• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

HuskerMax readers can save 50% on  Omaha Steaks .

Conference Champions as automatic qualifiers.

Hville

Blackshirt
5 Year Member
This year in the B1G is one great example of why I don't believe conference champions should be automatic qualifiers in any CFP. Northwestern......short of a meltdown......is going to represent the west with anything from a 8-4 record to a 6-6 record. Most likely a 7-5 record. Imagine what would happen if they actually won the conference playoff game. I know that is a long shot but the way they are playing now they would probably be about a 10 point underdog on a neutral field.

How would you like to be a 12-1 Nebraska team that lost the Conference playoff game in OT and your place taken up by a Power 5 team with a 8-5 record. I'm not necessarily against expanding the team size but keep it to the most qualified and keep automatic qualifiers out. We already have that mistake in the NCAA basketball field so no reason to double down on the mistake. For the small field of teams relative to basketball you need to get it right and keep the poor record teams out.
 
I tend to agree with this...but what about an 8-4 team that is hitting their stride?
Play-makers injured to start season.. bad/fluke beats at the beginning of the year where they lose 4 straight. Then rattle off 8 straight wins in dominating fashion. Truly the best/hottest team in the nation.
 
This year in the B1G is one great example of why I don't believe conference champions should be automatic qualifiers in any CFP. Northwestern......short of a meltdown......is going to represent the west with anything from a 8-4 record to a 6-6 record. Most likely a 7-5 record. Imagine what would happen if they actually won the conference playoff game. I know that is a long shot but the way they are playing now they would probably be about a 10 point underdog on a neutral field.

How would you like to be a 12-1 Nebraska team that lost the Conference playoff game in OT and your place taken up by a Power 5 team with a 8-5 record. I'm not necessarily against expanding the team size but keep it to the most qualified and keep automatic qualifiers out. We already have that mistake in the NCAA basketball field so no reason to double down on the mistake. For the small field of teams relative to basketball you need to get it right and keep the poor record teams out.

I'd rather have it that way than a 12-1 Nebraska team being left out of the playoff because a group of people used "metrics" to decide they weren't one of the best 4 or 6 or 8 teams. Because there's no consistency in the selection process, I'd rather it be automatic for conference champs.
 
I'd rather have it that way than a 12-1 Nebraska team being left out of the playoff because a group of people used "metrics" to decide they weren't one of the best 4 or 6 or 8 teams. Because there's no consistency in the selection process, I'd rather it be automatic for conference champs.
I'm pretty certain you would be a rarity to be happy that a 8-5 team getting in over a 12-1 Nebraska or another 12-1 team beating us out because of the metrics. Those metrics are what separates the deserving from the undeserving.
 



I'm pretty certain you would be a rarity to be happy that a 8-5 team getting in over a 12-1 Nebraska or another 12-1 team beating us out because of the metrics. Those metrics are what separates the deserving from the undeserving.

But who decides "deserving"? And at least with this committee, they aren't looking at deserving and instead of looking at the 4 best teams. Alabama wasn't deserving last year because they didn't even win their division. At least the fate of your team is decided on the field, and if a favored and much better NU team couldn't beat and 8-4 team on a neutral site, then that's on them, not on a committee.
 
With a 4 team playoff I dont thing there should be an "automatic qualifier". I absolutely...100% believe not winning your conference should be an automatic DISqualifier. The reason for a playoff is to find out who is the best of the best so to speak. If you aren't even the best in your conference, or worse....division!... then how can you make a claim to be the best overall? Defies logic and it gives ammo to those that fear making the regular season meaningless. For example...Alabama didnt even need to show up to that game last week. They did THIS time but they've gotten away with "ducking" their conference title game before.

Moving on to 8? 5 guaranteed slots and 3 wild cards. That leaves room for a team like in your scenario where someone was great all year and came down with the flu en masse. Also leaves room for a team like UFC last year. Still preserves the sacred regular season because you'd be playing first round on campus and bama, for example, wouldn't want to risk having to travel to lincoln in December so... it only risking missing the playoffs they risk seeding by losing to LSU this past week. Incentive.
 
But who decides "deserving"? And at least with this committee, they aren't looking at deserving and instead of looking at the 4 best teams. Alabama wasn't deserving last year because they didn't even win their division. At least the fate of your team is decided on the field, and if a favored and much better NU team couldn't beat and 8-4 team on a neutral site, then that's on them, not on a committee.
Yep. Essentially those title games are the start of the playoffs. No do-overs.
 



Yep. Essentially those title games are the start of the playoffs. No do-overs.

In the current scenario, a 12-1 NU team who won their title game could still be passed over for a 2 loss SEC team because of "metrics". At least make it so everyone knows going in exactly what it will take to get in the playoff, which is win your conference.
 
I tend to agree with this...but what about an 8-4 team that is hitting their stride?
Play-makers injured to start season.. bad/fluke beats at the beginning of the year where they lose 4 straight. Then rattle off 8 straight wins in dominating fashion. Truly the best/hottest team in the nation.

That's where I'm at on this topic. Oklahoma has a shot at the playoffs if they win out, but they absolutely have to win out, and that includes their conference championship game. They are essentially in their playoff run right now. It's what makes the college football regular season so exciting, and why I'm against any further expansion of the playoffs.
 
But who decides "deserving"? And at least with this committee, they aren't looking at deserving and instead of looking at the 4 best teams. Alabama wasn't deserving last year because they didn't even win their division. At least the fate of your team is decided on the field, and if a favored and much better NU team couldn't beat and 8-4 team on a neutral site, then that's on them, not on a committee.
They absolutely looked at deserving last year and nailed it. Alabama won the whole thing so they did get the best team in there.
 
Yep. Essentially those title games are the start of the playoffs. No do-overs.
I don't believe they are the start of the playoffs as none of them are equal. Until the NCAA starts arranging conferences and starts setting up equal schedules like the NFL does it will never work to treat conferences like Divisions. It is an unfair platform. It is similar to football in Nebraska. Conference affiliations mean nothing in selecting who goes to playoffs. Schedules are determined on metrics associated with schools of similar size and then points assigned to whether you win or lose to teams with better records and/or performance with teams in a upper or lower class.
 
Last edited:



They absolutely looked at deserving last year and nailed it. Alabama won the whole thing so they did get the best team in there.
How do you treat Alabama this year if they lose the SEC championship?
I would not include them.
 
In the current scenario, a 12-1 NU team who won their title game could still be passed over for a 2 loss SEC team because of "metrics". At least make it so everyone knows going in exactly what it will take to get in the playoff, which is win your conference.
Yes they could be passed over by a 2 loss team but wouldn't that be better than being passed over by a 5 loss team?
 

How would you like to be a 12-1 Nebraska team that lost the Conference playoff game in OT and your place taken up by a Power 5 team with a 8-5 record. I'm not necessarily against expanding the team size but keep it to the most qualified and keep automatic qualifiers out. We already have that mistake in the NCAA basketball field so no reason to double down on the mistake. For the small field of teams relative to basketball you need to get it right and keep the poor record teams out.

I tend to think that, in an eight team playoff, that 12-1 Nebraska team would get in unless the OT CCG loss was to a 7-5 team. In that case, it would be justified to be left out. The conference championship games become a de facto part of the playoff. Win and you're in. I'd like to see the scenario that others proposed. Power 5 champs are in with three at large teams. The best team in the country is going to be in the tournament every year. There will still be a lot of arguing over last in/last out, but that's the nature of a playoff set up by a selection committee.
 

GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top