...be unable to defend its title.

(12-09-2019 10:01 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  ...be unable to defend its title.

I think the CFP has improved the play at the top. This year, we have three unbeaten teams going in to the CFP. Last year, we had three as well. And against tougher schedules than an unbeaten would have 20 years ago too.

That almost never happened in the pre-BCS or even BCS eras. I think the reason is, in the past, a team like Clemson might have gotten disheartened knowing it was likely locked out of the BCS title game, but with the CFP you know if you go unbeaten in a P5, you are in.

If this was the BCS, if Clemson wins their bowl game, I think we have a split title again.

(12-09-2019 10:11 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 10:01 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  ...be unable to defend its title.

I think the CFP has improved the play at the top. This year, we have three unbeaten teams going in to the CFP. Last year, we had three as well. And against tougher schedules than an unbeaten would have 20 years ago too.

That almost never happened in the pre-BCS or even BCS eras. I think the reason is, in the past, a team like Clemson might have gotten disheartened knowing it was likely locked out of the BCS title game, but with the CFP you know if you go unbeaten in a P5, you are in.

Teams played tougher schedules in the 70s-80s. It was after that the top teams started avoiding each other (I'm not disagreeing with you-just pointing out that 20 years ago was not what all CF history was like).

(12-09-2019 10:11 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 10:01 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  ...be unable to defend its title.

I think the CFP has improved the play at the top. This year, we have three unbeaten teams going in to the CFP. Last year, we had three as well. And against tougher schedules than an unbeaten would have 20 years ago too.

That almost never happened in the pre-BCS or even BCS eras. I think the reason is, in the past, a team like Clemson might have gotten disheartened knowing it was likely locked out of the BCS title game, but with the CFP you know if you go unbeaten in a P5, you are in.

It helped the rise of Miami. In 1983 Nebraska and Texas were 1 and 2 all season. Bowl tie-ins meant they could never play. Texas played uninspired in the Cotton Bowl and lost to Georgia 10-9. After the Texas loss, Nebraska didn't show up for the first half and fell way behind vs. Miami. They charged back, but went for two and failed losing 31-30. Miami won the MNC.

(12-09-2019 10:01 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  ...be unable to defend its title.

This is how the rankings should be determined anyways. When the AP gives 50+ 1st place votes, and the Coaches give 50+ 1st place votes to LSU while the 13 committee members give Ohio State the #1 rank, it raises a lot of questions.

We only ever had problems with the BCS because there weren't playoffs. They fixed the issue and created another when they made the CFP Committee.

(12-09-2019 10:51 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 10:11 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 10:01 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  ...be unable to defend its title.

I think the CFP has improved the play at the top. This year, we have three unbeaten teams going in to the CFP. Last year, we had three as well. And against tougher schedules than an unbeaten would have 20 years ago too.

That almost never happened in the pre-BCS or even BCS eras. I think the reason is, in the past, a team like Clemson might have gotten disheartened knowing it was likely locked out of the BCS title game, but with the CFP you know if you go unbeaten in a P5, you are in.

Teams played tougher schedules in the 70s-80s. It was after that the top teams started avoiding each other (I'm not disagreeing with you-just pointing out that 20 years ago was not what all CF history was like).

I don't think so. Just randomly, I picked a unanimous champ from the 1970s, Alabama in 1979. They went 12-0 and were the AP and UPI champs.

The teams they beat went ..

4-6-1
8-4
1-10
1-10
0-10-1
7-5
5-6
3-8
7-5
5-6
8-3

And their big bowl win to clinch the title ... 24-9 over 10-2 SWC runner-up and #6 (at the time, finished #8) Arkansas in the Sugar Bowl. The only other ranked team they played all year was 8-4 Baylor in week two, who finished #15.

That's a cake-walk by today's standards.

(12-09-2019 10:59 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 10:51 AM)bullet Wrote:  [quote='quo vadis' pid='16532824' dateline='1575904301']
[quote='IWokeUpLikeThis' pid='16532785' dateline='1575903685']
...be unable to defend its title.

I think the CFP has improved the play at the top. This year, we have three unbeaten teams going in to the CFP. Last year, we had three as well. And against tougher schedules than an unbeaten would have 20 years ago too.

That almost never happened in the pre-BCS or even BCS eras. I think the reason is, in the past, a team like Clemson might have gotten disheartened knowing it was likely locked out of the BCS title game, but with the CFP you know if you go unbeaten in a P5, you are in.

Think about how all of these would have played out if we had playoffs in the past...

2007
1. Ohio State
2. LSU
3. Va Tech
4. Oklahoma

2008
1. Oklahoma
2. Florida
3. Texas
4. Alabama

2009
1. Alabama
2. Texas
3. Cincinnati
4. TCU

2010
1. Auburn
2. Oregon
3. TCU
4. Stanford

2011
1. LSU
2. Alabama
3. Oklahoma State
4. Stanford

2012
1. Notre Dame
2. Alabama
3. Florida
4. Oregon

2013
1. FSU
2. Auburn
3. Alabama
4. Michigan State

This year is probably most similar to 2004, where you had USC, Oklahoma, and Auburn all undefeated. 4th team would have been interesting with the committee.

