Does FSU's loss to GT validate their exclusion from the last playoffs?

[blacklistedbully]

Granted not the exact same team, but one that was ranked #10. Makes me think the blowout loss to UGA wasn't just because their roster was gutted because they didn't care after being "snubbed".

I suspect they flat our did not belong...were a paper tiger, and that the "gutted bowl roster" just made it more of a blowout.

 

[QuaoarsKing]

No, nothing from one season can ever be "validated" by something from another season.

 

[She Mate Me]

This is a question I have no interest in at all. Sorry for being an Ahole and typing it.

 

[mstateglfr]

Does FSU's loss to GT validate their exclusion from the last playoffs?​

No

 

[BKCBully]

Does GA techs 8 point Loss to that same Uga team mean that they were 52 points better than FSU last year? FSU was a playoff caliber team last year, but were down to a QB who otherwise could've went the whole year without getting his jersey washed

 

[HulksStache]

No. It does look bad though

 

[OG Goat Holder]

Granted not the exact same team, but one that was ranked #10. Makes me think the blowout loss to UGA wasn't just because their roster was gutted because they didn't care after being "snubbed".

I suspect they flat our did not belong...were a paper tiger, and that the "gutted bowl roster" just made it more of a blowout.

No, they didn't belong. But that really doesn't matter - they had earned their spot. They were a Power 5 team and had went undefeated - that's how the BCS and the 4-team playoff worked. That was always the question.....are you trying to put in the best 4 teams (which is subjective) or the best 4 resumes (objective). The right thing was the latter, so I don't really know why people spent so much time debating it.

Now, with a bigger playoff, it really doesn't matter anymore. Should have been done years ago.

 

[mcdawg22]

No, they didn't belong. But that really doesn't matter - they had earned their spot. They were a Power 5 team and had went undefeated - that's how the BCS and the 4-team playoff worked. That was always the question.....are you trying to put in the best 4 teams (which is subjective) or the best 4 resumes (objective). The right thing was the latter, so I don't really know why people spent so much time debating it.

Now, with a bigger playoff, it really doesn't matter anymore. Should have been done years ago.

 

[Dawgzilla2]

That was always the question.....are you trying to put in the best 4 teams (which is subjective) or the best 4 resumes (objective). The right thing was the latter, so I don't really know why people spent so much time debating it.

Now, with a bigger playoff, it really doesn't matter anymore. Should have been done years ago.

I disagree....the four team playoff was intended for the four best teams. It was, and still is, subjective, which is why they had a committee of 13 people making the decisions. The way things stacked up last year, two deserving teams were going to get left out. I think the committee was right, but of course there was room for debate.

 

[mcdawg22]

I disagree....the four team playoff was intended for the four best teams. It was, and still is, subjective, which is why they had a committee of 13 people making the decisions. The way things stacked up last year, two deserving teams were going to get left out. I think the committee was right, but of course there was room for debate.

I disagree with your disagreement. They play the games for a reason. UGA was one of the four best teams in the country, but they lost so they were omitted. UNLV was the best basketball team in all of history in 1991, but they lost and now they are not champions.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

I disagree....the four team playoff was intended for the four best teams. It was, and still is, subjective, which is why they had a committee of 13 people making the decisions. The way things stacked up last year, two deserving teams were going to get left out. I think the committee was right, but of course there was room for debate.

No point in playing the games, then.

 

[patdog]

I disagree....the four team playoff was intended for the four best teams. It was, and still is, subjective, which is why they had a committee of 13 people making the decisions. The way things stacked up last year, two deserving teams were going to get left out. I think the committee was right, but of course there was room for debate.

How do you decide who the best 4 teams are other than the results of the games played?

 

[GloryDawg]

The go 11-1 they will be in. Plus GT might end up being a legit team.

 

[RiverCityDawg]

I disagree with your disagreement. They play the games for a reason. UGA was one of the four best teams in the country, but they lost so they were omitted. UNLV was the best basketball team in all of history in 1991, but they lost and now they are not champions.

