oldschool2

But you understand my point.. I'll never say that 1 play is the sole reason for the overall outcome of a game but at that particular point in the game, it was a huge deal. Momentum swings are enormous. Since we're speculating anyway.. they had led the entire game up to that point. You telling me it isn't plausible for them to have punted, gone to OT, and won in OT? A 20 point loss to the #11 team in the country shouldn't cost a team a playoff spot if they're truly one of the best and had a stellar season other than that. I know this is this year and that's all that matters but Alabama has been in the 4 team playoff before with a loss to an unranked team. Unranked.

By the way.. if Clemson would’ve lost their conference championship game just look at their resume. They would have only beaten two ranked teams. A two point win over #19 and a 4 point win over #20. Yeah that’s not very impressive. The only thing they have going for them is the fact they haven’t lost and they won their conference.

Of course! You should be entitled to one bad game. And at the end of the season if you take the 5 champs plus 3 at large bids the chances are high that you’ll get to redeem the loss (cough cough Georgia). According to my suggestion ^ Clemson could still lose just their title game and likely be ok. According to the current playoff system Georgia was punished for one bad decision..not even game. Them trying a fake punt at midfield after an absolutely stellar season cost them a chance at the National Championship.

If Clemson and Ohio St lose their championship games to the likes of Pitt and Northwestern.. do they deserve to be in the playoff? When underdogs get in and make deep runs in basketball and baseball they’re heroes.

UCF didn't beat any ranked teams this year... and beat Memphis by 1 point. I understand what you're saying but that's also just more proof that the field needs to be expanded. Any team in the top 25 is capable of beating or losing to any other on any given night. Bama has also been in the field of 4 before when having their only loss to an unranked team. Is that fair? You could argue that they were still one of the best in the country and maybe they were...but again...that proves that it can be done. The current playoff system has no requirement of getting in other than finishing in the top 4 by the end of the season. I would hope that every FBS school in the country has the goal of winning the national championship. That's basically saying to a school that you're not allowed to have a single off game or have any key injuries. That very thing happened to Penn St a couple seasons ago. Had some injuries and lost big to Michigan...then came back, beat OhSt, beat top 10 Wisconsin, and won the Big10...but because of the current system was left out. That's crap.

Fixing some.. but I still think that expanding to 8 teams will eliminate the possibility of someone getting left out that shouldn't have. Every single year you could easily make the argument someone got hosed. To be honest.. that's true. You could've slid Georgia or Ohio St in this year and either would've been fine. Me personally.. I think that Notre Dame could've been left out. It's all debatable but the fact remains that by expanding one more round there is no more "well they are one of the best but got left out". Should it just be top 8? Possibly. I happen to like the Power 5 champs plus 3 more because it makes it like every other sport. I have a conference championship ring that I barely wear that I wouldn't have if only the "top 2/4" got to compete for everything.

What I used was an example. That may be the case with Bama but you know good and well that a majority of games for the first few weeks are blowouts. Zero fun to watch. For me anyway..

Every year that the playoff has happened if you took the 5 Power 5 champs and added the next 3 best ranked "non champs" it would've been a fair indicator. I believe that that would be the case every year. But that way it would be a lot more exciting, interesting, and make for better preseason games. I, for one, am tired of seeing Bama vs Appalachian St or whatever for the first 3 weeks of college football. Let the conference champs in so we can see some top 10 matchups early in the year.

Any top 25 team is capable of beating another top 25 team. It literally happens every week. And yeah you're right there's a chance that a weak team wins their conference and sneaks into the tournament but that's no different than any other sport. That's just life. And that's what the 3 at large bids would be for. You can say what you want but I played for a team that not only won our conference tournament (when we had no business being in it) but went on to win the first game of the NCAA tournament..when we had no business being in it. My mind won't be changed and more times than not the best teams are always there in the end.

As a general rule, I don't usually pick SeTx teams to win much past Rd2 (WOS/Newton exceptions). However.. I'm at odds with this one. EC has seemingly figured out the keys to smaller school success. Transfers. Will these kids be enough to get EC further over the hump this year? We'll see. Definitely possible.

