Baylor is most likely going to the Sugar assuming they win this weekend and are the second highest ranked Big XII school.
I think the ACC will get 2 NY6 bowl games. It just depends if one is a playoff.
If UNC beats Clemson, are they in?
- Thread starter Sean Miller Fan
- Start date
Baylor is most likely going to the Sugar assuming they win this weekend and are the second highest ranked Big XII school.
I think the ACC will get 2 NY6 bowl games. It just depends if one is a playoff.
I am sorry but that would be a travesty not only to UNC but to other 1 loss teams.Why would you give the nod to a 2 loss conference champ over a 1 loss conference champ who just beat the season long #1 team. Makes absolutely no sense. UNC is in with a win.
No. (A) was answering his question. (B) was telling him that his question is irrelevant.
When the 1-loss conference champ only played ONE SINGLE game against a top-30 team, albeit a win, and only had 10 FBS wins..... their resume is worse than a 2-loss conference champ that played SIX games against the top-30 and had 11 FBS wins. If you threw all of UNC and Stanford's wins together... 6 of the top 7 wins would be held by Stanford, although the #1 win would be UNC's. Conversely, UNC's loss to a 3-9 team that lost to the Citadel is 10 times worse than Stanford's losses to two RANKED teams.
Stanford would have a better record with UNC's schedule than UNC would have with Stanford's schedule. That's the bottom line.
First priority goes to conference champs, according to the committee itself. Since both teams would be conference champs, the next thing the committee looks at is overall body of work.... and UNC's is nowhere near Stanford's - even with a Clemson win. It just isn't.
I think the decision would be a close one..... but Stanford would edge out UNC because of 11 FBS wins to 10... 5 Top 25 wins to 1.... and a much, much, much harder schedule.
People are just having a hard time adjusting to the new college football world.
It focuses more on SOS and a loss to a ranked team is worth more than a win against a poor team.
Just read quotes from the mouth of UNC's AD in the link below. Back in the BCS days, they scheduled just to win, and that is all anyone looked at. Now you have to schedule strong and win to have a chance, however a stronger schedule with a loss or two is viewed more favorably, and I agree.
It's not UNC's fault that Minnesota backed out late in the game and they got stuck with 2 FCS opponents, or that USCjr absolutely sucked this year. But that's life.
http://espn.go.com/blog/acc/post/_/...cunningham-talks-about-the-tar-heels-schedule
It focuses more on SOS and a loss to a ranked team is worth more than a win against a poor team.
Just read quotes from the mouth of UNC's AD in the link below. Back in the BCS days, they scheduled just to win, and that is all anyone looked at. Now you have to schedule strong and win to have a chance, however a stronger schedule with a loss or two is viewed more favorably, and I agree.
It's not UNC's fault that Minnesota backed out late in the game and they got stuck with 2 FCS opponents, or that USCjr absolutely sucked this year. But that's life.
http://espn.go.com/blog/acc/post/_/...cunningham-talks-about-the-tar-heels-schedule
You can make a good case for Stanford but the 11 1A wins compared to 10 is irrelevant. If UNC beat the worst 1A team instead of the extra 1AA team, it wouldn't matter.
I Hate the Buckeyes, but they are far from out of it. If Michigan State wins, they could get in over Stanford or a won loss Clemson. The committee will look at how they manhandled Michigan. Remember, their resume was weak last year and they jumped Baylor and TCU. TCU should have been in the playoffs and looked like men among boys against Ole Miss. I hope I am wrong, but the committee loves OSU.
Hail to Pitt!
Dave
Hail to Pitt!
Dave
The five wins against ranked teams compared to one WOULD matter, though. A lot.
The only way I see tOSU getting in this year is if Clemson, Stanford and Bama all lose.
I don't know how you can say TCU deserved it when tOSU beat both Bama and Oregon.
This is the only thing I disagree with you about, to me, only top 25 at the end of the year should count. And that is the way the committee looks at it as well.
Stanford will most likely have 2 top 25 wins after the newest polls, (I expect Washington St and UCLA to drop out) compared to UNC's 0.
Stanford - ND and Oregon
UNC - none
OSU resume last year wasn't nearly as weak as it is this year. They had 4 top 25 wins last year... only 1 this year. They won their conference last year over a ranked Wisconsin team, 59-0. This year, they won't even play for the conference title.
OSU had a solid case last year to make it at 12-1 as Big Ten champs. They don't have a solid case this year. Their schedule this year was MUCH weaker, and they didn't do as well against it as they did last year against a more difficult schedule.
The committee has said.... over and over and over and over again.... that they place a high premium on conference champions. And that the only way they would put a NON-conference champion in over a conference champion is if the evidence is overwhelming that the NON-conference champion is better. Comparing OSU to Stanford or OSU to UNC doesn't give the committee that option.
OSU is deader than a doornail... and needs several very unlikely events to all occur before they even have a sniff.
Well.. at the time the committee selected Ohio State, they hadn't defeated Bama and Oregon.... so you can't use that argument. The committee aren't time travelers who can see the future.
The fact that they won it all doesn't mean that they had the resume to be in the tournament BEFORE the games were played. TCU also blew out Mississippi in their bowl game last year.
In deciding the playoff teams, the committee has to compare the resumes on December 7th. And this year's OSU has a much weaker resume than even last year's OSU had. They're out - unless miraculous things occur for them this weekend.
then if you were on the committee that is how you would vote...however, this new system was supposed to chose the best four teams and resume, notwithstanding, should not be the determining factor...If Iowa is undefeated and not considered to be one of the four best then the committee should not select them...the big 12 teams got hosed for this very reason last year....
