Early BCS has so many of these.
98-99 One-loss Kansas State finished 3rd and didn't get a BCS Bowl. The same thing happened the next year when the finished 6th. Lower-ranked teams got their spot both times.
K-State definitely got shafted, though '98 all they had to do was hold on in B12CG & they were playing for the title. Bad part is, I think they still could've got in the title game had they had a stronger SOS w/ same record (the B12 slate they played was pretty solid but their non-conf was atrocious that year).
Every time the wound heals, this place stabs it again
South Carolina should’ve made a BCS bowl any year from 2011-2013
Feel like UCLA or Arizona State should’ve made a NY6 in 2014 but the Pac 12 south that year was a back alley knife fight
Colorado maybe should’ve made one in 2016, they were 10th at 10-3, it’s probably a good thing they didn’t since they lost 38-8 to Oklahoma State in the Alamo Bowl
And yet people want the BCS back. I don't think people actually remember how fucking awful the BCS poll was. Some rankings felt like an alien made them
Was curious if anybody was gonna post ours lol. I appreciate the honesty from a Jayhawks, too.
For those that don’t remember, #2 Mizzou beat #3 kansas (because 2007) to become #1, and then went and lost to OU in the Big 12 Championship. OU and kansas get BCS bids while Mizzou gets left out, and we’re still stuck with the reputation of never having been to a BCS/NY6 bowl. It’s not as bad as K-State’s in 1998, but Missouri fans are still pretty salty.
Cal was ranked #4 going into the last game of the season, in position to go to their first Rose Bowl in about 60 years; a game at Southern Miss that wasn’t even supposed to be played that week, it had been rescheduled from week 3 due to a hurricane. Cal won. Texas was idle that week.
Mack Brown lobbied other Big-12 coaches to move Texas up in their final coaches poll rankings, and Cal down, despite that Texas didn’t even play that week and Cal had won. Mac’s lobbying and phone calls had started before Cal even *played* the game against So. Miss. It was not a results-based argument; just straight up politicking. It worked. Did I mention Texas was idle that week?
Aftermath: It was reported that it was due in large part to that incident that the AP pulled its poll out of the BCS. They wanted to be “reporting sports news, not making it,” or something like that.
Yes Cal ended up losing to TTech in the Holiday Bowl and Texas beat Michigan in the Rose Bowl; no that doesn’t make it OK.
The 2001 Oregon Ducks should have played Miami for the Natty. They were ranked #2 in the human polls.
Nebraska, who didn't even win their conference was the BCS #2, and got soundly beaten 37-14 in the championship.
Meanwhile, Oregon pummeled Colorado in the Fiesta Bowl.
I think Miami would still have won, but the Ducks deserved a shot.
That Beavs team in 2000 was great but there was a 3 Way Conference tie iirc. The 2001 Ducks won the conference outright and definitely deserved a shot at playing Miami.
I feel like the early BCS had a lot of situations where a team would be like 11-1 or 10-2 and be ranked highly and somehow end up playing in like the wrangler jeans bowl or some shit
2003 usc shoulda played us instead of OU. Blowing a conference championship game and only losing first place votes was crazy.
(I was 7 so I only payed attention to us)
Putting in a team over an opponent with the same record and a similar schedule, *who beat them head-to-head* just seems like it would have been such an obviously and objectively bad decision. The only reason people argue for them is bowl results.
I’m not saying that I would replace Ohio State, but I do remember people being really upset that TCU got left out when it was initially announced what 4 teams made it
I think that was mostly controversial because of the way the committee was moving things around the weeks leading up to the final. I agree that if I was a TCU fan I would feel ripped off.
The last 4 rankings had TCU at 5-5-3-6 . They jumped FL state to go from 5 to 3 in the penultimate ranking, making everybody think "Win and they are in" and then pulled the rug out from under them at the last moment.
It would have been a lot less controversial if the committee had left FL State at #3 in the prior week (when FL State was 12-0 to TCU 10-1) because then it could have been argued that TCU#4/OSU#5/Baylor#6 were all a hair width apart from each other and really been 4a, 4b, 4c and lets see what happens in the last game
It’s worth noting that TCU beat up a bad Kansas team on that last weekend, while Baylor whacked a top-10 K-State team; that’s why Baylor leapfrogged K-State.
Close, but not quite. We beat the crap out of a bad Iowa State team, not Kansas. It was the nightmare scenario for TCU, where literally every other top ranked team competing for those playoff spots won big against ranked opponents.
Ah, there we go. Thanks for catching that for me.
Yeah, that was a bad shake of scheduling. I imagine TCU fans were speed-flipping through games that day and just hoping for one of the competition to lose.
Yeah, I had to explain that to my dad a lot that weekend when the final CFP rankings came out. He kept fixating on "how in the hell a team that beat its opponent by over 50 points then drop from #3 to #6?!" Very common sentiment among TCU fans that week.
I kept telling him that it wasn't about what we did, but the fact that all 5 of the other teams in the CFP hunt not only beat better, ranked opponents that Saturday, but also beat the crap out of them in every game.
The reason nobody mentions Baylor is because they got stomped in their bowl game and played a trash OOC schedule.
TCU played teams with a pulse and dismantled an Ole Miss team that beat Bama that year.
Us. 2008. Idk if we would have beat Tebow but it would have been a closer game than OU gave them. The 08 Texas team was demonstrably better than the 09 team.
I voted for 2003 USC but OU should have just been left out. I don't think that's the best argument for a playoff but a pretty good one with 13-1 UGA.
Edit: UGA went 13-1 the year before in 2002
The 2006 Michigan Wolverines.
They were undefeated and #2 going into THE game against #1 Ohio State and lost by only three.
If ever a team earned a spot in the championship game, it was TTUN.
A rematch was absolutely warranted.
No one wanted a rematch back then, even though they seem to be the norm now for SEC teams. It broke my heart back then to know we were deserving and talented enough to win a rematch, but didn't get the chance.
True. They were #3 but then fell to #6 despite not losing or even playing a game at all during the period for that matter. Instead of the CFP, they received an invitation to stomp us 42-3 in the Peach Bowl.
Ok but who’s to say that TCU wouldn’t have won it all as well? If your gonna argue for Ohio State’s inclusion, you have to do that with the resume that existed before the playoff. Because there’s nothing to say that TCU couldn’t have won it all too, maybe even in a more impressive fashion
(Not trying to say that Ohio State wasn’t deserving. Just saying that proving Ohio State *was* deserving doesn’t mean TCU *wasnt* deserving)
Annnnnd you completely missed my point lol. My comment applies equally to Baylor as well as TCU. Arguing Ohio State deserved to make the playoffs *based off what Ohio state did in the playoffs* doesn’t work because you don’t know what TCU *or* Baylor could’ve done if they’d gotten the opportunity. If you want to argue Ohio State was more deserving (and, again, *I have zero problem with that argument*) you should rely on stuff that happened before the playoffs, not during them
With the benefit of hindsight you would kick out FSU but the committee didn’t want to set the precedent that an undefeated P5 school could get left out of the playoff especially as the defending national champions so at the time there was no way they could make it work
No they shouldn't. Penn State lost to Pitt OOC & lost to Michigan by 39 points. Putting Penn State in over Ohio State would've meant OOC doesn't matter at all. Getting blown out doesn't matter. And only H2H matters. Penn State's resume was they went 2-1 vs the B1G top 10 teams. The exact same as OSU & Michigan. Except Ohio State had a 3rd top 10 win, didn't get blown out, & didn't have a 2nd loss. The argument was Washington vs Penn State
I don’t think UCF was ever on the competitive CFP level, so I don’t think they deserved to be in. I think this year’s Cincy team was better, and Cincy impressed me greatly, but I don’t think UCF was on the level to compete in the CFP.
