The conference champion piece is ridiculous in my opinion. Let’s say that somehow Pitt knocks off Clemson in the ACC title game and is 9-4 with a loss to UNC but a crazy upset winner in the championship, is that really a legit playoff team? Why get rewarded for being in a conference with a bad division? I realize where this thread is headed but could not resist.
Here is the link to the fall sports streaming schedule.
https://appstatesports.com/news/2023/8/ ... edule.aspx
https://appstatesports.com/news/2023/8/ ... edule.aspx
We rise....
-
- Posts: 5832
- Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 1:08 pm
- School: Appalachian State
- Has thanked: 15 times
- Been thanked: 2474 times
Re: We rise....
-
- Posts: 9658
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:39 pm
- School: Appalachian State
- Location: Huntersville, NC
- Has thanked: 6406 times
- Been thanked: 3994 times
Re: We rise....
So you would rather put LSU back in knowing that they got shutout by Bama on their home field? Or the loser of Ohio St/Michigan in?
-
- Posts: 9658
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:39 pm
- School: Appalachian State
- Location: Huntersville, NC
- Has thanked: 6406 times
- Been thanked: 3994 times
Re: We rise....
So you would rather put LSU back in knowing that they got shutout by Bama on their home field? Or the loser of Ohio St/Michigan in? If you are only putting in the so called best teams, then they should win their conference. And if your not going to do it the what would 95% of the teams line up and play?
- APPdiesel
- Posts: 2566
- Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2015 5:53 pm
- School: Appalachian State
- Has thanked: 788 times
- Been thanked: 1422 times
- Contact:
Re: We rise....
Then why have conference championship games? If they don't mean anything except the possibility of knocking the better team out of the playoff? Eliminate them and add in another bye week.bigdaddyg wrote: ↑Mon Nov 05, 2018 3:15 pmThe conference champion piece is ridiculous in my opinion. Let’s say that somehow Pitt knocks off Clemson in the ACC title game and is 9-4 with a loss to UNC but a crazy upset winner in the championship, is that really a legit playoff team? Why get rewarded for being in a conference with a bad division? I realize where this thread is headed but could not resist.
- appstatealum
- Posts: 3314
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2015 1:45 pm
- School: Appalachian State
- Location: Charlotte/Gastonia
- Has thanked: 3326 times
- Been thanked: 1777 times
Re: We rise....
Yes to this. Gives the G5 squads something more to play for, keeps the integrity for the P5s. If you lose your Conference title, you need to hope that your schedule was good enough to get an at large. An 8 team playoff is the only valid way to do it right now to give those deserving an honest shot. I do not think UCF would be a quality contender this year, but definitely would have made a little noise in an 8 team playoff last season.
The Appalachian State
-
- Posts: 1453
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 8:19 am
- School: Appalachian State
- Has thanked: 1256 times
- Been thanked: 504 times
Re: We rise....
My idea is close to this but with a tweak. I know Unlikely, but I would do away with the at-large & institute a ‘must be conference champ’ criteria. All P5 champions in, then top 3 rated G5 conference champions. This gives the G5 a legit fighting chance & encourages playing tougher schedules. If just 1 G5 gets in, we will always be paired against the #1 seed.appstatealum wrote: ↑Mon Nov 05, 2018 11:27 pmYes to this. Gives the G5 squads something more to play for, keeps the integrity for the P5s. If you lose your Conference title, you need to hope that your schedule was good enough to get an at large. An 8 team playoff is the only valid way to do it right now to give those deserving an honest shot. I do not think UCF would be a quality contender this year, but definitely would have made a little noise in an 8 team playoff last season.
I say if a Clemson loses to a Pitt in CCG, then they are SOL. They lost in a single elimination round. Everyone knows the rules going in.
Regular Season - Round 1
CCG’s - Round 2
Elite 8 - Round 3
Final 4 - Round 4
Natty C - Round 5
-
- Posts: 9658
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:39 pm
- School: Appalachian State
- Location: Huntersville, NC
- Has thanked: 6406 times
- Been thanked: 3994 times
Re: We rise....
How do you factor Notre Dame into all of this?AppDawg wrote: ↑Tue Nov 06, 2018 12:06 amMy idea is close to this but with a tweak. I know Unlikely, but I would do away with the at-large & institute a ‘must be conference champ’ criteria. All P5 champions in, then top 3 rated G5 conference champions. This gives the G5 a legit fighting chance & encourages playing tougher schedules. If just 1 G5 gets in, we will always be paired against the #1 seed.appstatealum wrote: ↑Mon Nov 05, 2018 11:27 pmYes to this. Gives the G5 squads something more to play for, keeps the integrity for the P5s. If you lose your Conference title, you need to hope that your schedule was good enough to get an at large. An 8 team playoff is the only valid way to do it right now to give those deserving an honest shot. I do not think UCF would be a quality contender this year, but definitely would have made a little noise in an 8 team playoff last season.
