NCAA Football 2016-17 Thread

[draynay]

A hypothetical which ignores the past and reality doesn't serve much purpose in the real world. Plus, we're talking about a #2 ranked team not being assured of a spot, that is reality, all this talk of "clinching" is absurd when discussion is centering on the #2 team in the nation having their fate undecided. Does your use of the word "hypothetical" rework reality to the extent that 8 teams can be chiseled in stone when there are still games left to be played?

NCAA Football is not the NFL, nobody wants it to be, using the NFL as precedent is silly. The rivalry games are not played for seeding purposes, again, this isn't the NFL, the whims of rankings are why you try TO WIN EVERY GAME. At this point Alabama is the only team that has "clinched" a spot in the playoff. Would they still be in such a position if they decided to rest players and picked up a loss or two?

Your talk of seeds and clinching and rivalries being silly is the talk of someone who doesn't understand college football at all.

[Xargoth6634]

I think one of the better arguments for an 8 team playoff is that it's easier to account for all the "top" teams. You have the 5 power conference winners in (which this year would include either PSU or Wisconsin repping the Big Ten) and then there's no problem adding say (this year) both OSU and Michigan along with the next highest ranked team. Hell, put a rule in like the BCS had (and I think the new top bowls have now?) where a non P5 conference team gets automatic entry if it's in the top x ranked teams.

Like I've said before and I'm sure I'll say again about this topic: there's usually some serious questions about teams in the #3-6 or so spots in the rankings, which is why we keep having these discussions like we did about the top 2 in the BCS days. If you expand and cap a playoff at 8 teams, you might get some bickering about the last couple of spots, but it's going to be by 2-3 loss teams who didn't take care of business during the regular season to the degree that they've locked in their slots.

[Tech614]

Wisconsin and Penn State have a minor chance of getting in with a Clemson loss and a convincing win for Washington.

If Washington loses Michigan is in easily. That head to head win vs Colorado which looked like a survival over a meh team in the early season is pretty key now.

If Clemson loses and Washington barely escapes with a win then Michigan still probably gets in over the B1G champion.

I'm sure everyone on the committee is just hoping Clemson and Washington both win so their job is easy.

If Clemson and Washington both lose Colorado gets the last spot IMO, the other power 5 conferences would have the committees ass if they put 3 B1G teams in. Also if Penn State wins the common opponent criteria shows Colorado playing Michigan better then Penn State.

TBH I like the potential for utter chaos the 4 team playoff is giving us this year. It makes following the sport as a whole more interesting even if it still leaves some deserving teams out of the picture.

[Razamith]

With the new rankings out it looks pretty straightforward the scenarios with two problematic:
- if clemson, washington, and penn state win, it a huge debate who the 4th is (obviously not michigan).
- if clemson wins, washington loses, and wisconson wins, it may even bring michigan back into discussion along with colorodo.
otherwise, clemson loss opens up another slot things become easy regardless of winners, and washington loss penn state win is instantly decided (PSU), and other combos should be fairly obvious. IMO i'm going to assume a clemson win, and its up to Penn State/Washington to control their own destiny and make the best argument for themseleves as the most likely 4th man in. Or the way some of this season has gone we'll see a bunch of losses and last minute chaos >.>

[Stommped]

A hypothetical which ignores the past and reality doesn't serve much purpose in the real world. Plus, we're talking about a #2 ranked team not being assured of a spot, that is reality, all this talk of "clinching" is absurd when discussion is centering on the #2 team in the nation having their fate undecided. Does your use of the word "hypothetical" rework reality to the extent that 8 teams can be chiseled in stone when there are still games left to be played?

NCAA Football is not the NFL, nobody wants it to be, using the NFL as precedent is silly. The rivalry games are not played for seeding purposes, again, this isn't the NFL, the whims of rankings are why you try TO WIN EVERY GAME. At this point Alabama is the only team that has "clinched" a spot in the playoff. Would they still be in such a position if they decided to rest players and picked up a loss or two?

Your talk of seeds and clinching and rivalries being silly is the talk of someone who doesn't understand college football at all.

Your entire first paragraph is completely wrong. IF there was a 8 team playoff, both OSU and Mich would have absolutely clinched before their game being played. This is evidenced by the fact that the losing team is still ranked 5th in the most recent poll. It doesn't matter that other teams have games remaining, this is going to happen all the time with an 8 team playoff. It blows my mind that you can't grasp the concept of giving yourself the best chance to win a Natl Championship over winning a rivalry game. Who gives a fuck if your starting QB broke his leg in the second half of that rivalry game which had no impact on finishing in the top 8, because the important thing is winning that game right? I'm sure all Mich and OSU fans would gladly give up a shot at the Natl Championship in order to beat their rival....