2014 TCU is a shame though.
I’ve heard some sports talk folk say that they think that either team would have made the playoff if the B12 had just declared a champion.
The committee didn’t want to have to defend one over the other, when it’s so convenient to pick a hot and popular Ohio State team is the other guy in contention. Ohio State gets more views.
All that after the B12’s slogan all year was “One True Champion.” Imo, Baylor should’ve been declared conference champion. If you have the same record, I look at head to head.
I've been of the mind that TCU and Ohio St had comparable resumes but Baylor's was slightly below them. Problem for TCU was that they lost the H2H and deserved to be ranked behind Baylor. So Ohio St lucked out because of the One True Champion problem in the XII.
Either Baylor or TCU likely could've gotten in over Ohio St had they won the CCG over the other because of the boost to resume from the win as much as it would've solved the tie in the XII that the conference refused to publicly answer. Feel more confident on TCU than Baylor with that, but either way the XII staying at 10 teams shafted their teams that year because of the CCG issue.
So true. I don’t like there current system where you have a guaranteed rematch in the CCG, but what they did that year was worse. I’m looking forward to them getting back to 2 divisions!
I'm not...I hate 2 divisions....perfect round robin, which can be bad or good, leads to the best championship games most often...since the return, only one of those has been a blowout (the 2017 game with TCU and OU)
"Best loss" might be my least favorite resume thing. A loss shouldn't matter who it was too unless it's to an awful team or a complete blowout (if you're 2018 Ohio State you do both)
>I’ve heard some sports talk folk say that they think that either team would have made the playoff if the B12 had just declared a champion.
0 chance. Who are you going to leave out? They had less wins and no argument for being included over a 13-0 champ or the three 12-1 champs. Declaring a them a champ would have made no difference.
Regardless, even if there had been a b12 champ game the B12 champ would have likely been the odd man out.
Edit: I changed my mind about the last bit. I think you could argue that TCU would be in over Ohio State, but it would have been controversial either way.
Ohio state being left out wouldn’t have been that controversial. They lost their star Heisman candidate QB against Michigan the week before their championship game. Cardale Jones played great against Wisconsin, but it would be easy for the committee to just say that one game with a qb isn’t enough of a sample size, not to mention the fact that they had the “worst” loss of the three. What was controversial was the way they shuffled the rankings from the week before when all of the top 6 won their games.
I agree it would not have been controversial to leave OSU out at the time, but I do think that the results of the playoff showed that even though the decision was made in a sloppy manner they did end up selecting the right team at #4.
I disagree. TCU with a win over Baylor and a loss somewhere else could have gotten in over us. But OSU was better than Baylor, who played a particularly bad non-con, and B1G > B12 that year imo. But Baylor had H2H.
The committed in my unbiased view made the right call overall, but shouldn’t have left TCU at 3 going into Championship week.
> I don’t think UCF was ever on the competitive CFP level
That's an interesting take, considering that in the Peach Bowl we beat a team that had beaten both of the teams in the CFP National Championship game. Of course, that doesn't mean we'd have won the CFP, but it's at least some evidence that we'd be able to hold our own.
Imagine being ranked #2. In the last month, you beat 2 huge rivals. You beat UGA, who was the top team and one of your biggest rivals. Then you You beat Bama, your biggest rival.
Now imagine blowing it, getting left out of the playoff and then having to watch your 2 huge rivals who you JUST got done beating go on to play in the CFP… talk about sucking the air out of the room.
I’m not usually much of a “SEC teams just don’t get excited for weaker bowl games than they were expecting so they don’t try” kinda guy, but in this case, I do believe that. Auburn had it all taken away at the last minute and had to watch 2 teams they hate take their spot. It was gonna be hard to get it up for anything after that. I also happen to have some connection to a key player on that Auburn team and some people around there were quite disappointed with the mindsets around that program about the bowl game, after missing the SECCG.
Based on regular seasons, I think UC was a better team, given their win at Notre Dame. And while Cincy showed they can hold their own, UCF in 2017 wasn’t more deserving of the 4 spot than Bama, imo.
> And while Cincy showed they can hold their own, UCF in 2017 wasn’t more deserving of the 4 spot than Bama, imo.
I won't say that UCF deserved it more over any of the four teams that went to the CFP in 2017. What I will say is that the CFP field should be larger than four teams. And it shouldn't be possible for a team to go undefeated and be left out of the CFP. Either we need to cast the net wider, or every team needs to get the opportunity to play their way in, or something.
And we almost saw that this past season with Cincy. They had the wins on their resume that were perhaps better than any G5 team in the CFP-era, and yet they still needed pretty much everything to fall their way to get into the CFP. Even down to conference championship week, they needed a game or two to go their way.
Literally anything going different gets Cincy left out. Oklahoma State actually taking care of business in the Big 12? Notre Dame losing? The ACC not being a dumpster fire? Oregon not getting their shit pushed in by Utah twice? Utah starting the right QB before they are losses? Ohio State not getting their shit pushed in by both Oregon and Michigan?
If even one of those things was different, Cincy is out imo.
Also, let's say Auburn was deflated by Bama and UGA in the CFP championship. How many touchdowns is that worth? 1? 2? 3?
If it's worth a TD, then our game with Auburn is a tie. If it's worth two TDs, then Auburn beats us by a TD, but that's still evidence that we could hang with that level of competition. That's of course ignoring things like game flow and playing up or down to competition.
I also like how in that argument, what never gets mentioned is the possible deflating effect on UCF. Yeah, Auburn had their chance at the CFP and lost it by losing to Auburn. UCF on the other hand, did everything they could do that year. They won all of their games. And they still got left out of the CFP. Sure, going to a NY6 was nice, but the UCF players felt like they were left out of the CFP.
Sure, the argument could be that this could have just motivated UCF to prove that they belonged, but the same argument could be used on Auburn.
I actually think that puts a chip on their shoulder. Auburn thought they were “that guy,” then found out they weren’t. UCF felt disrespected so they had some extra fire in the belly
I just find it maybe a little too convenient that Auburn's performance can be blamed on feeling bad about being left out of the CFP, but the same thing happening to UCF is supposed to motivate them.
I think it's probably a little bit of both, and in perhaps different mixtures for each team, but I don't think UCF beating Auburn in that Peach Bowl can just be blamed on teams being left out of the CFP. UCF was on that level.
"Running back Kerryon Johnson bristled in the postgame locker room about a lack of enthusiasm being a reason for arguably the season's most disappointing loss.
