserve a 2nd/3rd chance to be considered a national champion for this season.

To me there's no doubt the two best teams based on their regular season body of work are UGA and Michigan - and I think there should be immense value placed on regular season body of work to determine a national championship for college football.  I think you've got to win your conference in order to win a national championship with football.  With how college football is structured I just don't like expanding the playoff to the point where no matter what the Alabamas, OSUs, and other programs that get their pick of 5-star talent every recruiting season do during their seasons to still get a shot at winning a national title.

[igor67]

Expansion is really contraction of the playoffs as Chorizo pointed out indirectly. The old system ensures you have a month and a half of playoff games in Oct and November. And with most teams having a year end big rivalry game it's just fun. I can still hate on the Gophers for costing us a chance at a title with that stupid tie almost 30 years later.

[LouisEly]

22 minutes ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

Alabama, who already lost head to head against UGA and didn't even win their conference division

Alabama didn't play Georgia.  Alabama is SEC West and UGA is SEC East and they skipped each other this year.

Alabama's losses were to Tennessee and LSU.

[Fear The Chorizo]

24 minutes ago, LouisEly said:

Alabama didn't play Georgia.  Alabama is SEC West and UGA is SEC East and they skipped each other this year.

Alabama's losses were to Tennessee and LSU.

Oops, yep you're right....both teams UGA also flat out dominated

[MrTPlush]

So basically you’d rather occasionally get the opportunity to not see Alabama and Ohio State in the playoff versus letting more teams have an opportunity. 

I don’t really understand college football fans and wanting to make sure they are as miserable as possible and make sure the regular season champion can get the trophy. There is basically no other sport on the planet that insists on that.

Maybe recruits wouldn’t pile on those teams as bad if they can still experience the playoffs at other schools? Who knows. 

Them again, if a team is truly the best…they shouldn’t have a hard time winning an expanded playoff anyway, right?

 

[Fear The Chorizo]

5 hours ago, MrTPlush said:

So basically you’d rather occasionally get the opportunity to not see Alabama and Ohio State in the playoff versus letting more teams have an opportunity. 

I don’t really understand college football fans and wanting to make sure they are as miserable as possible and make sure the regular season champion can get the trophy. There is basically no other sport on the planet that insists on that.

Maybe recruits wouldn’t pile on those teams as bad if they can still experience the playoffs at other schools? Who knows. 

Them again, if a team is truly the best…they shouldn’t have a hard time winning an expanded playoff anyway, right?

 

If we're wanting to expand the college football playoff to 12 or 16 teams or even 32, I'm all for it....just do away completely with nonconference regular season games, have every power 5 team play their conference games only Sept-Oct to determine tourney seeding and then proceed with the playoff starting in November through early December.  Then you schedule the final 4 playing Jan 1 and Jan 8th, with other teams getting knocked out in earlier playoff rounds getting a bowl game to round out their schedule.  

College football isn't the NFL - if they want to make teams play 16-17 games to win a natty they should just let them turn pro at 18 so they can at least get paid for that length of a season.

The Super Bowl champion is oftentimes not the best NFL team in a given season even with a playoff format that dramatically de-emphasis regular season success and winds up with half the league in the postseason - there's much more parity throughout the NFL because it's structured in a way that there aren't dramatic financial/personnel/scheduling advantages for certain teams/divisions/etc...College football is nowhere near that balanced, and IMO expanding the CFP without first addressing the structural advantages is going to wind up looking just like the NCAA D3 football playoffs - with the same 2-4 teams who happen to have more resources dedicated to their football program always playing for the title anyway over a 6-8 year period.

[owbc]

The playoff is the rare alignment of the fans wanting something that will also make more money. CFB will eventually be a full paid professional league for 18-22 year olds with a set of super conferences that will have guaranteed slots in the playoff. 

To me the outstanding question is whether the financial evolution of the sport will lead to more parity. It was a pretty rough go for a while there but the SEC dominance isn’t quite what is was anymore and there is more financial incentive for players to go to a school like USC now than there previously was given the paycheck that they are getting to play there. 

