2023 NCAA College Football-Hail to the Victors!!!

[hefdaddy42]

The committee always cares more about getting the best four teams; they don't care about "deserves." 

Well, that's their job.  "Deserve" doesn't mean anything.  Their charge has always been to get the four best teams.

The problem is one that they have somehow been able to successfully avoid for 10 years: a 4 team playoff with at least 5 "deserving" Power 5 teams.  5 "deserving" Power 5 conference champs.  No matter who they left out, it wouldn't have been "fair".  But their job, as stated, and always has been, to pick the 4 Best Teams, according to the selection committee.  That's what they did.

And I don't know how many of you are complaining just because of the 0 in FSU's loss column, but I've seen everyone play multiple times, and FSU wasn't better than any of the 4 teams that made it, even before their QB got hurt, but CERTAINLY not now.  They were ranked too high all season.

Every year before this in the playoff era, everything mostly worked itself out, because usually only 3 of the Power 5 conference champs would be considered to be among the 4 best.  That's the only reason Cincinatti got in a few years ago.  Or the seasons where 2 SEC teams made it, or 2 Big Ten teams.  It was fine, because there weren't 4 or 5 "deserving" Power 5 conference champions any of those years.  But this year there were 5, with only 4 slots.

Hell, I would argue that, if anything, Georgia was "screwed" worse than FSU.  They were # 1 most of the year, and no # 1 team has ever fallen out of the top 4 in the final ranking.  They lost a close game to Alabama, and I don't believe for a second that they are a worse team today than they were Saturday morning. 

Just my opinion (which is all that any of this is).

[cramx3]

I think FSU was the weakest of the undefeated, but the problem is the committee had them ranked #4 previously, so how did they all of the sudden go backwards after winning the ACC?  It seems fairly obvious that the committee moved them out because of the QB injury. Which does make some sense, but it just feels so unfair to them.  They literally did everything on the committee's criteria to make the playoffs including scheduling both LSU and Florida in the OOC schedule.  They can't help the fact those two teams weren't as good as typical.  They won every game on their schedule including a P5 championship.  They literally click the check box for every criteria, except SOS is weak but that hasn't held back previous P5 undefeated teams before so it definitely seems to be the QB.  I see the question coming up a lot, what if the school didn't disclose the injury?  Obviously it looked really bad so I think maybe lying wouldn't have gone too far here, but maybe, just maybe if they didn't saw a word, the committee might weight them differently?

I mean, I might argue Oregon is better than FSU too.  But it's not always who's the best, but who is deserving is certainly still important to the integrity of the game.  So glad this didnt happen to my team, but the committee failed IMO even if I think there's better teams than FSU.

[hefdaddy42]

the committee failed IMO even if I think there's better teams than FSU.

But that's just the thing.  Unless you think teams better than FSU also didn't make it, then by definition they didn't fail, because their job is to pick the four best teams.

I think too many people are hung up on "undefeated".  No one gets bonus consideration for being undefeated.  It's the four best teams, regardless of record, because "record" is not one of the criteria.

If you think FSU is a better team than any of the 4 that made it, meaning you think they could beat any of those teams, then you have a gripe.  But if you agree with the committee that the four teams that made it are better football teams than anyone that didn't make it, then you don't really have a gripe.

[cramx3]

So if FSU's QB didn't get injured, you'd still rank Alabama and Texas over them?  Because, to me, it seems 100% due to the QB that they fell back. There's just no other sport (OK, there likely is and I just can't think of it) where a team would be screwed like that and not make the playoffs.  If anything, to me, they should have moved to 4 and not to 3 with Texas above them. 

I'm also having a hard time thinking ESPN or other outside figures ($$$$) didn't have some involvement in this.  I think Michigan likely destroys FSU with a back up QB.  It wouldn't be good for the sport, even if I believe it is what should have happened. Alabma vs. Michigan is a way better match up.

The reality, is I don't disagree with you that Texas, Bama, likely Georgia, and Oregon are all better than FSU, but I can't ignore an entire season of perfect work in a P5 conference. 

Best is just wayy too subjective for this sport and of course, any given sunday (saturday).  FSU earned that shot.

