Mountainman wrote:Spence wrote:Yeah, that is the whole problem with this system. Indiana had maybe the best team they have ever had this year. People just can't buy that they may be good. Even when they were playing Ohio State they went down 35-7. So did they make adjustments and mount a come back or did Ohio State players realize they weren't as good as they thought and lay down, letting Indiana back in it? I don't know the answer to that question, but I do know Pentix is a solid QB and Fryfogle is an NFL receiver.
I think Cincinnati was the team that got hosed the worst. They did everything they could do. Indiana, A&M, and Florida all lost games. All lost to teams in the playoff.
.......just thought Indiana should have got a better bowl game than the Outback.
As for Cincy, they did all they could do, but until Group of 5 teams play stronger schedules they won’t break the CFP top 4 in the current system, and as you said, Indiana, Texas A&M and Florida all had a shot during the regular season and lost.
That's the thing, though ...
In a season where most conferences are not allowing inter-conference competition, the chances were slim to none that Cincy could get a heavier schedule --- Maybe they could have somehow been the team to schedule BYU instead of Coastal Carolina.
I don't know if their conference would let them, however.
On the other hand; Ohio State played Indiana, who had proven they are likely every bit as good as Tulsa. Beyond that, we do not know for certain.
Elsewise, the traditional powers of the Big 10, who were ranked high once the Big 10 played their first week of games, turned out to be uncharacteristically deplorable.
Penn State was 0-5 before they won their first game.
Michigan finishes with a mere two win season. [which is why D Coordinator Don Brown finds himself unemployed]
Minnesota, who was the upstart that was said to challenge Ohio State for the Big 10 Championship, sputtered out to an 0-2 start, losing their first game to Michigan --- with the Gofers ending their season 3-4.
We say, "Until the Group of 5 schools play a tougher schedule". But do we mean it?
I ask, because, other than Indiana & Northwestern; Ohio State didn't play any teams with a winning record.
It simply isn't true that the group of 5 has an avenue to get into the playoff. Because the Committee is Committed to selecting brands, over productivity.
It's an invitational, and the Group of 5 never had their invites post stamped. They just get an envelope titled; Return to Sender.
Remember when the media pushed and pushed for the Playoff?
They championed the little guy, telling us all how unfair it was that Boise State, Utah, TCU, Hawaii weren't getting the opportunity to prove it.
Then, after they got the playoff, they wanted; UCF disappeared into the fray. The media, who said those teams weren't getting a fair shake, were now telling us, two consecutive year undefeated UCF doesn't play a hard enough schedule. If they put someone who was a worthy opponent on their schedule, then maybe they'd have a case.
Now ... all of a sudden.
The media is at it again. Talking about how unfair it is for teams such as Coastal Carolina, Cincinnati, BYU and even bringing up UCF from a couple of years ago, as evidence why we need to expand the playoff to 8 teams.
If they expanded the playoff by 4 more; Do you actually believe their would be a Group of 5 team invited?
There again would be special conditions.
1.) Auto invites for the Power5 Champions
2.) Notre Dame
3.) finish in the Top 8
4.) SEC/Big XII/Big 10 second best records
5.) Best Group of 5 " if " Undefeated team