I also think the playoff will lead to more parity because recruits will have more options for schools that can reasonable expect to make the playoff in any given year. They don’t play enough games for us to really know who the top-4 are. The schedules are insanely unbalanced, especially when you consider conference strengths and the difficulty of winning road games in a hostile environment. 
 

As long as they keep the first round of the playoff at campus stadiums, that will make it unique and interesting enough. If the Citrus Bowl or something becomes a first round hosting site and the stadium is half-full, then forget it. 

[SomewhereInTime]

On 12/3/2022 at 12:18 PM, Fear The Chorizo said:

So far NCAAF Conference Championship weekend and results from last weekend really point to the CFP to be reduced to 2 teams and definitely not expanded to 12.  

Yeah because there's no way #5 ranked Alabama could compete with anyone in the top four.  I'm sure they'd be big underdogs.

Seriously, there's about fourteen teams that would have a reasonable chance against TCU, Ohio, and Michigan and I think some would even be favored over TCU.

[SomewhereInTime]

4 hours ago, owbc said:

The playoff is the rare alignment of the fans wanting something that will also make more money. CFB will eventually be a full paid professional league for 18-22 year olds with a set of super conferences that will have guaranteed slots in the playoff. 

To me the outstanding question is whether the financial evolution of the sport will lead to more parity. It was a pretty rough go for a while there but the SEC dominance isn’t quite what is was anymore and there is more financial incentive for players to go to a school like USC now than there previously was given the paycheck that they are getting to play there. 

I also think the playoff will lead to more parity because recruits will have more options for schools that can reasonable expect to make the playoff in any given year. They don’t play enough games for us to really know who the top-4 are. The schedules are insanely unbalanced, especially when you consider conference strengths and the difficulty of winning road games in a hostile environment. 
 

As long as they keep the first round of the playoff at campus stadiums, that will make it unique and interesting enough. If the Citrus Bowl or something becomes a first round hosting site and the stadium is half-full, then forget it. 

Don't kid yourself, the SEC is as dominant as ever and that's not going to change anytime soon.  They have a massive geographical advantage that no other conference can compete with.

[Fear The Chorizo]

3 hours ago, SomewhereInTime said:

Yeah because there's no way #5 ranked Alabama could compete with anyone in the top four.  I'm sure they'd be big underdogs.

Seriously, there's about fourteen teams that would have a reasonable chance against TCU, Ohio, and Michigan and I think some would even be favored over TCU.

It's not about whether #5 Alabama would be competitive or not, IMO - they lost twice in the regular season against SEC teams that UGA dominated and didn't event play in their conference title game because of it.  They had their chance to punch their ticket into the top 4 with a better regular season performance and they didn't.

[MrTPlush]

I think it is great to make the playoff large enough to represent each power conference and allow some at large bids so no one gets screwed over due to a 4 loss power 5 team sneaking in. Now the Iowa/Wisconsin/Minnesota of the world can have something to hope for even if they suffer a loss to OSU. Needing to be utterly perfect to make it is not entertaining. Utah beating USC shouldn't be a celebration because they got to ruin USC's season...it should catapult them into the playoff picture versus out. 

Rivalry games are cool and all, but they are what they are. Hopefully more teams can have something to play for at the end of a season instead of trying to play spoiler. Watching fans freak out and get excited to play in a specific exhibition bowl game and watch a specific parade is...kinda sad. 

I also don't necessarily agree that it is condensing the excitement of the regular season. Maybe it is a bit boring for select elite teams. Alabama/OSU/Georgia, sure, the regular season won't be too nail biting...but for the large majority of teams? It would be pretty epic. The #8-#12 seeds would be musical chairs. 

If championship week still exists there could be some annoying issues though. Idling teams now are somewhat annoying to people and it could be worse in a 12 team format. Utah and Kansas State would have been playing for their lives while Penn State got to sit at home watching Michigan/OSU battle each other in nothing more than a seeding matchup

[owbc]

2 hours ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

It's not about whether #5 Alabama would be competitive or not, IMO - they lost twice in the regular season against SEC teams that UGA dominated and didn't event play in their conference title game because of it.  They had their chance to punch their ticket into the top 4 with a better regular season performance and they didn't.