I hope you are right. Obviously, OSU proved they belonged when they not only beat Bama and Oregon, they whopped them. I am just saying TCU was ranked #3 won their last game like 41-7 and dropped. OSU lost their only decent nonconference game to a BAD VA Tech team and TCU beat up Minnesota from the Big Ten.
This is why I love college football. What other sport can you seriously argue about as most championships are won purely on the field/court/ice.
Hail to Pitt!
Dave
Not if you use computer rankings, which the committee does. USC and WSU are both Top 25 and UCLA is close. USC is actually Top 10 in Sagarin.
But even if you use AP Rankings.... Wins over both ND and Oregon would trump a close win over Clemson. Now, a BLOWOUT win over Clemson is a different animal. If UNC does to Clemson what Ohio State did to Wisconsin last year in the CCG, then that's a whole 'nother matter.
I was responding to the poster saying TCU deserved it because they looked like a man among boys and beat Ole Miss in their bowl game last year.
Why would we want UNC over Clemson.
Lets say UNC has a great " fluke" game against Clemson and manages to win. I think Clemson is a stronger team overall, with better coaching and has the best chance of an ACC team winning the National Championship.
Isn't that the goal for our conference the ACC to win the National Championship?
Lets say UNC has a great " fluke" game against Clemson and manages to win. I think Clemson is a stronger team overall, with better coaching and has the best chance of an ACC team winning the National Championship.
Isn't that the goal for our conference the ACC to win the National Championship?
I'm just looking at the committee rankings.
But I do agree, Stanford has a better resume even if those two do drop out. I'm not arguing that. I just don't think 5 ranked teams vs 1 is a fair representation because some will not be ranked at the end of the year.
I don't think anyone in this discussion "wants" any team. (I'm rooting for Clemson big time for the reasons you state).
We are discussing what would happen IF UNC wins.
The Big 12 teams did NOT get "hosed for this reason last year". Last year there was one undefeated team (FSU) and six one-loss teams (Alabama, Oregon, Ohio State, TCU, and Baylor). The committee's charter is to put extra weight on conference champions when all else is equal or close. Alabama and Oregon were in, because their resumes were the strongest. The choice came down to OSU, TCU, and Baylor for the final spot. All had 1-loss. OSU had 12 wins compared to TCU and Baylor's 11. TCU was problematic because it technically wasn't the B12 champ, Baylor was. Baylor was problematic because its schedule strength was WAY worse than OSU's.
In the end, it came down to which conference champ.... OSU or Baylor.... had the better resume. And OSU won out. TCU fell to 6th because it was the only 1-loss team that was NOT the conference champion.
Thanks for the clarification I sometimes miss the point of the thread with a lot of posts!
Go Clemson!
Merry Christmas to all!
Why is there a magic line between the bottom of FBS and the better FCS teams? If UNC had played New Mexico State instead of Delaware, that would have been better? 99% chance either way.
If you want to ding them for playing a bad team, fine. But I don't think FBS/FCS should be the determinate.
If you want to ding them for playing a bad team, fine. But I don't think FBS/FCS should be the determinate.
UNC's gotta be in if they beat #1 Clemson. Assuming UNC wins and the rest is chalk, it'd be pretty straightforward. Bama / MSU / Oklahoma / UNC, in that order. OSU's only hope is if USC beats Stanford and Florida beats Bama.
What if MSU also loses in your scenario? OSU cant get in over MSU. Thats impossible. MSU's resume blows away the Buckeyes.
OSU probably cant get in over a 1 loss Clemson team who has wins over FSU and ND....or even 2 loss Bama.
I dont see any way, any scenario where OSU makes it. Their schedule and resume are just too weak.
I actually agree with this, but unfortunately I think that perception is there.
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/forde-yard-dash-083818137-ncaaf.html
The first part of the Forde Yarde dash summarizes what we've been talking about here.
The first part of the Forde Yarde dash summarizes what we've been talking about here.
I think the 4 teams should be the 4 best teams with at least comparable (because some years a 9-3 SEC team may be much better than this year's Iowa, but can't go that low) resumes. So I would rank the next few teams up:
Ohio State
Stanford
UNC
Clemson
Ohio State is just the next best team and even though their schedule wasn't great, neither was UNC or Clemson and you shouldn't be overly penalized for your only loss being to your conference champion. Clemson is tough because they shouldn't be penalized just because they lost their last game, but they also don't have a darling resume outside of that and aren't unbeatable as some have suggested on here.
L. O. L.
I'm already losing faith in the CFP as quickly as I did with the BCS. We can argue all we want about Carolina, Ohio State, Stanford, etc. But for god's sake... Florida State ahead of Carolina?!?!? That is seriously so funny I'm expecting to wake up tomorrow and hear it was a prank. I really wonder if these people watch football or just look at pieces of paper. Florida State is nowhere near as explosive offensively as UNC. Honestly they looked better at times when Golson wasn't even in the lineup. If Clemson and Alabama are not upset on Saturday there should be no problems, if one of them is though, it will be interesting if the committee actually stands by their theory of wanting conference champions in, which I actually think is a really good idea.
I think conference champs matter. Imagine the Patriots losing in the Wild Card round but the NFL moves them to the conference championship because they're just "better".
