The real problem with Florida State at #4

[longislandcuse]

Why? Because they're squeaking out wins in a relatively weak ACC? Will they still be one of the greatest if they lose to GT? PRESSURE!

Relatively weak compared to what? The ACC has done pretty good out of conference. We just don't have teams who start off over ranked and we have teams that can't string together wins inside the ACC to become ranked.

Lets look at the middle of the pack..

Boston College - Beat USC
Virginia - If not for turnovers outplayed UCLA
Va Tech - Beat Ohio State

Top of the League..

FSU - Undefeated
Ga Tech - Beat UGA
L'Ville - Solid team ranked in the Top 25
Clemson - Beat S. Carolina and is probably Top 10 if Watson never got injured.

Teams actually play defense in the ACC so you can't really compare our league to the PAC or Big 12. We actually performed well OOC unlike the B1G and just went 4-0 against the SEC. (Yes, the SEC is the best CFB conference, i'm not debating that).

 

[CousCuse]

Alabama beat Arkysaw by one point and needed a bad call at the end of the game to do it!

 

[SmilinBob]

Honest question: Do you really think the ACC is better than the SEC?

I don't like to compare conferences because each team brings up it's own unique pluses/minuses and along with that matchups. It isn't a conference that goes to the Final 4 it is a school/team. The annoying part of this is when people say USCe or A&M would easily win the ACC because of how tough the SEC is and that is incorrect imo. I'm a huge believer in letting the winner on the field be the judge, not perception or opinion.

That said when who gets in a playoff is done due to manipulation, then I'm annoyed. Win your conference and then go to the playoffs and not let the eyeball test or perception or any other rea$on be the judge of who gets a shot.

 

[NashvilleOrange]

I think it's a load of crap that FSU got bumped down after beating an SEC team (the committee seems to have them painted as the best conference) while FSU's top opponents beat SEC teams as well. FSU should go up to 1 or 2 if they beat GT by 2+ TDs; they won't win by that much and even if they do I bet they only move up to 3. Can we have the BCS rankings back?

 

[SmilinBob]

One analyst brought up an interesting point. Will this get FSU to think about joining the SEC since being undefeated in the ACC means so little? Now, not so much that this would happen but to discredit the ACC yet once again. I despise this lobbing crap part that is college football.

 

[Finwad32]

It's hard for me to concede the SEC's so much better than the ACC this season. what's the ACC Conference's record vs. the SEC? That's really all we can judge it off of IMO.

In terms of what FSU is doing and where they rank amongst the greatest teams of all time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longest_NCAA_Division_I_football_winning_streaks

In the modern era, (25 years) only USC, Miami and the early 90's Alabama teams have been in the same ballpark. Winning is winning is winning. You know who's not on this list? Oregon and all their shiny scores and domination. You know who else is not on the list? Any of Nick Saban's teams.

Pure and simple, Kannel's assumption hit it on the head. FSU is being judged on a whole nother level.

 

[Fjoinkay]

One analyst brought up an interesting point. Will this get FSU to think about joining the SEC since being undefeated in the ACC means so little? Now, not so much that this would happen but to discredit the ACC yet once again. I despise this lobbing crap part that is college football.

Imho, only if FSU was already leaning in that direction. Otherwise, I doubt that this ranking would influence FSU to join the SEC. If FSU beats Georgia Tech they are in, and they probably move back up into the top 3. If FSU loses to Georgia Tech, they probably drop out of the top 4, and in that scenario I think just about everyone would agree that playing this season in the SEC would have been too challenging for this FSU team to make to the playoff anyway.

 

[HOFCeluck]

Relatively weak compared to what? The ACC has done pretty good out of conference. We just don't have teams who start off over ranked and we have teams that can't string together wins inside the ACC to become ranked.

Lets look at the middle of the pack..

Boston College - Beat USC
Virginia - If not for turnovers outplayed UCLA
Va Tech - Beat Ohio State

Top of the League..

