2025-2026 College Football Season

[greg683x]

Also, just to be clear, bc I think I?ve gotten myself in the weeds a little bit.  I have no problem with Notre Dame being in the CFP this year.  This debate started with the suggestion of throwing Alabama out, bc they lost the title game, and keeping Notre Dame in, which I think is a joke.

The screw up in my opinion is letting both Tulane and James Madison in.  That is a huge steaming pile.  JMU should have been dropped out and Notre Dame could have been kept in and I think most people would have understood

[Moranis]

ND played Miami, A&M, and USC this year.  Plus the 3rd best team is the 4th/5th best conference (Navy) and perennial conference winner Boise St. in addition to 5 other ACC teams and another SEC and Big Ten team.  That is a better schedule than A&M and Ole Miss.  Frankly it is comparable to Oregon and Ohio State's schedules as well (prior to OSU playing IU).  They don't have a terrible loss like Bama or Texas.  If ND had played someone like Missouri instead of A&M and won that game, they would have been in (same argument i made re. Texas and the OSU game).  The committee is incentizing teams to not play games like that. That is bad for the sport.

Except A&M and Ole Miss have a win against quality opponents this year.  Notre Dame does not.  They need to have a signature win, who was it?  Pitt?  No one?s ever going to care about teams like Boise and Navy.

I agree with you about the problem with incentivizing weak schedules but this isn?t the argument to plant that flag on.  Texas tough schedule should have allowed them some grace with an extra loss AS LONG AS they had good wins to back it up and they certainly did


Notre Dame does not have an elite win on their schedule.  You need to beat at least one of those teams

USC is ranked 16th.  Not really all that much different than Notre Dame or Oklahoma in the scheme of things.

[Moranis]

Also, just to be clear, bc I think I?ve gotten myself in the weeds a little bit.  I have no problem with Notre Dame being in the CFP this year.  This debate started with the suggestion of throwing Alabama out, bc they lost the title game, and keeping Notre Dame in, which I think is a joke.

The screw up in my opinion is letting both Tulane and James Madison in.  That is a huge steaming pile.  JMU should have been dropped out and Notre Dame could have been kept in and I think most people would have understood

After Bama lost to Oklahoma, Bama fell behind Notre Dame in the rankings and was behind them in week 13 and week 14. Then, despite Notre Dame destroying Stanford while Alabama was barely getting by an awful Auburn team, their ranking flipped in week 15.  How could barely beating Auburn while ND is destroying Stanford cause those teams to switch spots in the rankings?  It is dumb.  Notre Dame should have always been ahead of Alabama and Miami should have always been ahead of them both. 

This was simply the committee doing all kinds of inconsistent and stupid things to make sure Alabama made it in.  It is a travesty.  Alabama lost by 14 points to a 5-7 Florida State team.  They got destroyed by 21 points in their last game.  They have no business being in the playoff as the first 3 loss (non-CC) team to ever make it in.

[Moranis]

As for the devaluing of conference championship games. Every other team in 2 years that lost its conference championship dropped in the rankings. The only one that didn't was Alabama. You know the one that got beaten by 21 points and was never in the game. 

Also, the semi-finals last year had 2 teams that lost the conference championship and 2 teams that didn't even play for a conference championship. Not a single conference champion made the semis and the national champion didn't even play for the Big Ten title and had the extra playoff game (same for the independent it played in the title game).

Ohio State is the betting favorite this year and obviously did not win the Big Ten and Oregon is 4th who didn't even play in the game. A&M and Ole Miss are 6th and 7th (Miami is 8th) and like Oregon weren't in a CC game. 

The ACC wouldn't have created this mess if they didn't have a stupid tiebreaker (if the ACC had the same tiebreaker system as the American, Miami would have played Virginia).  Then, had Miami won, all 3 teams would have been in and no controversy at all.

So the sport itself devalued the CC with dumb rules or teams winning the title that didn't even qualify for a CC.

I say this because the CC should be treated like just another game, which is what the committee has done every other time (heck they didn't even move Georgia or TTech, both conference champs, ahead of Ohio State, not a conference champ).  The only time in the 2 years playing for a conference championship mattered was this year and then only for Alabama.

[Donoghus]

Non-playoff bowls are in deep trouble here.  Collateral damage in the move to the CFP.  10 teams have opted out of bowl games.

[Moranis]

Notre Dame's AD says the ACC has caused permanent damage to their relationship.  Not sure exactly what he means or what they will do. I assume cooler heads will prevail, but it has to be on the table that they leave the conference in their other sports and stop the affiliation in football. 

[Moranis]

The unbalanced schedules are so weird in the mega conferences, so I think they should just go to divisions.  The Big Ten has 18 teams, they could easily split into 2, 9-team divisions and play 8 conference games with 4 non-con games.  The winners then play for the Big Ten title. 