[hefdaddy42]

So if FSU's QB didn't get injured, you'd still rank Alabama and Texas over them?  Because, to me, it seems 100% due to the QB that they fell back.

I personally would have ranked Alabama and Texas over them, yes, because I've thought that all season, but I doubt that the committee would have.  I think his injury is what gave them the "reasoning" to do this.

There's just no other sport (OK, there likely is and I just can't think of it) where a team would be screwed like that and not make the playoffs.  If anything, to me, they should have moved to 4 and not to 3 with Texas above them. 

Professional sports don't work like this.  But in one way or the other, all collegiate sports do.  In every sport, there is a selection committee that decides who gets in and who doesn't.  In most of them (which will include football for the first time starting next year), there are automatic spots for conference champions, but the rest of the tournament is filled by a committee.

I'm also having a hard time thinking ESPN or other outside figures ($$$$) didn't have some involvement in this.  I think Michigan likely destroys FSU with a back up QB.  It wouldn't be good for the sport, even if I believe it is what should have happened. Alabma vs. Michigan is a way better match up.

I understand why you would think that, but I actually doubt that happened.

The reality, is I don't disagree with you that Texas, Bama, likely Georgia, and Oregon are all better than FSU, but I can't ignore an entire season of perfect work in a P5 conference. 

Well, for that matter, Alabama went undefeated in the SEC this season.  Their only loss was to # 3 ranked Texas.  I can't imagine you think that going undefeated against FSU's schedule is more impressive than going 12-1 against Alabama's.  Really?

Best is just wayy too subjective for this sport and of course, any given sunday (saturday).  FSU earned that shot.

But "subjective" is the only this sport has EVER been run, especially once we stopped using computer rankings in the BCS.

[cramx3]

The reality, is I don't disagree with you that Texas, Bama, likely Georgia, and Oregon are all better than FSU, but I can't ignore an entire season of perfect work in a P5 conference. 

Well, for that matter, Alabama went undefeated in the SEC this season.  Their only loss was to # 3 ranked Texas.  I can't imagine you think that going undefeated against FSU's schedule is more impressive than going 12-1 against Alabama's.  Really?

FSU played Bama's rival and won (LSU, on a neutral field) and also beat SEC foe Florida on the road.  I don't think Bama has a less difficult schedule, but I have a hard time faulting a team for scheduling and winning against two SEC schools that are typically good.  I think that HAS to count for something.  It's exactly what the committee had been telling teams to do to get into the playoff. 

Also, the SEC as a whole is kind of down this year (relative to their typical best conference).  Of all their schools OOC schedules, the only notable win was Kentucky over Louisville. I think the SEC bias came out for this hence my thought that there are likely outside influences.  Both Georgia and Bama looked VERY vulnerable at times this year too.

It just seems so unfair to me. Granted, it's not personal for me, but PSU has been screwed before and it feels, to me, like FSU got screwed.  Thankfully next year we can argue about the 12 seed and not 4 seed so it's much less earned/important.  No P5(or 4) conference champ will be left out next year and thats probably the way it always should have been, but the numbers never made sense. (as you stated, 4 playoff teams for 5 conferences)

[hefdaddy42]

FSU played Bama's rival and won (LSU, on a neutral field) and also beat SEC foe Florida on the road.  I don't think Bama has a less difficult schedule, but I have a hard time faulting a team for scheduling and winning against two SEC schools that are typically good.  I think that HAS to count for something.  It's exactly what the committee had been telling teams to do to get into the playoff. 

Yes, but their Strength of Schedule was still 55th.  LSU was pretty good, but had what they would consider to be a down year.  FSU plays Florida every year, that's their archrival, and they were 5-7 this season.

Also, the SEC as a whole is kind of down this year (relative to their typical best conference).  Of all their schools OOC schedules, the only notable win was Kentucky over Louisville. I think the SEC bias came out for this hence my thought that there are likely outside influences.  Both Georgia and Bama looked VERY vulnerable at times this year too.

I know people say that SEC had a down year, but they still finished with 5 teams ranked in the top 13.  The ACC would kill for that kind of year, EVERY year.

