It's long past time to have a discussion about just how much influence ESPN has on the sport. From actively destroying traditions and conferences to build a super SEC to now outright manipulation to exclude an undefeated Power 5 program with a national brand from the college football playoff to make sure the SEC didn't get left out, it's hard to ignore anymore. And, oh wouldn't you know, the program they manipulated is the one program they want to leave the ACC to join the SEC in the future, how convenient.
ESPN has killed the golden goose. You cannot ignore it anymore. They have too much power, they are too influential to the sport.
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
I get both sides. At the end of the day, the $EC won, again.
Second time an undefeated conference champion from Florida gets left out.
I see a pattern. Lol
First undefeated P5 champ who had 2 SEC ooc wins
Yes to all, but Fox is just as guilty. Together they will have both sides of the FBS P2 super conferences. So either join the Big 10/SEC, or sit at the little kids table. Media conference relationships are fully out in the open, to a new degree
This has always been my argument for the "break away from the NCAA" crowd...
The only other logical scenario is having TV Executives run CFB and they care about:
1) making money
2) buying a bigger boat
They give ZERO shits about the actual game of football..it is only a means to #1 and #2.
The idea that Conferences are going to start their own league is laughable because:
-doing that would require consistent altruism and cooperation which will
never fucking happen
-they are 100% beholden to the $$$ from the TV Networks.
CFB now stands for Corporate Football and it sucks.
There's not much to say, really. It's a kangaroo court travesty. Worst of all, VT is on the outside looking in.
The sport I loved so much growing up is now completely unrecognizable.
And I'm sorry to say this but no, Bar1990, before you even get started, no amount of proselytizing or turd polishing is gonna change my mind. The vast majority of CFB fans have just been told to either quit caring, or pick a P2 team to follow when your local school is done playing its irrelevant schedule.retracted due to distinct lack of proselytizing or turd polishing
Do I turd polish often? Genuinely asking lol
Not really, haha. You're a pretty straight shooter. That was just my somewhat grouchy way of noting that you generally seem to look more on the bright side re: the current state of the sport than I and some others do.
Thanks. I try to be cognizant of the history of the sport and keep perspective. Throughout the history of the sport, there were soooo many times that people thought the sport was ruined forever - Offering scholarships, integration, scholarship limits, broadcasting games, the BCS, fast tempo offenses, etc.
Despite all of these drastic changes, the sport has survived, and (overtime) continued to grow.
I try to maintain that, just because this is not the college football I grew up with, it doesn't mean the sport was ruined.
But this one sucks. It marks the first time in the championship (aka post BCS era, starting in '98) that a P5 team was told 'your undefeated record isn't good enough'
Edited for clarity
I mean how is this different than 1994 PSU not getting a share of the title? They were arguably the better team than Nebraska.
I don't know much anything about the 94 season, but now I want to learn more!
https://www.blackshoediaries.com/2016/6/21/11968726/the-loss-that-cost-p...
I mean, the idea of the BCS and then the playoff was to avoid exactly that issue, right? It's definitely similar, but it's setting up the same situation while dodging the safeguards that were put in place to avoid exactly this issue, which makes it feel a little more egregious.
Not only do the two undefeated teams not get to play, basically excluding one of them from contention, but several one loss teams get shots at the expense of the undefeated team.
I love college football, and i have said this before and now it is even more true. College football is the greatest sport there is because it is the only sport that teaches a real life lesson, no matter how good you are, no matter how great you perform, you're going to get screwed over by some one with a better name. Welcome to life.
Alabama has the name, they have the wealth backing them, they win. It doesn't matter what FSU can do. Now FSU can work harder and prove to themselves they are the best, and hopefully that will be good enough for those guys, because they don't have the capital backing them so they can at best play on the 2nd tier.
All due respect and no offense whatsoever intended to you as a person, but that's depressing as fuck and not at all what I want out of the sports I choose to follow. Sports are supposed to be a mindless escape from life, not ruined by all the things I hate about life seeping into them.
None taken, I realize that I think way differently than lots of people.
Yeah I'm with you on this, fuck all that noise. It's already bad enough that it's abundantly clear that us peons are just pawns with disposable lives to the super wealthy. I enjoy football and sports in general to get away from that for a few hours every week. To now make it clear that these powerful fuckheads can't even let the regular folk have a fair fight in what should be the distraction from their aristocratic greed is downright disgusting. And even more so, it's worrisome for the future of this country because if you keep pushing people down into the dirt in every aspect of their lives, they eventually realize they have nothing to lose from pushing back, and it's rare when that push back is peaceful.
I fear this country is hurdling fast toward a violent future, and seeing this kind of shit play out in sports of all places makes me more sure than ever that the powderkeg is going to blow in my lifetime.
Holy shit man. I do not envy your thought process.
Having 2 young daughters in a southern state where their rights are actively being stripped away is straight up not a good time right now.
Yeah I live about 20 miles from you and do not carry that perspective at all with the same exact circumstances. Funny how humans are ain't it.
This is veering into waters we'd best not get into....
I wanted to respond but I couldn't do it without risking a ban hammer or a penalty box. I'm right there with you, my guy.
Bolshevik much? Stop using this website to launder in your political grievances.
It can absolutely be hard not to see everything as different symptoms of the same virus. I want to say more but I reeeeeeeally shouldn't
FSU got fucked
And not even properly.
The ACC, Big 12, AAC, Mountain West and Sun Belt should just form their own league. Stop subsidizing the top 2 leagues. Delegitimize them by refusing to participate in their flawed system
Damn right. Refuse to participate in that bullshit
What time do we find out ours?
What, when we get fucked wrongly?
It'll happen when we get left out of realignment, whenever that is.
If I were FSU, I would want to make a statement in my bowl game and pound the the hell out of my opponent. 70 to nothing would really be satisfactory.
Biberty would be a good one on the receiving end of that.
They are going to pair fsu with Georgia or Ohio st to try to make sure they don't finish undefeated.
You mean the opt out bowl?
If they had done that last night, they'd likely have gotten in.
My big take away from this is that VT needs to get out of the ACC ASAP.
I knew we needed to get out, but I thought we had to take the time to wait for the numbers to work out. No more. We can't be patient, we need to be proactive.
On a related note, I wouldn't be surprised if FSU files a lawsuit.
Sad but true. Which sucks because in a perfect world, I think we don't really fit with either the Midwestern Big Ten teams or Deep South SEC teams - we are really with our ideal mid-Atlantic/east coast regional rivals. But we just can't stay in the ACC at this point, it is a sinking ship and we are headed for the P2 no matter what.
And this conversation is exactly what ESPN has been wanting forever. Manipulate the sport to destroy what you don't like to make people masturbate to the thought of sucking the teat of what you can provide.
It's fucking disgusting what college football has turned into.
And go... where? And pay for it... how?
I'll admit to being a rabid ACC partisan, though my enthusiasm fades each time we add a west coast (or northeastern) team, but where can we legitimately go right now that's better?
Unrelated: petty Matt is deriving just a bit of pleasure out of how irate FSU fans are that the ACC didn't do more to push their cause. The very same ACC they've vocally and officially shit on for 2 years now.
Depends what options are available to us. Option 1 is SEC. Option 2 is B10. Option 2b is see if we can gather a block of similar minded schools to go to the B12.
Option 3 is stay in the ACC.
Debt and/or private equity, unfortunately.
Idk who petty Matt is, but knowing nothing but your comment, I agree with him. The minute Travis went down, Phillips should've started media blitz. He should've been everywhere.
I've defended Phillips a lot as being a given a shit hand to play, but he really failed to show any foresight today.
I think VTs only likely chance of making the B1G or SEC is if they start cannibalizing their own...i.e. Vandy,NW, maybe Miss St.?
And that would 100% lead to Lawsuits that would drag on for years, so more Yay! Lawyers!!
So that probably isn't happening.
The Big12 is still going to be a de-facto minor league going forward.
This is why cfb needs to break off from the ncaa. Just do promo and relo. No need to kick out vandy, just let them fall.
The b1G is headed for 20 teams. The SEC runs a risk of struggling to keep up if they don't also expand. Their strategy for expansion, though, is going to rely on keeping their footprint to the southeast. With the Virginia and North Carolina markets being ripe and untapped by either of the p2 leagues, it would make a LOT of sense for the SEC to quickly nab some or all of the top football brands in those states. VT is fairly well positioned to take advantage of that reality. The ACC just needs to hurry up and collapse so the SEC can grab VT and either unc or ncst.
Here's the issue though...at some point by adding more teams, the teams in these Conferences are just diluting their share of the $$.
Given that the future of cable/network broadcasting looks bleak...I think it's a big risk to think the next TV contract is going to be as lucrative.
If a team clearly brings enough value to a conference, it makes sense..whether VT does that for the SEC or B1G is ultimately up to them..I know we'd all like to think so, but if you step back and take an unbiased view...if the ACC collapses and Conferences are picking thru the bones there are at least 4 teams above us in desirability and 2-3 with similar cases.
Which 4 teams? Don't say fsu and clemson. They are big brands, yes, but they are also in states the SEC already has. The outlook for cable may be bleak but it's still driving the bus rn and will continue to do so for quite some time. Carriage fees in state are a serious incentive for both p2 leagues to try getting into markets they're not already in. The largest untapped markets rn are VA and NC. If you think there are 4 teams in those two states more valuable to the SEC than VT then idk what you're smoking.
I love VT, but try and be objective...if the ACC were to say to the SEC "for $150 million we will sell you 2 of these teams: FSU, Clemson and VT," we are getting left out every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
UNC and Miami are national brands, Miami is a huge media market..VT is not.
VT, UVa, NC State would have similar profiles each with own specific strengths and weaknesses.
This is precisely where I am. I think our chances are notably less than 50% to end up in one of the P2.
Clearly you're not getting my point. The sec already has Florida and South Carolina markets. The fees they get in those states are $1.30 per subscriber. If the SEC grabs teams from a state they already have they get not real value. However, out of state carriage fees are a mere $0.25. So if they grab teams in states they don't already have (VA, NC - two of the largest remaining markets) they can increase their revenues by $1.05 per subscriber in those markets by making them in-state products. So a few million subscribers in VA amounts to a few million extra revenue that neither clemson nor fsu could provide.
Vt isn't clemson or fsu, but we do have a football brand and culture. We have more than most other teams in the acc could offer.
Clearly you don't understand that carriage fees are going to be irrelevant soon.
Getting "into a TV market" is going to matter less than boosting the prominence of your Conference as a whole.
Soon enough most events are going to be Ala carte or based on subscriptions to an individual service (more likely multiple). There's a reason ESPN has been actively studying starting a subscription model.
I get your point perfectly-- it's just not 2006 anymore and market forces have changed significantly--imagining VT is going to get in the SEC over 2 Programs who have both competed for National Championships in the past 10 years because the SEC desperately wants to capture the Roanoke MSA market is illogical.
I don't believe ESPN is forward thinking enough as they have been behind the curve every step of the way.
ESPN absolutely has looked into it..how close they are to rolling it out is questionable:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/media/2023/05/18/espn-plans-to-launch-subscription-streaming-service/70233888007/
Sure but they should have done this 10 years ago. They have been laying off tons of people the past 5 years or so, they have been bleeding money for years. They overspent on the NFL and SEC in some cases outbidding no one. They are reactive and have been for decades. They will probably get to a streaming model but they are still on the wrong side of the curve.
Don't disagree...also the fact that the parent Disney is flailing in the Cinema division lately, it may be quite a while before this is up and running because it's going to require quite a bit of capital.
I also agree that ESPN and Fox overspent for CFB rights but that is also why I think Conferences are going to be increasingly picky about additions--there is no guarantee the next contract is going to be as generous.
Long story short..in 5 years or so, I don't see the ACC or SEC Networks existing--they will be subscription based services likely with additional fees to see all of your Teams games that aren't OTA broadcasts (like Sunday Ticket). Anyone from anywhere can subscribe..having a "regional presence" is going to be much less important--there's a reason why the B1G now extends to the Pacific. Thus the idea that Conferences are going to use Regional presence as criteria for expansion is flawed.
Apple had discussions about buying ESPN from Disney but the way things are going they can wait and buy Disney entirely.
Apple doesn't need to wait they could buy them directly today, but why waste money.
Agreed. Let Disney get desperate than low ball them
This is my hypothesis as well, but I would not be surprised if the SEC says 'nah we're good with 16' and stays
Lol...just what College Football needs...let's add some lawyers in with the greedy TV Executives.
The ACC is about to enter the "Legal Unraveling" Phase where their legal costs overwhelm their ability to enforce the GoR and the Conference gives in, negotiates an exit fee and dissolves.
It's the same process that works for Personal Injury Attorneys...it costs less to pay them off than to go to Court 95% of the time.
The ACC is about to meet FSU, Clemson, and Miami's version of Morgan and Morgan.
Not normally a fan of suing, but I agree they should. The Committee ignored the printed guidelines because they wanted to make sure the SEC was included and no other reason.
The ACC should sue, as they are the ones losing out on millions.
Problem with suing is they left enough slack in the guidelines to drive a truck through.
Yes, that's the NCAA we all know.
VT is fucked man. Let's be honest. We are not at the adults table. We aren't. It has nothing to do with our recent decline, NIL, or any of that shit. We are in a conference with a dog shit TV deal and there is no competition to re-bid it. ESPN can and will continue to put their thumb on the ACC because they control the SEC rights as well. So they are actively cannibalizing's one for the other. What incentive does ESPN have to pay the ACC fairly? None. The PAC 12- which had 2 teams in the countries 2nd largest TV market and 100 years of excellent traditions disappeared in an instant. The Pac 12- the rose bowl, USC, UCLA, etc- gone. Why? TV money. Simple. VT is more than fucked. We stay in the ACC- a hoops league paid pennies, and watch Liberty pass us as a program and play in the fiesta bowl on NY day, etc. Or we beg the Big 12 to take us- for a few dollars more perhaps. Best case. We are fucked. And to think we all laughed at Maryland when they left. Fucking smart. and in 1996 if you had Rutgers being in a better situation than VT, you would have been mocked. So now more than ever with money driving the bus, we sit back and watch JMU and Liberty on equal footing with the proud VT football program. Sobering.
As much as it would like to reset my expectations to having the ACC championship be our ceiling and then after that it's just icing on the cake (if any at all), I can't help but agree with all of this. My gut has been quietly telling me this and to be honest, I am playing denial a bit here.
It's all phucked up and who knows how Ferkakta the CFB landscape becomes....
The takes out of ESPN personalities right now are heinously bad. It could not be more obvious today that the fix was in and the wagons were circled overnight to spin it appropriately.
It was manufacturing consent from the get go.
And they had a 3 vs 1 panel with Booger McFarland being the only rational voice at the table.