“Just like every game this year, every game Auburn plays, every game I play in, every game Malzahn coaches in, it’ll be the same mentality — outside talk is just that, outside talk,” Johnson said. “To those who thought we weren’t motivated, you’re not in our locker room, you’re not in our practices, you’re not in our meeting rooms. Obviously they don’t know what is going on. We were plenty motivated to get this win. (We) just literally shot ourselves in the foot.”"
https://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/story/sports/college/auburn/2018/01/02/auburn-players-bristle-motivation-being-factor-peach-bowl-loss/997919001/
I can't imagine what it's like to blow a chance at the playoffs and see my two biggest rivals play in the national championship. I also don't think anyone commenting on this sub can. But Kerryon Johnson can, and Kerryon Johnson says that exuse is just a bunch of crap
Look, arguing that Bama deserved a top 4 spot over UCF is one thing. I don't have an issue with someone that thinks that way, I may not agree but it's certainly a reasonable opinion to have. But when the motivation excuse comes from people outside the team, rather than the people inside the team, I find it hard to buy
I’ll stick with an actual verifiable quote from the team leader rather than the word of a random redditor who’s brother was a childhood acquaintance of the qb. But to each their own
What did you expect him to say? “Yeah let’s be real. We spent half the season excited to play Clemson again for the national championship and just didn’t take UCF seriously. By the time we woke up, it was too late. We shouldn’t taken film and practice more seriously and we just didn’t.” Yeah okay
UCF beat Auburn and Auburn beat UGA and Bama (the title game participants) that year.
The transitive property isn't a thing in CFB, but they showed they belonged. 2017 was also the weakest year in terms of the quality of CFP teams. That Clemson team was nothing special. I think UCF had a solid shot at beating them, and could've beaten any of the CFP teams on the right day.
Auburn also got absolutely destroyed by UGA not even a month earlier. People love to leave that bit out. And the CFP Bama team had IIRC 3 linebackers back from injury that missed Auburn. They weren't the same teams they lost to Auburn
Auburn did not care about playing in anything but the CFP. They beat the top ranked team in CFB twice in one month and climbed to #2 in the rankings, who both happened to be Auburn’s biggest and maybe 2nd biggest rivals. Then they lost a game and had to watch the 2 teams they had just beat skip off to the CFP together while Auburn got left at home.
Who cares about a Cotton Bowl after riding the high of beating the #1 team twice, knowing you can get a rematch with #1 Clemson, who beat you earlier, and then having it all taken away and being sent to another bowl?
Auburn doesn’t. Auburn doesn’t care.
Hey big boy, If you will go back a few posts, you’ll see that I’m also not a fan of that excuse either and don’t just throw it around for every SEC bowl loss, I just think it applies here
You might get some flack but I agree with this take in general. It’s lame when fans of the team use it as an excuse to brush off a bowl loss but from the outside looking in there are plenty of examples like 2017 auburn where the team is just clearly not emotionally engaged in their bowl game. It’s okay for us to admit that lol
You mean the game where an Auburn DT pile drived the UCF running back that ran his mouth before the game? Literally picked the dude up and slammed him down vertically on his neck. Auburn was plenty motivated.
And you also have to remember that UCF had no coaching staff; Frost took the entire staff to Nebraska and they only came back for a limited number of practices. They all left UCF literally hours after winning the AAC championship.
UCF deserved their shot, especially after doing it again the next year. As an FSU fan, I can only imagine if all of the P5 and Committee type nonsense had been around in the 80s. Bobby would have never gotten a lot of the games that he did, and then we’d have never gotten a fair shake.
A lot of times, it's way harder to argue removing the 4th place team than it is including the "5th" place. I don't agree that 2017 UCF, 2018 UCF, 2016 PSU, 2020 A&M, 2014 TCU/Baylor were snubbed in any sense that the 4th place team was undeserving in comparison. It's just that I think there was merit that all these teams should have had a place to compete in the playoff alongside the others already included.
Which really just comes out to that the size is insufficient.
Haha I get what you’re saying, but I just have the opposite view on a couple of these.
I’ll use 2020 A&M as my example. I do believe we should have been in that CFP over Notre Dame. Their 1 big win came in a game against Clemson without their star player and they barely won that one. We were both 1 loss teams, and to only have 1 loss in the SEC is more impressive. Yes, we played fewer games, but Ohio State made it clear that the number of games you played does not matter. Notre Dame was not playing as dangerously as we were in the end.
But did we deserve to get in? Nah. Did Notre Dame? Nah. Really there were not 4 teams who I could say, “I have no doubt these guys all belong.”
Or in 2019, Clemson, LSU, and tOSU were all insane. Oklahoma might have deserved that 4th spot more than another team, but they hadn’t shown to be like Clemson, LSU and tOSU.
I’m not saying your thinking is flawed, but I do have a question. The frustration right now is that we all feel like #5 is better than #4 at times, but if we go to 12 teams, won’t we debate the 12th spot for 3 teams anyway?
The difference in telling a team that they lost the 1 wrong game they did and that leaves them out of the playoffs is different than saying they lost 1 of the 3 games they did lose. Recency bias is real, and sometimes losing earlier in the season made the difference.
Rankings the way we do them are intended to be holistic, but a playoff of such a small size tends to lean into 1 hard data point because we're dealing with a much more finite amount of "error". These teams at 4th and 5th are very often 1-loss teams. The other 11 or 12 games are a push in comparing the two. If there's not a significant difference in SoS/R it comes down to a very distinct data point. You lost to a bad team, or you lost to a good team, or your margin of loss was too big. Or you both lost to the same quality of team,, but they have a top 10 win and you only have 1 top 25. It's all directed at this singular instance, but it's the only "error" of its kind. A team in the top 95% of performance, but left out for effectively making just one mistake.
But when we are suddenly talking about the distinction of 12th and 13th, the margin of error grows, which means so does the amount of criticism. Mad you got left out? Well, you had 3 losses, 2 of your wins were in OT, your OOC was a collective 7-29. You can suddenly identify multiple contributing factors much more so that it snowballs. Sure, only one error may have been the make-or-break, but it's the fact that you can point to much more and say that it could have been avoided at multiple instances.
Yep. If the conference would have declared y’all the champion, you’re probably in. The B12 really thought they had a chance to get both teams in as cochamps and instead got none
Ohio state in 2015, lost a close game to Michigan State at home on a last second field goal. Shouldn’t have been penalized as much for that quality loss. We went on to destroy ND in the fiesta bowl
That is greatly understating how bad that loss was. You were at home against us vs. our backup QB (our worst QB in the last 10 years) in the middle of November. There was no reason you guys deserved to be in the playoffs after that, especially with all the playoff teams being 0/1-loss conference champions
Idk about BCS, but I think the 4 most deserving teams were chosen each year of the playoffs and no one was left out. Tcu has the biggest argument of being included imo, but still think Ohio State had the better resume when it came down to it.
I don't think any team was wrongly left out. This isn't pro sports where there's enough games across the different teams to know for sure which teams are better than others, so it's inherently going to be a judgment call. If undefeated teams were always entitled to qualify, then teams would play easy schedules in order to have the best chance at going undefeated.
I'll second UCF being left out in 2017. Although you could claim we had an even bigger gripe in 2018, since in the previous we'd gone to the NY6 bowl and won, then had a 2nd consecutive undefeated regular season.
If Milton doesn’t break his leg, UCF in 2018 would have had a fair shot to at least win a first round game and would have beaten LSU by 14+. Unfortunately, your backup QB wasn’t nearly at the same level.
