|
Replies: 26
| visibility 1
|
Associate AD [816]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 1089
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Bottom line: CU has to go undefeated . . .
Jun 21, 2012, 7:19 PM
|
|
with a 9-game ACC schedule to make it to the Top 4. I suppose Barker, the BOT, and Dabo and Co. are 1000% committed to lunacy. Oh yeah, and no clue how the playoff monies will be distributed. (LOL.) Well done, well done . . .
From TI and L. Williams . . .
The ACC advocated a conference-champs model because that's the model that would give it the best access. The ACC's position was self-serving, and justifiably so. But if your analysis is objective and fueled by what is best for college football, you arrive at the conclusion that Swofford articulated before he huddled with his coaches and athletics directors to formulate the ACC's party line.
"I'm a big believer in conference championships and that resonates with me," Swofford told Tony Barnhart in early May. "But if you're selling a four-team playoff and it's not 1-2-3-4, then the credibility of the system is undermined."
If you are a football-first school in the ACC, you have some legitimate questions right now. The new postseason will place a greater emphasis on scheduling strong non-conference opponents, but the addition of a ninth game to the ACC schedule hamstrings Clemson and Florida State.
Clemson would love to schedule teams such as Auburn, Georgia, Oklahoma State and Mississippi. Actually, the Tigers already have. But the permanent presence of South Carolina on the slate makes it hard to schedule a second strong non-conference foe while maintaining a seven-game home schedule every year.
Swofford has created the impression that he's a key player in these playoff discussions, but we're guessing the football interests in the ACC are more interested in production than perception.
The biggest topic of all is how all this playoff money will be distributed, and that's another column topic unto itself. But the ACC can't afford to get further left behind by conferences that cash in on repeated representation in the playoff.
The ACC should have a seat at the four-team table if one of its teams goes undefeated. But how often will the ACC have two teams in the playoff compared to, say, the SEC or Big 12? The cumulative monetary disparity of such a trend cannot be ignored.
Back to the general playoff topic: People have been grousing about the concept of a selection committee and inherent conflicts of interest. Again, the coming system won't be foolproof. But if you give us the choice between a selection committee and sham polls by coaches (who let their SIDs vote) and media (who don't even watch most of the games) we'll take the selection committee as the decided lesser of two evils.
The whole "you have to win your conference" thing sounds good in theory, but Alabama blew that position to bits last year by finishing second in its division and then proving it was the best team in college football. And how ironic is it that the record low ratings for that game, not to mention a growing "SEC fatigue" nationally, helped drive changes that left Slive positively giddy after yesterday's meetings in Chicago?
|
|
|
|
 |
CU Medallion [58816]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46508
Joined: 4/23/00
|
I agree with all of that. I do like the selection committee
Jun 21, 2012, 7:29 PM
|
|
better than relying on polls. While it's a step in the right direction, it doesn't solve our problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [816]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 1089
Joined: 11/30/98
|
I'm fine with the selection committee . . .
Jun 21, 2012, 7:34 PM
|
|
But I fear we are becoming Boise St. 2.0. Many will be fine with that (and the Idaho Potato Bowl); not I.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2253]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2967
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: I'm fine with the selection committee . . .
Jun 21, 2012, 7:41 PM
|
|
I'm fine with the selection committee too but this 9 game ACC schedule is ridiculous and self serving to the non football first institutions in the conference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [56143]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 35492
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58816]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46508
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Thanks - I've always admired him.***
Jun 21, 2012, 8:55 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2196]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 2070
Joined: 1/7/00
|
No they don't...
Jun 21, 2012, 7:45 PM
|
|
Last year, a 1-loss Clemson team probably could've gone to a 4-team playoff. There will be 1-loss ACC teams that get into the big dance. This "we have to go undefeated" stuff is not true.
I don't really like the new playoff setup that looks like it will be moved forward. But I think people, in their zeal to do anything to go to the Big 12, are saying things that don't make sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2253]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2967
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: No they don't...
Jun 21, 2012, 7:48 PM
|
|
So you're saying Larry Williams has a ZEAL for Clemson to join the Big 12 ?? Wow just Wow !!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2196]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 2070
Joined: 1/7/00
|
Do you believe a 12-1 Clemson can't get in?...
Jun 21, 2012, 7:51 PM
|
|
Holy Smokes!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4192]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2999
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Yes they do IMO...
Jun 21, 2012, 7:53 PM
[ in reply to No they don't... ] |
|
When you are going to be compared to other SEC teams with one loss.....or any other teams with superior sos.....the ACC team is typically going to be at a big disadvantage...particularily playing nine conference games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4192]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2999
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Also...look at sos from last year....
