If UCF was a little closer to the top 4, this wouldn't be much of a deal. Being so far off has to be discouraging to non bigs.

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/6/2017 11:33:00 AM (view original):
See, that's the thing. Every true competitors ultimate goal is a national title. Right now, the non-P5's have zero chance.

At the last school that I coached at, my guys got sick of hearing me talk about winning championships because I did it so much. It was highly unlikely as our schedule was made up of the Landers, USC-Aikens, and N. Georgia's of the world, but if we won our games we had a chance.

In DI football, even if you go undefeated you still don't have a chance.

And that's also what bugs me. All the talking heads explaining to all of us how expanding the playoffs will reduce the importance of the regular season.

How now the "regular season still means something".

Tell that to UCF.

Well, to be fair, UCF has no chance of playing for the National Championship under any previous system either.

No two loss team has made the playoffs. That actually does indicate that the "regular season still means something" and that scheduling a tough non-con is a really bad idea.

Central Florida's best win was Memphis. They played Austin Peay, Florida International, and @ Maryland in the non-con and had games against Georgia Tech, Memphis, and Maine cancelled. Had UCF played 4 non-con games against mid-tier or better power 5 schools, and gone unbeaten, then they would have a much better argument, but Maryland was terrible, FIU was an ok CUSA school, and Peay is an FCS program. That just isn't going to cut it.

If a lower 5 conference school wants to have a realistic shot they need to play 4 road games against power 5 programs and they shouldn't be dregs either. Replace Peay with a team like Oregon, FIU with a team like A&M, Maryland with a team like Iowa/Purdue, and play that Ga Tech game that was cancelled, then they would have a much stronger argument. That would be 4 road victories against mid-tier power 5 programs (spread across the country). Add in the USF and Memphis games and that is a respectable enough schedule that they might have earned a shot especially in a year like this (i.e. where there were 3 deserving teams and they had to pick 1 other team). If they really want to strengthen their cause they should replace one of those mid-tier games with a game against a good program like a Virginia Tech, Michigan, Oklahoma St., Washington, South Carolina, etc. or even one of the "great" programs like an Oklahoma, Ohio State, Alabama, etc.

This is the SEC conference strength argument in reverse, i.e. your conference isn't good so you have to stack the non-con to get a respectable schedule.

You recognize the problem with UCF scheduling is that A) they were 0-12 not so long ago after being pretty solid with Bortles at QB and B) none of those mid-tier P5s want to risk a loss to a good UCF team.

Posted by moranis on 12/7/2017 2:10:00 PM (view original):
Central Florida's best win was Memphis. They played Austin Peay, Florida International, and @ Maryland in the non-con and had games against Georgia Tech, Memphis, and Maine cancelled. Had UCF played 4 non-con games against mid-tier or better power 5 schools, and gone unbeaten, then they would have a much better argument, but Maryland was terrible, FIU was an ok CUSA school, and Peay is an FCS program. That just isn't going to cut it.

If a lower 5 conference school wants to have a realistic shot they need to play 4 road games against power 5 programs and they shouldn't be dregs either. Replace Peay with a team like Oregon, FIU with a team like A&M, Maryland with a team like Iowa/Purdue, and play that Ga Tech game that was cancelled, then they would have a much stronger argument. That would be 4 road victories against mid-tier power 5 programs (spread across the country). Add in the USF and Memphis games and that is a respectable enough schedule that they might have earned a shot especially in a year like this (i.e. where there were 3 deserving teams and they had to pick 1 other team). If they really want to strengthen their cause they should replace one of those mid-tier games with a game against a good program like a Virginia Tech, Michigan, Oklahoma St., Washington, South Carolina, etc. or even one of the "great" programs like an Oklahoma, Ohio State, Alabama, etc.

This is the SEC conference strength argument in reverse, i.e. your conference isn't good so you have to stack the non-con to get a respectable schedule.

That is all true.

Just wanted to point out that they beat Maryland AT Maryland by more than did Wisconsin playing in Wisconsin.

Still their only "good" wins were the two victories against Memphis, and we don't really know how good Memphis is either since their best win was probably against a 6-6 UCLA.

