Started By
Message
re: A lot of the FSU white knighting depends on criteria that is not in the CFP protocol
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:03 am to skrayper
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:03 am to skrayper
quote:
It makes you wonder when the gap between SOS no longer matters? JMU's SOS was closer to FSU's than FSU's was to Alabama's or Texas'. IF they had won all their games, by the "wins over weaker teams > playing a strong schedule" would imply JMU should be in over Texas. Taking the next step, where's the white knighting over Liberty? They went undefeated and won their conference. If SOS is an irrelevant metric, then why not them and FSU in the playoffs?
I don’t think SOS should be irrelevant. But it was very obvious from the way the committee approached everything that if Travis hadn’t gotten hurt, FSU would be in
I don’t know what that means for the future of the importance of SOS, but hopefully the 12 team playoff will help things even out a bit
1
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:04 am to HottyToddy7
quote:
13-0 and left out. It is bullshite. There is no way to say it isn't.
Ya, there is. Read the OP's post.
"Undefeated" is not a criteria. If that's the case, Liberty also has a case to be included. And we all know that's bullshite. Why?
Strength of fricking schedule.
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:06 am to Centinel
quote:
Let's be honest here. You're not mad about how the committee made the decision. You're mad it was Bama that benefited from it. UGA could have won out, and the committee selected Texas over FSU for the same reason, and you wouldn't have said shite.
No I’m really not. I’ve kind of said that quite a few times over the past few hours. The problem is there’s no argument for Bama over Texas, and Michigan and Washington were in no matter what
So the fact that I believe FSU should be in happens to mean that Bama would be out, but that’s really not what I care about
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:07 am to Tuscaloosa
quote:
We can go round and round over all of this, but the bottom line is that a team with the fifty-fifth ranked strength of schedule does not deserve to be in over a 1 loss SEC Champion. They didn’t deserve to be there over UGA, either.
Maybe, maybe not, that's not my call to make. I'm simply saing that if this was 2014-2022, they most certainly would've been in. Without a shred of hesitation. Because that's what they've proven with their own choices they would've done. My whole irritation wiht this situaiton isn't the fact that bama is in anf FSU is out (or any team in these positiosn), it's that the committee pulled a complete 180 out of nowhere wiht their decision making. THAT is what's annoying to me.
quote:
If this had benefited anyone other than Alabama, this discussion wouldn’t even be happening.
I do'nt really agree with that. The 2 teams in question are completely irrelevant to me personally. My biggest thing is, every yera in the playoffs if the 5th ranked team asks "well what else could we do? What more could we have done?" The instant, easy answer is going ot be "win more games, you shouldn't have lost to so and so" or "win your conference". But you can't answer that way to FSU. They won every agme they played. They won their conference. There is...*literally*...nothign else they could have done this year to improve their stock or their resume. The only ding against them is they had a player get injured, which isn't their fault, and they continued to win anywy. IT just feels slimy to me.
quote:
Playing a 55th ranked SOS doesn’t make you deserving of anything more than what you got.
Does anyone believe that FSU would be left out if jorddan travis was still healthy? You and I know damn well that hey would not have been. So their SOS is just a crutch to use as an excuse right now.
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:07 am to Centinel
Undefeated in a p5 conference was the whole reason we went from 2 to 4. If you don't like it, don't lose. That is the whole point. Settle it on the field.
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:10 am to HottyToddy7
What is a solid comparison of FSU's SOS as compared to recent contenders such as maybe a Washington. I dont know what Google has done but it's a headache to research anymore.
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:11 am to Centinel
quote:
Let's be honest here. You're not mad about how the committee made the decision. You're mad it was Bama that benefited from it. UGA could have won out, and the committee selected Texas over FSU for the same reason, and you wouldn't have said shite.
Bingo!
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:13 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
The committee operated in one fashion the exact same way for 9 years.
The committee isn't made up of the exact same 13 people every year... the history of the committee doesn't matter.
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:13 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
The committee operated in one fashion the exact same way for 9 years. Actions speak louder than words so I don't care what they claim they use or what espn says, I'm talking about the literal, actual decisions they made.
This year, they abandoned 9 years of precedent and did something completely adn tonally different.
quote:
Well that' simply not true at all. What they did this year is going against the repeated pattern of how they operate.
The only criteria that exists is the items on their protocol. I don't think any lawyer in the world would envy trying to prove an inconsistency in selection by the CFP. Each season is so unique it would be hard to pin down the CFP on making contradictory decisions. The most similar comparison is 2014 Ohio State but Ohio State's offense performed exceptionally with their backup QB in the B1GCG. The admirable performance of Cardale Jones alone invalidates that comparison.
Furthermore, we must go back that there is no explicit criteria that an undefeated P5 champion is an auto-bid. The CFP was explicitly constructed to not have automatic bid criteria. The trend of every undefeated P5 champion making the field is not a precedent. It is simply a tendency in most years that an undefeated P5 champion was a top 4 team due to generally thinner fields of legitimate contenders.
