2 hours ago, futurecoach said:

Notre Dame while not in a conference played 10 games against P5 schools this year, so it isn't like they aren't playing P5 schools like teams in conferences do, they are playing just as many P5 games as teams in conferences. Then their two non P5 games were Navy, and Boise State who won their conference.

For comparison Notre Dame's strength of schedule this year is higher than 4 teams who are in the CFP. Their strength of schedule was higher than Big 12 Champ Texas Tech, and also higher than Miami's in the ACC. So the two best teams in the ACC and Big 12, Notre Dame had a tougher schedule than. Then they obviously had tougher schedule than Tulane and James Madison. Notre Dame schedule was only 6 spots behind Ole Miss in the SEC, and only 15 spots behind Indiana. So while Notre Dame may not be in a conference, let's not act like all these conference teams in the CFP played better schedules just because they were in a conference. Notre Dame's schedule isn't as drastically bad as some others like to try to claim. 

 Which to hit on what you said about playing Miami and Texas A&M the first two games. I don't think we are even having this discussion if Notre Dame say had played Miami and Texas A&M the last two games instead. As probably a much better chance that Notre Dame wins both of those games, if they didn't play them at the start of the year. 

I agree with everything you said. However playing a conference schedule against teams that are used to playing you year in and year out is tougher than playing an ACC school every 4 or 5 years. You lose the intimidation factor of the ND name and those Gold helmets when you're used to seeing them at least every other year. 

29 minutes ago, Jumper_Dad said:

I agree with everything you said. However playing a conference schedule against teams that are used to playing you year in and year out is tougher than playing an ACC school every 4 or 5 years. You lose the intimidation factor of the ND name and those Gold helmets when you're used to seeing them at least every other year. 

I agree it definitely helps to know a team, as it does help you prepare. However, I disagree with that last part. As I don't think it matters how many times Big 10 teams have played OSU, or SEC teams Bama, LSU, etc. The majority of the schools in the SEC, Big 10 still have that intimidation factor no matter how many times they have played them. In fact they probably are even more intimidated, because they usually get beat by those teams every single year. 

Of course Vandy and ND are better. For the Tulane’s and JMU’s and all the other mid-majors, there needs to be a playoff tournament like the FCS has. They deserve to showcase their talent other than smaller bowl games. They just don’t have the resources or talent the big boys have to compete in the CFP. 

They should have had 2 play in games.

Anybody that doesn't think Notre Dame isn't one of the 12 best teams has nothing more than I.D.S (Irish Derangement Syndrome) & "join a conference" crowd? Upset that their school and/or school(s) in their conference don't carry enough of a coast to coast, National Brand to solely have their own network. It would be highly, fiscally irresponsible (at least at this point in time) for Notre Dame to join a conference.

....and, there isn't another school in the country that wouldn't operate the same way if they could.

29 minutes ago, Calico Jack said:

Anybody that doesn't think Notre Dame isn't one of the 12 best teams has nothing more than I.D.S (Irish Derangement Syndrome) & "join a conference" crowd? Upset that their school and/or school(s) in their conference don't carry enough of a coast to coast, National Brand to solely have their own network. It would be highly, fiscally irresponsible (at least at this point in time) for Notre Dame to join a conference.

....and, there isn't another school in the country that wouldn't operate the same way if they could.

ND was 1-2 versus ranked teams this year. They only have themselves to be mad at. 

Why would any conference lobby for them over a team that is actually in their conference (ACC, Miami)? Makes zero sense. 

Notre Dame has FULL control over their destiny each year, more so than most other teams. Hearing them cry about being left out is about as annoying is it could get. 

Financially, I agree that ND is better off not in a conference, but this is one of the ways it can bite you. The lack of sympathy for ND is warranted, IMO. 

1 hour ago, TheDeuce said:

ND was 1-2 versus ranked teams this year. They only have themselves to be mad at. 

Why would any conference lobby for them over a team that is actually in their conference (ACC, Miami)? Makes zero sense. 

Notre Dame has FULL control over their destiny each year, more so than most other teams. Hearing them cry about being left out is about as annoying is it could get. 