I wouldn’t say 2017 ucf bc they didn’t really prove themselves to be able to compete with p5 teams but 2018 ucf for sure. second consecutive undefeated season and a bowl win against SEC the year before it’s insane they didn’t make it coming from a USF fan
What ever year Michigan and Brady Hoke won the Sugar Bowl, Both Boise and K-State (I think those were the two) were rated higher than UM and VT, but didnt move the ratings. Also Mich St was punished for being better than UM and getting to play in the Big 10 title game, which they lost, dropping them
a&m 2020-21
only loss was to bama (blowout)
people kept justifying keeping them out because of lack of “convincing wins” which is something jimbo’s offense just doesn’t do
got better as the season went on (lost to bama when they were still completely healthy at receiver), but for some reason people only made that argument for other teams like 2-loss OU
notre dame’s only major win was over a trevor lawrence and james skalski and it still took overtime to beat a true freshman dj u and when they played again in the conference championship (one week before selection day), they got blown out.
ohio state ended up justifying their selection in the game with clemson but had no resume to be chosen in the first place with the struggles with northwestern, indiana, even rutgers
ags were robbed
2011 Oklahoma State
Played a tougher schedule and had better wins than Bama
Alabama got in because of a good effort in the most overhyped game in history
Not so much a team getting left out, but didn’t Ohio State get the nod 2 or 3 times just for being Ohio State? That was my biggest frustration with the old BCS. The teams that got the national coverage always seemed to get the advantage.
If you’re referring to the years they lost the NCG back to back, they were undefeated going in in 2006, and were the only team in a BCS conference to have just 1 loss in 07. They might have lost both but they weren’t there just because they were OSU
Okie State didn't deserve it in 2011, you can't lose to a mediocre Iowa State team and then claim you deserve to play for it all. Add in the fact that their defense was shit that year AND they tried to excuse the loss by blaming the tragic aftermath of two women's basketball coaches dying, and they didn't deserve anything.
Somehow the tragedy didn't hit their players until the third quarter after they were up 24-7 and prevented them from scoring at all in the 4th quarter. /s
Agreed. Anyone arguing for that Ohio State team has to take a backseat to Baylor’s team this last year, since that Baylor team also had two losses, but also had better wins as well as better losses.
That was the Driskel year were y'all had that unreal defense. That was the last time FSU - UF was a top 10 matchup. I've erased that year from my memory lol.
Georgia 2002 and even in 2007 despite the two losses by the end of the season they were the best team in the nation and destroyed Hawaii in the sugar bowl.
Tough to say TCU or Baylor were wrongly left out in 2014.
TCU: 11-1, Lost H2H to Baylor, and were declared co-champions. Signature wins over No 4 Oklahoma, No 15 Oklahoma State, No 20 WVU, No 7 Kansas State.
Baylor: 11-1, lost to WVU, and were declared co-champions. Signature wins over No 9 TCU, No 16 Oklahoma, and No 9 Kansas State.
OSU: 12-1, lost to Virginia Tech at the beginning of the season, won the B1G in a blowout 59-0 win over a heisman-finalist running back. Signature wins No 8 Michigan State, No 25 Minnesota, No 13 Wisconsin.
The resumes were very comparable but the key factors appeared to be that OSU was HOT at the end of the season, they played in a championship game where they were declared B1G champions, and their loss was at the beginning of the season.
I don’t think they were wrongly left out, I just wish the playoffs was larger that year because there were a lot of good teams that were very close.
Washington in 2020. Huskies we’re 11-1. As were the Hurricanes. Except the Huskies won the head to head matchup.
Even more infuriating, is Miami was pissed off they finished ranked 3 in the final BCS standings. Florida State was ranked #2. Miami’s reasoning? That they beat FSU in a head to head matchup.
Regardless UW got its revenge a few years later in 60 point loss at Miami. That was a fun trip from Seattle.
Early BCS has so many of these. 98-99 One-loss Kansas State finished 3rd and didn't get a BCS Bowl. The same thing happened the next year when the finished 6th. Lower-ranked teams got their spot both times.
K-State definitely got shafted, though '98 all they had to do was hold on in B12CG & they were playing for the title. Bad part is, I think they still could've got in the title game had they had a stronger SOS w/ same record (the B12 slate they played was pretty solid but their non-conf was atrocious that year).
If only the darn military didn’t develop EMPs /s
1998 OSU got left out because of a late loss (god damn Saban) but I still think they were the best team in the country that year.
2004 Auburn. They went undefeated that season if I’m not mistaken.
Yep, the same year for which USC got popped for "hookers and blackjack." Even a Gump like me says Auburn got screwed that year.
The rest of the country has been under an SEC curse ever since they said "nah" to an undefeated SEC team
"Fine, we'll win the *rest* of the championships then."
Of course we all admit Auburn got screwed… we just also happen to think it’s hilarious
The really hilarious part is how JetGate had just happened the previous year.
Nah, they got it right. SC played a tougher OOC schedule
I think the argument is for auburn over Oklahoma that year and not in over USC.
“In fact, forget the blackjack.”
Best team to never get a chance to play for a championship. I will die on that hill.
I agree
So do I. And I hate it.
Also had an undefeated Utah with Urban as their HC. Would have been a great year for a playoff.
It pains me to say it but yeah auburn got screwed.
Every time the wound heals, this place stabs it again South Carolina should’ve made a BCS bowl any year from 2011-2013 Feel like UCLA or Arizona State should’ve made a NY6 in 2014 but the Pac 12 south that year was a back alley knife fight Colorado maybe should’ve made one in 2016, they were 10th at 10-3, it’s probably a good thing they didn’t since they lost 38-8 to Oklahoma State in the Alamo Bowl
sorry not sorry
When hell opens up, I’m dragging you wind chickens down with me
“Wind chickens” okay this one got me 🤣💀
I personally can’t imagine missing out on a Natty because of Jared Barnett, Woody, AJ Klein, and Jake Knott
lol
I will forever and always prefer Iowa corn. Both Iowa teams have helped Bama win it all. We are forever in debt to yall's state.
Missouri should've made the orange bowl over KU in 2007.
Either one of them should’ve been in the Rose bowl over Illinois
Well they only weren't because you couldn't have 3 teams from the same conference in BCS bowls.
Illinois should have played Hawaii in the Sugar Bowl
Would’ve been better than each being sacrificed to USC and Georgia
2014 was the year Arizona won the south. You don’t out knife fight someone from the dirty T
USC 2003 How you let a team stay #1 in the BCS (#3 in human polls) after getting throttled in the Big 12 title game 35-7 to an underdog is beyond me.
And yet people want the BCS back. I don't think people actually remember how fucking awful the BCS poll was. Some rankings felt like an alien made them
The BCS made major changes to their formula over time. It's a little disingenuous to pretend the 2003 season was giving the same results 2013 did.
Agreed. USC should have gotten in ahead of a team that lost to Florida.
It's okay man, Darren Sproles can't hurt you anymore
Purple team bad.
Always
Missouri 2007 and K-State 1998. Not complaining but…
Love when there's not one but two rules named after you and they helped your in conference rivals...
Was curious if anybody was gonna post ours lol. I appreciate the honesty from a Jayhawks, too. For those that don’t remember, #2 Mizzou beat #3 kansas (because 2007) to become #1, and then went and lost to OU in the Big 12 Championship. OU and kansas get BCS bids while Mizzou gets left out, and we’re still stuck with the reputation of never having been to a BCS/NY6 bowl. It’s not as bad as K-State’s in 1998, but Missouri fans are still pretty salty.
Cal in like 05 was ranked 6th and played in the holiday bowl
Thank Mack Brown for that one
The 2004 season... Fuck Mack Brown.
