5 conference champions +3 at larges is fool proof. Its obvious that no one wanted to actually improve the system, they just wanted to make predictable profits. They probably already know the matchups.

12/1/2015 7:42:37 PM

If you want to go to 8, why not just do the top 8 teams? Case in point USC has a chance to win the pac 12 this year. Really want them to play for a championship...and do not compare this to basketball.

12/1/2015 7:46:28 PM

Quote :

"^^so you think the final 4 should be Florida, Oklahoma, USC, and UNC if that is how it plays out this weekend?"

no, reread it holmes...I never said it would be automatic if you win your conference, I said it was mandatory. On top of that there are other considerations. Florida and USC should definitely not be in no matter what happens.

12/1/2015 8:08:38 PM

when you let two teams from the same division and the team that lost in the regular season wins in the playoff, you have a problem. they shouldn't have to beat a great team twice to win the championship. This usually applies to alabama and ohio state. Its insanely difficult to beat a talented team like that twice in one season.

[Edited on December 1, 2015 at 8:12 PM. Reason : if they have exceptional talent, its not like a loss will cause them to drop in the polls.]

12/1/2015 8:11:52 PM

^^^, ^^^^

As it stands now:

#1 Clemson (ACC)
#2 Alabama (SEC)
#3 Oklahoma (B12)
#4 Iowa (B1G)
#7 Stanford (Pac-10)
#5 Michigan St (At-Large)
#6 Ohio State (At-Large)
#8 Notre Dame (At-Large)

This would make for an AMAZING playoff, aside from 3 B1G teams when no other conference gets 2. (Has the B1G leap-frogged the SEC?) And all 5 power Champs are in no question.

Here's the bigger problem - Will the loser of the B1G championship game fall below Ohio State, who couldn't even win their division, and possibly out of the top 8? Is it more or less fair for a 2-loss UNC, who at least competed for a championship, to be potentially left out in favor of a 2-loss Notre Dame or FSU, just because their 2nd loss came more recently?

There will never be a 100% fair way to do this without P5 playing more P5 OOC games, so the conferences can accurately be ranked against each other.

[Edited on December 1, 2015 at 8:42 PM. Reason : -]

12/1/2015 8:39:06 PM

I feel like its inevitable the playoff will extend to 8 eventually.

however, i think iowa playing MSU will speak some volumes for teams who have a weak SoS. Iowa didn't even have to play MSU, michigan, or OSU for the entire regular season which is probably why they're undefeated. but we'll see though.

the same can be said for UNC who didn't even have to play FSU or Clemson during the regular season, while most other ACC teams would have had to beat them just to even sniff a bid to the ACCCG.

[Edited on December 1, 2015 at 8:52 PM. Reason : .]

12/1/2015 8:51:11 PM

I would prefer 8 teams, but this year isn't a particularly compelling case for why there should be 8.

Clemson is in with a win.
Alabama is in with a win.
Oklahoma is in.
MSU/Iowa winner is in.

If one of Clemson/Alabama loses it's likely that Ohio State is back in over the loser of the Iowa/MSU game.

If both lose it's probably Ohio State and Stanford (if they win) or Notre Dame.

Seems very unlikely that UNC is in even with a win. Worst loss of any one loss team, played 2 FCS teams.

12/1/2015 9:05:45 PM

UNC is fucked unless they destroy Clemson ala Ohio State vs Wisconsin last year. If UNC wins a close game against Clemson and gets left out, will Fedora make a fake NCAA champion ring too?

12/1/2015 9:17:44 PM

Well the important thing to note, is that UNC is @ 10 and has 0% chance at getting in.

12/1/2015 9:28:30 PM

its probably the cheating scandal that has them that low. thats really the only viable explanation.

12/1/2015 9:39:59 PM

or the SOS

12/1/2015 9:46:20 PM

Quote :

" never said it would be automatic if you win your conference, I said it was mandatory."

Dog, who else you gonna put it if you say it's mandatory you win the conference...say Florida and UNC win. By your statement, Alabama nor Clemson can get in.

