Andy

All these things, plus Miss St or LSU needs to beat Alabama, and it would help if Missouri beat the SEC West champ in Atlanta as well. Navy game feels meaningless. Nothing ND does will change the fact that the Big 12 champ looks mostly assured of a playoff spot after TCU won today, nor will it change the fact that Stanford's gonna lose its fourth game tonight.

I think that's Beth Mowins.

Maryland got an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty on the coin toss because their captains refused to shake hands with Penn State's.

Oakland generally has big and good playoff crowds as well (and the small crowds that do show up in the regular season are awesome), and they play in a dumpy football stadium. A bad stadium is no excuse.

I referenced when he said something. I wasn't comparing the two.

I get that they have a rapist at QB but what is it about the rest of the team? They don't seem any worse than the typical elite college team. Their starting RB beat his pregnant girlfriend, and their coach said with a straight face after they beat ND that their program is about class and integrity. Which is worse than ND how? I was explaining why one might find FSU loathsome. Anyone is free to find ND loathsome if they want, but the post I was replying to didn't mention them, so I don't really see the need to shoehorn them into the discussion.

I get that they have a rapist at QB but what is it about the rest of the team? They don't seem any worse than the typical elite college team. Their starting RB beat his pregnant girlfriend, and their coach said with a straight face after they beat ND that their program is about class and integrity.

I originally thought I should want FSU to win tonight, but the committee made it pretty clear they don't give a rip about "quality of loss", as far as such a thing can exist, so I'm thinking a Louisville win would be better for ND so they could shoot up the rankings prior to the 11/22 game.

He does in my book.

I can't believe Bumgarner. This is literally unprecedented. Over twice as long as any other SP with 2 other WS starts in a Game 7 bullpen outing.

Citation needed here. Sure a couple teams will probably be more assured of their playoff spot in the last week or two, but if anything there's far more teams gunning for #8 in November than there will be teams gunning for #4. Also, the 'mulligans' you're referring to are basically 'the right to play one of the best couple teams in the country in the 1st round of the playoffs, possibly on the road'. More does not always equal better, and the tension will be lessened by the #12 team or whatever still being alive even after at least 2 losses in mid-November. If you can lose twice and still be very much alive, the week-to-week tension plummets. Self-replying here - for instance, the ND/FSU game two weeks ago, while fun, wouldn't have near the meaning in an 8-team system. Both would easily be able to make it to the playoff. In the current system, ND, now having lost the game, is by no means a lock to get in even if they win out, especially since their schedule looks far less overwhelming than it did in July. The entire SEC West season would be different because any team could lose twice and still easily pick up enough quality wins to get an at-large bid. Hell, even as it is, 2 losses might still win the SEC West and therefore give the champ a shot at playing their way in. Both ND and FSU can pretty easily still make the playoff in the current format. I mean, there's 4 SEC teams alone in front of ND with like 4-5 games against each other, TCU plays K-State, etc. If your premise were true then no one would care about conference tournaments in basketball season, but those continue to be very popular. The same logic applies, more teams have at least an outside shot at a playoff berth so people tune in to see if it comes to fruition, and teams that are more assured of their spot still have seeding to play for. If anything this is even more significant in the football playoff, because even if a team is a 'lock' the season is short enough that they could stumble into a game where they're a potential underdog or even playing the best/near best team in the country. If the season ended on Saturday in an 8 team playoff, do you think Ole Miss/Auburn would be a pointless affair? No, even if both were guaranteed a spot(they wouldn't, your certainty about locks before championship week is exaggerated), they'd desperately want to win to avoid having to play Florida State/Miss State in round 1. All your points have some degree of merit, frankly. I think I might just be an old man on this topic.

Not gonna lie, this is kind of exciting.

'Almost certainly' might be a stretch as there is any number of scenarios that could end with multiple SEC West teams tied with 2 losses for the division - and given the committee's initial rankings, it looks like the loser will still have plenty of chances to pick up quality wins. But it should affect the playoff picture as much as any game before it.

