(09-04-2018 07:12 AM)owl at the moon Wrote: (09-03-2018 04:16 PM)JRsec Wrote: (09-03-2018 03:31 PM)JHS55 Wrote: So it looks like the 4 playoff teams are 3 SEC teams and Ohio st!, wow y’alls committee led playoffs are soooooo ......hmmm, I don’t know, great?
No it won't be. Whether the SEC gets a 2nd in this year will depend upon two things. How well does Washington play in the PAC. If they win out with a close loss to what will likely be a 3rd to 5th place finish by Auburn will only strengthen their resume. If Washington wins the PAC with two losses it leaves wiggle room.
But, this year the ACC is off to a flying thud. They have on any given year 5 solid to very strong football teams: Clemson, F.S.U., Virginia Tech, Louisville, and Miami. Sometimes Georgia Tech will surprise folks.
Well this year Miami and Louisville have already sustained a couple of bad losses with regard to standing. They could overcome it, but the ACC always does some beating up on each other so 2nd losses now are likely for both somewhere down the line.
Complicating the ACC's position is that Florida State opens with Virginia Tech tonight so 1 more will likely have a loss. Let's assume that for the sake of argument that Tech loses tonight. If so F.S.U. still has Clemson to play and a much more respectable Florida team. If F.S.U. loses tonight then the SOS of the ACC will drop significantly because they always carry higher expectations in the eye of the nation. That could come into play if say Clemson has a loss somewhere during the year.
If the unthinkable should happen and Jimbo's Aggies upset Clemson next week and Florida State loses, unless Virginia Tech runs the table the ACC with a much lower S.O.S. due to their brands all losing would have a tough time sneaking a 1 loss school in unless that one loss school is Clemson.
Something like that will have to happen this year for the SEC or Big 10 to get two in.
Then there is another obstacle. I think both the Big 10 and SEC will have very strong middles this year. So 2 losses for schools that might have had only 1 is more likely. Alabama looks the part of an unbeaten right now and injuries withstanding they have to be a favorite. Whether Georgia can navigate their schedule without a loss in the East and get to Atlanta unbeaten will determine whether or not the SEC has anyone challenge for a second spot.
Penn State, Michigan State, and Michigan are going to beat up on each other and none of them look like serious challenges to the Buckeyes. If Wisconsin can get by Iowa and Nebraska to get to the Big 10 championship game against Ohio State unbeaten then the Big 10 could also lay claim to a 2nd slot should the PAC and the ACC wind up looking less competitive this year.
So I think it's going to be an interesting year.
If Oklahoma or WVU runs the table there will be your 3rd entrant.
But if I had to guess I'd say that OU and Clemson make it back where they could likely face Alabama/Georgia and the Big 10's Ohio State/Wisconsin.
You made his point for him very effectively by writing 11 paragraphs on all of the CFP contenders with out so much as even dismissing the AAC or any other G5 contenders.
Because under the current system, there are none even eligible. (Even the defending NCAA co-champions)
No, I explained it accurately because the assertion made stated the SEC would have 3 in the CFP which was an absurdity because of the composition and mission of the CFP selection committee, and since the posters assertion was that only A5 conferences would have entrants, I broke down the reasons that no A5 would have 3.
Now, as to your insinuation. It is what it is and I'm not being disingenuous or close minded to acknowledge reality. The CFP is an invention of the networks (think ESPN) and is a commercial enterprise which heretofore has managed to try to engage as many of the regions of the country with large name brand schools with even larger alumni & fan bases because that drives ad revenue 2nd only to the Super Bowl. Therefore optimally they would prefer to have U.S.C. from the PAC, Ohio State from the Big 10, Alabama from the SEC, and Florida State from the ACC with Clemson as a substitute if Texas or Oklahoma are not available.
The only reason the SEC has gotten two in was because even by their jaded criteria the PAC has failed to produce a truly competitive school, and certainly not U.S.C.. Most years Alabama and Ohio State justify themselves. But with Texas floundering and the Sooners having until last year, under preformed, Florida State and now the rise of Clemson capture some of that East Coast demographic the advertisers like. Clemson has made it because they simply couldn't be denied. But needless to say the more regions involved with the biggest brands the more ESPN/ABC/Disney make off of the venture.
And it appears they've carefully crafted and justified the current growing gap between the A5 and G5 schools via what they pay out for TV rights and this too justifies some of their decision making because it gifts more to compete with to the schools that meet their criteria and hamstrings the ones they fear would have low ratings for TV.
I might also add that an interesting merchandising transition looks to be well underway that most here have not caught onto yet. They are preparing for the possible expansion of the playoffs by convincing bowl cities that there is more revenue to be made off of early season matches at their sites, rather than season ending ones. Why? Expanding the playoffs isn't possible until schools see how to replace that bowl revenue with early season neutral site games with guaranteed payouts making expanded playoffs and their revenue less risky. And that won't happen until all of the minor the bowls are essentially moved to the opening week where their chambers of commerce get the revenue from two sets of fully hopeful fans, rather than from two dwindling fan bases seeking a consolation prize.
I have no doubts but what the larger bowls will be utilized for the expanded playoff structure when the time comes for it.
And that brings us to another business question. Do the bowls prefer large fan bases from A5 established brands, or do they prefer the followings of the smaller Cinderella stories? Why do you think the larger bowls have contracts with specific conferences in the first place? They want large traveling fan bases with higher per capita earnings visiting their venues because they get drunk and spend money.
It's not run by the NCAA because it is a business and not an NCAA championship event. That's also why the NFL is self described as an entertainment industry and not a sport.
When the time comes to expand the playoffs and buy off the minor bowls with more profitable season opening events, I doubt we see more than 1 school from the G5 in them, if at all. The reason again is business related. What's better than 4 large venerated rabid fan bases to make money? The answer is 8 large venerated rabid fan bases.
If college football truly wanted a playoff that would be fully inclusive and yield a NCAA sponsored champion then several things have to change.
1. The NCAA can't get their ratty claws on the dough and hold onto it to make interest from it as they broker it out in "tourney credits" over the next 5 years like they do with basketball. This is why OU/UGA sued to get the right to handle their own TV gigs and revenue.
2. The NCAA can't rat hole non dispersed revenue to the tune of what would be an adjusted for football 350 million a year the way they essentially steal 70 million a year from basketball with which they've built over a 1 Billion dollar endowment spread across 2 separate funds. Why? The money belongs to the schools and not a damned bureaucracy.
3. The G5 needs to consolidate into 4 conferences and the A5 needs to do the same so that their champions would move into the playoff structure. Why? Otherwise a committee picks. Good luck with that!
4. The bowls would have to be practically eliminated since on campus games at the home fields of the higher seeds would be more profitable. Multiple neutral site games would be too self limiting on actual fan attendance due to costs. And the bowls would have to be eliminated because they would be the ones to grouse the loudest over the inclusion of 4 G5 champs.