12/1/2015 10:38:14 PM

What?

12/2/2015 12:20:31 AM

I'm sure Notre Dame will go along with your mandatory thing..

12/2/2015 12:24:04 AM

The pizza party at Death Valley is crazy. Papa John is gonna get bankruptcy.

12/2/2015 3:05:08 PM

I wouldn't say UNC has a 0% chance of getting in... I'd put it more at 35-40%..

As someone else mentioned, I think it largely comes down to them beating Clemson very convincingly...

FSU has 2 losses... One to a bad GT team...and 2 wins against Chatanooga and Texas State..yet they are still ranked ahead of UNC?

And everyone wants to point out the bad loss to USC... but USC almost beat Clemson..

OSU doesn't have that strong of a schedule either..and they didn't even win their division.

I don't want UNC to get in, but when thinking about it, I pretend it is NCSU we are talking about instead and that's what I think.

12/2/2015 4:09:20 PM

YUP

12/2/2015 5:16:08 PM

35-40% chance? you mean, if they beat Clemson, and if Florida beats Bama, and if USC beats Stanford, THEN they have a 35-40% chance, I assume. Because there is a much greater than 60-65% chance that either Bama beats Florida or Stanford beats USC or Clemson beats UNC. Any one of those things happens and UNC is done.

[Edited on December 2, 2015 at 5:22 PM. Reason : .]

12/2/2015 5:21:03 PM

i think hes saying they have that much chance to beat clemson convincingly and if so they should be a lock to take clemsons spot.

12/2/2015 5:28:57 PM

UNC is +186 in Vegas to win period, so I don't agree with the 35-40% chance of beating the #1 team in the nation convincingly

And lol at them being a lock over Stanford or Ohio State

12/2/2015 5:32:05 PM

the key word is should. i think its obvious that won't happen now that they have ranked unc insanely low unless they want to do like last year and magically make unc #2 next week.

12/2/2015 5:40:40 PM

Them being at 10 tells me that they are an absolute last option for the committee.

12/2/2015 6:32:10 PM

Quote :

"the key word is should. i think its obvious that won't happen now that they have ranked unc insanely low unless they want to do like last year and magically make unc #2 next week."

I could see something like last year happening again. It didn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out though. Some of the big factors in who gets in are head to head and conference championships. Putting TCU ahead of Baylor because they were playing better that week was BS. If the committee used their own rules each week then TCU should have always remained behind Baylor and they should have remained behind Ohio State too. The selection committee just tried really hard to create drama. I wouldn't put it past them again ths season if UNC wins. Hopefully Clemson blows them out.

12/3/2015 12:34:46 AM

UNC has 1/100th of the football brand name as Ohio State, and the playoff is about money. How is this at all similar to a football powerhouse like tOSU when we're talking about UNC and their aluminum jungle fanbase? They might have a nice fan presence at the ACC title game since a lot of UNC fans live in Charlotte, but this is in no way similar to Ohio State making it last year.

12/3/2015 1:15:28 AM

At least youre admitting these "playoffs" are a sham

12/3/2015 7:34:11 AM

not to mention 1 loss Ohio St is the defending national champ - that may give the committee another reason to select them over UNC. give OSU a chance to defend their title.

12/3/2015 7:36:46 AM

Committee chair said that defending champs means NOTHING in their eyes... This year is completely separate from last year...

And I meant 35-40% chance IF they beat Clemson...

The chair (Long I think), said using "the committee's metrics", OSU was way ahead of UNC based on SoS and other factors.. Even though Sagarin and commonly used metrics show them almost the same..

I'd love to see what "metrics" they use and what they factor.

12/3/2015 4:16:36 PM

if they really had metrics, there wouldn't be a committee in the first place.

12/3/2015 4:25:41 PM

I wish we could make computers do this.

Wait.

12/3/2015 4:34:26 PM

Quote :

"Committee chair said that defending champs means NOTHING in their eyes... This year is completely separate from last year..."

