CollegeFootballPoll.com Message Board

Problem is...the G5's want in...and Tulsa (conference champ) ve an Alabama or Ohio State holds little interest.

Or Miami of Ohio (MAC Champ) vs the P5 champs....

billybud wrote:Problem is...the G5's want in...and Tulsa (conference champ) ve an Alabama or Ohio State holds little interest.

Or Miami of Ohio (MAC Champ) vs the P5 champs....

Alabama, as other teams do, playing the likes of Mercer, Southern Mississippi and New Mexico State this regular season and knowing these smaller conferences need revenue too, causes me to lean toward Conference Champs to becoming automatic qualifiers for the tournament…… and if they want addition teams, they should have expanded to 16 teams.

I believe that, for a national championship, the BEST ought to play for it.

Not teams that Vegas would have as 27 point underdogs to the second or third SEC or Big Ten team.

Basketball has a large "AQ" model because you can play three games in a week...

But the basketball illusion of "everybody has a chance" is just that...an illusion.

No team seeded #9-16 has ever won the NC, nor have advanced to the Final Four.... the NC winners have been mainly seeds #1-#3. In fact, #4 seeds have a little over one half of one percent chance to win a NC (.7%).

Football is not basketball...not enough "slack" to waste on illusions and our love of Cinderella's.

It would be ok if you really knew who the best were. We think we know. We are pretty sure who the top 6 or so are, but there really isn’t a way to determine who the best really are so they should include all conference champs as basketball does and then let a couple at larges come into the mix.

billybud wrote:I believe that, for a national championship, the BEST ought to play for it.

Not teams that Vegas would have as 27 point underdogs to the second or third SEC or Big Ten team.

Basketball has a large "AQ" model because you can play three games in a week...

But the basketball illusion of "everybody has a chance" is just that...an illusion.

No team seeded #9-16 has ever won the NC, nor have advanced to the Final Four.... the NC winners have been mainly seeds #1-#3. In fact, #4 seeds have a little over one half of one percent chance to win a NC (.7%).

Football is not basketball...not enough "slack" to waste on illusions and our love of Cinderella's.

I believe in the best teams playing for the title too…….. I also believe in opportunity and earning a title.
To me the best should determined on the field by the game itself after all participants have been provided a path to earn the title by winning games. I mean who are these groups claiming they know what’s better for the game???? They all claim they know what’s best for the game, but it’s NOT THEIR GAME. They bought and others sold the game for money to advance their own interests, not the games interest, and they’ve convinced many they know
better than the game itself…….. and to me, there’s something not quite right about that.


……….. and btw, this is the same bunch that I would think would be thinking now, You know, ‘We should have just let Ed O’Bannon get paid’.

It ain't basketball...you can not have "the best play for it" and also be inclusive of 122 programs...

Sine 2018, more than 1/2 of the five star talent has landed at just four schools...Alabama, Clemson, Georgia, or Ohio State....talent is concentrated.

The SEC has signed 123 Five stars....the G5, just 1. Talent is concentrated.

https://twitter.com/ADavidHaleJoint/sta ... 4252744704

Silly Pretend World...where we believe that a win counts the same, whether it is over Toledo or Ohio State.

Where we think that a Champ of the MAC (Miami of Ohio in 2019) who plays Ball State, Buffalo, Central Michigan, Akron, Bowling Green, Kent State, Ohio, etc....equates to be the same as a team like Bama...playing LSU, Texas A&M, Florida, Auburn, Tennessee, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Ms State....

A factoid...

The MAC is 0 for 25 against Ohio State.

Since 2010...the MAC is 1-38 vs the SEC..

billybud wrote:A factoid...

The MAC is 0 for 25 against Ohio State.

Since 2010...the MAC is 1-38 vs the SEC..

Well, since they’re already playing one another…… what’s the problem???

billybud wrote:A factoid...

The MAC is 0 for 25 against Ohio State.

Since 2010...the MAC is 1-38 vs the SEC..

Based on past performance, I’d take the favorites to cover the spread.

billybud wrote:Silly Pretend World...where we believe that a win counts the same, whether it is over Toledo or Ohio State.

Where we think that a Champ of the MAC (Miami of Ohio in 2019) who plays Ball State, Buffalo, Central Michigan, Akron, Bowling Green, Kent State, Ohio, etc....equates to be the same as a team like Bama...playing LSU, Texas A&M, Florida, Auburn, Tennessee, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Ms State....

“Silly Pretend World”…….. sounds like where the NCCA has been residing for a while now.

billybud wrote:It ain't basketball...you can not have "the best play for it" and also be inclusive of 122 programs...

Sine 2018, more than 1/2 of the five star talent has landed at just four schools...Alabama, Clemson, Georgia, or Ohio State....talent is concentrated.

The SEC has signed 123 Five stars....the G5, just 1. Talent is concentrated.

https://twitter.com/ADavidHaleJoint/sta ... 4252744704

Those conferences and teams have dominated…….. maybe it’s time to just go ahead and exclude the BigXII and the PAC12 too.

billybud wrote:It ain't basketball...you can not have "the best play for it" and also be inclusive of 122 programs...

Sine 2018, more than 1/2 of the five star talent has landed at just four schools...Alabama, Clemson, Georgia, or Ohio State....talent is concentrated.

The SEC has signed 123 Five stars....the G5, just 1. Talent is concentrated.

https://twitter.com/ADavidHaleJoint/sta ... 4252744704

I agree it isn't basketball. But I also believe that what people perceive as the top 10 and the actual top 10 isn't true either. So much of college football is politics. Why not let all the conferences have a team. The best 2 or 4 should still make it to the top. The way it is now we have self fullfilling prophecy on who is the best. Ohio State, Alabama, Clemson, Georgia, Oklahoma, and Notre Dame are recruiting at a high level because recruits know those teams are likely to be in the playoffs at least one year in their career if they go there. If the last seven years has taught us nothing, it has taught us that the playoff and they way it is done has strengthened those teams while making the gap between them and the rest of college football larger. Maybe if all the conferences are really eligible that gap will diminish. Maybe it won't, but why not see. The current system is really only fair for a few teams.

Good stuff gentlemen……… we all could take any position surrounding this, whether it be inclusiveness, practicality, fairness, or any other issue and make the case for it pro or con and be correct. As Spence so accurately put it, “So much of College Football is politics.”, and as we all also know, politics is power, pure and simple, it determines who gets to decide what’s done, how it’s done and who’s going to do it, who’s gonna pay for it and who’s going to benefit from it.

College Football needs leadership to get the game out of that environment.

That's the basketball model...where half of the tournament actually has zero chance of playing in the Final Four....

Oh..yeah, we let them play it out on the court, cheer for the upsets (like the one game of 136 played that a #16 seed actually won a game). And no #16 seed has ever advanced beyond that one game.

It's all a farce meant to dupe the public into thinking "it's anybody's game". Until the best teams crush Cinderella's glass slipper.



Why not let the MAC Champ and CUSA Champ and Sunbelt Champ play the #2 SEC or B1G team in a bowl....that might be competitive....or not.


In 2019...Florida Atlantic (CUSA Champ) would have played Georgia...my money would be on the Dawgs.

...........Miami of Ohio (MAC Champ) would have played Wisconsin....anyone seeing an upset here?

..........The American (AAC) Champ did play the #3 B1G in the bowl...lost by 14...respectable but predictable