You can disagree all you want but you're wrong. The stated intent was to select the four "best" teams. You can disagree that they actually put the four best teams in or that it should be done that way versus four "most deserving" teams, but four "best" was factually in the intent.

 

[RiverCityDawg]

How do you decide who the best 4 teams are other than the results of the games played?

At the risk of sounding like Josh Pate, "you are what your record says you are" is a myth in college football. Not all schedules are equal and context (such as missing your starting QB) matters when determining the "best" teams.

If Liberty goes undefeated this season is anyone going to say they are one of the four "best" teams? Of course not. Because context matters and you have to use more than just wins and losses when there are so many team involved.

This, by the way, is why the expanded playoff was needed. More than 4 teams could have a claim as being the best. More than 12? I doubt it.

 

[Fishsqeezer]

FAU ain’t going to win many games with their Quarterback

 

[patdog]

At the risk of sounding like Josh Pate, "you are what your record says you are" is a myth in college football. Not all schedules are equal and context (such as missing your starting QB) matters when determining the "best" teams.

If Liberty goes undefeated this season is anyone going to say they are one of the four "best" teams? Of course not. Because context matters and you have to use more than just wins and losses when there are so many team involved.

This, by the way, is why the expanded playoff was needed. More than 4 teams could have a claim as being the best. More than 12? I doubt it.

I disagree your record includes you strength of schedule. But FSU wasn’t kept out because of their record or strength of schedule.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

You can disagree all you want but you're wrong. The stated intent was to select the four "best" teams. You can disagree that they actually put the four best teams in or that it should be done that way versus four "most deserving" teams, but four "best" was factually in the intent.

Then you literally have no reason to play the games.

"Best" includes who won the games. Not the theoretical best on paper. How would even define it if not for wins? Recruiting ranking?

You notice how every time we go the route of 'best', which, for 17 years, has literally always been Alabama, that leads to an expanded playoff system? It's because they keep getting the benefit of the doubt from people like you, and folks get fed up with the unfairness.

 

[RiverCityDawg]

I disagree your record includes you strength of schedule. But FSU wasn’t kept out because of their record or strength of schedule.

The point is that context besides win-loss record is fair game when determining a subjective "best".

 

[tired]

Then you literally have no reason to play the games.

This is what popped in my head, initially, & then I thought..

The records should mean something, but all schedules are not created equal.

"I don't think it's about who you play, I think it's about who you are"
-Nick Saban

To the OP, We have confirmation that FSU is not a blue blood.

 

[RiverCityDawg]

Then you literally have no reason to play the games.

"Best" includes who won the games. Not the theoretical best on paper. How would even define it if not for wins? Recruiting ranking?

You notice how every time we go the route of 'best', which, for 17 years, has literally always been Alabama, that leads to an expanded playoff system? It's because they keep getting the benefit of the doubt from people like you, and folks get fed up with the unfairness.

You can like it or not, it doesn't matter to me, but it doesn't change the fact that "best" is subjective and involves context more than win-loss record.

Was Liberty better than Alabama last year? Alabama lost 2 and Liberty only lost 1, so Liberty is better in your mind? Of course not. That's an extreme example but the point is that it's never just about the record. Once that's true - and it is - your whole argument breaks down.

"Fairness"? LOL. Fairness went out the window in college football a LONG time ago. Again, I'm not explaining how it should be, just how it is... Or "was" last year. The expanded playoff gives more opportunity to settle this on the field, which is obviously a good thing.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

This is what popped in my head, initially, & then I thought..

The records should mean something, but all schedules are not created equal.

"I don't think it's about who you play, I think it's about who you are"
-Nick Saban

To the OP, We have confirmation that FSU is not a blue blood.

Easy for him to say, because his team is always the one given the benefit of the doubt. And while I agree that not all schedules are equal, if you were a Power 5 team last year and undefeated, come on mane. We simply do not have enough cross pollination to leave an undefeated team out. FSU earned it.

You can like it or not, it doesn't matter to me, but it doesn't change the fact that "best" is subjective and involves context more than win-loss record.

Was Liberty better than Alabama last year? Alabama lost 2 and Liberty only lost 1, so Liberty is better in your mind? Of course not. That's an extreme example but the point is that it's never just about the record. Once that's true - and it is - your whole argument breaks down.

