What about Baylor and TCU?
I don't think either one of them really have a reason to complain too much. I know that is not very popular, but it is what it is.
Baylor was the Big 12 Champion...period. It was disingenuous and showed a lack of integrity to try to "delay" announcing them as champion because you were trying to trick the system in the CPC.
"One True Champion"... That pious, self-righteous slogan was meant to jab at other conferences...and it should ring in the ears of all the Big 12 leadership because when it mattered, they abandoned that slogan and plan. They ran from it like a scalded dog.
They were EXPOSED because when it mattered the most, because the Big 12 was fine to NOT have "one true champion" and have co-champions (at least until AFTER the Playoff Committee selected someone to be in the playoff). It was the equivalent of just putting your name in the drawing TWICE to try to up your chances of winning.
The Big 12 deserves to be left out, if for no other reason, than to promote the slogan that "cheaters never prosper" because that's what the Big 12 officials tried to do.
That's not Baylor's fault...and they should be ticked off at the Big 12 leadership for that.
The problem was that, no matter how many times the CPC and Jeff Long said it (and they said it every week), everyone just didn't think about how this was playing out. Instead of looking at a resume, it was more like turning over a hand of cards one card at a time...one card each week.
The committee didn't look ahead and project...they said that EVERY week, so, in effect, the weekend before last, Baylor had only played 1 top ten team and they beat them...and that's how the CPC looked at their schedule --- 1 top ten team win...the identity of that team was not linked to that accomplishment, that comes in later.
They didn't turn over the K State card until last night, so you have to look at it like it didn't exist before last night...didn't even exist.
Last night, FOR THE FIRST TIME ALL SEASON, the rest of the schedule existed and was considered....fans look ahead, the committee didn't...and they told you they wouldn't...I'm not liking it, but it was what it was.
Same with Conference Champion AND Head to Head.
The conference champion thing never came into play until there actually WERE conference champions...and that was this weekend. No matter what TCU said or how the Big 12 team reneged on their own rules for tiebreaking and end up with "one true champion", it wasn't happening...ever and it shouldn't have.
Here are the conference champions...Bama, OSU, FSU, Oregon, Baylor --- that's it. The committee didn't let the Big 12 try to sneak an extra card in the lottery to get two teams to choose from, they knew what the tie breaker system was and they were like "No thank you, Big 12, not fooling anyone."
If the Conference Champion wasn't enough, then they went to H2H...TCU, sorry, you never had a chance as soon as Baylor ended with 1 loss and the same conference record...it was OVER, you just didn't want to "know" that two weeks ago. You should have beaten Baylor when they played you...plain and simple...everything else was lottery.
The committee proved they weren't looking ahead, because without the H2H and the Conference Champion and a convincing win against KState, which is what TCU had last week...and this week, the same record, then it's tie break and Baylor had the Conference Champion (really) and the H2H...eos.
You can claim it was "mean" for the CPC to put TCU at 3 when they were never going to finish that high without a Baylor loss and some other things to happen, but they were consistent in this one area... they only looked at what was actually real the week that TCU went to 3, not what was coming, inevitable or supposed, and they ranked them on that...
Why is OSU better?
OSU's Strength of Schedule was better than both TCU and Baylor.
OSU's Strength of Schedule out of conference was 60 and 70 places higher.
They played a conference championship game and beat the #13 team by 50+ points....WAY better than anything TCU or Baylor did at the end. (Iowa State by 52 doesn't hold a candle...over-rated or not. KState is a comparable and slightly better opponent, but Baylor only beat them by 10.)
Before they beat the dog out of Wisconsin, it was closer and I didn't really think too much of OSU, but after, it was an easy decision....sorry.
What about FSU at 3, Oregon at 2, Bama at 1 and all the seeding in the top 4?
I have heard all the "we won and they dropped us"...that's POLL talk, not Committee talk. All that "we won" so we can't obviously show ourselves as worse than last week...that's crazy talk. You take on a loser team and barely beat them...the only time that no one cares about that is when it's YOUR team that beat the "loser" team.
EVERY time someone looks at somebody else's team and THEIR team beats a tomato can by 2 points, they are all like "see, they are over-rated"...so you can't have your cake and eat it too.
When it happens once, it's NORMALLY an ANOMALY...when it happens 3-4 times, it's a sign, and the more times it happens, the more you raise your eyebrows, because the normal thing is good teams beat bad teams bad...and that usually bears out. Not every time, but most...look at Bama in '92. Their most impressive blowout by far didn't come until the championship game...they took loads of criticism for just winning.
This year, when Bama beat Arkansas by 1 point, I was questioning Alabama....why because if they can't beat a bad team like a drum, there's a problem...they aren't as good or the team is better. As it played out, Arkansas was better than everyone thought, but they just had a tough run of luck and Bama had an off day...it is what it is.
What about being undefeated?
Okay, let's get to the elephant in the room...FSU.
Do they deserve to be in the playoff? Yes. That's true. #1? Not so much.
"Bu...bu...bu...they've won 29 in a row..." No they haven't. 2 years ago, a team that went 12-2 and won the last 2 games of the season. In 2013, a different team won 13 in a row and they are AWESOME...great champions, hate the lame character stuff, but they won. Congratulations!