It just seems so unfair to me. Granted, it's not personal for me, but PSU has been screwed before and it feels, to me, like FSU got screwed.  Thankfully next year we can argue about the 12 seed and not 4 seed so it's much less earned/important.  No P5(or 4) conference champ will be left out next year and thats probably the way it always should have been, but the numbers never made sense. (as you stated, 4 playoff teams for 5 conferences)

It is unfair.  I never said it wasn't unfair.  The unfairness is in the CFP only having four slots. 

Also, I think everyone agrees with Michigan and Washington making it in.  The grief seems to be with Texas and Alabama vs. Florida State.  They are all elite teams.  Also, they all had elite wins.  Michigan beat Ohio State (and Penn State).  Washington beat Oregon twice, which is a feat unto itself.  Texas beat Alabama, and Alabama beat Georgia.  Florida State doesn't have a win on that level, unless you want to count Louisville, which I don't.

I'm not trying to be an asshole or anything.  Just saying that the kneejerk reaction isn't always right, and that some people seem to be mad at the Committee for doing exactly what they are supposed to do, which I just don't understand.  Unless, of course, you really think that Florida State is a better football team than any of the four teams that made it, which is certainly a valid opinion, just not one that I share.

[cramx3]

I dont take it as being an asshole, its your view and there is no correct answer.  Also, sadly, I don't think Bama winning proves anything (or FSU beating Gerogia) so while we all have our thoughts, I don't think there is one true answer here. 

My thought had always been Texas goes in, not Bama because of the head to head win.  You are right, that those teams all have better wins than FSU.  I just have a hard time looking at the 0 losses in a P5 conference with a strong OOC schedule. 

But if they removed LSU and Florida from that OOC, I would find it a lot harder to put FSU in because their SOS would be a lot worse likely.  There was just literally nothing FSU could have done besides avoid injury in this case and that's not a good precedent to use (IMO).  But once again, all this discussion is moot going forward.

[hefdaddy42]

I don't think there is one true answer here. 

Agreed.  My opinion isn't right just because it's mine.  It's just the one that makes the most sense TO ME, and it's the one that the committee arrived at also.

[KevShmev]

The problem is that opinions help decide the national championship, rather than the players deciding it all.

Florida St. went undefeated.  Alabama lost a game.  If (the general) you think Alabama is better, that is your opinion, but the records show that Florida St. was the better team this year.

[emtee]

How many times in the course of college football--or any sport for that matter--have there been upsets? Thousands. Making an assessment of what team is better based on data points is well and good but until the game is played you never know. Making an assessment that FSU is not one of the 4 best teams in the country is an exercise in data points and opinions. And now we will never know because they don't get to play.

[hefdaddy42]

Florida St. went undefeated.  Alabama lost a game.  If (the general) you think Alabama is better, that is your opinion, but the records show that Florida St. was the better team this year.

That is not in any way what their records show.  Not unless they played close to the same schedule.

Which is why record is not part of the criteria.

Unless you also think that the records show that Liberty was also the better team versus Alabama.

[cramx3]

The problem is that opinions help decide the national championship, rather than the players deciding it all.

Florida St. went undefeated.  Alabama lost a game.  If (the general) you think Alabama is better, that is your opinion, but the records show that Florida St. was the better team this year.

The record definitely doesn't show that though.  Otherwise we'd have Liberty in that spot. When teams don't play each other, this is what we get, all our data points as emtee stated and then we can draw our own opinions from that.  But it's never clear until they play.  It sucks they don't get that opportunity.

lol beat by hef about Liberty

[hefdaddy42]

lol

[KevShmev]

Did Liberty go undefeated by playing in one of the power five conferences?

(comparing the records of Alabama and FSU was more relevant since both won their power five conference)

I'll hang up and listen.

[emtee]

Did Liberty go undefeated by playing in one of the power five conferences?

(comparing the records of Alabama and FSU was more relevant since both won their power five conference)

I'll hang up and listen.

Exactly. And I will add this; though highly unlikely Liberty wins against any of the 4 teams, we will never know. And just to hammer this point home, you might all recall a time when App State kicked Michigan's ass...as a HUGE underdog.