I do understand college football, more important, I understand sports. Clearly you've been involved in some major rivalry your entire life which has clouded your judgement on this pretty clear issue.

- - - Updated - - -

With the new rankings out it looks pretty straightforward the scenarios with two problematic:
- if clemson, washington, and penn state win, it a huge debate who the 4th is (obviously not michigan).
- if clemson wins, washington loses, and wisconson wins, it may even bring michigan back into discussion along with colorodo.
otherwise, clemson loss opens up another slot things become easy regardless of winners, and washington loss penn state win is instantly decided (PSU), and other combos should be fairly obvious. IMO i'm going to assume a clemson win, and its up to Penn State/Washington to control their own destiny and make the best argument for themseleves as the most likely 4th man in. Or the way some of this season has gone we'll see a bunch of losses and last minute chaos >.>

I don't understand, why would Michigan be in the discussion if Wisconsin wins, but not Penn St.? Michigan beat both of those teams, and PSU specifically they destroyed. I could see the argument for both or neither, but I don't understand one but not the other..

[Razamith]

I don't understand, why would Michigan be in the discussion if Wisconsin wins, but not Penn St.? Michigan beat both of those teams, and PSU specifically they destroyed. I could see the argument for both or neither, but I don't understand one but not the other..

Wisconsin's resume is less comparable. I still think it would be more likely Wisconson would get the nod over Michigan if it came down to them, but the convo is much closer.
Michigan will have 3 top 25 wins (2 top 10), loss to #2/#26+[unranked], 10 wins
Wisconsin will have 2 top 25 wins (1 top 10), loss to #2/#5, 11 wins [they lost head to head and lost to OSU who beat UM] (plus conference champ)
Penn State will have 3 top 25 wins (2 top 10 including #2), loss to #5/#25, 11 wins [they lost head to head but beat OSU who beat UM so its a wash] (plus conference champ)

As stated either way Michigan is outside looking in, but they are at best parallel or below Penn State's resume vs parallel or above Wisconsin.

[Crissi]

You think you understand, but you reaaaaly don't. Schools will riot if they relax on rivalry games. The boosters will riot. The board of directors and AD will get involved. That is why even if they clinch, they won't relax. Why do you think even teams with no shot at the playoffs play their hardest in rivalry games?

Just look at the bitching involved when Tex and Tex AM stopped playing. Even the legislature attempts to get involved. The rivalries are bigger than your logic

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, and rivalry games serve as great recruitment games. Why would you rest your starters when you're trying to impress and recruit 4 and 5 star recruits?

[Stommped]

You think you understand, but you reaaaaly don't. Schools will riot if they relax on rivalry games. The boosters will riot. The board of directors and AD will get involved. That is why even if they clinch, they won't relax. Why do you think even teams with no shot at the playoffs play their hardest in rivalry games?

Just look at the bitching involved when Tex and Tex AM stopped playing. Even the legislature attempts to get involved. The rivalries are bigger than your logic

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, and rivalry games serve as great recruitment games. Why would you rest your starters when you're trying to impress and recruit 4 and 5 star recruits?

The boosters will riot when their star player gets injured in a game that winning offers no benefit to the post season. Rivalry games are what they are because winning has always been better than losing in college football, since any loss would drop you from the potential #1 or #2 rankings. If you weren't in contention for those top spots winning was still better because you got yourself a better bowl game. So there's no precedent for teams ranked #1-4 playing each other in the world of an 8 team playoff.

You act like you know how it would be except you don't, since it's never happened before you're just assuming that everything would be status quo and nothing would change. Very close minded thinking.

[Crissi]

I know how it would be because similar problems have cropped up from Tex and Tex AM no longer playing. When Tex beat TexAM on their last meetup, the most important part wasn't just winning a game to get a better bowl, it was to make sure we send them off with a loss because we regarded their decision as stupid. People were and still are super upset. Also, star players get injured ALL the time anyways, regardless of game importance, so the only time that's ever taken into consideration is if Team A is up by 40 points and thus will already win (95% of the time, bar any TCU - Oregon shenaniganz).

Even teams that arent in contention for Bowl games will play hard. Look at what Tex Tech did to Baylor. They knew they wouldnt get a bowl game and they still went lights out. It just seems you don't really understand the college scene, at all. Doubly so when you realize that relaxing on rival games (or any game really unless you're already up significantly) tends to harm your recruitment.