The better team to point to is 2008 Utah who finished unbeaten after they beat Bama in the Sugar by 14. Eventual champion Florida only beat Bama by 11 in the SECCG. They were rewarded with the number 2 spot in the final polls. Somehow I don't think they were satisfied with that.

I'd much prefer a system that allows these teams to get beat on the field to prove they aren't the best, and occasionally lets in a 2012 Wisconsin than a system that just dismisses these teams outright.

Bottom line really, if we're being honest, is that the powers that be aren't really looking to share the wealth or the chance at a NC with the Group of 5 schools.

Just hate the argument of "regular season matters" when it clearly does not to over half of the schools.

You can only play so many games. And there are a lot of teams. The regular season matters to the P5 schools. And, I imagine, every game matters to the fans/players of the other schools.

I've not seen you post an allegiance to any school but, if you went to Purdue, you know you're going 5-7 in a good year. People still attend those games, players play.

At the start of this thread, I listed 14 schools as potential National Champs(mentioned around 20). The regular season still matters to the other 110ish. A lot of schools have never seen top 5.

Sure "it matters" in that the fans still like to watch and go to the games and what not. But too many Group of 5 schools have run the table and never even had the chance to sniff a championship. Doesn't really "matter" in the sense that no matter how well they perform they won't be afforded a seat at the table.

I just don't see how allowing one of these teams a shot (obviously by expanding to 8) diminishes the regular season.

One could argue that even at 4 this season, the Iron Bowl "didn't matter". I don't agree with that sentiment, because it obviously gave a 2 loss Auburn the shot to punch their ticket. They just didn't seize that opportunity. Did the B1G championship matter? I'd say it still did, because if Wisc had won it they'd be in at 4. If Ohio State had made a statement in that game (like in 2014) they'd have taken the 4 spot instead of Bama. Winning by a mere 6 wasn't enough to discount the 30+ point loss to 7-5 Iowa. Win by 4 TDs or so and it probably does.

I think if we had 8 this season we would see the addition of UCF, Ohio St. & USC. Then we'd be choosing the last participant from a pool that includes 1 loss Wisconsin, and 2 loss teams Washington, Miami, Penn St.

I think in that scenario Miami is the first to be dropped from consideration due to their poor performance in their final two games.
I wouldn't have a problem with any of the other 3 teams getting in.

If it were Wisconsin, then one could argue "the B1GCG didn't matter", but that would be incorrect. It mattered to Ohio St., who wouldn't have gotten in had they lost. If the problem is Wisconsin lost and still got in, well that already happened under the old 2 team BCS system in 2003 when Oklahoma lost their Conference CG by 28 to Darren Sproles and a 3 loss Kansas St. They were beaten soundly, but had such a strong season prior to that they still ended up #2.

As I've posted earlier I just feel that a system which lets UCF in, even if it means Wisc gets in after a loss in the B1GCG, is far superior to a system that just dismisses the efforts of teams like 2008 Utah and 2006 Boise. Both of whom proved they could play with the "big boys".

CFB is not the NFL for many reasons. If you think "Everyone deserves a chance", you're not really understanding that. You posted that "An undefeated Wisconsin is NOT the same as an undefeated UCF" earlier so I think you do understand CFB. I'm not sure where you're going so it's hard for me to to argue. But a top team that doesn't play the powers will not get in the playoffs.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/7/2017 7:52:00 PM (view original):
CFB is not the NFL for many reasons. If you think "Everyone deserves a chance", you're not really understanding that. You posted that "An undefeated Wisconsin is NOT the same as an undefeated UCF" earlier so I think you do understand CFB. I'm not sure where you're going so it's hard for me to to argue. But a top team that doesn't play the powers will not get in the playoffs.

Tell me how many "powers" that are willing to put Boise on their schedule? Oregon did it and it bit them. Most teams wouldn't make that mistake again.

Problem with a Power 5 team accepting a game against a good Group of 5 school is it is a no win situation.

Lose to them and it's a hard thing to overcome. Beat them and everyone says "big deal, you beat a Group of 5 school".

Not much of an incentive.

I don't want CFB to turn into the NFL. I also don't think "everyone deserves a chance".

The ONLY thing I want is for teams like 2008 Utah to have a chance at a title. All a team can do is win the games on the schedule. If they win them all they should be champs. Name another team, from any sport, that never lost a game and yet didn't win a championship.

