2018-2019 NCAA Football

[Pendulous]

Bama and the SEC have special rules, but OK
See Utah being denied a chance to play for the 08 natty

I'm all in favor of an expanded playoffs to give teams like UCF a chance to prove themselves against a power conference. But it honestly sounds like you're complaining for the sake of complaining. If you're going to argue that the SEC is overrated, you might want to wait until they don't win nine of the past twelve titles (and competed in eleven of the past twelve).

[Brubear]

I'm all in favor of an expanded playoffs to give teams like UCF a chance to prove themselves against a power conference. But it honestly sounds like you're complaining for the sake of complaining. If you're going to argue that the SEC is overrated, you might want to wait until they don't win nine of the past twelve titles (and competed in eleven of the past twelve).

I mean, it really doesn't take much to see that the system has been geared in their favor for awhile (see: the year Alabama had a rematch against LSU for the BCS title after having just played each other in the SEC championship). Has Alabama performed pretty well (even ignoring the way they've set up their schedule very much skew things to their advantage)? Yes. But outside of Alabama and whatever other team happens to be coming in second to them that year, the SEC as a whole has been rather mediocre (and even with some of those schools downright bad). Yet every year we keep hearing about how tough the SEC is because for some reason people keep buying into the hype that Tennessee and Arkansas are back, or that Ole Miss/Miss State/Mizzou/TA&M have finally figured out how to stay competitive, or that LSU and Auburn have turned things around and will challenge Alabama (and everyone just ignores Vandy).

The SEC has been Alabama (replaced by Auburn a couple of times) vs Georgia (occasionally Florida) for awhile now. The rest of the SEC has not deserved the amount of hype they keep getting every year (as seen by their OOC/bowl record over that span).

- - - Updated - - -

They weren’t in the PAC 12 at the time of course they were. Same applies to UCF until they join a real conference.

Cool, they still completely dismantled Alabama that year and the AP at least recognized that them being left out was a mistake and were deserving of being co-champions afterwards because of said shellacking. The SEC has had special rules in their favor for quite awhile (again: see the year we had an SEC rematch in the BCS championship because LSU and Alabama were just obviously the two best teams that year. Seriously guys!). I really do think that schedules need to be updated with a teams current ranking, not what they were ranked when you beat them. Always cracks me up to see people say "well they beat 4 ranked teams this year, included 2 top-10 teams!" when only one of those teams even finishes in the top 25.

Ib4 "Alabama was just disappointed to not be playing for the title that year."

[Pendulous]

I mean, it really doesn't take much to see that the system has been geared in their favor for awhile (see: the year Alabama had a rematch against LSU for the BCS title after having just played each other in the SEC championship). Has Alabama performed pretty well (even ignoring the way they've set up their schedule very much skew things to their advantage)? Yes. But outside of Alabama and whatever other team happens to be coming in second to them that year, the SEC as a whole has been rather mediocre (and even with some of those schools downright bad). Yet every year we keep hearing about how tough the SEC is because for some reason people keep buying into the hype that Tennessee and Arkansas are back, or that Ole Miss/Miss State/Mizzou/TA&M have finally figured out how to stay competitive, or that LSU and Auburn have turned things around and will challenge Alabama (and everyone just ignores Vandy).

The SEC has been Alabama (replaced by Auburn a couple of times) vs Georgia (occasionally Florida) for awhile now. The rest of the SEC has not deserved the amount of hype they keep getting every year (as seen by their OOC/bowl record over that span).