(12-09-2019 11:22 AM)stever20 Wrote:  This year is probably most similar to 2004, where you had USC, Oklahoma, and Auburn all undefeated. 4th team would have been interesting with the committee.

Probably Texas, but Cal's win over USC that year would have carried a lot of weight.

(12-09-2019 11:26 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 11:22 AM)stever20 Wrote:  This year is probably most similar to 2004, where you had USC, Oklahoma, and Auburn all undefeated. 4th team would have been interesting with the committee.

Probably Texas, but Cal's win over USC that year would have carried a lot of weight.

actually think Texas- partially because Cal had a starting WR hurt in their final game(a make up vs So Miss)- and that whole game for Cal was really unimpressive...

However- lets put 2004 to today.... Both Texas and Cal would have been in their CCG.

(12-09-2019 11:26 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 11:22 AM)stever20 Wrote:  This year is probably most similar to 2004, where you had USC, Oklahoma, and Auburn all undefeated. 4th team would have been interesting with the committee.

Probably Texas, but Cal's win over USC that year would have carried a lot of weight.

Cal's only loss that year (regular season) was a 6 point loss to USC. Texas's only loss was a 12 point loss to OU. No telling what they would have done. Cal had one ranked win, Texas had two.

(12-09-2019 11:39 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 11:26 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 11:22 AM)stever20 Wrote:  This year is probably most similar to 2004, where you had USC, Oklahoma, and Auburn all undefeated. 4th team would have been interesting with the committee.

Probably Texas, but Cal's win over USC that year would have carried a lot of weight.

Cal's only loss that year (regular season) was a 6 point loss to USC. Texas's only loss was a 12 point loss to OU. No telling what they would have done. Cal had one ranked win, Texas had two.

Oh yeah, Cal beat USC in '03, not '04.

(12-09-2019 11:39 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 11:26 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 11:22 AM)stever20 Wrote:  This year is probably most similar to 2004, where you had USC, Oklahoma, and Auburn all undefeated. 4th team would have been interesting with the committee.

Probably Texas, but Cal's win over USC that year would have carried a lot of weight.

Cal's only loss that year (regular season) was a 6 point loss to USC. Texas's only loss was a 12 point loss to OU. No telling what they would have done. Cal had one ranked win, Texas had two.

#4 should have been Utah coached by Urban Meyer

(12-09-2019 12:29 PM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 11:39 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 11:26 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 11:22 AM)stever20 Wrote:  This year is probably most similar to 2004, where you had USC, Oklahoma, and Auburn all undefeated. 4th team would have been interesting with the committee.

Probably Texas, but Cal's win over USC that year would have carried a lot of weight.

Cal's only loss that year (regular season) was a 6 point loss to USC. Texas's only loss was a 12 point loss to OU. No telling what they would have done. Cal had one ranked win, Texas had two.

Oh yeah, Cal beat USC in '03, not '04.

I've never seen a media love affair quite like USC '03
LSU coaching staff: Nick Saban, Jimbo Fisher, Will Muschamp

Who honestly doesn't think LSU would have stomped a hole in USC that year

USC, also the school that let Ed Orgeron go

(12-09-2019 01:00 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 12:29 PM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 11:39 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 11:26 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 11:22 AM)stever20 Wrote:  This year is probably most similar to 2004, where you had USC, Oklahoma, and Auburn all undefeated. 4th team would have been interesting with the committee.

Probably Texas, but Cal's win over USC that year would have carried a lot of weight.

Cal's only loss that year (regular season) was a 6 point loss to USC. Texas's only loss was a 12 point loss to OU. No telling what they would have done. Cal had one ranked win, Texas had two.

Oh yeah, Cal beat USC in '03, not '04.

I've never seen a media love affair quite like USC '03
LSU coaching staff: Nick Saban, Jimbo Fisher, Will Muschamp

Who honestly doesn't think LSU would have stomped a hole in USC that year

USC, also the school that let Ed Orgeron go

It would be fascinating just like this year to see who gets the #1 seed and the easier SF. Is USC #1 and Oklahoma/Auburn have to play in the 2/3 game? Or is it Oklahoma #1 and USC/Auburn in that 2/3 game.

2003 would have been interesting too. USC/LSU go 1-2 with Oklahoma 3 and Michigan 4. Who gets the tougher Oklahoma in the sf?

(12-09-2019 12:54 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 11:39 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 11:26 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 11:22 AM)stever20 Wrote:  This year is probably most similar to 2004, where you had USC, Oklahoma, and Auburn all undefeated. 4th team would have been interesting with the committee.

Probably Texas, but Cal's win over USC that year would have carried a lot of weight.

Cal's only loss that year (regular season) was a 6 point loss to USC. Texas's only loss was a 12 point loss to OU. No telling what they would have done. Cal had one ranked win, Texas had two.

#4 should have been Utah coached by Urban Meyer

I thought about that, too, but they didn't have a ranked win that season. They won their bowl game, first mid major to a BCS bowl, but that's all hindsight.