[lonestar]

Ok, I still can't get over that we don't know if FSU is worse than the teams that made it though. To our very uneducated, layman's eyes? Sure, what the heck. But, unless that shit is decided on the field, we'll never know.


As Marc said, FSU did everything that was asked of them, and running the table is a huge part of that. They deserved that spot over Texas and Bama. This sideline QB deciding who's the better team on paper is straight up bullshit. Play the games.

[cramx3]

Did Liberty go undefeated by playing in one of the power five conferences?

(comparing the records of Alabama and FSU was more relevant since both won their power five conference)

I'll hang up and listen.

You never mentioned that, just said undefeated and record. But I still disagree with your point unless I'm misunderstanding.

[hefdaddy42]

Ok, I still can't get over that we don't know if FSU is worse than the teams that made it though. To our very uneducated, layman's eyes? Sure, what the heck. But, unless that shit is decided on the field, we'll never know.


As Marc said, FSU did everything that was asked of them, and running the table is a huge part of that. They deserved that spot over Texas and Bama. This sideline QB deciding who's the better team on paper is straight up bullshit. Play the games.

Well, straight up saying that Florida State "deserves" to be in over Texas and Bama is no different.

There are only four spots.  And since there are no automatic qualifiers (yet), it's a subjective process and always has been.  They've just always been able to get away with it before because not all 5 power conferences have ever had deserving teams in the same year before.

The committee have criteria to go by, and you guys that are saying that FSU got screwed aren't judging the committee on whether they followed their criteria or not.

"Undefeated" is not one of the criteria.

Florida State's best win is LSU.  Well, Alabama beat them too, and that WASN'T Bama's best win.  They also beat # 1 Georgia.

Hey, if Bama and/or Texas had been left out, I would have been fine with that, but mostly because I can't stand either team or their respective fanbase.  But they are (IMO) better teams, so if that happened, an injustice would have been done, by the criteria of the process, regardless of how happy I personally would have been about it.

[KevShmev]

Did Liberty go undefeated by playing in one of the power five conferences?

(comparing the records of Alabama and FSU was more relevant since both won their power five conference)

I'll hang up and listen.

You never mentioned that, just said undefeated and record. But I still disagree with your point unless I'm misunderstanding.

I said the below:

The problem is that opinions help decide the national championship, rather than the players deciding it all.

Florida St. went undefeated.  Alabama lost a game.  If (the general) you think Alabama is better, that is your opinion, but the records show that Florida St. was the better team this year.

I think it was more than obvious that I was talking about Alabama and FSU when it comes to their records.  Sorry if I wasn't more clear, but I thought it was obvious.

[KevShmev]

Ok, I still can't get over that we don't know if FSU is worse than the teams that made it though. To our very uneducated, layman's eyes? Sure, what the heck. But, unless that shit is decided on the field, we'll never know.


As Marc said, FSU did everything that was asked of them, and running the table is a huge part of that. They deserved that spot over Texas and Bama. This sideline QB deciding who's the better team on paper is straight up bullshit. Play the games.

Well, straight up saying that Florida State "deserves" to be in over Texas and Bama is no different.

There are only four spots.  And since there are no automatic qualifiers (yet), it's a subjective process and always has been.  They've just always been able to get away with it before because not all 5 power conferences have ever had deserving teams in the same year before.

The committee have criteria to go by, and you guys that are saying that FSU got screwed aren't judging the committee on whether they followed their criteria or not.

"Undefeated" is not one of the criteria.

Florida State's best win is LSU.  Well, Alabama beat them too, and that WASN'T Bama's best win.  They also beat # 1 Georgia.

Hey, if Bama and/or Texas had been left out, I would have been fine with that, but mostly because I can't stand either team or their respective fanbase.  But they are (IMO) better teams, so if that happened, an injustice would have been done, by the criteria of the process, regardless of how happy I personally would have been about it.

Okay, so if we are discussing best wins, let's discuss worst losses as well.

Alabama's worst loss (because it was their only one) was losing by double digits AT HOME to Texas.

FSU's worst loss was...oh wait, they didn't lose a game. 

