Bull94

21 minutes ago, Gismo said:

BIG10 and SEC asserting themselves as the P2 by putting two 1 loss SEC teams ahead of an undefeated ACC team. 
 

All this means is that even if USF were in the ACC, we won’t get recognized or respected by the P2 or playoff system. They shafted FSU, they will definitely shaft USF.

This was also a move to prompt the top ACC schools to depart for the Big10 and SEC. They just took a huge dump on the desk of the ACC asserting their dominance and demonstrating that the table is reserved for Big10 and SEC only.

It’s truly one of the greatest subtle power moves of all time. 

why would the big 10 and sec want anyone from acc or big 12? they wouldn't increase the payout per school.

and when they expand playoffs  to 12 ACC champ will get autobid

29 minutes ago, puc86 said:

No that is the very small insignificant minority view, you see it as taking away because you know the G5 probably should lose it (which sounds pretty pessimistic). The overall view is that everyone is gaining something in that everyone regardless of conference affiliation still has the exact same chances of making it into the playoffs just as long as they show the committee they are the best teams (that sounds optimistic). Why should the rich and powerful playing the toughest schedules be punished for their success that doesn't sound very fair, doe is? Does anyone really want in because of pity and technicalities just to get embarrassed when they can actually earn it and have things be fair?

don't understand your line of thinking. here is the ncaa site.

States that top 6 ranked conference champs make the playoffs. (they will change this as the pac 12 will no longer exist).

That means highest ranked g5 champ is in. they earned it. No pity involved.

If you looked at the teams that would be currently in and the conferences they will be in next year then you would have 5 SEC teams, 5 Big 10 teams, 1 ACC team and Liberty.

Of course they would have to knock out either a big 10 or sec team to get a big 12 team in there. So much for power 4.....lol

I get that the sec and big 10 will dominate playoff members and there might even be people screaming that it's unfair that a 9-4 oklahoma state gets in over a 10-2 ole miss but that's the way it is until they expand again.

I could see the big 10 and sec splitting off but I don't think the crumbs they throw to g5 (or even acc and big 12) will cause that to happen.

How the 12-team College Football Playoff will work: Teams, schedule, bids

WWW.NCAA.COM

---

Here's a breakdown of how the new 12-team college football playoffs will work －starting next year － according to CFP officials.

7 minutes ago, puc86 said:

It isn't pessimistic and I do not think it is working out for the worst, I just think people looking at it that way are looking at it from the wrong perspective of where it is designed to be looked at from.

yeah the actual perspective because those are the actual rules in place.

you assume they will take something away. that our situation will somehow become worse.

Pessimist -

they are expanding the playoffs and that will benefit everyone including g5 schools.

the "power" schools will get 7 more playoff spots and g5 gets 1.

12 minutes ago, puc86 said:

I thought we were shelfing this conversation until it happens for the first time, at which point I fully expect you to be shocked by the idea that they could possibly do this...again.  68 teams does not equal 12 and 5 on 5 does not equal 11 on 11 especially when most people do not play iron man and its actually closer to at least 25 vs 25 from a fielding perspective. Cinderella story runs are from survivorship bias based on volume. Most Cinderella hopefuls are back to scrubbing floors 1 minute into the tournament on games no one noticed because 10 or them are going on at the same time.

I won't be shocked if the sec and big 10 break off that could be tough though because every other conference could say f you then we won't play you in any other sport..

not sure what you are saying as far as basketball v football but look at the revenue generated by both playoffs.

I assume the g5 will get 1/12th of football playoff revenue(or whatever pittance they get for each round).

That's 92%(or more) of revenue to the "power" conferences.

I'm willing to bet that the power schools get far less % of the basketball revenue and they started out with 100% of that.

I get you're a pessimist and assume everything will work out for the worst but the playoffs expanding is good for everyone including the g5 schools.

10 minutes ago, puc86 said:

The action wasn’t to expand the playoffs to the g5 it was to expand the playoffs. 

The G5 part makes an argument for the size of the expansion and appeals to fairness.

The G5 part was important to fairness because it requires more from athletes and if its just the P5 they already settled it in the season and in the conference championship.

The same fairness argument will then be used to remove the G5 because they aren’t qualified and it’s unfair to those that are qualified.

The G5 isn’t losing anything it’s just making it fair for everyone and every year the G5 has top 12 teams they will still get in. 

again that is your pessimistic assumption. unless you have a crystal ball, I'll go with the rules in place.

like I said, basketball has become more inclusive as they have expanded the playoffs to the benefit of everyone involved.

