2025 College Football Season

[NWI_Irish96]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/45271767/sources-college-football-playoff-moving-straight-seeding

The 12-team College Football Playoff will move to a straight seeding model this fall, rewarding the selection committee's top four teams with the top four seeds and a first-round bye, the CFP announced Thursday.

The 10 FBS commissioners and Notre Dame athletic director Pete Bevacqua, who comprise the CFP's management committee, reached the unanimous agreement necessary to make the change during a call on Thursday afternoon.
Editor's Picks

This past season, the four highest-ranked conference champions earned the top four seeds -- regardless of where they were ranked. Now, independent Notre Dame is eligible to earn a first-round bye if the Irish are ranked in the top four.

The 12-team format has only been around for a year and yet this still feels long overdue. Last year's seeding made the whole tournament kinda unserious. The game that should have been the natty happened in the quarterfinals, and once Oregon was out, the next game that should have been the natty happened in the semifinals.

Not sure what you are talking about. The two best teams met in the finals.

Notre Dame was the 4th best team in the country.

Notre Dame lost to Ohio State by 11
Texas lost to Ohio State by 14
Oregon lost to Ohio State by 20

You understand why it's silly to use the margins of victory - not even the results - of 3 games to determine an entire ranking, right?

Generally, yes, but when they are playoff games all occurring within the span of a month, they are more telling.

There's no data to suggest that, at the end of the season, Notre Dame was anything other than the second best team.

That's interesting, because there actually is data to suggest that. A lot of it in fact.

ESPN FPI: 3rd behind OSU and Texas
ESPN SOR: 3rd behind OSU and Oregon
ESPN offensive efficiency: 9th (they're 2nd in defensive efficiency)
Teamrankings.com SOR: 4th behind OSU, Oregon, and Georgia (I am aware they beat Georgia)

Those metrics measure over the entire season. Notre Dame was clearly nowhere close to the second best team early in the season. At the end of the season, they were the second best team, though I'll also note that they were ahead of both Texas and Oregon in one of FPI and SOR, so even accounting for the early season struggles the data supports being among a small number of teams that could be considered to be #2.

Yes, that's all true . . . but this is what I said:

Notre Dame was the 4th best team in the country [last season].

If you shrink the timeframe enough you can draw just about any conclusion you want, including that ND was awful because they lost to a MAC team. Did Notre Dame have the 2nd best playoff run of any team? Yes. Does that automatically make them the second best team? No.

In the NFL, it's undeniable that Washington had a great playoff run last year, probably a better run than the Chiefs, Bills, Ravens, Lions, etc. Nobody would say Washington was better than those teams.

I shrinked the time frame to target your original assertion that Notre Dame only made the final because Oregon and Texas were on the other side of the bracket.

[thspfc]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/45271767/sources-college-football-playoff-moving-straight-seeding

The 12-team College Football Playoff will move to a straight seeding model this fall, rewarding the selection committee's top four teams with the top four seeds and a first-round bye, the CFP announced Thursday.

The 10 FBS commissioners and Notre Dame athletic director Pete Bevacqua, who comprise the CFP's management committee, reached the unanimous agreement necessary to make the change during a call on Thursday afternoon.
Editor's Picks

This past season, the four highest-ranked conference champions earned the top four seeds -- regardless of where they were ranked. Now, independent Notre Dame is eligible to earn a first-round bye if the Irish are ranked in the top four.

The 12-team format has only been around for a year and yet this still feels long overdue. Last year's seeding made the whole tournament kinda unserious. The game that should have been the natty happened in the quarterfinals, and once Oregon was out, the next game that should have been the natty happened in the semifinals.

Not sure what you are talking about. The two best teams met in the finals.

Notre Dame was the 4th best team in the country.

Notre Dame lost to Ohio State by 11
Texas lost to Ohio State by 14
Oregon lost to Ohio State by 20

You understand why it's silly to use the margins of victory - not even the results - of 3 games to determine an entire ranking, right?

Generally, yes, but when they are playoff games all occurring within the span of a month, they are more telling.

There's no data to suggest that, at the end of the season, Notre Dame was anything other than the second best team.

That's interesting, because there actually is data to suggest that. A lot of it in fact.

ESPN FPI: 3rd behind OSU and Texas
ESPN SOR: 3rd behind OSU and Oregon
ESPN offensive efficiency: 9th (they're 2nd in defensive efficiency)
Teamrankings.com SOR: 4th behind OSU, Oregon, and Georgia (I am aware they beat Georgia)

Those metrics measure over the entire season. Notre Dame was clearly nowhere close to the second best team early in the season. At the end of the season, they were the second best team, though I'll also note that they were ahead of both Texas and Oregon in one of FPI and SOR, so even accounting for the early season struggles the data supports being among a small number of teams that could be considered to be #2.

