It actually opened at 0.5 at some books, which obviously was still a loser. It’s a little bit of a publicity thing as well, unless there is a safety there’s no difference between 0.5 and 2.5, but it sounds a lot better being able to say holy crap the total is less than a point.
Florida State
- Thread starter TheWerewolfFromTwilight
- Start date
Alright, I'm for Louisville now. I did bet on FSU, but I don't care. I've determined not winning the ACC at all will hurt their feelings the most.
Refs are sure noticing a lot of holding calls on Louisville now that we're getting to nut cutting time...
Refs are sure noticing a lot of holding calls on Louisville now that we're getting to nut cutting time...
This sport is such a farce. It's barely more legitimate than WWE championships. Men(and Condoleeza Rice for some reason) in a smoke filled room pick their 4 favorites based on a secret set of criteria. For all the tradition and pageantry of college football I'll always prefer the NFL because of this.
Has there been any recent national champion that you thought didn't deserve it?
My son doesn't watch a ton of sports but today he was making this exact same point. And he asked why I like college football if people pick the playoff teams. He also was like "it's the same teams every year" and I couldn't really argue.
Once we go to 12 teams next year and 16 eventually it will change for the better. Sure whoever ends up finishing #17 will have a gripe but it won’t hold nearly the same weight.
Will be nothing like this season where Alabama and Georgia may be excluded but both would be favored over the 4 teams that did make it.
2014 Ohio State. Either Baylor or TCU should have gotten in over them, but the committee didn't want to decide which one.
Maybe 2014 OSU? Both TCU and Baylor had a legitimate argument to take the #4 spot.
They beat Oregon with Cardale Jones. It was the 2014 season, with the championship being played in 2015.
OK. Your terminology differs from google, which calls the OSU championship "2015".
But lets be clear. You think Baylor or TCU would have won the championship over Alabama, Oregon, and Florida State, right?
Louisville sucks. I think even Pitt might be able to beat them.
How do you define recent? I hate PSU as much as anyone but I would say their 94 team was robbed of an opportunity to play Nebraska. UCF a few years ago was robbed of an opportunity to play for a national title. Why play the season if you can win all your games and not even have an opportunity to play for a title?
JFC you know how to twist an argument.
No. I think Ohio State WOULD NOT have won the championship if they didn't get in rhe playoff. That's what the premise was; don't pull this bullshit with me.
As we have seen before, he just can't bring himself to say, oops, I got that wrong, by bad.
College Football playoff era. And I asked about "champion" not about "opportunity". Has the ultimate champion been undeserving because the committees didn't include a team that would have won instead?
How would you know without letting them play? All the experts thought Villanova had no chance to beat Georgetown in 85 and the Giants couldn't beat the Patriots. Hell, Joe Namath and the Jets had no chance against the Colts in 69 . It is amazing what happens when things are settled by playing vs. a committee deciding who they think is better.
So despite OSU beating the next best teams on the field, they didn't deserve it? Got it.
Ah, so you don't know. Everyone can't get in. I want to know of any ultimate champion that you believed didn't deserve it. It you think OSU is it, that's your opinion, and that's fine. I think they earned it on the field.
I don't think any of them are "deserving" because there is no objective criteria for determining a champion.
They didn't deserve to get in, in my opinion.
But they got in and won it.
If they hadn't got in, someone else would have won it.
Thus, the committee got it wrong, in my opinion, and it affected who won the national championship.
You and only you has difficulty following that logic, so now you've moved the goalposts to "left a team that would have won the championship out."
My logic is that beat they still beat out the other 3 teams that you seem to acknowledge should have been there and that makes them deserving.
I never moved the goalposts.
Okay, then if we leave out #1 Michigan this year and replace them with Ohio State, it will have been the right decision if Ohio State wins it all.
Fine. You can continue to ignore the reality that champions are crowned every year by existing criteria. They generally get it right enough that the best team is champion and that was the point of my question.
No. Michigan earned it over OSU. I never said that undeserving teams should take the place of deserving teams. You guys like to create straw men.
I really have clue about 2014. You're free to believe that your logic is sound. I'm free to believe that my logic is sound. These are opinions with no real basis to prove one is right or wrong.
Do you think the existing criteria makes any sense? Why is college football the only sport where you can win all your games and not be the champion? I don't disagree with your premise that generally the consensus best team wins but why the hell is this process for determining a champion ok with anyone?
No undefeated P5 team has never failed to make the playoffs to the best of my knowledge. If that's right, your premise of a team winning all of its game and failing to be champion isn't right.
I have always thought an expanded playoff would be a better way to determine a champion. The problem is that adding those games to the schedule is abusing the players. The right way to compensate for those games is to reduce the regular season and most teams don't want to take the revenue hit from that.
Had to scroll back to your original question here NCPITT to confirm in my mind that you’ve definitely moved the goalposts after a few posters gave you very valid examples of teams that didn’t deserve it.
When it comes to college FB there’s only 2 ways to answer your question. First, since only 4 teams are given the opportunity to win the national championship, any team that was given one of those 4 opportunities when they shouldn’t have qualifies as not deserving that national championship. Doesn’t matter if they ended up winning it on the field, if they didn’t deserve one of the opportunities, they didn’t deserve the national championship. So you’re moving the goalposts when you’re discounting those examples given to you.
Only other way to answer your question is a team given a win on the field when they shouldn’t have. That can pretty much only happen because of some blatantly wrong ref call giving a team a win they shouldn’t have. Closest example I can come up with on that is OSU over Miami FL because of a bad pass interference call in the end zone. Sure can’t remember the year but it was the ISU team with Maurice Clarrett as the RB
So you are saying being undefeated and the ACC champion doesn't matter. Winning with a 3rd string Freshman QB does matter.
I'm not discounting those examples at all. I asked for opinions. No opinions are wrong because they aren't facts. I never said they were wrong.
I just have a difference of opinion. I think that the groups who have selected the teams for the playoffs have generally got it right enough to have included the teams that got the ultimate champion right. Frankly, once a season is over, I can barely remember who the champion was. I'm not going argue with someone who thinks that USC was the best team in 2003 and OSU didn't deserve it in 2014 because I have no recall of anything about those teams.
My sole point was that the committees almost always included the 1 team that everyone agreed was a legitimate champ at the end of the playoffs. The rest is just noise.
It'll be worse. What would the point of yesterday's games be? FSU, Bama, UGa, Mich, Texas would already be in. 10-2 PSU with 10 wins over girls teams would be resting up preparing for the playoff.