And every other team in every other conference is constantly a title contender? Be real. FIVE different SEC teams have been in the national title game in the past ten years. Florida, Alabama, Auburn, LSU, and Georgia last year (who DID win their playoff game so don't give me the "they shouldn't have been in" thing). The other conferences have only had two different schools in the title game in the same time. Mississippi State was 10-3 in 2014 and hasn't missed a bowl game since 2009. South Carolina had a string of 11-2 records between 2011 and 2013. Texas A&M hasn't missed a bowl game since they entered the SEC. Yes, Kentucky is a basketball school, and Vandy is an academic school, and are always bad. But then what do you say when Kentucky goes 9-3 like they did this year? Between 2006 and 2015, The SEC has had a .500 or better bowl record every single year. They were 4-5 last year. And the SEC has had a number of representatives from the East in the SEC title game in recent times, not just "oh, pick Georgia or Florida". So a competitive bowl record, with winning almost every national title in the past decade +, and a number of teams competing each year? Yes, Alabama has dominated, but they have also dominated everyone else. Other than that, where's the "bad"?

[draynay]

Bama and the SEC have special rules, but OK

I think its just Alabama, the only times we get two SEC schools are when Alabama wasn't good enough to win the conference but they get in anyway. If it applied to other SEC schools, Georgia would've still made it in, but of course Alabama would still be in if they had lost to Georgia.

[muto]

I think its just Alabama, the only times we get two SEC schools are when Alabama wasn't good enough to win the conference but they get in anyway. If it applied to other SEC schools, Georgia would've still made it in, but of course Alabama would still be in if they had lost to Georgia.

Yeah they would and they would deserve to be with 1 loss to the #4 team in the country. If Georgia didn’t get blown out by LSU they would be in too.

[PACOX]

Love CFB but its become very apparent in the last 15-20 years that it's largely a popularity contest for teams and conferences that have snowballed due to past seasons and not current ones.

National championships, hell the race to the national championship is boring when certain teams are guaranteed spots while teams with spectacular seasons are left feeling like they worked hard for nothing.

Doesn't matter how hard you try, how well you played, you're not even going to get a chance to compete because you're not part of the Good Ole Boys Club.

Too much is done for the sake for tradition and not enough for competition. 10 more years, hell 5, and the NCAA is going to be scrambling to rebrand like the NFL. All it will take is a couple of disgruntled writers to start talking about CFE and athletes not being paid.

The national championship game between UCF and LSU is going to be great.

[draynay]

Last year

Shouldn't mean a damn thing.

[draynay]

You misunderstood my intent... I was saying that last year, when they got into the playoffs despite not winning their conference, they validated the committee's decision by winning the championship.

I don't agree with that either, but at least we're on the same page now.

[PACOX]

Its okay. We're just going to a thorn in the side of any SEC fan until we lose.

[Brubear]

And every other team in every other conference is constantly a title contender? Be real. FIVE different SEC teams have been in the national title game in the past ten years. Florida, Alabama, Auburn, LSU, and Georgia last year (who DID win their playoff game so don't give me the "they shouldn't have been in" thing). The other conferences have only had two different schools in the title game in the same time. Mississippi State was 10-3 in 2014 and hasn't missed a bowl game since 2009. South Carolina had a string of 11-2 records between 2011 and 2013. Texas A&M hasn't missed a bowl game since they entered the SEC. Yes, Kentucky is a basketball school, and Vandy is an academic school, and are always bad. But then what do you say when Kentucky goes 9-3 like they did this year? Between 2006 and 2015, The SEC has had a .500 or better bowl record every single year. They were 4-5 last year. And the SEC has had a number of representatives from the East in the SEC title game in recent times, not just "oh, pick Georgia or Florida". So a competitive bowl record, with winning almost every national title in the past decade +, and a number of teams competing each year? Yes, Alabama has dominated, but they have also dominated everyone else. Other than that, where's the "bad"?

