The FACT that Alabama didn't even play in their conference's championship game SHOULD end the debate.

 

Didn't end the debate last year. When OSU didn't play in their conference championship.

Didn't end the debate last year. When OSU didn't play in their conference championship.

 

That's why I said SHOULD. It probably won't.

Didn't end the debate last year. When OSU didn't play in their conference championship.

 

Bingo! It'll be interesting to see what the committee does this year. If Bama gets in over the Buckeyes, there should be no complaints from the Buckeye faithful. Right?

That's why I said SHOULD. It probably won't.

 

Then an undefeated conference champion SHOULD get in over the 2 loss conference champion.

How did you know the make up of the crowd in Mercedes-Benz Stadium or the AAC Championship. Is this statistical analysis or your perception? Please point me to the web site for the break down.

 

For the sake of argument, though....

 

The MAC is a regional conference, relegated to the Midwest. The American has programs in Connecticut, Ohio, Maryland, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Texas, Louisiana, Tennessee, and Florida. That's the Northeast, the Atlantic coast, the Southeast, the Midwest, and the Southwest.

 

I will concede, though, that Memphis did give much of their allotment back to UCF. The G5 schools simply don't draw like the P5 schools. When systematically relegated to second class status, you are not going to draw as well. I also know this from experience, too. USF lead the Big East averaging close to 60K per game, even during the Holtz years. Now? 40K. Financially, the setup the AAC has now works best for them.

 

10 years ago, when Clemson, FSU, and Miami were all bad, the ACC was struggling to get fans to the Championship game and were considering this very setup.

I still thinks it's ridiculous not to play the most important game of the year for your conference at home. Geographically what you said makes sense, but either way play it at a true neutral site it's the only fair way to do it.

Clemson punches who ever it is right in the mouth.

 

My thoughts exactly!

The problem with telling "G5" teams to schedule tough OOC schedules is nonsensical. Good G5 teams cannot get P5 teams to schedule them hardly ever. On the occasion that they do, it is very, VERY rare to get any decent P5 game at home. It's completely stacked against teams like UCF. Then you look at Alabama, for example. I think they have played something like 90% of their OOC games the last 20 years at home.

 

Key to getting into the playoffs:

P5: Schedule whoever ya want OOC

G5: Go on the road to play against teams who won't schedule you. What's that? You didn't lose to Syracuse or Iowa? You went undefeated? Nah too bad not good enough. It's your own fault for not scheduling better.

Somebody will play you. The games are scheduled years in advance. Like UCF had their OOC schedule set this year when they went 0-12. Make it a habit to have a big name OOC on the schedule every year.

See how is the thing. I agree last year's 1 loss osu has a better resume than this years 1 loss Bama. However if they are going to say conference titles and head to head to carry a lot of weight. Then they really did mess up by putting osu in last year. When a team has a head to head loss, and also that same team that beat them won the conference and you didn't even play in it. Then you shouldn't have made it if they say head to head and conference titles do matter and carry a lot of weight. By putting osu in last year, they basically said head to head and conference titles didn't have as much weight. That set a bad precedent. Especially now for this year. Osu does have the conference title and better wins. Yet they also have more losses, and 2 blowout losses at that one at home and another to a bad team. So the committee has the precedent that a conference title doesn't weigh that much after last year. So yes those 2 losses and how they lost should matter. When comparing to a team with only 1 loss, and before they lost their last game was a team they had as a top 2 team all year. So if it's about putting the 4 best teams in, it has to be Bama between those two.

You are still acting like the committee debated OSU/ PSU last year. They didn't. They debated PSU/ Washington.

I don't think teams like OSU want to schedule teams like UCF or USF because in years like this year I think they beat OSU. But we'll never know because A) as I said they won't schedule them and B) the so called committee won't give them the relevance they deserve and move an undefeated non P5 conference champion into the top 4. If you guys want to say a conference champion should get in over Bama then an undefeated conference champion should get in over a 2 loss conference champion that got smoked in those two loses.

This isn't a playoff, it's like Danny Kanell said, it's an invitational. This thing is a joke. The only right way to have a true playoff and find out who truly is the best is a 16 team playoff. 10 conference champions and 6 at large bids. What they're currently doing is a sham.

UCF made their OOC schedule this year over 2 years ago when the program was a joke. They were 0-12 just two years ago. Teams would schedule them. You have to play somebody. You literally have no idea if UCF would beat any of the teams ranked in front of them because they haven't played anyone that can serve as any sort of benchmark. It will be interesting to see who they draw in the Peach Bowl. Right now I would imagine they would see Wisconsin.

You all are illogical sometimes. "If the committee didn't care about the conference championship last year they shouldnt care this year" They did care last year. OSU had 3 wins against teams who were in the top 10 and 2 of those were on the road. Bama has 2 top 25 wins this year and both were games they didn't look impressive in. It's not even remotely the same case. The only reason this is a debate this year is because of the ridiculousness of the Iowa loss. If OSU loses that game by a FG we don't even have a debate today. But they lost by 31. It's not about Bama deserving to make the playoff, it's about does OSU not deserve it because of the 31 point loss. Bama would make it in by default because the committee doesn't want to put such an inconsistent team in the playoff.

UCF made their OOC schedule this year over 2 years ago when the program was a joke. They were 0-12 just two years ago. Teams would schedule them. You have to play somebody. You literally have no idea if UCF would beat any of the teams ranked in front of them because they haven't played anyone that can serve as any sort of benchmark. It will be interesting to see who they draw in the Peach Bowl. Right now I would imagine they would see Wisconsin.

 

I doubt any of the big P5 teams would schedule them for fear of what it might do to their chances if they lose.

You're, I can't know because they won't schedule teams like USF or UCF and when they go undefeated, they still don't get a chance. Again, this "playoff" is a sham. There's only one right way to do it, only one way to find out who's truly the best.

You all are illogical sometimes. "If the committee didn't care about the conference championship last year they shouldnt care this year" They did care last year. OSU had 3 wins against teams who were in the top 10 and 2 of those were on the road. Bama has 2 top 25 wins this year and both were games they didn't look impressive in. It's not even remotely the same case. The only reason this is a debate this year is because of the ridiculousness of the Iowa loss. If OSU loses that game by a FG we don't even have a debate today. But they lost by 31. It's not about Bama deserving to make the playoff, it's about does OSU not deserve it because of the 31 point loss. Bama would make it in by default because the committee doesn't want to put such an inconsistent team in the playoff.

 

They care about ratings. That's the problem. Ratings = money, it's all about money. It's a sham. In the end, this isn't a playoff, it's an invitational.

I doubt any of the big P5 teams would schedule them for fear of what it might do to their chances if they lose.

You're, I can't know because they won't schedule teams like USF or UCF and when they go undefeated, they still don't get a chance. Again, this "playoff" is a sham. There's only one right way to do it, only one way to find out who's truly the best.

That's why you schedule them years in advance. Like I said their OOC schedule this year was set over 2 years ago when they went 0-12 so don't act like nobody would play a team that went 0-12. If the playoffs matter to you at all schedule a tough OOC opponent every year so if you do have a good team you have a chance.

They care about ratings. That's the problem. Ratings = money, it's all about money. It's a sham. In the end, this isn't a playoff, it's an invitational.

That's what you got from my post? Ok...

That's why you schedule them years in advance. Like I said their OOC schedule this year was set over 2 years ago when they went 0-12 so don't act like nobody would play a team that went 0-12. If the playoffs matter to you at all schedule a tough OOC opponent every year so if you do have a good team you have a chance.

 

What does an 0-12 team do to help your SOS? That's how they would look at it. They won't schedule them.