Or they could do something truly unique with mini-tourneys at the end.  So play 11 regular season games over 12 weeks (8 conf., 3 non-con) and then have a bunch of mini 4-team tournaments at the end i.e. 1E v. 2W, 1W v. 2E, winners play for 1st, losers play for 3rd.  3E v. 4W, 3W v. 4E, winners play for 5th, losers play for 7th.  Then you do that through 16 with the bottom 2 just playing 1 game.  If that is too many games, then maybe you just have the top 2 in each division play the tournament (I'd still do 3rd place game) and just have everyone else play just the 9th conference game against the team in the same divisional slot as them.

Something like that would be fun.  Each team would end up with 9 or 10 conference games and 3 non-con and you'd have a true idea of who the best team is because of the mini-tourney.     

So for divisions
East - Maryland, Rutgers, Penn St., Ohio St., Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, Indiana, Illinois
West - Oregon, Washington, UCLA, USC, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern

Those seem pretty balanced and you keep almost every rivalry intact (sorry NW/ILL). 

I know they didn't play that sort of schedule this year, but the top mini-tourney would have probably been Indiana vs. Southern Cal and Ohio St. vs. Oregon.  That would have been awesome to see those games to determine the champion and as a preview of playoff-caliber football.  The next 4 if you played that mini-tourney would have been Michigan v. Washington and Iowa v. Illinois.  Fun games, though obviously not quite as interesting. 

[greg683x]

As for the devaluing of conference championship games. Every other team in 2 years that lost its conference championship dropped in the rankings. The only one that didn't was Alabama. You know the one that got beaten by 21 points and was never in the game. 

Also, the semi-finals last year had 2 teams that lost the conference championship and 2 teams that didn't even play for a conference championship. Not a single conference champion made the semis and the national champion didn't even play for the Big Ten title and had the extra playoff game (same for the independent it played in the title game).

Ohio State is the betting favorite this year and obviously did not win the Big Ten and Oregon is 4th who didn't even play in the game. A&M and Ole Miss are 6th and 7th (Miami is 8th) and like Oregon weren't in a CC game. 

The ACC wouldn't have created this mess if they didn't have a stupid tiebreaker (if the ACC had the same tiebreaker system as the American, Miami would have played Virginia).  Then, had Miami won, all 3 teams would have been in and no controversy at all.

So the sport itself devalued the CC with dumb rules or teams winning the title that didn't even qualify for a CC.

I say this because the CC should be treated like just another game which is what the committee has done every other time (heck they didn't even move Georgia or TTech, both conference champs, ahead of Ohio State, not a conference champ).  The only time in the 2 years playing for a conference championship mattered was this year and then only for Alabama.

So the conference championship should count as just another game.  Ok, so all these teams in the CC will have to play what will likely be their toughest game of the year, and a loss will be held against them.  While Notre Dame, since they don?t belong to a conference, essentially gets a bye week from it after already losing their two toughest games of the season.

In what world is that fair?



I do agree with you though that the rankings leading up to all this make no sense now.

[Moranis]

As for the devaluing of conference championship games. Every other team in 2 years that lost its conference championship dropped in the rankings. The only one that didn't was Alabama. You know the one that got beaten by 21 points and was never in the game. 

Also, the semi-finals last year had 2 teams that lost the conference championship and 2 teams that didn't even play for a conference championship. Not a single conference champion made the semis and the national champion didn't even play for the Big Ten title and had the extra playoff game (same for the independent it played in the title game).

Ohio State is the betting favorite this year and obviously did not win the Big Ten and Oregon is 4th who didn't even play in the game. A&M and Ole Miss are 6th and 7th (Miami is 8th) and like Oregon weren't in a CC game. 

The ACC wouldn't have created this mess if they didn't have a stupid tiebreaker (if the ACC had the same tiebreaker system as the American, Miami would have played Virginia).  Then, had Miami won, all 3 teams would have been in and no controversy at all.

So the sport itself devalued the CC with dumb rules or teams winning the title that didn't even qualify for a CC.

I say this because the CC should be treated like just another game which is what the committee has done every other time (heck they didn't even move Georgia or TTech, both conference champs, ahead of Ohio State, not a conference champ).  The only time in the 2 years playing for a conference championship mattered was this year and then only for Alabama.

So the conference championship should count as just another game.  Ok, so all these teams in the CC will have to play what will likely be their toughest game of the year, and a loss will be held against them.  While Notre Dame, since they don?t belong to a conference, essentially gets a bye week from it after already losing their two toughest games of the season.

In what world is that fair?



I do agree with you though that the rankings leading up to all this make no sense now.

it is a just game. Usually one with a very good opponent, but a game none the less.  I mean how else do you explain OSU at 2 with Georgia at 3. 

If Bama was in the game at all, I don't think there is a lot of controversy though that Florida State loss is a horrible loss.  The fact that Bama got crushed is a big problem and then not having them drop even a spot is even more of a problem.  I mean BYU dropped and they had a similar scenario to Alabama.  Every other team, both years, that lost in the CC moved down in the rankings.  Bama should have as well.  The only reason they didn't (or that they even moved ahead of ND) was so that the committee could screw over ND. It Is the only logical explanation.  They wanted to send a message to the independent that isnt on ESPN.  Bama got blown out in its last game and has BY FAR, the worst loss of any playoff team (well any at large as Tulane did lose badly to UTSA). They shouldn't be in the playoffs.

