College Football
A community to discuss college football.
| /c/CFB Poll Top 25 |  |
|---|---|
| 1. Oregon |  |
| 2. Indiana |  |
| 3. Ohio State |  |
| 4. Miami |  |
| 5. Georgia |  |
| 6. Texas |  |
| 7. Notre Dame |  |
| 8. BYU |  |
| 9. Tennessee |  |
| 10. Penn State |  |
| 11. Alabama |  |
| 12. SMU |  |
| 13. Boise State |  |
| 14. Ole Miss |  |
| 15. Army |  |
| 16. LSU |  |
| 17. Texas A&M |  |
| 18. Iowa State |  |
| 19. Pitt |  |
| 20. Washington State |  |
| 21. Clemson |  |
| T-22. Louisville |  |
| T-22. South Carolina |  |
| 24. Kansas State |  |
| 25. Colorado |  |
Check out our other sports communities!
I followed college ball there in the late 2000s while dating a US girl. As a hockey fan it was a fun experience to learn about the game, and the fans, until it came to the stakes involved on judging how to filter over 120+ teams into a playoff system of bowls that couldn't accommodate all of the teams in a fair way. At that stage there was even pressure on Obama to get involved to "fix" the system.
I'll take the grueling best of 7 playoff series over that noise every time. Mind you the tailgating and the fan culture was still the tops. Such a great time.
Oh man, the weird cultural and historical quirks that led to interscholastic, nominally amateur "U23" football being a top 5 sports entertainment business in the US could fill volumes!
And basically yes, every single system designed to name a champion is doomed in a sport with (1) no enforced parity (either by salary cap or by relegation), (2) a huge number of teams nominally in the same tier, (3) a 12-game regular season, and (4) vast and barely concealed corruption. Honestly, the stupidity of college football is a non-negligible part of its charm.
the stupidity of college football is a non-negligible part of it's charm
100% and I feel like the bowl system was a much better reflection of this than any playoff will ever be. The ridiculousness of 2+ schools claiming the same titles on a regular basis, and everyone else mostly agreeing both claims are valid but still bickering over which is more valid, was a big part of the sport's charm.
The format's changing to a 12 team playoff next year, so this will all be fixed, at least
Except for who gets a bye week.
If FSU is good enough they'd win their first round game under the new system
The 4 major conference champs next year (rip PAC 12) get bye weeks
There will still be outrage that some team got snubbed, but it won't make as many headlines as no one ranked 9-25 really has a chance of winning in a playoff.
Yeah any argument about who's ranked 10-15 is not going to make headlines
You're right. Just look at this year, the two deserving teams got in Michigan and Washington. The next 3 teams are essentially wild card. The problem is that the playoff system was supposed to make sure those outlier teams like FSU got in when there wasn't enough room when it was just 2 teams. Under the old system, there wouldn't be a controversy at all, but now there's a controversy to rival 2 SEC West teams snubbing everyone else.
The next controversy I was expecting was 2 G5 teams getting in over an unranked P5 champion. But with the Pac-12 almost certainly dissolving, that seems wildly unlikely to ever happen.
Yeah now we just have the ability for a 10-2 bama to win the ncg. That's a downgrade for me
Can we stop pretending FSU was snubbed? There isn't a team in the playoffs they would be favored against. They likely wouldn't be favored against Georgia or Oregon either. The ACC is a lesser conference in football, especially with a bad Clemson. The big 10 has more money, but Michigan and Ohio State were the only two teams with a chance of making the playoffs, the rest of the conference is pretty bad.
FSU had an elite defense that could keep them in any game. With a month to coach up Rodemaker they can definitely win against anybody. Even if they are still the underdogs. Thats why we play games and don't crown a champ based off pre-season rankings.
The same ACC who had a 6-4 record against the SEC this year?
Face it- FSU earned it. They won with a 2nd stringer, won with a 3rd stringer. Alabama needed all their guys to pull out a last second win over Auburn who was shredded by 21 by New Mexico. They squeaked by other lesser opponents too.
Either the games mean something or they don't. And it's quite hard to ever win it all if you are never given the opportunity and set aside for teams who didn't prove themselves this year (or at least not in the way they should've.)
If it's just a glamour competition (which it is- as evidenced by the outrage and how the committee doesn't care) then they should just say so. Call it the $EC $pectacular. At least they'd be honest.
FSU didn't beat a playoff contender. Washington beat Oregon twice, Michigan beat Ohio State, Texas beat Alabama, and Alabama beat Georgia. They were the easiest team to leave out, with the least impressive championship, and least impressive signature win.
All I'll say with all this drama is that I may be almost as invested in this year's orange bowl as last years. And I honestly don't know what outcome produces the most drama? FSU win? Well obviously that means they deserved to play in the cfp, and maybe they'll even claim the nc. UGA win? The sec front office (and thus the cfpc through espn money) is clearly playing favorites since they are based in Birmingham after all. FSU boycotts? 🍿🍿🍿
The orange bowl won't mean anything. Too many players will sit out for it to matter. This is the downside of the playoff, all the other bowl games get less fun because the players you want to see are sitting out.
While I absolutely subscribe to this argument, I think the outlined narratives will still be present. Even if 30 years ago it would be front page headlines instead of sports page headlines now.