The expanded College Football Playoff off to a rough start

[Hogoff]

Clemson has some good players especially on the defensive line. Clemson has been inconsistent this year but still the best team in the ACC. In all likelihood you will be seeing a SEC/BIG10 final four. But the reality is P2 has one the football championship for the last 30 years except for Clemson(1 year), Miami (1year), and FSU (1 year).

In the ACC,
Clemson has 2, FSU has 2, and Miami has national championships in the last 30 years.

In the BIG,
Michigan has one and Ohio state has two.

 

[CJasmer]

In the ACC,
Clemson has 2, FSU has 2, and Miami has national championships in the last 30 years.

In the BIG,
Michigan has one and Ohio state has two.

The BIG now includes USC. Outside the current P2 only championship have been won only by FSU, Miami and Clemson. Only Clemson has had any success in the last 10 years. Obviously the SEC has had the most success especially over last 20 years.

 

[Vowelguy]

The BIG now includes USC. Outside the current P2 only championship have been won only by FSU, Miami and Clemson. Only Clemson has had any success in the last 10 years. Obviously the SEC has had the most success especially over last 20 years.

And Miami’s title came when they were in the big East

Texas and Oklahoma won as part of the big12

 

[traitor71]

Clemson has some good players especially on the defensive line. Clemson has been inconsistent this year but still the best team in the ACC. In all likelihood you will be seeing a SEC/BIG10 final four. But the reality is P2 has one the football championship for the last 30 years except for Clemson(1 year), Miami (1year), and FSU (1 year).

I'm not so sure about Clemson being the best team in the ACC. They got a chance to win in a one game championship, but they really, like really had the favorable schedule this year. They didn't have to play Miami, Syracuse, GA Tech, or even Duke, and they didn't have to go across the country to the west coast. I credit them for winning that game and getting in, but they definitely had a very favorable path. Other than that, it seems hard to disagree that the winner is going to come from one of two leagues for the forseeable future.

 

[CJasmer]

I'm not so sure about Clemson being the best team in the ACC. They got a chance to win in a one game championship, but they really, like really had the favorable schedule this year. They didn't have to play Miami, Syracuse, GA Tech, or even Duke, and they didn't have to go across the country to the west coast. I credit them for winning that game and getting in, but they definitely had a very favorable path. Other than that, it seems hard to disagree that the winner is going to come from one of two leagues for the forseeable future.

Yeah powerhouse teams like Duke…. Duke did not beat anybody this year. Unless Ole Miss players decide to opt out of the bowl game this will be a blow out.

 

[UCFBfan]

Quick question, how far out do basketball teams make schedules? I ask because I read an article suggesting that the CFB use a similar system as bball to determine playoff teams. Use Quad wins. I ask about how far out because these football schedules are usually made years in advance. You can't help it if you scheduled Michigan St three years out thinking it'd be a quality win only to have them become a dumpster fire for a few seasons (not saying they are). It also is tough because there are fewer games. However, I thought it was an interesting concept.

 

[giddyup]

The issue in a nutshell is reasonable parity so all teams have a chance to compete through fair access to talent on a level playing field. The system rewards entrenched big money systems and the rules keep changing to ensure they are protected.

 

[CJasmer]

The issue in a nutshell is reasonable parity so all teams have a chance to compete through fair access to talent on a level playing field. The system rewards entrenched big money systems and the rules keep changing to ensure they are protected.

The problem is you need collective agreements with the players- make them employees. You cannot limit a players earning ability by just having NCAA pass a rule. It will be overruled by the court for antitrust reasons. The NCAA caused this issue for not paying football players at the highest level. The players whose career could end with getting an injury were treated as serfs at the Football power schools.

 

[traitor71]

Yeah powerhouse teams like Duke…. Duke did not beat anybody this year. Unless Ole Miss players decide to opt out of the bowl game this will be a blow out.

I'm just pointing out that Clemson, who won that league, really benefited from the schedule. As these leagues expand, we are going to see more situations where teams can benefit from an unbalanced schedule. Indiana benefited from that as well, but they have the benefit of playing in the BIG, so it looks a little better.

