Bowlsby calls out the committee

[Tired Horn]

A few take aways-
1. "Brand Matters" They were perfectly willing to screw over TCU and Baylor two years ago.
2."They're making it up as they go along". Sometimes having the "13 data point" is important. sometimes meh...
3. They didn't want to leave out two conferences. Particularly, the Pac-12 two years in a row.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-fo...nation-on-this-years-playoff-field-decisions/

 

[ryan_sublett]

Yeah the whole thing is a sham. First of all a conference has to be left out, and maybe two in certain years. That itself creates an unfair system.

He's right about them making it up as they go along. Championships matter until they don't, scheduling matters until we decide it doesn't.

And if none of those fit our agenda we will just say we don't like one of the aspects of your game and that will keep you out. Penn state lost to a pretty good Pitt team( the same Pitt team that beat Clemson). They also scheduled and beat AAC champ Temple. You basically just told the country that if they had scheduled some FCS school instead of pitt they'd be in the playoff. Same with OU. If they had played Rice instead of Houston I'd bet they'd be in as well. The whole thing makes no sense. You gotta go to 8 teams and have some criteria for schools to follow. It shouldn't be a moving target every year.

 

[topdecktiger]

Except that no one wants to look at the actual specifics. The thing that screwed up the field this year is that 2 conference champs had 2 losses. If Oklahoma or Penn St had just one loss, it's a different ballgame. Back in 2014, Florida St was undefeated, and Alabama, Ohio St, and Oregon all had one loss. In other words, everybody was essentially tied, so it went to "tiebreakers." This year, Oklahoma and Penn St both had 2 losses, so the other teams were simply ahead just on record, before you got into all those metrics.

 

[ryan_sublett]

Except that no one wants to look at the actual specifics. The thing that screwed up the field this year is that 2 conference champs had 2 losses. If Oklahoma or Penn St had just one loss, it's a different ballgame. Back in 2014, Florida St was undefeated, and Alabama, Ohio St, and Oregon all had one loss. In other words, everybody was essentially tied, so it went to "tiebreakers." This year, Oklahoma and Penn St both had 2 losses, so the other teams were simply ahead just on record, before you got into all those metrics.

Right. But if you want to say schedule matters then you have to be willing to,put a 2 loss team with a strong schedule over a team with one loss who didn't play anyone. If you aren't willing to do that then schedule doesn't matter only wins

 

[topdecktiger]

Right. But if you want to say schedule matters then you have to be willing to,put a 2 loss team with a strong schedule over a team with one loss who didn't play anyone. If you aren't willing to do that then schedule doesn't matter only wins

Yeah, that's exactly it. Schedule doesn't matter if you don't have the wins to go with it. By that logic, somebody could go out and schedule Alabama, Clemson, and Ohio St OOC, lose all three games, and then claim they should get in because they played a strong schedule.

 

[ryan_sublett]

Yeah, that's exactly it. Schedule doesn't matter if you don't have the wins to go with it. By that logic, somebody could go out and schedule Alabama, Clemson, and Ohio St OOC, lose all three games, and then claim they should get in because they played a strong schedule.

Yeah. To me schedule has to count both ways. If you play a tougher schedule you have less of a chance of going undefeated or having one loss. That has to be taken in to consideration if you want teams to schedule well. As of right now there is nothing to be gained by USC and Texas playing each other for example. The winner gets credit for scheduling well and the loser gets "you lost so your out". It can't work that way or everyone is going to start "bayloring" their schedule.

 

[topdecktiger]

Yeah. To me schedule has to count both ways. If you play a tougher schedule you have less of a chance of going undefeated or having one loss. That has to be taken in to consideration if you want teams to schedule well. As of right now there is nothing to be gained by USC and Texas playing each other for example. The winner gets credit for scheduling well and the loser gets "you lost so your out". It can't work that way or everyone is going to start "bayloring" their schedule.

No they won't, for the exact reason of what happened to Baylor. If you schedule down, and everybody else goes 12-1 (as happened in 2014), then you're screwed. Scheduling down only works if other teams are losing.

You also have another issue. There isn't any guarantee that the team you schedule will actually be any good when you play them. When Washington scheduled Rutgers, Rutgers was a pretty solid program, winning 8-9 games a year. Then when the actual game came up, Rutgers imploded. So Washington actually went out and scheduled a pretty decent opponent, but it blew up in their face.

