CFP announcement. - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: CFP announcement. (/thread-15145.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: CFP announcement. (/thread-15145.html)
Pages:
1
2
Re: CFP announcement. - CTcard - 12-04-2017
(12-03-2017, 10:53 PM)cardcrimson link Wrote:Long drive tonight and listened to a ton of commentary. The best was a quote from the president of the CFP. He stated the SC wasn't considered for the playoff as they had no marquee wins. Seriously? Who the hell did Bama beat? Why the ESPN interviewer didn't push him on that, I'll never know.
Best wins:
Bama
Over top 25 (by cfp): 24-10 over #17 LSU; 31-24 over #23 Miss. St.
Other notable: 27-19 over (7-5) Texas AM; 41-10 over (9-4) G5 Fresno
(and 1 win over a 6-6 team, 1 over a 7-5 G5 team)
$C
Over top 25 (by cfp): 31-28 over #13 Stanford; 42-24 over #13 Stanford.
Other notable: 48-17 over (7-5) ASU; 49-35 over (7-5) UA
(and 4 wins over 6-6 teams)
tOSU
Over top 25 (by cfp): 27-21 over #6 Wisconsin; 48-3 over #16 Mich St; 39-38 over #9 PSU
Other notable: 31-20 over (8-4) Mich; 38-7 over (8-3) G5 Army
(no wins over 0.500 teams)
By this measure it seems pretty clear the rankings should be tOSU $C Bama.
The main reason Bama was rewarded was fewer ticks in the loss column.
[As I have previously mentioned, never once has the cfp committee put in a team with X+1 losses over a team with X losses. Being a Power 5 team with fewer losses so far has always trumped all else.]
Re: CFP announcement. - Mick - 12-04-2017
I still think we should schedule San Jose State permanently, along with Rice (for Texas recruiting) and Florida (for Florida recruiting and SEC win). The Pac-12 schedule is brutal. We beat the worst team in the league (by far) by ONE point. We need easier non-conference opponents.
Re: CFP announcement. - ChicagoCard - 12-04-2017
(12-04-2017, 01:46 PM)Mick link Wrote:I still think we should schedule San Jose State permanently, along with Rice (for Texas recruiting) and Florida (for Florida recruiting and SEC win). The Pac-12 schedule is brutal. We beat the worst team in the league (by far) by ONE point. We need easier non-conference opponents.
I like the Texas and Florida connections. But if they were to schedule SJSU annually, would Stanford play in San Jose each year?
Re: CFP announcement. - BostonCard - 12-04-2017
Yeah, when all is said and done, the CFP committee has been predictable:
#1 criteria: fewest losses among P5 teams
#2 criteria: win conference
#3 criteria: strength of schedule
It sucks, but Alabama over tOSU and USC because of criteria #1. Same with Ohio State over Penn State last year.
BC
Re: CFP announcement. - Mick - 12-04-2017
(12-04-2017, 02:33 PM)ChicagoTree link Wrote:[quote author=Mick link=topic=18270.msg217018#msg217018 date=1512420404]
I still think we should schedule San Jose State permanently, along with Rice (for Texas recruiting) and Florida (for Florida recruiting and SEC win). The Pac-12 schedule is brutal. We beat the worst team in the league (by far) by ONE point. We need easier non-conference opponents.
I like the Texas and Florida connections. But if they were to schedule SJSU annually, would Stanford play in San Jose each year?
[/quote]
Nope. Never.
Re: CFP announcement. - ChicagoCard - 12-05-2017
(12-04-2017, 06:52 PM)Mick link Wrote:[quote author=ChicagoTree link=topic=18270.msg217031#msg217031 date=1512423210]
[quote author=Mick link=topic=18270.msg217018#msg217018 date=1512420404]
I still think we should schedule San Jose State permanently, along with Rice (for Texas recruiting) and Florida (for Florida recruiting and SEC win). The Pac-12 schedule is brutal. We beat the worst team in the league (by far) by ONE point. We need easier non-conference opponents.
I like the Texas and Florida connections. But if they were to schedule SJSU annually, would Stanford play in San Jose each year?
[/quote]
Nope. Never.
[/quote]
Ok, that's what I thought. Isn't that what they wanted though? It seems games in Texas and Florida make sense but Stanford already has an annual Bay Area game.
Re: CFP announcement. - JohnR34231 - 12-05-2017
Why do I think that no matter how many teams you put in the playoffs you will have people bitterly complaining that the fringe teams that did not make it should have and the playoffs need to be expanded?
Re: CFP announcement. - winflop - 12-05-2017
(12-05-2017, 04:56 AM)JPRI link Wrote:Why do I think that no matter how many teams you put in the playoffs you will have people bitterly complaining that the fringe teams that did not make it should have and the playoffs need to be expanded?
