And? Does not change the fact that All Cupcake Conference is easily the weakest of the Power 5. FSU got what they deserve. And I will not apologize for the superior Bama team getting in over FSU.The ACC had a winning record against the SEC this year. 6 - 4.
OT: Other Sports 82
- Thread starter No Fun Shogun
- Start date
- Status
TLEH
Pronounced T-Lay
Bama's resume isn't that great either to be honest. You see those USF!!!! and Auburn games? They do have a great win with Georgia obviously.
If they are the better team than FSU, they really didn't play like it this year. I still think they likely ARE the better team than FSU, but you have to actually take the season into account. If not, then I am saying that Georgia is better than Bama and just lost a fluke game.
You actually have to take the games into account.
If they are the better team than FSU, they really didn't play like it this year. I still think they likely ARE the better team than FSU, but you have to actually take the season into account. If not, then I am saying that Georgia is better than Bama and just lost a fluke game.
You actually have to take the games into account.
OhCaptainMyCaptain
Registered User
No Fun Shogun
34-38-61-10-13-15
The point I'm making was that a lot of Big Ten and SEC haters are probably upset, that's all.
But, that being said, the NCAA itself set up the notion of power five conferences. To throw out an undefeated power five champion in favor of not one but two one-loss teams seems nonsensical to me, and inherently is a statement that the ACC flat out could not make the playoff no matter what they did. And if that's the case, then just say that there's really only a power four and soon to be power three (and really, just a power two between the Big Ten and SEC).
Now, am I saying that FSU is better than Texas, Alabama, or Georgia? No. In fact, I doubt it. But they took care of business, the other three dropped at least one.
If Texas and Bama were undefeated as well and you argued that FSU was the weakest of the five 13-0 P5 champs, sure. Okay. 4 chairs for 5 teams for one last postseason, and one has to be on the outside looking in. But this was the last time with four playoff teams and the undefeated power five champs should have dibs.
But, that being said, the NCAA itself set up the notion of power five conferences. To throw out an undefeated power five champion in favor of not one but two one-loss teams seems nonsensical to me, and inherently is a statement that the ACC flat out could not make the playoff no matter what they did. And if that's the case, then just say that there's really only a power four and soon to be power three (and really, just a power two between the Big Ten and SEC).
Now, am I saying that FSU is better than Texas, Alabama, or Georgia? No. In fact, I doubt it. But they took care of business, the other three dropped at least one.
If Texas and Bama were undefeated as well and you argued that FSU was the weakest of the five 13-0 P5 champs, sure. Okay. 4 chairs for 5 teams for one last postseason, and one has to be on the outside looking in. But this was the last time with four playoff teams and the undefeated power five champs should have dibs.
OhCaptainMyCaptain
Registered User
Bama has the better wins here without a doubt.
4 wins against teams #21 or better, and 3 of those wins were by 2 touchdowns or more. USF and Auburn games weren't good, but those are .500 teams. Not like they're both major bums. If we're holding that against Bama, then we need to also hold Boston College against FSU.
FSU didn't have the loss, but Bama easily has the better wins too.
I don't think we can sit here and say Bama doesn't have a good resume. They do. Now, that doesn't mean they should have gotten in over FSU. I am personally glad they did, though I do think they should have put FSU in at the same time.
At the end of the day, we got the better matchups, and this will be the last version of this format. That might be part of the reason the committee did it too. They won't have to worry about how this impacts decisions moving forward either.
I'm honestly shocked it took this long for a decision to be this controversial. For the most part, the committee has been able to avoid these kinds of things. Funny it happened like this on the last year.
TLEH
Pronounced T-Lay
They definitely have the better wins with Ole Miss, LSU, Georgia being better than @ Clemson and LSU Neutral site and @ Florida.
I'm just saying Alabama really hasn't been that good. I expect them to also get beat by Michigan by a TD.
OhCaptainMyCaptain
Registered User
It's possible, but I'm not sure how we can say Bama hasn't been that good when they just beat Georgia. A better word is probably inconsistent. The Auburn game was bad, but their three SEC games before that were some of the best football played by anyone all year.
If we get good Bama, they'll beat Michigan, who also hasn't been anything special as of late either. There is a reason the Vegas line on that game is only a point right now. Would probably be closer to 10-14 points if it was FSU. That's not how the playoff should be determined, and it doesn't mean that's how the games would play out either, of course. But if we're just talking probabilities here, Bama is the far more likely team to be Michigan.
I don't love how it all played out, but I do love the College Football Playoffs we got.
TLEH
Pronounced T-Lay
I just think its a bit rough to FSU considering TCU was apparently a "waste" to add and they beat Michigan. OSU went with their third string QB and won it all. The games aren't played on paper and its not really the committees right to decide what they "think" is going to happen.
Alabama needed a 4th and 20+ mistake from Auburn to even be where they are. I agree that they are likely the better team than FSU but then the regular season is pointless anyway and we should play 5 warm up games and then the rest be March Madness style playoffs.
