Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

The media has already been pushing a narrative that UT might return to Lubbock for the first round of the playoffs, and how fun that would be.  In this scenario, the winner would likely then play Aggie in round two.  I think if Tech wins out (or even if they lose their conference championship game) and UT doesn't stumble, they will make this happen for the spectacle alone.   This has never been a sport, but rather a beauty pageant, and that is the case now more than ever.  I like UT's chances of a spot.

Posted
Just now, Drew said:

Oh you're kidding yourself that a 10-2 Texas this year would not be a lock. They absolutely would be. That still means wins over OU/Vandy/Aggy.  C'mon on immamac that's silly.

10-2 Texas with losses to Florida and Georgia when everyone else who is 10-2 in the league or 11-1 in the league has only lost to 

Alabama, Georgia, Ole Miss, Texas

Yeah dude Texas gets left out. Idk why this is so hard for you to understand. They aren't gonna make the CCG if they win out. That's how fucking competitive the top of the SEC is. The Florida loss keeps them out of the CCG. You need to reframe your argument. The Florida loss is the entire reason why playoffs are even in question. 

Screenshot_20251111_093513_Chrome.jpg

Posted
Just now, chainsaw said:

If we beat Georgia and aggy, we need Ole Miss to lose in order to make the CCG.

That’s one way, OU could also beat Bama, or A&M could go Aggie and lose to South Carolina, there may be others I haven’t tried to figure out every combination. 

 

Posted
3 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

If we beat Georgia and aggy, we need Ole Miss to lose in order to make the CCG.

I don’t care about making the CCG. Just an extra opportunity for injury. I’d rather be seeded 5-8 instead and host a home game and rest 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 minute ago, Js1 said:

I don’t care about making the CCG. Just an extra opportunity for injury. I’d rather be seeded 5-8 instead and host a home game and rest 

All gas, no brakes.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, TxEx84 said:

And yet, ND lost to NIU last year and made it to the Championship game.

Northern Illinois was 8-5, won a bowl game. Florida is bottom of the barrel dogshit bad. Florida didn't win by some fluke, they kicked our ass all day. That was a terrible loss. Texas hasn't loss since but now we are in the position of probably having zero room for error. I don't see a 3 loss Texas team getting in with how many teams are ahead of us in the SEC alone. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Js1 said:

I don’t care about making the CCG. Just an extra opportunity for injury. I’d rather be seeded 5-8 instead and host a home game and rest 

Yeah but us winning the SEC before A&M during their best year ever would be pretty fun. 

Edited by hornbri
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 2
  • Drool 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, Vic Mackey said:

Northern Illinois was 8-5, won a bowl game. Florida is bottom of the barrel dogshit bad. Florida didn't win by some fluke, they kicked our ass all day. That was a terrible loss. Texas hasn't loss since but now we are in the position of probably having zero room for error. I don't see a 3 loss Texas team getting in with how many teams are ahead of us in the SEC alone. 

 

NIU lost to Buffalo, NC State, Toledo, Ball State, and Miami of Ohio. Best win besides ND?  I guess the 2OT victory over Fresno State in the Famous Idaho Bowl? Not exactly an SEC schedule there. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
32 minutes ago, immamac said:

10-2 Texas with losses to Florida and Georgia

Can you fill me in on this hypothetical?  Is there an underlying assumption that we didn't play (and lose to) tOSU?  There are way too many moving parts in this thread to keep up.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Just now, TxEx84 said:

NIU lost to Buffalo, NC State, Toledo, Ball State, and Miami of Ohio. Best win besides ND?  I guess the 2OT victory over Fresno State in the Famous Idaho Bowl? Not exactly an SEC schedule there. 

This website would have fucking exploded if we lose at home as a top 10 team to a MAC team, regardless of whether they finished 8-5 or 9-4 or 5-7

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
10 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I won’t say it will “never” happen because on a long enough timeline it will, but: the teams ranked from 10-12 (really more like 8-12, but I’ll be generous) are really unlikely to win a title. They may upset a team or two that could, but they won’t make a four game slog. 
 

Go back and look at past AP or Coaches polls and find a team with that ranking that really belonged on the field with the winner. 10-12 is talented teams with visible flaws. 

Past is no longer prologue in college sports, and that shouldn't have to be explained. Your argument is dated and wrong. Ohio State was seeded 8th last year, dude. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Can you fill me in on this hypothetical?  Is there an underlying assumption that we didn't play (and lose to) tOSU?  There are way too many moving parts in this thread to keep up.