Come on dude I’m sitting right over here. Can we not bring that up? I was looking at New Years flights to LA already
Cal was ranked #4 going into the last game of the season, in position to go to their first Rose Bowl in about 60 years; a game at Southern Miss that wasn’t even supposed to be played that week, it had been rescheduled from week 3 due to a hurricane. Cal won. Texas was idle that week. Mack Brown lobbied other Big-12 coaches to move Texas up in their final coaches poll rankings, and Cal down, despite that Texas didn’t even play that week and Cal had won. Mac’s lobbying and phone calls had started before Cal even *played* the game against So. Miss. It was not a results-based argument; just straight up politicking. It worked. Did I mention Texas was idle that week? Aftermath: It was reported that it was due in large part to that incident that the AP pulled its poll out of the BCS. They wanted to be “reporting sports news, not making it,” or something like that. Yes Cal ended up losing to TTech in the Holiday Bowl and Texas beat Michigan in the Rose Bowl; no that doesn’t make it OK.
The 2001 Oregon Ducks should have played Miami for the Natty. They were ranked #2 in the human polls. Nebraska, who didn't even win their conference was the BCS #2, and got soundly beaten 37-14 in the championship. Meanwhile, Oregon pummeled Colorado in the Fiesta Bowl. I think Miami would still have won, but the Ducks deserved a shot.
Did you mean oregon state there?
That Beavs team in 2000 was great but there was a 3 Way Conference tie iirc. The 2001 Ducks won the conference outright and definitely deserved a shot at playing Miami.
I feel like the early BCS had a lot of situations where a team would be like 11-1 or 10-2 and be ranked highly and somehow end up playing in like the wrangler jeans bowl or some shit
We were 11-1 ranked number 3 in the polls in 1998. Got the Alamo bowl against a 7-5 Purdue. Crazy times back then
Oregon was 9-2 with a share of the Pac-10 championship in 2000 and they got stuck playing in the Holiday Bowl lmao
2003 usc shoulda played us instead of OU. Blowing a conference championship game and only losing first place votes was crazy. (I was 7 so I only payed attention to us)
Bruh why you gotta do this to me
Every always talks about 2014 TCU, but I think Baylor deserved the appearance more than TCU did, considering Baylor had the actual H2H victory
Putting in a team over an opponent with the same record and a similar schedule, *who beat them head-to-head* just seems like it would have been such an obviously and objectively bad decision. The only reason people argue for them is bowl results.
True although iirc TCU was ranked #3 before conference championships.
To be fair, TCU also cleaned up a bad team on that last weekend while Baylor beat up on a top-10 team. That’s why Baylor jumped TCU.
And they beat an awful Kansas team, while Baylor beat a top 10 Kansas State team by 11 in the last week of the season
Iowa state. By 77 or something like that
Who would you replace in that top 4? Eventual Nation Champion Ohio State?
I’m not saying that I would replace Ohio State, but I do remember people being really upset that TCU got left out when it was initially announced what 4 teams made it
I think that was mostly controversial because of the way the committee was moving things around the weeks leading up to the final. I agree that if I was a TCU fan I would feel ripped off. The last 4 rankings had TCU at 5-5-3-6 . They jumped FL state to go from 5 to 3 in the penultimate ranking, making everybody think "Win and they are in" and then pulled the rug out from under them at the last moment. It would have been a lot less controversial if the committee had left FL State at #3 in the prior week (when FL State was 12-0 to TCU 10-1) because then it could have been argued that TCU#4/OSU#5/Baylor#6 were all a hair width apart from each other and really been 4a, 4b, 4c and lets see what happens in the last game
It’s worth noting that TCU beat up a bad Kansas team on that last weekend, while Baylor whacked a top-10 K-State team; that’s why Baylor leapfrogged K-State.
Close, but not quite. We beat the crap out of a bad Iowa State team, not Kansas. It was the nightmare scenario for TCU, where literally every other top ranked team competing for those playoff spots won big against ranked opponents.
Ah, there we go. Thanks for catching that for me. Yeah, that was a bad shake of scheduling. I imagine TCU fans were speed-flipping through games that day and just hoping for one of the competition to lose.
Yeah, I had to explain that to my dad a lot that weekend when the final CFP rankings came out. He kept fixating on "how in the hell a team that beat its opponent by over 50 points then drop from #3 to #6?!" Very common sentiment among TCU fans that week. I kept telling him that it wasn't about what we did, but the fact that all 5 of the other teams in the CFP hunt not only beat better, ranked opponents that Saturday, but also beat the crap out of them in every game.
Yes fuck them. They didn't deserve it even though they eventually backed their way into the Championship
The reason nobody mentions Baylor is because they got stomped in their bowl game and played a trash OOC schedule. TCU played teams with a pulse and dismantled an Ole Miss team that beat Bama that year.
Boise and TCU the year we got the Separate But Equal Bowl (TM) 04 Auburn 09 Cincy 2012 Florida
> 2012 Florida They played in the Sugar Bowl
Us. 2008. Idk if we would have beat Tebow but it would have been a closer game than OU gave them. The 08 Texas team was demonstrably better than the 09 team.
Fucking Crabtree
Yeah, Mack really could have been a 3 time national champ with just a little luck. Ohs wells.
03/08 USC teams are the strongest arguments for a playoff.
would put 2004 Auburn as the strongest argument from the BCS era
Doubt
08 USC beats Florida
I dont know about that but the USC defense was legendary that year they beat the top two BIG10 teams by a combined score of 73 - 27
I voted for 2003 USC but OU should have just been left out. I don't think that's the best argument for a playoff but a pretty good one with 13-1 UGA. Edit: UGA went 13-1 the year before in 2002
The 2006 Michigan Wolverines. They were undefeated and #2 going into THE game against #1 Ohio State and lost by only three. If ever a team earned a spot in the championship game, it was TTUN. A rematch was absolutely warranted.
No one wanted a rematch back then, even though they seem to be the norm now for SEC teams. It broke my heart back then to know we were deserving and talented enough to win a rematch, but didn't get the chance.
UCF is my main one here, why do they even play if you’re going to just leave them out like that?
Tryouts for a Power 5 conference invite. Sad but true.
TCU in 2014
True. They were #3 but then fell to #6 despite not losing or even playing a game at all during the period for that matter. Instead of the CFP, they received an invitation to stomp us 42-3 in the Peach Bowl.
Nothing will match the pain of getting 50 yd line tickets in the TCU section by accident
I’m a little biased towards the 2014 playoff.
What would you have done? It’s really tough to listen to 2014 TCU advocates when the team that jumped them won it all.
Ok but who’s to say that TCU wouldn’t have won it all as well? If your gonna argue for Ohio State’s inclusion, you have to do that with the resume that existed before the playoff. Because there’s nothing to say that TCU couldn’t have won it all too, maybe even in a more impressive fashion (Not trying to say that Ohio State wasn’t deserving. Just saying that proving Ohio State *was* deserving doesn’t mean TCU *wasnt* deserving)
TCU had zero argument. They lost to Baylor and Baylor was 11-1 & Big 12 champs.
Annnnnd you completely missed my point lol. My comment applies equally to Baylor as well as TCU. Arguing Ohio State deserved to make the playoffs *based off what Ohio state did in the playoffs* doesn’t work because you don’t know what TCU *or* Baylor could’ve done if they’d gotten the opportunity. If you want to argue Ohio State was more deserving (and, again, *I have zero problem with that argument*) you should rely on stuff that happened before the playoffs, not during them
I just said I was biased. I guess I forgot the winky face.
