They would have to remove one or their FCS opponents, only so many weeks in a season.

 

I was talking about in the playoffs...Grant was talking about getting southern schools the the horseshoe in the snow would be great. I was saying OSU playing in the real death valley (LSU) at night would be cool also.

You will never convince me a 7-5 Pac Champ is more deserving than 10-2 B1G or even 9-3 team. The ACC is so weak, that if Clemson has lost to NC and another game...no one from that conference would have deserved to get in. Being a conference champ of a horrible conference is just more "blah blah blah look what we did!"

 

Reserving a spot for a non-power 5 is even more ludicrous, if one is a top 8 team take them. If the best non P5 team is 9-3, then no way they deserve an autobid.

 

As far as the selection by the committee, name a year that they've been completely wrong?

 

Teams should know at the start of the season without a doubt what they have to do to get in. The way it is currently set up, that is not how it works.

 

Now to continue on with naming a year where they could have gotten it wrong. I would say the very first year. That very first year OSU slips in as the 4th seed after winning big in the conference championship. They made it in over a team like TCU who also only had one lost and was a very good team. Would they have been able to beat Bama and Oregon like OSU who knows. However, we didn’t get to find out because the human element chose OSU. Say the human element would have chose TCU instead. Then that means we would have never got the chance to see OSU beat those two teams and win it all. In fact the talk would have been it wouldn’t have mattered if OSU got in, because no way OSU beats Bama with a third string qb. If we never got to see it play out on the field, no one would have ever thought OSU wins it all with their third string qb. However, they were given that chance and took advantage of it. TCU was not given that chance, so no way to know if they could have or not. Chances are no, but we would have said the same thing about OSU with their third string qb.

 

Shoot I hate to say this but even the very next year when OSU got left out Elliot’s last year. If the committee would have put them in, there is a great chance they would have won it all that year still. Quite honestly even One of the last two years OSU teams possibly wins it all if the committee puts them in. I’m a Notre Dame fan and Notre Dame went undefeated, but who is to say that one of the teams that only had one lost wouldn’t have went undefeated with that same schedule? There is truly no way to know for sure how things would play out on the field unless you give a team that shot.

 

With conferences being uneven it is truly impossible to know how a top team from another conference would do against the top teams from another. Most year conference champions are usually top ten teams anyways. However, I would agree that there should be some stipulations in place. If you lose more than 2 games the automatic bid is no longer in play just because you won your conference and something like that.

In almost every single case in an 8 team playoff a power 5 conference champ is going to be in the top 8 as long as they have 2 losses or less. It will take care of itself. I have no interest in seeing a 3 loss team have any chance at a title.

 

Completely agree.

I don't get the argument that the HIGHEST RANKED G5 team shouldn't get an auto bid. Look at the results. That G5 team is capable of playing with and beating anyone.

 

2014: #20 Boise State 38 #10 Arizona 30

2015: #18 Houston 38 #9 Florida State 24

2016: #8 Wisconsin 24 #15 Western Michigan 16

2017: #12 UCF 34 #7 Auburn 27

2018: #11 LSU 40 #8 UCF 32

2019: #17 Memphis v #10 Penn State (I'm taking Memphis)

 

Best G5 team has more than held their own against these overrated P5 teams that apparently deserve to be in more just because of the conference they play in...even though each conference has 2-4 good teams and the rest have no business making the money they are making from TV revenue because of their conference affiliation.

 

Like it or not, if they expand to 8 teams, the top ranked G5 team is going to be apart of it and they deserve it, IMO.

I’m just a sucker for the way football looks in the snow.

 

Those games where they have to clear the snow off the yard lines are always fun.

I don't get the argument that the HIGHEST RANKED G5 team shouldn't get an auto bid. Look at the results. That G5 team is capable of playing with and beating anyone.

 

2014: #20 Boise State 38 #10 Arizona 30

2015: #18 Houston 38 #9 Florida State 24

2016: #8 Wisconsin 24 #15 Western Michigan 16

2017: #12 UCF 34 #7 Auburn 27

2018: #11 LSU 40 #8 UCF 32

2019: #17 Memphis v #10 Penn State (I'm taking Memphis)

 

Best G5 team has more than held their own against these overrated P5 teams that apparently deserve to be in more just because of the conference they play in...even though each conference has 2-4 good teams and the rest have no business making the money they are making from TV revenue because of their conference affiliation.