If I was on the panel Joey Galloway and Greg McElroy would catch these hands
Galloway and McElroy were fighting with each other and they were both arguing the same point that FSU was a different team without Travis.
Looks like ACC teams have a way to break the GOR or at least a compelling enough argument to piss off ESPN to keep them out of their CFB Invitational. I would sue if I was the ACC and use the ACCCG broadcast as evidence that ESPN doesn't even represent their product on ACC broadcasts. Loss of value or something like that. I'm sure there are smart enough lawyers to make that argument.
And a little more background on why this pisses me off so much. We were manipulated out of the 2007 title game because we lost early on to LSU. Computers had us #1 in the country but it didn't matter, the human voters manipulated the system to keep us out because at the time the mantra was that on field results had to rein supreme.
So now, 16 years later it looks like the SEC was about to get left out due to on field results, so those very same people who manipulated us back then now turn the entire debate about what matters on its head to say that the on field results don't matter as much as your opinion. It's all fucking bullshit. Fuck ESPN, fuck all the studio hosts who have been manipulating the sport for the last few decades. You've ruined what was once good and fucked over the vast majority of schools in the process. Congrats, assholes
I mean, that was different. There were very clear rules to the BCS. 1/3 computer poll, 1/3 coaches poll, and 1/3 AP. The Associated Press was not controlled by any one entity, and should have a variety of opinions. Additionally most AP ballots are shared/findable.
This is very different. A small of people get into a room a rerank teams each week. They don't have share their ballot.
All this responsibility used to be shared between 6 algorithms, 75ish coaches, and hundreds of media members. Now the responsibility is shared between 14(?) people, and no one is accountable for any mistakes.
"oh hey committee member, here's a cool 10K if you put Alabama in the playoff"
This would never happen so no reason to have accountability /s
ESPN is bleeding money. They lose money on the CFP in terms of ratings too. So you had to know after last years game that was over in 10 minutes, that ESPN would have MAJOR- if not ALL- pull in that committee room. They simply can't afford to have shitty ratings, so they insisted Bama be in. Simple as that. Bama/Michigan will draw a number- which in pro football, that's all that matters.
Sadly this is true. And I know it probably pissing in the wind, but I am going to take my eyeballs and my clicks elsewhere. I won't be watching a single minute of the bowl coverage and I will be looking for another source for my sports scores and news.
I'll get my VT coverage from Burnop and Roth (which even if it is just radio is better than the craptacular announcers we get assigned to our games anyway.)
Fuck ESPN.
If I can't make the game, then I'm going to pirate it, and sync Roth and Burnop audio to it. Not giving ESPN the clicks.
I'll add to my above comment. The playoff never should have been about the 'best' teams - that's too vague - is it the team with the best season? The team playing the best at the end of the season? The team that 'looks' the best? The team with the best players? The team with the best performance? The team that has the best potential?
Do I think that bama beats FSU? Yes. Should that matter? In my opinion, no.
Let's not forget, the FSU snub cost everyone in the ACC $$. No split playoff payouts
Laugh at them all you want, but this is bad for VT in multiple ways
Yeap, this is the last year before the acc stops sharing post season revenue.
That said, IIRC it's only around $2M/school that comes from the cfp. About 2% of VT athletics total revenue.
Still, $2 million is $2 million.
And it should go to ACC schools, not the $EC.
Well, at least I won't have to hear that stupid fucking FSU war chant.
College football really is a joke. Man, this sucks.
Cancelling my TV subscriptions and using streams or going to home ACC games only.
I hope others choose to as well, also think about cancelling Disney+, you can find all of those shows on streams as well
The most annoying thing is everyone is like "ah well the Seminoles quarterback is out what can you do" when ohio state was #6 in penultimate poll in 2014 with 1 loss but won their conference championship with a backup and then got selected to be in the inaugural CFP, which they won.
Yeah that's not a good reason. What happens if Milroe gets in an auto accident and can't play, or Penix get's the Flu, or Ewers gets arrested for smuggling ivory. Things happen. You know who lost a game, Milroe, you know who else, Ewers, you know who didn't lose a game, every FSU QB. This is a BS reason.
Let's not forget that all four teams selected are now tied to the Big 2. It's not coincidence.
Will never happen since there's too much money at stake, but the entire ACC should opt out of the postseason in solidarity and tell ESPN to screw themselves. Then they have to pull up all these 5-7 and other bad teams to fill out the bowls and would really hurt ratings. Honestly would be a big middle finger to E$PN.
I like that, but it would hurt the ACC more than the $EC and B1G.
SEC = Southern Entitlement Conference
Probably won't watch the playoff again this year. All that matters is the P2 and if it's gonna be that way I'd much rather watch the actual professionals in the NFL, where on field results matter and the quality of play is still way better.
Been trending this way for a while but it'll be VT and NFL for me
When the CFP started and the games were all on E$PN vice ABC it was a pretty clear signal they cared only about maximum $ vs reaching the most fans. I recall their streaming technology couldn't even keep up, but that didn't dissuade them. I agree with many of the comments here that I won't even bother watching the CFP. I was already planning on cancelling my YouTube TV subscription now that football is over and this makes me feel even better about that.
Liberty Biberty to play Oregon in the Fiesta bowl. I hope they lose 70-0.
Kind of a win win for them either way unfortunately due to the exposure
There's no "hoping" about it. LIberty's SOS is #133. Oregon might have 70 by halftime.
Boo Corrigann on why Liberty got the nod over SMU: "Liberty just continued to win throughout the year."
...ba dum dum and so did FSU....
Oh and loved this response to Herbstreit
We all know the answer.
Herbie is such a sellout. The man used to stand up for the better stories, the unpredictability of college football, and the fact that the best teams don't always win. He used to care about the lesser teams getting a shot.
Now he's such a corporate whore he is actively going out there and campaigning why the big boys deserve a spot over others because he just feels like they are better. Good little corporate shill just doing what his pimp daddy execs tell him to do.
This corporate sellout was singing a different tune about 5 weeks ago. Funny how that changes when its about an SEC team.
Are we going to have to wait until tomorrow before we find out where we are headed? What the hell is ESPN waiting on?
According to McMurphy, the FSU snub has sent the ACC bowl selections into a tailspin. Seems the bowls all thought FSU was in the playoffs and a selection order was penciled in.
https://twitter.com/Brett_McMurphy/status/1731417420760240502?t=7CwGYfVt...
Here's another bullshit aspect of this. Going forward if you have an elite QB, all that needs to happen to get left out of the playoff is to have an opponent take some runs at him with intent to injure, and you're toast. You can win all the games, but the committee now says the QB is the only spot on the field that matters and if you are able to knock your opponents QB out, you kill their chances in the big picture
You damn well know that'll happen in some of these heated rivalry games going forward
JFC you're right, I hadn't even thought of that
* Unless you are in the P2 conferences
NIL is just another way to say "Bountygate"
Even if this doesn't happen, think of all of the programs rushing back key players from injury just to get in the good graces of the deciders.
On the flip side, this adds a ton of fuel to the "be smart- just sit out" fire.
Pretending that the playoff selections are all about QB health really opened up Pandora's box here.
On the radio today I heard them discussing the possibility of playing coy w injuries moving forward. Due to HIPPA there is no requirement to disclose things. Could just say he's probable for each week and let the chips fall.
In some circumstances that might work..when Jordan Travis's lower leg was pointing the wrong way, it doesn't.
Still, I think this will lead teams to try to push kids back. The message is clear..we will punish you for injuries...unless you are Ohio State.
Just the other day Cover 3 was talking about how the SEC could be left out if things fell right. Everything fell exactly as they said it needed to.
What a freaking joke.
The Selection Committee has the same energy as those asshole teachers that say "The Bell doesn't dismiss you, I dismiss you "
I hope this is either a behind the scenes revolt, the end of the ACC, or FSU just straight up saying we are gonna sue the playoff committee lol. Turn the chaos to 11
ACC fans could Boycott watching Alabama play.
I would think the viewer numbers lost would be significant, and not make advertisers happy.
Better yet boycott all the bowls E$PN broadcasts.
Better yet boycott ESPN period, including their website/app.
One of the worst things about this whole situation is recruiting... The ACC is already fighting an uphill battle from a revenue standpoint, now the wonderful folks who coach in the SEC and BIG can tell a kid, "Hey, even if you go to XYZ ACC school and win out, you still may not make it to the playoffs."
One thing I hadn't seen mentioned that is a real kick in the nuts is the CFP Committee Chairman is Boo Corrigan, the NC State Athletic Director. Phillips has to see him removed from the committee after this decision.
How much would you like to bet that ole Boo ends up with a position within the SEC once this blows over??
Would not surprise me at all. Getting those extra checks. Probably would make more as an SEC assistant AD than he does at NC State
Total BS. CFB has been transitioning from a sport to a business for some time. This is one of those crowning moments that cements this.
Fans across the board should refrain from watching any of these games. And I hope neither Bama or Texas win. I would love for today's PAC 12 member to win. That to me is the best case scenario for the final results of this CFP.
Another thought, once they go to 12 teams the future snubs will be less BS (never this egregious) but will more than likely favor SEC, B1G or Notre Dame. Any way you slice it.....it's BS.
At this point, I'm going to root for the Hokies and hope they return to ACC championship form. After that, I have zero expectations.
What will end up happening is that the top 2 teams of the SEC and Big Ten will get first round byes every year to keep them fresh going into the final 8 of the playoffs. The committee will go out of it's way to make sure the likeliest result is only teams from those 2 conferences left come the Final Four. And then in a few years use that as justification to completely cut everyone else out of the running when it comes time to reevaluate how the playoff is set up to end up with a 12 team playoff made up of 6 from the SEC and 6 from the Big Ten
By then the SEC and Big 10 may have relegated all the other schools to D1-B and taken D1-A anyway. It's what the networks want. If they do though then they should be barred from scheduling down and forced to play a full meatgrinder.
I wonder if any schools will cancel their non-conference games with the SEC? It would be a riot if they couldn't play a complete schedule because nobody else will play them. At a minimum, demand some of that $EC money and insist on at least $5,000,000 a game.
I've long wondered why ESPN, owning the media rights to both the SEC and ACC, pump the SEC continually and actively do whatever they can to screw the ACC or crap on them. And it occurred to me - they basically bought up the ACC on the cheap to keep it weak and appease the inferiority complex of the SEC and keep the recruiting and perception advantage in their favor. And it keeps the ACC brands away from the competition (Fox, etc). Honestly, some major litigation needs to happen and I think discovery could be made that the SEC and ESPN have colluded against the ACC from the start, and ESPN has breached fiduciary duties and not worked in the ACC's best interest.
Last night's broadcast as Exhibit 1.
This is where I disagree. ESPN goes above and beyond for the SEC because it drives viewership. There's three leagues they prioritize: the NFL, the NBA, and the SEC. This is not a secret. You can hear execs say this on shareholder calls.
ESPN does not actively try to screw the ACC. They ACC has done that to itself (on the field) time and time again over the last 2 decades. SEC football is a superior product to ACC football, and has been since the mid-aughts.
I really believe that today is the first time ESPn has done anything to knock the acc down a peg.
This is a prescient take.
I might add that ESPN didn't knock the ACC down a peg intentionally, they instead pumped the SEC at all costs - and the cost was the ACC.
ACC was sideswiped, not targeted.
That's fair, but - continuing this analogy - I'd argue that the acc chose not to swerve when they had the chance.
I say this all the time in these conversations, but the ACC has had one good season in the last 20+ years: 2016. It's the only year when every team performed to their potential.
I think this is a chicken and egg situation.
The ACC hasn't done itself a ton of favors. Letting the good ole boys from Tobacco Road run the conference for way too long was a massive mistake.
Despite that there have been years that the ACC top to bottom has been better than the SEC..2016 comes to mind and I think you could make a strong argument that it is true in 2023 as well. Has anyone on ESPN ever uttered that though..other than maybe Booger today?
But ESPN has significantly more $$$ vested in the SEC than the ACC...its hard to imagine that there is not a clear bias and emphasis to feature the SEC and cover it positively. It's basic business sense at some point..if you have Product A and Product B but spent 3x more money on A, which Product are you gonna push harder to sell?
And at some point, when you are by far the dominant media source your choice to preferentially cover one conference over the other does screw the other over. Featuring SEC homers like Finebaum regularly on SportsCenter does. As does having Joe Tessitore not fail to go more than 2 minutes without mentioning FSU's offense struggling and how tough a decision the playoff committee has during the ACCCG...
Fuck ESPN. Eddie is right, it's fucking infuriating that pundits were laughing at FSU's misfortunes because these players may never get this opportunity again, and it's a joke to them. They're ok completely ruining the collegiate experience for a deserving team and deserving players to give a shot to a school who is in the playoff every fucking year.
I always like the perspectives of the 'younger' ex-college broadcasters like Mac, Royal, and Manuel. They at least played in the modern era and still remember the excitement and feel for college football unlike Joey Galloway, Kirk, Palmer, and the rest of the ESPN shills
FSU should decline the orange bowl on Dec 28th due to player safety concerns during a meaningless exhibition and screw over the TV people who are pulling the strings.
Florida State lawmakers threatening lawsuit and a bill. If they really pursue a law they should pursue banning ESPN the ability to broadcast any of the bowls in the state of Florida. DeSantis loves fighting with Disney anyway so hit them where it hurts. How many bowl games are in Florida? Five or six right? I know it's never going to happen, just in the mood to think about what things Florida might do to hurt the process. It helps that a former Seminole player is a state Senator in Florida.
I mean this hurts every single team in the ACC financially. There is a direct financial loss due to this for the ACC. Make ESPN go up and say in court that this is because of money.
I think the result was outrageous, but I'm having trouble finding any reasonable grounds for a lawsuit.
Unless FSU could prove some form of collusion between the SEC, ESPN, and CFP committee I'm not sure what the point would be. I can't imagine anyone involved would have been dumb enough to leave a document or electronic trail that could be found in Discovery. And hearsay is generally not able to be used as evidence to my understanding.
Those with actual legal training feel free to correct me, but this seems a bit like Filing a Lawsuit against the High School basketball coach because they cut your kid from the team....I don't see any merit.
Yeah it would be very tough, the only thing is they have 10 years of history and some how this year everything is an outlier. Their week to week voting did not match what they said they were doing or what happened at the end. Best that would be proven is humans are irrational.
But it would be really great to just have ESPN say it's a out money. That pisses me off more than anything. Because a player is injured is bullshit. They are looking for the best teams to make sure the best team wins, we know Bama isn't better than Texas, they lost at home. So give FSU a chance if you want to find THE champion. I just want ESPN to acknowledge that this is about money and Bama bring in more money than FSU. Also how many hits and stories can they do about FSU getting snubbed. More money!
