re: Fair question for SEC fans:

quote:

---

They can only play the schedule they're given. Notre Dame is in because they went undefeated, and that's about it. UCF should be, too.

---

Notre Dame is in because they played 10 P5 teams, had a SOS in the 40s, AND went undefeated. UCF played ONE P5 team and had a SOS in the 90s. If you can’t see the difference then there’s no point arguing with you

Not the way they are doing it. Oklahoma played nobody the caliber of 4 or 5 of Georgia’s opponents. Georgia got screwed this year. They paid the price for getting themselves to the SEC championship game and losing, and the committee rewards Notre Dame for not playing one at all.

There is no accounting for strength of schedule, and it’s wrong. Strength of schedule is being sacrificed in favor of appeasing upper tier conferences, and big name schools, instead of letting the best 4 teams fight it out.

quote:

---

Nothing's stopping UCF from going independent and playing big boys on the road like Bowden did earlier in his FSU tenure.

---

Play a crappy schedule besides Florida and another game or two then coast into the MNC chatter.

Not saying he was a bad coach, but playing a tougher schedule hits him with an extra loss or two and that keeps him out of MNC games.

Are they all like this?

quote:

---

Play a crappy schedule besides Florida and another game or two then coast into the MNC chatter.

Not saying he was a bad coach, but playing a tougher schedule hits him with an extra loss or two and that keeps him out of MNC games.

---

Except it helped them get into the title game (over a team that beat them HTH) in 93.

The issue with college football, is it’s the only major sport without a legit playoff system. It has nothing to do with “potential” or “talent”. Every year people talk about how the western conference is better than the eastern conference in the NBA. Maybe the Rockets should have played the Warriors again for the NBA finals last season if we could talk about the mythical “best two teams” in the NBA championship. Why even play a playoff when basketball experts can decide who they think is best based off of random arguments. Why even have a 64 team playoff in March for college basketball. Let’s just put, Kansas, Duke, North Carolina and Kentucky in because they got the best recruiting classes every year and top records.

quote:

---

DisplacedBuckeye

---

quote:

---

quote:
you want inclusion at the big boy's table for not playing a big boy's schedule


What is the "big boy's table?" Do Oregon State, Rutgers, Arkansas, Kansas, and Louisville get a seat at this table?

quote:
The College Football Playoff is the postseason format that determines the national champion for FBS college football.

---

Surely you are not as stupid as you sound. You are just a bitter man because OSU has wasted great talent the last few years and just missed the playoffs again by losing to a 6-6 Purdue team by 29, last year to Iowa by 31. Add to that your jealousy of Alabama and their phenomenal and unprecedented success and your ability to apply logic has been wrecked.

I am for an 8-team playoff. Carolina has little to no chance of making a 4-teamer, but there is a chance at 8. The 2012 and 2013 teams would've made an 8-team playoff, or at least be right on the cusp.

We didn’t deserve to get in. You cannot put a 2 loss non-conference champ in over a P5 team who is either undefeated (ND) or beat the team that was their only loss of the season (OU).

I know ND needs to join a conference, but they won every game on their schedule which wasn’t terrible. I would obviously love to be in, but we didn’t deserve it.

They called them coaches votes. But who really decided how they would rank the teams?

What I said was there was NO WAY for coaches to evaluate all the other teams ALONG WITH preparing their athletes that week.