Yeah assume they played Rice and didn't blow them out game 1 of the season. 

Everything else is the same that's all that changes the entire season. 

The assumption is that Texas loses to Florida and Georgia and everyone else wins out including Texas at the expense of a doesn't matter at that point loss for TAMU. 

That's 8-0 bama, 7-1 Georgia (L to bama), 7-1 ole miss (L to georgia), 7-1 aggy (L to TEX), 5-2 Vandy (L to bama, TEX), 5-2 Texas (L to Georgia, FLORIDA), 4-3 Oklahoma (L to TEX, ole Miss, bama) 

If Oklahoma upsets bama, that only moves them ahead of Texas at 5-2 with only losses to TEX and ole miss and bama down behind aggy because of how tiebreaker works. 

Texas is the 5th best team with BOMC or the 6th best team (reality) in the SEC. Everyone else lost to good teams with heavily positive SEC records. Florida has an SEC win over... Texas and Mississippi state who just won their first conference game in years. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

Its impossible to overstate how bad the Florida loss is when considering a second loss on top of it to make the playoffs on a resume. 

The only way to be sure is to win out and host a home playoff game. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

Past is no longer prologue in college sports, and that shouldn't have to be explained. Your argument is dated and wrong. Ohio State was seeded 8th last year, dude. 

Ohio State was seeded 8 because last year the CFP committee didn’t do a straight seeding model. Boise and Arizona State jumped them, despite being ranked behind them in all the polls. They’d have been 6 or 7 without that.

Edited by 956 Worldwide
Posted

For those that think Texas outdraws the comeback kid story of Diego Pavia and vandys quest for a national championship as underdogs is really kind of smoking some crazy crack. Hell, I'd rather watch that narrative than a 12th ranked longhorns squad who did nothing to deserve to be there outside of having potential.

Texas outside of about 5, maybe 6 quarters of football this season has been excruciating to watch. It's not entertaining football. Vandy is entertaining as fuck, it's the right kind of sloppy where the team is doing well, but they just aren't good enough so Pavia is willing things to happen. 

The Texas vandy game was a great watch, Q4 ms state was a great watch, Q3/4 of OU was a good watch. Outside of that? It gets bad fast. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, immamac said:

I'm saying the OSU game has no relevance at all in the playoff rankings or punishment for said rankings. The Florida loss is that bad. 

Once again you're wrong here. They are being held down by BOTH losses not just florida.

13 minutes ago, immamac said:

Yeah assume they played Rice and didn't blow them out game 1 of the season. 

Everything else is the same that's all that changes the entire season. 

The assumption is that Texas loses to Florida and Georgia and everyone else wins out including Texas at the expense of a doesn't matter at that point loss for TAMU. 

That's 8-0 bama, 7-1 Georgia (L to bama), 7-1 ole miss (L to georgia), 7-1 aggy (L to TEX), 5-2 Vandy (L to bama, TEX), 5-2 Texas (L to Georgia, FLORIDA), 4-3 Oklahoma (L to TEX, ole Miss, bama) 

If Oklahoma upsets bama, that only moves them ahead of Texas at 5-2 with only losses to TEX and ole miss and bama down behind aggy because of how tiebreaker works. 

Texas is the 5th best team with BOMC or the 6th best team (reality) in the SEC. Everyone else lost to good teams with heavily positive SEC records. Florida has an SEC win over... Texas and Mississippi state who just won their first conference game in years. 

Wait you think 2 loss Texas would be behind 2 loss Vandy in this scenario?  Yeah you're smoking.

Unless you're talking SEC standings and not actually how they'd be ranked by the polls/Committee? 

I'm talking 10-2 Texas overall. Not SEC standings. That team is a LOCK this year.  No question about it.  You're also not looking at wins.  Texas would have wins over Aggi/Vandy/OU and that's better than Vandy's wins, by far, which would put them over them.

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, immamac said:

For those that think Texas outdraws the comeback kid story of Diego Pavia and vandys quest for a national championship as underdogs is really kind of smoking some crazy crack. Hell, I'd rather watch that narrative than a 12th ranked longhorns squad who did nothing to deserve to be there outside of having potential.