 

[CJasmer]

I'm just pointing out that Clemson, who won that league, really benefited from the schedule. As these leagues expand, we are going to see more situations where teams can benefit from an unbalanced schedule. Indiana benefited from that as well, but they have the benefit of playing in the BIG, so it looks a little better.

SOS should be considered for CFP. The problem is G5 and lower level P4 leagues would be disadvantaged.

 

[traitor71]

SOS should be considered for CFP. The problem is G5 and lower level P4 leagues would be disadvantaged.

I would agree with all of this. The one other thing I think that everyone would agree on is that none of the bubble teams we were talking about down the stretch would have a chance to win the title, maybe not even a game, although I guess that could be matchup dependent.

Moving forward, the two big leagues are simply going to gobble up all the talent and whatever handful of teams left that they want, and then no one else will even have that slight chance that they have now.

 

[CJasmer]

I would agree with all of this. The one other thing I think that everyone would agree on is that none of the bubble teams we were talking about down the stretch would have a chance to win the title, maybe not even a game, although I guess that could be matchup dependent.

Moving forward, the two big leagues are simply going to gobble up all the talent and whatever handful of teams left that they want, and then no one else will even have that slight chance that they have now.

But college football has been like that for the last 30 years. Even before NIL. Basketball is a game where little schools have a chance since you only need to recruit 5 players.

 

[traitor71]

But college football has been like that for the last 30 years. Even before NIL. Basketball is a game where little schools have a chance since you only need to recruit 5 players.

This is pretty much true, but you had much more of a chance to actually build a program prior to what we now have. You could at least tell yourself that if you found a good coach, recruited well, got the admin behind you, etc that you could do something. Now the money and power possessed by two leagues just crushes that. You get a year or two of success and your coaches and players get so much money thrown at them that it all vanishes. That sucks in my opinion.

 

[huskymedic]

SOS should be considered for CFP. The problem is G5 and lower level P4 leagues would be disadvantaged.

A relevant strength of schedule discussion from today:

There's no point in being Data-Driven if your data actually sucks

On strength of schedule, better decision-making and a major trend of 2024

www.extrapointsmb.com

 

[SubbaBub]

There are 130+ FBS teams and only 12 games. 8-9 of which are in conference. It is not possible to create a SOS metric that can precisely rank the quality of teams based on who they play. You can only sort them broadly based on quality. Yeah, the top P4 teams and teams that look like those teams are really good, they look better than the other good and pretty good looking teams. This is the committee model in a nutshell, the pomp is just covering their decisions. You will note how the chosen metrics shift year to year and team to team. Same happens in BB but they use more computer rankings.

Everyone assumes the SEC teams are good because they play other SEC teams. The reality is the top SEC teams are good because they get the best players so they are inclined but not guaranteed to be among the best 5 or 6 at large teams. 2 or 3, probably. But, it's all assumptions.

The only thing we know about the SEC is that Georgia was the best team in it this year. They won the championship and beat the next closest contender twice. We assume Texas was next best based in their record, but they didn't play as many top half conference teams as Bama or Tenn. But they went undefeated in conference except for UGA, so we assume and rank them as the SEC #2.

You can do the same for every P4, and the committee discounts them for number of losses and the perception of their conference vs the others. Reputation and the eye test. It's all subjective.

The best system is based on conference championship with some at large teams to account for the small sample of games, the lack of similar schedules and the any given Saturday effects.

Well, that's what we currently have. A system that values championships and allows for others to play their way to the NCG. Just because the SEC and ESPN didn't like this year's result and CFB is more about hot takes than playing the games.

This will be the first year that we get an uncontestable deserving champion. Try to enjoy it.

 

[TheDrifter75]

And Miami’s title came when they were in the big East

Texas and Oklahoma won as part of the big12

If you're talking championships in the last 30 and naming the conference they were won in Nebraska won 3 in the BigXII

I guess it's 2, the one in 94 would be 31 years ago

 

[CJasmer]

This is pretty much true, but you had much more of a chance to actually build a program prior to what we now have. You could at least tell yourself that if you found a good coach, recruited well, got the admin behind you, etc that you could do something. Now the money and power possessed by two leagues just crushes that. You get a year or two of success and your coaches and players get so much money thrown at them that it all vanishes. That sucks in my opinion.