Man, all the talk about how other schools couldn't compete in the SEC, yet Texas A&M moves to the SEC and hasn't missed a bowl game the entire time. Apparently they've been able to compete fairly well. You're right that every other team in every other conference isn't a title contender, that's the whole point. People always talk about how the SEC is just far and away above every other conference, yet they are a very top-heavy conference, just like the other conferences. As I said, for the last decade the SEC has come down to Alabama (they have been the top team from the SEC in 7 of the last 10 years, Auburn twice, Florida once), with Auburn usually in the mix (LSU has fallen on hard times lately), and then either Georgia/Florida (though Mizzou had a couple good years, and SCarolina made some noise). But that's the thing, Mizzou, Scal, Arkansas, and the two Mississippi schools usually only put together one or two good years before they fall apart again and have to rebuild. UT will sometimes put together an alright season but has been largely irrelevant for the last decade, with Vandy and UK being bottom dwellers up until this year when UK pulled an alright season that likely won't last. In fact, the SEC East has been won by either Florida or Georgia every year dating back to 2003 with the exception of 2010 (SCal) and 2013 & 2014 (Mizzou both years). The west has been Alabama/Auburn/LSU every year since 2003 except for 2006 (Arkansas), and has been won by either Alabama or Auburn every year since 2007.

The SEC has had a losing bowl record the last two years, actually (5-6 last year, and 6-7 the year prior), and has had comparable bowl records to at least one other P5 school every year with the exception of 3 years ago when they went 9-2. Now, we could get into how playing an 8-game conference schedule makes a huge difference in strength of schedule rankings and getting more teams in the conference to bowl eligibility (which also helps to inflate SOS), or how starting most seasons with 24 teams in the top-10 and 5-7 teams in the top-25 also serves to greatly inflate SOS even if half of those teams end the season unranked (and just how much that helped get at least 1 SEC team into the BCS championships), but everyone has likely heard these arguments before and just doesn't care. There's also the way in which these structural advantages has created a positive-feedback loop at the collegiate level (since there is no salary cap that helps to force a certain level of parity like is seen in the NFL), so the best prospects are more likely to go to the schools that have won more championships which, combined with the way that Saban has been able to game the scheduling game in his favor, is far more likely the reason for their recent dominance than Saban being an amazing coach.

The fact that every other collegiate sport and level has been able to figure out how to do an actual playoff to determine its champion, and never has NEAR the amount of controversy surrounding their championship games as FBS football has, should show just how flawed the system is and has been for decades. The BCS rankings where literally popularity contests, since there was no way to prove that 3 or 4 undefeated teams that never played each other were better than each other (and also as indicated by the fact that you could have co-national champions). If it was really about having the best teams playing in the CFP, then the only way to do that without having all the teams play very similar schedules/each other regularly is to give the top teams from every conference a shot along with some wild-card teams like the NFL does. Force the teams to play home-and-home series and travel across multiple time-zones for their OOC games instead of never leaving the area except for an 8 hour drive to start the season.

[Pendulous]

The fact that every other collegiate sport and level has been able to figure out how to do an actual playoff to determine its champion, and never has NEAR the amount of controversy surrounding their championship games as FBS football has, should show just how flawed the system is and has been for decades. The BCS rankings where literally popularity contests, since there was no way to prove that 3 or 4 undefeated teams that never played each other were better than each other (and also as indicated by the fact that you could have co-national champions). If it was really about having the best teams playing in the CFP, then the only way to do that without having all the teams play very similar schedules/each other regularly is to give the top teams from every conference a shot along with some wild-card teams like the NFL does. Force the teams to play home-and-home series and travel across multiple time-zones for their OOC games instead of never leaving the area except for an 8 hour drive to start the season.

I don't disagree here; in fact, I've been an advocate for an eight + team playoff since the start.

But you're never gonna have a perfect way to determine who is the best in such a short season. Each team can't play one of a hundred or so in a twelve-game season. That's another reason why expanding the playoffs is a good idea. Unfortunately, I believe they are locked into the four-team deal for so many years, so it will still be some time until we see more, though that's even IF they decide to expand it.

[Armourboy]

Always said it needed to be 8 teams in the playoff as it allows you to let a team like UCF, or in the past Boise State, to have a chance to prove themselves.

It will happen eventually as there is too much money to be made and the big conferences arent going to keep sitting out every year and keep putting on a smiling face.

