My guess, 2 Things:
I already addressed this earlier and you didn't answer the question I asked of you., so I will copy it below and ask an additional question.
It's fair because the best teams had their shot. For example, let's say Alabama is #1 in the SEC, LSU is #2, and Florida is #3 one year. Alabama and Florida play in the CCG. LSU was in Alabama's division and lost. They had a shot to beat Alabama already. Plus, the rules were set up before the season, so everybody had the same shot from the outset.
Never considered that the ACC would partner with the SEC but that would be a problem for the B1G when I stop and think about it.
theathletic.com
Cannot read it. It is a paid subscription.Big Ten, Pac-12, ACC alliance expected to be formally announced soon: Sources
Schools within the three conferences believe they are like-minded, that they want to continue to prioritize broad-based sports offerings and that the academic profile of their institutions matters.
Basically, there is a hint that that there may be some announcement next week.
The rules are set that a conference champ isn’t a requirement. If you are going to change the rules to say that it is, I’m asking why not make the change to be fair so that the two teams with the best records are guaranteed to be matched up? To use your example, what if UF has already lost to both Bama and LSU, what’s fair about that?
I was able to read it w/out a subscription. But, there was really no new content in it. Just saying that an announcement was forthcoming. And, they all three share the same values.
In your example, it is fair because the framework was in place at the beginning of the season, nothing was changed after-the-fact, and everyone was already aware a rematch was a possibilty. The was no subjectively such as the "eye test."
Here's the answer, to me it's totally OK to have the same arbitrary divisions forever, like the NFL, even if it means lesser teams can sneak into the playoffs, I'm fine with it. And OOC games are like NFL preseason, don't count in the LEAGUE standings.
Because THAT DOES NOT HAVE TO HAPPEN, nothing wrong with THAT NOT HAPPENING, the rules for qualification where known before the first game was played, before anyone knew who would be 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th best.
That's great but in a division format you could plausibly have three, one-loss teams, in the same division. It's rare but it happens.
Right, but you have a predetermined tie breaker system in place. The problem with the CFP is there are no predetermined rules and the qualifications shift from week to week.
Those rules are fine but they are hardly perfect in college because you're determining the outcome based on roughly 75% of the total schedule for some conferences.
If all you do it take the top two teams from the conference, you are still determining the outcome based on 75% of the total schedule.
It's all great and I still agree with you fundamentally. Regardless of how anyone feels, they're going to make up their minds and do it however they want.
The framework isn’t in place as part of the CFP. You are proposing to change the CFP system to use the conferences so I am just saying be more thorough with the changes. That isn’t the catch phrase that you are attempting to call it.
Going by records isn’t subjective. Lay out tiebreaker criteria just like now.
Assuming you mean LSU in lieu of one of the above. That also would mean one of the above would have lost to a much suckier team than Bama. You aren't making the case any better for them. See above about a tie-breaker.
They can vary in conference also based on which teams from the other division someone may get.
I thought the whole point of having playoffs was so it wouldn't be MYTHICAL anymore. There would be STRICT QUALIFICATION RULES laid out, so that before the season started, every one of the 130 FBS teams would know exactly what it would take, exactly which games that they'd win that could send them into a playoff tournament, then it wouldn't be MYTHICAL anymore.
This is why it sucks! Nobody but Alabama, Clemson, tOSU and ND knows EXACTLY what they'd need to do to get in. If for example, you made the Conference Championship Game winners automatic qualifiers, then at least all the P5 teams would know what they have to do at a minimum to get in, and maybe even half the teams would still have at least some hope going into November and that would make it more interesting for more fan bases.
Sorry to inform you of a non-secret that everyone else seems to be aware of: cfb OOC games are shown on everyone’s record, have been for all time, and are in all the record books.
The NCAA doesn’t name an official national champion. That is what the “M” is based on. Nothing has changed about that.
Overall record and league record can be and are different, you could win your division by being 8-0 in your league and be 8-4 overall. And who says that mythical can't be changed, things SHOULD CHANGE to make CFB a normal sport, like the rest.
In MLB, yes. In your references to the NFL, the league record is the overall record.
cfb doesn’t have leagues. They do have conferences, and some even divisions…hmmm, sounds familiar to that other football entity where the league record is the overall record.
Show where I said it can’t be changed. They are still part of the NCAA and the NCAA doesn’t name an official champ.
CFB DOES HAVE LEAGUES, ACC, SEC, B1G for example. Basically you're OK with the way things are, because you want the status quo where only certain teams ever get into a tiny tournament, and also you probably think that CHAMPION has something to do with being THE BEST TEAM, when the reality is, that the best team is champion most times, but sometimes they aren't.