I just wrote this letter and emailed to [email protected]: To whom it may concern, Hello. My name is (name) and I would like to share a serious concern of mine regarding the current BCS playoff format. For years I held issue with the ways in which National Champions were decided in NCAA FBS football. It never sat well with me that the two teams that were picked to compete for the title were based solely on the BCS ranking system. While I agree with the way that the rankings are chosen (record, strength of schedule, etc..) I never believed that having one game between the two top-ranked teams could truly decide a champion. When the decision was made to move to a playoff format I was beyond thrilled. Thrilled until I realized that it was exactly the same way as previously done, except for the adding of the 3rd and 4th ranked teams according to BCS rankings. If history tells us anything it is that rankings do not always mean anything. This is evident in the fact that your own rankings change weekly. Every single week during the season ranked teams are beaten by unranked teams, and high ranked teams are beaten by lower ranked teams. This is not only evident in this regard but also in every single sport that is or has ever been played. There are so many variables that can determine or affect the outcome of a football game (or any sport). I am urging whoever will read this to please consider the following: In literally every single sport in the history of sports, there are leagues/conferences that are used to determine seeding in a post-season tournament. To decide a post-season champion. While I know that FBS football is slightly different than most other NCAA sports, I believe that a similar format can be used to determine a National Champion. It's obvious that the competition level in certain conferences is stronger than other conferences from year to year but that doesn't change the fact that a conference champion does at least deserve a shot to play for some kind of post-season championship. I'm not talking about bowl games. I'm also not referring to FCS schools. I'm suggesting that the conference champion of each of the Power 5 conferences not only deserves to be in a National Championship playoff but need to be in order to truly know who the team will be that should represent NCAA football as the best team in the country. Every single year there has been a very legitimate argument for at least one team that has been left out of the playoff, as well as a very legitimate argument why a team in the playoff shouldn't have been. What I'm suggesting would not only eliminate that issue but make for more exciting post-season as well as pre-season FBS football. Let me explain. By simply adding 4 more teams to the playoff and one more round of the playoff you could include each of the FBS conference champions as well as 3 other highly ranked teams that didn't win their conference. That's not only fair, but it's the way that every sport that has ever been played decides a champion. From High School all the way up to Professional in both men and women's sports. I've never understood why FBS football has to be the only one who doesn't follow this format. Now.. The BCS ranking system could be used to determine seed matchups for the National Tournament. This year the tournament would be as followed: 1 Alabama (SEC champ) vs. 8 Washington (Pac12 champ) (take the place of an at-large bid since they won the Pac12) 4 Oklahoma (Big12 champ) vs. 5 Georgia (at-large) 2 Clemson (ACC champ) vs. 7 Michigan (at large) 3 Notre Dame (at-large) vs. 6 Ohio State (Big10 champ) This ^ is the format that is literally used with every sport to have ever been played that decides a champion. FBS football should be no different. Here is the reason that pre-season games would be better and possibly more of a money maker for each of the schools. I played 4 years of college basketball and happen to know for a fact that preseason games are supposed to be used as a preparation for actual conference games. By including the conference champion into the post-season tournament (no matter the rank or record) you will eliminate the fear of a team getting a loss. You know as well as I do that teams shy away from playing tough games in the preseason because they know that overall record can have an effect on their post-season chances. This would not only bring FBS football up to par with the rest of the sports world but would also bring in the power matchups before conference play that all schools and fans aspire to see. I thank you so much for taking the time to read this letter. I am very hopeful to see the continued and much-needed change in D1 football... so as to be done a similar way as D1 basketball, D1 baseball, D1 softball, D1 soccer, D1 volleyball, and every other champion that has ever been decided.