[lonestar]

Cal got a good bowl draw, Texas Tech in the Liberty bowl. A good, even match between two very average teams, but, after seeing how my boys excelled at the end, I'm hoping for a win. This Cal team only loses 3 starters to graduation, expect them to scare a few teams next year in the inexplicably downgraded ACC conference. (not quite so P5 conference?)(P₅ Conference?)

[cramx3]

Cal got a good bowl draw, Texas Tech in the Liberty bowl. A good, even match between two very average teams, but, after seeing how my boys excelled at the end, I'm hoping for a win. This Cal team only loses 3 starters to graduation, expect them to scare a few teams next year in the inexplicably downgraded ACC conference. (not quite so P5 conference?)(P₅ Conference?)

I saw something about if this years NY6 bowls were from next year's conference's, 10/12 teams would be from Big10/SEC.  Might as well just get it out of the way sooner than later that this is becoming a two conference division. ACC got shafted this year and it may only going to get worse.

[hefdaddy42]

Ok, I still can't get over that we don't know if FSU is worse than the teams that made it though. To our very uneducated, layman's eyes? Sure, what the heck. But, unless that shit is decided on the field, we'll never know.


As Marc said, FSU did everything that was asked of them, and running the table is a huge part of that. They deserved that spot over Texas and Bama. This sideline QB deciding who's the better team on paper is straight up bullshit. Play the games.

Well, straight up saying that Florida State "deserves" to be in over Texas and Bama is no different.

There are only four spots.  And since there are no automatic qualifiers (yet), it's a subjective process and always has been.  They've just always been able to get away with it before because not all 5 power conferences have ever had deserving teams in the same year before.

The committee have criteria to go by, and you guys that are saying that FSU got screwed aren't judging the committee on whether they followed their criteria or not.

"Undefeated" is not one of the criteria.

Florida State's best win is LSU.  Well, Alabama beat them too, and that WASN'T Bama's best win.  They also beat # 1 Georgia.

Hey, if Bama and/or Texas had been left out, I would have been fine with that, but mostly because I can't stand either team or their respective fanbase.  But they are (IMO) better teams, so if that happened, an injustice would have been done, by the criteria of the process, regardless of how happy I personally would have been about it.

Okay, so if we are discussing best wins, let's discuss worst losses as well.

Alabama's worst loss (because it was their only one) was losing by double digits AT HOME to Texas.

FSU's worst loss was...oh wait, they didn't lose a game.

OK?

Again, "undefeated" is not a criteria.

One reason for that is that not all schedules are created equal.  It's not the NFL, with only 32 teams, where all teams have the same salary cap and other guidelines. 

Strength of schedule rankings for the relevant teams:

Texas (2nd)
Alabama (6th)
Washington (8th)
Michigan (51st)
Florida State (55th)

So going undefeated against FSU's schedule is not the same as going against Alabama's schedule with only one loss.

That, along with the loss of their quarterback, made this a painful but straightforward choice for the committee, and one for which I find no fault, no matter how much I sympathize with the Seminoles.

Having said all that, I think a secondary "playoff" with FSU, Georgia, Ohio State, and Oregon would be just as entertaining as the real deal. 

[cramx3]

I saw an AP pollster say if FSU beats Georgia and Texas/Alabama win the Playoff, they will vote FSU to be #1  I get the sentiment and FSU would be the only undefeated P5 team in that scenario, but let's not get carried away.

[KevShmev]

Ok, I still can't get over that we don't know if FSU is worse than the teams that made it though. To our very uneducated, layman's eyes? Sure, what the heck. But, unless that shit is decided on the field, we'll never know.


As Marc said, FSU did everything that was asked of them, and running the table is a huge part of that. They deserved that spot over Texas and Bama. This sideline QB deciding who's the better team on paper is straight up bullshit. Play the games.

Well, straight up saying that Florida State "deserves" to be in over Texas and Bama is no different.

There are only four spots.  And since there are no automatic qualifiers (yet), it's a subjective process and always has been.  They've just always been able to get away with it before because not all 5 power conferences have ever had deserving teams in the same year before.

The committee have criteria to go by, and you guys that are saying that FSU got screwed aren't judging the committee on whether they followed their criteria or not.

