Started By
Message
So they ran a mock scenario for the upcoming playoff system and here is what ...
Posted on 5/25/14 at 11:40 am
Posted on 5/25/14 at 11:40 am
.... here is what happened.
Looks suspect to me. From where did they pull the teams for the mock sample? Or is this a hint as to how they are thinking?
It's a long article:
LINK
College football's forthcoming Playoff might be preferable to its predecessor on paper, but in practice could remind why we can't have nice things.
Excerpted from above:
Excerpted from above:
Continued here: LINK
Looks suspect to me. From where did they pull the teams for the mock sample? Or is this a hint as to how they are thinking?
It's a long article:
LINK
College football's forthcoming Playoff might be preferable to its predecessor on paper, but in practice could remind why we can't have nice things.
Excerpted from above:
quote:
College Football Playoff executive director (and former BCS head) Bill Hancock met with gathered journalists Saturday morning at the annual Association for Women in Sports Media convention. Hancock appeared to provide a glimpse into the relative transparency of the new Playoff selection process.
We already had a pretty good idea of what the selection process will look like, but only from a high level. The Playoff committee members will meet on Mondays and Tuesdays to produce weekly rankings, beginning October 28, which will decide both the two Playoff games and the four other New Year's bowls.
The selection committee voting guidelines show the committee's general emphasis. How rigidly they're enforced and how much emphasis is placed on things like conference championships over record alone remains very open to debate. An entire controversy arose a month back when committee chair and Arkansas AD Jeff Long said it's not the "most deserving" teams... it's the "best."
Saturday, Hancock appeared to show a list of Playoff's selection committee's 2015 mock ...
Excerpted from above:
quote:
Ignoring some of the bolder projections (put down the pitchforks, #FSUTwitter), which would appear to be geared towards experimenting with some of the recusal guidelines, here's an educated guess on why the schools in the right hand column are grouped the way they are.
No. 1 seed Stanford, Pac-12 champions
No. 2 seed Michigan, Big Ten champions
No. 3 seed Duke, ACC champions
No. 4 seed Wisconsin, Big Ten runners-up
Florida, SEC champions
Clemson, ACC runners-up
Arizona State, Pac-12 runners-up
Oklahoma, Big 12 champions
Baylor, Big 12 No. 2
Oklahoma State, Big 12 No. 3
BYU, independent
Michigan State, Big Ten No. 3
San Diego State, best Group of Five
Georgia, SEC No. 2
Central Florida, Group of 5 No. 2
Continued here: LINK
7
Posted on 5/25/14 at 11:45 am to scrooster
So with this example we learn we will/can have 2 SEC teams in the 4 game playoff...
And they dont have to play each other in the Semis? This cant be right.
And they dont have to play each other in the Semis? This cant be right.
This post was edited on 5/25/14 at 11:46 am
Posted on 5/25/14 at 11:46 am to 3andOut
quote:
with this example we learn we will/can have 2 SEC teams in the 4 game playoff...
First thing I noticed.
Posted on 5/25/14 at 11:50 am to TbirdSpur2010
Seems likely 2 teams can make it..
Posted on 5/25/14 at 11:50 am to scrooster
Yep Auburn and UGA will be going with only one loss to the other.
The rest of you are fricked!
The rest of you are fricked!
Posted on 5/25/14 at 11:51 am to scrooster
This i 
at.
at. quote:
Florida, SEC champions
quote:
Georgia, SEC No. 2
Posted on 5/25/14 at 11:53 am to 3andOut
quote:
So with this example we learn we will/can have 2 SEC teams in the 4 game playoff...
i don't see the playoff committee allowing the SEC to double down on winning the championship. They want us to lose big time and i just don't see them letting us have two teams.
Posted on 5/25/14 at 1:19 pm to Warfarer
quote:
i don't see the playoff committee allowing the SEC to double down on winning the championship. They want us to lose big time and i just don't see them letting us have two teams.
I dunno. If there is one hint of favoritism or corruption then there will be backlash I would think.
Posted on 5/25/14 at 1:52 pm to scrooster
Lets take last year for example. SEC had 4 in the top 6 at one point, how do 2 not get in?
Posted on 5/25/14 at 1:56 pm to scrooster
Duke 
Posted on 5/25/14 at 1:57 pm to TigerCruise
quote:I'm ready to see a division runner up go in favor of the SECCG. Florida a couple of years ago would have been an example
Lets take last year for example. SEC had 4 in the top 6 at one point, how do 2 not get in?
Posted on 5/25/14 at 1:58 pm to tween the hedges
USC and Alabama would have gone over Mizzou last year as well
This post was edited on 5/25/14 at 2:00 pm
Posted on 5/25/14 at 2:00 pm to TigerCruise
The "committee" is going to rank the teams. Last year's rankings was not a committee action.
quote:
a camel is a horse designed by committee.
Posted on 5/25/14 at 2:03 pm to TigerCruise
I think USCe was 7-8. Doubt they would have jumped. I don't really have a problem with the winning divisions runner up going(Bama last year) if there is a lack of quality teams around the country, but I do have a big issue of the losing division's runner up going.
Posted on 5/25/14 at 2:06 pm to TigerCruise
Last year would have been interesting to see how it played out.
Florida State and Auburn would have made the playoffs.
Then I think it would have come down to picking two of Alabama, Michigan State, Stanford, and Baylor.
Florida State and Auburn would have made the playoffs.
Then I think it would have come down to picking two of Alabama, Michigan State, Stanford, and Baylor.
Posted on 5/25/14 at 2:10 pm to JCinBAMA
quote:
Florida, SEC champions
quote:So you don't have to win your division?
Georgia, SEC No. 2
Posted on 5/25/14 at 2:14 pm to scrooster
quote:
Arkansas AD Jeff Long said it's not the "most deserving" teams... it's the "best."
Shows you how much I know. I was under the impression that the most deserving teams were the best teams.
Posted on 5/25/14 at 2:14 pm to scrooster
They have 2 SEC East teams and have UF winning the SEC
Posted on 5/25/14 at 2:16 pm to UAFanFromNOLA
Probably not, Georgia won the East in 2012 and ended up going to the Outback Bowl while we went to the BCS Sugar Bowl. It's not absurd by any means to think this scenario could play out again with the playoffs.
Posted on 5/25/14 at 3:10 pm to tween the hedges
quote:
I don't really have a problem with the winning divisions runner up going(Bama last year) if there is a lack of quality teams around the country, but I do have a big issue of the losing division's runner up going.
This is dumb.
So in 2001 you wouldn't have a problem with a 7-5 Auburn team going over a 10-2 Florida team just because LSU beat UT in ATL?
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News