That would be way more justifiable than what they did. Still BS, but not as bad
***2023-24 College Football Thread***
- Thread starter Jer
- Start date
Live sporting events are one of the few truly valuable advertising opportunities left for companies......the money wouldn't go anywhere. Imagine the bidding war between ESPN and Fox for exclusive broadcast rights for a 32 team college football league, where if you don't win that TV contract the best game you broadcast on any of your networks for the next 7 years is Iowa State/K-State, or Virginia/Virginia Tech, or some other rivalry game bewteen any of the leftover teams.
It's one of the reasons these conferences have expanded so aggressively: more games fill more timeslots with more commercial breaks and more sponsorships.
Thanks. I think he would give whatever the "right" answer is. If all the metrics would should that the Big 10 should be left out, I think he would say the Big 10 should be left out.
Do I think that's actually what he would say if Iowa was 13-0? Probably not because I think ESPN and the college football playoff cares more about the Big 10 than Florida State being a big brand. But no one can prove that so there's no reason for him to say anything other than the most popular answer.
Why? Texas, a one loss conference champion, winning in dominant fashion, huge brand, huge following, heading ton the SEC...
and Jordan Travis, still injured.
Nothing in the committee's stated "logic" would have changed.
They simply would have said Texas has looked more impressive down the stretch, that FSU was not the same team and that they doubted Florida State had the ability to win a national title.
That's why it's less about Bama and more about Texas.
The SEC was ALWAYS getting one team in. The question was whether or not it was going to be 1 or 2. They were NEVER getting left out.
So that removes it from being about Alabama.
Washington winning and Michigan winning makes them locks.
Which leaves... Texas.
Florida State needed Okie State. Okie State laid an egg.
13th data point was incredibly important compared to 12 one season then in another year 6 data points was just as good as 11 or 12.
They even had the gaul to say "well there's nothing they can do about only playing 6 games". As if the 12 game team they rejected had it within their power to play 13. That's fixing things right out in the open.
Most scripted sports entertainment set of circumstances possible.
This is a really good lesson but everyone is missing the REAL lesson. The real lesson is that no matter how hard you try, no matter how great of a play you made, there’s always the next play in which all that effort didn’t mean jack **** because you got ran over on the next play by people that are bigger, badder, and richer than you are.
I 100% agree with your bolded point about the SEC always getting a team in. But, since they decided Bama was the more worthy rep from that conference, they couldn't put in Bama without also putting in Texas. Yeah, if OSU took care of business in Arlington it would have been easy to leave UT out, but I still think they'd be left out in favor of FSU if they didn't have that win over Bama. That forced the committee to include them. That one game was way more valuable than their win over Okie State.
I only disagree because a 2 loss, non champion Texas doesn't get in.
Texas winning and winning the WAY it did - sealed FSU's fate.
FSU might have been hanging on by a thread - but IMO when Texas murdered Okie State, it was curtains. I could be right, I could be wrong, we'll never know.
What we do know is the system is rigged, it sucks and its largely about brand and money
Florida State got f**ked. Period.
KidSilverhair
Well-Known Member
I can see the committee reaction today being, “hey, we wanted to put in both Alabama and Georgia, but we decided not to do that. Why are we still getting ripped for ‘SEC bias’ when they obviously have two of the ‘best’ four teams. You should be giving us credit for screwing the SEC this year! Why are you all still mad?”
Pretty much. They knew what they were doing
They literally ran out the ACC guy to explain the decision
Another lesson is being intentionally bad on offense creates a ceiling on a football team’s potential where they can shut down an opponent’s offense all game yet lose by 26.
Your play of the game is a guy that got juked out of his shoes and had to run down a returner that just went like 70 yards to set up a first and goal because your vaunted Special Teams isn’t that special. So wow.
Regardless of the selection, this should be investigated. Did the results get leaked and people placed wagers? Can we just put the SEC (the other one) in charge of this and they treat gambling like investments? In the end, they’re basically the same thing and insider trading laws should apply.
Kirk told Iowa’s radio guys at half they only made two mistakes all half, on d and special teams. No offense mistakes, that’s his mistake free perfect execution offense in first half.