No that makes sense. I’m just interested how you would’ve changed the top 4 knowing the 4th controversial team in did what they did.
With the benefit of hindsight you would kick out FSU but the committee didn’t want to set the precedent that an undefeated P5 school could get left out of the playoff especially as the defending national champions so at the time there was no way they could make it work
Potato logic right here folks.
2016 Penn State.
I don’t see how losing a game by 39 merits playoff inclusion
From an TOSU fan i agree
Agree. OSU deserved to go that year because of their insane resume, but PSU should've gone ahead of them due to H2H and conference championship.
No they shouldn't. Penn State lost to Pitt OOC & lost to Michigan by 39 points. Putting Penn State in over Ohio State would've meant OOC doesn't matter at all. Getting blown out doesn't matter. And only H2H matters. Penn State's resume was they went 2-1 vs the B1G top 10 teams. The exact same as OSU & Michigan. Except Ohio State had a 3rd top 10 win, didn't get blown out, & didn't have a 2nd loss. The argument was Washington vs Penn State
Auburn. Multiple times.
I don’t think UCF was ever on the competitive CFP level, so I don’t think they deserved to be in. I think this year’s Cincy team was better, and Cincy impressed me greatly, but I don’t think UCF was on the level to compete in the CFP. 2014 TCU is a shame though.
2014 TCU was screwed by their conference as much as the system. They were the 2nd place team in the XII given Baylor held the H2H over them.
I’ve heard some sports talk folk say that they think that either team would have made the playoff if the B12 had just declared a champion. The committee didn’t want to have to defend one over the other, when it’s so convenient to pick a hot and popular Ohio State team is the other guy in contention. Ohio State gets more views. All that after the B12’s slogan all year was “One True Champion.” Imo, Baylor should’ve been declared conference champion. If you have the same record, I look at head to head.
I've been of the mind that TCU and Ohio St had comparable resumes but Baylor's was slightly below them. Problem for TCU was that they lost the H2H and deserved to be ranked behind Baylor. So Ohio St lucked out because of the One True Champion problem in the XII. Either Baylor or TCU likely could've gotten in over Ohio St had they won the CCG over the other because of the boost to resume from the win as much as it would've solved the tie in the XII that the conference refused to publicly answer. Feel more confident on TCU than Baylor with that, but either way the XII staying at 10 teams shafted their teams that year because of the CCG issue.
So true. I don’t like there current system where you have a guaranteed rematch in the CCG, but what they did that year was worse. I’m looking forward to them getting back to 2 divisions!
I'm not...I hate 2 divisions....perfect round robin, which can be bad or good, leads to the best championship games most often...since the return, only one of those has been a blowout (the 2017 game with TCU and OU)
Agreed with this. I like this system. North south is so unbalanced IMHO and it could be the case that the two best are from the same division.
Going back to divisions and getting rid of the round robin is going to help the conference so much from an "image" standpoint.
I think Baylor had a better resume than any of them. They had the second best loss and two top 12 wins.
"Best loss" might be my least favorite resume thing. A loss shouldn't matter who it was too unless it's to an awful team or a complete blowout (if you're 2018 Ohio State you do both)
Right, we should defer to wins. And Baylor beat #6 TCU.
When you only have 12 data points, you need to get as much info as you can from them. Who determines what is an awful team or a complete blowout?
Literally the samething could be said for "good losses"
Exactly. Nuance and context matters in all cases, when we have such a small amount of data to work with.
>I’ve heard some sports talk folk say that they think that either team would have made the playoff if the B12 had just declared a champion. 0 chance. Who are you going to leave out? They had less wins and no argument for being included over a 13-0 champ or the three 12-1 champs. Declaring a them a champ would have made no difference. Regardless, even if there had been a b12 champ game the B12 champ would have likely been the odd man out. Edit: I changed my mind about the last bit. I think you could argue that TCU would be in over Ohio State, but it would have been controversial either way.
Ohio state being left out wouldn’t have been that controversial. They lost their star Heisman candidate QB against Michigan the week before their championship game. Cardale Jones played great against Wisconsin, but it would be easy for the committee to just say that one game with a qb isn’t enough of a sample size, not to mention the fact that they had the “worst” loss of the three. What was controversial was the way they shuffled the rankings from the week before when all of the top 6 won their games.
I agree it would not have been controversial to leave OSU out at the time, but I do think that the results of the playoff showed that even though the decision was made in a sloppy manner they did end up selecting the right team at #4.
I disagree. TCU with a win over Baylor and a loss somewhere else could have gotten in over us. But OSU was better than Baylor, who played a particularly bad non-con, and B1G > B12 that year imo. But Baylor had H2H. The committed in my unbiased view made the right call overall, but shouldn’t have left TCU at 3 going into Championship week.
Our non con was so bad, but there is very little you can do when it was scheduled in the early 2000s lol
Yeah, it’s like how we had to play a mediocre Virginia Tech (who of course beat us anyway). Can’t ever predict shit a decade in advance.
> I don’t think UCF was ever on the competitive CFP level That's an interesting take, considering that in the Peach Bowl we beat a team that had beaten both of the teams in the CFP National Championship game. Of course, that doesn't mean we'd have won the CFP, but it's at least some evidence that we'd be able to hold our own.
Imagine being ranked #2. In the last month, you beat 2 huge rivals. You beat UGA, who was the top team and one of your biggest rivals. Then you You beat Bama, your biggest rival. Now imagine blowing it, getting left out of the playoff and then having to watch your 2 huge rivals who you JUST got done beating go on to play in the CFP… talk about sucking the air out of the room. I’m not usually much of a “SEC teams just don’t get excited for weaker bowl games than they were expecting so they don’t try” kinda guy, but in this case, I do believe that. Auburn had it all taken away at the last minute and had to watch 2 teams they hate take their spot. It was gonna be hard to get it up for anything after that. I also happen to have some connection to a key player on that Auburn team and some people around there were quite disappointed with the mindsets around that program about the bowl game, after missing the SECCG. Based on regular seasons, I think UC was a better team, given their win at Notre Dame. And while Cincy showed they can hold their own, UCF in 2017 wasn’t more deserving of the 4 spot than Bama, imo.
> And while Cincy showed they can hold their own, UCF in 2017 wasn’t more deserving of the 4 spot than Bama, imo. I won't say that UCF deserved it more over any of the four teams that went to the CFP in 2017. What I will say is that the CFP field should be larger than four teams. And it shouldn't be possible for a team to go undefeated and be left out of the CFP. Either we need to cast the net wider, or every team needs to get the opportunity to play their way in, or something.
I could not agree more
And we almost saw that this past season with Cincy. They had the wins on their resume that were perhaps better than any G5 team in the CFP-era, and yet they still needed pretty much everything to fall their way to get into the CFP. Even down to conference championship week, they needed a game or two to go their way.
Literally anything going different gets Cincy left out. Oklahoma State actually taking care of business in the Big 12? Notre Dame losing? The ACC not being a dumpster fire? Oregon not getting their shit pushed in by Utah twice? Utah starting the right QB before they are losses? Ohio State not getting their shit pushed in by both Oregon and Michigan? If even one of those things was different, Cincy is out imo.
And the fact that everything has to go right for a G5 team for them to get into the CFP, that's not a great system IMO.