EDIT: You might be able to make an argument that the unclear guidelines were anticompetitive and would force ESPN to have CFP committee to have clear guidelines. There is some weird laws when you get anti competitive stuff that make zero sense and takes some one way more lawyerly than I to figure out.
Exactly. If FSU wasn't deserving of being in the playoff after the Jordan Travis injury, then why tf did they have them in the top four for the last two weeks? It's just a sorry excuse in order to ensure than an SEC team is in the playoff. Guarantee you had Georgia won last night FSU would be in - this was all about SEC bias and nothing more. And by putting Bama in they had to put Texas in due to the H2H win over Bama. Massive screw job there's no other way of looking at it.
Saw something where Gov of Fla has earmarked $1million for a lawsuit fund...
And furthermore, Nick Saban, Bama, and the whole SEC can go pound sand. I'm so sick of the media hyping up Saban to be the czar of college football - the man is single-handedly responsible for the ridiculous arms race the sport has become with the absurd large staffs, recruiting budgets, facilities arms races, etc. And everyone else who wants to seriously compete has to follow suit, because there is always someone willing to spend more money than you. I'm sorry but just because you go coach for a school in the deep south that would rather spend millions upon millions to win football games than have clean water and good education for their kids, you don't get to be the voice of the sport IMO. He can kick rocks.
We are heading toward a P2 but I really at this point don't care for VT to be a part of a league like the SEC or Big Ten.
The comedy is that with NIL sort of legally leveling the playing field a bit, suddenly Saban is against compensation for players unless they earn it. (At least that's the public persona but those 5* kids have kept going there)
Saban still prefers paying the kids under the table. Less paperwork.
Committee just made it clear as day. We aren't heading for a Power 2. We're already there
Yes if this were next year, 10 of the 12 NY6 teams are B1G and SEC. lol.
coming back from a job site about an hour ago, ESPN radio was saying that 7 or 8 of the 12 spots next year will be filled with either SEC or B1G teams.
It's 10 of 12 this year.
Who is the other one besides FSU? The other top 11 teams in the selection committee are Big Ten/SEC
Why liberty biberty of course
Agree. Oregon and Washington are Big10 next year. Texas and Oklahoma are SEC.
I think everyone here knows I'm a huge SZD Stan, but Alex and Richard absolutely nailed it with their assessment of the decision to leave FSU out. Strongly recommend the listen: https://open.spotify.com/episode/7qYfF6lvLl7SVzUlC1T3LG?si=Wt779_kfSQqlY...
It's like suspecting Santa didn't exist for years and then your parents coming out and telling you Santa's not real.
Same feeling I had today. It's not longer a conspiracy theory it's real life. All about the money, and not gonna be fair
I hope that FSU beats Georgia and Michigan destroys Alabama.
I hope the acc can finish with a winning bowl record against the sec and Big10.
Those will be the best responses to this garbage.
Bowl records have largely been unreliable datapoints, and increasingly so in the playoff era. I don't think this would move the needle.
This would certainly vindicate the people who are upset about this, but I highly doubt either thing happens. UGA-FSU could be somewhat interesting depending on which UGA players sit out, particularly the decision of Carson Beck, who has a draft/return situation to make.
The orange bowl is meaningless this year thanks to Christian McCaffrey. He sat out the Sun Bowl and made it cool to bail on your team, so no chance Beck plays. Why would he? School pride? teammates? LMFAO. Go get that bag baby, money, money, money- all that matters. Go rest and get ready for the NFL. Fuck all of your teammates and coaches. Fuck them. So IF FSU wins, it's tainted. If they lose, well they suck anyway because none of GA's good players played, etc. Also when the SEC loses a NY6 game- Boise, WVU, etc. It's because they didn't want to be there, weren't excited. What a meaningless game this year. Ratings will be horrid for that game.
Honestly hope the ratings are a dumpster fire across the board.
They may be unreliable data points but it's something the ACC can pound their chest on. If we have a winning year against the Big 10, SEC, and bowl season then maybe the talking heads will have something positive to say about the conference. Maybe this shitshow is exactly what the ACC needed to get the entire conference aligned on a common goal like the SEC has been the last 15 years.
I hope to see one of two things happen - Either FSU obliterates Georgia and makes a point that will ultimately have zero impact on anything except opening investigations into bribery charges. Or FSU literally doesn't show for the game - like literally not show up. Tell the bowl organizers the day that FSU is supposed to travel that they aren't coming in protest, and leave the organizers scrambling to find a lower tier anything to try and keep the game on.
FSU ghosting the game would be glorious but you know it's never going to happen.
Would love to see it happen but you know if FSU doesn't show up, then the CFP and NCAA will come down hard on them. Hell, they might even have them in litigation for breach of contract or some shit.
I'm sure their legal team is looking into it.... I know I would be if I were in their shoes.
And for the conspiracy theorists - maybe FSU WANTED this to happen. This gives them a lot more ammunition with their fan base to help generate the funds for the exit fee, or maybe to get the remainder of the conference to rally together and tell ESPN they go F themselves with the current ACC TV deal.
I'm pretty sure when FSU and Clemson were saber rattling earlier this year it was discussed that the actual get out money would be close to a billion dollars? There's a fee + their share of media rights for X number of years (until 2035 or whatever it is?).
From my understanding, they can't get out simply by paying. They'll need a vote.
This definitely crossed my mind
I'll add that it isn't about football either.
What most everyone everywhere is missing, with the possible exception of the Mothership execs, is that this isn't about football, the purity or sanctity of the game, getting the best teams, or getting the most deserving teams (they can be different). At the risk of sounding a bit like the movie The Truman Show, it's all a big TV show. Ratings dollars. Most eyes in front of the 'ole 55" living room screen. And since that's the driving force, it shouldn't surprise anyone that the folks calling the shots are in Bristol, CT. (and to a lesser extent, wherever FOX is located) than in the NCAA offices, or wherever the Committee meets. They have compliant partners (accomplices?) in the CFB Committee, who are happy to forward the desired result. It's all a made-for-TV event. It's a wonder they haven't made it a pay-per-view deal yet.
ESPN doubling down posting some "funny" FSU reels this morning.
This is insane. What a great "partner" E$PN is.
"The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must."
Thucidides, 411 BC
"Some pigs are more equal than other pigs."
George Orwell, Animal Farm, 1945
"The NCAA sucks."
-various, December 3, 2023
-many, 2004-current
The CFP is literally the one process that the NCAA has zero oversight of.
The NCAA is to blame for alot of the problems that have plagued this game but this isn't one of them.
Again, this was a preview for all the "form your own league" proponents. It will become nothing more than a good ole boys club where the traditional Blue Bloods manipulate the rules to benefit themselves. Much as they have with NIL and the Transfer Portal, just worse.
The idea that letting the SEC, ESPN, and Fox run college football will lead to less corruption and bias is fucking hysterically short-sighted.
This is nothing if not classic NCAA. The names and processes change. The results do not.
Follow me here:
-The CFP committee is completely independent of the NCAA. They are their own organization. They are not beholden to the NCAA in any way.
-The decision to exclude FSU was made by the CFP...
-The Championship Trophy that is awarded to the winner of the CFP is not an NCAA award. See the Trophy that the FCS, DII and DIII winners get--that is an official NCAA award.
So an organization that is independent of the NCAA makes a decision on their own accord...and the blame here goes to the NCAA???
I am following you. I get all that. Still...
There is zero difference here from what it ever was.
Both y'all, please stop talking past each other.
Not wrong. Not directly relevant to the date you listed, but the statement itself is still accurate.
Also accurate.
Agreed.
Never thought I'd have to defend "NCAA sucks".
The fact is that the NCAA is at fault for ALWAYS being feckless. This is no change from what it ever was - a fig leaf for the strongest teams and the media.
There's actually a ton of difference.
Previously, the BCS Championship was #1 vs. #2 decided completely by computer rankings, but that wasn't good enough so we expanded to four and added a human element in the CFP committee and these are the results (rather predictably).
But either way the NCAA was not directly involved in any of it.
Your "point" is illogical...you obviously didn't understand from the get-go that the CFP was independent of the NCAA, but rather than just admitting that, you are doubling-down on absurd logic.
Oh, please. The absurd logic is that it was ever different from this.
The only logic being applied is power and money. There may be a slight difference in that they're not bothering to pretend otherwise, and the money has gotten really big.
One amusing thing for which I have exactly zero time is UGA fans complaining that they didn't get in.
When OSU was on their 3rd QB, no problem- put them in the playoff. They weren't even undefeated. I can't belive FSU was left out. I honestly can't. Imagine how pissed we would be if VT was undefeated and left out- regardless of the QB situation. And I have always said its not a 4 team playoff. It's a 3 team playoff because Bama is literally always in. No matter what. Welp. Yep. And next year it's an 11 team playoff. Beacuse if bama is 9-3 but "improving, playing much better"- they will get that 12th spot over 11-1 Ok. State or 11-1 Clemson. Mark it.
Bama literally missed the playoff last year...
I am absolutely certain this will not happen in a 12 team playoff. 11-1 Okie State and 11-1 Clemson will be in the 12 team playoff every single time, no questions about it at all. 100% guaranteed.
Lighting does strike. Like Bama not playing for their own conference title in 2022. It happens once a decade or so. You are correct about that.
Your general point though, I agree with, not that they would get in over 11-1 teams, because that is not the case.
I do think the primary beneficiaries of the expanded playoff will be the most elite programs. Now they will never miss the playoff. A bad year for Alabama, UGA, Ohio State, etc. is losing 2 games, maybe 3. Now they will be in even with a few hiccups. The five seed the previous two seasons would have been Ohio State (2021) and Alabama (2022), who would avoid a CCG, and get to play the 12 seed at home. Same number of games between them and the national title as Michigan and UGA since they would get a BYE, but play in a conference championship game.
Of course. You know why the committee did not "require" winning your conference in the original 4 game format, don't you? Because Sankey wanted two of the 4 spots, so he wouldn't agree to having to win your conference. 130 teams and the SEC wanted access to half of the playoff. of course. with a straight face.
The SEC normalized that winning games is not the most important factor of success in the sport, and it's more about how you perceive them to be.
Never forget that.
The best place to be is LSU/Ole Miss... lose literally all of your toughest games, remain in the top 12 all year. That's the sweet spot. just behind bama and GA- you can lose to every good team you play, and still be in the mix
Also, they're deeper teams, so the likelihood of making it through the playoffs with a solid team is higher.
My question though is how likely are they to get the players that intend to go pro to commit to these extra games. 12 team playoff means that teams 5-12 would need to play three games (two extra) to win it all.
Not sure how many kids looking at the NFL will decide to opt out in that scenario. We likely get some really watered down version once it's all said and done.
Also curious what this does to the bowl game structure. I would stand up and cheer if it imploded the bowl games as they stand now. It's estimated 40-50% of schools declare a loss financially on bowl games.
Now i'm wondering if the new format next year is going to change anything. On the plus side, each of the P5 champions +1 G5 will get an invite, regardless of their record, so there's definitely going to be a reward for on-field performance. On the other hand, we now have 6 spots that are going to be up to the CFP committee, or the Nazgul, or whatever else they're going to be called. That could likely mean that the runner-up in each conference championship game is in, plus one darling that didn't get to their championship game this year.
Scenario #1 - Keep the Planned 12-team Format
Auto-bids:
Michigan
Washington
Texas
FSU
Alabama
Liberty
And here's the perceived "best" of the rest
Georgia
Ohio St.
Oregon
---------------- cut line for this debate
Missouri
Penn St.
Oklahoma
---------------- 12-team cut line
Mississippi
LSU
Arizona
Notre Dame
Now instead of 1 or two teams with a very legitimate argument for being left out, you now have 4. Great.
Now, for what I would prefer - Every conference champ gets an auto-bid (P5 and G5), and you fill in the last 2 spots with at-large / wild card bids
Scenario #2 - Conference Championships Matter
Auto-bids:
Michigan
Washington
Texas
FSU
Alabama
Liberty
SMU
Miami (Oh)
Troy
Boise St.
At-large:
Georgia
Ohio St.
Gimme scenario #2 any day of the week. This might actually counter the conference realignment fight (if its not too late) and some schools might / would consider a move to an actual conference that actually aligns to their geography and they might actually have a shot of winning a conference championship without having to spend millions on one-upsmanship to get there in their current conference.... rant over.
There will be flaws. As long as Nick Saban is of sound mind and coaching Bama, they will be ranked in the top 12. Also Notre Dame will have an auto bid most years if they are around 9-3. It's not going to be as open as people think. most often 8-9 spots will be locked up by early november- the only drama might be the G5 spot, etc.
Agree. As long as the playoff has any component that is not purely based on records and winning your conference, there are going to be flaws. And until someone grows a spine and tells Notre Dame and the independents they need to be in a conference to qualify, it will never change.
Also, the committee needs to be removed. Bring back the BCS with a modernized formula and remove the people from influencing the rankings... while I'm at it - get rid of any kind of pre-season and in-season ranking system, and have the BCS-style approach based purely on the performance - records, stats, SoS, etc.
What's really frustrating is that you know that they have set it up for 4 of Alabama, Georgia, Texas, Oklahoma, Michigan, Ohio State, LSU and Florida are getting the 1st round bye of the playoffs every year going forward. It won't matter what anyone else does, it doesn't matter any other records who who any other team in the country has beaten, it'll never be good enough to overcome the perception that 4 teams out of that group just deserve it more.
I'll take #1 all day. I don't want a 3 loss MAC team getting an autobid. I also don't want to see 10 teams from two leagues. The issue here is that committee botched the FSU ranking. Not that Troy didn't get a shot.
and my issue with that take is that this takes away any chance of a Cinderella story. Do I think Troy is capable of winning it? Hell no. Would I want to watch that story unfold and see it play out on the field? 100%. All this format does is it make it so that nearly all the teams that are included are ones that have a legitimate shot at a title (edit: E.g., if you ran a simulated playoff, these teams would have double-digit % chances of winning it all), and almost entirely removes any remote possibilities of a miracle champion.
This is the problem with the playoff... The regular season was supposed to determine who was a national champion. That's what made college football so cool; that you lose one game, have one mistake, and you no longer control your own destiny.
I want to maintain that so badly, but with the playoff, it's no longer possible (unless we want to introduce promo/relo, and punish teams for losing)
Texas and Alabama both made mistakes...
like I said:
A mistake doesn't exclude you from a championship, but you should no longer control your own destiny. Regardless, FSU should have been in over bama.
But they are both $EC teams now, so they get a mulligan. The Committee played their mulligans.
Yeah I see both sides of this. G5 schedules are almost always easier so I don't see how you give all of G5 an autobid.
