The horseshit, it’s shoveled.

You’re right, Jimbo.  The only way to know if Alabama is really better than Texas A&M is to expand the college football playoff.

Sadly, this is college football’s future.  That blows.

74 Comments

Filed under BCS/Playoffs

74 responses to “The horseshit, it’s shoveled.

  1. Huh? You got run off the field by Bama and didn’t win your division, but you believe you have a claim to be national champions? Who do you think you are?

    Of course, I didn’t think Bama had a claim in 2017 or 2011 either.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Derek

      Claiming to be entitled to a playoff spot is not the same as saying you deserve a national championship. In fact, the years you have three deserving claimants is rare. Sometimes, its just one: lsu in 2011 is an example.

      But with playoffs you get teams in who don’t deserve to win it all but then do. How many wild card teams have won super bowls?

      So instead of deciding a championship by determining which is the best, most deserving team, you’re fielding a post-season tournament which often does not identify the season’s best team.

      Liked by 7 people

      • Biggen

        And you end up with a Superbowl winner that has 6 losses…

        I think the regular season should matter.

        Liked by 16 people

        • PTC DAWG

          Did anyone watch? That is the K$Y.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Taylor Masters

          The regular season clearly does not matter and it’s all about getting in the brand names into the college football invitational.

          How can you try and say the regular season matters when the Sun Belt goes 3-0 against the Big 12 and the committee puts Iowa State with two losses above an undefeated Coastal team. One of Iowa State’s losses was to Louisiana and Louisiana is somehow ranked 12 spots lower than Iowa State. There needs to be 32 team playoff. If FCS can do it, there’s really no excuse.

          Liked by 2 people

          • fisheriesdawg

            Iowa State isn’t going to the playoff. I don’t understand why this matters.

            Liked by 1 person

            • Taylor Masters

              It matters because the entire committee rankings are a sham. We are about to have a team play 6 games in the playoff. There is no rhyme or reason and if you are the group of 5, the committee has shown you have zero chance at making the playoff (Cincy, dropping 2 spots for no reason) An expanded field would be so much more exciting, there would be matchups not played before and a lot more intrigue in the finals weeks of the season. Instead, there are largely meaningless games.

              Like

      • Russ

        Yep. Let’s identify the hot team, not the best overall team.

        Of course, in 2007, I was perfectly fine being the hot team. I think we would have smoked whoever we played at the end of that year.

        Liked by 6 people

        • stoopnagle

          If only Kentucky or Vandy could hit a damn field goal.

          Still mad they took 9-3 Illinois for the Rose Bowl when we could have played USC and possible split the title.

          Liked by 2 people

        • MGW

          I’d like to have at least seen us get the opportunity to play USC. That would have been an impossibly good game. I was fine being shut out of the BCS, but that was some bull shit. Instead we both went our separate ways and absolutely destroyed two teams who didn’t even belong on the same field.

          I’d love a system with a single, winner take all game… if the bowl with unfettered first pick choses. But where the next bowl in line can put two others who might have a claim together, and if there’s a split title after that then who cares? You can’t make everyone happy. It’s so rare that there’s more than two or three with a clear claim to be there, and we will have gotten to watch two awesome games.

          Just all the way down the list of bowl games, we need a way to make sure there are as many good, competitive match ups as possible. USC Illiinios, and UGA Hawaii should never happen again.

          Liked by 3 people

          • Migraine Boy

            I used to like the pre-playoff idea that you play all the bowls with all the traditional conference tie-ins, and then when the dust settles pick two for a National Championship game…

            Liked by 1 person

            • MGW

              It’s not perfect, but the resulting quantity of meaningful games throughout the season would far, far outweigh the two to three meaningful postseason games we have now. I wish I were exaggerating how few decent postseason games there are right now.

              The best compromise to me would be the BCS, but with some sort of quasi-objective (computers determine a statistical range of eligibility, then an eyeball test says yay or nay on actually pulling the trigger) way to declare the necessity of a first round for four total teams, or a play-in game for two teams to see who faces the clear #1. 2007 would have had USC, UGA, LSU, and Ohio State. And that’s probably the only time in history 4 teams deserved it. 2004, Auburn and OU would have played for the opportunity to take on USC. Easy peasy.

              Like

            • MGW

              Not sure I see your point. What exactly are you saying Auburn/UCF is the exception to?

              Because I wasn’t at all saying that mid majors shouldn’t ever be considered one of those best teams. Just that when it’s clear two teams ought to play, don’t instead match them up with obviously, drastically inferior teams simply to avoid a split title. Often, the undefeated mid major gets pumped up by the media just because they’re undefeated, like Hawaii 2007. UCF, like some Boise State teams of the past, was clearly an excellent team heading into that game.