I say if a Clemson loses to a Pitt in CCG, then they are SOL. They lost in a single elimination round. Everyone knows the rules going in.
Regular Season - Round 1
CCG’s - Round 2
Elite 8 - Round 3
Final 4 - Round 4
Natty C - Round 5
-
- Posts: 1453
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 8:19 am
- School: Appalachian State
- Has thanked: 1256 times
- Been thanked: 504 times
Re: We rise....
Force them to join the ACC... none of this right foot in BS.AppSt94 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 06, 2018 4:12 amHow do you factor Notre Dame into all of this?AppDawg wrote: ↑Tue Nov 06, 2018 12:06 amMy idea is close to this but with a tweak. I know Unlikely, but I would do away with the at-large & institute a ‘must be conference champ’ criteria. All P5 champions in, then top 3 rated G5 conference champions. This gives the G5 a legit fighting chance & encourages playing tougher schedules. If just 1 G5 gets in, we will always be paired against the #1 seed.appstatealum wrote: ↑Mon Nov 05, 2018 11:27 pmYes to this. Gives the G5 squads something more to play for, keeps the integrity for the P5s. If you lose your Conference title, you need to hope that your schedule was good enough to get an at large. An 8 team playoff is the only valid way to do it right now to give those deserving an honest shot. I do not think UCF would be a quality contender this year, but definitely would have made a little noise in an 8 team playoff last season.
I say if a Clemson loses to a Pitt in CCG, then they are SOL. They lost in a single elimination round. Everyone knows the rules going in.
Regular Season - Round 1
CCG’s - Round 2
Elite 8 - Round 3
Final 4 - Round 4
Natty C - Round 5
Good point. Totally forgot about the independents... so make it the top 3 G5 conference champions / Independent schools. However, the Independent has to be ranked in at least top 10 of the CFP to jump over a G5 conference champion.
- appstatealum
- Posts: 3314
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2015 1:45 pm
- School: Appalachian State
- Location: Charlotte/Gastonia
- Has thanked: 3326 times
- Been thanked: 1777 times
Re: We rise....
Not bad. I would certainly like it, but the big boys will never go for it. That's why I think the atleast one guaranteed G5 spot is more realistic. The degrees of seperation are certainly getting smaller between G5 and P5, but they will do whatever they can to keep G5 out.AppDawg wrote: ↑Tue Nov 06, 2018 12:06 amMy idea is close to this but with a tweak. I know Unlikely, but I would do away with the at-large & institute a ‘must be conference champ’ criteria. All P5 champions in, then top 3 rated G5 conference champions. This gives the G5 a legit fighting chance & encourages playing tougher schedules. If just 1 G5 gets in, we will always be paired against the #1 seed.appstatealum wrote: ↑Mon Nov 05, 2018 11:27 pmYes to this. Gives the G5 squads something more to play for, keeps the integrity for the P5s. If you lose your Conference title, you need to hope that your schedule was good enough to get an at large. An 8 team playoff is the only valid way to do it right now to give those deserving an honest shot. I do not think UCF would be a quality contender this year, but definitely would have made a little noise in an 8 team playoff last season.
I say if a Clemson loses to a Pitt in CCG, then they are SOL. They lost in a single elimination round. Everyone knows the rules going in.
Regular Season - Round 1
CCG’s - Round 2
Elite 8 - Round 3
Final 4 - Round 4
Natty C - Round 5
The Appalachian State
- Rekdiver
- Posts: 7555
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 1:14 pm
- School: Appalachian State
- Has thanked: 1440 times
- Been thanked: 3761 times
-
- Posts: 13469
- Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2000 9:41 pm
- School: Appalachian State
- Has thanked: 3043 times
- Been thanked: 2821 times
Re: We rise....
I have no problem with the current system.
"Some people call me hillbilly. Some people call me mountain man. You can call me Appalachian. Appalachian's what I am."-- Del McCoury Band
-
- Posts: 359
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 8:25 am
- School: Appalachian State
- Location: Vance County NC
- Has thanked: 219 times
- Been thanked: 176 times
Re: We rise....
I'd like to see an 8 team playoff as that's the only way I can see a G5 team having an opportunity. Otherwise, while there are some tweaks I'd like to see, I actually like the bowl system.