Texas outside of about 5, maybe 6 quarters of football this season has been excruciating to watch. It's not entertaining football. Vandy is entertaining as fuck, it's the right kind of sloppy where the team is doing well, but they just aren't good enough so Pavia is willing things to happen. 

The Texas vandy game was a great watch, Q4 ms state was a great watch, Q3/4 of OU was a good watch. Outside of that? It gets bad fast. 

Yeah well fuck that trashy fucking puto. There’s nothing special about him except media hype 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Js1 said:

Yeah well fuck that trashy fucking puto. There’s nothing special about him except media hype 

Which is what everyone is claiming gets Texas in, which is why drews argument is stupid. 

Posted
12 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Yeah well fuck that trashy fucking puto. There’s nothing special about him except media hype 

I’ve had a real arc with Pavia. At first I thought he was just a super COVID player being shoved down my throat to gin up interest in Vandy. The I begrudgingly admitted I’d love him if he was on my team. Now he’s just really punchable.

Needed to knock off a really good team again to earn his mouthiness. 

Posted
1 hour ago, immamac said:

10-2 Texas with losses to Florida and Georgia when everyone else who is 10-2 in the league or 11-1 in the league has only lost to 

Alabama, Georgia, Ole Miss, Texas

Yeah dude Texas gets left out. Idk why this is so hard for you to understand. They aren't gonna make the CCG if they win out. That's how fucking competitive the top of the SEC is. The Florida loss keeps them out of the CCG. You need to reframe your argument. The Florida loss is the entire reason why playoffs are even in question. 

 

That, and looking like shit at almost every single point in the season except for the second half against OU, the last quarter against Miss St., and the first three quarters against Vandy. 

  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Vic Mackey said:

Northern Illinois was 8-5, won a bowl game. Florida is bottom of the barrel dogshit bad. Florida didn't win by some fluke, they kicked our ass all day. That was a terrible loss. Texas hasn't loss since but now we are in the position of probably having zero room for error. I don't see a 3 loss Texas team getting in with how many teams are ahead of us in the SEC alone. 

 

This Florida team would prison rape that Northern Illinois squad if both teams played at their best. Florida has 10x more talent than NIU and frankly, they have the dogs to compete with the best teams in the country (see the UGA/Texas games). They just are undisciplined and lazy and cant put it all together except for a few times this season... So they lose to bad teams. Let's not act like they are some dogshit team and we lost to McNeese State. They can beat and lose to anyone depending on what Florida team shows up.  

Posted
26 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Ohio State was seeded 8 because last year the CFP committee didn’t do a straight seeding model. Boise and Arizona State jumped them, despite being ranked behind them in all the polls. They’d have been 6 or 7 without that.

1) You've been posting on this site long enough to know that you do not have to explain shit like this to other long time posters. Do you think I was on a desert island or in solitary confinement in Huntsville during last year's playoff selection period? No, you chose to be pedantic on a tangent rather than admit the silliness of your overall point. 

2) Ohio State was the 8th seed in this era, barely got into the playoffs after the embarrassing Michigan loss, and won it all. No one gives a fuck about the nuance of how they got to that seed but you, because it makes your prior position look inherently false on its face.

3) The larger point was a rebuttal to your larger point - parity is here and referencing the past to make a point about "10-12 seeds, even probably 8-12 seeds, don't really have a chance to win the title" is specious. This isn't 2015 in which its Bama, Ohio State, Clemson and sometimes LSU or Georgia with a real shot to win the whole thing. You want it to be one way, but it is the other. 

18 minutes ago, immamac said:

For those that think Texas outdraws the comeback kid story of Diego Pavia and vandys quest for a national championship as underdogs is really kind of smoking some crazy crack. Hell, I'd rather watch that narrative than a 12th ranked longhorns squad who did nothing to deserve to be there outside of having potential.

Texas outside of about 5, maybe 6 quarters of football this season has been excruciating to watch. It's not entertaining football. Vandy is entertaining as fuck, it's the right kind of sloppy where the team is doing well, but they just aren't good enough so Pavia is willing things to happen. 

The Texas vandy game was a great watch, Q4 ms state was a great watch, Q3/4 of OU was a good watch. Outside of that? It gets bad fast. 

Do you have any evidence whatsoever showing that Vanderbilt is a bigger draw than Texas this year in terms of viewership? If you do, show your work. Otherwise, you're doing your stupid fanboi shit and making broad sweeping generalizations that you wish to be fact because you're excited about somebody or some thing. 

