OFFICIAL 2022-2023 COLLEGE FOOTBALL THREAD

[aepps20]

Looking forward to Utes vs USC part 2.

 

[nako xl]

Tell me where the percentages come from then that’s what I wanna know.

I’ve said all along all of their rankings are to get people talking and tuned in on a Tuesday night and it still is. The only one that matters is next Sunday after the conference title games

#NeverWrongNako

Lol. I’m not even going to argue with you though that’s what you want.

0-0. All focus to Utah.

 

[Nipsey3000]

There is no way either of you are gullible enough to believe Ohio state will be in if TCU and USC both win out

Tell me y’all ain’t serious.

And where do these percentages even come from?

Again. It's not about what we think.

You've totally taken everything out of context.

It's about what the media and committee is thinking.

 

[witnesskb24]

Lol. I’m not even going to argue with you though that’s what you want.

0-0. All focus to Utah.

Is this one of the games you predict USC to lose but then get mad if people don’t say they looked like the top team in the nation in a victory?

USC wins by 14+

Book it

 

[witnesskb24]

Again. It's not about what we think.

You've totally taken everything out of context.

It's about what the media and committee is thinking.

I’m still trying to figure out how the playoff killed the B12 and PAC

 

[nako xl]

 

[nako xl]

 

[Nipsey3000]

The SEC bias is real but also valid. Y'all act like the conference hasn't dominant in the Playoff as well as the BCS era. If other conferences would show up then their wouldn't be nearly as much bias, bottom line.

I agree with you 100%

Again, the issue isn't with Alabama in years where they're clearly the best team, or Georgia or Ohio State.

The issue is the disadvantages that come with conference bias for other conferences that play good football.

Conference bias is about more than just playoff berths.

It's about money, recruiting, etc etc.

The bias has caused major imbalance.

It won't be an issue for the USCs, Ohio States, Alabama's, Clemson's, Florida State etc etc.

But what happens to Colorado? TCU? Oregon? Washington? Baylor? I.e. teams that don't get the invite to be in these mega conferences and may not have the cache' to stabilize a conference like Clemson, or USC?

USC and UCLA are moving in 2024, if you don't think Clemson and Florida State aren't sniffing around... You're living under a rock.

The fact that Ohio State is reported by ESPN to still have an 80%+ chance of making the playoffs after getting beat at home by Michigan is exactly why USC and UCLA are bolting the PAC 12 for the BIG 10.

The fact that ESPN reports that Alabama's chances of making the playoffs is greater than USCs at this point is evidence of the bias (warranted or unwarranted) and again, is justification to why the most powerful programs in college football outside of the SEC and Big 10 are abandoning ship for what will be the power 2 conferences.

Who came up with those numbers? Idk. Doesn't even matter.

What matters is what that 5 star recruit that will change your program thinks about it... And what that big time advertiser thinks of it... And what that network that's going to pour billions of dollars into your conference thinks.

Again, this is just imo.

 

[Nipsey3000]

I’m still trying to figure out how the playoff killed the B12 and PAC

Let me ask you this...

Why do you think USC and UCLA have decided to join the Big 10?

Do you think they just prefer to travel and play at Rutgers and at Penn State over going to Stanford and at Cal?

 

[pmatic]

UCLA moved for the money.

 

[witnesskb24]

Let me ask you this...

Why do you think USC and UCLA have decided to join the Big 10?

Do you think they just prefer to travel and play at Rutgers and at Penn State over going to Stanford and at Cal?

You really think it’s for the playoff? Considering UCLA has been cheeks the last several years I’m SURE that was their top priority.

It couldn’t possibly be the B1Gs new 7 year $7 BILLION dollar TV deal they just inked.

No, it was strictly for the playoff

Got it

I’m sure Oklahoma and Texas only left the B12 for the playoff too. I mean Oklahoma had a cakewalk into the playoff and now they’re going to the SEC and that’s going to be easier? It couldn’t possibly be that the B12 had a $200 million dollar deal per year and the SEC has one that’s about to be over $300 million per year.

Nope all about the playoff

 

[Nipsey3000]

You really think it’s for the playoff? Considering UCLA has been cheeks the last several years I’m SURE that was their top priority.

It couldn’t possibly be the B1Gs new 7 year $7 BILLION dollar TV deal they just inked.

No, it was strictly for the playoff

Got it

If you don't think the playoff influences alot of that you're just being naive

How do you think the BIG 10 got that deal?

 

[aepps20]

Can't wait for da UC Regents to block the UCLA move.

 

[witnesskb24]

If you don't think the playoff influences alot of that you're just being naive

How do you think the BIG 10 got that deal?

If the playoff is the reason for teams jumping conference why did Nebraska/Rutgers/Maryland jump to the B1G? Why did Missouri go to the SEC? Because they’re playoff contenders?

“The fact that Ohio State is reported by ESPN to still have an 80%+ chance of making the playoffs after getting beat at home by Michigan is exactly why USC and UCLA are bolting the PAC 12 for the BIG 10.” Is what you said in a previous post. Those schools aren’t sitting there and saying “Aw man I saw the espn percentage indicator and we should jump ship so we have a higher percentage!” I hate to break it to you but most of these higher ups at schools don’t give two sh*ts about making the playoff, all they care about is making money

 

[Nipsey3000]

If the playoff is the reason for teams jumping conference why did Nebraska/Rutgers/Maryland jump to the B1G? Why did Missouri go to the SEC? Because they’re playoff contenders?

