Recent Comments

Random, but reminded me of something I heard a while back:

"Forgive me father for I have sinned" and "Sorry daddy, I've been a bad girl" technically mean the same thing, but definitely DO NOT mean the same thing.

People will look you in the face- many people - and say that a team that didn't even win their division "deserve" to play for a national championship. It makes no sense on any level, but hey.

Are you trying to suggest that a system where you pit divisional champions against each other in a Conference Championship Game for the right to enter the National College Football Playoff as a representative of your conference creating a year long playoff where the only thing that matters is winning and yet also encourages big out of conference cash grab contests that only matter for pride would be a good thing for the sport?

Nah, fuck that. 12 of 16 teams from the SEC and Big Ten based on who we think is better regardless of results or we riot!

all of this could easily be avoidable if we just had a 4 team playoff where the criteria for making it to the playoff is that you win your league's championship game. The committee gets to pick which of the leagues send their champion and they can base their decisions on whatever made up metrics they want to in the moment. But the SEC would only get, at most, 1 team into the playoff. Same for the B1G and the ACC, etc.

The playoff shouldn't have ever been about the "best" or the "most deserving" teams - it should always have been about bragging rights for the conference. Maybe the SEC would win every single playoff ever. Maybe the 4th best team in the SEC would be better than the best team in half the other leagues. I don't give a shit. You want to lift the national title you gotta get through your own league first. Then the top dogs from each league can duke it out and prove which league is the strongest.

The system we have now is completely f*cked

I mean - I get it that there is a point to be made about signal to noise ratio. But yeah, this was my thought as well.

2023 FSU with NO LOSSES shatters his whiny argument.

I've never understood the FCS-DIII hate. "Oh we're recruiting from DIII schools, we must suck"

Everyone has a different journey. Late bloomers and missed evaluations happen all the time. I don't care where a kid comes from, if he can help us will ball games, then I want him on our team.

So, people are downvoting comments due to content, not due to violations of community guidelines. Got it.

I am in this camp. More conference games disincentivizes compelling OOC matchups because of how punitive losses are at the moment. I also don't want to see schools sacrifice locked OOC rivalries for the same reason.

Personally, I agree that it's cool that Indiana made the playoff, and they weren't one of the teams that was even really on the bubble.

My only point is that the point Kirby is making, based on how the selection committee approached the at-large decisions last year, is reasonable.

You commonly employ these hypothetical situations to be upset about when it comes to anything involving the SEC.

What I just laid out, and what Kirby is alluding to, is what actually happened last year. They are observable, recorded events that occurred in reality.

At no point did I, or Kirby, say we should have 8 SEC teams in the playoff. This is a hypothetical tangent from the original discussion to get mad about.

And yet he does not say "Its not fair that the SEC doesn't control who is invited to the playoff."

His point is also pretty measured for a question that gets brought up every offseason, and he knows whatever he says is going to get this exact treatment.

The SEC had three 9-3 teams miss the playoff, all three of which with much stronger wins on their resumes than say Clemson, SMU, or Indiana, and the current committee landed heavily on the side of fewer losses is more important than strong wins. The auto-bid element, which benefitted the ACC greatly, is another unmentioned point here. Of the four teams who finished 9-3, Clemson had by far, and by any metric, the weakest resume of the four, but eventually got an autobid through being in the ACC. They lost head to head to one of those teams at home (South Carolina), and lost head to head on a neutral field (3-34) to a team that both Alabama and Ole Miss beat in a football game.

You can say they picked the right teams (SMU and Indiana) and acknowledge that the point he is making about the SEC not having much incentive to add more losses to their schedules, when last year's selection showed that each loss is incredibly punitive and highly valued in their decision making criteria, is not really him being ridiculous or even whiny. It's a pretty reasonable statement in the context of what happened.