FSU - Undefeated
Ga Tech - Beat UGA
L'Ville - Solid team ranked in the Top 25
Clemson - Beat S. Carolina and is probably Top 10 if Watson never got injured.

Teams actually play defense in the ACC so you can't really compare our league to the PAC or Big 12. We actually performed well OOC unlike the B1G and just went 4-0 against the SEC. (Yes, the SEC is the best CFB conference, i'm not debating that).

Are you really trying to use Virginia Tech to try to prop up some argument that the ACC is strong?

 

[NKR1978]

Are you really trying to use Virginia Tech to try to prop up some argument that the ACC is strong?

They did walk out of Columbus with a win. The ACC has big out of conference wins. Does the B1G?

 

[Orangepace]

Honestly as long as hey finish top 4 it really doesn't matter except for he color of their jersey.

However, putting Florida State at 4 sends he chilling effect that margin of victory and game control matter more than just winning games. You play to win the game not dominate the game. The committee may not like the ACC like the SEC or PAC-12 but FSU has played 11 of 12 games against P5 competition and yet because all they do is win they dinged. If Syracuse magically went undefeated they would barely be top 4 if all they did was win and not dominate.

I get FSU hasn't looked great and could have lost 5 games but Bama barely beat LSU/Arkansas/Miss state and trailed Auburn a great deal and they don't get scrutinized like FSU.

It is bad precedent.

Their rankings this week lead me to believe the committee is trying to stack the playoffs so they will be more competitive. The issue with having FSU as a 2 or 3 seed is that Bama would have to play against TCU. Bama would crush TCU. The only team that may be able to compete with Bama on a talent level is FSU, so I think the committee tried to stack the deck to get the most competition out of the semi-final games.

Btw... I'm appalled that they put FSU as the 4 seed considering they're the only undefeated in the country. It's like they are looking at the ACC as the 5th best conference in the NCAA. The thought that a 1 loss B12 team is ranked above an undefeated and defending national champion is disgusting.

 

[Alsacs]

It is a joke and honestly I wouldn't be surpised if a couple members of the committee are dinging FSU for their conferences best interest. Mike Tranghese didn't vote last week and this week comes back and votes. Tranghese hates the ACC for destroying the Big East.

It doesn't matter because being in the top 4 is that matters, but I can't see how being undefeated matters so little to committee. FSU is getting each team's best shot and while they aren't dominating they are winning. Winning is that all that should matter if you are undefeated.

TCU has 10 wins and Florida State has 12 wins. Florida State has beaten 11 teams P5 conferences, TCU has beaten 10 P5 teams.
TCU's close games Kansas and @West Virginia are not held against them like FSU's close games against @Miami, Boston College, Florida are held against them.

TCU lost the most difficult game on their schedule but beating Kansas State and Oklahoma moved them over Florida State who beat #19 without Jameis Winston, #21 on the road.


TCU best road win is at 5 loss WVU. This committee is saying if your undefeated and aren't in game control it matters less.
FSU should be #2 at worst. Oregon lost at home and barely won @Washington State. The SOR is just wrong. Alabama could likely lose to Mizzou and still be top 4 I bet.

 

[HOFCeluck]

It is a joke and honestly I wouldn't be surpised if a couple members of the committee are dinging FSU for their conferences best interest. Mike Tranghese didn't vote last week and this week comes back and votes. Tranghese hates the ACC for destroying the Big East.

It doesn't matter because being in the top 4 is that matters, but I can't see how being undefeated matters so little to committee. FSU is getting each team's best shot and while they aren't dominating they are winning. Winning is that all that should matter if you are undefeated.

TCU has 10 wins and Florida State has 12 wins. Florida State has beaten 11 teams P5 conferences, TCU has beaten 10 P5 teams.
TCU's close games Kansas and @West Virginia are not held against them like FSU's close games against @Miami, Boston College, Florida are held against them.

TCU lost the most difficult game on their schedule but beating Kansas State and Oklahoma moved them over Florida State who beat #19 without Jameis Winston, #21 on the road.


TCU best road win is at 5 loss WVU. This committee is saying if your undefeated and aren't in game control it matters less.
FSU should be #2 at worst. Oregon lost at home and barely won @Washington State. The SOR is just wrong. Alabama could likely lose to Mizzou and still be top 4 I bet.

Oregon looks better, has better wins, and plays in a tougher conference. They have one loss, but if Florida State played Oregon's schedule, I wager theyd have at least one loss too. I have no problem with it.

I get that we have to rally around Florida State because rah rah conference rah rah but they just don't pass the eye test to me. Obviously they deserve to be in the playoff, but I'd have them 3 or 4.

 

[Chip]

Why do people keep mentioning their the defending national champs? Last year shouldn't have any bearing on this one. At all.

But it does. Last year FSU destroyed everyone. And they are being held to that standard by the committee.

If they were a 10 win team last year who won the Orange Bowl or Chick Fil A bowl, they'd be #1 right now.

I also think there's some anti-Jameis bias.

 

[longislandcuse]

Their rankings this week lead me to believe the committee is trying to stack the playoffs so they will be more competitive. The issue with having FSU as a 2 or 3 seed is that Bama would have to play against TCU. Bama would crush TCU. The only team that may be able to compete with Bama on a talent level is FSU, so I think the committee tried to stack the deck to get the most competition out of the semi-final games.

Btw... I'm appalled that they put FSU as the 4 seed considering they're the only undefeated in the country. It's like they are looking at the ACC as the 5th best conference in the NCAA. The thought that a 1 loss B12 team is ranked above an undefeated and defending national champion is disgusting.

Wouldnt they want a more competitive Championship Game? Bama would crush Oregon too. FSU/Bama Championship Game would be a ratings explosion.

 

[Alsacs]

Oregon looks better, has better wins, and plays in a tougher conference. They have one loss, but if Florida State played Oregon's schedule, I wager theyd have at least one loss too. I have no problem with it.

I get that we have to rally around Florida State because rah rah conference rah rah but they just don't pass the eye test to me. Obviously they deserve to be in the playoff, but I'd have them 3 or 4.

Oregon lost at home. They beat Sparty, @UCLA(who lost 3 home games), @Utah(after the dumb TD would have put them down 0-14), and Pac-12 North which stunk this year.

Eyeball test all you want but they lost a home game at night and barely beat Washington State on the road.

If things are equal you should apply subjective criteria like the eye test, but Florida State plated 3 P5 teams in the non-conference, and won all 12 games.

This committee is using a complete different standard. How the did Wichita State get a 1 seed in the basketball tournament if they beat a bunch of tomato cans. Florida State beat #19 without their QB, won @ #21 by 11 points. However, beating Florida and Miami close in rivalry games and barely beating a bowl team BC which beat USC which beat Arizona which beat Oregon isn't factored in.

Florida State is getting screwed by a couple of committee members who probably don't even have them in their top 4. I am looking at you Mike Tranghese, Oliver Luck etc. Who have agendas against the ACC for the Big East crap.

 

[HOFCeluck]

Oregon lost at home. They beat Sparty, @UCLA(who lost 3 home games), @Utah(after the dumb TD would have put them down 0-14), and Pac-12 North which stunk this year.

Eyeball test all you want but they lost a home game at night and barely beat Washington State on the road.

If things are equal you should apply subjective criteria like the eye test, but Florida State plated 3 P5 teams in the non-conference, and won all 12 games.

This committee is using a complete different standard. How the did Wichita State get a 1 seed in the basketball tournament if they beat a bunch of tomato cans. Florida State beat #19 without their QB, won @ #21 by 11 points. However, beating Florida and Miami close in rivalry games and barely beating a bowl team BC which beat USC which beat Arizona which beat Oregon isn't factored in.

Florida State is getting screwed by a couple of committee members who probably don't even have them in their top 4. I am looking at you Mike Tranghese, Oliver Luck etc. Who have agendas against the ACC for the Big East crap.

Oregon has more top 25 wins than FSU, and better ones. They beat 8,15, and 23. FSU beat 19 and 21. How Oregon do they do in their "rivalry game?"

