B1G, SEC to receive three auto bids under proposed 14-team CFP expansion
- Thread starter HailToPitt725
- Start date
To the extent that I understand there isn’t “SEC” math but just math, and the algorithm spits out what it spits out, yeah, I’m an expert.
Once again: it’s relative to the average team, not SEC teams.
I think the SEC has earned the rep. BIG, not so much.
Their top teams sure, but how about Vandy, South Carolina, Kentucky, MSU, Ole Miss, Florida, and others in recent years before this past year you could argue Pitt is right there with their middle teams, Pitt played Tennessee pretty even over 2 games, B1G is still The Big 2 and the rest as it has been for 100 years.
If this were to come to fruition, should the ACC stay divisionless or return to having divsions for football?
I get the point of going divisionless was to have your two best teams play in the conference championship game; but it feels a bit anti-climatic to play a conference championship game and then have both the winner and loser of that game go to the playoffs.
I'm sure in some years the 3rd place team would jump the loser of the conference championship game for the playoff spot, but in others there could be a 2+ loss gap between the 2nd and 3rd place team.
Will conferences (especially the SEC and B1G with 3 autobids) possibly consider doing away with their championship games to not add another game to the path to the championship for their playoff teams?
I'm not sure conference championship games have been the cash bonanza conferences wanted them to be; and there will probably be more money in having teams from your conference advance deeper in the playoffs.
I get the point of going divisionless was to have your two best teams play in the conference championship game; but it feels a bit anti-climatic to play a conference championship game and then have both the winner and loser of that game go to the playoffs.
I'm sure in some years the 3rd place team would jump the loser of the conference championship game for the playoff spot, but in others there could be a 2+ loss gap between the 2nd and 3rd place team.
Will conferences (especially the SEC and B1G with 3 autobids) possibly consider doing away with their championship games to not add another game to the path to the championship for their playoff teams?
I'm not sure conference championship games have been the cash bonanza conferences wanted them to be; and there will probably be more money in having teams from your conference advance deeper in the playoffs.
I don't know why just the final 2 top ranked teams get the byes. In more years than not, they will be SEC or Big 10. No need to give them a reward on an overall down year for their conference when maybe the ACC or Big 12 or ND has one of the top 2 teams.
You couldn’t really argue that.
UF was probably a shoe throw away from being in the playoffs within the last 4 years.
Ole Miss went 10-3 and and 11-2 in two of the last 3 years, while playing in the division you seem to be acknowledging is loaded with top tier elite teams.
Ole Miss’ average power ranking over the last 3 years is 14.6.
Pitt’s during that time is 47.
The two programs just aren’t really close in terms of quality of play.
If Ole Miss was in the ACC, they would be the runaway preseason pick to win the conference, and there’s a chance they’d be going for a 4th straight ACC title.
Pitt’s during that time is 47.
The two programs just aren’t really close in terms of quality of play.
If Ole Miss was in the ACC, they would be the runaway preseason pick to win the conference, and there’s a chance they’d be going for a 4th straight ACC title.
Tough call. Sure, there is a danger of a weak division. I would go divisions though. Get some of the regionality into it and gives most teams something to play for versus no divisions where most would be out of it mid-season.
First round byes for the SEC and Big Ten is a terrible idea. In this scenario, teams like Clemson/FSU/Pitt could be ranked #1 in the country and two lower ranked teams get byes instead. No thanks.
Florida was 5-7 last year, Ole Mise 8-5 the year before, so you could. UT lost to Pitt and barely beat them in OT in the year they were contenders.
What does that mean? What are they calculating? You don't even know; you just want to accept it.
They are calculating a bunch of things. Down to down success rate. Explosive rate. Etc. then measuring that against what the average team would have done.
Go look at Ole Miss’ losses the year they lost 5 games.
Just an insane schedule of elite teams.
They would have boat raced most of the ACC that year. Unfortunately for them, they play in the SEC West.
2022 Ole Miss regular season losses:
LSU (finished 8th in F+ power rankings)
Bama (2)
Arkansas (23)
Miss State (12)
They lost to 4 teams ranked in the Power Ranking Top 25. 3 of which were in the Top 12.
Ole Miss finished 18th that year in the power rankings.
Highest ranking ACC team was FSU at 14.
Anybody pretending like the middle of the SEC in any given year isn’t stacked, is delusional. Those teams would would compete for Big 12 and ACC titles.
LSU (finished 8th in F+ power rankings)
Bama (2)
Arkansas (23)
Miss State (12)
They lost to 4 teams ranked in the Power Ranking Top 25. 3 of which were in the Top 12.
Ole Miss finished 18th that year in the power rankings.
Highest ranking ACC team was FSU at 14.
Anybody pretending like the middle of the SEC in any given year isn’t stacked, is delusional. Those teams would would compete for Big 12 and ACC titles.
What Boise State teams even exist anymore?
A couple of things have happened since Boise ran the Statue of Liberty.
P5 gobbled up the best G5 teams.
The P5 went on steroids in ways that have crowded out G5.
You’re pointing to a bowl game that was in 2007, and a bowl game in which one team couldn’t have cared less because they were a game away from the playoffs and lost, and were playing against a team that’s no longer a G5.
There just isn’t much left in the G5 anymore.
That's always the excuse when a P5 loses to a G5, they didn't really care. It does seem like there's a whole log of not caring in college football anymore.
No it’s not. That’s the excuse when they lose in *bowl* games, because it’s largely true.
But when Boise went on that run of beating Oregon and VT to open the year, nobody argued Oregon and VT didn’t care. Because they obviously did in the regular season.
But I would hope in the last few years, with the amount of opt outs, you see how little a lot of players care about bowl games.
Bill Connelly was actually talking about that this week. That his analytics should adjust for bowl games, but there’s no way he can objectively do that except to not input them at all. Because it would be him subjectively determining how much the team cared. And the games always matter to G5 teams.
You can make whatever power ranking arguments you want, if 2022 Slovis-led Pitt played them 10 times, Pitt wins 5, at least. Yeah I know what happened with their common opponent, I don't care, Pitt would have still gone .500 against them.
Similar threads