I also don't like the subjectiveness of the committee selecting 6 teams because the middle of the pack gets jumbled frequently. This is why i often proposed an 8 team playoff rather than a 12. It allows more flexibility while not over representing the G5. 5 P5 champions, Highest rank G5 two wildcards. Conference championships still mater, there's still some subjectivity where a single loss won't absolutely murder your chances.
I'm not sure what the solution with 12 teams. Getting rid of a committee and "eye-test" and going purely with some advanced analytics (similar to NET in bball), or just back to the BCS computers for the last 6 seems like the best approach to me
Then take out the subjectiveness:
Publish the algorithms, and then every knows exactly what they need to do to win
This really makes the most sense. Prior to the announcement of the 12 team playoff and the most recent realignment throwing a wrench in things I thought it should be the P5 conference champions and 1-2 G5 champions and/or 1-2 of the highest ranked P5 teams that didn't win their championship.
It's going to be a machine learning algorithm that learns how to get the most SEC teams in the playoffs...
Lol, I was joking with my wife that ESPN's FPI probably weights the number of times a team is mentioned on their programming as part of the ranking.
I think the difference for the 4 teams wo are upset about being left out is related to the FSU argument this year. FSU had no other opportunities to prove that they should be in. #12 has 2 losses. #13 has 3, this year. At the 12-13 cut-off, the team missed opportunities to prove they should be in the playoff.
I hope that when it does expand to a 12 team playoff we get a string of champions that come from outside the top 4 teams in the CFP final rankings.
Never hurts to hope, but I think you will disappointed when the teams who win from outside that top 4 are the Bama, UGA, and Ohio State teams that had an "off" year or lost their big game (Bama-UGA loser or The Game loser).
Honestly that does not even matter, because it would still invalidate both the 2 team and 4 team playoff where they always said that they "got it right".
We were supposed to get a true national champion with the BCS and then CFP, and we never really did IMO.,
So if we were still in the BCS era, it would be Michigan vs. Washington with FSU (and everyone on here) still pissed that they were left out. Shoot, there was even one year that the SEC was left out when Auburn was undefeated.
Edit: That brings up another point. The SEC acts like they have always been the most dominant conference in all of CFB since the beginning of time. That wasn't even the case as recently as 20 years ago.
That was before the first big ESPN-SEC media deal and before the SEC hype fest took off full force. That deal was signed around the exact same time as when Florida whipped OSU in the title game and out of nowhere, you start hearing all this "SEC speed" propaganda (insinuating the Big Ten was slow and unathletic) and the SEC chants started. Literally was not a thing before then. Coincidence? I think not.
BCS is whack, but I wouldn't be mad at this national title game.
Great, the old system got it wrong too. Was this really necessary Brett?
To be fair he posted this before the committee dropped their bomb and it was probably supposed to be a light hearted what-if, not a jab at the decision they made.
I mean, the old system got it less wrong. That's something.
They chose Florida State by the slimmest of margins? If I'm reading this right, then Florida State was closer to being #3 than they were to being #5.
This will hurt ACC recruiting very badly.
Any athlete hoping to play in a national championship will not select ACC.
Meh, Clemson and UNC will still sign a bunch of 4 and 5 star players. Norvell will clean up in the portal again.
If you want to identify when things started the decline into what we have now:![]()
It was the NCAA's decision regarding the eligibility of this man...an admitted thief who was fleeing one Program to avoid punishment and nothing more.
Allowing him immediate eligibility in 2010 was the match that lit the fire on all of the Transfer Portal/if you don't have the players then just take someone else's shitshow that we have now.
Shockingly, the SEC and one of its dirtiest programs was involved.
So if you want to be mad at the NCAA, be mad at them for this. Everything that has happened since has just been a progression due to the Big Programs realizing the NCAA was gutless and that they could walk all over them, middle fingers blazing.
Yep- admitted to burglary, got kicked off the team for drugs, and a "man of christ" Houston Nutt opens his arms to him immediately. lololololol. Why? to beat Vandy in football of course. College football is such a fucking cesspool.
I didn't think it would actually happen, but Paul Finebaum has overtaken Beano Cook as my most hated football journalist. Well done, Paul!
Also, its not fake outrage. Its real outrage.
Wow! What a self-righteous tool!
Me, Finebaum, or Cook?
Finebaum
Can't even finish it. Anytime someone says, "remember what Heather said", and I have to stop it. He's a Buffon Douche Canoe and she just needs to STFU like always.
Finebaum, Greenberg and Orlovsky--if you combined all of their IQs together, you still end up well short of 3 digits.
And Dinich has always hated on most of the ACC.
I didn't think it would actually happen, but Paul Finebaum has overtaken Beano Cook as my most hated football $EC Mouth Breather
journalist. Well done, Paul! FTFYYou insult journalists by including this clown.
This will most likely be the final straw for FSU... good bye ACC... VT needs to get out asap.
They cannot afford to get out.
They're mad, but they'll need to force a vote which won't happen.
The ACC is in a bad place, but Clemson and FSU can't get out.
I keep hearing that, but I still think FSU/Clemson will find a way.
Their best bet is some weasel terms in the contract that can be interpreted by a judge in their favor. I think it reads something like the GOR holds unless there are "material" changes to the league. That is probably what they will argue- the league has changed, etc.
This worried Cal fan did a deep dive on the GoR. I don't see how FSU or Clemson gets out it any time soon.
They've been trying, without success, for almost two years.
and after this, they won't stop their pursuits, if anything, it makes them want to leave even more so.
And they're still stuck with the same, immovable object: the GoR. FSU getting snubbed doesn't move that.
I'm not saying it will happen, but all it takes is a few major boosters to pony up the money to get around it. Money talks.
Do they have enough boosters/donors that have deep enough pockets to do so and willingly? That I don't know.
They need Saudi oil money
Which they might get, to be honest
Trying to hold off on Saudi "sand man"/Enter Sandman endorsement joke lol
The rumor is that the number starts with a B.
They don't have it.
"The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak" ?
They were already serious about wanting it. This gives them even more reason to want, but no additional means to achieve.
All that's really changed is that then, they were afraid this would happen. Now, it has happened.
And isn't it funny that the entity which was predicting this would happen just to happened to be the same entity that pulled all the strings to make it happen. And it just so happens to be that this same entity stands to make a lot of money by destroying the ACC and taking anything attractive to the SEC.
The collusion is real.
Man, neither of the HCs at Georgia or F$U want to be in the Orange Bowl. Could be a 5-4 game or a pull-out-all-stops game. Honestly, no reason to watch.
Correct - a shit ton of players won't play. This UGA roster is used to playing for the national title, not the meaningless OB trophy, the game is at 4pm in what will be a half full stadium. Rodemaker vs. whomever Beck's back up is. TV disaster. The only people watching are hard corps alums and those with money on it
or a reason to only play those that are graduating and not intent on the NFL, and the younger kids/non-starters on the team that need experience. Let everyone else rest and not get hurt going in to next season.
Build the fucking warchest
New ESPN talking point: Florida State did not go undefeated.
That just moved to my #1 worst take
Dan Orlovsky may be the dumbest person on ESPN..and when you consider his company..that is quite a statement.
Running out the back of the end zone might not even be in the top 10 of the dumbest things he's ever said or done
That stupid fuck. "They weren't undefeated without Travis." ummm yes fuck face they were. He should stay in his lane- which is low IQ takes on the NFL on a show nobody watches.
FSU has 3 QBs that are undefeated, who else has that? They are the best teams!
Biggest slimeball has gotta be Kirk Herbstreit imo. Dude can not get enough of the top 9 ish programs, and absolutely hates if anyone else gets in their way. (Basically the opposite of how I watch football).
He was putting forward that garbage narrative for weeks.
Pat McAffee would give Orlovsky a run for his money on dumbest. He has the most basic takes and just yells them while wearing a tank top, apparently that's all you need to do to get a following these days.
Totally agree regarding McAfee. Don't get why everyone loves him so much. Just seems really dumb and loud.
Pat McAfee is exactly what I'd expect a talking head with a WVU degree to be.
Its what I expect from anyone who attended WVU for more than 2 years. That diploma doesn't matter, it's just a certificate of survival in Morganhole for 4 years.
Original founding member of the McAfee Hater club. That dude makes me cringe. He opens his mouth and I have to change the channel. Seriously, I have zero understanding of his appeal.
I don't care for McAfee that much but I also don't think that he really takes himself that seriously.
I think deep-down he understands that he is riding the "Dude-Bro wave" and that it's gonna come crashing down at some point--hence why he cashed in with ESPN.
But when Orlovsky stares down in the camera like he's making some profound statement there...that is pure, unadulterated stupid.
Can someone just punch him?
I felt that way about so many of the guys on ESPN Sunday
I feel that way about most of the guys on ESPN now, period.
To think that I used to get mad at Mark May in the 2000s for considering out loud on the halftime show every week that it was possible the Hokies would lose ...I had no idea how far we would both fall.
THIS Virginia Tech team did not lose to FSU. We should get a bowl based on our last game alone. THIS Virginia Tech team dominated a P5 rival for 60 minutes straight and sent them crying to the locker room. #VTToTheOrangeBowl
SMDH
OMG he actually said that. ESPN actually aired it.
#AlternativeFacts
FSU portaled so hard that they just changed teams mid season and kept winning.
This is as bad a take as people saying the Holocaust didn't happen.
If anyone still had doubts, any credibility that ESPN may have still had is completely gone. How incredibly moronic and blatantly trying to make a false narrative.
And I thought Baghdad Bob had some bad takes! 🤣
I miss the old Baghdad Bob generator. Would give him some heavy use this week.
UM had 5 games without Harbaugh. They weren't the same team without him. So their new record is 8-0 and they are out of the playoffs. /s
Worst take ever. It's the same FSU team regardless; the same 85 scholarship players today as it was the beginning of the season. QB1 got hurt so QB2 steps in, QB2 gets hurt and QB3 steps in and they still win. That's what good teams do with good depth.
I wonder if Alabama is missing any starters now that they had at the beginning of the season? If so, they should have been removed from the playoff conversation based on the Jordan Travis precedent.
If needledick wants to talk about a team that didn't go undefeated he should be talking about the loss that Texas handed Alabama on their home turf. He might also want to include the absolute last second luck fest Alabama had with 4th and 30 against a meh Auburn.
His IQ is lower than UVA attendance for Spring Game.
I didn't realize the IQ scale went negative.
Here's the best way I can imagine the season ending:
FSU beats UGA in the Orange
Liberty loses to Oregon
Either Texas or Alabama win the playoff.
FSU, hang a banner you're the last undefeated team.
I like that, except for Alabama winning. I don't want them benefiting from this debacle.
Florida can be co-winners with Washington as both go undefeated.
You forgot Air Force destroys JMU in the Armed Forces Bowl. Even more so and F the B10 because the winner of Army/Navy who will have six wins does not get a bowl game because it doesnt fit the E$PN timeline/narrative while JMU, Jacksonville St and 5-7 Minnesota get bowl games. So go Falcons destroy the Dukes and F E$PN.
Good with the rest.
Texas curb stomps Bama again for the championship.
FYI, here is the SEC Shorts for Florida State getting screwed over.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZm3pc5HbsY
Amazingly accurate yet somehow satire
The "Lightning Lane pass" is hilarious. As insane as it seems, I would 100% not doubt if some random DVC vouchers or a Club 33 membership was involved in the process here.
I have seen grown adults come to blows in lines at Disney.
Props to the SEC Shorts making fun of the SEC and pointing out that FSU got screwed. They even labeled it as ACC Shorts.
Odd, no Herbstreit cameo during the credits.
Well they are making fun of a decision he was full party on endorsing as the correct decision.
I didn't think I needed the "/s" on that one.
Well, it was fun watching them while it lasted
Listening to XM radio on the way home and some dumb idiot was on there saying "let's do an invitational next week and play Alabama and FSU, who do you pick to win? Alabama? Well then why are you mad?!? Gotcha!"
I seriously need to take a break from college sports. The narrative has completely jumped the shark. If we have really shifted to a point where results don't matter and we just award opportunities based on what you feel is right, then this isn't for me anymore. I have zero desire to be at all invested in that kind of popularity contest.
but the thing that really bothers me is that Alabama vs FSU is a far from an easy pick. I mean, we're talking about a team that needed a miracle to beat 6-6 Auburn that was boat raced by NMSU. And it's not like we're talking about a game in August, it was the very previous game. And the NMSU game was 2 weeks ago.
FSU had its best defensive game of the entire season against UL. And the narrative was UL was a bad team and FSU did not look good beating them. No, UL was a really freaking good team and had really good offense. FSU just dominated a really good team.
I'd be interested to see the line, because it won't be that far off and I'd definitely bet against Bama. 2023 Bama isn't that good.
Yeah but Alabama plays in the SEC and they just feel like a team that would beat up FSU and that's all that matters anymore
The SEC invitational said the teams didn't want to play FSU. I think they are scared FSU would beat them in front of their friends and they can't have that.
Well they did beat LSU two years in a row. How many in a row against Florida now?
Also Bama struggled with Arkansas and south Florida and A&M.
Now I would never bet against nick saban and a month to prepare, but you want this weekend game sure FSU defense looks pretty darn good.
I'd bet a substantial amount of money that Bama beats this FSU team 10/10 times.
Using an Auburn game at Jordan-Hare as an argument point against Alabama is the worst possible anecdotal data point. This happens almost every single time they play at Jordan-Hare. It's basically been confirmed they prepped for Alabama for two weeks and ignored NMSU. If you view it as an actual trend of their season, they are one of the most clearly improved teams, with even to the most laymen of viewers, significant improvement from their QB and OL, two of the most, if not the most, important things in football.
People using this point never seem to bring up that Auburn also gave Georgia their biggest scare of the regular season... at Jordan-Hare. I know I have preseason receipts somewhere online, either here or r/cfb or both, that Freeze was going to dial up their best efforts in this first season for Bama and Georgia without any shadow of a doubt. He knows what they hired him to do.
Yes, Saban with a month to prepare for Rodemaker is a no brainer. That's why Bama is so good in these games- coaching. Saban knows how to win playoff/big games and on the rare occasion he loses, it's typically close. FSU with Travis would give them a good run though, IMO
Yes. To be clear I'm talking about the current FSU team. While I still think FSU with Travis is the weakest football team (not 6th most deserving) of the 6 potential options we had for the playoff (Michigan, Washington, Bama, Texas, UGA, FSU), they were certainly good enough to be competitive/maybe win if a few things swung their way with Travis.
Anecdotal is better than a made up statistic that "Alabama would win 10/10." And in place of anecdotal, let's use Bill C's stats instead.
I read that article already. As he states in the article, most of the data on FSU includes Travis as the QB and it cannot adjust for injury.