I like the use of fourth degree transitive property to support your argument, though.

 

[4the Dubs]

Oregon looks better, has better wins, and plays in a tougher conference. They have one loss, but if Florida State played Oregon's schedule, I wager theyd have at least one loss too. I have no problem with it.

I get that we have to rally around Florida State because rah rah conference rah rah but they just don't pass the eye test to me. Obviously they deserve to be in the playoff, but I'd have them 3 or 4.

Games are supposed to be about wins and losses. If there is a tie I could see factoring in score differential. The bottom line is they play 4the dubs. Using words like "if" and phrases like "I bet" followed by playing anyone other schedule is the reason why college sports are unfair. It's a dirty, filthy game guided by special interests and talking heads who have something to gain by their team being a front runner. I'll bet this entire circle jerk committee is approaching it with the "if" and "I bet". Florida State has not lost a game since November 24, 2012 and they are a major program. They aren't Boise State who lived off the merit of winning a bunch of games year after year against nobody teams. It's ridiculous that Florida State isn't ranked number 1 right now and I HATE Florida State.

 

[longislandcuse]

Oregon has more top 25 wins than FSU, and better ones. They beat 8,15, and 23. FSU beat 19 and 21. How Oregon do they do in their "rivalry game?"

I like the use of fourth degree transitive property to support your argument, though.

Oregon State has NOWHERE near the talent Miami or Florida has. Florida was actually ranked in ESPN's top 25 power index before they played FSU.

 

[HOFCeluck]

Oregon State has NOWHERE near the talent Miami or Florida has. Florida was actually ranked in ESPN's top 25 power index before they played FSU.

Don't look at me. I didn't try to apologize for FSU struggling against mediocre UF and Miami squads because they were rivalry games.

 

[HOFCeluck]

The funny thing is that if we had a CFB playoff a couple years ago, when we were in the Big East and HATED the ACC, the narrative would be ENTIRELY different. Not that that would be right or anything, just an observation.

 

[Orangepace]

Wouldnt they want a more competitive Championship Game? Bama would crush Oregon too. FSU/Bama Championship Game would be a ratings explosion.

Typically, I would agree with you that the best game should be the NC game. However, this is year 1 of the FBS playoff and politicking alone will have an impact as they try to "validate" the rationality behind a playoff system, or even letting the #3 and #4 team compete for the NC. The only difference between the new system and old is the additional of a semi-final round before the NC. If the semi-final games are blowouts or completely one-sided, the rationality of a playoff comes into question. It would be better politically for the semi-finals to be tough/close games and the NC to be a blowout than it would for the Semi's to be blowouts and the NC to be close. A blowout in the NC game would leave everyone with the thought, "well that team was clearly the best." Easier to pallette that in the first year than people saying, "why play the semi's if the #3 and #4 teams really couldn't compete anyway?!" No?

 

[Indytarheel]

Are you really trying to use Virginia Tech to try to prop up some argument that the ACC is strong?

Sorry, it is no different than the SEC trying to use an obviously over ranked USCe and Texas A&M to boast their teams into high rankings. "Game Control" really. So, Game Outcome is less important now. And if you are applying that silly metric, apply it equally. TCU struggled to beat a lowly Kansas team. Bama struggled to be a lowly Arkansas team who haven't beaten an SEC team in almost two years. Oregon plays in the PAC12 north which is weaker than the ACC coastal. Double standard much?

 

[TheCusian]

Why do people keep mentioning their the defending national champs? Last year shouldn't have any bearing on this one. At all.

If the SEC teams get to carry their "reputation" over from one year to the next, why wouldn't FSU? They haven't lost in nearly two years.

 

[HOFCeluck]

If the SEC teams get to carry their "reputation" over from one year to the next, why wouldn't FSU? They haven't lost in nearly two years.

They shouldn't.

 

[TheCusian]

In terms of who goes to the playoff? No it shouldn't. But Alabama has looked better playing in a better conference this year than the ACC.

How do we know they are the better conference this season?