"Undefeated" is not one of the criteria.

Florida State's best win is LSU.  Well, Alabama beat them too, and that WASN'T Bama's best win.  They also beat # 1 Georgia.

Hey, if Bama and/or Texas had been left out, I would have been fine with that, but mostly because I can't stand either team or their respective fanbase.  But they are (IMO) better teams, so if that happened, an injustice would have been done, by the criteria of the process, regardless of how happy I personally would have been about it.

Okay, so if we are discussing best wins, let's discuss worst losses as well.

Alabama's worst loss (because it was their only one) was losing by double digits AT HOME to Texas.

FSU's worst loss was...oh wait, they didn't lose a game.

OK?

Again, "undefeated" is not a criteria.

One reason for that is that not all schedules are created equal.  It's not the NFL, with only 32 teams, where all teams have the same salary cap and other guidelines. 

Strength of schedule rankings for the relevant teams:

Texas (2nd)
Alabama (6th)
Washington (8th)
Michigan (51st)
Florida State (55th)

So going undefeated against FSU's schedule is not the same as going against Alabama's schedule with only one loss.

That, along with the loss of their quarterback, made this a painful but straightforward choice for the committee, and one for which I find no fault, no matter how much I sympathize with the Seminoles.

Having said all that, I think a secondary "playoff" with FSU, Georgia, Ohio State, and Oregon would be just as entertaining as the real deal.

Okay, but if strength of schedule is so important, why is Michigan ranked number 1? 

And the committee was so concerned about FSU without Travis, but they didn't have him for basically the last three games (he got hurt in the 1st quarter of the North Alabama game), and they scored 100 points in those three games.

Michigan scored 87 points in their last three games.

In other words, Michigan's offense is no better than FSU's without Travis AND they have about the same strength of schedule.  Where is the consistency?

Also, the committee also doesn't have regard for defense obviously.  Louisville was averaging over 30 a game, yet FSU held them to 6 points last week.  I know ugly defensive games are not considered style points, but it just doesn't make a lot of sense. FSU probably would have gotten more consideration had they beaten Louisville 54-51 than they did for dominating them on defense and winning 16-6.

Edit: not trying to be argumentative, really, I just think all this illustrates the moving goal posts the committee used to come to their decision.

[hefdaddy42]

I saw an AP pollster say if FSU beats Georgia and Texas/Alabama win the Playoff, they will vote FSU to be #1  I get the sentiment and FSU would be the only undefeated P5 team in that scenario, but let's not get carried away.

Well, the AP poll doesn't carry the same kind of weight as it used to be.  When it's all said and done, and FSU beats Georgia, if he really thinks they are the best team, he SHOULD vote for them # 1, regardless of who wins the playoff.  But if he thinks the playoff winner is the best team, and he still votes for FSU # 1, then he's kind of an asshole.

Okay, but if strength of schedule is so important, why is Michigan ranked number 1? 

Because they felt they were clearly the overall best team.  To be fair, they beat Ohio State, and also Penn State.  But the rest of their schedule was definitely trash.  For that reason, I would have had them ranked second or third, and would have ranked Washington # 1.

And the committee was so concerned about FSU without Travis, but they didn't have him for basically the last three games (he got hurt in the 1st quarter of the North Alabama game), and they scored 100 points in those three games.

Michigan scored 87 points in their last three games.

In other words, Michigan's offense is no better than FSU's without Travis AND they have about the same strength of schedule.  Where is the consistency?

Obviously, it's all just opinions at the end of the day, but for me the consistency is, again, in the schedule.  The level of competition that Michigan faced in its last 3 games was, as far as I can tell, a lot better than what Florida State faced.  So just flat numbers-to-numbers doesn't work.  *shrugs*

Also, the committee also doesn't have regard for defense obviously.  Louisville was averaging over 30 a game, yet FSU held them to 6 points last week.  I know ugly defensive games are not considered style points, but it just doesn't make a lot of sense. FSU probably would have gotten more consideration had they beaten Louisville 54-51 than they did for dominating them on defense and winning 16-6.