I didn't use that as a statistic, by the way, I simply said I'd bet a lot of money on that happening. If Florida wasn't **also** playing a backup QB, one who was substantially less experienced than Rodemaker, they almost certainly win that game and end this entire conversation.
Meanwhile, Bama gave UGA only their second loss in the last ~47 games... and the other loss was also Alabama.
Gary Danielson stated simply that "The SEC wasn't ever going to be left out" so FSU should be glad Bama is not in at 8-4.
Ok, so playoff selections are based on injuries to QBs and whether Saban has month to prepare. Might as well just replay the sound bites of ESPN.
Let me further posit this. If I understand, your position is that Bama is the better team than FSU and thus deserves to be in the CFP. While I agree they are going to be favored against FSU, I don't think it was going to be that lopsided, but let's just take the position Bama is way better than a Travis-less FSU.
What if the Alabama miracle against Auburn didn't happen? Alabama has two loses, still is the SEC champ, and still has a head-to-head win over UGA. Who is in the playoff? Is it still Alabama? It seems your argument (along with the bulk of talking heads of ESPN) is that it would still be Alabama. And if not, what changed in the analysis here?
The problem is we're ranking teams based on potential, not performance. Alabama probably does have a better roster. Does that mean they win? Someone always has to be favored. Why play the damn game? And to your point - if Bama had not converted on that miracle for some minute reason, does that make them a worse team? How could you say it does? They are who they are. And the people that matter say that they're better, so they'll always be better. We pick winners and losers.
I'm done with this shit.
When we are judging highly ranked teams from the SEC and Big Ten there is an assumption they are good, so the talking heads and selection committee tell us they need to be convinced that they don't belong.
When we are judging highly ranked teams from literally everywhere else there is an assumption that they are not good, so the talking heads and selection committee tell us they need to be convinced that they do belong.
ESPN has worked long and hard to get to the point where this is the case, and now there is no going back. If you're not in one of those 2 conferences, you're an outsider, you don't belong, and you don't deserve any piece of the pie. And when we are now awarding opportunities based purely on perception, the entire system is rigged. If you're not a fan of a team in one of those 2 conferences, I don't know why you would care anymore. The games don't matter. Wins no longer are actually wins, head to head results are completely meaningless. You're always fighting an uphill battle you cannot win, and eventually everyone will realize its not worth fighting anymore.
amen. louder for those in the back
Your first two paragraphs are a chef's kiss description of the current state of things. No notes from me.
Amen to all of this. ESPN slowly has taken over control of the college sports media market, and when they got in bed with the SEC in the late 2000s (equally ambitious and with a huge inferiority complex, needing to be seen as the best conference), they went all in on slowly gaslighting the average viewer and swaying perception. Even though the ACC went 6-4 against the SEC and has four teams in the top 25 to their five, the SEC is perceived as clearly stronger. And even though Fox owns the Big Ten, they basically are colluding for mutual benefit - the Big Ten is built up to be the only conference that can rival the SEC, so you can watch the battle between the two super leagues unfold either from the ESPN (SEC) or Fox (Big Ten) perspective and camp. Choose your side - this is the matchup our corporate tv overlords have chosen for the country. Anyone else simply isn't worth discussing.
The ACC also has more bowl eligible teams than the SEC. The SEC has a losing record against all P5 teams not just the ACC. The fact is that this year the SEC was not the best maybe not even a good conference, but no press agent is going to admit that.
Nailed it bro. I will say I hope that supporting VT football and the traditions that go along with it never die. I love CFB and it absurdities. it makes me sad that is is dying because of money.
A two loss team has never made the playoff, and I think there's no way 11-2 Bama makes the playoff in that case.
The only time a 2loss SEC champ was guaranteed a spot was Auburn in 2017, but they were unable to beat UGA twice, and frankly, it would have been deserved that year as Auburn may have played the hardest schedule in the history of the sport that year.
Yet, but that will likely change in a 12-team format.
Right- which could explain auburns DL running away from Milroe and not towards him on that 4th and 31... and Auburn letting a WR get in front of them in the endzone on the last play of their biggest game of the year. To assure an SEC team would be in the playoffs should bama upset GA.
I really can never tell with you, but if I am reading this correctly, are you suggesting that game was rigged for Alabama to win?
Seriously- no of course not- I don't think Auburn would tank that game if the SEC told them to, no. Im just trying to wrap my head around why Auburn gifted an impossible TD to bama??- watch the play again.
What happened is they made a very poor decision to mush rush 2 with a spy (he's gotta scramble 31 yards all or nothing), and everyone in the endzone was actually doubled except for Bond who was ulitmately able to find some empty space in the corner because Milroe had so much time. I think it was a pretty savvy decision by Bond to work himself into that corner, it basically forced the single coverage, and he used the sideline and backline to give an opportunity where a defender was unwilling to position themselves. After watching it over and over on the highlights that weekend I started to wonder why more of those all or nothing plays are not designed to attack the corners.
What do you think would happen in these two scenarios:
1. Auburn beats Bama and Bama still beats UGA in SEC championship game. You stated you don't believe a 2 loss Bama makes it in. Does UGA get in (like TCU last year)? If so, does Texas still jump FSU? Who makes it in.
2. UGA beats Bama. Obviously they are in as the undefeated SEC champ. Does Texas still jump FSU for the 4th spot?
If UGA had won, FSU would have been in, STOP. It would have been 4 undefeated champions. Primarily because the SEC still would have been in the playoffs.
Completely agree. We keep hearing the debate about best vs most deserving teams. I don't think it is one or the other. In the entire history of the playoff, if you were a P5 team that went undefeated as a conference championship you were in the playoff. The debate about "best" team was always reserved for the usually 4th spot when there are 2-3 teams with similar resumes. There is an objective criteria set to determine the teams admitted to the playoff. Once that criteria has been worked through, if 4 spots have not been filled then the subjective criteria of who is "best" must be used to round out the playoff. In this case, it was pretty clear for both sets.
Michigan, Washington, and FSU went undefeated in P5 conferences. They are in. Still need one more team so we move to the subjective.
Bama, Texas, OSU, and UGA have 1 loss. Bama and Texas won conference championship. Bama beat UGA. Texas beat Bama head to head at Bama. Unless the case can be made that OSU is better than Texas, Texas is the clear 4th.
However, this being the scenario that leaves the SEC out. This is where Eddie Royal was spot on. The committee didn't want to deal with the SEC fallout of not being represented and suffer the boycott of SEC fans. So Bama has to be in and Texas can't be left out since they beat Bama so they stuck the knife in FSU.
This is exactly what happened.
This is called a heckler's veto, no?
Except that "best" doesn't mean anything. It's undefinable and impossible to prove. It's a stand in for "my own subjective criteria, that I can change at any time".
It's always been most deserving and best resume, it has to be. Strength of record is the closest you get to a power rating that can factor in. If you're choosing the "best" teams off of your own criteria (meaningless). It is no longer a playoff, it's an invitational
Georgia wasn't as hot as everyone made them out to be this season. They had multiple scares. They were losing at halftime to South Carolina. Auburn probably should have beat them but couldn't finish. Georgia Tech gave them a scare in the 4th quarter holding Georgia scoreless and nearly getting the onside kick. Hope the Jackets next year remember the timeouts Kirby Smart called in the final two minutes to rub it in. Alabama put the nail on them.
Alabama had more scrape by wins though.
Ten point loss to Texas. Texas A&M game winning by six where again their offense couldn't do anything in the 4th quarter. Managed 3 points in second half against Arkansas to escape 24-21. And then the hail Mary on 4th and forever to beat Auburn.
Neither team was as dominant as everyone wants to try and make it seem. I think the FSU defense could hold Alabama under 20 points so if Rodemaker does much they are right there in any game with Bama.
They didn't hold LSU, BC, Clemson, Duke, or Miami to under 20 points.
Not a chance in hell they hold Bama to under 20, especially with an offense that would be repetitively putting them back on the field. I'd probably take Bama's defense out of a choice of any the country has to offer this year.
Under 20 is an insane ask against any competent offense, under 28 is much more reasonable. I could see that game being close in the 28-24 range with either team winning.
With Travis they beat Bama by 7-14 imo
You think FSU beats Bama by two scores with Travis?!? Based on what? You think they are significantly better than Georgia? I am legitimately baffled reading this.
Based on Rayo simps for the ACC with his whole being lol
Edit: before i get drawn and quartered, this is tongue in cheek
I absolutely simp for the ACC, but I'll stand by this opinion.
I think Bama is pretty mid compared to their previous teams, their offense is nothing to write home about. Their big regular season accomplishments were beating Ole Miss and LSU, Ole Miss is pretty solid but they have no defense and they beat LSU pretty well but FSU made them look like a Sun Belt team. They struggled with an actually bad Auburn, and yeah they beat Georgia but two of their best players were playing hurt, and Bama still needed some turnover luck. Georgia also didn't play a super tough schedule, so while they're clearly very good, we don't have the evidence to say they're the world beaters that ESPN and others assume.
FSU without Travis looks different offensively, but both games were never seriously in doubt (in a rivalry and conference championship, where the opponent has every inventive to give them a good game). They are a damn good team.
Matchup wise, FSU's offense (with Travis) is clearly better and has a better QB and better skill position players. Bama's defense has the edge, but I like FSU's very good (and clearly clutch) defense to slow down Bama's offense more than Bama's very good maaaybe borderline elite defense to hold up for 60 minutes against Jordan Travis, Keon Coleman and company
This is the problem I have with CFB right now. We decide who's going to win the games before they're played. I'd just rather the SEC form their own semi pro league and let the rest of us get back to watching teams we like play each other. The SEC has more money, better players, and - most importantly - they are always included in opportunities to win, whether or not they deserve it, because they're better. Hats off to them for being picked as winners.
I know I'm reignited a 5 day old discussion, but I'm just catching up, so fuck it, let's get weird.
.
The last bullet is what really peeves me. They changed the rules.
Btw, Chris - you're totally right about TCUs win over Michigan being flukey, but it shouldn't matter. Future projections should not be used to inform decisions, and post-decision results shouldn't be used to justify past decisions.
I agree with all of this for the most part, at least in my initial once-over, with the exception that I do think their logic has not been totally consistent throughout the selections process. I think in 2016(?), when they chose 1-loss Ohio State over 2 loss B1G champ Penn State, you can argue they chose 'best' over 'most deserving' but obviously, Ohio State was the team with one loss which has always been a consistent criteria so it can go either way.
I'm not saying I disagree with the TCU thing, but the committee was given a lifeline to avoid the NCG debacle last season when TCU lost to Kansas State in the Big12 championship and they did the "right" thing by including them. Thankfully, (from their perpspective) TCU did beat Michigan, no matter how repeatable that game was, which gave them some semblance of justification for their decision... but it still led to the worst national championship game I've ever watched. Whether or not it was the right thing to do, I do think it played a role in this year's decision. They don't want to risk another dud product, and the four teams in the playoff right now will generate an enormous amount of viewership and should be at least somewhat competitive games on paper, something I do not believe would be the case with FSU starting either of their available QB options.
I don't really "support" their decision, so much as I am thankful for it. I want to watch good football games once VT is out of the picture. I think a playoff without the SEC champion is frankly ridiculous to even consider in this context. I think the idea that Bama was an undeserving selection is ridiculous as well 12-1 SEC champ with the 5th toughest schedule should never be excluded. They have 3 better wins (at least) than FSU's best win, and they beat that team too.
So ultimately, I got what I wanted. I definitely think FSU got screwed over but sports are entertainment, and I wouldn't be entertained watching FSU get slowly choked out without ever threatening their opponent offensively in a semi-final.
Yea, I get your position. I have a friend who feels the same way. Disagree, but I understand.
So, you still didn't get what you wanted based on a CBS Sports Gamblin guru... There were absolutely zero objective measurements used by the committee to choose the teams they thought "should be in."
For example: Oregon was favored over Washington by 9.5. They lost, so they didn't get in. Why, if they were favored (rhetorical question obviously)? Why is no one talking about a 1 loss Ohio State team who would be favored over everyone in the Top 10 not named Georgia. And while we are talking about Georgia, they are still favored over everyone in the country. Why didn't they get in? Everyone is arguing over the Alabama - FSU thing, but why isn't anyone asking why Texas got in over anyone? Is that because of how they "looked"?
So, yea, we may have gotten teams that will give us good football, but I'm not convinced we have teams that will give us the "best football."
Spin this however you want, but it's a sham. You will never convince me this years FSU team, with their backup QB rather than the 3rd string QB, would look like TCU against any team in the playoff. They have the talent and depth across the board to compete with every team in the playoff, and I would submit, based on the BIG10's history in these big games, that they wouldn't have a problem beating a Michigan team with a very similar resume.
In any event, the 12 team playoff may help some with this specific situation, but CFB as we have known it is officially over. Games played and won on the field are meaningless in the grand scheme of things. It's all about eyeballs and money. Nothing more, nothing less. We all will have to take a collective deep breath and embrace the new reality.
I think two things can be true:
I can appreciate this take.
FSU vs Michigan was going to be an old school slug it out defensive grind of a game. It would be great.
I think it would've been a repeat of Iowa/Michigan. But we'll never know.
Iowa is terrible. The FSU to Iowa comparison that was started on ESPN is incredibly inaccurate. They played no one and won almost every game by less than 7 points.
Louisville would've housed Iowa. FSU Michigan likely would've been very competitive
If it was unclear, I was talking about if FSU/Mich played and Travis was out. As is ESPN.
Also, this is not an argument for whether FSU deserved to be in the playoff (they did). Just saying that, had FSU played Michigan without Jordan Travis, Michigan would likely score 20-30 points, and FSU would likely score 0-10. It would be ugly, not unlike the Michigan/Iowa game that UM won 26-0.
Louisville would be favored by less than 2 points on a neutral field.
SP+ has Louisville as the 23rd best overall team (32nd best offense, 31st best defense), with 10.1 rating. Iowa has an 8.4 rating, with the 124th best offense, and the best defense in the country, good for 31st overall. (10.1 - 8.4 = 1.7, which is how I got the 'less than 2 point' spread above).
Yeah I'm talking about FSU with 2nd string. But I'd go as far to say FSU with the 3rd string would put up a much better fight than Iowa did against Michigan.
You can't actually be serious that Iowa Louisville would be close. Louisville had two weird games with bad turnover luck, other than that pretty darn good team that beat good teams and housed decent ones.
Iowa consistently played unimpressive teams close and got caught in one by Minnesota. Their most impressive game against Rutgers was a clear outlier. But for that one we know Rutgers can't throw, they just had to sell out against the run.
Let's make this easier, what would your line be between Iowa and Notre Dame on a neutral field. What would it be between Louisville and Iowa before the ACC Championship game?