Can't speak for others by my issue is that Power 5 conference champions are left out. If there's a spot for them and the top-ranked Group of 5 champ I'm good.
Re: CFP announcement. - Mick - 12-05-2017
(12-05-2017, 03:58 AM)ChicagoTree link Wrote:[quote author=Mick link=topic=18270.msg217069#msg217069 date=1512438746]
[quote author=ChicagoTree link=topic=18270.msg217031#msg217031 date=1512423210]
[quote author=Mick link=topic=18270.msg217018#msg217018 date=1512420404]
I still think we should schedule San Jose State permanently, along with Rice (for Texas recruiting) and Florida (for Florida recruiting and SEC win). The Pac-12 schedule is brutal. We beat the worst team in the league (by far) by ONE point. We need easier non-conference opponents.
I like the Texas and Florida connections. But if they were to schedule SJSU annually, would Stanford play in San Jose each year?
[/quote]
Nope. Never.
[/quote]
Ok, that's what I thought. Isn't that what they wanted though? It seems games in Texas and Florida make sense but Stanford already has an annual Bay Area game.
[/quote]
I vaguely recall that SJSU asked for a guarantee that was out of the question.
Re: CFP announcement. - CTcard - 12-05-2017
(12-05-2017, 08:10 AM)Mick link Wrote:I vaguely recall that SJSU asked for a guarantee that was out of the question.
My memory is that SJSU demanded either that the series be turned into alternating home and home or a payout on the scale of what the SEC teams play.
I see that this year SJSU's OOC games were: home vs USF, home vs Cal Poly, @ Texas, and @ Utah.
Texas probably gave them a big payout. Doubt Utah could afford as much.
Most likely somebody like Terry could chime in with a more exact memory of how the series ended.
Re: CFP announcement. - ChicagoCard - 12-05-2017
A gaurantee in the form of a payout? Btw, I meant to write "every other year" earlier, not that Stanford would play there each yr...
Re: CFP announcement. - Mick - 12-05-2017
(12-05-2017, 08:22 AM)CTcard link Wrote:[quote author=Mick link=topic=18270.msg217092#msg217092 date=1512486609]
I vaguely recall that SJSU asked for a guarantee that was out of the question.
My memory is that SJSU demanded either that the series be turned into alternating home and home or a payout on the scale of what the SEC teams play.
I see that this year SJSU's OOC games were: home vs USF, home vs ×ÉÉ Poly, @ Texas, and @ Utah.
Texas probably gave them a big payout. Doubt Utah could afford as much.
Most likely somebody like Terry could chime in with a more exact memory of how the series ended.
[/quote]
Here's Wilner's take on it. Seems Stanford was miffed when SJSU went for the million dollar payday at Alabama a few years back when SJSU needed it to survive. Also, Stanford's guarantee to SJSU is $215,000, when it should be closer to $500k to $600k.
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2013/09/12/stanford-and-san-jose-state-the-end-of-the-bill-walsh-legacy-game-series-at-least-for-now/
Re: CFP announcement. - CTcard - 12-05-2017
(12-05-2017, 08:26 AM)Mick link Wrote:Here's Wilner's take on it. Seems Stanford was miffed when SJSU went for the million dollar payday at Alabama a few years back when SJSU needed it to survive. Also, Stanford's guarantee to SJSU is $215,000, when it should be closer to $500k to $600k.
I cannot quite tell if you are agreeing with or simply quoting Wilner.
As usual his logic is a little ... complicated. And he could use an editor.
Quote:1. The responsibility for the BWLG series ending falls almost entirely on Stanford.Which he follows by calling SJSU's main demand (for a home and home) entirely unrealistic.
Quote:... there is no room to beef about the 2012-13 paychecks. But going forward, they would like a bigger cut and they deserve one.ÂThis is the reason he blames the end of the series on Stanford. However, there is no discussion at all (even made up, much less by any actual information) as to what Stanford would be willing to offer. Presumably it would have been above the previous number ($215K) and less than the circa $1 million they could get from some SEC schools.
Apparently Stanford did give Sac State considerably more than that as a replacement for SJSU, so it's pretty clear that Stanford was willing to up the guarantee. How much? No information or speculation here.
Quote:Dont underestimate the role that on-field success is playing in the breakdown of the BWLG.
The Spartans are a much better than they were five or 10 years ago, when they considered themselves fortunate to get a shot at Stanford every year.
Now theyre coming off an 11-win season, theyre in the Mountain West, and they consider themselves one of the rising programs in the West.
Whoops.