So I don't know how anyone can argue they did something wholesale different than any other year. Just because Alabama and Ohio State didn't make the field as a 2-loss 5th ranked team in the Final poll does not mean there is precedent that 2 losses was disqualifying. The CFP just never had a 2007 type chaos season where those sort of considerations end up on the table.
This post was edited on 12/4/23 at 9:14 am
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:14 am to Diego Ricardo
quote:
So win/loss record is not mentioned in the criteria
Isn't this just ridiculous by itself? Win loss records apparently don't matter to the committee
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:14 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
Does anyone believe that FSU would be left out if jorddan travis was still healthy? You and I know damn well that hey would not have been. So their SOS is just a crutch to use as an excuse right now.
The Travis injury was A factor but not the only factor. Both combined did FSU in but the Bama haters only are going to point out the injury to help them cry, bitch, and whine but totally ignore the SOS factor because that demonstrably favored Bama.
This post was edited on 12/4/23 at 9:17 am
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:16 am to Crimson1st
quote:
The Travis injury was A factor but not the only factor. Both combined did FSU in but the Bama haters only are going to point out the injury and totally ignore the SOS factor.
Dude it was very obvious that the committee was saying FSU would be in without the injury. I really don’t think there’s an argument otherwise
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:18 am to Centinel
You gumps need to acknowledge that the committee did 3 things that have never happened before to justify putting Bama in. 1) They dropped UGA from #1 completely out of the Top 4, 2) A 13-0 power 5 conference winner dropped 2 spots despite winning their conference championship game, 3) two 12-1 teams passed up a 13-0 team. You can try to justify what happened however you want - the reality is the optics looked like ESPN and the SEC conspired to get a playoff birth for Bama that they did not deserve based on record on the field. When you start bending your rules to get a desired outcome, you end up with the appearance of impropriety.
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:18 am to HailToTheChiz
quote:
Isn't this just ridiculous by itself? Win loss records apparently don't matter to the committee
It really is not ridiculous. So let's say there is a year where none of the P5 conferences produce a champion with 0 or 1 losses. Are you going to be cool with a playoff field full of MWC, Sun Belt, American, or C-USA teams who went 12-1 or 13-0 with a win over a 7-5 P5 team and bunch of tomato cans?
This post was edited on 12/4/23 at 9:20 am
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:18 am to HailToTheChiz
quote:
Isn't this just ridiculous by itself? Win loss records apparently don't matter to the committee
It’s what happens when the criteria is designed by power 5 schools for power 5 schools
I really hope that 12 teams means that no undefeated teams will ever miss again, because I think anyone who doesn’t lose has the right to fight for the championship, but we’ll see
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:19 am to Tuscaloosa
quote:
We can go round and round over all of this, but the bottom line is that a team with the fifty-fifth ranked strength of schedule does not deserve to be in over a 1 loss SEC Champion. They didn’t deserve to be there over UGA, either. If this had benefited anyone other than Alabama, this discussion wouldn’t even be happening. Playing a 55th ranked SOS doesn’t make you deserving of anything more than what you got.
The undefeated Power 5 champion should always be in regardless of style points. That is why we went from 2 to 4. The committee could have established a precedent pointing out despite their recent weakness FSU was proactive scheduling 2 OOC games against SEC teams (one was a convincing win over a hesiman contender) that can get hot quickly thus sought a formidable schedule. That could've been FSU's in and the standard before penalizing players for doing everything they were suppose to do.
This post was edited on 12/4/23 at 9:24 am
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:20 am to Terrific Tales
quote:
Dude it was very obvious that the committee was saying FSU would be in without the injury. I really don’t think there’s an argument otherwise
The Travis injury definitely opened the door for a closer examination of the three teams jockeying for two spots. The first thing to spot was the glaringly weak SOS FSU had to get to their record.
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:21 am to Crimson1st
quote:
The Travis injury definitely opened the door for a closer examination of the three teams jockeying for two spots. The first thing to spot was the glaringly weak SOS FSU had to get to their record.
You can believe this, but it’s just straight up not what the committee said
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:22 am to HailToTheChiz
quote:
quote:
So win/loss record is not mentioned in the criteria
Isn't this just ridiculous by itself? Win loss records apparently don't matter to the committee
Totally agree.
13-0 Liberty(who beat the team that beat an SEC team) should totally be in over Bama.
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:29 am to Crimson1st
quote:
The Travis injury was A factor but not the only factor.
It was like 99% of the factor. The only reason tehir SOS is even questioned is because they've looked like arse for 3 weeks. If they were still humming along wiht a heisman contender nobody is talking about their scheudle
quote:
the Bama haters only are going to point out the injury to help them cry, bitch, and whine
I know this is crazy, but believe it or not, not everythign si all about bama all the time. Sure there are some people (probably a ton of lsu fans) that are steamed up about it being bama, but I think A LOT of people are simply miffed that a 13-0 undefeated P5 champion could be left out. At least that's me personally, I can't speak for eveyrone. I just think it's insane to do everythign you possibly can do in a season, ie win every game, and still be told it's not enough. The 2 teams in the mix couldn't matter less to me.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News