Financially, I agree that ND is better off not in a conference, but this is one of the ways it can bite you. The lack of sympathy for ND is warranted, IMO. 

I don't have any issues whatsoever with Miami getting in. None. I knew exactly how it was going to play out down the stretch with Miami and ND, and never understood why they didn't have Miami/ND flipped to begin with those last few weeks.

My issues, granted, the committee did what was per the rules....  is JMU and Tulane. 

Being in a conference also bit Duke and BYU....here Duke wins their conference & it doesn't matter.  BYU loses, only chance they get in is to win the Big 12, didn't....yet they drop in the final rankings (probably did so bc it wouldn't matter), Alabama loses (and, the game wasn't even that 'close'), yet doesn't. 

Vandy has as much of a gripe as anybody, as does Texas.

The Playoff Committee keeps changing the rules mid-season, and that’s the real problem.

They tell teams to schedule tough, non-conference games — but then punish you for losing them. Texas schedules Ohio State Week 1 (as everyone asked them to do), loses to a top-tier opponent, and that single loss hangs over them all year.

Then there’s the conference contradiction. We’re told conference affiliation matters — until it doesn’t. Win your league? Great… unless you’re Duke winning the ACC and somehow still on the outside looking in. So conferences matter, but only for certain brands?

And the final-week rankings were the clearest example yet. Miami jumps Notre Dame without either team playing a game. That’s indefensible. Rankings should reflect what happens on the field — not last-minute reshuffling to fit a narrative. Miami deserved to be in the whole time, not just when it was convenient.

That’s the issue:
• Tough schedules are “encouraged” but punished (Texas)

• Conference championships matter — selectively (Duke)
• Rankings change without games being played ND/Miami)

...lastly, you won't be punished if you lose in your conference championship, unless you're BYU and not Alabama

 

You can’t sell “criteria” when the application changes every week for what's "convenient" at the time. 

1 hour ago, Calico Jack said:

I don't have any issues whatsoever with Miami getting in. None. I knew exactly how it was going to play out down the stretch with Miami and ND, and never understood why they didn't have Miami/ND flipped to begin with those last few weeks.

My issues, granted, the committee did what was per the rules....  is JMU and Tulane. 

Being in a conference also bit Duke and BYU....here Duke wins their conference & it doesn't matter.  BYU loses, only chance they get in is to win the Big 12, didn't....yet they drop in the final rankings (probably did so bc it wouldn't matter), Alabama loses (and, the game wasn't even that 'close'), yet doesn't. 

Vandy has as much of a gripe as anybody, as does Texas.

The Playoff Committee keeps changing the rules mid-season, and that’s the real problem.

They tell teams to schedule tough, non-conference games — but then punish you for losing them. Texas schedules Ohio State Week 1 (as everyone asked them to do), loses to a top-tier opponent, and that single loss hangs over them all year.

Then there’s the conference contradiction. We’re told conference affiliation matters — until it doesn’t. Win your league? Great… unless you’re Duke winning the ACC and somehow still on the outside looking in. So conferences matter, but only for certain brands?

And the final-week rankings were the clearest example yet. Miami jumps Notre Dame without either team playing a game. That’s indefensible. Rankings should reflect what happens on the field — not last-minute reshuffling to fit a narrative. Miami deserved to be in the whole time, not just when it was convenient.

That’s the issue:
• Tough schedules are “encouraged” but punished (Texas)

• Conference championships matter — selectively (Duke)
• Rankings change without games being played ND/Miami)

...lastly, you won't be punished if you lose in your conference championship, unless you're BYU and not Alabama

 

You can’t sell “criteria” when the application changes every week for what's "convenient" at the time. 

We are in complete agreement that the committee is the problem, and they that change their "requirements" throughout the season to fit whatever narrative they've decided to push. 

16 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

We are in complete agreement that the committee is the problem, and they that change their "requirements" throughout the season to fit whatever narrative they've decided to push. 

Bingo. Yeah man…that’s my whole gripe (which I hate doing), but towards them…it’s been “make any of this make sense.”