Yes, that's all true . . . but this is what I said:

Notre Dame was the 4th best team in the country [last season].

If you shrink the timeframe enough you can draw just about any conclusion you want, including that ND was awful because they lost to a MAC team. Did Notre Dame have the 2nd best playoff run of any team? Yes. Does that automatically make them the second best team? No.

In the NFL, it's undeniable that Washington had a great playoff run last year, probably a better run than the Chiefs, Bills, Ravens, Lions, etc. Nobody would say Washington was better than those teams.

I shrinked the time frame to target your original assertion that Notre Dame only made the final because Oregon and Texas were on the other side of the bracket.

Can you quote me on where I said that?

[NWI_Irish96]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/45271767/sources-college-football-playoff-moving-straight-seeding

The 12-team College Football Playoff will move to a straight seeding model this fall, rewarding the selection committee's top four teams with the top four seeds and a first-round bye, the CFP announced Thursday.

The 10 FBS commissioners and Notre Dame athletic director Pete Bevacqua, who comprise the CFP's management committee, reached the unanimous agreement necessary to make the change during a call on Thursday afternoon.
Editor's Picks

This past season, the four highest-ranked conference champions earned the top four seeds -- regardless of where they were ranked. Now, independent Notre Dame is eligible to earn a first-round bye if the Irish are ranked in the top four.

The 12-team format has only been around for a year and yet this still feels long overdue. Last year's seeding made the whole tournament kinda unserious. The game that should have been the natty happened in the quarterfinals, and once Oregon was out, the next game that should have been the natty happened in the semifinals.

Not sure what you are talking about. The two best teams met in the finals.

Notre Dame was the 4th best team in the country.

Notre Dame lost to Ohio State by 11
Texas lost to Ohio State by 14
Oregon lost to Ohio State by 20

You understand why it's silly to use the margins of victory - not even the results - of 3 games to determine an entire ranking, right?

Generally, yes, but when they are playoff games all occurring within the span of a month, they are more telling.

There's no data to suggest that, at the end of the season, Notre Dame was anything other than the second best team.

That's interesting, because there actually is data to suggest that. A lot of it in fact.

ESPN FPI: 3rd behind OSU and Texas
ESPN SOR: 3rd behind OSU and Oregon
ESPN offensive efficiency: 9th (they're 2nd in defensive efficiency)
Teamrankings.com SOR: 4th behind OSU, Oregon, and Georgia (I am aware they beat Georgia)

Those metrics measure over the entire season. Notre Dame was clearly nowhere close to the second best team early in the season. At the end of the season, they were the second best team, though I'll also note that they were ahead of both Texas and Oregon in one of FPI and SOR, so even accounting for the early season struggles the data supports being among a small number of teams that could be considered to be #2.

Yes, that's all true . . . but this is what I said:

Notre Dame was the 4th best team in the country [last season].

If you shrink the timeframe enough you can draw just about any conclusion you want, including that ND was awful because they lost to a MAC team. Did Notre Dame have the 2nd best playoff run of any team? Yes. Does that automatically make them the second best team? No.

In the NFL, it's undeniable that Washington had a great playoff run last year, probably a better run than the Chiefs, Bills, Ravens, Lions, etc. Nobody would say Washington was better than those teams.

I shrinked the time frame to target your original assertion that Notre Dame only made the final because Oregon and Texas were on the other side of the bracket.

Can you quote me on where I said that?

You said the game that should have been the natty was in the quarterfinals, thus implying that Oregon was the second best team. The two best teams played for the championship.

[thspfc]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/45271767/sources-college-football-playoff-moving-straight-seeding

The 12-team College Football Playoff will move to a straight seeding model this fall, rewarding the selection committee's top four teams with the top four seeds and a first-round bye, the CFP announced Thursday.

The 10 FBS commissioners and Notre Dame athletic director Pete Bevacqua, who comprise the CFP's management committee, reached the unanimous agreement necessary to make the change during a call on Thursday afternoon.
Editor's Picks

This past season, the four highest-ranked conference champions earned the top four seeds -- regardless of where they were ranked. Now, independent Notre Dame is eligible to earn a first-round bye if the Irish are ranked in the top four.

The 12-team format has only been around for a year and yet this still feels long overdue. Last year's seeding made the whole tournament kinda unserious. The game that should have been the natty happened in the quarterfinals, and once Oregon was out, the next game that should have been the natty happened in the semifinals.