"Fairness"? LOL. Fairness went out the window in college football a LONG time ago. Again, I'm not explaining how it should be, just how it is... Or "was" last year. The expanded playoff gives more opportunity to settle this on the field, which is obviously a good thing.

Again, use common sense. We're talking about Power 5 teams here. And I don't care if FSU was or wasn't better than Alabama on paper.....they earned their spot. It HAS to be about the record.

And by the way, best or not.....FSU got left out because of their QB.....which was absolute BS and throws out your theory too. So you're basically telling me now that best is defined as how you are projected to play in the future, not how you played during the season. Again I say, absolute garbage.

You must define 'best'.

 

[Anon1697564126]

At the risk of sounding like Josh Pate, "you are what your record says you are" is a myth in college football. Not all schedules are equal and context (such as missing your starting QB) matters when determining the "best" teams.

If Liberty goes undefeated this season is anyone going to say they are one of the four "best" teams? Of course not. Because context matters and you have to use more than just wins and losses when there are so many team involved.

This, by the way, is why the expanded playoff was needed. More than 4 teams could have a claim as being the best. More than 12? I doubt it.

missing a player should not matter. You shouldn't only get to count the games where your team is 100% healthy.

 

[tired]

"So you're basically telling me now that best is defined as how you are projected to play in the future"

It's been this way for a long time and will always be this way. Whether you or I agree or disagree, doesn't matter.

 

[mcdawg22]

The point is that context besides win-loss record is fair game when determining a subjective "best".

Do you think FSU would have been kept in if their QB didn’t get hurt. I do and that goes against the principle of merit based selection vs talent based.

 

[mcdawg22]

Me Pat and Goat agreeing on something.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

I'm just sayin', who da 17 looks at these results and says, "hey, they don't deserve to make the playoff".

I don't care how you define. Screwjob of the century. No they wouldn't have won it. Who cares, you reward the right teams.

 

[HuntDawg]

5 conference champions 4 spots. Was doomed from the get go. 1 loss SEC was always getting in and deserved to get in... and an SEC team that went undefeated in conference play... certainly wasnt getting left out

Wasnt a screw job. The committee was put in an impossible situation. But what gets lost in it all is not 1 but 2 teams passed up FSU.

Power 5 is just a cute word thrown around. There are 2 major conferences. Those champs had 0 chances of ever being left out and deservedly so.

 

[mstateglfr]

Then you literally have no reason to play the games.

"Best" includes who won the games. Not the theoretical best on paper. How would even define it if not for wins? Recruiting ranking?

You notice how every time we go the route of 'best', which, for 17 years, has literally always been Alabama, that leads to an expanded playoff system? It's because they keep getting the benefit of the doubt from people like you, and folks get fed up with the unfairness.

Again, use common sense. We're talking about Power 5 teams here. And I don't care if FSU was or wasn't better than Alabama on paper.....they earned their spot. It HAS to be about the record.

And by the way, best or not.....FSU got left out because of their QB.....which was absolute BS and throws out your theory too. So you're basically telling me now that best is defined as how you are projected to play in the future, not how you played during the season. Again I say, absolute garbage.

You must define 'best'.

^ clearly doesnt like the concept of taking a holistic approach to evaluations.

Determining participants based on more than one metric means someone/team will usually feel like they were screwed. When that happens, that person/team will typically focus on the metric that shows they are better than others while ignoring metrics that show they are worse than others.
Thats how it works in college athletics where selections are made, its how college acceptance works, its how scholarships work, its how job offers work, its how job evaluations work, its how job pay/promotions work.
All those things take multiple metrics into account and they are weighed differently depending on who is evaluating.


It sucks that you are just now realizing how the world works.

 

[HuntDawg]

Easy for him to say, because his team is always the one given the benefit of the doubt. And while I agree that not all schedules are equal, if you were a Power 5 team last year and undefeated, come on mane. We simply do not have enough cross pollination to leave an undefeated team out. FSU earned it.


Again, use common sense. We're talking about Power 5 teams here. And I don't care if FSU was or wasn't better than Alabama on paper.....they earned their spot. It HAS to be about the record.

And by the way, best or not.....FSU got left out because of their QB.....which was absolute BS and throws out your theory too. So you're basically telling me now that best is defined as how you are projected to play in the future, not how you played during the season. Again I say, absolute garbage.

You must define 'best'.

Power 5 dead and gone... The ACC is/was closer to the group of 6 than it is the Big 10 or SEC when you looked at the ratings and strengths.

The committee weighed that in.. and i dont blame them for it.

No different than the NCAA basketball committee taking that 9th team from a power conference over a team with better record in a lesser conference.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

5 conference champions 4 spots. Was doomed from the get go. 1 loss SEC was always getting in and deserved to get in... and an SEC team that went undefeated in conference play... certainly wasnt getting left out

Wasnt a screw job. The committee was put in an impossible situation. But what gets lost in it all is not 1 but 2 teams passed up FSU.

Power 5 is just a cute word thrown around. There are 2 major conferences. Those champs had 0 chances of ever being left out and deservedly so.

^ clearly doesnt like the concept of taking a holistic approach to evaluations.

Determining participants based on more than one metric means someone/team will usually feel like they were screwed. When that happens, that person/team will typically focus on the metric that shows they are better than others while ignoring metrics that show they are worse than others.
Thats how it works in college athletics where selections are made, its how college acceptance works, its how scholarships work, its how job offers work, its how job evaluations work, its how job pay/promotions work.
All those things take multiple metrics into account and they are weighed differently depending on who is evaluating.


It sucks that you are just now realizing how the world works.

Fart.

The team that should have been left out was actually Texas. That precedent had been set throughout the modern era, and it's the correct one, if you're looking at schedule strength. They had the lesser loss. Alabama had the better loss.

1993 Florida State gets in over Notre Dame, who beat them, but had a lesser loss to Boston College
2000 Florida State gets in over Miami, who beat them, but had a lesser loss to Washington
2008 Oklahoma gets in over Texas, who beat them, but had a lesser loss to Texas Tech

I'm sure there are more, but that's a different argument - that's the argument between Alabama and Texas.

But back to FSU, who absolutely should have gotten in, without a shadow of a doubt. We simply don't have enough data to take 'holistic' approaches. Because you matter how you shake it, FSU had the better resume. Again, they got screwed due to losing their QB. PERIOD. Please explain, again, how you look at their schedule above and say "hey, this isn't a playoff team".

 

[OG Goat Holder]

Power 5 dead and gone... The ACC is/was closer to the group of 6 than it is the Big 10 or SEC when you looked at the ratings and strengths.

The committee weighed that in.. and i dont blame them for it.

We're talking 2023, old man.

This year and beyond, yeah, it's gone. And all of this is now moot.

 

[HuntDawg]

Fart.

The team that should have been left out was actually Texas. That precedent had been set throughout the modern era, and it's the correct one, if you're looking at schedule strength. They had the lesser loss. Alabama had the better loss.

1993 Florida State gets in over Notre Dame, who beat them, but had a lesser loss to Boston College
2000 Florida State gets in over Miami, who beat them, but had a lesser loss to Washington
2008 Oklahoma gets in over Texas, who beat them, but had a lesser loss to Texas Tech

I'm sure there are more, but that's a different argument - that's the argument between Alabama and Texas.

But back to FSU, who absolutely should have gotten in. We simply don't have enough data to take 'holistic' approaches. Because you matter how you shake it, FSU had the better resume. Again, they got screwed due to losing their QB. PERIOD. Please explain, again, how you look at their schedule above and say "hey, this isn't a playoff team".

There were 5 playoff teams last year... 4 spots. 1 had to be left out.

SEC and Big10 werent getting left out. The other resumes you could weigh however you wanted. I agree with you though, history shows it should have been texas...

However wasnt a screw job. Committee again had to pick 4 of the 5. First time since the model was brought about that there were actually 5 deserving teams.

 

[HuntDawg]

We're talking 2023, old man.

This year and beyond, yeah, it's gone. And all of this is now moot.

Im talking last year as well. The power 5 was the power 5... but again the ACC was rated closer to the sun belt than the Big10 or SEC, meaning the ACC champ was the weakest conference champion..... so even though there was still a power 5 on paper.. the ACC was the/a distant 5th, and i think the committee weighed that in.

And when splitting hairs, i can see why/how that would matter

 

[MSUDAWGFAN]

And by the way, best or not.....FSU got left out because of their QB...

First off, they didn't get left our because of their QB. That was the excuse. They got left out because they do not bring in as much money as the alternative, in this case Alabama.

But let's look at this - at the end of the regular season Alabama needed a "Prayer at Jordan Hare" to win. Keep in mind that this was the same Auburn team that lost to New Mexico. And also, FSU went to Florida and won. And let's accept the fact that it's ok to win with defense. FSU was down a key player but still found a way to win the game. That's what good teams do.

Yes, FSU should have been in, but they were left out because they don't bring in enough money.

If someone doesn't believe that, ok. Show me just one team who was left out that was a "money team" when another lower money team got in when it was close. For the record, I have heard Cincinnati, but they beat Notre Dame straight up and Notre Dame has 2 losses, so it wasn't close. Any others I should look at?

I'll save everyone the headache. There's not one.

 

[MSUDAWGFAN]

Do you think FSU would have been kept in if their QB didn’t get hurt. I do and that goes against the principle of merit based selection vs talent based.

I do not and have stated why. That was just a convenient excuse. Alabama was going to get in because they bring in more money.

FSU belonged. Alabama didn't.

 

[MSUDAWGFAN]

View attachment 636211

I'm just sayin', who da 17 looks at these results and says, "hey, they don't deserve to make the playoff".

I don't care how you define. Screwjob of the century. No they wouldn't have won it. Who cares, you reward the right teams.

Well I THINK Michigan would have still won, but that's the thing. We don't know and now we never will. We agree though that FSU belonged.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

Im talking last year as well. The power 5 was the power 5... but again the ACC was rated closer to the sun belt than the Big10 or SEC, meaning the ACC champ was the weakest conference champion..... so even though there was still a power 5 on paper.. the ACC was the/a distant 5th, and i think the committee weighed that in.

And when splitting hairs, i can see why/how that would matter

When you think too much, you start coming up with stuff like this. You're in a power conference and go undefeated with 2 big time P5 OOC wins, you should get in.

How silly would it have been for LSU to get in over West Virginia or Mizzou in 2007, had the latter two not lost on the last weekend?

How silly would it have been for Florida to get in over USC in 2006, had USC not lost on the last weekend?

How silly would it have been for Alabama to get in over Oklahoma State in 2011, had Oklahoma State not lost to Iowa State late in the year?

I could go on and on. You don't leave out Power teams with better records (especially if undefeated), unless there is a COMPELLING reason to do so.

 

[RiverCityDawg]

Easy for him to say, because his team is always the one given the benefit of the doubt. And while I agree that not all schedules are equal, if you were a Power 5 team last year and undefeated, come on mane. We simply do not have enough cross pollination to leave an undefeated team out. FSU earned it.


Again, use common sense. We're talking about Power 5 teams here. And I don't care if FSU was or wasn't better than Alabama on paper.....they earned their spot. It HAS to be about the record.

And by the way, best or not.....FSU got left out because of their QB.....which was absolute BS and throws out your theory too. So you're basically telling me now that best is defined as how you are projected to play in the future, not how you played during the season. Again I say, absolute garbage.

You must define 'best'.

Whatever team you think should have been left out in favor of FSU is as also a P5 team. A team that played a completely different schedule. How can you possibly say one was better than the other objectively when they didn't play each other or same teams?

Sorry, "best" is not objective no matter how mad you are about it.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

Whatever team you think should have been left out in favor of FSU is as also a P5 team.

A P5 team with a loss.

Sorry, "best" is not objective no matter how mad you are about it.

When are you going to define it? Because we can probably hand the trophy to Georgia or Ohio State right now, and not even play the season. We know they are the best.