re: 8 teams ranked higher than Tulane

quote:

---

Nothing objective about DEI. Tulane got routed by the only P4 team they played and lost by more than one score to a 6-6 G6 team.

---

You’re spouting DEI because it’s a dog whistle to a certain group of mouth breathers, but this has nothing to do with that.

The criteria to make the playoffs, established before the season, was to be one of the five highest ranked conference champions or one of 7 at large teams listed. Tulane and JMU both met those OBJECTIVES.

Now, Alabama - which lost by two scores to a team with a losing record and lost two of their final four games, including a 3-score drubbings, didn’t make the playoffs based on their objective merit, but because of someone’s subjective opinion that they were one of the seven best at large teams. Your issue with DEI is actually more applicable to their case, as they were shown undo favoritism due to non-merit factors.

top 8 use BCS system.

tell these jackass teams..if you cry more we will blow it all up and go back to a 2 team BCS with NO PLAYOFF. f u clowns.

quote:

---

Correct. It was a terrible objective criteria that was setup not to identify the best or most deserving teams…but instead to fend off an anti-trust lawsuit. The result is the equivalent of a week 2 cupcake game in the playoffs. It’s horrible. It’s embarrassing for the G5 participants. Nobody wants to see it.

---

That’s the nature of seeded tournaments. There are first round blowouts in the
NCAA basketball tournament every year, and I believe it too 30+ years before a 16 seed ever beat a 1.

In the first round of last years playoffs, IIRC all of the games were decided by 10+ points, including Ohio State’s 42-17 blowout of Tennessee in an 8-9 game. So why is that blowout ok? Did the third place team in the SEC not belong in last years playoff?


Is it ok that BEFORE the season starts, Alabama, Ohio State and Oregon are basically IN the playoffs and simply don’t have to lose their way out by losing more that 2 games?


Trust me, guaranteeing that five conference champs make the playoffs is not a problem. It is a far better measure than letting the committee pick and choose who they want by ever-changing criteria