None of us know who the committee would pick between 10-2 Vandy and 9-3 Texas. The eyeballs would drive that decision. If anyone is actually taking the position that 10-2 Vandy gets in over 10-2 Texas, they haven't been paying attention. In both instances, Vandy would likely be pushing someone else out, but it wouldn't be one of the biggest brands in the sport, who they lost to, who is sitting there with 3-4 top 10 wins. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

1) You've been posting on this site long enough to know that you do not have to explain shit like this to other long time posters. Do you think I was on a desert island or in solitary confinement in Huntsville during last year's playoff selection period? No, you chose to be pedantic on a tangent rather than admit the silliness of your overall point. 

2) Ohio State was the 8th seed in this era, barely got into the playoffs after the embarrassing Michigan loss, and won it all. No one gives a fuck about the nuance of how they got to that seed but you, because it makes your prior position look inherently false on its face.

3) The larger point was a rebuttal to your larger point - parity is here and referencing the past to make a point about "10-12 seeds, even probably 8-12 seeds, don't really have a chance to win the title" is specious. This isn't 2015 in which its Bama, Ohio State, Clemson and sometimes LSU or Georgia with a real shot to win the whole thing. You want it to be one way, but it is the other. 

Do you have any evidence whatsoever showing that Vanderbilt is a bigger draw than Texas this year in terms of viewership? If you do, show your work. Otherwise, you're doing your stupid fanboi shit and making broad sweeping generalizations that you wish to be fact because you're excited about somebody or some thing. 

None of us know who the committee would pick between 10-2 Vandy and 9-3 Texas. The eyeballs would drive that decision. If anyone is actually taking the position that 10-2 Vandy gets in over 10-2 Texas, they haven't been paying attention. In both instances, Vandy would likely be pushing someone else out, but it wouldn't be one of the biggest brands in the sport, who they lost to, who is sitting there with 3-4 top 10 wins. 

I wasn't saying that. I was saying that I would personally rather watch that. 

I think a 10-2 Texas and Vandy final record is impossible since that was a hypothetical situation explaining how Ohio State loss isn't impacting Texas. 

Texas just needs to win out, anything else requires a lot of chaos and help from other teams stepping on their dicks. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, BigHornedLurker said:

It's funny how that looks now versus end of the year. Texas has played its 3 shitty non-cons already and has 2 big games in prime time plus a rivalry game remaining.

-Tennessee's had some big games already, but they still have Kentucky and NMSU left plus Vandy. The Vandy game will be watched, but that game will have a lot of competition and the other two games will be viewership dogshit.

-Bama's Eastern Illinois match-up, as brave and daunting as it is, will have SECN+ viewership to average in to the overall number.

-UGA still has Charlotte (SECN).

-Ohio State will get the Michigan game boost, but UCLA and Rutgers are more anchors to the OSU numbers in the steaming pile of shit that is the Big 10.

The top brands in the league are all going to wind up around the same average, and ahead of the rest of the sport, including Ohio State. 

Posted

I didn’t say a word in my post about seedings. I said “rankings.” And Ohio State easily made it into the playoffs, they were ranked at 6 in the final CFP ranking before the playoffs. You just made up the fact that they barely got in;” that team wasn’t even the lowest ranked Big Ten team. The 8-12 ranked teams last year were all pretty flawed. None of them advanced to the semifinals. (Well, Alabama didn’t get an invite). 
 

image.thumb.png.c759898f4fc2a79e87e324562f3130c1.png


 

Posted
11 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I didn’t say a word in my post about seedings. I said “rankings.” And Ohio State easily made it into the playoffs, they were ranked at 6 in the final CFP ranking before the playoffs. You just made up the fact that they barely got in;” that team wasn’t even the lowest ranked Big Ten team. The 8-12 ranked teams last year were all pretty flawed. None of them advanced to the semifinals. (Well, Alabama didn’t get an invite). 
 

image.thumb.png.c759898f4fc2a79e87e324562f3130c1.png


 

Cool. AreaCode PitBull thinks that parity isn't a factor in CFB going forward and that we may never see a seed worse than 9 win the title. All we can do is watch and point and laugh from here when it happens, or when it doesn't.