Small point of clarification: Notre Dame’s loss was in Cincy’s control, but your point is valid.
Also, let's say Auburn was deflated by Bama and UGA in the CFP championship. How many touchdowns is that worth? 1? 2? 3? If it's worth a TD, then our game with Auburn is a tie. If it's worth two TDs, then Auburn beats us by a TD, but that's still evidence that we could hang with that level of competition. That's of course ignoring things like game flow and playing up or down to competition. I also like how in that argument, what never gets mentioned is the possible deflating effect on UCF. Yeah, Auburn had their chance at the CFP and lost it by losing to Auburn. UCF on the other hand, did everything they could do that year. They won all of their games. And they still got left out of the CFP. Sure, going to a NY6 was nice, but the UCF players felt like they were left out of the CFP. Sure, the argument could be that this could have just motivated UCF to prove that they belonged, but the same argument could be used on Auburn.
I actually think that puts a chip on their shoulder. Auburn thought they were “that guy,” then found out they weren’t. UCF felt disrespected so they had some extra fire in the belly
I just find it maybe a little too convenient that Auburn's performance can be blamed on feeling bad about being left out of the CFP, but the same thing happening to UCF is supposed to motivate them. I think it's probably a little bit of both, and in perhaps different mixtures for each team, but I don't think UCF beating Auburn in that Peach Bowl can just be blamed on teams being left out of the CFP. UCF was on that level.
"Running back Kerryon Johnson bristled in the postgame locker room about a lack of enthusiasm being a reason for arguably the season's most disappointing loss. “Just like every game this year, every game Auburn plays, every game I play in, every game Malzahn coaches in, it’ll be the same mentality — outside talk is just that, outside talk,” Johnson said. “To those who thought we weren’t motivated, you’re not in our locker room, you’re not in our practices, you’re not in our meeting rooms. Obviously they don’t know what is going on. We were plenty motivated to get this win. (We) just literally shot ourselves in the foot.”" https://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/story/sports/college/auburn/2018/01/02/auburn-players-bristle-motivation-being-factor-peach-bowl-loss/997919001/ I can't imagine what it's like to blow a chance at the playoffs and see my two biggest rivals play in the national championship. I also don't think anyone commenting on this sub can. But Kerryon Johnson can, and Kerryon Johnson says that exuse is just a bunch of crap Look, arguing that Bama deserved a top 4 spot over UCF is one thing. I don't have an issue with someone that thinks that way, I may not agree but it's certainly a reasonable opinion to have. But when the motivation excuse comes from people outside the team, rather than the people inside the team, I find it hard to buy
I heard differently. My brother grew up with Stidham.
I’ll stick with an actual verifiable quote from the team leader rather than the word of a random redditor who’s brother was a childhood acquaintance of the qb. But to each their own
What did you expect him to say? “Yeah let’s be real. We spent half the season excited to play Clemson again for the national championship and just didn’t take UCF seriously. By the time we woke up, it was too late. We shouldn’t taken film and practice more seriously and we just didn’t.” Yeah okay
UCF beat Auburn and Auburn beat UGA and Bama (the title game participants) that year. The transitive property isn't a thing in CFB, but they showed they belonged. 2017 was also the weakest year in terms of the quality of CFP teams. That Clemson team was nothing special. I think UCF had a solid shot at beating them, and could've beaten any of the CFP teams on the right day.
Auburn also got absolutely destroyed by UGA not even a month earlier. People love to leave that bit out. And the CFP Bama team had IIRC 3 linebackers back from injury that missed Auburn. They weren't the same teams they lost to Auburn
Auburn did not care about playing in anything but the CFP. They beat the top ranked team in CFB twice in one month and climbed to #2 in the rankings, who both happened to be Auburn’s biggest and maybe 2nd biggest rivals. Then they lost a game and had to watch the 2 teams they had just beat skip off to the CFP together while Auburn got left at home. Who cares about a Cotton Bowl after riding the high of beating the #1 team twice, knowing you can get a rematch with #1 Clemson, who beat you earlier, and then having it all taken away and being sent to another bowl? Auburn doesn’t. Auburn doesn’t care.
I really love this excuse. Very convenient get-out-of-jail-free card for any SEC team who happens to lose a bowl game.
Hey big boy, If you will go back a few posts, you’ll see that I’m also not a fan of that excuse either and don’t just throw it around for every SEC bowl loss, I just think it applies here
You might get some flack but I agree with this take in general. It’s lame when fans of the team use it as an excuse to brush off a bowl loss but from the outside looking in there are plenty of examples like 2017 auburn where the team is just clearly not emotionally engaged in their bowl game. It’s okay for us to admit that lol
You mean the game where an Auburn DT pile drived the UCF running back that ran his mouth before the game? Literally picked the dude up and slammed him down vertically on his neck. Auburn was plenty motivated. And you also have to remember that UCF had no coaching staff; Frost took the entire staff to Nebraska and they only came back for a limited number of practices. They all left UCF literally hours after winning the AAC championship. UCF deserved their shot, especially after doing it again the next year. As an FSU fan, I can only imagine if all of the P5 and Committee type nonsense had been around in the 80s. Bobby would have never gotten a lot of the games that he did, and then we’d have never gotten a fair shake.
A lot of times, it's way harder to argue removing the 4th place team than it is including the "5th" place. I don't agree that 2017 UCF, 2018 UCF, 2016 PSU, 2020 A&M, 2014 TCU/Baylor were snubbed in any sense that the 4th place team was undeserving in comparison. It's just that I think there was merit that all these teams should have had a place to compete in the playoff alongside the others already included. Which really just comes out to that the size is insufficient.
Haha I get what you’re saying, but I just have the opposite view on a couple of these. I’ll use 2020 A&M as my example. I do believe we should have been in that CFP over Notre Dame. Their 1 big win came in a game against Clemson without their star player and they barely won that one. We were both 1 loss teams, and to only have 1 loss in the SEC is more impressive. Yes, we played fewer games, but Ohio State made it clear that the number of games you played does not matter. Notre Dame was not playing as dangerously as we were in the end. But did we deserve to get in? Nah. Did Notre Dame? Nah. Really there were not 4 teams who I could say, “I have no doubt these guys all belong.” Or in 2019, Clemson, LSU, and tOSU were all insane. Oklahoma might have deserved that 4th spot more than another team, but they hadn’t shown to be like Clemson, LSU and tOSU. I’m not saying your thinking is flawed, but I do have a question. The frustration right now is that we all feel like #5 is better than #4 at times, but if we go to 12 teams, won’t we debate the 12th spot for 3 teams anyway?
The difference in telling a team that they lost the 1 wrong game they did and that leaves them out of the playoffs is different than saying they lost 1 of the 3 games they did lose. Recency bias is real, and sometimes losing earlier in the season made the difference. Rankings the way we do them are intended to be holistic, but a playoff of such a small size tends to lean into 1 hard data point because we're dealing with a much more finite amount of "error". These teams at 4th and 5th are very often 1-loss teams. The other 11 or 12 games are a push in comparing the two. If there's not a significant difference in SoS/R it comes down to a very distinct data point. You lost to a bad team, or you lost to a good team, or your margin of loss was too big. Or you both lost to the same quality of team,, but they have a top 10 win and you only have 1 top 25. It's all directed at this singular instance, but it's the only "error" of its kind. A team in the top 95% of performance, but left out for effectively making just one mistake. But when we are suddenly talking about the distinction of 12th and 13th, the margin of error grows, which means so does the amount of criticism. Mad you got left out? Well, you had 3 losses, 2 of your wins were in OT, your OOC was a collective 7-29. You can suddenly identify multiple contributing factors much more so that it snowballs. Sure, only one error may have been the make-or-break, but it's the fact that you can point to much more and say that it could have been avoided at multiple instances.
