re: Why is there a playoff committee to begin with?

quote:

---

And the whole part about LSU getting punished for going 12-0 and having less time to prepare and rest than their opponent.

---

LSU didn't have enough time to rest :/

quote:

---

You actually believe that OkieState was a better team than 2011 BAMA?

---

No. But as the 13-0 SEC Champion who not only went through the entire SEC unscathed, but also beat #5 Oregon out of conference, and beat Alabama in Tuscaloosa, LSU earned the right to not have to give Bama a do-over.

The entire problem with the rematch is that after Bama won round two, you had LSU at 13-1 and Bama at 12-1, and each 1-1 against each other.... and LSU, unlike Bama, never had the luxury of playing one of those games in their home stadium.

LSU had the better resume EVEN AFTER losing to Bama. That's the entire point. It rendered winning your conference completely irrelevant. It rendered the regular season completely irrelevant. Why even play in the regular season if winning a game like that on the road is not going to be valued one bit?

This is the problem with letting Bama in that game.

LSU, Bama, and Oklahoma State were all either undefeated or had one loss. Bama had their chance in the regular season and failed. At home. Oklahoma State should have had their chance since Bama had already had it and failed.

If you want to argue that Bama was clearly one of the best two teams, have at it. You have a very valid point. But don't act as if questioning the decision of the voters isn't also a valid argument. There isn't always just one side to every argument.

Had the teams in question been turned on their heads, and had Oklahoma and Oklahoma State been the #1 and #2 teams when they played in the regular season... with OK State losing a close one to the Sooners AT HOME.... and had Bama been 12-1, SEC Champs with a loss to Texas A&M. And had the nation decided it wanted to see OU-OK State again, don't act as if you'd be cool with it. OK State got screwed. You'd feel the same way if it had happened to your team.

quote:

---

If the conference champion isn't considered the best team in that conference, how can the national champion be considered the best team in the nation?

Either championships mean something, or they don't.

---

It doesn't mean a thing. I get you're antiBama and that's fine but theres no way regardless of the outcome of this seccg you can make an argument that Florida is a better team than Alabama or that Wisconsin or Penn state is a better football team than Ohio State.

quote:

---

quote:
there is legitimate argument to be made that 2 of the best teams were from one conference.

If the conference champion isn't considered the best team in that conference, how can the national champion be considered the best team in the nation?

Either championships mean something, or they don't.

What the hell does "champion" mean?

---

It means you won the regular season for that conference... the same as it means for literally every other sport, both collegiate and professional.

That qualifies you to compete for the national championship via playoffs.

If you win that, you are considered the national champion.

Again, literally the way it works in every other sport.

quote:

---

The fact that Penn St could win the Big 10, having beat Ohio State, and still get passed over in favor of Ohio State is beyond ridiculous. It needs to expand to 8 with 5 Power 5 Champs, best Group of 5 champ, and the next 2 highest ranked teams.

---

While I agree with your sentiment, I disagree with it going to 8 teams. I used to be a proponent of an 8-team playoff but, after seeing the CFP the past 3 years, I think 4 is the right call...

If you go to 8, it'll diminish the regular season greatly. The Ohio State - Michigan game this past weekend would've meant nothing if an 8-team play-off was in play as both teams would've been in regardless of the outcome...that game felt like a playoff game. In the past 2 seasons, after Bama lost to Ole Miss, every game they played afterwards felt like a playoff game. In an 8-game playoff, as long as you win your conference championship, nothing else really matters...and then every few years, you'll get a 3 or 4 loss conference champion in that shouldn't be there...

The primary issue with the CFP as it is now is how the 4 are chosen. In a year like 2015, the four teams were pretty much cut and dry with no controversy. In 2014, it appeared that conference championships and head-to-head matchups were major factors. This year however, as it stands right now, if Penn State were to win the Big 10, they'd likely be the odd man out (providing Washington, Bama, & Clemson all win), so it doesn't appear that those 2 factors matter as much. It gives the appearance that the standards for getting into the CFP vary each year, depending on the teams in the running, which will lead to conspiracy theories and accusations of bias.

If the scenario plays out with Bama/Washington/Clemson/Penn State winning this weekend, it'll be interesting to see how the committee rationalizes their picks...but as whacked as this season has been, now watch 3 (or even all 4) lose this weekend...then chaos will really reign supreme.

As far as major college football, every "champion" has been a "mythical champion" or MNC, even with a 4-team play-off. Now if you include 8 or more objectively-chosen teams in the play-off, I think you could rightly crow about a championship. Until then, you could definitely be leaving out a team that could potentially win it, right TCU?

quote:

---

If you go to 8, it'll diminish the regular season greatly.

---

That same sentiment was espoused as reason not to expand to 4. There is still drama. There will still be drama with 8. Obviously if you go undefeated until the last week of the season, there will be no drama. But if Bama loses to Ole Miss mid-season, the risk of dropping another game and possibly missing the playoffs becomes a very real scenario. Hence, drama.

quote:

---

If the conference champion isn't considered the best team in that conference, how can the national champion be considered the best team in the nation?

Either championships mean something, or they don't.

What the hell does "champion" mean?

---

Good point...which is another reason why I like the 4 team playoff. Most years you'll most likely get the 4 highest ranked conference champs. Perhaps the criteria should be changed to reflect that...the regular season would still matter as not all Power 5 champs would be automatically in...and the occasional undefeated Group of 5 champ could have a chance if they beat a decent Power 5 team during the season...

The Power Five conferences need a human-staffed committee to decide the playoffs. So there'd be that political element involved when statistically a non-Power 5 school is shown to deserve entry more than a Power 5 school does. When humans are involved in things that really do not require human involvement, the reason is always political....

Because the BCS was an unmitigated disaster