  • Haha 1
Posted
35 minutes ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

This Florida team would prison rape that Northern Illinois squad if both teams played at their best. Florida has 10x more talent than NIU and frankly, they have the dogs to compete with the best teams in the country (see the UGA/Texas games). They just are undisciplined and lazy and cant put it all together except for a few times this season... So they lose to bad teams. Let's not act like they are some dogshit team and we lost to McNeese State. They can beat and lose to anyone depending on what Florida team shows up.  

That sounds like the ol SECSECSEC mantra and hyping up every dogshit team in the conference. They are terrible. Even terrible teams can play good here and there but their record speaks for itself. We made their QB and offense look extremely efficient. Terrible loss. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
41 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

 

None of us know who the committee would pick between 10-2 Vandy and 9-3 Texas. The eyeballs would drive that decision. If anyone is actually taking the position that 10-2 Vandy gets in over 10-2 Texas, they haven't been paying attention. In both instances, Vandy would likely be pushing someone else out, but it wouldn't be one of the biggest brands in the sport, who they lost to, who is sitting there with 3-4 top 10 wins. 

I think the 10-2 Vandy vs. 9-3 Texas would be fascinating.   I don't think current "playoff" eyeballs that would be the debate in the room as much as the bigger picture "eyeballs" with non-conference inventory and whether to give Texas the nod to encourage difficult OOC matchups. As we know TX-OSU is highest rated game of the year to date.  Klatt had a segment on this I thought was pretty interesting.  He said flat out there is a lot of 'back room' pressure not to punish teams for losing tough OOC games so the leagues and networks get the matchups they want.  He said at some point there was a model floated where 'points' are assigned for wins/losses to determine playoffs and in that model, for example, Texas would have gotten more "points" for losing to OSU than blowing out a directional school.   10-2 Vandy vs. 9-3 Texas would be perfect scenario to put that to the test and the Committee would always have the excuse to just claim H2H was the driver of slotting TX ahead.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
27 minutes ago, Vic Mackey said:

That sounds like the ol SECSECSEC mantra and hyping up every dogshit team in the conference. They are terrible. Even terrible teams can play good here and there but their record speaks for itself. We made their QB and offense look extremely efficient. Terrible loss. 

It's not and you know it. NIU and Florida have different athletes. If we were comparing a Clemson and Florida squad, that would be more apt, because the players are at least similar. 

17 minutes ago, Skipper said:

I think the 10-2 Vandy vs. 9-3 Texas would be fascinating.   I don't think current "playoff" eyeballs that would be the debate in the room as much as the bigger picture "eyeballs" with non-conference inventory and whether to give Texas the nod to encourage difficult OOC matchups. As we know TX-OSU is highest rated game of the year to date.  Klatt had a segment on this I thought was pretty interesting.  He said flat out there is a lot of 'back room' pressure not to punish teams for losing tough OOC games so the leagues and networks get the matchups they want.  He said at some point there was a model floated where 'points' are assigned for wins/losses to determine playoffs and in that model, for example, Texas would have gotten more "points" for losing to OSU than blowing out a directional school.   10-2 Vandy vs. 9-3 Texas would be perfect scenario to put that to the test and the Committee would always have the excuse to just claim H2H was the driver of slotting TX ahead.

I like the cut of your jib!

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 hours ago, immamac said:

#10 ranked Texas is being punished for losing to dogshit Florida. #1 Texas going to the swamp and losing to unranked Florida drops them and then beyond that they get leapfrogged by everyone else who has performed well. I don't think there's much of a difference in 8-1 Texas and 7-2 Texas from a ranking perspective maybe ahead of ND with only 1 loss, but still not ahead of TTU Georgia etc.

Texas isn't being punished for OSU loss and if they drop 2 in the SEC they will be the first in with 2 losses. 

Alabama has a worse loss and didn't play #1.  We should be ranked right next to them if this were true.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
21 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

Cool. AreaCode PitBull thinks that parity isn't a factor in CFB going forward and that we may never see a seed worse than 9 win the title. All we can do is watch and point and laugh from here when it happens, or when it doesn't.

Using seeding as the metric decreases the chance it will happen now that the committee uses straight seeding. The lower seeds had a better chance under the old format.
 

 This year the 10-12 seeds WILL include a G5 team, an ACC team, and maybe a 2nd place Big XII, fourth place Big Ten, or 5th place SEC team in those spots. Which one has a decent shot over the SEC/Big Ten top six plus ND and Tech over four games?  BYU? Georgia Tech? Pitt? Virginia? JMU?  USF? 
 