              Like

  2. David Basham

    The way that Ohio State and the Big 10 have gamed the system this year, I’m kinda surprised that the ACC hasn’t called off their championship game for COVID reasons yet. Both Clemson and Notre Dame would be in.

    Liked by 6 people

    • akascuba

      David,
      The game has yet to be played. Dont think for a minute if they are sure the ACC will get both in the CFP this wont happen.

      Like

    • stoopnagle

      How rich would it be for the Irish to walk away with the ACC Championship, then go back to their independent ways. I’d be for that.

      Liked by 1 person

    • siskey

      One of the Georgia writers posited than Bama should take off the SEC Championship game since they are assured a spot allowing the Winner of Florida and A&M to be granted a spot. I’m not in favor because I think Florida wins a rematch but it would be funny to see the Big 10 go crazy.

      Like

  3. mddawg

    I’ve always thought they should’ve kept the BCS formula and let that decide the 4 playoff teams. All of the drama about who the 4 best teams are each year is a feature of the current system, not a bug.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Agree about using a formula to make the call. I know some don’t like the polls, but my perspective is that if the first poll didn’t come out until October, it would work. The law of large numbers make it where a lot of the bias we see in the committee washes out with the number of human votes in both the media and coaches polls. Combine that with the computers (drop the highest and lowest ranking) and a strength of schedule component.

      Weight each poll ranking at 30% (total 60%), the composite computer ranking at 20%, conference championship at 15% and SOS at 5%.

      Liked by 2 people

      • stoopnagle

        I bet the committee would do better if they used the Mumme Poll technique. They potentially wouldn’t have a top 25, but they only really need a top 4 and only use a top 12.

        Liked by 2 people

  4. Hogbody Spradlin

    If Jimbo sits tight he might back in. A&M is next man up in the rankings.

    Like

  5. Derek

    It took a couple of decades but Kirk made a good point here:

    The incessant desire for an objective champ, simply because 2 times a decade or so there was a debate about it, is going to kill college football.

    On Jan. 1st 1984, auburn vs. Michigan, georgia vs. texas and miami vs. Nebraska were played at essentially the same time and they all had national championship implications.

    The fans, in their infinite wisdom, decided, “nope, not good enough.”

    Liked by 2 people

    • Russ

      Yeah, that’s rich, Herbie. You’ve been shilling for the group that’s created this NFL-Lite for the past 15+ years and now you think it’s all wrong?

      Liked by 2 people

    • akascuba

      He should look in the mirror when complaining about CFB. His constant bend the rules to fit his conference helped create the mess.

      Liked by 1 person

    • MGW

      Make me CFB Dictator for a year and the first thing I do is realign the conferences to my taste, based on history and geography. YOU WILL PLAY YOUR NEIGHBORS WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT!

      Then I kill the playoff and let bowls send whatever bids they want to whoever they want. Bowls will have real names. There will be a designated bowl each year with first pick that can’t be refused, and they’ll pick whoever they think the two best teams are and if that pick upsets people then holy shit we’ll have voters split and maybe two+ teams will claim a title for the 100th time and I really don’t care.

      Also there’s a week every year when every bowl game from the previous year is rematched at the winning teams stadium. So win your damn bowl game.

      Also players have full unfettered NIL rights and ONE unrestricted transfer. Their second transfer they have to sit a year but it doesn’t cost a year of eligibility. I’m sick of that co versatility and that’ll put an end to it. Plus I guarantee every major player’s NIL contract will have a clause either requiring them to play in the bowl game, or paying a substantial bonus for doing so.

      Liked by 8 people

  6. MGW

    I’m not in favor of 8, but it is the only way for every FBS team to really have something to play for beyond pure rivalry, which has been dead since expansion for most schools. We’ve got it pretty good in the SEC, considering. But it’s still a seriously watered down version of what we’ve had in the past. For most schools their schedule is a long slog of uninteresting exhibition games to determine which uninteresting exhibition they’ll play in after the season if they win enough of the regular season ones.

    I’d love for the powers that be to take us back to something resembling the old days where most schools have 3-5 major rivalry games, any one of which can be big enough to “make” a season. But that isn’t happening. Next best (translated, the only realistic realistic) thing to make it more interesting is to move to 8, which they’ll probably do.

    Liked by 1 person

    • PTC DAWG

      In the past, the SEC had 6 conference games and no Championship game. I much prefer the way we do it now.

      Liked by 2 people

      • MGW

        Well, yeah. I guess “past” is a bit broad. What I mean is the 1992 until realignment era. That was a damn good template.

