re: Kelly supports the Bama over FSU decision

quote:

---

Wrong. It’s in the very first paragraph of the selection process, see my post above. They use strength of schedule as a tie breaker.

---

Does similar mean identical? 13-0 and 12-1 aren't similar enough to make you go to the other criteria?

quote:

---

Being considered isn't the same as automatically puts you in, but, yes, putting Bama in and then not Texas wouldn't look right.

---

LINK

quote:

---

Strength of schedule, head-to-head competition and championships won must be specifically applied as tie-breakers between teams that look similar;

---

quote:

---

I get where you are going; what's the detailed protocol? Without it, there's your subjectivity. If you can find where it is stated, I'd like to see it, but those items I mentioned are what make sense to me.

---

I can’t find it. And I don’t really know how Michigan and Washington are so clearly above FSU.

quote:

---

I'm asking why doesn't Liberty get in with 2 spots among Texas, Bama, and FSU? For me, they don't beat out those three on any of the criteria I mentioned.

---

I’ll just say, this is my opinion - I don’t know why they ever had a playoff if it weren’t for giving teams like Liberty a shot. This season is tougher because there are many 0 and 1 loss teams

As per the selection committee criteria, they would not pass the first threshold of similar “pedigree” I suppose.

quote:

---

I take you mean they didn't base it solely on FSU QB injury.

---

Yes and no. They stated this as their reason. Once out of the way, they clearly used the stated criteria, but had to first get FSU out of the mix. At the end of the day, they started with the teams they wanted in and justified it from there.

quote:

---

Arguably, Texas, Bama, and FSU would have similar records and pedigree.

---

Using that same argument, so would OU and UT

quote:

---

their own rules

---

Their own rules are wins matter.

quote:

---

Maybe, but who are we talking about? Bama and Michigan? TX and UDub?

---

I'm talking about your Power 5 conference winners who are really the only teams considered for the CFP. 3 undefeated; 2 1-loss.

In my book, they would all be considered similar record and pedigree. So, it's hard to use a tie-breaker across 5 teams that meet the similar criteria.

As far as Michigan and Washington, that's an interesting debate. Michigan was No. 2 most of the season until they got jumped by Ohio St. Michigan reclaimed number 2 after beating Ohio St. Come selection time, they weren't going to drop them.

Washington was below FSU until their win against Oregon St and they stayed above FSU through the rest of the season.

Losses by Georgia and Oregon pushed Michigan and Washington to 1 and 2. The committee wasn't going to push FSU above them. They both benefitted from staying ahead of FSU towards the end of the season and beating Oregon and Iowa.

So the 3-way look at Texas, Bama, and FSU was going to happen. I won't dive back into to all those considerations again.

I wouldn't have railed against an FSU selection; it would be justifiable, but I the selection of Texas and Bama is equally justifiable.

quote:

---

This is like when Les said he would be "honored to play that team" again in 2011 and voted Bama ahead of Oklahoma State in his poll.

---

Lol. Nothing at all the same. Now if we were hanging on to the fourth seed and CBK said “Bama deserves to be in the playoff” then it would be similar.

As it is we are nowhere near the playoff so CBK’s opinion on who should be in is inconsequential. Boy, the stupidity on this board.

quote:

---

By third best did you mean fifth best? And your whole analysis is shite. LSU played FSU the first game of the season and the offense was not clicking yet.

---

I think you just proved his point. Are we talking about the entire season, or how they finished the season?

You can’t have it both ways by saying LSU is the fifth best team by static record/ranking, and also use the dynamics of the season to support the quality of a win at the time.

quote:

---

I'm only talking about this year.

---

This is what you said.

quote:

---

Power 5 conference winners who are really the only teams considered for the CFP

---

So are you just saying thats what happened this year? Because other teams have been considered that did not fit that criteria.

quote:

---

That an undefeated P5 conference champ didn't make it this year is based on this year's circumstances. Ever been what? Excluded?

---

Yes, ever been excluded. Further, if you look at ranking the playoffs year over year, record is the prime factor in determining not only who gets in, but the seeding. Clearly, the committee has discretion in regard precedent. But when looking at the guidelines, and trying to understand the hierarchy, I believe the opening paragraph that includes “similar record and pedigree” has been demonstrated to mean that undefeated is the primary consideration

quote:

---

UW and UMich were ahead of Bama and Texas by a wide margin and didn't have CCG wins that gave any doubt.

---

UW won by 3 pts. Define doubt.

quote:

---

UW and Mich weren't going to be lowered based on their SoS and CCG

---

This means nothing. You have yet to quantify any of this.

quote:

---

No. You reference the tie-breaker, but it's a five-way tie,

---

But you keep making it a three way tie. And I’m trying to tell you that UT and Bama don’t need to be tied to eachother, because of the tie breaker.

quote:

---

UT and Bama can't jump Michigan and UW because of their CCG wins and SoS.

---

This is not a reason. Quantity it, at least a little

quote:

---

UGA losing moved them to 1 and 2. That leaves Texas, Bama, and FSU.

---

This is just what happened again. I see you already moved them to the end of the list but I don’t think they should have been.

quote:

---

I think it could have easily played out with FSU getting in with Bama or UTx being left out. It would not have been indefensible nor unreasonable

---

It would have been the most defensible with Bama out, which is the point of all these posts. To believe FSU should have been left out, is to believe that your entire Roster needs to stay available for the playoffs. You must start with the assumption that they, not all undefeated teams, deserved to defend their case against Bama AND UT.

I know what happened, you don’t have to explain it to me. I’m trying to explain how it happened, and give my opinion that I don’t think it’s good for the sport. it’s a further step in the direction to quasi professional, yet Top-Heavy realignment of college sports that will be supported by Gambling more than fandom.