Bar was quoting advanced stats about Iowa. His opinion is rooted in opponent adjusted analysis regarding how Iowa played. The games were close because Iowa's offense is historically bad. At the same time, none of those mediocre or bad teams were ever going to score much because of how insanely good Iowa's defense is. Yes, the games looked gross and boring, but that's how Iowa wanted to play. It's a more severe version of 2006 Virginia Tech. The country's best defense and special teams with a pretty bad offense. That team just had a little more talent on the offensive side of the ball.
So when it comes to a hypothetical Iowa vs Louisville game, yea it's predicted to be a pretty close game. Iowa's defense will nullify Louisville's offense and Iowa will still score barely anything. 16-13 would be very possible (and I'd probably take whatever under Vegas put out).
Lol imagine predicting 29 points in an iowa game in the year of our lord 2023
Inorite!? They only had games with more than 29 points 6 times this year
🙄
In week 13, I would favor ND by 9.8 points. Basically, Iowa wouldn't be able to score, but neither would Notre Dame.
My above projection was from week 13. Bill C has not published post-championship game SP+ yet.
I agree. Again, SP+ (in post week-13 rankings) has Louisville ranked 23rd overall.
Fwiw, SP+ only considers adjusted turnovers (which assumes the defense recovers 50% of fumbles and 22% of all pass breakups). So if the defense has 5 pass breakups, but 4 of those result in picks, SP+ (which only considers the 'repeatable' things) would consider 3 of those picks to be 'lucky', and not 'count' towards future projections.
Overall, I think you under estimate how good Iowa's defense is. Their offense is trash, but their defense is one of the best in the nation. That keeps them in games, and keeps them from getting blown out
I think their defense is solid but it benefits from playing in the Big 10, specifically the Big 10 West where there is no offense to be found for hundreds of miles.
Do you have a good explanation for why the Iowa Tennessee bowl line is Tenn -8.5? I don't even think Tennessee is that good but I'll give you a point and a half and take Tenn -10 gentlemen's wager 🤝
SP+ is adjusted for strength of opponent, and accounts for number of snaps played. After all that, Iowa is still number 1. I'll rattle off some stats for you:
TL;DR - No
Long answer:
So, first you have to understand how Vegas makes lines:
What I'm doing is just step 1....
So, SP+ says that Iowa is 8.4 points better than the average team, which is good for 31st in the country. SP+ says Tennessee is 12.1 points better than the average team, which is good for 19th in the country. 12.1-8.4 means that Tennessee should be a 3.7 point favorite. BUT SP+ does not account for injuries, opt outs, etc, and it doesn't move based on the market.
Also worth noting, bowl games are just weird. There's motivational factors, coaches changing jobs, guys getting healthy from injuries, coaches throwing in trick plays and experimenting, etc.
Finally, if your curious, SP+ went 51.8% against the spread this year in FBS vs FBS games. Professional gamblers aim for 53% ATS. You can go through Bill's Spready if you want.
Not sure I believe how good the Michigan offense actually is. They played a lot of bad teams this year with the exception of Penn State and Ohio State.
'Good' is an arbitrary term. Let's be a bit more precise: The Michigan offense is extremely efficient, as evidenced by their second half against Penn State. The one area I think Michigan is lacking is the deep ball/vertical passing game.
I recognize that Michigan's offense isn't perfect. But it's pretty damn good, and one of the best in the game any way you slice it.
but is it...effective? [ducks]
I get that but there's no way to adjust the strength of offense for a whole conference when 9/12 games are against each other and the other 3 are usually 2 cupcakes and P5 or 3 cupcakes. You will not get an accurate comparison across conferences with that few data points
I don't know what to tell you... clearly there is nothing I could tell you that would change your mind.
I'm not saying Iowa is an amazing team... they're a top 30/35 team, with an elite defense, and a garbage offense. Louisville is a top 20/25 team. FSU, without a super star QB, has an elite defense, and an okay offense (hence the comparison to Iowa)
Texas got in by playing the hardest schedule by far of the top ten and they have the best win (over Bama)
So in this case the product on the field matters (I'm not debating with you as I actually agree. I just think this continues to prove the point about the committee's inconsistency)?
Except Bama had the 5th toughest schedule (highest in the CFP contenders) and Texas was 13th. FSU with the 55th toughest schedule.
Strength of record is a better metric. And FSU is right up there at the top.
Is Bama's actually the 5th toughest or just because they played SEC teams? The SEC was downright bad this year compared to most years. Losing record to P5 teams, and couldn't even fill their bowl obligations with qualifying teams.
Does Texas figure into that 5th place ranking? If so, why count teams that beat you?
The difficulty of your schedule is still difficult whether you win or lose, is this controversial? I've never once in my life heard this suggestion about SOS before now.
If you prefer SOR, which factors in how you perform against your schedule... Bama is 4th.
If that's the case with SOS, congratulations to South Carolina for their first playoff appearance
Pick any metric you want to use for SOS... Bama will be near the top. The one I quoted was the FPI SOS, which uses an average top-25 team as the benchmark.
Did the SEC perform below their usual standard in the early season OOC this window? Yes. And they are still by far the best conference against other P5 conferences since the inception of the BCS
That said, the overreaction to that occurrence, something that happens to just about every other conference *every* season really speaks to how much of this is simply "I hate the SEC" logic. People go to bat for the weaker conferences, who perform poorly OOC almost every season, every year without question. The first time the SEC falters in their early season OOC slate those same people use it as a hammer to downplay the conference all season long. It's a bit annoying to me watching people use these double standards so frequently in regards to the SEC. It is the best conference, it has been for about 20 years now, pick any metric you want, national championships, out of conference records, bowl records, talent acquisition (recruiting), talent deployment to the NFL (draft), etc. In 2023 people are still trying to pretend it's just media bias.
I love that arguments like this make it oh so easy to justify claiming that losses in the SEC are actually better than wins in other conferences, which then just leads to an echo chamber of vaulting the SEC over everyone. Because at that point no matter what everyone else is fighting an uphill battle with one hand tied behind their back.
Well yeah, they're annually vaulted above others to the point where both the BCS and Committee have gone out of its way to position SEC teams in a favorable spot, often throwing out the standards to justify it. We have 20 years of precedent over this, even so far as to vaulting teams that didn't even win their division to the National Championship Game before the playoff. Of course numbers will be skewed when they get that preferential treatment.
The SEC is notorious for playing inferior teams OOC, and whenever they play anyone remotely good it either has to be at home or in a "neutral" site like Atlanta. Once again, they game the system to put themselves in a preferential spot that is ignored by those who should be pointing it out.
Are we really pretending that bowls are meaningful? Didn't the ACC have the best bowl record for a few years in a row recently and it was completely downplayed?
Its been well documented that recruits get a bump in their ratings when certain programs show interest? And when that happens to every recruit that certain schools offer, wouldn't that naturally make their classes higher than others?
Well, nobody ever accused NFL front offices of being smart, otherwise the shelf life of a coach or GM would be longer than 3 or 4 years. And of course the players whose teams are on national TV the most often would get the best chances to get drafted. That doesn't mean they're better than everyone else, it means NFL front offices are lazy.
You didn't have to come out and illustrate my point so beautifully, but I am thankful that you did.
Recruiting rankings are bullshit, every NFL team is dumb for drafting SEC players (let's ignore that they are also the number one represented conference on active rosters, 367, next closes B1G with 288), preferential treatment is why they win all these national titles (five different SEC programs have won a national title since 2006, no other conference has more than two in that time period), all their OOC matchups are favorable (no evidence of this provided)... If you can justify away every piece of evidence presented to you, at some point it's not worth continuing to talk about it.
lol ok so any criticism of the SEC is some kind of bias and we should all just shut up and accept they are better and not try to argue against it.
Goodness, can your nose be any further up their asses?
When you look at every possible way you could realistically measure the success or strength of a conference, and it all points to one conference, and then you decide that none of it really counts for narrative reasons you cannot supply ample evidence for, why should I feel like I'm the one who isn't seeing the real picture?
At this point we have nothing more to discuss. You clearly have your mind made up that the SEC is just better and nothing will ever convince you otherwise, and anything that gets presented to you that counters your belief is hand waved away as an anti-SEC bias. There's no rational debate that can be had with you regarding this going forward.
It's absolutely baffling that you could type that message out directed at me, when that is exactly what you are doing in the opposite direction.
You haven't presented any evidence more than your opinions on the matter. You have waved away every objective measurement of the conference I've provided.
Read the room, dude. What did you expect when you came into this thread? People to warmly accept your "the SEC is great, you're just biased and jealous" viewpoint with open arms in a discussion where the vast majority is vehemently pissed off over the ACC getting screwed (which actively kept money out of VT's pockets and sent us to a worse bowl) at the benefit of that same SEC?
Like seriously, I would expect a mod to be able to read a room better than that and not try to actively stir shit up.
I am not making that argument hoping for upvotes. I know people, specifically fans within the ACC, are mad about the playoff, the SEC, etc. I have a different viewpoint than many in here on the selection, why would I not be allowed to discuss it in the thread where it is being discussed? Why would my being a mod have any relation to me posting SOS/SOR numbers, or providing evidence to the contrary of what people are saying?
i really hope you're not one of the ones downvoting chris's comments in this thread because you disagree with his opinion
I'm disappointed you think I would do that
idk man accusing chris of actively stirring things up when all he's doing is playing comment tennis isn't really a good faith comment in my opinion
IDK, man. Maybe assuming people cannot separate a disagreement from downvoting isn't in the best faith either. Case in point, I would say we disagreed quite a bit the other day. Didn't downvote you not one time.
Who assumed? I literally said i hoped it wasn't alum.
Edit to add: alum's comment about chris actively (with emphasis) stirring things up les me to believe that he didn't view chris's comments as "comment tennis". Which, from someone not engaged in the back and forth, i think it was basically just a disagreement and not any exchange happening in bad faith -- until the accusation of actively stirring things up. Hence my comments and this one.
W
h
e
n
t
h
e
t
e
n
n
i
s
g
o
e
s
b
a
c
k
a
n
d
f
o
r
t
h
s
o
m
u
c
h
i
t
s
l
i
k
e
t
h
i
s
o
n
p
h
o
n
e
P
H
U
C
K
I
N
G
B
R
I
L
L
I
A
N
T
If you made no assumption that Alum was the culprit, why is there a need to take the time to comment and say you hope it isn't him?
There is a huge difference between "assuming something is true" and "considering something is possible", and that difference is represented in the uncertainty of the language i chose
Again, if you have a problem, take it up with Joe
I really didn't mean to kick this off. I did state the SEC wasn't the best conference this year. Yes, they have several perennially great teams. But also some stinkers. This year they were poor against other conferences.
Oh, of course the SEC was just better - shut up and swallow it everyone- than the ACC this year. That's why they went 4-6 against the ACC. Just simply better, so shut up.
We already talked about the matchups the ACC vs SEC had this year... in this thread. You never answered when I wrote them out for everyone to see.
It's old news. When the SEC loses, there are excuses. We get it. They are just better. Everyone shut up.
Again, not addressing the matchups I wrote out clear as day for anyone to see within this thread.
This is the part I struggle with. The sec and espn have absolutely been yelling at everyone who will listen that the sec is the best conference and that it has been for 20 years. I just don't buy that, though.
The sec is the best conference now. And has been for about 5 to 10 years. But they weren't clearly the best conference 20 years ago when that idea was being parroted by interested parties.
The sec has done one non-football thing better than any other league. Propaganda. Plain and simple. The sec is better than everyone now because they, and their media arm (a.k.a. espn), convinced everyone that they were the best. It wasn't true when they started saying it but they spoke it into existence. They have benefited from preferential treatment which has skewed them up and created a perception that became reality. If everyone believes they are the best then everyone will feed into that belief and make it true. It's impossible for the sec not to win a championship when the only two teams in the championship are from the sec (lsu vs bama, 2011) which only happened because everyone had been force fed this idea that the sec was king. That championship game is probably the one that broke the system. There's no reason a championship game should ever be a rematch of a conference title game.
This is all moot at this point though. The sec is top dog with the B1G being the only other league to make a substantial challenge. The other leagues, particularly the acc, have been absolutely feckless dweebs by comparison.
College football is never going back to what it was 20 years ago. I think the sooner we accept this fact the easier it'll be to move on. VT is likely to get stuck out in the cold. I have no idea what CFB will look like in another 20 years but if you're not part of the big 2 leagues I'd bet you're going to have a hard time finding games on tv. It's why I want so badly for VT to get into the SEC. It's the only way VT football as we know it can survive. Otherwise we'll be relegated to playing games broadcast on radio only and potentially winning a league no one gives two fucks about.
I agree w/ everything you wrote, except I do think that, in 10-20 years, non P2 games will still be broadcast. VT won't be on every weekend, but there'll still be a lot of air to fill, and non P2 games will be tapped to fill it.
It'll be interesting to watch, for sure. I think as fewer and fewer teams have a shot at a special season fewer and fewer eyeballs will be on cfb generally. The media giants (espn and fox) are going to be shrinking their customer base to fans of the schools in the P2 and since none of those games will have any bearing on what happens to, say VT's post-season, the only people who will care will be fans of teams in the P2. I used to be interested in watching other league games because, when VT was good, I wanted to have an idea of what type of other good teams we might have to compete with in the post season. When the acc champ had a legit shot at a bcs berth and we were winning acc championships it was interesting to know what the teams in the SEC and B1G were doing on a weekly basis. Now that I know with confidence that VT never has a shot at a championship I don't give two shits about OSU, UM, LSU, or Bama. I'm not a fan of any of them and since their games don't have any bearing on VT or VT'S post season I have no interest.
When the big TV networks discover that they have all this content but 1/3 of the eyeballs they're going to have to start dialing back the content. Essentially, it'll be too expensive for the networks to broadcast all the games they are currently when viewership inevitably falls off a cliff so they will cut a lot of the content. And guess who will be first on the chopping block? Anyone not in the P2. I think there's going to be a drop in demand when fans of teams not in the P2 realize they are rooting for second rate products and the natural response to the drop in demand will be a drop in supply.
I agree with you which is why you have to hope the next iteration is the Division 1 Affluent Division. It likely brings the dissolving of conferences and nullification of E$PN media contracts.
1. It frees the ACC schools from GoR most likely
2. Possibly levels the TV monies distributed amongst the division
3. Forces E$PN and Fox to compete more often for the media rights.
Obviously all speculation on what happens there but seems a likely scenario if they do break off the top 60ish teams.
Starting in 2006 (17 years ago) through 2022 the SEC had five different teams win 13 out of 17 available national titles to be won.