Maybe, maybe not.  What I know for sure is that if they had beaten Louisville 54 - 10, they would have eliminated the criteria that allowed them to take the injury into consideration, because there would have effectively been no dropoff.  But that didn't happen.

Edit: not trying to be argumentative, really, I just think all this illustrates the moving goal posts the committee used to come to their decision.

No worries, I love these kinds of discussions.  People wouldn't bother if they didn't care.

For me, the only real goalpost that moved this season was the number of "deserving" teams.  College football screwed itself when they set up a four team playoff while having five power conferences.  They just miraculously avoided the consequences of that ludicrous decision until this season.

[Podaar]

I saw an AP pollster say if FSU beats Georgia and Texas/Alabama win the Playoff, they will vote FSU to be #1  I get the sentiment and FSU would be the only undefeated P5 team in that scenario, but let's not get carried away.

Yeah, that's kinda ridiculous. In 2008 Utah went undefeated, beating Michigan in Ann Arbor the first game of the season, and Alabama in the Sugar Bowl but no one thought they deserved to be number 1, rightly so.

[hefdaddy42]

I saw an AP pollster say if FSU beats Georgia and Texas/Alabama win the Playoff, they will vote FSU to be #1  I get the sentiment and FSU would be the only undefeated P5 team in that scenario, but let's not get carried away.

Yeah, that's kinda ridiculous. In 2008 Utah went undefeated, beating Michigan in Ann Arbor the first game of the season, and Alabama in the Sugar Bowl but no one thought they deserved to be number 1, rightly so.

I kinda did.  That was a good team.

[cramx3]

I saw an AP pollster say if FSU beats Georgia and Texas/Alabama win the Playoff, they will vote FSU to be #1  I get the sentiment and FSU would be the only undefeated P5 team in that scenario, but let's not get carried away.

Yeah, that's kinda ridiculous. In 2008 Utah went undefeated, beating Michigan in Ann Arbor the first game of the season, and Alabama in the Sugar Bowl but no one thought they deserved to be number 1, rightly so.

I kinda did.  That was a good team.

Forgot about that team.  Deserving for sure.  We can go back to 1994 for PSU to be undefeated and not get a NC.  It's always been the way for college ball to be in the hands of voters.  Thankfully we can get away from that, for the most part, next year.  (obviously there will still be a first team out that may have legit complaint, but they won't be undeafeated and they won't be a P5 champ)

[lightningbolt]

I'm a fan of the Florida Gators and, of course, hate the Seminoles (thankfully, I was in school at UF during some of the 2000s era glory years, it has often been rough since then).  That being said, I feel really bad for their fans and the team.  To the point where it has legitimately bothered me.  However, nothing in life is fair.  This was probably the right decision competitively and, the real driver of this, for the TV ratings/etc...  TV doesn't want to serve up another almost certain blowout.  That being said, it doesn't sit well with me at all.  Thankfully, this won't happen with the new 12 team model.

The fact that the injury occurred in a meaningless late season OOC game against an FCS team just rubs salt into the wound.  During the 2006-2009 run where Florida was championship caliber, the team always played a similar opponent as their 11th game - Western Carolina, FAU, The Citadel, and FIU.  I was terrified a key player was going to get injured during one of those pointless contests.  Fortunately, it never happened to us during that time.

I am very happy Georgia got knocked out.  It would be difficult to stomach seeing them win 3 national titles in a row.  2 in a row was bad enough

[hefdaddy42]

Hey, maybe we can all agree on this:  Paul Finebaum is the most annoying and worthless person in the landscape of college sports media.

[cramx3]

Hey, maybe we can all agree on this:  Paul Finebaum is the most annoying and worthless person in the landscape of college sports media.

I agree, but I can't recall the last time I listened to him anyway.  SEC teet sucker.

[lightningbolt]

Hey, maybe we can all agree on this:  Paul Finebaum is the most annoying and worthless person in the landscape of college sports media.

I agree, but I can't recall the last time I listened to him anyway.  SEC teet sucker.

He is terrible.  Can't stomach him at all.

[lonestar]

So by NCAA committee logic, Jacksonville Jaguars should be left out if the playoffs because Lawrence got injured