Jun 21, 2012, 8:03 PM
|
|
We fall behind, Bama, LSU, Ok. State Oregon and Stanford...who finished 1-5 in final BCS poll. Last year wasn't an anomaly
1 Kansas
2 Iowa St
3 Texas A&M
4 Texas
5 Oklahoma
6 Oklahoma State
7 Missouri
8 Baylor
9 Texas Tech
10 Kansas State
11 Auburn
12 Ole Miss
13 UCLA (16)
14 Tennessee
15 Arizona
16 Oregon State
17 Colorado
18 LSU (20)
19 Minnesota
20 USC
21 Florida
22 Mississippi State
23 Alabama
24 California
25 Washington
26 Notre Dame
27 Georgia (39)
28 Arkansas
29 Oregon (25)
30 Nebraska
31 Arizona State
32 Ohio State
33 Vanderbilt
34 South Carolina
35 Washington State
36 Stanford
37 Utah
38 Penn State
39 Maryland
40 Rice
41 Michigan State (55)
42 Michigan
43 Kentucky
44 Clemson (44)
45 Boston Coll
46 New Mexico
47 Indiana
48 Iowa
49 Illinois
50 Miami (FL)
51 UNLV
52 Duke
53 North Carolina
54 Pittsburgh
55 Wake Forest
56 Virginia Tech (60)
57 Marshall
58 Wisconsin (64)
59 Northwestern
60 Tulsa
61 Syracuse
62 Navy
63 South Florida
64 Purdue
65 Connecticut
66 Louisville
67 West Virginia
68 Fresno State
69 Boise State
70 Florida State
71 Georgia Tech
72 San Jose State
73 Virginia
74 East Carolina
75 SMU
76 Rutgers
77 Idaho
78 NC State
79 Louisiana Tech
80 Cincinnati
81 Army
82 Ball State
83 Toledo
84 New Mexico State
85 TCU
86 San Diego State
87 UAB
88 Nevada
89 UTEP
90 Wyoming
91 Miami (OH)
92 Colorado State
93 Central Michigan
94 BYU
95 Utah State
96 Bowling Green
97 Florida Atlantic
98 Buffalo
99 North Texas
100 Southern Miss (108)
101 Kent State
102 Troy
103 Air Force
104 Central Florida
105 Western Michigan
106 Houston (109)
107 Northern Illinois (106)
108 Akron
109 Tulane
110 Hawaii
111 LA Monroe
112 Memphis
113 Middle Tenn St
114 Western Kentucky
115 East Michigan
116 Temple
117 LA Lafayette
118 Ohio (120)
119 Arkansas State
120 Fla. International
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2196]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 2070
Joined: 1/7/00
|
You can look at other years, too...
Jun 21, 2012, 8:34 PM
|
|
In 2007, LSU with 2 losses won the MNC. Would a 12-1 Clemson have gotten into a 4-team playoff that year? I think so.
Some years, you have to be luckier than others. But seriously, this "we've always got to go undefeated" stuff is just not logical.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4192]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2999
Joined: 11/30/98
|
I see your point....
Jun 21, 2012, 8:49 PM
|
|
but most years CLEM, GT et al. will need to win them all. A one-loss UF, Bama, LSU (or other school with a higher sos) will usually get in b/f us. That two-loss LSU season where they won the NC was a rarity IMO
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1071]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 1282
Joined: 6/19/03
|
maybe .. But only if the loss was early - FSU perhaps - and
Jun 21, 2012, 8:24 PM
[ in reply to No they don't... ] |
|
then win out. No way we re in the top 4 with a loss to Ga Tech or NC State or a late season loss to USuC - no way. We have to win all of our games or survive an early loss to a quality team and get a little lucky. It has always been this way and always will be - no matter what conference we play in. Just win.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [598]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 584
Joined: 6/29/11
|
Re: Bottom line: CU has to go undefeated . . .
Jun 21, 2012, 7:58 PM
|
|
My problem with the "Alabama proved it was the best team in the country..." is pure non-sense.... they should not have been in the NC game.... it should have been OK St. in my opinion.
Conference Champions should have a greater place at the table.... you see this in pro baseball and other sports...... sometimes there are teams that are better who don't even make the playoffs but you don't see people screaming for a different system in pro baseball..... I think it should be conference champions or at least a greater margin for them to get in....
This is simply a move by Slive to have more than one team from the SEC in the 4 team playoff..... and trust me ESecPN will make sure of that.... they WILL have an influence on who gets in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16343]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 25419
Joined: 10/10/06
|
exactly...
Jun 21, 2012, 8:25 PM
|
|
you could take the top 15 schools last year not counting bama.and one of those teams could knock off lsu.just because bama was good on that night doesnt prove a thing.for the simple fact lsu beat them the first game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [942]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 2479
Joined: 6/2/11
|
I have mixed emotions because SOS works against Clemson.