13 minutes ago, CousinRicky said:

I get that. But they could have ranked SMU ahead of Liberty based on SOS.

sure but smu had 2 losses. our commissioner is out there complaining about it.

rankings will always be subjective and there will always be people who claim it isn't fair.

they still do that for the basketball tourney and they let in **** near everybody.

the 13th placed team will complain next year how unfair it is.

13 minutes ago, CousinRicky said:

I reread that a couple of times and still not seeing what you are saying. But please, don't try to explain it with a 7 paragraph answer. I'll suffer through my day trying to figure it out - or not. 

What happened yesterday is just baffling because they excluded a P5 unbeaten team from the playoffs but yet put in Liberty in the NY6 games. So FSU isn't qualified but Liberty is? I realize one is the playoffs and one is a NY6 game but it doesn't seem they applied the same logic to the 2 scenarios.

Liberty was the highest ranked g5 team. If tulane had beaten smu then they would have gone in their place even though tulane already had a loss and liberty was undefeated.

unfortunately when there are only 4 spots and 5 supposed power conferences then someone will be left out. acc conference was by far the weakest

I guess if fsu beats georgia then they can claim a national title like ucf did.

26 minutes ago, puc86 said:

No they changed the rule to expand the playoffs, why does it need to be so big when it will require student athletes to play longer for the same rewards and most teams were already disqualified by the teams already in it? Well because fairness and trying to squeeze in one of the little guys that we couldn’t let in when all of these other teams are more deserving but maybe if we just go bigger we can justify it. Oh wait we just realized these teams aren’t qualified and it’s not fair to not have the most qualified teams in the playoffs, sports should be merit based so we should remove the other parts and just go to straight merit, of course the g5 teams have just as great a shot as anyone if they just earn it. You do want things to be fair and for people to get in on merit and not technicalities and quotas, don’t you?

and in doing so they included the top ranked g5 team.

did you know that the ncaa basketball tournament used to be 8 teams?

they expanded to 16 and then 32 and now they are at 64 (or whatever nonsense with play in games).

you do realize that as they added teams they included more and more of the lower conference champs right?

they promote it as march madness. where every d-1 conference champ in the country has a chance to win national championship.

they talk about "cinderella" teams non stop.

if they were still at 8 teams from only "power" conferences almost nobody would watch.

11 minutes ago, SilverBull said:

The only applicable rule is the Golden Rule:  Those with the gold, rule.  I think it is pretty clear, even in the pristine world of "amateur athletics," that the power brokers change the rules when it suits them.  This year has borne that out. 

how does this year bear that out?

again they changed the rules to include the top ranked g5 team with the expanded playoffs.

it actually benefits them in that fans of all those g5 teams now actually believe they have a shot at winning a national championship.

it will actually get more people to watch and many fans of smaller programs will be pulling for the g5 champ in the playoffs.

2 minutes ago, puc86 said:

Sure, we can revisit this the year after implementation 

when they actually change the rules, you may have a point.

wouldn't it be ironic if the aac champ makes the playoffs next year

1 minute ago, puc86 said:

The lottery is random chance, this isn’t a random chance event. This is a clear path with a clear pattern that the power brokers aren’t even pretending to have any other possible scenario about. Pattern recognition is one of the few things people are actually good at until we have to invent reasons why you cannot consider the actual pattern. No one can honestly think anyone with the money , spending the money or making the money is going to for the first time consider how do we spread it around to more places for no value to ourselves when everything else we are doing is focused on concentrating that wealth and has resulted in exponential growth for all of us. It just doesn’t make any sense and there isn’t a way anyone could possibly believe it does.

word salad.

fact is the rules in place include the highest ranked g5 team in the payoffs starting next year.

that would be liberty with the #133 ranked schedule.

 you can assume whatever you want but until it actually happens you are wrong.

What an expanded 12-team College Football Playoff would have looked like this season

WWW.USATODAY.COM

---

College Football Playoff expansion is coming next year. But what if it was 12 teams this season? A look at what the field would have looked like.

7 minutes ago, puc86 said:

 

Half the teams in FBS vs a tenth of the teams in FBS isn’t the same thing. The rules were changed to allow for the expansion to 12 and not to actually include any teams like Liberty, once it actually happens the fairness argument will pivot to how it’s actually unfair to skip over 11 more deserving teams in order to get to a team skating by to undefeated season by playing a cupcake schedule every other team would have went more than undefeated playing. Are you watching the same movie? This only ends one way and there isn’t some G5 redemption arch that’s finally going to play out for the first time. Most of the time Goliath wins, that’s why no one writes stories about it.

You seem to be able to see the future. any lottery advice?

as far as I'm aware, the rules state that the highest ranked g5 team makes the playoffs. until that is actually changed, you are wrong.

this year Liberty with the #133 ranked schedule would be in the playoffs.