Maybe Texas has the roster to make that run if they play at their best with no coaching errors. Or if Tech if weirdness happens to strike in the CCG and they fall this far. Either will have very, very long odds. If a 10-2 ND falls this far, maybe they can.
 

You and I both know the G5 and ACC do not have NC winners in them. You’re staking your argument on the very last of P2/Big XII/ND to get in running through four games versus teams that finished ahead of them. Possible? It will happen eventually. Very unlikely any given year? Yes. 

Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I won’t say it will “never” happen because on a long enough timeline it will, but: the teams ranked from 10-12 (really more like 8-12, but I’ll be generous) are really unlikely to win a title. They may upset a team or two that could, but they won’t make a four game slog. 
 

Go back and look at past AP or Coaches polls and find a team with that ranking that really belonged on the field with the winner. 10-12 is talented teams with visible flaws. 

The title game last season was 7 vs. 8.

That said - it should have been 5 vs. 6, but still. Those teams still got there coming out of the 7 and 8 spots.

Edited by ztejas
Posted
3 minutes ago, ztejas said:

The title game last season was 7 vs. 8.

That said - it should have been 6 vs. 7, but still. Those teams still got there coming out of the 7 and 8 spots.

I feel like I am banging my fucking head against the wall. The title game featured the teams ranked 5 (ND) and 6 (tOSU) in the final CFP rankings. And that’s how they would have been seeded under this year’s model. 

 

image.png.94cf8f79b8e571ce4b5b98d0e916722d.png

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 hours ago, chainsaw said:

If we beat Georgia and aggy, we need Ole Miss to lose in order to make the CCG.

If Texas finishes 10-2 I would give zero fucks about making the SECCG.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
2 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I feel like I am banging my fucking head against the wall. The title game featured the teams ranked 5 (ND) and 6 (tOSU) in the final CFP rankings. And that’s how they would have been seeded under this year’s model. 

 

image.png.94cf8f79b8e571ce4b5b98d0e916722d.png

Either way your sample size is just one season. And the one season we have seen doesn't really prove or disprove your claim. #1 and #2 both lost in the quarterfinals. Rank #12 took rank #3 to overtime. 

The main reason it will be hard for teams ranked 9-12 going forward is because they have to start with a road game. 

Posted
36 minutes ago, JBJ said:

Alabama has a worse loss and didn't play #1.  We should be ranked right next to them if this were true.

I am unaware of Alabama's conference loss. Can you show me it on the schedule or link the box score? Did they lose an OOC game AND a game to a dogshit conference bottom dweller? I fucking missed that, and I wasn't even drinking this weekend. 

Posted
6 minutes ago, ztejas said:

Either way your sample size is just one season. And the one season we have seen doesn't really prove or disprove your claim. #1 and #2 both lost in the quarterfinals. Rank #12 took rank #3 to overtime. 

The main reason it will be hard for teams ranked 9-12 going forward is because they have to start with a road game. 

No, it will be hard for them because they will play on the road, they will have an extra game to lose, but most importantly: they will need to win four straight games against teams that are probably better than them. Every single participant in the semifinals came from the top half of the CFP rankings. And that is WITH Boise and AZ State getting byes. 
 

There will be upsets, but the chance of pulling off wins in four straight games as either a dog or a coin flip is pretty low. And that’s what straight seeding will mean. 

9-12 in the AP is ND, Texas, OU, BYU. Tell me which teams you’d be willing to call a real contender at the moment. And keep in mind that at least two of those WILL fall out for a G5 and/or ACC team. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

9-12 in the AP is ND, Texas, OU, BYU. Tell me which teams you’d be willing to call a real contender at the moment.

Well - they play the games for a reason. Last year you had a really strong top 6 and I think ASU proved to be under-ranked. Unless you want to argue the bye they got was instrumental in coming back against Texas. They still kicked the shit out of ISU in the B12TG. Some years you may only have 3 teams worth a shit.  Some years you may have 10 teams all about as good as each other. I think it's too early to call it for this season. 

Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, ztejas said:

Well - they play the games for a reason. Last year you had a really strong top 6 and I think ASU proved to be under-ranked. Unless you want to argue the bye they got was instrumental in coming back against Texas. They still kicked the shit out of ISU in the B12TG. Some years you may only have 3 teams worth a shit.  Some years you may have 10 teams all about as good as each other. I think it's too early to call it for this season. 