        If a player played four years, he played every conference team at least once. We went a full home and home cycle with every single SEC team every 5 years, and had a conference filled with bitter rivalries.

        The way we do it now, it’s a 12 year cycle instead of 5, which is unacceptable. We’ll play in Tuscaloosa 8 times in the next 100 years. We’ll play in Columbia, Missouri 50 times.

        My point is that even with that absurdity, we still managed to preserve the biggest SEC rivalries. Right now we’ve got it better than any other conference and it’s still not nearly as good as it should be. As it very easily could be.

        And there are maybe two conferences whose fans wouldn’t prefer whatever 6 game era of the SEC you’re referring to over the bull shit they have now. There were only 6 games but at least they were truly regional conference foes. That’s the point.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Migraine Boy

      Expand to 6: Five major conference winners and an at-large group of five team. Reseed when you select. Bam.

      That way, everyone gets a seat, and winning the conference means something, and therefore so does the regular season.

      Like

      • You left out the magic gnome underpants part between your first step and the conclusion. 😉

        Liked by 1 person

        • Migraine Boy

          ?????

          Profit!

          Liked by 1 person

        • MGW

          I’d love to see flexibility in how large the bracket is based on some sort of advanced stat threshold. As in, if SP+ (or whatever) saw a small enough gap between 1 and 3 or 2 and 3, it would trigger a play-in because that gap reflects an actual dispute over who ought to be in the game. If the #3 team is far enough behind #2, then it’s just one game. If 2 and 3 are super close, then they settle it on the field. It’ll never happen because another game means more content which means more money which is all that matters here (hence, we now have a 4 team playoff usually featuring at least one blowout in the semi’s), but still. If it were purely about competition, a flexible playoff would be amazing.

          Like

      • Throw in a bye for the top 2 seeds and I think you’ve got something.

        Liked by 1 person

  7. CB

    I’m not really a proponent of keeping Ohio State out of the Big Ten championship or the playoff because they’re clearly one of the best teams in the country. But it’s starting to seem like the bigten it’s basically like the big banks during the housing crisis. They moved rashly knowing they were just going to get bailed out in the end anyway.

    Like

    • Down Island Way

      Let’s just say the team not making the qualifications was…say…FU and the conference was the sec that set the rules and guide lines for qualifying for the seccg, the sec lowers the standard for FU to play in the seccg (heaven for bid…forever) are you gonna’ say that’s acceptable, cause if that’s what you’re heading for, next time UGA gets to a 5-0 record lets just stop right there, demand the sec cancel the rest of the season and send UGA to the head of the line…. understanding they are cha$ing their checking account$…

      Like

      • CB

        Yeah, I don’t think you’re dealing with a realistic possibility so I’m not sure how to respond. This is a wild year with a pandemic. Extreme examples don’t make for rules.

        At some point Mickey will start coming for his tv money if games aren’t being played.

        Like

        • Down Island Way

          That conference made their own rules for said championship game and tosu still didn’t make the standard, now that conference want’s to lower the standard to qualify, pandemic or not, I’ll just say that’s a big pile of buckeye/big 10 crapolla…

          Liked by 1 person

          • CB

            Maybe, but it doesn’t effect my life. All I know is Georgia isn’t making the playoff either way and tOSU is clearly a top 4 team nationally. So A. Idgaf who wins the title as long as it’s not Florida, Tech or Auburn, and B. One of the best teams to watch won’t get left out because of a pandemic.

            Like

    • sniffer

      You know Lehmann Bros. was a bank, right?

      Like

  8. Auburn blew us out and then we redeemed ourselves in the SECC and came within a play of a title. Or have we already forgotten?

    If you’re going to have a playoff, 4 is the bare minimum. Bama and ND could both lose their conference championships and still get into the CFP. Of course Jimbo is politicking for his program but there is some validity to what he’s saying. OSU is getting a freaking free pass into the playoffs.

    Like

  9. otto1980

    Bring back the BCS more games mattered when one upset could change the bowl season.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. uga97

    blame uva’s

    Like

  11. Tony BarnFart

    If you expand it, I think you need to have a couple of triggers in the rulebook that modify the default “5 conference champion auto-bid” to protect the integrity of both the regular season and playoff field from 1 game Cinderellas. Something along the lines of pushing the auto-bid to an at-large bid “shall such conference winner have 3 or more conference losses.” But also a caveat to protect the winner over the loser of the actual championship game, like “no loser of a championship game shall be selected in an at-large spot, unless (a) the winner is also selected or (b) the loser has 2 or more fewer conference losses, including the loss in the championship game.”