Well yeah, of course they'll say that. But if it really comes down to Ohio St and UNC, I think that would be something that is perhaps a factor. They wouldn't admit it, but I wouldn't really doubt for a second that the defending national champ (and perennial football power) would get the benefit of the doubt over a school that has virtually no football tradition.

12/3/2015 4:39:16 PM

Was there an issue with computers? I thought the playoff was created to double the number of teams. 4 out of 116 teams barely even qualifies as "playoffs" anyway.

12/3/2015 4:40:26 PM

one of the issues with computers was that every year when the computers had a result that the public didn't like, the computer formulas were tweaked for the following year to reflect that. people were (are?) simply opposed to the idea of a computer spitting out results that don't necessarily line up with what we see on the field. the public lets their biases get in the way of non-biased computer rankings.

12/3/2015 4:48:37 PM

computers didn't factor in talent which is what voters are doing. alabama has the most talent therefore they have some sort of birthright to a playoff spot. even when they lose, people will say "well they can still beat anybody" so theres no way for them to actually drop with a loss.

This means they are not evaluating teams on merit. They are giving talented teams a free pass to lose one game and evaluating less talented teams on a merit-based system. Thats the only way you could explain something as simple as not putting unc above FSU. A no brainer.

12/3/2015 5:07:53 PM

the first question is, should the playoffs be for the four (4) best teams or the four (4) most deserving teams? This can often be the same, but not always.

12/3/2015 9:03:44 PM

If you expand to 8 teams (p5 winners and 3 of whoever the fuck, the best and the deserving will coincide imo

12/3/2015 9:23:55 PM

They said on the radio today that the 4 team playoff has a 12 year contract in place. There are currently no plans to expand and that one of the main new reasons that have been brought up against expansion is that coaches have said that two games in a short amount of time against "top level competition" is enough and any more would expose the athletes to possible injury.

I know that $$ is the main factor in all of this but I think they enjoy the P5 conferences knowing that 1+ of the conference champions can be left out in any year. I do like how the SOS of these schools is going to change in the next 5 years.

12/3/2015 11:07:32 PM

ESPN has the contract through 2025 so doubtful any changes before then

12/3/2015 11:21:37 PM

Quote :

"Clemson's been before and it didnt sell out. I have Carolina as much as the next wolf but I have to admit this is impressive."

whoops

Quote :

"UNC-Chapel Hill football fans may think they missed the turn-off to Charlotte and instead ended up in Death Valley on Saturday night when they enter Bank of America Stadium for the Dr. Pepper ACC Championship Game against Clemson. They’ll likely be greeted by a stunning splash of Tiger orange."

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article47830300.html

12/4/2015 1:00:22 AM

I checked the ticket selling information early this week. It's sold out so fast.

12/4/2015 1:27:47 AM

Turns out people probably care more when there are national title implications on the line rather than just winning the ACC. For the most part the ACC title is decided earlier in the year when Clemson and FSU play.

12/4/2015 8:51:38 AM

OK. I see. So this one is not related with national title.

12/4/2015 9:21:55 AM

^^^^ LOL @ the UNC "fans" in that article making excuses for why they aren't going.

12/4/2015 9:35:23 AM

In this game, fans will expect EXTREMELY intense security watch.

[Edited on December 4, 2015 at 9:38 AM. Reason : ;]

12/4/2015 9:38:04 AM

did it sell out when State played in it?

12/4/2015 12:15:25 PM

wasn't in charlotte

12/4/2015 12:19:49 PM

^^eat a dick

[Edited on December 4, 2015 at 12:26 PM. Reason : a]

12/4/2015 12:25:24 PM

? sorry bro, been working a lot, a lot on my mind, couldnt remember

12/4/2015 12:27:53 PM

this dude's eaten a lot of dicks

and all the sides

12/4/2015 12:32:35 PM

So, how would you pronounce Marquis Williams' name?

I hear marr-kwese all the time, but it makes me think marr-kese when I see it.

12/4/2015 7:44:51 PM

It's mar-kee

It's French

12/4/2015 8:30:06 PM