Just to make the point a little more clear:

March Madness takes the top 68 schools, which is less than 20% of the schools. That 20% is already quite a bit LESS than every major professional sport's post season.

When I'm advocating for 8 teams I hear a lot of "watering down" kind of talk.

If CFB expanded to 8 that would be a tad over 6%. SIX percent is watering down??? That's absurd.

Compared to every other major sport it is still a ridiculously low number and a very elite club. Obviously it is half as exclusive as 4, but I'm just saying lets not pretend like allowing 6 percent in a playoff system is tantamount to making the regular season not count anymore.

I'd like 8 but, as it stands, a 2 loss team has never made the CFB playoffs. That indicates that the regular season does matter. If it was 8, 2 loss OSU/USC are in as conference champs. I guess the argument would have been WI/Auburn for the final spot. If it's Auburn, that's 3 two loss teams. And, with that, Wisconsin is raising holy hell. And people will begin to clamor for 16 teams. Then you may begin to say "12% is watering down? That's absurd!!!"

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/8/2017 8:59:00 AM (view original):
I'd like 8 but, as it stands, a 2 loss team has never made the CFB playoffs. That indicates that the regular season does matter. If it was 8, 2 loss OSU/USC are in as conference champs. I guess the argument would have been WI/Auburn for the final spot. If it's Auburn, that's 3 two loss teams. And, with that, Wisconsin is raising holy hell. And people will begin to clamor for 16 teams. Then you may begin to say "12% is watering down? That's absurd!!!"

We all know you value your opinion much more than facts, but Auburn has 3 losses, and would be in the Playoff if it had only 2.

Posted by Vitamin_C on 12/7/2017 8:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/7/2017 7:52:00 PM (view original):
CFB is not the NFL for many reasons. If you think "Everyone deserves a chance", you're not really understanding that. You posted that "An undefeated Wisconsin is NOT the same as an undefeated UCF" earlier so I think you do understand CFB. I'm not sure where you're going so it's hard for me to to argue. But a top team that doesn't play the powers will not get in the playoffs.

Tell me how many "powers" that are willing to put Boise on their schedule? Oregon did it and it bit them. Most teams wouldn't make that mistake again.

Problem with a Power 5 team accepting a game against a good Group of 5 school is it is a no win situation.

Lose to them and it's a hard thing to overcome. Beat them and everyone says "big deal, you beat a Group of 5 school".

Not much of an incentive.

I don't want CFB to turn into the NFL. I also don't think "everyone deserves a chance".

The ONLY thing I want is for teams like 2008 Utah to have a chance at a title. All a team can do is win the games on the schedule. If they win them all they should be champs. Name another team, from any sport, that never lost a game and yet didn't win a championship.

Boise was demanding return games. They wouldn't just play a one off on the road. In other words, Boise thought it was something it was not. In the early 80's, Florida State was trying to make a name for itself as an outsider looking in. It took the philosophy that it would play anyone anywhere at anytime because it needed to build its name. So that is exactly what FSU did and they built themselves a great program and got invited to the ACC as a result.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/8/2017 8:59:00 AM (view original):
I'd like 8 but, as it stands, a 2 loss team has never made the CFB playoffs. That indicates that the regular season does matter. If it was 8, 2 loss OSU/USC are in as conference champs. I guess the argument would have been WI/Auburn for the final spot. If it's Auburn, that's 3 two loss teams. And, with that, Wisconsin is raising holy hell. And people will begin to clamor for 16 teams. Then you may begin to say "12% is watering down? That's absurd!!!"

If you could point to any season where there were more than 8 teams who you could legitimately argue should have had a shot at the title based on their regular season, I will concede your point.

Otherwise it is simply a "slippery slope" type of argument that really holds no water.

Even at 8 Auburn wouldn't have been invited. This is the same faulty type argument as your other. No two loss team has ever made it, but if we go to eight, a 3 loss non-conference champ Auburn would get in? I doubt it.

There's no way they get in over Wisconsin. Even in the CFP final rankings Wisc was ahead of Auburn. No scenario puts a 3-loss Auburn in over Wisconsin. Possibly Penn St or Washington, but not a 3 loss Auburn.