They played rough games vs multiple opponents too.. forgot about the Arkansas game they also won on the last play and that team went 4-8. Its not like they dominated the entire year and were expected to beat GA. No one expected that. Even Vegas had them 5 point dogs at a neutral site.
Sure the playoffs are likely to be more competitive with Alabama rather than FSU and their 2nd string QB, but that doesn't mean that what the committee did is right.
Alabama needed a 4th and 20+ mistake from Auburn to even be where they are. I agree that they are likely the better team than FSU but then the regular season is pointless anyway and we should play 5 warm up games and then the rest be March Madness style playoffs.
They played rough games vs multiple opponents too.. forgot about the Arkansas game they also won on the last play and that team went 4-8. Its not like they dominated the entire year and were expected to beat GA. No one expected that. Even Vegas had them 5 point dogs at a neutral site.
Sure the playoffs are likely to be more competitive with Alabama rather than FSU and their 2nd string QB, but that doesn't mean that what the committee did is right.
OhCaptainMyCaptain
Registered User
Maybe not, but I'm also happy with it.
Also, OSU won the Big Ten Championship 59-0 with that 3rd string QB, or they may have been left out too. I'm pretty sure the committee would have left FSU in had they done that on Saturday night.
Not saying that's right, but it is what it is. The criteria do say they take major injuries into consideration. A bit of an easy out, but the language is there.
TLEH
Pronounced T-Lay
Yeah. I even tweeted that the injury language gives them the out. I went to FSU. I'm really not that salty about it. It is what it is. But at the same time I do think it sets a pretty bad precedent. Easy out for them with this being the last year of this format.
The ACC is bad and FSU should probably try and join the Big10 or something, but they recognize them as a P5 and you went undefeated. Not sure what else you want them to do.
Not play a cupcake schedule, for starters.
We could have had a 12 team playoff THIS YEAR had "The Alliance" not blocked that vote. So...the committee did not screw over FSU, The Alliance did.
TLEH
Pronounced T-Lay
I mean they scheduled LSU week 1. They beat the other "power" in their conference at their own stadium. Its not really their fault the conference they were in was bad. Especially considering its a P5 conference. Also these schedules are planned 3 and 4 years ahead.
IU Hawks fan
They call me IU
southsideIrish
Registered User
Meh even if FSU's QB hadn't gotten hurt I'd have probably not voted them in either. Their best win was against a 3-loss LSU team - they barely beat BC, who took a ridiculous amount of penalties (like 19) and still outgained FSU by over 100 yards. FSU struggled with teams like Miami (a rivalry game, to be fair) and Pitt.
They were also losing to Duke - with Duke driving for another score when they arguably knocked out the Duke QB and the whole game changed. All that being said, they were still undefeated. But I think the other teams clearly did more to get in.
I just love all the carnage. For years all we heard was the BCS sucks - (which it did) - and once a playoff was started all would be well. Now it's all about the playoff process sucking so voila - we'll expand it to 12 so a lot of mediocre teams get in. Hey more games, more ads, more revenue. Blech.
They were also losing to Duke - with Duke driving for another score when they arguably knocked out the Duke QB and the whole game changed. All that being said, they were still undefeated. But I think the other teams clearly did more to get in.
I just love all the carnage. For years all we heard was the BCS sucks - (which it did) - and once a playoff was started all would be well. Now it's all about the playoff process sucking so voila - we'll expand it to 12 so a lot of mediocre teams get in. Hey more games, more ads, more revenue. Blech.
Blackhawkswincup
RIP Fugu
MLB draft lottery is f***ing horrendous.
f***ing Cleveland jumped up for #1 pick
2024 draft
1. Cleveland Guardians (2% odds)
2. Cincinnati Reds (0.9% odds)
3. Colorado Rockies (18.3% odds)
4. Oakland Athletics (18.3% odds)
5. Chicago White Sox (14.7% odds)
6. Kansas City Royals (18.3% odds)
f***ing Cleveland jumped up for #1 pick
2024 draft
1. Cleveland Guardians (2% odds)
2. Cincinnati Reds (0.9% odds)
3. Colorado Rockies (18.3% odds)
4. Oakland Athletics (18.3% odds)
5. Chicago White Sox (14.7% odds)
6. Kansas City Royals (18.3% odds)
TLEH
Pronounced T-Lay
Blackhawkswincup
RIP Fugu
clydesdale line
Connor BeJesus
- Jan 10, 2012
- 25,553
- 24,415
It's an interesting gamble. He was awesome in KBO last year. Added a sweeper pitch there, threw 180 innings. Sox needs bodies who can throw a ton of innings on this team.
But of course.
Best part is, Sox probably lose 120 games next year, and can only pick as high as ...10th.
I really do think I'm just done being a Sox fan.
No Fun Shogun
34-38-61-10-13-15
OhCaptainMyCaptain
Registered User
Sounds like they are / going to be out on both Ohtani and Soto here soon. Never thought the Cubs were for sure getting either of them or anything like that, but still.
- Status