 

[ryan_sublett]

Sure scheduling down may hurr you in a rare case, but scheduling up doesn't help you. its all about odds. If I'm a coach I have better odds of scheduling weak and running my conference table than I do scheduling up and winning all my games.

The committee sent a message today that the only thing that matters is winning the most games, so teams are goimg to put themselves in the best spot to do that.

 

[topdecktiger]

Sure scheduling down may hurr you in a rare case, but scheduling up doesn't help you.

Yes, it does. If Ohio St hadn't played Oklahoma, they wouldn't be in the playoffs.

 

[4MNChampsHorn]

We need 4 conferences - 16 teams in each one. Play 10 conference games per year. Eliminate the cream puff schedules. The top 4 teams go to the CFP.

 

[ryan_sublett]

Yes, it does. If Ohio St hadn't played Oklahoma, they wouldn't be in the playoffs.

If Oklahoma hadn't played Ohio state they'd be in the playoffs.

 

[topdecktiger]

If Oklahoma hadn't played Ohio state they'd be in the playoffs.

Or Houston. That still doesn't change the facts. You claimed scheduling up doesn't help you, and that's completely disproven by Ohio St getting in. It's a double-edged sword. Sometimes it helps, sometimes it hurts. That's why you won't see teams scheduling down, like you claim.

 

[speedstrength]

Seems to me like Washington getting in over Penn state is a reason to schedule lower ranked teams.

 

[topdecktiger]

Seems to me like Washington getting in over Penn state is a reason to schedule lower ranked teams.

It's not. Again, you can turn right around and say Ohio St getting in over Penn St is a reason to schedule higher ranked teams.

 

[outhereincali]

Bob Bowlsby. I'd forgotten that name until I read this thread. Which reminds me that the Big XII has no leadership whatsoever. Gee, Bob how long did it take you to notice that the pc is dominated by self interests? Most of us figured that out a long time ago. I noticed that Kirby Hocutt's term is up as our Barry Alvarez, Condoleeza Rice (finally), and a few others. Tell ya what Bowlsby try getting two Big XII people on the pc next month. And get someone with teeth, someone who will put his conference above all else, someone who has no interest in building a consensus, because Barry Alvarez and Jeff Long clearly don't. Think you can do that? Show some leadership for once?

 

[madcow12]

Nobody to blame but OU. They can't hang with the big boys.

 

[ryan_sublett]

Schedule doesn't help you. All they care about is the # of wins you have. If I was a coach I'd put together the schedule that gave me the best odds of going 12-0 at worst 11-1. That's what the committee cares about. Anything else they say they look at is just lip service.

 

[Son of Wasatch]

All this is telling me is that a 1 loss Texas team will get into the playoffs.

 

[GuaranteedFresh!]

All this is telling me is that I dont give a chit because we couldn't even get bowl eligible yet again. Cfb is over for me until our spring game.

 

[2300 Nueces]

Really, it's the money. This should benefit Texas if we could win a game. The sooner we are paying players, the better. Our $$$ will destroy the rest of the Texas cheaters soon enough. Getting tired of the weak tcu's of the world paying players against the rules and getting away with it.

 

[OldHornInPA]

We need 4 conferences - 16 teams in each one. Play 10 conference games per year. Eliminate the cream puff schedules. The top 4 teams go to the CFP.

I'd go even further is that every 3-5 years eliminate the non-productive programs and promote teams from 2nd tier and let them have a try. Basically it would give ALL teams in the 64-team super conference a reason to be competitive or face losing a significant revenue stream.

 

[weevilcatch]

I'd go even further is that every 3-5 years eliminate the non-productive programs and promote teams from 2nd tier and let them have a try. Basically it would give ALL teams in the 64-team super conference a reason to be competitive or face losing a significant revenue stream.

Promotion/Relegation!

I like it.

 

[bubba2023]

I'd go even further is that every 3-5 years eliminate the non-productive programs and promote teams from 2nd tier and let them have a try. Basically it would give ALL teams in the 64-team super conference a reason to be competitive or face losing a significant revenue stream.

That would be awesome but that's dreamland stuff.