But reality is to win a national championship in football you need lots of resources. Just look at the winners over last 30 years. I would say NIL now makes it possible to have a top 25 team. Look at SMU.

 

[Mike75]

But reality is to win a national championship in football you need lots of resources. Just look at the winners over last 30 years. I would say NIL now makes it possible to have a top 25 team. Look at SMU.

At some point there is a limit to how much NIL a school can put together, whether it be through the university and/or through collectives. Year in and year out, can they raise the tens of millions that will be required to fund a competitive program? SMU had a lot of enthusiasm with the move to the ACC, but where was all that money when they were a mediocre G5 team? And will that money still be there in 5-10 years when they are an average P4 team in the bottom P4 conference? My guess is no.

 

[CJasmer]

At some point there is a limit to how much NIL a school can put together, whether it be through the university and/or through collectives. Year in and year out, can they raise the tens of millions that will be required to fund a competitive program? SMU had a lot of enthusiasm with the move to the ACC, but where was all that money when they were a mediocre G5 team? And will that money still be there in 5-10 years when they are an average P4 team in the bottom P4 conference? My guess is no.

For Athletic Boosters for SMU that is chump change. It will be interesting to see the difference once revenue sharing goes into effect (July 2025) providing many P4 schools with around $16 million for football team excluding NIL. Obviously SMU getting no revenue from the ACC will have to make that up through NIL. It will be interesting to see revenue sharing impact on G5 schools.

 

[CJasmer]

At some point there is a limit to how much NIL a school can put together, whether it be through the university and/or through collectives. Year in and year out, can they raise the tens of millions that will be required to fund a competitive program? SMU had a lot of enthusiasm with the move to the ACC, but where was all that money when they were a mediocre G5 team? And will that money still be there in 5-10 years when they are an average P4 team in the bottom P4 conference? My guess is no.

You do realize that SMU won the AAC the year prior to joining the ACC

 

[CJasmer]

There are 130+ FBS teams and only 12 games. 8-9 of which are in conference. It is not possible to create a SOS metric that can precisely rank the quality of teams based on who they play. You can only sort them broadly based on quality. Yeah, the top P4 teams and teams that look like those teams are really good, they look better than the other good and pretty good looking teams. This is the committee model in a nutshell, the pomp is just covering their decisions. You will note how the chosen metrics shift year to year and team to team. Same happens in BB but they use more computer rankings.

Everyone assumes the SEC teams are good because they play other SEC teams. The reality is the top SEC teams are good because they get the best players so they are inclined but not guaranteed to be among the best 5 or 6 at large teams. 2 or 3, probably. But, it's all assumptions.

The only thing we know about the SEC is that Georgia was the best team in it this year. They won the championship and beat the next closest contender twice. We assume Texas was next best based in their record, but they didn't play as many top half conference teams as Bama or Tenn. But they went undefeated in conference except for UGA, so we assume and rank them as the SEC #2.

You can do the same for every P4, and the committee discounts them for number of losses and the perception of their conference vs the others. Reputation and the eye test. It's all subjective.

The best system is based on conference championship with some at large teams to account for the small sample of games, the lack of similar schedules and the any given Saturday effects.

Well, that's what we currently have. A system that values championships and allows for others to play their way to the NCG. Just because the SEC and ESPN didn't like this year's result and CFB is more about hot takes than playing the games.

This will be the first year that we get an uncontestable deserving champion. Try to enjoy it.

So you think the semifinals will not be SEC/BIG10?

 

[CJasmer]

Miami goes down. ACC is 1-8 in bowl games. Two games left. NC state is probably only other game ACC could win. Expect Duke to get boat raced.

 

[UConnDan97]

Current Bowl Count:

Independents 2-0
ACC 1-8

And we only have 2 teams...

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Current Bowl Count:

Independents 2-0
ACC 1-8

And we only have 2 teams...

I'm not sure that ND's win over Indiana qualifies as a bowl game.

Regardless, we matched the entire ACC in bowl wins all by ourselves.

 

[Vowelguy]

Miami goes down. ACC is 1-8 in bowl games. Two games left. NC state is probably only other game ACC could win. Expect Duke to get boat raced.

Who would’ve thought that their record in the ACC-SEC bball challenge would be the one they’d be proud of?