College Football Off Topic

[countryboy]

Quote: Originally Posted by canes21

You already know the UCF answer. No reason to go into that. How is Georgia beating the number 1 team in the nation and passing Notre Dame because of that unfair to Notre Dame? You keep arguing that Notre Dame gets unfair treatment because they didn't have to play one more game, but imagine Notre Dame is 5th place and sitting at home. You don't think they wouldn't like the chance to play another game against a top 4 team that if they won guaranteed they got into the playoffs? Isn't them not playing that 13th game just as hurtful to them as it is beneficial to them? Notre Dame not playing during CC week can hurt them just as much as it helps them in your eyes. There is nothing unfair about two teams playing similarly tough schedules and one winning all of them and making the playoffs while the other loses multiple games and doesn't make the playoffs.

I don't know how to make my point any more clear.

You state on one hand that Notre Dame deserves to be in because they played 12 games and won them all and Georgia played 13 and lost 2. You then state that if Georgia had beat Alabama then they deserve to be in over Notre Dame because they beat the number one team in the country and Notre Dame is left out.

My point, one more time, is that in this example I've provided and the posts that I've made, is that Notre Dame is at an unfair advantage because they aren't in a conference and aren't playing in a conference championship game, that they have no control over whether they get into the 4 team playoff or not. They did everything they could do, they won all of their games, but yet because a team got the benefit of playing a 13th game that Notre Dame doesn't, they could possibly be left out for no other reason than not playing a 13th game.

Or in my previous post...when the regular season ended, which you continuously tout should matter, Georgia was voted as one of the 4 best teams in the country by the CFP committee and therefore should be playing in the 4 team playoff. But because they had to play a 13th game that they lost to the number one team in the country, they are now viewed as not one of the 4 best teams in the country and are left out of the playoffs. But Notre Dame, who wasn't put at risk of losing because they weren't required to play a 13th game is still in.

[canes21]

Let me see if I can make it clearer for you then...


Notre Dame is both helped and hurt by not playing a CC. I am not arguing that. They did a better job of taking care of business in the regular season than UGA. That is why they were ranked ahead of them in the first place. Georgia got an opportunity to jump Notre Dame and solidifying a playoff spot by playing a top 4 team. They failed and picked up their 2nd loss. You argue it is unfair to them that ND didn't have to play, but if they won the it is unfair to ND that they got the opportunity to jump them and potentially push them outside of the top 4.


Georgia is still viewed as probably one of the top 4 teams. They just didn't earn the right to be ranked in the top 4 anymore by losing ANOTHER game. You say Notre Dame wasn't at risk of losing, that is true, but if Georgia wins then they are at risk of being left out because they weren't playing.


If you are wanting every team to have an absolute equal platform then you can keep on dreaming. That will never happen. That doesn't mean we should expand it to 8 teams. Georgia and every other top team had a chance to make the playoffs. Don't lose multiple games, don't get blown out by average opponents. Actually earn the right to be a top 4 team like the current top 4 did. We shouldn't expand it because a poor Georgia team picked up a 2nd loss and showed that they couldn't beat an actual playoff team.

[countryboy]

Quote: Originally Posted by canes21

Let me see if I can make it clearer for you then... Notre Dame is both helped and hurt by not playing a CC. I am not arguing that. They did a better job of taking care of business in the regular season than UGA. That is why they were ranked ahead of them in the first place. Georgia got an opportunity to jump Notre Dame and solidifying a playoff spot by playing a top 4 team. They failed and picked up their 2nd loss. You argue it is unfair to them that ND didn't have to play, but if they won the it is unfair to ND that they got the opportunity to jump them and potentially push them outside of the top 4. Georgia is still viewed as probably one of the top 4 teams. They just didn't earn the right to be ranked in the top 4 anymore by losing ANOTHER game. You say Notre Dame wasn't at risk of losing, that is true, but if Georgia wins then they are at risk of being left out because they weren't playing. If you are wanting every team to have an absolute equal platform then you can keep on dreaming. That will never happen. That doesn't mean we should expand it to 8 teams. Georgia and every other top team had a chance to make the playoffs. Don't lose multiple games, don't get blown out by average opponents. Actually earn the right to be a top 4 team like the current top 4 did. We shouldn't expand it because a poor Georgia team picked up a 2nd loss and showed that they couldn't beat an actual playoff team.

I'm done.

The point I'm making and using to advocate for an expanded playoff you're using to argue against me.

And a poor Georgia team that couldn't beat a playoff team....which of the other 3 beat a current playoff team?

