That's still not a good reason. The conference is too damn big to give a school 3 protected rivalries. Nobody else in the conference has that luxury.
SEC/Big10 Pushing for 16 Team Playoff
- Thread starter Flyforcy
- Start date
That's still not a good reason. The conference is too damn big to give a school 3 protected rivalries. Nobody else in the conference has that luxury.
It’s a perfectly good reason even if you don’t want to accept it. The conference is too big, it shouldn’t be that big, but if you’re going to protect rivalries, Iowa should have three. Otherwise, what other school gets ****** over?
And I don’t think it is a luxury. Because the odd team out is probably Wisconsin, and in the past 30 years they have been in the top half of the league over 20 times. So even before you get to your rotating games you know at least one of them will be difficult
Why should Iowa be the exception? Nobody else in the conference gets 3.
Did any of the others fight for three rivals and not get them?
And why should Wisconsin or Minnesota not play their two traditional rivals or Nebraska not get their rivalry game?
If the Rose Bowl can part ways with a perfect sunset surely other concessions can be made.
That’s such a stupid comparison, you’re smarter than that
No. If two schools both requested one another as a protect rival, they got it. It had to be mutual. Each school could have up to 3. Penn St. has zero protected rivalries, obviously wanting to avoid tOSU and Michigan every year.
If the composite BCS ranking algorithms (Wolfe, Billingsley, Sagarin, Massey, Colley, Anderson & Hester) were used to select last season's CFP teams, it would have shook out as follows. Final CFP rankings are in parenthesis:
1 Oregon (1)
2 Georgia (2)
3 Notre Dame (5)
4 Ohio St (6)
5 Texas (3)
6 Penn St (4)
7 Indiana (8)
8 Alabama (11)
9 Arizona St (12)
10 SMU (10)
11 Tennessee (7)
12 South Carolina (15)
13 Boise St (9)
14 Clemson (16)
15 Miami (FL) (13)
16 Mississippi (14)
17 BYU (17)
18 Iowa St (18)
19 LSU (Not Ranked)
20 Missouri (10)
The two major changes from actual CFP selection/seeding if the composite ranking was used are Arizona St would have received the first round bye ahead of Boise (and played in the Fiesta) and Alabama would have been selected as an at-large instead of Tennessee. The biggest eff up by the CFP Committee was obviously seeding Boise ahead of ASU and maybe that was influenced by ASU not being a pre-season ranked team. Picking Tennessee over Bama wasn't as egregious given Tennessee's regular season win over Bama.
Last edited:
And I’m fine with that. If those teams are genuinely the best rated teams, then so be it. The Big12 had a down year last year with teams like Kansas crapping the bed in the non-conference, so it shouldn’t have been ranked highly. I just want an algorithm with known and agreed upon inputs and weightings to be able to quantitatively select teams rather than a committee that seems to have different criteria for why individual teams were or were not selected.
They did but AZ State plays in the Fiesta if they get seeded ahead of Boise. I will edit my post.
Nebraska is a manufactured rivalry, because neither team had an #1 rival in conference. I personally, roll my eyes at that rivalry.
I'm not sure why the other conferences agreed to go along with this. I wouldn't trust the Big 10 or SEC at all
Vote it down. This isn’t a contract year, so nothing was being taken away if you said no.
Yeah, even if say Isu or k state ran the table they are never going to send an sec team into a blizzard to play a big 12 team
Good read here by Mandel regarding the ongoing CFP expansion absurdity. He puts primary blame on Pettiti:
