Scores: 14-31, 10-41 & 3-34 in 2nd quarter. And none played a top 4 seed. When are they going to admit this is a farce and split into 2 divisions?
There have been 3 G6 teams in the playoffs.
- Thread starter patdog
- Start date
ND and BYU should have been there instead of those two mediocre teams. When are they going to put the legit top 12 in the playoffs and not the nos. 20 and 24th teams in? Both of their conferences are a joke compared to the SEC and BIG 10. A Ole Miss ND matchup would’ve been far more entertaining rather than the having OM play the participant trophy winner.
They should have a NIL floor for a team to FBS. Set the floor low enough to get about 60-80 teams in the FBS, most of P4 and maybe a few others. Assuming you don't see the entire American or new Pac-12 get in, you could automatically invite whatever handful of G5 teams are able to qualify into the Big 12 or ACC.
You left out Cinncinnati losing to Bama 6-21 in 2021. But Bama was the #1 seed.
These G5 teams in the 12 team playoff are about as competitive as the 1/16 games in the first round of the NCAA Basketball Tournament.
In prior years, non-P5 teams have played in, and won, BCS games which are equal to these CFP games.
This year they didn't.
OK.
This year they didn't.
OK.
The BCS games those teams won were meaningless exhibitions. In no way, shape, or form were they equal to CFP games.
No, they were not. You had Utah beating an Alabama team that did not meet expectations and in a game that no one on the Bama team gave a **** about. That is not the same as the playoffs, when everyone is still playing like the season is on the line.
What? Not really following this.
You know the NCAA has absolutely nothing to do with the CFP, right?
And you also know if a G6 team is ever clearly good enough to make the field without an auto-qualification, they can still be taken as well.
What was better? The G6 teams? The games themselves?
Not sure what you mean by “better”, but the games themselves meant absolutely nothing. And therefore those wins by those teams meant nothing.
1. Years past = pre NIL / portal era. Completely different game today.
2. as others have pointed out those bowl games were meaningless.
True. But I’ll claim I left them out because that was the old 4-team playoffs & that was an earned bid. I won’t admit it’s because I just didn’t think about it. Although I do think if a G5 team is ranked high enough then yeah, give them a bid.
They were the prestigious end of season games that existed at the time and against highly ranked p5 teams.
In those ways, I think they were very similar to yesterday's 1st round games.
I recognize the comparison isn't exact, but I also recognize t can't be exact.
Until they split away and create their own playoff, you're going to have to include them. At least one. And that's fine.
In response to your #1 point, do you bring this up every time someone talks about football from 2020 or earlier? Like, if someone compares a player or team from 2018 to now, do you claim it's a totally different game?
Just curious.
Additionally...so what? Why does that being PreNIL actually matter? The game is largely the same- only a few small rules have changed.
And if you mean NIL has changed whether smaller programa can compete or not, the same arguments made now were made when Boise was included in BCS games.
Responding to your #2 point, it is unfortunate to see such a revised version of history being claimed just to try and make a point.
Those games were huge. Boise state vs Oklahoma was huge. It is laughable to claim Oklahoma didn't care because the game was meaningless.
1 - so the game is largely unchanged with just a couple of minor rule changes in the NIL/portal era. That’s an interesting take. And I suspect a minority one. Have you been living under a rock?
ESPN has pushed for the Super Conference with all the high dollar, high profile college teams so this will eventually happen. Their goal is high viewership. Alabama, Georgia, Ohio State, Florida, Notre Dame, USC, etc. The biggest issue they will run into is shrinking the number teams means some big name teams have to lose.
It’ll be interesting to see what the networks do. On the one hand those 2 games were ratings killers. On the other hand they could have put OSU v Georgia & Oregon v Texas Tech in those time slots and Bears-Packers & Eagles-Redskins would still draw more viewers.
Maybe I am not thinking of what you are thinking of.
What major rule changes have been implemented in the last 4 years, since NIL has been around?
Targeting is called a bit differently now that 2019, but that surely isn't what your are referring to.
Yeah, I am drawing a blank on what major rule changes have been implemented to make comparing a game from 2019 to a game in 2025 totally pointless.
Would have been better if you simply led with this, instead of saying they were “equal”.
Oklahoma vs. Boise State in the Fiesta Bowl with nothing on the line. Oklahoma just really isn’t going to give that much of a 17 about that game. It’s Boise’s Super Bowl. That stuff matters.
Bama vs. Utah - same deal….even though thinking of a now Big 12 member that’s about to sign a half a billion dollar PE deal as G5 feels pretty silly anyway, even if it was technically true.
UCF in whatever year it was, same situation.
All three of those got paired with teams that just barely missed the cut for the title game….it’s the best case scenario for them every time. In CFP setting that is no longer possible.
I seem to remember Oklahoma giving many shíts about how that game would end.
So many shíts were given, you could say they collectively added up to giving a 17.
Maybe I am misremembering?...that Oklahoma team absolutely cared, and most BCS teams cared in other games and years too.
It's interesting how we all remember things differently with the passage of time.
So many shíts were given, you could say they collectively added up to giving a 17.
Maybe I am misremembering?...that Oklahoma team absolutely cared, and most BCS teams cared in other games and years too.
It's interesting how we all remember things differently with the passage of time.
It’s dishonest to say that the P5 (back then) teams viewed games against G5 the same way the G5 viewed them. And many times in the BCS bowls the P5 team was disappointed in not making the ship game or the 4-teamer. But, I do think the G5 was more competitive back then. Problem was the elite blue bloods were better too. We came real close to seeing it in a game that mattered in 2011 if Boise State had finished undefeated. They had been gearing up for that year for about 3 and would have finished #2 and played LSU had they finished it out. Can’t remember who they lost to, either TCU or Nevada I think. Maybe Kapernick.
But nowadays, while I absolutely want them to continue to get a shot in the playoffs (at least until there is a breakaway), there’s really no question that they are less competitive than they used to be. There are less G6 upsets, and look no further than us beating USM so easily.
Part of it is that there is just so much player turnover as they are raided yearly. But the coaching talent is good because everyone is trying to make a name for themselves. But as we know, Jimmy and Joes over Xs and Os. It’s never been more evident than last night.
Because the G5s now get raided by p4 teams
Eventually the G5 will figure out that they can raid FCS and on down. Already happening most likely. Maybe it will normalize soon.
Of course they already do. But replacing their best players with FCS players won’t get them many wins vs P4 schools.
So why is it working for low level P4 vs upper level P4. I think it definitely can work.