No need to respond, as we both, and everyone else, knows the answer to that question.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Quote: Originally Posted by countryboy

Ok...let me ask you this. Let's say Notre Dame was 4th with a 12-0 record and Georgia was 5th with an 11-1 record heading into the conference championship games. Georgia beats Alabama and then leap frogs Notre Dame who was undefeated, but was passed up simply because Georgia got an extra game. Is that fair to Notre Dame? And if we are penalizing teams for losing, then how come Central Florida doesn't get in? They played 12 games and didn't lose. I know the answer is going to be because they aren't as good as the other teams or the schedules aren't the same..yada..yada..yada...well then couldn't it be argued that Georgia played a tougher schedule and is better than Notre Dame? For the record, I'm not advocating that Georgia should be in over any of the 4 teams that have been selected. I'm stating that there are times when teams are penalized or rewarded for having played in or not played in a conference championship game under the current format.

If UGA were 11-1 and then beat Bama, then they'd obviously leapfrog ND. Totally fair. They would've beat the #1 team in the land when it mattered most and compared to an idle team, rising in the rankings is an easy call to make. This is entirely how rankings work all season long...some teams win, others lose, even others have byes, and all go up and down based on their results. If [hypothetical] ND, doesn't like that, they can join a football conference and give themselves a shot at playing 13 games to maintain their position on the final weekend. I bet almost any conference would take them if they wouldn't mind sharing their sweet, sweet cash.

If UGA were 11-1 and then lost to Bama (like irl), then as a 2-loss team they open themselves up to getting caught from behind by other 1-loss teams/conference champions. I think a lot of people who are on the "UGA forever" thing, which I just made up by the way, are totally and completely forgetting about a 20-point loss to a solid, but 3-loss LSU team. It's not like UGA was perfect except for just coming up a bit short against Bama (a game in which they kinda choked it away to be honest). It could be argued that UGA played a better schedule than ND, but not so much different as to account for 2-losses.

As for UCF, they beat nobody all season. At least ND's 12-0 includes wins over Michigan and a slate of other P5 teams with P5 talent. To me, 12-0 UCF and 12-0 ND aren't in the same discussion. I mean there was nothing more that either team could've done this regular season, and I get that, but sometimes your best [like UCF] simply isn't good enough. Like me sprinting against Usain Bolt, which would not end well for me. I'd be totally out of my depth.

[canes21]

I am using that point against you because it can be used against you as I have displayed. If you can't counter it that is fine, but I don't know why me poking a hole in your argument should make you just quit the conversation completely.


None of the other teams have beaten one yet, obviously. That isn't why they are left out of the playoffs. They are left out because they lost multiple games. They are left out because the teams in front of them all have better wins and not as many losses.

[countryboy]

Quote: Originally Posted by canes21

I am using that point against you because it can be used against you as I have displayed. If you can't counter it that is fine, but I don't know why me poking a hole in your argument should make you just quit the conversation completely. None of the other teams have beaten one yet, obviously. That isn't why they are left out of the playoffs. They are left out because they lost multiple games. They are left out because the teams in front of them all have better wins and not as many losses.

You're not poking a hole in anything.

You're actually agreeing with my point, but you are using it as an argument for why Georgia was left out of the Top 4, which isn't the argument I'm making. As I stated previously, I'm not advocating for Georgia to be in the Top 4. I'm advocating that in every season since this started, there are more than 4 teams deserving of playing for the National Championship, but are left out because we only have 4 spots open.

I only used UGA and ND as an example for my reasoning, not to debate this year's 4 teams which seems to be what you're arguing against.

The fact that under the current format a team can be either put into the playoffs or left out of the playoffs without having played a game is wrong. Given the fact that not all wins, losses, conferences, and schedules are equal, to me it makes more sense to have more teams in the playoffs versus less, so that good teams aren't left out of the playoffs for things out of their control.

[canes21]

But Georgia isn't deserving to play for a national championship. They have multiple losses including a 20 point one to LSU. They lost in worse fashion to LSU than Miami did. They could have gotten away with it and rectified it by beating Bama, but they failed there also. They are not deserving to play for a title.



If you are saying ND is both hurt and befitted by not playing during CC week then I agree with you. I don't agree that there are more than 4 teams deserving to play for a title. Heck, I think it can be argued we only have 3 in Bama, Clemson, and ND.

[countryboy]

Quote: Originally Posted by canes21

But Georgia isn't deserving to play for a national championship. They have multiple losses including a 20 point one to LSU. They lost in worse fashion to LSU than Miami did. They could have gotten away with it and rectified it by beating Bama, but they failed there also. They are not deserving to play for a title. If you are saying ND is both hurt and befitted by not playing during CC week then I agree with you. I don't agree that there are more than 4 teams deserving to play for a title. Heck, I think it can be argued we only have 3 in Bama, Clemson, and ND.

But yet if Georgia would've beaten Alabama and Oklahoma beat Texas as they did, there was a possibility that ND would've been left out of the playoffs.

A team that you feel is only one of 3 that actually deserves to play for the National Championship could've been left out of the playoffs at no fault of their own under the current landscape. That is the problem with the current format and the exact point I'm trying to make as to why the playoffs need to be/should be expanded.