Of course none of this is an issue at all if the ACC didn't have a stupid tiebreaker.  Virginia should have played Miami.  If that happens the winner is in, the loser is out, and ND is in instead of James Madison.  Basically no controversy at all.

[greg683x]

As for the devaluing of conference championship games. Every other team in 2 years that lost its conference championship dropped in the rankings. The only one that didn't was Alabama. You know the one that got beaten by 21 points and was never in the game. 

Also, the semi-finals last year had 2 teams that lost the conference championship and 2 teams that didn't even play for a conference championship. Not a single conference champion made the semis and the national champion didn't even play for the Big Ten title and had the extra playoff game (same for the independent it played in the title game).

Ohio State is the betting favorite this year and obviously did not win the Big Ten and Oregon is 4th who didn't even play in the game. A&M and Ole Miss are 6th and 7th (Miami is 8th) and like Oregon weren't in a CC game. 

The ACC wouldn't have created this mess if they didn't have a stupid tiebreaker (if the ACC had the same tiebreaker system as the American, Miami would have played Virginia).  Then, had Miami won, all 3 teams would have been in and no controversy at all.

So the sport itself devalued the CC with dumb rules or teams winning the title that didn't even qualify for a CC.

I say this because the CC should be treated like just another game which is what the committee has done every other time (heck they didn't even move Georgia or TTech, both conference champs, ahead of Ohio State, not a conference champ).  The only time in the 2 years playing for a conference championship mattered was this year and then only for Alabama.

So the conference championship should count as just another game.  Ok, so all these teams in the CC will have to play what will likely be their toughest game of the year, and a loss will be held against them.  While Notre Dame, since they don?t belong to a conference, essentially gets a bye week from it after already losing their two toughest games of the season.

In what world is that fair?



I do agree with you though that the rankings leading up to all this make no sense now.

it is a just game. Usually one with a very good opponent, but a game none the less.  I mean how else do you explain OSU at 2 with Georgia at 3. 

If Bama was in the game at all, I don't think there is a lot of controversy though that Florida State loss is a horrible loss.  The fact that Bama got crushed is a big problem and then not having them drop even a spot is even more of a problem.  I mean BYU dropped and they had a similar scenario to Alabama.  Every other team, both years, that lost in the CC moved down in the rankings.  Bama should have as well.  The only reason they didn't (or that they even moved ahead of ND) was so that the committee could screw over ND. It Is the only logical explanation.  They wanted to send a message to the independent that isnt on ESPN.  Bama got blown out in its last game and has BY FAR, the worst loss of any playoff team (well any at large as Tulane did lose badly to UTSA). They shouldn't be in the playoffs.

Of course none of this is an issue at all if the ACC didn't have a stupid tiebreaker.  Virginia should have played Miami.  If that happens the winner is in, the loser is out, and ND is in instead of James Madison.  Basically no controversy at all.

We?ll have to agree to disagree on it, just being a game.

I have no problem with a loss dropping you in the rankings, but it shouldn?t eliminate you from the CFP.  And I do agree Bama should have dropped in the rankings.  If you want to call it Alabama bias then that?s your opinion, but Alabama got left out of the playoffs last year bc the committee didn?t want to punish SMU for losing a CC game.  Which is the way it should be.

I also agree that the committee is trying to nudge ND into a conference.


Maybe the best way to solve this problem, is to take all these meaningless bowl games and play them between conference championship weekend and the start of the playoff. And instead of having crappy teams play in these bowls, we have all these playoff bubble teams play each other. kind of like a play in weekend for teams ranked 8-16

 

[Donoghus]

FWIW, SMU lost on the last play of game in the '24 ACC Championship game and was 11-1 heading into the game with its sole loss to a BYU team that finished 11-2 and in the Top 15.. 

Alabama had two losses already and got absolutely smoked by Georgia in the SEC Championship game.

I don't know what the right answer is with ND/Bama but not all CC losses are created the same.

[greg683x]

FWIW, SMU lost on the last play of game in the '24 ACC Championship game and was 11-1 heading into the game with its sole loss to a BYU team that finished 11-2 and in the Top 15.. 

Alabama had two losses already and got absolutely smoked by Georgia in the SEC Championship game.

I don't know what the right answer is with ND/Bama but not all CC losses are created the same.

Fair enough.  That being said, it must be nice not to have to worry about playing in one

[Ilikesports17]

FWIW, SMU lost on the last play of game in the '24 ACC Championship game and was 11-1 heading into the game with its sole loss to a BYU team that finished 11-2 and in the Top 15.. 

Alabama had two losses already and got absolutely smoked by Georgia in the SEC Championship game.

I don't know what the right answer is with ND/Bama but not all CC losses are created the same.

Fair enough.  That being said, it must be nice not to have to worry about playing in one

Why?

And again I have no understanding AT ALL why people want Notre Dame in a conference. Ive yet to hear even an OK explanation for it.