1. North Shore 2. Fort Bend Marshall 3. Silsbee 4. Cameron Yoe 5. Franklin 6. Daingerfield 7. Newton 8. San Augustine 9. Mart 10. Muenster 11. Oakwood 12. Katy Tompkins 13. Huntsville 14. Jasper 15. Gilmer Union Hill 16. Cedar Park Summit 17. Atascocita 18. Humble Summer Creek 19. Alvin Shadow Creek 20. Hutto 21. Carthage 22. Henderson 23. Price Carlisle 24. Southlake Carroll 25. Allen

"They are currently ranked higher (61) in football in the state of Texas than 6A football teams, Cy-Fair (70), Plano East (76), Temple (90), 5A schools like Cedar Park (105), Manvel (122), and a ton of 4A schools." Well...there you have it, folks. I guess it's true. By the way..don't tell the people that actually believe this that Santa is fake. It'll be heartbreaking.

The fact that this is even a thread leads me to believe that Huffman (or any school that feels remotely similar to this) will never have any real success in football. "who supports or do not support High School football during Thanksgiving break?".. Get out the flags Huffman. You're officially playing intramural football over there.

I just can't see myself thinking that Yoe loses. Until I'm given a reason not to I'm going with Yoe.

I want to change my #2 game to Strake Jesuit. Gut feeling.

1. Galena Park North Shore 2. Beaumont West Brook 3. Georgetown 4. Huntsville 5. Marshall 6. A&M Consolidated 7. Port Neches-Groves 8. Henderson 9. Carthage 10. West Orange-Stark 11. Silsbee 12. Giddings 13. Jasper 14. West 15. Cameron Yoe 16. Grandview 17. Franklin 18. Newton 19. Winona 20. San Augustine 21. Clarksville 22. Grapeland 23. Muenster 24. Shiner St. Paul 25. Van

Yeah, they actually played Buna really close.. (down to the last few minutes I think) and then beat KV but lost their QB somewhere in there. They only beat Warren after that out of their last 5 games. Apparently, the kid made quite a difference. My point is that I don't think they'll stay down, in this district, based on recent history. Started the year off pretty decent with a win over Shepherd and a tough loss to Buna so I think they would've been in the playoff picture if not for that injury. But.. that's part of the game.

Well.. I've been saying the whole latter half of this season that I was wrong about Hardin. Mostly wrong about how bad KV, OF, and Ana would be this year. I have a hard time seeing that happening again. Next year will tell a better story I think.

You are fun to debate. 1. What are you basing their "last year in 3AD1 for quite a while" statement on? I was actually told that Hardin has some pretty big classes in the younger grades. Like..abnormally big for typical Hardin #s. Maybe they don't.. I was just wondering if you are speculating. Even if they would've been D2 this year it would have been a somewhat similar ending. Take NW out of their preseason schedule and replace with Warren. Yeah it would've been a better first round game but Hemphill, AS, and Corrigan aren't bad..obviously, Newton steamrolls everybody. Hardin would've battled for the 3/4 spot if in that district. Only to play Waskom, Daingerfield, or Elysian Fields in round 1. Lol. Of course, now I'm speculating. Next year will tell us a lot when that Hardin RB graduates. 2. Hardin volleyball is very good.. for the area. Just like football for much of SeTx.. round 3 seems to be the Achilles heel for even the girl's powerhouse that is Hardin Volleyball.

Just realized I didn't pick the Joaquin/West Sabine game. I'll take Joaquin.

It'll probably be up to Franklin.

Will they score in the first half?

1. Atascocita 2. Galena Park North Shore 3. Beaumont West Brook 4. New Caney 5. Angleton 6. Alvin Shadow Creek 7. Port Arthur Memorial 8. Marshall 9. Huntsville 10. A&M Consolidated 11. Nederland 12. Port Neches-Groves 13. Lindale 14. Navasota 15. Splendora 16. Liberty 17. Jasper 18. Silsbee 19. Newton 20. Joaquin/West Sabine 21. San Augustine 22. Mart 23. Grapeland 24. Milford 25. Garrison

One could say that..that's quite a bit in there way. Even if down.. West won't be a pushover and Yoe..well..Yoe is still Yoe.