    The only complaint I can see is that a (now) 8-1 SECCG loser could get in on an at-large bid “taken” from the (now) 6-3, or worse, SECCG winner’s now ineligible auto-spot. I’m fine with that. If the whole national landscape is “wack” with tons of multi-loss teams, then you may have a weird year where the whole thing is auto-bids. So be it.

    Like

    • CB

      Because conference championship games are unnecessary and carry way too much significance for one game at the end of the season. More often than not they prove nothing and only serve as potential spoilers for the clear best team in the conference. Eliminate them entirely, require 10 game conference schedules across the board with no FCS games allowed and no more than one FBS opponent per season. Then just take the top 6 teams based on the old BCS style rankings, top two seeds get a bye.

      Conference champion is the team with the best record/head to head etc. In the event of a tie the conference title is split and both teams can hang a banner.

      As for the FBS and FCS let’s stop pretending they’re really in the same division. FBS = Division II and FCS= Division III and everyone can have their own playoffs and crown their own champions.

      Like

    • Wolfman

      The idea of having a conference champion in a sport that can’t play much more than 12 games in a season is crucial. It determines who is the champion of that division, or conference, or whatever you’d like. There’s so little opportunity in college football to play teams outside your area each season – 3 or so at most. Thus, we need a way to compare regions, conferences, divisions.

      Having the conference champion get an automatic bid solves so many of the problems we complain about these days with the CFP. It makes the regular season matter, it ensures that non-division champions aren’t rewarded for a strategic loss, and it eliminates the need for a weekly ranking that is absolutely unnecessary.

      The onus then switches from the NCAA and some “committee” to the conferences, and forces them to ensure that they are appropriately crowning a champion. Oh, Missouri upset Alabama in the SECCG? Sorry, SEC, Missouri’s going to the CFP. Guess you should have thought about the actual best way to crown a champion. That also ensures that every conference is in the CFP, and has equal access to the money.

      But, instead, we will be treated ESPN’s deluge of watering down college football for money and to stuff some personalities they consider important down our faces, while draining every last dollar they can until it just isn’t fun anymore. Can’t wait for that SEC Game of the Week to be on ESPN+ in a few years.

      Like

      • Tony BarnFart

        I feel like Covid should (but won’t) trip off a few light bulbs about the reality of flexibility, particularly on the scheduling front. Most leagues, even the SEC (although the exceptions seem to swallow the rule) have either implemented or have a written plan for opponent replacement on a short-notice basis. BYU and Coastal obviously being the best example of what can work to marvelous success.

        I don’t have the math brain, but there has got to be some computer modeling system that could effectively tee up a flexible round-robin type scheduling simulator where we could manually “avoid” pitting the 2 best teams (based on the simulator’s spitting out of W/L and other crucial metrics) until the end of the scheduling period. In other words, could you make the regular season akin to the largest “octuple elimination” tournament.

        We now know that nobody gives a shit if other regular season games are being finished on the day of the SECCG. You could also guarantee certain H/A slots on the schedule, it’s just that your fans may not know the opponent until the Sunday before, but they could pretty well guess the level of opponent depending on who you are. Maybe that’s too much of a financial “ask” for money spending fans, I dunno. It wouldn’t bother me too much.

        Like

  12. jdawg108

    “ Inevitably“ ?

    Like

  13. TN Dawg

    Would you favor an 8 team playoff and shortening the regular season to eliminate the annual Nichols State, Directional Louisiana game?

    I would.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Tony BarnFart

      Hell, they ought to do that (10 game reg seasons across the board), and then just make the entire post-season groups of 8 team tournaments. Would people watch an “NIT” version of an 8 team tournament that featured: 9georgia 10miami 11oklahoma 12indiana 13coastal 14northwestern 15USC 16iowa.

      I sure as hell would. Dammit, make them double elimination if you want to in order to give everyone a minimum of 12 games that year. I’ll watch everyone of them. Pay the players and absolutely litter the holiday calendar with football.

      Like

  14. 69Dawg

    It is what our ESPN masters say it is. The committee idea was chosen so that ESPN could have specials to keep the hype up longer. The BCS method would have been better with the 4 team playoff. This year is just a peak under the curtain that is ESPN’s mandate, “chose the four teams with the greatest TV ratings possible”. Make it so.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Russ

    BTW, it’s fun to watch Tech lose. The announcers keep talking about this Tech LB who hurt his hand and how tough he is to get back in there and play (and he is). But they conveniently ignored the three straight missed tackles that sealed the loss for Tech.

    THWGT

    Like