Citation needed here. Sure a couple teams will probably be more assured of their playoff spot in the last week or two, but if anything there's far more teams gunning for #8 in November than there will be teams gunning for #4. Also, the 'mulligans' you're referring to are basically 'the right to play one of the best couple teams in the country in the 1st round of the playoffs, possibly on the road'. More does not always equal better, and the tension will be lessened by the #12 team or whatever still being alive even after at least 2 losses in mid-November. If you can lose twice and still be very much alive, the week-to-week tension plummets. Self-replying here - for instance, the ND/FSU game two weeks ago, while fun, wouldn't have near the meaning in an 8-team system. Both would easily be able to make it to the playoff. In the current system, ND, now having lost the game, is by no means a lock to get in even if they win out, especially since their schedule looks far less overwhelming than it did in July. The entire SEC West season would be different because any team could lose twice and still easily pick up enough quality wins to get an at-large bid. Hell, even as it is, 2 losses might still win the SEC West and therefore give the champ a shot at playing their way in.

I still like the idea of an 8 team playoff where the first round is at the home stadiums of the top 4 seeds If they went to 8, I have to think this is what would happen. It's already pushing it asking fan bases to send thousands of people to two different neutral-site locations within a week and a half. Add a third and you've got problems.

Citation needed here. Sure a couple teams will probably be more assured of their playoff spot in the last week or two, but if anything there's far more teams gunning for #8 in November than there will be teams gunning for #4. Also, the 'mulligans' you're referring to are basically 'the right to play one of the best couple teams in the country in the 1st round of the playoffs, possibly on the road'. More does not always equal better, and the tension will be lessened by the #12 team or whatever still being alive even after at least 2 losses in mid-November. If you can lose twice and still be very much alive, the week-to-week tension plummets.

How is an 8 team playoff "too many games" for the FBS schools, but not the FCS schools? I know nothing about the FCS, but I'm pretty sure most of them don't play 12 games and none of them play conference championship games.

Literally every other major American sport has an overly inclusive playoff system. We can't just have one that isn't? They would never go past 8 because of the additional number of games and all that. If you don't think an 8 team College Football playoff wouldn't be fun as hell to watch, then you're a communist and hate puppies. The seven playoff games would be fun, sure. Playoff games are always fun. Would it be fun enough to make up for the loss of some of that week-to-week tension generated by the exclusivity of a small playoff? I don't think so, though obviously I'm in the minority. The idea of any contender automatically having a mulligan no matter how bad the loss is, and most SEC contenders probably having 2, plus the loss of any real reason for any power-conference fan to care what happens in any other power conference because they'd all have auto-bids for their champions, doesn't seem very much fun to me.

Literally every other major American sport has an overly inclusive playoff system. We can't just have one that isn't?

I don't think this is true at all. Mid-major teams can now shoot for a New Year's 6 bowl every year, and lower-tier Power 5 teams (Minnesota, Kentucky, Wazzu to use a few examples) still know they're not likely to make the playoff and can use a certain number of wins or even an occasional New Year's 6 bowl appearance of their own as benchmarks. I do think the further you expand the playoff, the less of that there will be.

Michigan State has no business ahead of Notre Dame. ND beat Michigan and Purdue by more and looked far better in their loss than MSU did. MSU has a better top win, but they also played an FCS team and Eastern Michigan. I'm 100% ok with ND at 10 if 11 smart people and Tyrone Willingham came to that conclusion, but I think Arizona has a better case than MSU to be ahead of them. TCU and Arizona are too low, and Oregon and Auburn are too high. That being said, none of this matters. If the committee fully re-evaluates every week and adjusts accordingly, rather than falling into a poll inertia situation, all of this is fine.

I remember Jacque Jones hitting a home run over the hill, and I feel like I remember him making a great catch up there too, but I might have someone else in mind.

Written by a Florida State grad. Who decided not to disclose that in this piece. That's not to say his points are without merit, because they aren't, but I find that suspicious.

For S's & G's, my top 4 right now would be, in order, Mississippi State, Florida State, Alabama and TCU. I feel like it's a lock that the committee top 4 will waver from the polls' top 4 in this first ranking, just to prove that they're different.