That said people can keep bitching about the SEC and special rules, it's simply not true. Name one team from the SEC that didn't deserve the chance they got. I'm an Arkansas fan, I can't stand Alabama, but they are where they are because they win. No one gave a crap about Alabama when Tennessee was destroying them in the 90's.

[draynay]

Always said it needed to be 8 teams in the playoff as it allows you to let a team like UCF, or in the past Boise State, to have a chance to prove themselves.

It will happen eventually as there is too much money to be made and the big conferences arent going to keep sitting out every year and keep putting on a smiling face.

That said people can keep bitching about the SEC and special rules, it's simply not true. Name one team from the SEC that didn't deserve the chance they got. I'm an Arkansas fan, I can't stand Alabama, but they are where they are because they win. No one gave a crap about Alabama when Tennessee was destroying them in the 90's.

The problem is that Alabama doesn't exist in a vacuum, there are other deserving teams too, and whenever there are two deserving teams and one of them is Alabama, Alabama gets the spot.

[Kidneu]

true true

[Armourboy]

The problem is that Alabama doesn't exist in a vacuum, there are other deserving teams too, and whenever there are two deserving teams and one of them is Alabama, Alabama gets the spot.

And? Alabama has proven time and again they deserve to be there. Until someone puts them out before the championship game, there isnt much of an argument there.

[PACOX]

Always said it needed to be 8 teams in the playoff as it allows you to let a team like UCF, or in the past Boise State, to have a chance to prove themselves.

It will happen eventually as there is too much money to be made and the big conferences arent going to keep sitting out every year and keep putting on a smiling face.

That said people can keep bitching about the SEC and special rules, it's simply not true. Name one team from the SEC that didn't deserve the chance they got. I'm an Arkansas fan, I can't stand Alabama, but they are where they are because they win. No one gave a crap about Alabama when Tennessee was destroying them in the 90's.

(Since Bama is the example everyone uses) I don't think any UCF realistically thinks we could be Bama but thats not the point. We think that not one, but two stellar seasons would at least us compete.

We're talking CFB here, nobody is stupid. Even the 'get a tougher schedule' boils down to 'our schedule has more popular teams than yours'. Which is why UCF will claim the national champship once again this year if we win, parades, t-shirts, and all.

[Armourboy]

(Since Bama is the example everyone uses) I don't think any UCF realistically thinks we could be Bama but thats not the point. We think that not one, but two stellar seasons would at least us compete.

We're talking CFB here, nobody is stupid. Even the 'get a tougher schedule' boils down to 'our schedule has more popular teams than yours'. Which is why UCF will claim the national champship once again this year if we win, parades, t-shirts, and all.

Yep and I don't blame you.

[sibut]

Even the 'get a tougher schedule' boils down to 'our schedule has more popular teams than yours'.

It's not about popularity, it's about proven success. Play somebody; until you do you'll have nothing to celebrate other than fictional national championships.

I'd love to see an 8 team playoff where you'd have the chance to prove yourselves, though, if only because after one blowout loss we could stop listening to this whining.

[PACOX]

It's not about popularity, it's about proven success. Play somebody; until you do you'll have nothing to celebrate other than fictional national championships.

I'd love to see an 8 team playoff where you'd have the chance to prove yourselves, though, if only because after one blowout loss we could stop listening to this whining.

"Play somebody"

We did, we beat them all over the past two seasons. Let's us play you.

"No, you haven't proven yourselves"

Well we have lost a game since I don't know when. Let us play you.

"No, only the current season counts"

Except for 3/4th the teams ranked above us.

When you're tossed aside because you're school isn't part of the old boys club it's a popularity contest. No one cares if UCF would get blown out of not if they never even get the opportunity to play.

[sibut]

You beat a whole bunch of nobodies and an overrated Auburn team over the past 2 seasons. If I were in charge of OSU's scheduling, I would absolutely schedule a home and away with UCF. If nothing else, it'd settle this question once and for all.