2024 College Football Thread

[Shocker]

The way they are doing this seeding is fine IMO.  What we can’t have is teams from the same league getting byes.  I think the goal should be the top 12 teams and having 3 losses matters but shouldn’t exclude someone.  Alabama is a better team than SMU or Indiana and they would have been a serious threat.  Miami didn’t beat anyone.  

[CRA]

43 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

The 6th best team in the SEC would still be better than the best team in most conferences.

See there you go again, just getting whacky.   I mean, outside of some anomaly season….we know that just isn’t true.  

non-SEC teams have 4 of the 10 nattys in the CFP era. 

we know the 6th best team in the SEC hasn’t been better than the top of other conferences during this era.  Almost 50% of the time the top of the SEC didn’t finish on top. 

SEC is the best conference.  But that’s why the SEC gets hate because they often get stupid with it….and you aren’t even a SEC guy. At least not today. 

[CRA]

48 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

The voters will learn from the 1st playoffs. This was a chance for the lesser conferences to prove they belong with the big boys. If Clemson doesn't stay competitive in the next game it's gonna make the voters look even more ridiculous.

 

I think they have to reward more teams in the best conference which is the SEC. Teams shouldn't be punished because they play in the best conference. We all know the SEC is king in college football. Reward more teams in that conference please.

Disagree really.  The #4 and #3 team routinely got their doors blown off in the 4 team bracket.

In reality Penn St would have been in under the 4 team system….and yet they are playing a team that is only squeaked into the top 10 in one poll. 

Blowouts are going to happen.  

Hell one the biggest blowouts in CFP history was what everyone was appointing as the greatest team in college football history and were going to be appointed such when they won the title game….but they got smashed in it and everyone pretends that talk never happened.   Sports.  Bad and good days happen.  Therefore bad games happen. 

[LinvilleGorge]

All this recency bias is insane. Y'all, we all watched TCU get massacred 65-7 in the title game less than two years ago.

[CRA]

10 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

All this recency bias is insane. Y'all, we all watched TCU get massacred 65-7 in the title game less than two years ago.

and those games were neutral sites too.  The deck/format is intentionally slanted to reward and favor the higher seeds right now. 

[LinvilleGorge]

6 minutes ago, CRA said:

and those games were neutral sites too.  The deck/format is intentionally slanted to reward and favor the higher seeds right now. 

Yeah, I think they should be played in neutral sites. Just commandeer already existing bowl games like they did with the four team format. I mean, all the legacy "big bowls" have basically been rendered irrelevant with the current format.

[CRA]

I’ll be back later to take my lumps or gloat.  We getting situated over here.  

[CRA]

1 minute ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Yeah, I think they should be played in neutral sites. Just commandeer already existing bowl games like they did with the four team format.

Yeah, I never really understood how they cherry picked these opening games to give them homefield advantage given that’s not what college football does anywhere else in title, bowl, playoff games. 

[Bama Panther]

20 minutes ago, UnluckyforSome said:

I completely agree with that, on the other hand, specific to this year, a 3 loss SEC team still has 3 losses and I am not convinced they should be in a conversation about a "National Champion."

Your issue must be with the 12-team format then. As I mentioned, there have been many prior seasons with 3-loss teams in the top 12. If we are going to have a 12-team (or God forbid, 16-team) format going forward, three losses is not a disqualifier. 

The real question we all should be asking is this: should there really be 12 teams in the playoffs? We know that there are at least 2, but I’d venture to guess about 6, teams that truly have no chance at winning this thing and should not be in a conversation about a “National Champion.”

[Bama Panther]

31 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

All this recency bias is insane. Y'all, we all watched TCU get massacred 65-7 in the title game less than two years ago.

Which is why they NEVER should have expanded to 12 teams. Now that we are here, it doesn’t mean we have to accept teams getting in due to weak schedules only to get railroaded in the first round. 

[CamWhoaaCam]

The massacre part 2 begins now

[LinvilleGorge]

1 minute ago, Bama Panther said:

Which is why they NEVER should have expanded to 12 teams. Now that we are here, it doesn’t mean we have to accept teams getting in due to weak schedules only to get railroaded in the first round. 

I have an odd feeling you'd be singing a completely different tune had they let Bama in.

[Bama Panther]

1 hour ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Not sure of your point. Playoff blowouts are blowouts. There's been plenty of them. This isn't a new phenomenon.

Since these blowouts occurred in the 7/10 and 6/11 games, it suggests to me two things: (1) should the playoffs have been expanded to 12; and (2) if so, should SMU and Indiana, both teams who only got in due to the draw of extremely favorable schedules, have been amongst the 12?

[Brooklyn 3.0]

1 hour ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

NFL games on a Saturday is so stupid. Let college football have their moment for a day my goodness.

 

 

They're competitors. No way they care about that.