re: The Committee should be Embarrassed

No, they wanted equity.....jsut like the principal from North La would pushed for the public/private split in high school football.
Her team got to the playoffs, and got beat by 50!

quote:

---

Then make the regular season longer

---

They did that too. You start in week zero and finish in week 15 now. That’s a lot more dated as they added games and bye weeks. TV lives this.

quote:

---

So this expansion ISN'T about the best teams. Right?

---

Correct. It’s not about the best teams I. The country. It’s about the inclusion. It’s about throwing a bone to one or two tier 2 programs each season. Again, that’s one of the reasons some of us opposed it. Those of us who have watched college football of decades knew SMU couldn’t hang with the big boys. This isn’t the 1980’s.

I do think it’s not 100% fair to complain about the drubbing SMU got and blame it solely on the expanded field. We’ve seen multiple games during the 4-team structure that had lopsided score, including our game vs Oklahoma in 2019. I never saw the need to expand, and I’m sticking by that.

My biggest problem is that Boise State and ASU got a bye. Both should have been between 10 and 12 in seeding.

They wanted fairness - recruiting is cheating - you have no integrity. Texas doesn’t put up with that shite. Loaded deck. Teams with 200 enrollment nationally ranked. LOL. Take your locally recruited team and play a nationally recruited team like IMG. John Curtis is yet to schedule them. LOL

The answer is the 4 team playoff….was the answer. This Schlick is just greed trying to sap more money from tv network fans etc. I never thought i would say this but CFB is starting to suck

quote:

---

Correct. It’s not about the best teams I. The country. It’s about the inclusion. It’s about throwing a bone to one or two tier 2 programs each season. Again, that’s one of the reasons some of us opposed it. Those of us who have watched college football of decades knew SMU couldn’t hang with the big boys. This isn’t the 1980’s.

I do think it’s not 100% fair to complain about the drubbing SMU got and blame it solely on the expanded field. We’ve seen multiple games during the 4-team structure that had lopsided score, including our game vs Oklahoma in 2019. I never saw the need to expand, and I’m sticking by that.

---

I like the way they handled the CFP this year with the exception of the automatic top 4 seeding. As mentioned, the goal was to eliminate the annual complaints that other teams in the top 10 should have been ranked higher and in the field to play for national championship.

There are definitely lessons to be learned through this 1st run through the CFP.
1. the top 4 seeding has to change and everyone seems to agree.
2. the home team in the 1st round has a big advantage. However I think this will only hold true for power conference teams and not so much for tier 2 teams host power conference teams.
3. seeds 9-12 are probably not as competitive a previously thought. Now we will know every year.
4. Winning in your conference still means something.
5. The SEC and Big 10 regular season games should be viewed as CFP games. If you are playing to get into the CFP, then the whole season is a playoff game. The Big Ten and SEC created this problem all on their own. If you are not the 3rd best team in your conference you should have no complaints not making it to the CFP. No ifs, woulda, coulda, shoulda.