“The fact that Ohio State is reported by ESPN to still have an 80%+ chance of making the playoffs after getting beat at home by Michigan is exactly why USC and UCLA are bolting the PAC 12 for the BIG 10.” Is what you said in a previous post. Those schools aren’t sitting there and saying “Aw man I saw the espn percentage indicator and we should jump ship so we have a higher percentage!” I hate to break it to you but most of these higher ups at schools don’t give two sh*ts about making the playoff, all they care about is making money

Here's the thing about context. You can't pick and choose the buzz words you want to pay attention to and twist what I'm saying to fit your argument.

You want to twist what I said into me suggesting that conference movement and imbalance is tied directly into playoff berths and that's it. That's not what I said.

My statement about the playoff was fundamentally about media bias and how that influences a ton of what happens in college football.

If you can't see that media/committee bias, recruiting, money and playoff berths are all tied in to a programs long term success, I just can't help you.

And before you say something else silly, I'm not talking about Rutgers and Missouri. I'm talking about the elite programs

 

[nako xl]

Y’all really having this binary argument when you know it’s a little bit of several factors, the playoff absolutely being one, as was money, as was personal gripes with their conferences.

 

[witnesskb24]

Here's the thing about context. You can't pick and choose the buzz words you want to pay attention to and twist what I'm saying to fit your argument.

You want to twist what I said into me suggesting that conference movement and imbalance is tied directly into playoff berths and that's it. That's not what I said.

My statement about the playoff was fundamentally about media bias and how that influences a ton of what happens in college football.

If you can't see that media/committee bias, recruiting, money and playoff berths are all tied in to a programs long term success, I just can't help you.

And before you say something else silly, I'm not talking about Rutgers and Missouri. I'm talking about the 6 star programs

So I ask this, when the playoff expands to 12 teams and by default includes conference champs from all conferences along with G5 teams and the PAC/ACC both fall apart, is that still the fault of the playoff?

 

[Nipsey3000]

Y’all really having this binary argument when you know it’s a little bit of several factors, the playoff absolutely being one, as was money, as was personal gripes with their conferences.

It wasn't ever binary with me.

I feel like money, recruiting, visibility, alumni, media exposure all have something to do with it.

Dude heard the word playoff and ran with it... And he's still stuck on the word "playoff"

However, nako xl I do feel that if the playoff were 8-12 teams from the start with 5 auto bids and at least 3 at large, conference movement wouldn't be so flagrant.

 

[Nipsey3000]

So I ask this, when the playoff expands to 12 teams and by default includes conference champs from all conferences along with G5 teams and the PAC/ACC both fall apart, is that still the fault of the playoff?

Agree to disagree.

Moving on

 

[tupac003]

Great guy and good coach.

He was never the choice for SC.

 

[nako xl]

So I ask this, when the playoff expands to 12 teams and by default includes conference champs from all conferences along with G5 teams and the PAC/ACC both fall apart, is that still the fault of the playoff?

Just chiming in: It’s not going to include all conference champs by default. The SEC and B1G have specifically blocked that because they know a 12 team playoff made up of at larges would have 8 SEC and B1G teams. I don’t have a dog in this but you’re sort of helping him make his point.

SEC Media Days 2022: Greg Sankey reaffirms stance on expanded CFP field not including automatic qualifiers

The SEC is not on board with certain aspects of potential College Football Playoff expansion

www.cbssports.com

 

[dacomeup]

The SEC bias is real but also valid. Y'all act like the conference hasn't dominant in the Playoff as well as the BCS era. If other conferences would show up then their wouldn't be nearly as much bias, bottom line.

BCS is wild long ago at this point. Bama has been dominant and as of late, UGA. SEC as a conference has not been dominant in the CFP era. That’s nonsense

 

[witnesskb24]

Just chiming in: It’s not going to include all conference champs by default. The SEC and B1G have specifically blocked that because they know a 12 team playoff made up of at larges would have 8 SEC and B1G teams. I don’t have a dog in this but you’re sort of helping him make his point.

SEC Media Days 2022: Greg Sankey reaffirms stance on expanded CFP field not including automatic qualifiers

The SEC is not on board with certain aspects of potential College Football Playoff expansion

www.cbssports.com

Interesting, I didn’t realize they decided that. I was under the assumption it was still the P5 champs, highest ranked G5, and then the rest of whomever is ranked in the top 12

 

[witnesskb24]

BCS is wild long ago at this point. Bama has been dominant and as of late, UGA. SEC as a conference has not been dominant in the CFP era. That’s nonsense

In 8 playoffs The SEC has had 3 different teams make it (and win) along with 5 titles

The next closest is the ACC with 2 titles won by Clemson

To say they aren’t dominant is pretty wild and this is coming from an SEC hater

 

[tmay407]

No. I believe The committee would put in a one loss Ohio State over a two loss Alabama.



I highly disagree. The goal of the committee is to select the four best teams, sometimes those teams aren't conference champions. Would you rather the committee choose a three loss conference champion over a one loss non-conference champion with a better resume?

In the last decade or so we've had three non-conference champions when the national title

2011 Alabama (in the BCS era)
2017 Alabama
2021 Georgia

Are you staying the committee made a wrong choice putting those teams in the playoff?

Essentially yes, but only because Alabama proved to be the best team in a playoff.