When would a G5 "deserve" to be in an 8 team playoff?

[Utah]

Let’s look at 2008. The top 12 was: Oklahoma, Florida, Texas, Alabama, USC, Utah, Texas Tech, Penn State, Boise St, Ohio State, TCU, Cincinnati.

The conference winners were (we will exclude the Big East because it doesn’t exist anymore): USC (PAC-12), Florida (SEC), Texas (Big 12), Virginia Tech (ACC), Penn State (Big 10).

So, there are five of the eight teams: USC, Florida, Texas, Virginia Tech, Penn St.

The teams fighting for the last three spots are: Oklahoma, Alabama, Utah, Texas Tech, Ohio State and Cincinnati.

Resumes for every team will include P5 games, ranked teams, overall record vs ranked teams, similar opponents to Utah.

Oklahoma: 12-1. Top 6 ranking all year long. Only loss to #5 Texas. Played 6 ranked teams. Beat TCU 35-10. 5-1 vs ranked teams.

Alabama: 12-1. After 9/28, was ranked in the top 6 all season long. Only loss to #2 Florida. Played 4 ranked teams. 4-0 vs ranked teams.

Texas Tech: 11-1. Played 4 ranked teams. 3-1 including beating #1 Texas. Only loss to #5 Oklahoma.

Boise St: 12-0, played one ranked team #17 Oregon. The WAC had one other team have 8+ wins (La Tech).

Ohio State: 10-2. Played 4 ranked teams, including #1 USC and #3 Penn State. 2-2 vs ranked teams.

Cincinnati: 10-2. Played 4 ranked teams. Went 3-1, only loss to Oklahoma.

Utah: 12-0. Played 2 ranked teams. Played 2 P5 schools. Played zero ranked P5 schools. Beat TCU 13-10 (Oklahoma beat TCU 35-10). MWC had three good teams and 6 mediocre to bad teams.

So, we have three spots open. Oklahoma and Alabama are in over Utah. There isn’t a soul on earth that would argue Utah deserved to be in over them. It boils down to Texas Tech vs Utah.

Ranked teams played: TT: 4. Utah: 2.
Record vs ranked teams: TT: 3-1. Utah: 2-0.
Power 5 schools faced: 8. Utah: 2
Ranked teams in a group faced: TT: Played a ranked team 4 weeks in a row. Utah: Played two ranked teams out of three weeks.
Loss: Texas Tech’s only loss was to #5 Oklahoma. Utah had no losses, but best team they faced was #11 TCU, who they beat 13-10 on a last minute FG. Texas Tech had played three ranked teams the three weeks before Oklahoma. They beat #8 Oklahoma State 56-20.

Tell me how we “deserved” to be in over Texas Tech. Because we played an easier schedule?

If Utah didn’t deserve to be in the 8 team playoff in 2008, what G5 would ever “deserve” to be in?

[teepee]

Expand The College Football Playoff

538 looked at AP voting for the last 20 years. They found that AP voters would put an undefeated group of 5 champion into an 8 team playoff about 50% of the time. While not a perfect analysis and AP voting is far from perfect I think it shows that there are many people that believe undefeated group of five champions deserve a shot in the playoff.

[Utah]

First, AP voters are dumb. See 1984. They like a story. And an underdog. 

Second, if you put in the conference champs, that only leaves three spots open for a G5 to get in. And if the playoffs expanded, the reality is, it would expand under rules from the people who created the current playoff, which is to say, they would not be kind to G5 teams. They’d have a committee, like now, pick the final three teams and it would most likely be the P5 champs plus the three highest ranked teams left. 

In all the years of the CFP rankings, the highest a G5 has finished the season is: 2017 had #12 UCF, who was undefeated. 2016 had #15 Western Michigan 13-0. 2015 had #18 Houston 12-1. 2014 had #20 Boise St with 11-2 record. 

And if you have a committee ranking teams and not AP writers like Wilner who is a mess with his ballot, you have a much more researched ranking system. 

