Some of Klatt’s thoughts. “Best Four” is highly subjective.
As much as it fun to think about Alabama not being in the playoff, this is what I bet will happen.
OU will win out.
OSU will out.
UO will lose at least more game, because Pac-12.
Alabama will beat Georgia in the SEC CG, because Georgia.
#1 Alabama
#2 Georgia
#3 OSU
#4 OU
Bama will destroy OU, because OU in the playoffs.
Georgia will beat OSU in a close one.
Who the **** cares who wins the title (Bama, see above), because all we're going to hear is S-E-C!
Yes. I think even one loss Wake or undefeated Cincy goes ahead of 2 loss Alabama.
A 2 loss Alabama getting in over a 1 loss Conference Championship Game winner from another conference would piss me off to no end.Full disclosure: I’d like nothing more than to not see AL in the CFP this year
However, the discussion about whether a two loss AL still deserves to be in the top four misses out on who delivers that second loss and the circumstances surrounding it. We all guess their second loss would be to GA in the SECCG. If they somehow lose ahead of that, they’re FOR SURE not going to be in the CFP. If they get to the SECCG and lose a close, compelling game to GA, I think the playoff committee would see the opportunity for a rematch as must see TV and keep them in the top four, regardless of what happens elsewhere.
Agreed. Said it before...the question that doesn’t have a correct answer is: are the CFP top four supposed to be the four teams who are most deserving or should they be the four best teams?A 2 loss Alabama getting in over a 1 loss Conference Championship Game winner from another conference would piss me off to no end.
And it would simply reinforce the alignment between the ACC-B1G-P12 to fight against the SEC.
It doesn't matter how they get to 2 losses
You like the two-team computer/polls process better? Personally, I think this is better.
CFP is not perfect. It’s an easy target for shade in early weeks. But in the end, they have nailed it on best four teams virtually every year in my opinion.
i’m open to 12. Although some of those early games are gonna be rough (as bad or worse than semis have been)
Best. It’s in their charter.Agreed. Said it before...the question that doesn’t have a correct answer is: are the CFP top four supposed to be the four teams who are most deserving or should they be the four best teams?
Are they getting in 0 losses?Wake is not getting in with 1 loss.
Are they getting in 0 losses?
Right??I'm not convinced they would. SEC champ, B1G champ, undefeated OU, undefeated Cincy, 1-loss Oregon - all these teams would have a better resume than Wake. Would be interesting to see if the committe has the balls the leave out an undefeated P5 team even given their weak schedule.
That’s why, IMO, expansion to twelve teams is in the best interest for college football. Limiting it to the four best removes the cinderella possibilities which is what makes March Madness and the field of 64 the best sporting event for fans in the world.Best. It’s in their charter.
That’s why, IMO, expansion to twelve teams is in the best interest for college football. Limiting it to the four best removes the cinderella possibilities which is what makes March Madness and the field of 64 the best sporting event for fans in the world.
Right??
GO DEMON DEACS!! **** yo this playoff ****!
A Cinderella would have a very difficult time winning 3 CFP games.That’s why, IMO, expansion to twelve teams is in the best interest for college football. Limiting it to the four best removes the cinderella possibilities which is what makes March Madness and the field of 64 the best sporting event for fans in the world.
But I’d enjoy it nonetheless. Certainly more than watching four all-star teams.A Cinderella would have a very difficult time winning 3 CFP games.
I’m ready for 12.
I think it was politically motivated to set the stage for jumping Oregon with tOSU.I don't know how Michigan is ranked above Michigan State. That clown they put on tv said it was due to statistics? Umm, what is the only statistic that matters? Did you win or lose when you played each other? It's flat bull****. It's about the same damn thing it always is.
You could be right. I just know it's bull****.I think it was politically motivated to set the stage for jumping Oregon with tOSU.
I don't know how Michigan is ranked above Michigan State. That clown they put on tv said it was due to statistics? Umm, what is the only statistic that matters? Did you win or lose when you played each other? It's flat bull****. It's about the same damn thing it always is.
Alabama has to win out and beat Georgia. Period. No way they're getting in if they lose another game.If Cincy goes before 2 SEC teams, Paul Finebaum's head will explode.
I hope it happens.
I get all that, but head to head, you lost. Why should you be voted over them?Head-to-head is just one of the many factors they take into account though. Given tOSU's much tougher schedule down the stretch (MSU, Michigan, Iowa/Wiscy in the B1G championship) they will almost certainly jump Oregon if both teams keep winning. Texas A&M is ranked 5 spots ahead of Arkansas who beat A&M and both teams have the same record.
I get all that, but head to head, you lost. Why should you be voted over them?
Wait, didn't they go to ND and beat them? Say Cincy wins out, then what?It comes down to overall body of work though. Good example, if Cincy loses a game and the 4th spot comes down to 1-loss ND and 1-loss Cincy then I'd say ND should get the nod.
Wait, didn't they go to ND and beat them? Say Cincy wins out, then what?
You sure about that? I'm not.Sure, if Cincy wins out then they should and would get in over ND if it came down to these 2