Today I Give My All for Appalachian State
-
- Posts: 3741
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 11:27 am
- Has thanked: 1264 times
- Been thanked: 2094 times
Re: We rise....
8 teams with at least one guaranteed G5 and all P5 conference champs would accomplish the goal. It gives everybody (including G5) a path to a possible championship and allows for two "wild card" teams to account for the anomalous CCG results....or a deserving independent if there is one.
If the goal is to name a national champion, we don't need 24 teams. There are nowhere near 24 teams with any legit claim to a national championship track. Frankly, I thought it was ridiculous when FCS went from 16 to 24.
If the goal is to name a national champion, we don't need 24 teams. There are nowhere near 24 teams with any legit claim to a national championship track. Frankly, I thought it was ridiculous when FCS went from 16 to 24.
- YesAppCan
- Posts: 5870
- Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 7:52 pm
- School: Appalachian State
- Location: Greensboro
- Has thanked: 1584 times
- Been thanked: 567 times
Re: We rise....
This is exact model I would go with and ONLY one with a REASONABLE shot for a G-5. Diesel, with you being in the industry, what do you hear and believe is the likelihood of this set up?
- YesAppCan
- Posts: 5870
- Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 7:52 pm
- School: Appalachian State
- Location: Greensboro
- Has thanked: 1584 times
- Been thanked: 567 times
Re: We rise....
It is simply NOT HEALTHY for college football for "underdogs" not to have ANY chance. I've said for years that if things ever get bad enough, G-5's should just tell P-5's---No more scheduling our teams... Beat yourselves up!
- APPdiesel
- Posts: 2566
- Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2015 5:53 pm
- School: Appalachian State
- Has thanked: 788 times
- Been thanked: 1422 times
- Contact:
Re: We rise....
All of the national pundits that we've had on have said "we need a few more years of the 4 team setup to really know what we have" which, in some ways *IS* true. But that's what it will take...about half a dozen Matt Murschels or Brett McMurphys talking about how the system is unfairly stacked and a CFP buster like UCF beating on the door every single year.
The deck is most definitely stacked against G5 schools. Look at UCF. They got shafted in the 2nd CFP poll. 8-0 and still at #12 behind a 2 loss Kentucky???
5-2-1 is the most fair scenario that still protects the regular season. In most years the best team in each league should take at least 3 of those 5 spots. It allows for a Cinderella story in the event a lesser team pulls an upset in their CCG. It allows the committee the freedom to put a team back in that may have been upset. Plus gives the G5 a legitimate shot.
Last edited by APPdiesel on Wed Nov 07, 2018 8:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- CornCobPipes
- Posts: 1407
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 9:22 pm
- School: Appalachian State
- Has thanked: 1086 times
- Been thanked: 351 times
Re: We rise....
Truth bites sometimes......but I love a realist....by the same token I like the level of challenge we are at now vs the old FCS days.ericsaid wrote: ↑Sat Oct 27, 2018 8:35 pmUnfortunately, College Football, especially in the G5, leaves little to no room for error to accomplish something out of the ordinary. The fact that is takes lottery type odds to have a UCF type season for our level versus a 2-loss team being considered for a 4 team playoff is a joke.
KICK ASS!!!
-
- Posts: 1183
- Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2017 12:01 pm
- School: Appalachian State
- Has thanked: 119 times
- Been thanked: 504 times
Re: We rise....
P5 conference champ vs G5 conference champ
All P5's should agree since they are far SUPERIOR!!!!!!!!!
SEC vs SunBelt
Acc vs Conf USA
Mac vs Big
Mtwest vs Pac
Big12 vs Aac
Play at neutral site All Conference champs make playoffs.
All P5's should agree since they are far SUPERIOR!!!!!!!!!
SEC vs SunBelt
Acc vs Conf USA
Mac vs Big
Mtwest vs Pac
Big12 vs Aac
Play at neutral site All Conference champs make playoffs.
-
- Posts: 1509
- Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2015 10:51 pm
- School: Appalachian State
- Has thanked: 865 times
- Been thanked: 985 times
- YesAppCan
- Posts: 5870
- Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 7:52 pm
- School: Appalachian State
- Location: Greensboro
- Has thanked: 1584 times
- Been thanked: 567 times
Re: We rise....
It doesn't, but neither would half the P-5 schools with all the extra losses on their schedule due to playing each other work. The bottom 2/3's of P-5's would be "demanding" a fairer shake against the Alabamas of the world. It exposes the reality of the haves and have nots, I guess you could say.