 

Like it or not, if they expand to 8 teams, the top ranked G5 team is going to be apart of it and they deserve it, IMO.

 

There is no G5 team staying within 28 points of OSU, Ckemson or LSU this year. It's easier for a G5 to compete and win games against teams playing for nothing at the end of the season. Put them in a playoff situation against a top 4 team in the first round, and after a few years everyone will be wondering why they are even here.

 

If a G5 is legitimately ranked in the top 8, then put them in...I'm all for that. I'm not for a 9-3 MAC school (just because they are the best G5 school) getting in over a 11-1 Penn State that finished second in their division and missed the conference title game.

 

I also don't want to see a 8-4 P5 conference champ with 3 bad losses in. I can agree to expand it, just not to auto qualifiers.

There is no G5 team staying within 28 points of OSU, Ckemson or LSU this year. It's easier for a G5 to compete and win games against teams playing for nothing at the end of the season. Put them in a playoff situation against a top 4 team in the first round, and after a few years everyone will be wondering why they are even here.

 

If a G5 is legitimately ranked in the top 8, then put them in...I'm all for that. I'm not for a 9-3 MAC school (just because they are the best G5 school) getting in over a 11-1 Penn State that finished second in their division and missed the conference title game.

 

I also don't want to see a 8-4 P5 conference champ with 3 bad losses in. I can agree to expand it, just not to auto qualifiers.

 

How often do we ever even see that example you just mentioned happen with a P5 champ having even 3 or more losses? It is very rare and in most case the P5 champ is usually in the top ten anyways, so the example you used would rarely happen. Plus could always add a stipulation in if you have so many losses it takes away your automatic bid.

 

Something not mentioned that is also a good thing to do if you expand and have automatic bids for P5 schools. Is not only do teams know exactly what they have to do to get in, but it probably would give us better non conference games. Teams would most likely be more willing to play other top teams in non conference because it would prepare them more, and make more money. Since a team knows they can make it in as a conference champ, they don’t have to worry about a non conference lost keeping them out. So would allow them to schedule tougher non conference games too.

How often do we ever even see that example you just mentioned happen with a P5 champ having even 3 or more losses? It is very rare and in most case the P5 champ is usually in the top ten anyways, so the example you used would rarely happen. Plus could always add a stipulation in if you have so many losses it takes away your automatic bid.

 

Something not mentioned that is also a good thing to do if you expand and have automatic bids for P5 schools. Is not only do teams know exactly what they have to do to get in, but it probably would give us better non conference games. Teams would most likely be more willing to play other top teams in non conference because it would prepare them more, and make more money. Since a team knows they can make it in as a conference champ, they don’t have to worry about a non conference lost keeping them out. So would allow them to schedule tougher non conference games too.

 

PAC Champ Washington had 3 losses coming into the bowls just last year(2018)...then got beat in their bowl game ending up 10-4.

Stanford was one play away from winning the PAC in 2017 with a 10-3 record.

 

So it's not that rare.

 

Your point about getting more great non-conference games is a valid point. I know one high-level SEC coach want's to expnd Conference schedule to 9 games and eliminate FBS schools altogether. However other coaches and AD's aren't on board yet.

Teams should know at the start of the season without a doubt what they have to do to get in. The way it is currently set up, that is not how it works.

 

Now to continue on with naming a year where they could have gotten it wrong. I would say the very first year. That very first year OSU slips in as the 4th seed after winning big in the conference championship. They made it in over a team like TCU who also only had one lost and was a very good team. Would they have been able to beat Bama and Oregon like OSU who knows. However, we didn’t get to find out because the human element chose OSU. Say the human element would have chose TCU instead. Then that means we would have never got the chance to see OSU beat those two teams and win it all. In fact the talk would have been it wouldn’t have mattered if OSU got in, because no way OSU beats Bama with a third string qb. If we never got to see it play out on the field, no one would have ever thought OSU wins it all with their third string qb. However, they were given that chance and took advantage of it. TCU was not given that chance, so no way to know if they could have or not. Chances are no, but we would have said the same thing about OSU with their third string qb.

