Are you saying Vandy didn't play a tougher schedule than either Tulane or JMU? Did you even bother to take a look? I'd be very pissed if I were Vandy right now. To go 10-2 in the SEC and get passed over by two Group of 5 conference teams just because they have a "conference title" is ridiculous.

91AggieLawyer said:

---

tylercsbn9 said:

---

10Aggie10 said:

---

The real travesty is that the playoff should include 7-8 SEC teams , and adding the 9th conference game is going to make it even more difficult to even get 5, without expanding

---

Which is exactly why Sark's comments this week regarding scheduling tough OOC opponents is valid. If you just need to win 10 games on the season why make it harder on yourself? He was correct in saying if UT had scheduled Sam Houston in week 1 they'd be in. Even with a terrible loss to UF and close games with Miss St and UK.

I'm sorry but 10-2 Tulane has no business in this thing. Neither does 11-1 JMU.

---

As I pointed out on another thread, several 10-win teams aren't going to be considered. Vandy and BYU to name 2. Neither played a difficult non-con schedule. So saying "you just need to win 10" isn't accurate.

t.u./Sark is trying to make people forget that their loss to UFl is what is keeping them out, not their loss to OhSt. Don't fall for it.

---

Dude. You're kidding yourself if you think a 10-2 Texas team is left out. Even with a loss to UF. Just replace week one with Sam houston state. They'd be in over a team like OU or Miami/ND due to the wins they had mid season and A&M last week.

sincereag said:

---

Agreed! What a flawed system when Tulane and JMU get in a 12 team national playoff over a two loss Miami/ND, Bama/Vandy, and even a 3 loss tu. The conference realignment gave us this crap. All driven by money and greed in the SEC and B1G

---

The playoff is already too big.

Teams 11 and 12 complaining about not being in when they're not even top 10 is silly.

Should be an 8 team playoff.

The larger problem is the conference scheduling. Every team has a different schedule so you can't even determine who the best teams of each conference are. How did a 7-5 Duke even make it to the ACC championship? Or for example in the American conference, UNT got stomped by USF. USF had losses to away games at Memphis and Navy, while UNT had the softest schedule in the American and didn't play Memphis or Navy…. When any one of the 3, Memphis, Navy or USF is certainly a stronger team than UNT for Tulane to face in the American Conference Championship game.

We also benefited from a weak schedule going undefeated until our last game playing the best team in our conference schedule. Should we really be near the top of the SEC standings when we play none of the other top SEC teams? Maybe we just belong at the middle above teams we beat but below everyone else.

The conference schedules are the bigger problem than the playoff.

12 teams is plenty for the playoff and already too many teams.

sincereag said:

---

Are you saying Vandy didn't play a tougher schedule than either Tulane or JMU? Did you even bother to take a look? I'd be very pissed if I were Vandy right now. To go 10-2 in the SEC and get passed over by two Group of 5 conference teams just because they have a "conference title" is ridiculous.

---

It's a playoff and designed for inter-conference match ups. Conferences send their best teams, not the 4th and 5th best to have rematches against the conference champions.

Taking conference champions is the whole point, everyone not a conference champion gets in as a bonus. It's not an SEC-Big rivalry bracket, it's a national playoff with the top 6 conference champs and 6 wild cards.

bmks270 said:

---

sincereag said:

---

Agreed! What a flawed system when Tulane and JMU get in a 12 team national playoff over a two loss Miami/ND, Bama/Vandy, and even a 3 loss tu. The conference realignment gave us this crap. All driven by money and greed in the SEC and B1G

---

The playoff is already too big.

Teams 11 and 12 complaining about not being in when they're not even top 10 is silly.

Should be an 8 team playoff.

The larger problem is the conference scheduling. Every team has a different schedule so you can't even determine who the best teams of each conference are. How did a 7-5 Duke even make it to the ACC championship? Or for example in the American conference, UNT got stomped by USF. USF had losses to away games at Memphis and Navy, while UNT had the softest schedule in the American and didn't play Memphis or Navy…. When any one of the 3, Memphis, Navy or USF is certainly a stronger team than UNT for Tulane to face in the American Conference Championship game.