This is kind of my point— I don’t think you can find a year where 10-12 is anywhere close to 1-5 or 6. 
 

The value of the bye for AZ State was in replacing a potential loss (probability of a loss unknown) with a 100 percent guarantee they would not lose, in addition to the rest, practiced, time to get healthy. If you hypothetically place each game at a true push, they moved from a 25 percent chance to a 50 percent chance of advancing to the semis simply by not playing in the first round. But Texas was in fact a better team than them, and it was never a push. 
 

Those byes will be even more valuable and meaningful for teams that are straight seeded into them. 

Edited by 956 Worldwide
Posted
14 minutes ago, ztejas said:

Well - they play the games for a reason. Last year you had a really strong top 6 and I think ASU proved to be under-ranked. Unless you want to argue the bye they got was instrumental in coming back against Texas. They still kicked the shit out of ISU in the B12TG. Some years you may only have 3 teams worth a shit.  Some years you may have 10 teams all about as good as each other. I think it's too early to call it for this season. 

With the way the game is going and the concentration of talented players at the top, you are going to see more teams with a lot of talent that can put it together for a playoff run but maybe had a less than stellar regular season. Look at Ohio State last year. There will be years where teams seeded lower than them can win it. 

Posted
On 11/10/2025 at 8:44 AM, Iceman said:

KState in the 80's before Snyder was abysmal.  People forget or never knew how bad that program was.

anyone born in the 70s or earlier that cared the slightest about college football remembers vividly

reddit 8 years ago:

A lot of newer CFB fans don't realize how awful Kansas State used to be. They were, inarguably, the worst program in college football. Before Bill Snyder got there in 1989, they had appeared in only one bowl game in their history (and lost). Between 1940 and 1990, they had nineteen (19) seasons (or 38% of their seasons) in which they won only one game or less. In that same time frame, 7 of those 19 seasons were completely winless seasons - that's that's about 1.4 winless teams per decade. They only had FOUR (4) winning seasons in that same timeframe - that's fewer than one winning team per decade. They had more teams go completely winless than they had finish with a winning record. They were 3-40-1 in the 4 seasons prior to Bill Snyder's arrival (.068 winning %).

Upon Bill Snyder's arrival in 1989, they went 18-26 in his first four seasons before becoming a national power. In the next 11 seasons from 1993-2003, they finished ranked in the AP poll ten times. They finished in the top 10 of the AP poll six times. 1997 KSU went 11-1, with their only loss coming from the eventual undefeated national champions, the Nebraska Cornhuskers. 1998 Kansas State went undefeated through the regular season, only to lose to Texas A&M in double OT in the Big 12 championship game, ending their chance at a national championship game appearance. 1999 Kansas State also went 11-1, with their only loss coming to 12-1 Nebraska Cornhuskers, who finished in the top 3 in the AP poll and Coaches poll.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, ztejas said:

If Texas finishes 10-2 I would give zero fucks about making the SECCG.

This.  I'm not concerned one bit about that game.  Which is why I hope it goes away eventually.

Posted
25 minutes ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

With the way the game is going and the concentration of talented players at the top, you are going to see more teams with a lot of talent that can put it together for a playoff run but maybe had a less than stellar regular season. Look at Ohio State last year. There will be years where teams seeded lower than them can win it. 

The parity, though, is concentrated in the P2. And in the format of 5 conference autobids, that matters less.

The G5 team will always be a Cinderella shot. 

The Big XII and ACC between them have maybe two truly competitive rosters (Tech and Miami, with Miami underperforming). 

It won’t matter if the middle of the SEC or Big Ten is built to complete with the top when they are sitting at home. Maybe if we get to a point where Clemson, Miami, FSU, SMU, Pitt are playing at max potential or if someone besides TTU and BYU do real NIL game in the Big XII we have a true 10-11 team deep CFP. 

As it stands 10-12 are just filler. 

Posted
6 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

The parity, though, is concentrated in the P2. And in the format of 5 conference autobids, that matters less.

The G5 team will always be a Cinderella shot. 

The Big XII and ACC between them have maybe two truly competitive rosters (Tech and Miami, with Miami underperforming). 