[Tech614]

Wisconsin's resume is less comparable. I still think it would be more likely Wisconson would get the nod over Michigan if it came down to them, but the convo is much closer.
Michigan will have 3 top 25 wins (2 top 10), loss to #2/#26+[unranked], 10 wins
Wisconsin will have 2 top 25 wins (1 top 10), loss to #2/#5, 11 wins [they lost head to head and lost to OSU who beat UM] (plus conference champ)
Penn State will have 3 top 25 wins (2 top 10 including #2), loss to #5/#25, 11 wins [they lost head to head but beat OSU who beat UM so its a wash] (plus conference champ)

As stated either way Michigan is outside looking in, but they are at best parallel or below Penn State's resume vs parallel or above Wisconsin.

You apparently didn't listen to the committee man on ESPN. Michigan is just barely outside the top 4 as it stands now. Head to head is a major factor. Penn State nor Wisconsin are jumping them easily.

Michigan destroyed Penn State, if you think a flukey win vs OSU is going to make the committee think PSU is the stronger team... nah mate. Penn State could get it, but it would take a Clemson loss, a convincing Washington win and a very convincing PSU win. Wisconsin's chances are even smaller.

Especially if Washington loses. Michigan has 3 top 10 wins and 2 wins over "conference champions" in that scenario.

[cubby]

If Washington wins they are in - you can't ignore the Pac-12 champion with a 12-1 record, regardless of huge east coast bias. The B1G is really fucking things up with teams losing games in the wrong way - ridiculous that the obvious #2 team in the nation (and OSU very much earned that spot) isn't even playing in the conf champ game.

The argument for having three B1G teams in the four, regardless of how it plays out (WA and Penn St. losing) won't fly - it's just too controversial to have 3/4 teams from one conf in the CFP - no matter what logic you use.

The Committee will have it relatively easy is Washington and Clemson win. If they don't, there will be serious talk about an 8-team CFP.

[Razamith]

You apparently didn't listen to the committee man on ESPN. Michigan is just barely outside the top 4 as it stands now. Head to head is a major factor. Penn State nor Wisconsin are jumping them easily.

Michigan is currently ranked 5th and IMO correctly. Problem is many other teams are playing a conference championship game. And there's many other factors such as Penn State line injuries early season are mostly fixed, Michigan's loss to an UNRANKED team, and Penn State beat BOTH teams that beat michigan. And if you're gonna call the OSU win "flukey" without real merrit then the Pitt loss was super flukey from an uncalled PI endgame where they easily would have tied or won -- but a win's a win and a loss is a loss. The numbers dont lie and Michigan only has very outside chances of getting in with a lot of help.

Most likely scenario is Ala-Clem-OSU-Wash/PSU but there's fair chances some losses occur (most probable PSU).

- - - Updated - - -

Well, at least these are all just my opinion from statistics/history point of view. I do agree this year's selection has the potential to go many ways with difficult decisions & upset parties

[Stommped]

Even teams that arent in contention for Bowl games will play hard. Look at what Tex Tech did to Baylor. They knew they wouldnt get a bowl game and they still went lights out. It just seems you don't really understand the college scene, at all. Doubly so when you realize that relaxing on rival games (or any game really unless you're already up significantly) tends to harm your recruitment.

This last paragraph really highlights that you just simply do not understand at all what I'm saying. Or maybe you just don't understand sports? Teams with nothing to play for is not the same thing as teams who have already clinched their playoff spot. Yes Magic, we know that teams who have bad seasons like to finish off their crappy season with a big win, thank you.

You know what else helps recruitment? Winning national championships. You know what helps win national championships? Not having your best players injured.

And I don't why you keep bringing up the Tex and A&M example. It literally has nothing to do with what we are talking about. A game where a win gave a better bowl game and you wanted to win really bad...and? I'll repeat what I said before, you haven't seen what will happen with meaningless games because it has never happened before, so you don't know what will change. Tex vs A&M is not an example of this happening before.

Expanding the playoffs will only serve to devalue the regular the season, any argument denying that is patently wrong. One of college basketball's biggest criticisms is that nothing matters until March, since you have so many teams getting in the tournament. Obviously 68 is far greater than 8, but the biggest thing I love about college football is that practically every week throughout the entire season is a playoff game. One loss can potentially ruin your season. The further you expand the playoffs the further we will move away from that.

[Crissi]

and there's is literally nothing wrong with that other than personal preference. A little dilution is imo, necessary to avoid the clusterfuck that is this year. Add in the fact that ref screw ups should never decide anything so important, and ref screw ups did absolutely cost at least 1 team a win this year (Ok State), and being super harsh like your opinion wants tends to not be good for playoff credibility.

and I understand sports just fine, thanks.