We also benefited from a weak schedule going undefeated until our last game playing the best team in our conference schedule. Should we really be near the top of the SEC standings when we play none of the other top SEC teams? Maybe we just belong at the middle above teams we beat but below everyone else.

The confidence schedules are the bigger problem than the playoff.

12 teams is plenty for the playoff and already too many teams.

---

This to put it simply the real problem was the expansion of the last conference realignment into 2 main power conferences….


Advocating for expanding the playoffs is beyond stupid l, it will never end that teams "just outside" didn't make it and should be in. You can rewrite the rules for who gets in with the current structure but don't expand ffs

Aggies defeat Tulane 14-13 for yet another national championship.

Expand to 64 like basketball. Everyone gets a trophy.

The problem is the SEC and Big 10 sucked up all the big programs and killed the other conferences. A cost of that is losing playoff spots.

The conferences are too big.

Frok said:

---

The problem is the SEC and Big 10 sucked up all the big programs and killed the other conferences. A cost of that is losing playoff spots.

The conferences are too big.

---

How does that make them lose spots?

Now, it's Big Ten 3, SEC probably 5

Before the latest expansion, it would big ten 2, SEC probably 4

I don't want no scrubs.

Quote:

---

while UNT had the softest schedule in the American and didn't play Memphis or Navy

---

UNT played and beat Navy this year at UNT.

To make 12 team playoff:
Have 2 diff committees - first half of season rankings & second half rankings. (eliminates stubbornness to change, gets new eyes on teams)
No AP poll prior to CFP rankings release
(Eliminate influence)
Mandate schedules must be 10 games vs P5.
Nine conference games + one OOC (P5)
Eliminate Conf championships
Top 12 get in
No first rd cfp byes
First 2 rds on campus

Duke lost to tulane

TheBonifaceOption said:

---

---

scrubs was such a terribly humorless show. I didn't watch it much, just enough to know it was comedy for not so smart people.

I found myself often wondering why the writers did such a bad job on the obvious layups in the form of jokes and bits that would have been hilarious.

Just get on with expanding to 16 teams with no byes and this wouldn't be the issue it is this yr

Leaving out Vandy and potentially Notre Dame or Alabama this yr is pretty awful imo. Leaving out Miami doesn't bother me for some reason but I just flat don't like them, particularly their fan base.

If it was 16 teams no one left out would have a legitimate beef imo. Adds would be (Miami , Bama or ND) , BYU , Vandy , and yes … probably tu.

LatinAggie1997 said:

---

To make 12 team playoff:
Have 2 diff committees - first half of season rankings & second half rankings. (eliminates stubbornness to change, gets new eyes on teams)
No AP poll prior to CFP rankings release
(Eliminate influence)
Mandate schedules must be 10 games vs P5.
Nine conference games + one OOC (P5)
Eliminate Conf championships
Top 12 get in
No first rd cfp byes
First 2 rds on campus

---

12 teams in and no one gets a bye? Show me how this bracket works?

12 to 6, 6 to 3,..
Oops

Yes, meant 16.

halfastros81 said:

---

Just get on with expanding to 16 teams with no byes and this wouldn't be the issue it is this yr

---

Agree, but also would exclude non-Power 4 teams. Pac-12 teams would be treated as independents. Let Group of 5 teams have their own ranking and playoff system. Ultimately, that would result in more money for them from TV revenues that a separate playoff system would generate.
Also, all Power 4 conference champions get in, regardless of ranking. Otherwise, get rid of the conference championship games.
Finally, CFP rankings should be based on computerized metrics, which removes bias of human-based rankings.
No perfect system, but these changes would improve the one in place.

I don't agree because every once in awhile you get a team like Boise State under Peterson that is worthy of being in the mix. I'd leave "as is" wrt to the G5 entries but expand to 16.