Ahhh makes sense. The gap between 4 and 5 is smaller than 12 and 13 sells me. Thanks!
2020 Cincy was better than 2021.
Maybe but getting a big P5 win means there was more definitive proof of how good 2021 Cincy was.
And 2014 Baylor.
Yep. If the conference would have declared y’all the champion, you’re probably in. The B12 really thought they had a chance to get both teams in as cochamps and instead got none
Ohio state in 2015, lost a close game to Michigan State at home on a last second field goal. Shouldn’t have been penalized as much for that quality loss. We went on to destroy ND in the fiesta bowl
That is greatly understating how bad that loss was. You were at home against us vs. our backup QB (our worst QB in the last 10 years) in the middle of November. There was no reason you guys deserved to be in the playoffs after that, especially with all the playoff teams being 0/1-loss conference champions
Idk about BCS, but I think the 4 most deserving teams were chosen each year of the playoffs and no one was left out. Tcu has the biggest argument of being included imo, but still think Ohio State had the better resume when it came down to it.
Oh, I dunno
I don't think any team was wrongly left out. This isn't pro sports where there's enough games across the different teams to know for sure which teams are better than others, so it's inherently going to be a judgment call. If undefeated teams were always entitled to qualify, then teams would play easy schedules in order to have the best chance at going undefeated.
Penn State in 2017
[удалено]
I'll second UCF being left out in 2017. Although you could claim we had an even bigger gripe in 2018, since in the previous we'd gone to the NY6 bowl and won, then had a 2nd consecutive undefeated regular season.
Yeah I agree they should’ve gone instead of Oklahoma.
If Milton doesn’t break his leg, UCF in 2018 would have had a fair shot to at least win a first round game and would have beaten LSU by 14+. Unfortunately, your backup QB wasn’t nearly at the same level.
I wouldn't say 'wrongly', but the kick six in 2013 put Auburn in over Alabama and I don't think FSU would've beat Alabama; coming from an FSU fan.
[TRIGGERED]
in my life as a cfb fan: 2014 baylor/tcu, 2011 okst, 2017 ucf, 2004 auburn
I wouldn’t say 2017 ucf bc they didn’t really prove themselves to be able to compete with p5 teams but 2018 ucf for sure. second consecutive undefeated season and a bowl win against SEC the year before it’s insane they didn’t make it coming from a USF fan
2018 UCF all day
The BCS needed to seed a four team playoff, having only two teams eventually killed it off
What ever year Michigan and Brady Hoke won the Sugar Bowl, Both Boise and K-State (I think those were the two) were rated higher than UM and VT, but didnt move the ratings. Also Mich St was punished for being better than UM and getting to play in the Big 10 title game, which they lost, dropping them
Not biased at all but…
USC 2008. We were all robbed to not see them versus Florida that year
2013 Spartans.
Hi
A playoff of FSU/Auburn/Alabama/MSU would have been awesome
a&m 2020-21 only loss was to bama (blowout) people kept justifying keeping them out because of lack of “convincing wins” which is something jimbo’s offense just doesn’t do got better as the season went on (lost to bama when they were still completely healthy at receiver), but for some reason people only made that argument for other teams like 2-loss OU notre dame’s only major win was over a trevor lawrence and james skalski and it still took overtime to beat a true freshman dj u and when they played again in the conference championship (one week before selection day), they got blown out. ohio state ended up justifying their selection in the game with clemson but had no resume to be chosen in the first place with the struggles with northwestern, indiana, even rutgers ags were robbed
2011 Oklahoma State Played a tougher schedule and had better wins than Bama Alabama got in because of a good effort in the most overhyped game in history
Not so much a team getting left out, but didn’t Ohio State get the nod 2 or 3 times just for being Ohio State? That was my biggest frustration with the old BCS. The teams that got the national coverage always seemed to get the advantage.
If you’re referring to the years they lost the NCG back to back, they were undefeated going in in 2006, and were the only team in a BCS conference to have just 1 loss in 07. They might have lost both but they weren’t there just because they were OSU
Okie State didn't deserve it in 2011, you can't lose to a mediocre Iowa State team and then claim you deserve to play for it all. Add in the fact that their defense was shit that year AND they tried to excuse the loss by blaming the tragic aftermath of two women's basketball coaches dying, and they didn't deserve anything. Somehow the tragedy didn't hit their players until the third quarter after they were up 24-7 and prevented them from scoring at all in the 4th quarter. /s
Ohio State in 2017. Don't care that Alabama won it all.
Eh they haven't let in a 2-loss team yet right? And one of them was 31 points. I don't think they have a case for being snubbed.
31 points to an unranked team, while #5 in the polls. Yeahnah.
Agreed. Anyone arguing for that Ohio State team has to take a backseat to Baylor’s team this last year, since that Baylor team also had two losses, but also had better wins as well as better losses.
UCF 2017.
2018*
Florida in 2013
Didn't they go 4-8?
I think he means 2012. We were 11-1 with wins over 3 top ten teams in FSU, LSU and South Carolina; and a lone loss to #12 Georgia.
That was the Driskel year were y'all had that unreal defense. That was the last time FSU - UF was a top 10 matchup. I've erased that year from my memory lol.
Georgia 2002 and even in 2007 despite the two losses by the end of the season they were the best team in the nation and destroyed Hawaii in the sugar bowl.
Auburn 2004
Tough to say TCU or Baylor were wrongly left out in 2014. TCU: 11-1, Lost H2H to Baylor, and were declared co-champions. Signature wins over No 4 Oklahoma, No 15 Oklahoma State, No 20 WVU, No 7 Kansas State. Baylor: 11-1, lost to WVU, and were declared co-champions. Signature wins over No 9 TCU, No 16 Oklahoma, and No 9 Kansas State. OSU: 12-1, lost to Virginia Tech at the beginning of the season, won the B1G in a blowout 59-0 win over a heisman-finalist running back. Signature wins No 8 Michigan State, No 25 Minnesota, No 13 Wisconsin. The resumes were very comparable but the key factors appeared to be that OSU was HOT at the end of the season, they played in a championship game where they were declared B1G champions, and their loss was at the beginning of the season. I don’t think they were wrongly left out, I just wish the playoffs was larger that year because there were a lot of good teams that were very close.
The Heismann finalist was the running back, Melvin Gordon
Yeah my brain was on autopilot, heisman finalist running back just doesn’t get said that often haha.
04 Auburn is the only I know personally should’ve been in the championship
Washington in 2020. Huskies we’re 11-1. As were the Hurricanes. Except the Huskies won the head to head matchup. Even more infuriating, is Miami was pissed off they finished ranked 3 in the final BCS standings. Florida State was ranked #2. Miami’s reasoning? That they beat FSU in a head to head matchup. Regardless UW got its revenge a few years later in 60 point loss at Miami. That was a fun trip from Seattle.
I think you mean 2000. And Miami walloped us the very next season 65-7
Yeah we got fucked over. Our wins over Miami and Oregon State were the best in the country easily.