 

Shoot I hate to say this but even the very next year when OSU got left out Elliot’s last year. If the committee would have put them in, there is a great chance they would have won it all that year still. Quite honestly even One of the last two years OSU teams possibly wins it all if the committee puts them in. I’m a Notre Dame fan and Notre Dame went undefeated, but who is to say that one of the teams that only had one lost wouldn’t have went undefeated with that same schedule? There is truly no way to know for sure how things would play out on the field unless you give a team that shot.

 

With conferences being uneven it is truly impossible to know how a top team from another conference would do against the top teams from another. Most year conference champions are usually top ten teams anyways. However, I would agree that there should be some stipulations in place. If you lose more than 2 games the automatic bid is no longer in play just because you won your conference and something like that.

 

Did you recently meet up with JA and Grant and drink some kool-aid?

Did you recently meet up with JA and Grant and drink some kool-aid?

 

Not at all. They know I don’t like OSU because of their fan base. I absolutely loved seeing them get curb stomped by teams who were barely bowl eligible the last two years. I loved when they blew it and didn’t give the ball to Elliott and they lost to keep them out of the playoffs the year after the won it. With that said as much as I loved seeing it. It doesn’t take away from the fact if those years it was say an 8 team playoff. Those OSU teams definitely would have had a good chance to win it all with the talent they have had.

Not at all. They know I don’t like OSU because of their fan base. I absolutely loved seeing them get curb stomped by teams who were barely bowl eligible the last two years. I loved when they blew it and didn’t give the ball to Elliott and they lost to keep them out of the playoffs the year after the won it. With that said as much as I loved seeing it. It doesn’t take away from the fact if those years it was say an 8 team playoff. Those OSU teams definitely would have had a good chance to win it all with the talent they have had.

 

I was just messing with you. I couldn't believe JA or Grant didn't beat me to it.

PAC Champ Washington had 3 losses coming into the bowls just last year(2018)...then got beat in their bowl game ending up 10-4.

Stanford was one play away from winning the PAC in 2017 with a 10-3 record.

 

So it's not that rare.

 

Your point about getting more great non-conference games is a valid point. I know one high-level SEC coach want's to expnd Conference schedule to 9 games and eliminate FBS schools altogether. However other coaches and AD's aren't on board yet.

 

Yet Stanford didn’t win that game, so it didn’t happen. Just like Clemson was close to losing a game this year, but it didn’t happen. The majority of the time a conference champ is usually in the top 10 and usually less than 2 losses, so it would be rare. Then even for those rare occasions, have a stipulation in place in case there is a year where like a Washington already had three loses before winning their conference.

 

IMO a player and even coaches should go into a season knowing exactly what they have to do to be able to play for a championship. A year where all five P5 schools have a team go undefeated, or a more realistic one. All five P5 schools have a champ who has one lost. Humans should not be the ones determining which ones can play for a title. Let it play out on the field. Most years the conference champion from P5 schools usually are one of the top ten teams anyways.

Yet Stanford didn’t win that game, so it didn’t happen. Just like Clemson was close to losing a game this year, but it didn’t happen. The majority of the time a conference champ is usually in the top 10 and usually less than 2 losses, so it would be rare. Then even for those rare occasions, have a stipulation in place in case there is a year where like a Washington already had three loses before winning their conference.

 

IMO a player and even coaches should go into a season knowing exactly what they have to do to be able to play for a championship. A year where all five P5 schools have a team go undefeated, or a more realistic one. All five P5 schools have a champ who has one lost. Humans should not be the ones determining which ones can play for a title. Let it play out on the field. Most years the conference champion from P5 schools usually are one of the top ten teams anyways.

 

If all 5 conference champs are deserving then I have no problem with them being in an expanded playoff. It's the year like last year, that Washington with 3 losses didn't deserve to be in that has me against automatic bids.

If all 5 conference champs are deserving then I have no problem with them being in an expanded playoff. It's the year like last year, that Washington with 3 losses didn't deserve to be in that has me against automatic bids.

 

I am in agreement with you in that. That is why I think you can have automatic births, but have the stipulation of if you have more than two losses as a conference champ. You do not get the automatic birth and that spot turns into an at large.

No automatic bids. That would be a PR disaster for the big schools and the NCAA.