And they will look at G5 teams the same way I looked at Utah, and NO G5 team will ever have a resume that can compete with a P5 school. Even a two loss P5 school. And if they did, then UCF and Western Michigan would not have been ranked so low. 

In 2017, an 8 team playoff would look like this: Clemson, Oklahoma, Georgia, Ohio State, USC as the champs. Then at larges would be: Alabama, Wisconsin, Auburn. The runners up would be (in order): Penn St, Miami, Washington, THEN UCF. Not even close to the playoffs. 

In 2016, an 8 team playoff would look like this: Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, Washington, Oklahoma. Then at larges would be: Penn State, Michigan, Wisconsin. The runners up would be (in order): USC, Colorado, Florida State, Oklahoma State, Louisville, Auburn THEN Western Michigan. Not even close to the playoffs. 

What about a brand name G5, like Boise State or Houston? Could they get higher? 

In 2014, Boise didn’t enter the CFP until the last few weeks of the season and were ranked with two losses next to a 4 loss Utah team. That’s how they view P5 vs G5.

In 2015, Houston was 8-0. They were ranked #25. They went 9-0 (#24), 10-0 (#19), loss. So, even at 10-0, they had NO SHOT at the playoffs. 

Same for the remaining years. No G5 has even sniffed the playoffs. Most rankings have G5 teams around other teams with +2 losses. 

So, in order for a G5 to make the playoffs it would need to be undefeated and need all at larges to have at least three losses and most likely four. 

And that ain’t never gonna happen. IF you had an 8 team playoff and IF an 3 or 4 loss team would be in, it would because they won their conference, which means a 1 or 2 loss team would be waiting to be taken as an at large team, which would make it even harder for a G5 to get in. 

It won’t happen and it shouldn’t happen. 

[Sweetness]

I love the model of conference champions from all P5s, highest rated G5, and two at large teams. 

[UteThunder]

I’m good with that, but the highest rated G5 needs to have some stipulations, such as they must be a conference champion and they must be ranked in the top 12 or something like that. There’s no way a #20 or something like that G5 should be allowed in. 

[AlohaUte]

I’d say that the G5 can have no more than 1, maybe 2 losses. I also think that each P-5 conference should automatically be represented, but it doesn’t always need to be the CCG winner. For example, let’s take the B1G this year. In the event a 8-4 Northwestern defeats an 11-1 Michigan in the CCG, the B1G should still be allowed to send Michigan to the playoff. However, the winner of the CCG must have 3 or more losses and loser of the CCG must have 1 or fewer losses prior to the game for it to be permitted.

[UteThunder]

 If the conference champ doesn’t get the auto bid, then what is the point of having the CCG? 

[PlainsUte]

When a G5 team has no losses it is difficult to gauge their upside.   One could say, they weren’t being challenged week-in and week-out but they should at least get a chance to see how they measure up.   Sort of like the 14-16 seeds in the NCAA Tournament – they get their chance to see just how good they are, albeit they are seeded against the best of the bigger conferences and everyone still has a long road to the Championship.  

Utah vs Alabama and Boise St vs Oklahoma wouldn’t have had the outcomes they had if it were just assumed the team from the lesser conference was going to lose and there was no ticket into the BCS Bowls at the time.   NCAA football is better and more exciting because those games happened.   Note that allowing a top-notch G5 team into an 8-team playoff (still 3 difficult wins from a National Championship) is much different than just handing them the NC for being undefeated ala BYU 1984.

[EagleMountainUte]

LOL Utah deserved to be the PAC-12 that is what I meant below. We are now snobs  by putting our noses up at G5’s. That is what I meant. 

But blah blah yes I agree G5’s don’t belong in the CFP. 

[Anonymous]

Who cares about teams being ranked at the time you play them? We played 3 teams that finished ranked: #7 TCU, #18 Oregon State, #25 BYU.

Texas Tech played #4 Texas, #5 Oklahoma and #16 Oklahoma State.

And I’m pretty sure our win over Alabama and Texas Tech’s loss to Ole Miss proves the polls got it right.

[Author]

Posts