[cubby]

Michigan is currently ranked 5th and IMO correctly. Problem is many other teams are playing a conference championship game. And there's many other factors such as Penn State line injuries early season are mostly fixed, Michigan's loss to an UNRANKED team, and Penn State beat BOTH teams that beat michigan. And if you're gonna call the OSU win "flukey" without real merrit then the Pitt loss was super flukey from an uncalled PI endgame where they easily would have tied or won -- but a win's a win and a loss is a loss. The numbers dont lie and Michigan only has very outside chances of getting in with a lot of help.

I have trouble putting 2-loss teams ahead of 1-loss teams using the "flukey" win argument. While there are certainly close games, and even "flukey" win/losses, a loss is still a loss, regardless of how it came about.

This is my biggest problem with people discussing the idea that Washington might be out even with winning the PAC-12 championship game.

[Pendulous]

Also remember that college football has the smallest regular season. When each game is 1/12 of your season, every game will count regardless.

[Crissi]

Anyways, Go Washington Rather see them in over Michigan, but biased person is biased.

[Tech614]

Michigan is currently ranked 5th and IMO correctly. Problem is many other teams are playing a conference championship game. And there's many other factors such as Penn State line injuries early season are mostly fixed, Michigan's loss to an UNRANKED team, and Penn State beat BOTH teams that beat michigan. And if you're gonna call the OSU win "flukey" without real merrit then the Pitt loss was super flukey from an uncalled PI endgame where they easily would have tied or won -- but a win's a win and a loss is a loss. The numbers dont lie and Michigan only has very outside chances of getting in with a lot of help.

Most likely scenario is Ala-Clem-OSU-Wash/PSU but there's fair chances some losses occur (most probable PSU).

- - - Updated - - -

Well, at least these are all just my opinion from statistics/history point of view. I do agree this year's selection has the potential to go many ways with difficult decisions & upset parties

Again, you didn't actually listen to the committee talk I take it.

The difference between Wash and Mich to them is currently very, very small. The difference between PSU and OSU to them is not even close- world's apart. That shows how much they value that win over OSU. OSU dominated that entire game, lost it on some bad calls and a blocked fg return. It was a flukey as a win can possibly be.

Again what you're trying to say does not match what the committee is saying, and you're trying to speak in absolutes... lol.

PSU's chances of getting in are very, very small even with chaos happening. PSU can not escape the fact they took a beat down by the tune of 39 points to Michigan. Even a pitt win would be pretty meaningless to them in the grand scheme of things atm, they would likely still be where they are currently due to said beat down. No team currently in playoff contention took a beat down loss like a scrub MAC team coming to town for a pay day. PSU did. It's hurting them in a major way right now. If that game was even moderately close say a 10 point Michigan win we would be having a very different discussion right now.

[cubby]

Anyways, Go Washington Rather see them in over Michigan, but biased person is biased.

Same here. And I'm an old-school Oregon fan, so this hurts more than most. But gotta root for the conference.

- - - Updated - - -

Again, you didn't actually listen to the committee talk I take it.

The difference between Wash and Mich to them is currently very, very small. The difference between PSU and OSU to them is not even close- world's apart. That shows how much they value that win over OSU. OSU dominated that entire game, lost it on some bad calls and a blocked fg return. It was a flukey as a win can possibly be.

Again what you're trying to say does not match what the committee is saying, and you're trying to speak in absolutes... lol.

PSU's chances of getting in are very, very small even with chaos happening. PSU can not escape the fact they took a beat down by the tune of 39 points to Michigan. Even a pitt win would be pretty meaningless to them in the grand scheme of things atm, they would likely still be where they are currently due to said beat down. No team currently in playoff contention took a beat down loss like a scrub MAC team coming to town for a pay day. PSU did. It's hurting them in a major way right now. If that game was even moderately close say a 10 point Michigan win we would be having a very different discussion right now.

From what you gathered of the committee talk, could Washington still possibly miss out on a CFP spot if they win (for instance, if they won badly and Michigan dominated)?

[Tech614]

From what you gathered of the committee talk, could Washington still possibly miss out on a CFP spot if they win (for instance, if they won badly and Michigan dominated)?

If Washington wins they're in, they will beat a top 10 team while Michigan is idle so Michigan can't do anything to jump them this week. Michigan can only jump them if they lose.

Clemson and Washington just need to win to get in, things get crazy if either or both lose. OSU and Alabama are 100% in no matter what.