It won’t matter if the middle of the SEC or Big Ten is built to complete with the top when they are sitting at home. Maybe if we get to a point where Clemson, Miami, FSU, SMU, Pitt are playing at max potential or if someone besides TTU and BYU do real NIL game in the Big XII we have a true 10-11 team deep CFP. 

As it stands 10-12 are just filler. 

You point to Tech and Miami unironically and that is fantastic. Those two teams can compete, talentwise, with the P2 precisely because of what this era has enabled from a parity perspective, and this "era" is only 2-3 seasons old. As stated before, past is no longer prologue. You seem to only be able to comprehend shit directly in front of your face or whatever is in the rearview mirror. The concentration of potential victors is sliding from 3-4 teams each season to 7-10 now and likely 12-15 a few years from now. 

We don't need you to move the goalposts again or cite more well-known and obvious shit to support whatever point you think you're making. No one is going to be convinced by your certitude during a miasmic period of chaos. 

Posted
43 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

You point to Tech and Miami unironically and that is fantastic. Those two teams can compete, talentwise, with the P2 precisely because of what this era has enabled from a parity perspective, and this "era" is only 2-3 seasons old. As stated before, past is no longer prologue. You seem to only be able to comprehend shit directly in front of your face or whatever is in the rearview mirror. The concentration of potential victors is sliding from 3-4 teams each season to 7-10 now and likely 12-15 a few years from now. 

We don't need you to move the goalposts again or cite more well-known and obvious shit to support whatever point you think you're making. No one is going to be convinced by your certitude during a miasmic period of chaos. 

I mean, yeah it should be beyond obvious that going forward it’s likely that the SEC has 4 or 5 title contending type teams many/most years and the big 10 2 or 3. If the Domers are legit talent acquirers, which I see no reason to believe they aren’t that makes 6-9 teams every year right there that should feel like they have legit aspirations to a national title.

that leaves you needing 3-5 teams amongst the rest of D1 needing to be on an up roster cycle where they feel like “fuck it- our window is now” and you have a pretty solid 10 or 11 with a shot to win it all. Between Miami, FSU, Clemson, SMU, TCU, Tech, BYU and Pitt it feels like that’s more likely than not most years and you will have off seasons with 12-15 teams entering the portal cycle with money to burn and the idea of “why not us”. 
it’s going to be Major League Baseball. The dodgers and Yankees are always going to be good and spend a lot, but in the last 10 or 15 years you’ve also had titles won by the nationals, Royals, Astros, Giants, Cardinals and Rangers. Most of those teams aren’t in competition every year but there’s enough out there that some will always be. 
It’s not the dumbest take on this board in the last 2 or 3 weeks but it certainly isn’t well thought out or intelligent. 

Posted

Nothing at all new or groundbreaking about the ACC having a couple teams (Miami often among them) capable of competing with the best in the country. Nothing new about the Big XII having one really good team. The very best from those conferences were always going to be in the playoffs. 

And if the format changed to “12 best no matter where or we saw wild realignment, growing from 7 real contenders to 12 would change the calculus. 

Moving UT and OU out of the Big XII and into the SEC  makes likely playoff fields less strong, not more strong under the current format.  Likewise collapsing the PAC-12 and moving their best programs into the Big Ten. 

There’s no reason to think college parity turns G5 teams into contenders. Thus far, they’ve mostly been raided in the portal. There’s no guarantee that boosters like Campbell come in hot to make another Big XII team into a beast. Maybe someone will. 

But the media deals show the P2 pulling away from the ACC and Big XII in revenue. They show the ACC getting further sliced and diced into have and have notes, which doesn’t seem at all to help the middle of the conference. Those are the long-term trends we know. 

Posted
1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

The parity, though, is concentrated in the P2. And in the format of 5 conference autobids, that matters less.

The G5 team will always be a Cinderella shot. 

The Big XII and ACC between them have maybe two truly competitive rosters (Tech and Miami, with Miami underperforming). 

It won’t matter if the middle of the SEC or Big Ten is built to complete with the top when they are sitting at home. Maybe if we get to a point where Clemson, Miami, FSU, SMU, Pitt are playing at max potential or if someone besides TTU and BYU do real NIL game in the Big XII we have a true 10-11 team deep CFP. 

As it stands 10-12 are just filler. 

Depends on who #10 is, is it Big 12 #2 or SEC #5? SEC #5 has an infinitely better shot to get hot and win than some Mormon 2 and 3 stars. 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...