I'd say that's pretty clear cut, and has been the case way longer than 5-10 years. The recruiting dominance started in during the 2000's. Shifting demographics and talent beds have seen the Southeast, which was already talent rich, gaining an increasing market share of the top football talent. The perception change happened in this time as well, and that's leading recruits to continue to choose the SEC. It is what it is at this point.
Recently the sec deserves it. But in the early years the bcs provided the sec with more opportunities to play for championships than anyone else. And a lot of it was based on perception and propaganda. Not actually being head and shoulders better than everyone. Of course they have won more. They've had more chances.
This is a fact that SEC homers will never acknowledge. How many times did we hear "you mean to tell me that Alabama is not one of the best 4 teams in the country"
I guess being the best is why they NEEDED the most money from TV contracts, and why it's OK to boot an undefeated P5 champion in order to let a one-loss SEC team into the playoffs.
The best always need more reassurance than the others.
ESPN has to pay for that bloated SEC contract some way.
But the playoffs is supposed to be about this year, not the average performance since the BCS.
Right but even this year it's not that bad. When you list out the games, it looks significantly less bad.
It also didn't really impact Bama's schedule strength at all.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree there. "Not that bad" doesn't translate to "leave out an undefeated power 5 team who beat a top SEC team."
In that case Texas should still get in over Bama. Head to head is the hallmark tiebreaker for all sports. Bama has a good resume but it's very similar to Texas and Texas has head to head.
The only time you could consider scrapping head to head is when the team with the better resume loses very close on the road, or in OT. A good example of this is TCU in 2014 who lost by 3 in multiple OT's to Baylor but blew everyone else out all year, where Baylor got blown out by a mid West Virginia team. That is not the case this year though, because the game was at Bama and Texas won handily
The seedings should be:
1. Washington
2. Michigan/FSU
3. Michigan/FSU
4. Texas
(If the computer composite has Michigan above FSU then they should be 2, but those seeds are interchangeable since they play each other.)
They will never leave the SEC out of the playoff. If Alabama had lost to Auburn, but still beat UGA, they would have dropped UGA to fourth and probably still would have hosed FSU, though they might have left Texas out in that case.
They can't leave the SEC out because of the unceasing adoration for the SEC as the greatest league in the universe. If the committee leaves out the SEC then they have instantly de-legitimized their own playoff in the eyes of many. The debate around FSU's screwjob would be nothing compared to the hate the committee would receive for leaving out the SEC. They simply can't do it unless every single SEC team has three losses somehow, and even then the 3 loss SEC champ would probably be a top 5 team.
Texas also has the worst (lowest ranked) loss of the playoff contenders.
How does FSU's loss rank?
Starting QB is apparently worse than a loss to OU.
One of the things I loved (past tense) most about college football was when the TCUs would beat the Michigans. Nothing better than watching the big dogs fall. Any Given Saturday.
I mean, yeah, I knew Georgia was still gonna win. But thanks to TCU, Michigan wasn't. One less blueblood in the MNC.
It saddens me in ways I can't find the words for that the powers that be have just decided to shut out the TCUs (and even the FSUs, they're hardly a little dog football-wise) if they don't "look like champions" or if it's arbitrarily decided that they "ain't played nobody."
Any Given Saturday is increasingly a thing of the past, and I hate that.
If you wanted to watch good football, with a wider variety of participants in the long run, you needed FSU in the playoffs. You needed people to have some confidence that their favorite team has a chance, no matter how small.
Not because of that one game, but for the future of the sport. No, we don't need one team in every playoff. We need some variety, with the possibility of other teams participating.
If you win, you should be in. If you lose, it's OK not to go to the playoffs one year.
This should never matter in sports. The winning teams advance and play no matter who is "better" (immeasurable by the way). Every national championship from now to infinity could be 100-0, and if it's chosen by strength of record and a set of objective computer rankings it's the right system
For the record. If we went strictly by SOR, Bama would have been the 4 seed this year... and last season.
Yeah, that's like saying the 2013 Seahawks didn't deserve to win Super Bowl XLVIII because they ran away with the game too fast and made it more unwatchable.
Brady and Belichick should've advanced over the Broncos, even though they lost
Exactly this. The 2007 and 2011 Superbowl Champs (Go Big Blue!) came in as Wildcards and just kept winning. They took the "perfect" Patriots and beat them to win it all.
Now college and NFL are nothing alike, but there's a reason why the product on the field should be what matters and not what "looks good". Who's to say that FSU doesn't come in and win the whole damn thing? We'll never know and that's a travesty and underscores the whole system.
Ahhh, if people could predict for certain that FSU would get blown out by Michigan a month before the game, they would be retired in Bali of course. I loathe that argument. If you know the outcomes, why play the season? Just crown Alabama every year- they have the most 5 star recruits, right?
I would not pick against Saban with a month to prepare. But if it was a week to prepare then it's tough cause FSU is a great defense and Milroe hasn't been great. If Milroe was injured I wouldn't change my felling about Bama because the next guy could easily be better and coaches messed up (see Tua).
Having said that, the committee sucks about picking the best team. If they are picking because they think Bama will win then why has the number 1 team only one a 3rd of the time. The 2nd team has won a 3rd of the time.
I am routing for Washington to win it all, but look at the spreads, Bama is 1.5 behind Michigan but Washington the number 2 is 4 behind Texas. So that means Washington should be at least 3rd. Then 1) if Bama is that close to #1 then Washington is to the 3nd best team, or Texas is the best team. No matter what Vegas thinks the committee isn't with them.
So if you want the 4 best teams then why aren't they in order who you think will win? Why has #1 only played #2 3 times in 9 years? They have either proven they have no idea how to rank teams or don't care about identifying the best teams and go for TV matchups.
For anyone thinking E$PN didn't know who was in before the announcement...Herbstreit set had replaced the FSU helmet before the broadcast
Of course he knew, they probably were advised in the process
College Gameday should scrap the whole Coming to Your City intro video and use the Vince McMahon Corporation No Chance in Hell theme from now on.
Also because Big & Rich suck balls and that song is terrible.
Correct. After all games have been played, Lunardi moves teams from 13 seeds magically to "next 4 out". Once he is told who is in the tournament. No bigger sham in sports than Lunardi
FTFY
I would be shocked if he hadn't known. ESPN probably spent the whole morning briefing with every talking head and giving them all the bullet points they needed to stick to in order to keep the SEC narrative going.
But you mean Jordan Travis isn't a Heisman finalist? But wasn't he the difference? S/
Well, I'm going to watch our bowl, but this gives me the excuse I need to not watch another one. I really hope this backfires for ESPN and ratings are really low for bowl season and the playoff games.
https://www.thelines.com/florida-state-college-football-playoff-odds-pow...
Interesting Kelly Ford article on he lines if FSU was involved. His system is considered a vegas sharp so these numbers are pretty trustworthy.
TLDR:
- Travis worth roughly 7 points in the power rating.
- Would be +4.5, +9.5, +10.5, and +14.5 to Washington, Texas, Alabama, and Michigan respectfully
- TCU was +7.5 to Michigan in 2022
- In summary FSU was robbed their defense actually keeps them similarly competitive in these games without JT
TCU getting treated like an FCS team by UGA was something the committee wanted to avoid having a repeat of again this season. That was why I said before all this stuff, while people were arguing Bama/Texas stuff, that the one to watch was FSU.
For fucks sake, TCU beat Michigan to get into the title game, let's stop pretending they got gifted a spot they didn't deserve.
They beat Michigan by 6 with two pick sixes and a Michigan TD called back to the 1 then promptly fumbled inside the 1.
The fluke win was fun for all of us, especially those of us who don't care for Michigan, but lightning was never going to strike twice.
They were never in 100 tries going to beat UGA. Talent is too important in this sport, and in Bama and UGA's case, the talent is usually attached to the best coaching in the country as well. It's the whole reason why I hate the playoff in general. This sport needs things other than the national championship to matter, because the national championship is never going to happen for about 96% of the teams in the sport.
Cool- so why play the games? in 2024, lets just put Alabama in the final and look at recruiting rankings for their opponent. And your revisionist nonsense about the TCU win over Michigan is chicken shit. some on man- that's called football. Pick 6 TDs dont count now? come on man. Chicken shit. Why play the games?
Holy shit dude, a win is a win. TCU won, they proved they belonged, so to just whitewash it now and say that their entire year is disqualified because of the national title game is asinine.
Quite frankly it's stunning to see you argue with a straight face that winning didn't matter, because it didn't look like a win. That's every bit as bat shit insane as Orlovsky arguing that FSU wasn't undefeated this year.
Chirs, you are the freaking man all the time... But your take about TCU - Michigan is ehhh.
I do agree with your sentiment at the bottom though. This is college football, it needs so much more than the playoff.
To be clear, TCU won that game fair and square. I was only saying it was a one score game with three difficult to repeat scoring swings in terms of probability. You can't bank on pick sixes, and you certainly can't bank on a team having a TD called back and then immediately fumbling it to the other team inside the 1. That said, TCU also switched all their signs and caught Michigan off guard big time. They were making ghost keys and giving up big plays as a result. I'm glad TCU beat them, particularly in light of all the sign stealing stuff.
I do think TCU is a good example of what happens to a Cinderella team when they meet the Uber elite teams though, particularly when they are fully dialed in for the CFP.
OK... I can get behind this.
I just don't happen to think, and I don't think you're saying this, that FSU is in the same category from a team standpoint. In any event, I think the 12 team playoff will help with some of this, but I also think it will generally be poor for CFB as a whole. We will see the same teams, for the most part, year in and year out make it to the playoff. Then we will see a recapitulation of the regular season as 8-9 teams will be from the SEC or BIG on a regular basis (maybe I'm missing something from the format, but that's my perspective).
With Travis I think this FSU team was better than last year's TCU team for sure, but still a rung below the uber-elites (imo). I think this FSU team is ahead of schedule, and has a handful of elite pieces, on an otherwise tier below true national title winning level team.
Your take on the 12 team is definitely similar to mine.
I really think the 12 team playoff needs to have a hard control of no more than 3 teams at most from a single conference. That covers the SEC/B1G Champion, the loser from the championship, and the other team that their only loss was to the division winner.
I think the committee, ESPN, and fans need to stop worrying about trying to ensure the best/most competitive matchup and just let stuff play out on the field. Sometimes, teams get curbstomped in championship games. Hell I remember USC just beating the piss out of Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl about 20 years ago. Sometimes it happens - we can't contrive all the games to be this magical showdown like the 05 Rose Bowl for every big matchup. Sometimes that happens, but the randomness and that occasional epic game make it worth it.
Vegas sharps had VT a 10.5 point favorite over Louisville Sat. and They had Oregon -10.5 against Washington. Just saying.
I mean sure they're wrong time to time which is why we play the games but they're right more than they're wrong.
It's not by the margin you think it is though. Of course some lines are set to entice one side or the other, but their NFL hit % hovers around 55% IIRC.
One talking point that keeps coming up for me is how the SOS was a factor. Is there anywhere that you could analyze where Alabama's strength of schedule would be if they didn't play Texas? Or what Texas SOS would be if they didn't play Oklahoma?
They are getting/taking credit for having played a difficult schedule but they didn't win. I am interested in how far their SOS falls without those games to see how that compares to FSUs SOS
SOS is nonsense that is always "reverse engineered" to justify selections and seedings. It's nonsense. VT and UVA hoops play literally 90% the same schedule. UVA's SOS is always top 15 and Vt's is usually 340th. Because we play VMI I suppose and UVA plays delaware- 200 plus point disparity. I can't take it seriously. The only time it's mentioned is to justify a decision made on 50 other factors. The committee thought FSU with Rodemaker would get blown out and didn't want to lose TV ratings in the second half. Simple. so they tout some SOS bullshit. FSU played arguably the best non-con game of anyone this year. it's nonsense.
In this case, there was a pretty substantial difference in SOS... Keep in mind there are 65 P5 teams.
Bama played the 5th toughest schedule... Florida State played the 55th.
Of course they did. Why? Because Miss State, Kentucky, and Auburn are the same fucking teams as BC, Wake, and Virginia Tech of course. but for some reason they are rated much higher. It's a shell game- always has been.
Uhhhh... Kentucky beat Louisville at Louisville a little over a week ago. That was a 3-5 SEC team beating the 2nd ACC team...
Maybe Clemson, the much more talented team, will beat Kentucky in their bowl game to even things out a bit, but I don't really count bowl games as significant data points.
The ACC went 6-4 against the might SEC this year. But the SEC is just better top to bottom of course- like always every year. LSU is better than FSU- never mind the noles smoked them. And one of those sec wins was a totally outmatched GT program when compared to GA in every facet. Congrats.
Lol you think the only favorable matchup in those 10 games was UGA getting to play GT? Take the blinders off for one second man.
Clemson (8-4, ranked team) vs South Carolina (5-7, 2nd to last in the East ahead of only Vanderbilt)
FSU (13-0, best team in ACC) vs Florida (5-7, 3-5 SEC, 4th in East)
Louisville (10-3, 2nd best team in ACC vs Kentucky (7-5, 3-5 SEC, 5th in East)
UNC (8-4) vs South Carolina (again, 5-7, 2nd to last in their division)
FSU (again, 13-0, best team in ACC) vs LSU (9-3, 3rd in their division)
Blinders? that's funny. Bama in no matter what is your whole argument. They should have lost to Auburn- needed a miracle. But Auburn is such a tough place to play they lost at home by 21 to NM State. Blinders. lol
It's actually impressive how you shift the argument with each comment in any given chain.
Where did I shift the argument? You said I have blinders on. I called you out on it. I didn't shift anything.
I commented the actual SOS numbers -> They are wrong because the SEC actually sucks and Kentucky is actually the same as Boston College (based on???)
Well that Kentucky team beat the 2nd best team (Lousiville) at Louisville -> Well the ACC record is 6-4 and one of those games was UGA vs GT
I point out a bunch of lopsided games in favor of the ACC -> You just say Bama in no matter what... Start talking about Auburn (I've seen this argument at least 1000 times in the last two days).
What are we even talking about? Where did I say Bama in no matter what?? Why are we talking about Auburn?
And Pittsburgh also beat Louisville. Using the Kentucky loss is pointless. How teams strengths and weaknesses align matter, and shit happens in rivalry games.
Totally agree with both of these things. However, I've seen the Alabama-Auburn close game (not even a loss) used as a catch-all reason that somehow Alabama isn't that good AND/OR they don't deserve their playoff spot at least 1000+ times in the last two days, and that is not an exaggeration.
I want people to keep that energy consistent.