THOSE 2 TEAMS DON'T EXIST ANY MORE...a team is just as much about the composition of every player, coach, trainer and down to the water boys (well, the water boys aren't as much), but you trade out enough of those pieces, they aren't the same any more. You get a matched set of china, and you break half of it and just replace it with your favorite pieces of any brand or style enough, you don't have a matched set of china anymore...and the FSU team of last year doesn't exist.
When a Bama team won the national championship in 2011, then another Bama team won it again in 2012, and then still another Bama team went for another in 2013...everyone ELSE said "defending" national champion...that's just a title, it's not real. Saban told the team that the team that won the national championship the year before had ceased to exist and it didn't mean anything for the team that was playing this season and that's absolutely right. Fast forward, this FSU team has won 13 games...GREAT for them and they are undefeated...they deserve all the accolades for winning 13 games in a row and going undefeated...the program or the school can have the 29 game winning streak...but you can't bring out the mystique from last year and get a bump in the playoffs for that...so don't bring that up.
"Bu...bu...bu...they are undefeated."
In the days of the polls, I would totally agree...to be the man, you must beat the man, even when, technically, as I just stated, "the man" doesn't exist anymore...the reality is you can't. In the poll era, I was like, if you are undefeated and are playing a schedule in the relative stratosphere of other teams (not Marshall), then yeah, I think you get a serious bump from that. I'd have been on FSU's side. I was saying, a few years ago, that there was no use for anyone to play games until USC loses, because until they lose, no matter what they look like, they are going to be number 1...realized that reality.
Those days are gone...when the CPC said they would get the "best teams" and the "teams who are playing the best"...that's when we had to change our thinking...new metric and new combination of metrics.
New metrics and season maturity
Undefeated counts, but it's not the "be all, end all" anymore, because the playoffs determine the champion, not a poll. We all know that teams grow and change over the course of the season. They get better and they get worse...teams lose players and players get better, some drastically.
Case in point, Blake Sims is a prime proof of that...he's not the same QB he was in the spring...he SUCKED, he was TERRIBLE. I thought at the end of the season, Bama would be fine with Blake Sims and looked forward to him being the starter.
I was excited to watch the Spring game.
I was annoyed by the Jacob Coker talk and us running to grab the backup from FSU...come on, man.
After the spring game, I was soooo glad that Coker was here, because Blake looked absolutely horrible.
But Blake kept working...what he said was he "put his head down and kept working". He didn't win the job until the last scrimmage of August before the first game...he didn't have it solid until about 3 games later...and after that, he set the single game passing and yardage record at Alabama...the single season passing record at Alabama...the SEC Championship Game Completion Percentage Record and won the MVP of the SEC Championship Game as Bama just dismantled Mizzou...and that was honestly, just "another hero" job for Sims...he went from "Mr. Shaky" to "Big Hero 6" (as Rece Davis started calling him) and he IS that huge.
He's not the same player he was in September and consequently, Bama isn't the same team.
Ole Miss was VASTLY different when they had LaQuan Treadwell and after he was lost for the season with an injury...it happens all that time.
So teams get better and teams get worse...some are the best at the end, some are the best all the way through, but some get better BY the end...
...and THAT'S what you have to get in these new times.
It's who's the best at the end...is it perfect? NO, but that's what they are looking for, not just rewarding someone for getting lucky and eeeking by.
If FSU deserves to be here, it will bear out...but they don't HAVE to make them #1 either.
Seeding really doesn't matter either, if you are the champion.
You don't get to play at your stadium if you are the higher seed.
You don't get spotted 10 points if you are a higher seed.
You don't get a higher amount of tickets if you are a higher seed.
There's NO advantage based on higher seeding....except if you want to not have to travel as far. In this day and time, who cares about that really besides the fans? And the reality is if you'd spend $2000 a person to go, you'd spend $2500...eos.
If you are a higher seed, you might end up traveling across the country. If Oregon was #1 they would have had to travel across the country to New Orleans. Actually, if FSU was #4, they would have had an advantage by travelling less if you want to quibble...doesn't matter. (Bet the #4 spot looks a lot better today than last week, doesn't it, FSU fans?)
Here's the reality of the thing...it doesn't mean anything if you think you are THE "champion".
The playoff isn't about "winning" something, it's about "proving" something...if you can't get through the playoff because you can't beat someone, then you aren't deserving of being the champion. If you are trying to avoid someone, then that tells a lot about your opinion of your own level of skill. If you aren't down with yourself, why should anyone else be?
Unless you are into moral victories, so you can say "We made it to the championship game...then we lost...but we 'almost' did it.", then yeah, go that way. But if you are trying to be the TRUE champion (and not in the way the Big 12 chose to do it), then play whoever you get and beat them....don't try to trick the system.
So, being #1 or #4 doesn't matter...you, on a neutral site, play someone and you win or you don't.
Doesn't matter really at all. If Bama was #4...who cares? I know I give it a second thought and wouldn't have.
The reality is that you could make a giant case that being #4 is better than being #1...in the absence of any perceivable advantage of being seeded #1, all you have is the pressure of that and the "disrespected" card that the other team can play for motivation.
It's all the negatives and NONE of the positives, so me personally, in the current CPC system, I'll take the lower seed EVERY time and twice on Sunday.
There's my thoughts on the playoffs...I may have more and you may disagree, feel free to comment, if you made it this far.
No comments:
Post a Comment