🏈 SDC NCAA NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP THREAD: TCU vs. GEORGIA 🏈

[WETSU]

7 minutes ago, JustAFan11 said:

Couldn’t agree more. TCU had a great year and earned their way into this game but the talent is not the same. 
 

Win the more talented team is executing at that level, no one is beating them. 

All the respect for the grit tcu showed this year, but this team couldn’t have beat Georgia if they played 10 times. 

[DAWG91]

At least Horn Frogs won't be wondering "what if?"

[WinstonsStolenCrabLegs]

2 hours ago, JohnnyFootball said:

Sooooo this is why the big XII gets no respect. 

Get a win vs a sun belt team at home. 

[Coach Rab]

TCU earned their spot in this game.  But 80% of Georgia’s roster is 4-5*s… TCU is probably around 20%.  
 

Talent will almost always win out when the gap is that wide.

[Valhalla]

Just now, MavGrad99 said:

TCU earned their spot in this game.  But 80% of Georgia’s roster is 4-5*s… TCU is probably around 20%.  
 

Talent will almost always win out when the gap is that wide.

A team like TCU can win one game in a playoff. They will never win the whole thing.

It will always be teams that have the highest BCR that actually win it.

[Coach Rab]

4 minutes ago, Valhalla said:

A team like TCU can win one game in a playoff. They will never win the whole thing.

It will always be teams that have the highest BCR that actually win it.

Ohio St and Michigan etc can match Georgia in talent.  TCU can't... at least not yet.  I doubt they ever will.  For whatever reason, despite recent history, players still think Texas and Texas A&M are better football programs.

[Lobo97]

1 hour ago, Valhalla said:

A team like TCU can win one game in a playoff. They will never win the whole thing.

It will always be teams that have the highest BCR that actually win it.

Prior to the Final 4 being announced, you didn’t think they’d make the playoff at all either.

[Mr. P]

2 hours ago, Valhalla said:

A team like TCU can win one game in a playoff. They will never win the whole thing.

It will always be teams that have the highest BCR that actually win it.

Anyone know the team with the lowest BCR in modern history to win a natty, even a mythical one? 

[Valhalla]

14 minutes ago, Mr. P said:

Anyone know the team with the lowest BCR in modern history to win a natty, even a mythical one? 

My guess is 2000 Oklahoma or 2010 Auburn.

I am counting from 1998 to now.

Edited January 10, 2023 by Valhalla

[JohnnyFootball]

4 hours ago, Lobo97 said:

Prior to the Final 4 being announced, you didn’t think they’d make the playoff at all either.

And let’s face it. They shouldn’t have. 

[Coach Rab]

[WETSU]

9 hours ago, Mr. P said:

Anyone know the team with the lowest BCR in modern history to win a natty, even a mythical one? 

I think I ran the numbers on this one time and 2010 Auburn was the only team since 2000 that did not have a 4 year average of a top 5 class. You either have to have it, or you have to have a cam Newton type talent at QB capable of winning with just top 10 level talent. 
 

It’s why you’ll continue to see the emphasis be on recruiting and not coaching. If coaching won titles Mike Gundy and Matt Rhule would be two of the best coaches of all time. But neither will ever recruit at the level needed to win a natty. 

[Lobo97]

16 hours ago, JohnnyFootball said:

And let’s face it. They shouldn’t have. 

Regardless of what happened Monday night, they absolutely should have been there. 
 

They didn’t ‘luck’ their way into the NC. They had to earn that by beating the undefeated #2 team, which they did. 

[JohnnyFootball]

1 hour ago, Lobo97 said:

Regardless of what happened Monday night, they absolutely should have been there. 
 

They didn’t ‘luck’ their way into the NC. They had to earn that by beating the undefeated #2 team, which they did. 

They shouldn't have even been in the playoffs if you ask me, but that's another discussion.

I guess the point I'm getting at is that the committee needs to be far more transparent in the selection process. Cause it seems like they're just making it up as they go along. And it changes year to year. 

[JohnnyFootball]

On 1/10/2023 at 10:23 AM, MavGrad99 said:

For whatever reason, despite recent history, players still think Texas and Texas A&M are better football programs.

What's recent history to you? Their last 5 years look like this:

13-2

5-7

6-4

5-7

7-6

This year, to their credit, they put it all together and came up big in like 6 of their 13 wins. And they took advantage of the handful of Michigan mistakes. But when they played an elite team, they got played out of the building. 

[Lobo97]

45 minutes ago, JohnnyFootball said:

They shouldn't have even been in the playoffs if you ask me, but that's another discussion.

I guess the point I'm getting at is that the committee needs to be far more transparent in the selection process. Cause it seems like they're just making it up as they go along. And it changes year to year. 

So who do you think should’ve been in over them?

2 loss Alabama, that should’ve had a 3rd at Texas, and possibly a 4th against A&M?

Tennessee, who had just recently lost by 25 to S Carolina?

With the way this season played out, and there not being anyone outside of Georgia and Michigan that were clearly deserving, there simply wasn’t anyone else that should’ve been in over them. 
 

I completely agree that they need to be more transparent with the selection process. This is why I believe there should be stipulations in place that determine who makes it, and seeding, such as conference winners and rankings. 

[JohnnyFootball]

11 minutes ago, Lobo97 said:

So who do you think should’ve been in over them?

2 loss Alabama, that should’ve had a 3rd at Texas, and possibly a 4th against A&M?

If we're getting into "should've had more losses", then TCU should've had several more as well. 

Alabama played a tougher schedule than TCU and barely had a worse record (2 super close losses on the road to top 10 teams). Are UCF 2017 national champions to you? They were the only undefeated team, after all... I doubt we're going to come to an agreement on this. 

11 minutes ago, Lobo97 said:

Tennessee, who had just recently lost by 25 to S Carolina?

With the way this season played out, and there not being anyone outside of Georgia and Michigan that were clearly deserving, there simply wasn’t anyone else that should’ve been in over them. 

I completely agree that they need to be more transparent with the selection process. This is why I believe there should be stipulations in place that determine who makes it, and seeding, such as conference winners and rankings. 

Not Tennessee lol. I do agree that Georgia and Michigan were the only 2 deserving teams. I even give Ohio State a pass, as their one loss was to that Michigan team. 

I will say in looking stuff up, I didn't realize how strong a team KSU was this year. If they hadn't lost to Texas (which was a big win for Texas), I'd have even argued for putting them in.

[Lobo97]

4 minutes ago, JohnnyFootball said:

If we're getting into "should've had more losses", then TCU should've had several more as well. 

Alabama played a tougher schedule than TCU and barely had a worse record (2 super close losses on the road to top 10 teams). Are UCF 2017 national champions to you? They were the only undefeated team, after all... I doubt we're going to come to an agreement on this. 

Not Tennessee lol. I do agree that Georgia and Michigan were the only 2 deserving teams. I even give Ohio State a pass, as their one loss was to that Michigan team. 

I will say in looking stuff up, I didn't realize how strong a team KSU was this year. If they hadn't lost to Texas (which was a big win for Texas), I'd have even argued for putting them in.

No, UCF is not the 2017 NC’s. I’m not one of those, lol. I do believe, however, that they should’ve been in the playoff. 

[JohnnyFootball]

2 minutes ago, Lobo97 said:

No, UCF is not the 2017 NC’s. I’m not one of those, lol. I do believe, however, that they should’ve been in the playoff. 

I don't disagree. If a team handles their business, they should be given a chance at the very least. 

Have said for a while, my ideal playoff is 8 teams. The 5 P5 champions are included, if a G5 team is undefeated, they get an automatic bid, and then go from there. If a team is "left out", they didn't take care of their business at that point. 

[PelvisPresley]

3 hours ago, JohnnyFootball said:

They shouldn't have even been in the playoffs if you ask me, but that's another discussion.

I guess the point I'm getting at is that the committee needs to be far more transparent in the selection process. Cause it seems like they're just making it up as they go along. And it changes year to year. 

SOUTH DAKOTA STATE was the clear NATIONAL CHAMPION!!! 

[WETSU]

The thing that the committee needs to make clear is are we selecting the 4 best teams or the 4 most deserving teams. Tcu had a resume worthy of the top 4 when comparing it to the teams that were the first 3-4 left out. But I do not believe tcu was a better team than the 3-4 that were left out. I think Tennessee and Bama are better football teams than TCU. But they were not more deserving because they had losses they shouldn’t have had. 
 

So it all boils down to best vs most deserving. The committee chooses differently every year. They also ignore injuries some years and factor them in others.  There’s just absolutely no consistency. 

[JohnnyFootball]

30 minutes ago, WETSU said:

The thing that the committee needs to make clear is are we selecting the 4 best teams or the 4 most deserving teams. Tcu had a resume worthy of the top 4 when comparing it to the teams that were the first 3-4 left out. But I do not believe tcu was a better team than the 3-4 that were left out. I think Tennessee and Bama are better football teams than TCU. But they were not more deserving because they had losses they shouldn’t have had. 
 

So it all boils down to best vs most deserving. The committee chooses differently every year. They also ignore injuries some years and factor them in others.  There’s just absolutely no consistency. 

This is a good post and what I was trying to say. TCU wasn't better than Alabama but WERE more "deserving". 

Edited January 11, 2023 by JohnnyFootball

[Mr. P]

Refresh my memory...  exactly how is this better than the BCS?

Not being snarky. Sincerely curious. 

[WETSU]

1 hour ago, Mr. P said:

Refresh my memory...  exactly how is this better than the BCS?

Not being snarky. Sincerely curious. 

It’s not. At least with the bcs there were legitimate numbers involved and a formula that was fair to every team. 
 

The 4 team playoffs was supposed to just be a way to guarantee that 3rd team didn’t get left out. Instead what it did was create so much doubt and bias in the system that college football as a whole is ready to implode and form something different entirely. 

[WETSU]

The playoffs does not have to be 12 teams with every conference champ plus at large. Use a computer formula that factors in 3 things in a weighted formula. 
1. points per drive offensively. 
2. Points per drive defensively. 
3. An in depth SOS formula that factors your schedule plus the schedules of the teams on your schedule. 
 

The top 4 teams in that formula make the playoffs. That is how you select the 4 BEST teams.  You use real analytics. This would also prevent teams from playing meaningless games because they will need to constantly be trying to improve sos while also making sure they bring their A game every week or else risk losing ground in the points per drive metrics. The points per drive metrics are the best Way to gauge a team imo.