I did not- nor do I recall anyone saying 2023 Alabama isn't "good"- of course they are good. The point is that there are 4 playoff spots. Not 16. Alabama is certainly top 6 by all metrics. I honestly thought GA- defending champ team whose only loss was a close loss to Bama had a stronger case in a 4 team beauty pageant. Every team has flaws- hell Michigan isn't great on offense and their coach was suspended half the year. They played 2 tough games all year. Washington had some close calls, Texas lost their rivalry game to meh Oklahoma on a neutral field- while FSU beat LSU on a neutral field. Point is- nobody is saying Bama isn't good. But it's a 4 team playoff. FSU went undefeated- something Saban has only done twice coaching the greatest dynasty ever in the sport. They should have been in.
Yet all those SEC teams are part of Bama's awesome strength of schedule. So if they are bad than so is Bama' strength of schedule.
There's a stat called 'Strength of Record' that measures the likelihood that an 'average' Top 25 team would have that team's record or better, given the schedule. Bama was 4th in this metric. FSU was third. Source
Man that screen captured quote is so damning. Basically admitting that they just didn't feel like FSU was good so the undefeated Power conference team didn't deserve a chance to try.
This past weekend was a pivotal moment where the committee officially made it clear on record that perception was more important than reality.
So where is the ACC Leadership? I'm more concerned that our Commissioner and ACC leadership seemed to have either turtled up or just quit. Other than a "strongly worded statement" there has been nothing. I think it just reinforces that football isn't a priority.
I think ESPN has played this perfectly. They had ESPN personalities advocate for and others advocate against and all of it focused on the committee and not the network. Then Greenberg and Stephen A showed up on Pat McAfee like an old school Ric Flair / Dusty Rhodes interview from an 80s wrestling show barging in and shouting at each other. Nobody is talking about ESPN they have deflected it all onto the committee.
Meanwhile the ACC is just hanging out saying nothing. A lot of FSU folks are wondering where the other ACC ADs and Presidents are and why are they all silent. It starts to feel like everyone has just accepted that its over. I live in Bama and if they had been snubbed it would have been all hands on deck in the SEC to go fight.
I just don't get it. And I'm not sure what Jim Phillips actually does as the commissioner anymore.
There is a part of me that wants the ACC or FSU to file an injunction on the committee for excluding FSU. Yeah, it is wasted money, but make the effort and keep the fact that the conference and FSU got screwed in the publics eyes.
Everyone, and I do mean everyone, knows FSU got screwed.
David Teel:
I guess it depends on who is doing the rating$$$.
It's a good point and by the committee's logic FSU should be 6th (or worse, frankly!).
It's all very dumb.
Don't see how NC State shoulders blame for Corrigan's actions, but thought overall the article was a good read. CFP-committee's-meddling-will-linger-as-NC-State-deals-ACC-another-potentially-fatal-blow
From your link:
Keep in mind, Luke is a college sports beat writer for the Raleigh News & Observer, where this article was originally published. So if he's blaming NC State for it, he has enough contacts and knows enough about it to know why.
But this isn't the first time the ACC had people in place to do the right thing and they actively went in a direction that hurt the conference. I think back to the snub of VT from the NCAA Basketball tournament in 2010 when the Wake Forest AD was leading the selection committee. When asked about it after the fact, the guy was rattling off bullet points about our resume that weren't true at all.
Someone build the bonfire, I will bring the marshmallows. Boo needs to go and it's pretty clear that he doesn't have alot of fans inside their program. Now it's grown to pitchforks from the whole ACC.
NC State has its own problems though for football. Pretty sure they have 20 guys in the portal already.
A buddy who is a FSU alum shared a screenshot with me that I can't paste, but this is the text from the post on Warchant:
Florida State isn't that great.
- pulled away late from 6-6 G5 team
- needed prayer to beat 6-6 rival
- 3-point win vs 4-8 conference foe
- lost by 10 at home
Oh wait, shoot this is my Alabama file.
One second
Leg for this. Funny and actually quite true.
Yeah I believe the committee pulled shenanigans and twisted any and all rules to get the SEC into the playoffs. That being said if I ranked the top 4 teams I wouldn't have had FSU either. And that was before the QB injuries.
The move I've seen more frequently in the last few days is non-Alabama fans saying "Actually, Georgia wasn't really a good team, so it's not impressive that Alabama beat them."
Georgia, back to back national champion, the team that was on a 29 game win streak, 47 game win streak against everyone not named Alabama... Team that still has many of the guys who won the title last year 65-7.
Comical stuff.
Since when do actual accomplishments matter?
I like Bilas' take, personally
I've seen this take a lot, and while I think it is quite curious/funny that they decided to order it that way as well, I really don't think it makes their picking top 4 as "the four best teams" logic incoherent. The top 4 is really the only thing that matters in these final CFP rankings. I don't particularly care about the order after that, and there isn't much reason for anyone else to either (including the committee). I think there is maybe a ranking cutoff for the NY6 games(?) but the actual order of 5 through that number doesn't matter.
So, in short, the only thing that matters is the top 4, they picked the top 4 based on their loosely defined "four best teams" criteria that they've been parroting since the inception of the playoff, and everything after that doesn't really matter.
Personally, I think the more egregious committee incoherence throughout the season's CFP rankings was their consistently keeping Oregon ahead of Alabama and Texas each week... when by ALL the criteria they use Oregon had the weakest resume (fewest strong wins), weakest SOR and weakest schedule of those three one-loss teams.
I mean Oregon would probably be favored if they played Washington again for whatever reason.
Nothing through out the season has made sense, if SoR and game control mattered then UGA wouldn't have been number 1. If undefeated doesn't matter then the stats favor OSU in some instances so why were they not in the conversation?
This is why I wanted to continue with the computer rankings for the top 4, at least everyone knew how they were graded(they figured it out real quick)
Since the actual winning of the games do not matter, why not just declare the winner of the Natty right now and save us all the trouble?
Will never happen but would be glorious.
Just take a knee on every offensive snap and run prevent on defense. Make the game as simply unwatchable as possible
nah, then you have a legitimate loss on your schedule (assuming UGa can score, which is likely). Skip the game, claim the undefeated season, and lobby for a national championship. You have star players skip bowls to protect their draft stock with no repercussions, why not have a whole team skip the bowl to protect their undefeated season?
Because, and hear me out, they could actually win this game and have a real claim. We JOKE about CFU's claim, but NOBODY takes that seriously. They give up, it feeds the talking heads that say they weren't good enough and allows them to be laughing stock. "See, without their QB even they think they can't win, that's why they didn't play." Instead, pull out all tricks and everything and bury a UGA team that was on a 29-game heater. Make people turn it off because it's a trainwreck of a lopsided win.
Just seems like this belongs here. Yes, everyone noticed.
SEC Shorts on FSU getting left out
drink.
https://www.thekeyplay.com/comment/reply/23849/1233878
I'll get the next round.
I'll get the next round.
you can *hic*, you can *hic*, you can say that again
What is it about family members of high end ACC officials that keeps screwing the conference over long term? It's like Swofford giving the ACC contract to Raycom when his son was negotiating the deal for the network....
Talk about your tobacco road good-ole-boys network:
Boo's father Gene was the longest-tenured ACC Commissioner 1987-96 and NCAA President 1995-1997.
John Swofford began his first job as ticket manager and assistant director of athletic facilities at the University of Virginia in 1973, where he worked under athletic director Gene Corrigan. In 1997, Swofford was named the fourth commissioner of the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC), succeeding Gene Corrigan.
Man, they want so badly to just get F$U out of the conversation they ate opening their season in Dublin next year. Against GT. Not Dublin, GA, but Dublin Ireland 5 time zones away.
I'm less concerned about Alabama being included over Florida State than I am about Washington being ranked ahead of both of them. IMO Washington has an equivalent resume to Florida State being an undefeated conference champion, and is ranked lower than Florida State by SP+. I don't think it is consistent within the same rankings to say Washington is in for sure, based on resume, but Florida State isn't because Alabama looks better.
Okay hear me out, what if Michigan played Washington in the rose Bowl, FSU vs Texas in orange, OSU vs Bama in sugar and UGA vs Oregon in the Fiesta bowl. And then we just call it quits and enjoy those match ups.
Edit: I know words, really I do.
Sign me up!
What year is this, 1996?
This is where I'm at. We should just get rid of the national championship altogether. Have 4 to 6 prestigious bowls that match up the "best teams" (whatever tf that means) and then a bunch of consolation games for everyone else.
I supported a playoff back in the day but I only supported an actual playoff and we didn't get that. I hate whatever we have now. The only reason I supported a playoff was to determine 1 true champion. That's just not working and the sport would be better off without it, IMO
I wasn't a huge fan of the BCS game, it didn't fix the problem. Then the playoffs continued to not fix the problem as TCU got blasted out of 3rd place because they didn't play a championship game. And the 4th place team with a 3rd string QB let their RB loose to win a championship. There has rarely not been controversy, and that's what is best about college football, the what-ifs. What happens when a 9-3 Bama wins the championship over a 15-1 team? A true playoff will just cause more problems.
Let's go for the ultimate shit scenario for the media. A 10-3 G5 team makes the playoffs in the last spot. The #5 school is a G5 school with a perfect record and good P5 wins but doesnt prepare well and gets beat. The #4 team parties to hard because it's just a G5 team and then gets popped in the mouth. The number 1 team loses their QB in the playoffs and their 2nd string QB flu and now G5 is the championship game. Then #2 team, say UGA lost to the #3 team on a fluke play and ends the season 14-1. Now the #12 team in the playoffs happens to match up well and beats the #3 team so they are national championship at 13-3. This team is the 6th conference champ. So they aren't even the highest G5 school. A team ranked 18th just won the title not really playing any team full strength and a 14-1 UGA exists. All those odd polls are going to rank UGA tops and we get split titles again.
I don't think there was actually any problem until the bcs game...
That's a valid point, which I agree with. However, the BCS was to guarantee 1v2 which didn't always happen which lead to split titles, which some people hate.
The problem isn't the playoff itself; it's the whole media apparatus around it. The sport has been twisted to focus on 12 teams, because there's only 12 teams that have a shot at the playoff.
Which is why I agree with you.
Although I do agree that the playoff isn't the root cause, the current iteration of the playoff is problematic because it's not structured properly. It's absolutely part of the problem.
If it had actually been set up correctly then maybe we're better off. Either way, though, I think the bigger problem is trying to find a single champion in a sport with over 120 teams playing a schedule of only 12 games.
That's just a fool's errand. The sport would be better off without a single champion.
I don't think the playoff can be structured properly any more. In the 90s and 2000s every conference had good teams and bad teams. The parity between the conference was shown by each conference winning one of the first 6 BSC championships. Now Tennessee, FSU, OU, Miami, OSU, and USC are in 3 conferences not 6. So how do you compare conferences when they don't play eachother The Big 12 and Big Ten already play less P5 OOC games than ACC and SEC.
Maybe if the playoff was organized 20 years ago there would have been a chance but now it's 6 conference champs with only 4 power conferences, so two G5 school will be fodder for the SEC. Looking at this year Michigan, Bama (or texas), and FSU are the conference winners. OKstate (or arizona) would be the Big 12 champ. Then Liberty and SMU. The next 6 are Bama/Texas, OSU, Oregon, UGA, Washington (which would have a loss now) and finally either PSU or Mizzou. Now the committee has Mizzou higher but PSU wins out in just about every metric imaginable except SoR which they are neck and neck on. We're now arguing about the 9th spot and not the 12th. And if UofL had best FSU then we are arguing about the 8th spot. And what's the different in the 8th spot to #1, well if it's PSU it's 9 points. That's not much.
I agree. I think the playoff is bad for the sport, too much talent concentrating on too few teams, and conferences loading up big brands to get more teams in the playoffs. Everyone knows the bowl system is dead.
I think we should just go back to the traditional conference bowl tie ins and let the polls vote for the mythical national champion after the big bowls wrap up.
We?
The question is what's best for the top 6 or so "traditional" teams, and ESPN.
If we want a single champion and some sense of fairness with a tv deal then we need a 64 team conglomerate that shares a TV deal. Then have 8 divisions, you play 7 games in division, then on rotating basis divisions play another division based on last year's finish (1v1, 2v2, 3v3, etc). That leaves 4 OOC games. All division champs get a playoff seat. Then have 8 open spots in a 16 team playoff that one is guaranteed G5.
TV contract is for one super conference and we get back to a more distributed range of teams as divisions will laegely be geography based.
Great idea.
The problem is that a handful of teams (and ESPN) want the APPEARANCE of that, while keeping a handful of super teams advantaged.
This basically hurts Bama and UGA a tiny bit. Is Bama still the best destination, yup, is UGA 2nd? Yup. None of that changed? It will save everyone but the SEC money and that's because the SEC doesn't travel.
This will hurt teams like Tennessee who is only ranked because SEC amd not on merit. Bama might have to cross the Mississippi for the 2nd time in a century. But it will help so many teams maintain dominance. Think about UGA, USC and PSU running their divisions then you have Bama/LSU, Washington/Oregon, OSU/Michigan, Texas/OU and how ever you divide up Florida schools and Clemson for atlantic.
Good luck getting Notre Dame on board with this. If they did do this they should only do a four or five year TV contract to force Fox and ESPN to duel it out more often.
Why would anything change with ND? They can keep doing their thing and get an at large bid like now.
If they aren't in your 64 teams, do they have to schedule 8 of the 64 as an independent to qualify? How does their at large bid work? Right now they are assimilated into the ACC Bowl structure so with that going away and they don't get into playoff, where do they fall in pecking order of other bowls? Could be all a moot point if NBC goes after the 64 team tv rights.
Their at large bid works the same as the other 7 (g5 gets one bid), the BCS computers give us the 7 highest non division winners. If ND is there then they go no matter who they played. ND would have to work deals with the bowls they want to go to. Or go to a bowl with an at-large spot. They are going to have to work it out like they did when the BE fell. Frankly i don't really care what they do.
Considering how important the QB position is, you'd think FSU beating the Heisman winning QB by 21 points this year would have been enough to vault that undefeated team to the playoff, right?
It's only a quality win if you're in the SEC. SEC teams don't play hard against non-conference opponents. They would have to spend too much time knocking over trash cans and finding turkeys to replenish their health for conference games if they don't take that approach.
+1 for great Streets of Rage throwback
Take another
How did FSU and Jordan Travis not win the Heisman, according to the Football Committee he was the most important player in the Country.
No, the quarterback for the team they beat by three touchdowns is the best. But they can't compete with that conference.
Yeah, but according to ESPN this FSU team is not undefeated, so those wins don't count
Right, Travis was so important his team could possibly make the playoff without him and team of the guy who won couldn't make the playoff WITH him!
Further, FSU beat the Heisman winner by 21, but couldn't possibly compete in the playoff with a backup QB.
I mean, in all seriousness, the Heisman committee isn't beholden to the boneheaded decision making of the CFP committee....
TLDR:
part 2 thread:
https://www.thekeyplay.com/content/2023/december/12/college-football-fab...