They didn't play the same schedule. Alabama lost two very difficult road games. Georgia did not play any road games that were nearly as challenging as those. 

Alabama's two losses were amazing college football. We want more of that. But from Alabama's perspective they should try to avoid playing difficult road games as much as possible because it cost them the playoff and a ton of $$. 

If the playoff wasn't on the line, would the celebrations have been different for beating 'Bama? Would it have meant less to Tennessee or LSU? I doubt it, especially because both of them would have had a better shot at the playoffs themselves, rather than being left on the outside yet again this year because they aren't quite as talented as Alabama. 

[Fear The Chorizo]

20 minutes ago, owbc said:

They didn't play the same schedule. Alabama lost two very difficult road games. Georgia did not play any road games that were nearly as challenging as those. 

Alabama's two losses were amazing college football. We want more of that. But from Alabama's perspective they should try to avoid playing difficult road games as much as possible because it cost them the playoff and a ton of $$. 

If the playoff wasn't on the line, would the celebrations have been different for beating 'Bama? Would it have meant less to Tennessee or LSU? I doubt it, especially because both of them would have had a better shot at the playoffs themselves, rather than being left on the outside yet again this year because they aren't quite as talented as Alabama. 

Sorry, but Alabama simply cannot make an argument for their inclusion in this current CFP based on them playing more difficult road games, when this is basically the one season they've actually played anyone worth a darn in true road games outside the SEC west because Tennessee finally decided to field a pretty good team.  Easy to forget that 4 loss Texas basically had Alabama beat and blew it early in the season, too.

I don't think anyone outside of Bama fans will feel for them losing out on all that $$, as it's gotten to the point where the NCAA has an auto-deposit of CFP funds into Alabama's joint checking account the past 10 years...pretty sure they'll find a way to avoid having to drop the football program next fall.

And despite all that, next year Alabama will be ranked in the top 2 of the preseason poll...and in 2024, and in 2025, and so on.  

[stoutdude04]

17 minutes ago, owbc said:

They didn't play the same schedule. Alabama lost two very difficult road games. Georgia did not play any road games that were nearly as challenging as those. 

Alabama's two losses were amazing college football. We want more of that. But from Alabama's perspective they should try to avoid playing difficult road games as much as possible because it cost them the playoff and a ton of $$. 

If the playoff wasn't on the line, would the celebrations have been different for beating 'Bama? Would it have meant less to Tennessee or LSU? I doubt it, especially because both of them would have had a better shot at the playoffs themselves, rather than being left on the outside yet again this year because they aren't quite as talented as Alabama. 

This is a great point that people have pointed out for years.  Alabama has been the best college football team over the last 10-15 years or whatever, but they have also always had a schedule that helped that out.  If schedules aren't equal then I think there needs to be an expanded playoff.  Are there going to be blowouts?  Of course.  Will there be teams that make it in but probably shouldn't? Yep.  However, it will make the season more fun for fans.  Once the Badgers lost their 1st game this year I thought, well, maybe they can make the conference championship.

[SomewhereInTime]

6 hours ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

It's not about whether #5 Alabama would be competitive or not, IMO - they lost twice in the regular season against SEC teams that UGA dominated and didn't event play in their conference title game because of it.  They had their chance to punch their ticket into the top 4 with a better regular season performance and they didn't.

They lose two games by a point and would have a chance to beat any of the four playoff teams.  This is why it's good they are expanding the playoff.

[MrTPlush]

They need to do what they did in college basketball and make scheduling tough games a reward come seeding time. That motivates the fringe teams to schedule tough games and even the elite teams would have some motivation to get the bye week. 

Right now it is a joke. There is no motivation to schedule good games. Teams just pay mid major universities to come get whipped. Fans don't want to watch that. I would have to think it would be better financially if they can incentivize these universities to risk a loss and not have it end their season completely.