• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

2017 College Football Playoffs (and Other Bowl Games)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
zincfinger said:
You don't think that, under the current scenario, a 4-0 record against OOC weaklings would be more likely to get you into the playoff than would a 3-1 OOC record with the one loss being against the one good opponent you played. Or, to make it specific to '17 OSU, that if OSU had blasted Kent State in week 2 instead of losing to Oklahoma, and everything else being the same, they'd have been more likely to make the playoff?
Click to expand...

I don't think the 2017 OU game had much to do with it at all as a loss, I think it would have obviously helped as a win. I think winning the OU game in '16 got OSU in the playoffs without winning it's conference.

so what year do you choose as the one telling you "this is how the CFP committee will look at it" and make your scheduling decisions off of?

I still think those big OOC games are considered essentially riskless to playoff berths already and yet we still don't see them being SOP for P5 schools. Therefore I question auto bids = more big OOC games theory. There is some other reason we don't see them (money and operational ease of scheduling is my guess) but it isn't just because AD's see them as a huge risk to their playoff chances.
 
Upvote 0
Again, all this discussion aside, what would have really "helped" this year is if the SEC/ACC conferences, as a whole, weren't dogshit. Like the B1G used to be in the '70s/'80s ie the Big 2 and little 8. Also, of course, if the committee realized the obvious that indeed the SEC/ACC were in fact dogshit! Hopefully this year the ACC/SEC won't get the benefit of the doubt and will be ranked accordingly.

Yea I know, that's probably a bridge too far ...

Hoping the Buckeyes clock TCU at AT&T on Sept. 15. IOW hoping Urban opens up the offense to reflect their talent! ok, probably another bridge too far.

btw, what happened to the Seminoles ?!? Talk about a team that fell off the map in a splint second w/Jimbo bailing ship in a NY minute. Hopefully Texas A&M is dogshit in 2018 as well. I digress.

>

Recapping the SEC/ACC and Jimbo are dogshit!
 
Upvote 0
ORD_Buckeye said:
I know @MililaniBuckeye is going to disagree with me, but I've given more thought to why P5 schools should be getting an auto-bid. And that's because right now, there is a huge disincentive to playing marquee out of conference games. Ohio State didn't have a choice in playing Iowa, but we had a choice in playing Okie. Had we brought in Fredo or Beavis for a ritualistic disemboweling instead, we're 12-1 conference champs and get in over bama. And don't think the coaches and AD's aren't making the same note. I really don't want to go back to playing crappy ooc games that generate zero interest.
Click to expand...

I think we should drop the 9th game tbh... wonder which one Iowa was. But it gives us 3 OOC home games again... min 7 home games, 8 every other year assuming we stick with home&away major OOC matchups.
If scUM doesn't play Wisconsin, they're likely in the top25. If MSU doesn't play Northwestern, they're at least top15... very likely top10 just ahead of PSU. It's not like 3-loss Northwestern stops being ranked either. Iowa played MSU, PSU, and us ... if they missed one of those teams instead of us, at least they'd be ranked.

The 9th game just adds losses w/o building anyone's resume. Let them all play MAC schools imo... so long as there's 1 OOC game required against P5 and no FCS allowed.
Open up the conference schedule so schools can get a bye or play a cupcake in Nov. I don't want to see cowardly FCS scheduling like the SEC, but there are some things they do that we all know are smart.
 
Upvote 0
Jaxbuck said:
got it

The trade off is big OOC matchups vs The Game then

Last game of the year rivalries are immediately at risk when you have an auto bid game the following week (unless you are going to get rid of CCG's).
Click to expand...


How TF is this even still a sticking point for you? Bama lost to Auburn, and will win a natty BECAUSE they lost to Auburn.

Edit: besides, when in your life, have the Buckeyes ever played spoiler to TTUN? The Bucks have had exactly one opportunity that I can remember, and lost 20-14. Fuck those assholes. Every scum fan I've ever met that wasn't born there is a scum fan because they used to upset the Buckeyes EVERY. FUCKING. YEAR. Ohio State had the best team in the country for at least three seasons in the '90s and has shit to show for it. Because rivalries matter? Fuck that.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
lvbuckeye said:
How TF is this even still a sticking point for you? Bama lost to Auburn, and will win a natty BECAUSE they lost to Auburn.