Jun 21, 2012, 9:13 PM
[ in reply to Re: Bottom line: CU has to go undefeated . . . ] |
|
At the same time as a college football fan, I absolutely want the best 4 teams in regardless of their conference affiliation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4625]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3379
Joined: 8/14/01
|
Going undefeated is the best thing, but
Jun 21, 2012, 8:09 PM
|
|
Pretty much every year you have to go undefeated to be certain of getting to the NC game anyway. Yes, sometimes there are no undefeateds, and sometimes there is only one so some one-loss team gets in. Nothing much is changing. People are envisioning a nightmare scenario where there are 5 undefeated teams (one each from the ESPN conferences and the ACC)--in that scenario, it is quite possible that it is the ACC team (Clemson!) that gets left out. But check the record books and you'll find that that scenario has never played out.
Barring that, when the committee is forced to decide which 1-loss teams make the 4 team playoff (or which 2-loss teams make the 8-team playoff that people will be screaming for in 10 years or so) there will always be subjective considerations. Stronger SOS gets you in.
But before I panic about getting hosed out of the playoff, I'm gonna focus on actually getting to be 12-1 or 13-0. There's no cause to #####&moan about the situation if we're ending seasons at 7-6 or even 10-3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4625]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3379
Joined: 8/14/01
|
Re: Bottom line: CU has to go undefeated . . .
Jun 21, 2012, 8:12 PM
|
|
but Alabama blew that position to bits last year by finishing second in its division and then proving it was the best team in college football
No they didn't. At best they porved that they were equal to LSU, overall, but better than LSU on that given day. Winning a national championship is not exactly the same thing as being the best team in the country (in any sport) especially if you are not undefeated in the process.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1071]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 1282
Joined: 6/19/03
|
When has Clemson NOT had to go undefeated to play for a
Jun 21, 2012, 8:20 PM
|
|
national championship?
Answer: Never.
The reality is that a school like Clemson has to win them all to win it all. They key is to have just strong enough a schedule to not get passed over by a one-loss team.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4192]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2999
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Your last sentence
Jun 21, 2012, 8:30 PM
|
|
says it all. When it goes to a nine game ACC schedule..it b/cs that much harder.
Message was edited by: JREwing®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [3]
TigerPulse: 33%
Posts: 3
Joined: 5/4/12
|
Re: Bottom line: CU has to go undefeated . . .
Jun 21, 2012, 8:28 PM
|
|
That is not true. You are looking ahead two years and assuming everything will be the same.
USC (the real one) is going to mop the floor with whatever team they play in the national championship this year, so that will end the SEC's perceived invincibility.
ACC teams like Maryland and Virginia are having good recruiting years, and the ACC could win some good out of conference games this year.
If Clemson progresses as they should Sammy's JR. year could see us in the national championship hunt while it is still under the old system. A new championship right before the new playoff would give the ACC great street cred.
With the commitment of Nkemdiche it should be obvious by now that Clemson can recruit on a national level while in the ACC. In two years with two non SEC champs the College FB landscape will be vastly different.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [551]
TigerPulse: 48%
Posts: 403
Joined: 7/28/11
|
Re: Bottom line: CU has to go undefeated . . .
Jun 21, 2012, 8:51 PM
|
|
Ohhhhhh...we are gonna have street cred!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14431]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 22985
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Bottom line: CU has to go undefeated . . .
Jun 21, 2012, 8:55 PM
|
|
just a few days relief from this idiocy with the great recruiting run last week. now it is back to the flat earthers worrying about anything and everything
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [554]
TigerPulse: 40%
Posts: 1874
Joined: 10/29/00
|
Re: Bottom line: CU has to go undefeated . . .
Jun 21, 2012, 9:28 PM
|
|
May not be the best setup for the ACC but better than the alternative. Conference champs only was never going to happen. Only alternative was to not budge and risk the Big 4 going off and doing their own thing. At least with this an impressive ACC team will get in. The 9 game schedule hurts but it also gives you another game to hopefully look really impressive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1929]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2173
Joined: 12/27/99
|
Re: Bottom line: CU has to go undefeated . . .
Jun 21, 2012, 9:30 PM
|
|
i dont believe that..have a hunch that 2-3 of the teams will have a loss in the top 4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Team Captain [494]
TigerPulse: 73%
Posts: 1744
Joined: 9/27/11
|
If We cant go Undefeated in the ACC
Jun 21, 2012, 10:35 PM
|
|
If Clemson cant go undefeated in the ACC then it doesn't deserve to play for that National Championship.
Most teams over history that have won the National Championship have gone undefeated. Didn't happen last year and a couple of other times recently.
If we have 1 Loss, sure we can still get into the playoffs but if we do what we need to do and beat the teams that we are supposed to beat, then we will be right where we need to be.
Let LSU and Bama and Florida beat each other up during the season. If we win our games, we will be positioned for the Playoff.
If we had lost only 1 game this year, we would had most likely made the Playoff. Been #5 at worst.
Winning will solve a lot of problems. If there is an undefeated SEC team and a 1 Loss SEC team then yeah they probably will be and deserve to be in the playoff as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 26
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