Oh and if our conference mate tulane had won their game they would be the ones in the playoffs and the irony is they would have been taken over an undefeated liberty while having one loss.

11 minutes ago, puc86 said:

Moving up means you get to lose and still make it in over those in conferences that aren’t poaching p4 teams even if you go undefeated and are supposedly in a p4 conference. Everyone in the playoffs are from a poaching conference, if a team like liberty ever actually makes it into the playoffs the rules will be changed immediately. 

again the rules were changed to include teams like liberty. that's why we're going to 12 teams.

there are 5 supposed power conferences and only 4 playoff spots now. someone has to be left out

13 minutes ago, puc86 said:

It does matter entirely; for a single instance and the it would be rectified based on the outrage from the injustice that is letting in these undeserving teams. Every defect that is letting in G5 teams is parched immediately, there is never any outrage about correcting the G5 errors because collectively no one cares about the G5. 

it won't be rectified. just look at basketball. they let in conference champs from much smaller "less deserving" leagues every year.

in fact that's the reason they are going to 12 teams. so they can be more inclusive.

the only way things will change is if the big 10 and sec break off. otherwise there will always be a representative from the g5.

It just stands to reason(and has been proven over and over again) that a team that moves up in competition will lose more.

Losing more will mean you make the playoffs less often especially now that it's going to 12 teams.

Just now, puc86 said:

Liberty getting in is a Trojan horse to expansion, there is no way anyone can actually expect that to continue 

just proof that it won't matter who you play. doesn't matter if you think it won't continue.

They are playing in a NY6 bowl with the worst strength of schedule (#133) in the country and they would be in the playoffs if/when they go to 12.

14 hours ago, puc86 said:

For continuing to make it clear that who you play continues to be more important than winning more of your lesser games. Who is upset about winning less by moving up? No one.

FSU wouldn't sniff a 4 team playoff if they played in sec. it's one thing to beat up on the likes of boston college, duke and wake forest.

besides they are going to a 12 team playoff next year.

even liberty gets in without a win against a top 25 school and the worst strength of schedule in the country.

2 minutes ago, Brad said:

 

 

 

not sure what this means?

7 minutes ago, Friscobull said:

Per Poncho we were dancing this year,  hard to do that with these trash Q4 losses.  So your explanation is we need to shoot better while the other team needs to not make as many shots, good strategy, that normally has nothing to do with Offensive and defensive skills or execution.

don't care what poncho said. determining how good/bad a coach or team is after 4 games is dumb.

oh and variance on 3pt% can easily explain these small sample size results.

could we be a bad team and could this coach be a terrible fit? sure but maybe we should wait for a larger sample size (4 games??lol)

1 minute ago, Triple B said:

 

It's not a lie if you believe it, I guess ..... sucks would be 0-4 and saying the team is talent less is just Frisco being Frisco. Way too early to bury them ...

4 games in and they are writing off the new coach and players.....laughable

3pt% is what's killing us. 48% (14-29)against in 2 losses compared to 8% for (3-37)

heck Knox is shooting 11% from 3 compared to 41% from 3 last year. small sample size.

24 minutes ago, Friscobull said:

Stick to chasing ambulances, this is above your pay grade.  He could use a break out year and break the bank next season or leave for about what he can get here or a little more and start the process all over.  It is a gamble but he can really set himself up with patience and he is also playing the long game.  He may be able to play in Sundays. 

He can play on Sundays from a p5 school too.

Obviously he would only leave for the right situation but $1m is essentially the signing bonus  for an early third round pick. Nothing says he couldn't get a "retention" bonus from his new school of the same amount next year too.

14 hours ago, BDYZR said:

Keionte Scott, a defensive back and punt returner for the Tigers, has been the primary returner for Auburn all season. Backup Koy Moore has had the chance to return seven punts of his own, but hasn't seen as much action as Scott has.

Battie was a kick returner for us as he was for them. He didn't return punts.Had 24 returns for 562 yards for auburn.

14 minutes ago, Chardizard said:

This is what I hope comes to light...and I think will...kids need to start considering what's better...make a temporary big pay day and transfer?  Or stay and take a bet on yourself for a potential at the career pay day?  

who's to say you can't have both? or that the nfl was even realistic?

NFL isn't drafting RBs like they used to. might as well get the money while you can.

5 minutes ago, Triple B said:

 

Have to agree, to a point. Don't think we'd be in the same boat as the Dukes, Wakes and Vanderbilts, though ....

No certainly not.

13 minutes ago, Triple B said:

There's no reason why we can't compete if we move up to a conference that doesn't lose its top teams ....

$$$