 

[Steve91562]

PSU is not the best team in the B10. They just beat a Wisconsin team by only one score, and that Wisconsin team was playing their back up QB. Ohio St. possessed the better body of work, having beat four top ten teams.

The problem with the B12 a few years back is that Baylor/TCU had dog crap out of conference schedule, AND no championship game win. Washington had a dog crap out of conference schedule this year, but then they blew the doors off a top ten team in the PAC championship game. Although I do think Washington is the weak link of the top four.

Anyway, name brand will not hurt of course, and that's a good thing for Texas.

 

[Scholz]

"Big XII Commissioner wants an explanation..."

Of course he does. He's completely clueless and a buffoon. First it was his "one true champion" when he didn't actually crown a champion. The co-champs thing doesn't work in a round robin format, dum dum. Second, it's getting a conference title game in the round robin format. As mentioned, OU and OSU playing two weekends in a row this year would've been full blown retarded not to mention it takes away the only benefit we had going for us in a ten team league, namely no conference title game and the easiest path to the playoffs.

Dumbass. Looking at you fat queen Boren as well.

 

[jsto60]

He should be calling himself out for doing a lousy job, and then he should resign.

 

[DC3.0ppg]

didn't read all replies, but if i was an oklahoma fan, i'd a) be a sister-loving meth-head, and b) be pissed. switch oklahoma's and washington's non-conference schedules and oklahoma is 12-0 and the #2 seed, and washington is a minimum 2-loss afterthought.

 

[DC3.0ppg]

Promotion/Relegation!

I like it.

at this point, we might be relegated

 

[diadevic]

PSU is not the best team in the B10. They just beat a Wisconsin team by only one score, and that Wisconsin team was playing their back up QB. Ohio St. possessed the better body of work, having beat four top ten teams.

The problem with the B12 a few years back is that Baylor/TCU had dog crap out of conference schedule, AND no championship game win. Washington had a dog crap out of conference schedule this year, but then they blew the doors off a top ten team in the PAC championship game. Although I do think Washington is the weak link of the top four.

Anyway, name brand will not hurt of course, and that's a good thing for Texas.

TCU dropped from 4th to 6th after winning their last game 53-3. No way you can explain that away.

 

[diadevic]

I'm a conspiracy theorist. This thing is rigged. So tOSU sneaks in even though they don't get to raise a banner. Fine. But how about how the teams are seeded and where games are played? There is no doubt in my mind that (a) the committee would never drop tOSU to no. 4, because they want tOSU vs. Alabama in the championship game, and did not want them to play in semis; and (b) they put Alabama vs. Washington in Atlanta to give Bama a HUGE homefield advantage, instead of tOSU vs. Clemson, which would've given Clemson a HUGE home field advantage. We are now watching figure skating - look out for the Russian judges (in this case, Big 10).

 

[Scholz]

tOSU vs Clemson will be a good one though.

 

[bubba2023]

I'm a conspiracy theorist. This thing is rigged. So tOSU sneaks in even though they don't get to raise a banner. Fine. But how about how the teams are seeded and where games are played? There is no doubt in my mind that (a) the committee would never drop tOSU to no. 4, because they want tOSU vs. Alabama in the championship game, and did not want them to play in semis; and (b) they put Alabama vs. Washington in Atlanta to give Bama a HUGE homefield advantage, instead of tOSU vs. Clemson, which would've given Clemson a HUGE home field advantage. We are now watching figure skating - look out for the Russian judges (in this case, Big 10).

I don't call that conspiracy as much as I call it common sense. Has it ever been anything different? This is not new to college football, all that is different is what we call it. I guess maybe the few years their are 2 undefeated pitted against each other it's a no brainer. Unless you take conference champions there is always going to be a judging criteria, and humans being the judges will value one thing this year and another next.

 

[OldHornInPA]

at this point, we might be relegated

Not yet anyway.... I was thinking programs like Kansas (yeah, I know they beat us), Purdue, Rutgers etc. Then bring in fresh, up and coming programs. We might be on the bubble after the first round though.

 

[Scholz]

It's not confusing. Teams with 0 losses or 1 loss are in, those with 2 are out. If OU had beaten Houston, they would've been in the Final 4 with a loss just like last year.

 

[TexExSpur]

lol, shut up Bowlsby....