The B12 (XII) Forum, home of the 'Front Porch, y'all' at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

I suppose it's more likely that the buckeyes would get blown out in the semi than the Tide, but it's not real likely

Well, Bama it is.

I think Bama is the best of the teams competing for the #4 spot, but I don't like and haven't liked the idea of a committee picking "the four best teams."

I think that winning a conference championship ought to be the play-in requirement for the CFP, and the Committee would meet to pick the four best conference champs.

But nobody asked me when they made up the rules for the CFP.

fully agree...
there should be little doubt that Bama is at least one of the best four teams in the nation.   but... they didn't perform when they most needed to- and should have lost their position because of that one game. 
however, they would destroy tOSU, and anyone else from the B10... Clemson is worthy, regardless of their terribly foul loss, and OU is playing as good as any of the other three.  

• Georgia is going to be hard to stop.  their backfield is the best in the nation.  their starting 11 on D is the best starting 11 in the nation.  they're likely the team to beat by my reckoning.  
• Clemson plays to whatever level they are required to play to... they lost to 'cuse, yeah- but it wasn't the rupture tOSU endured to both OU AND Iowa.  Their D is STOUT, and they have likely the best starting lines in the nation. 
• OU is playing as well as anyone on O, and have proven it's not a 'conference' thing by lighting up both TCU (x2) and tOSU's nationally ranked D's.  Their D is serviceable and enough to keep them in the game with the other three. 
• Bama may not have the best starting lines, nor the best starting O or D in the nation, but they are better than anyone below the top 6.   but to state the obvious, you could rotate three players on either side of the ball and they'd still have a better starting O or D than anyone but the top six... attrition wins.  they'll be fresh when the games begin, and.... they'll be favored throughout the playoffs. 

honestly, once folks get over their redasses, this is going to be the best playoff so far.... there isn't a team there that clearly stands out from the others. 

Here's a question: Why wasn't USC in consideration for the #4 spot?  Seems that USC had a resume about as compelling as either Bama or tOSU.

Furthermore, 2-loss conference champ USC is now ranked behind 3-loss non-conference champ Auburn, and so is 2-loss non-conference champ Penn State.

If we say that Auburn's 3rd loss doesn't really count because it was in the CCG, then what explains TCU drop from #11 to #15?

If Auburn weren't ranked as highly, if it were just Georgia and Alabama at #3 and #4, I might not be seeing pro-SEC bias, despite two of the final four being from the SEC.  Georgia obviously belongs, as a 1-loss conference champ, just like Clemson and OU.  And there's no clear #4, so I can accept that tOSU's 31-point loss to Iowa is a fatal flaw, and that Alabama at least seems to be a very good team, although the Tide lost the only game in which it was tested by a good team.

But with Auburn at #7, I am seeing that bias.

What's the case for Auburn being ahead of USC?

Three reasons are what I see: S., E., and C.

Does any team in the SEC have a signature OOC win this year?  If not, how do we know that any of the teams in the SEC are any good?

Here are the results of the marquee games of SEC teams.

Alabama: beat Florida State 24-7.  Looked very good at the time.  Doesn't look like much now.
Arkansas: lost to TCU 28-7.
Auburn: lost to Clemson 14-6.
Florida: lost to Michigan 33-17.
Georgia: beat Notre Dame 20-19.  That's pretty good.  Notre Dame has faded down the stretch, but they were deemed to be a very good team at the time.
Kentucky: lost to Louisville 44-17.
LSU: beat BYU 27-0.
Ole Miss: lost to Cal 27-16.
Mississippi State: beat BYU 35-0.
Missouri: lost to Purdue, 35-3.
South Carolina: beat NC State 35-28.  Not bad.
Tennessee: beat Georgia Tech 42-41.  Georgia Tech ended up being about as good as Kansas State.
Texas A&M: lost to UCLA 45-44.
Vanderbilt: beat Kansas State 14-7.

To answer my own question . . . Yes, the SEC has a signature win.  Georgia over Notre Dame.  Does that rub off and make 1-loss Alabama clearly better than 2-loss Ohio State?  Or 3-loss Auburn better than 2-loss USC?

Here's a question: Why wasn't USC in consideration for the #4 spot?  Seems that USC had a resume about as compelling as either Bama or tOSU.

Furthermore, 2-loss conference champ USC is now ranked behind 3-loss non-conference champ Auburn, and so is 2-loss non-conference champ Penn State.

Yes, the SEC has a signature win.  Georgia over Notre Dame.  

if a one-point win by Georgia is something, then Stanford and Miami have better signature wins
if that's the SECs big win, they don't have much
to take this another step, the B1G is still looking for anything remotely looking like a signature non-con win
there's nothing
maybe a reason tOSU lost the vote to Bama

I just hope its not an all sec champ game

so which team is better Bama or OSU

thats the only question that has merit

For roughly 15 years I've been harping on how stupid it is to build a fixed playoff system.

A playoff should be nothing more than a tool.

Circumstances should dictate the tool because the tool won't always fit the circumstances.

If you need to rake your leaves and you only have a shovel how is a hole going to help you.

Study all possible scenarios and design a dozen or more playoff plans to fit the circumstances.

Some years one game between two clearly worthy teams may suffice.  Other years you may need to weed through a seven team six game one bye playoff.

This year I'd eliminate all two loss teams and build a series to accommodate 5 one loss P5 teams and 1 no loss G5 team.

The NBA uses a lottery to choose draft picks.

Put 6 balls in a hopper and rank the 6 play off teams as their balls are drawn.  1 and 2 get byes.  3 plays 6 and 4 plays 5.  1 plays the winner of 3 and 6.  2 plays the winner of 4 and 5.  Winners of those games meet for the championship.

6 teams, 2 byes, 5 games, 1 clear winner.

Next year it could be completely different.  Why not?  Are we apes who can't grasp anything beyond 2, 4 or 8 team symmetrical playoffs?

I think that the major legitimate obstacle is the need to schedule venues well in advance.
I don't think that anyone should or even could use this year as a reason to push for 8 teams.  Does anyone think that 3-loss Auburn, #7 in the CFP rankings, should be playing for a national championship?