Edit: besides, when in your life, have the Buckeyes ever played spoiler to TTUN? The Bucks have had exactly one opportunity that I can remember, and lost 20-14. Fuck those assholes. Every scum fan I've ever met that wasn't born there is a scum fan because they used to upset the Buckeyes EVERY. FUCKING. YEAR. Ohio State had the best team in the country for at least three seasons in the '90s and has [Mark May] to show for it. Because rivalries matter? Fuck that.
Click to expand...

I've read your post a few times now and can't really figure out what you are getting at but I'll do my best.

Bama getting in over OSU sucks, losing The Game in the 90's sucked, Ohio born scUM fans suck therefore fuck rivalry games??

The logic of how an auto bid would affect rivalry games is pretty clear and has been discussed quite a bit so I'm not interested in rehashing it. There are plenty of posts to read.

Each individuals preference for what they value in CFB (regular season, rivalries, NC's) is up to him or her and a matter of individual taste so, again, not really interested in a pissing match about that.
 
Upvote 0
I wouldn’t go as far as to say that Bama gets to play for a title because they lost to Auburn. I think the most likely result of Bama losing to Auburn is that UGA gets to play for a title. Bama beating Auburn would have put them undefeated and in the SECCG. Bama maybe beats UGA and then they are in, hands down. Maybe Bama loses and still gets in anyway. They got in with 1 loss and not playing in their CCG. It seems that Bama was going to get in, win or lose, to Auburn. UGA not winning their CCG and having 2 losses, could have been left out. Maybe not, but that seems more likely at this point than Bama not getting in, in hindsight. Ohio State needed Bama to beat Auburn, at the time. That was the general consensus. Had that happened, it could have ended up being OSU (2 losses but a conference champion) vs UGA (2 losses and not a conference champion.

It’s a tireless exercise to try and get in to the what-ifs. Getting in the minds of the committee is like trying to shovel smoke with a pitchfork in the wind. The criteria changes with whatever agenda they want to push.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
CFPBuckeye said:
I wouldn’t go as far as to say that Bama gets to play for a title because they lost to Auburn. I think the most likely result of Bama losing to Auburn is that UGA gets to play for a title. Bama beating Auburn would have put them undefeated and in the SECCG. Bama maybe beats UGA and then they are in, hands down. Maybe Bama loses and still gets in anyway. They got in with 1 loss and not playing in their CCG. It seems that Bama was going to get in, win or lose, to Auburn. UGA not winning their CCG and having 2 losses, could have been left out. Maybe not, but that seems more likely at this point than Bama not getting in, in hindsight. Ohio State needed Bama to beat Auburn, at the time. That was the general consensus. Had that happened, it could have ended up being OSU (2 losses but a conference champion) vs UGA (2 losses and not a conference champion.

It’s a tireless exercise to try and get in to the what-ifs. Getting in the minds of the committee is like trying to shovel smoke with a pitchfork in the wind. The criteria changes with whatever agenda they want to push.
Click to expand...

Just replying to 1st sentence... that is what happened.
They lost to Auburn, the only good team they played all year, and stamped their ticket. Sure Wisconsin could have beat us and gone instead. Other results could have been different.
But at the end of the day, the CFP Committee awarded Bama for missing Georgia in the SEC CG. If Bama wins, only 1 SEC team goes.
Instead we got the SEC Champion and 3rd Place... because they were awarded for losing to Auburn.
 
Upvote 0
kujirakira said:
Results say Alabama is the 3rd best team in the SEC ... so... are you saying Eye Test is more important than a seasons worth of games ?

scUM will be overjoyed to hear this.
Click to expand...
Results say Bama lost one game during the season.

If you seriously believe the Tide to be the third best team in its conference, you're too biased to have a serious discussion with.
 
Upvote 0
Onebuckfan said:
OSU vs. scUM is more important than the CFP, always has always will. The CFP has many flaws..no flaws in dismembering scUM
Click to expand...
Well as Alabama has proven this year it's not necessary to beat your rival at the end of the year to play for (and probably win) a national championship.

I don't know how Alabama fans do it to be honest... This will be the 4th time they'll have won the national championship out of their 5 total championships (God, that's a ton) that were gifted to them.

1. Got to play Texas without Colt McCoy for the entire game
2. Got a rematch with LSU even though they didn't win their conference
3. Got to play a shitty ND team because we were not eligible
4. Got to play this year regardless of losing their final game of the year

I too would chose winning a title over winning the big ten (or scum for that matter) but no doubt in my mind I would feel like something was missing having won the way they did.

The real issue with Alabama is not that they get the opportunity to play it's that when they lose they do not fall far enough, and they are always within striking distance of the final 2 (now 4) spots.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top