Not sure what you are talking about. The two best teams met in the finals.

Notre Dame was the 4th best team in the country.

Notre Dame lost to Ohio State by 11
Texas lost to Ohio State by 14
Oregon lost to Ohio State by 20

You understand why it's silly to use the margins of victory - not even the results - of 3 games to determine an entire ranking, right?

Generally, yes, but when they are playoff games all occurring within the span of a month, they are more telling.

There's no data to suggest that, at the end of the season, Notre Dame was anything other than the second best team.

That's interesting, because there actually is data to suggest that. A lot of it in fact.

ESPN FPI: 3rd behind OSU and Texas
ESPN SOR: 3rd behind OSU and Oregon
ESPN offensive efficiency: 9th (they're 2nd in defensive efficiency)
Teamrankings.com SOR: 4th behind OSU, Oregon, and Georgia (I am aware they beat Georgia)

Those metrics measure over the entire season. Notre Dame was clearly nowhere close to the second best team early in the season. At the end of the season, they were the second best team, though I'll also note that they were ahead of both Texas and Oregon in one of FPI and SOR, so even accounting for the early season struggles the data supports being among a small number of teams that could be considered to be #2.

Yes, that's all true . . . but this is what I said:

Notre Dame was the 4th best team in the country [last season].

If you shrink the timeframe enough you can draw just about any conclusion you want, including that ND was awful because they lost to a MAC team. Did Notre Dame have the 2nd best playoff run of any team? Yes. Does that automatically make them the second best team? No.

In the NFL, it's undeniable that Washington had a great playoff run last year, probably a better run than the Chiefs, Bills, Ravens, Lions, etc. Nobody would say Washington was better than those teams.

I shrinked the time frame to target your original assertion that Notre Dame only made the final because Oregon and Texas were on the other side of the bracket.

Can you quote me on where I said that?

You said the game that should have been the natty was in the quarterfinals, thus implying that Oregon was the second best team. The two best teams played for the championship.

To repeat, can you quote me on where I implied this:

Notre Dame only made the final because Oregon and Texas were on the other side of the bracket.

[NWI_Irish96]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/45271767/sources-college-football-playoff-moving-straight-seeding

The 12-team College Football Playoff will move to a straight seeding model this fall, rewarding the selection committee's top four teams with the top four seeds and a first-round bye, the CFP announced Thursday.

The 10 FBS commissioners and Notre Dame athletic director Pete Bevacqua, who comprise the CFP's management committee, reached the unanimous agreement necessary to make the change during a call on Thursday afternoon.
Editor's Picks

This past season, the four highest-ranked conference champions earned the top four seeds -- regardless of where they were ranked. Now, independent Notre Dame is eligible to earn a first-round bye if the Irish are ranked in the top four.

The 12-team format has only been around for a year and yet this still feels long overdue. Last year's seeding made the whole tournament kinda unserious. The game that should have been the natty happened in the quarterfinals, and once Oregon was out, the next game that should have been the natty happened in the semifinals.

Not sure what you are talking about. The two best teams met in the finals.

Notre Dame was the 4th best team in the country.

Notre Dame lost to Ohio State by 11
Texas lost to Ohio State by 14
Oregon lost to Ohio State by 20

You understand why it's silly to use the margins of victory - not even the results - of 3 games to determine an entire ranking, right?

Generally, yes, but when they are playoff games all occurring within the span of a month, they are more telling.

There's no data to suggest that, at the end of the season, Notre Dame was anything other than the second best team.

That's interesting, because there actually is data to suggest that. A lot of it in fact.

ESPN FPI: 3rd behind OSU and Texas
ESPN SOR: 3rd behind OSU and Oregon
ESPN offensive efficiency: 9th (they're 2nd in defensive efficiency)
Teamrankings.com SOR: 4th behind OSU, Oregon, and Georgia (I am aware they beat Georgia)

Those metrics measure over the entire season. Notre Dame was clearly nowhere close to the second best team early in the season. At the end of the season, they were the second best team, though I'll also note that they were ahead of both Texas and Oregon in one of FPI and SOR, so even accounting for the early season struggles the data supports being among a small number of teams that could be considered to be #2.

Yes, that's all true . . . but this is what I said:

Notre Dame was the 4th best team in the country [last season].

If you shrink the timeframe enough you can draw just about any conclusion you want, including that ND was awful because they lost to a MAC team. Did Notre Dame have the 2nd best playoff run of any team? Yes. Does that automatically make them the second best team? No.

In the NFL, it's undeniable that Washington had a great playoff run last year, probably a better run than the Chiefs, Bills, Ravens, Lions, etc. Nobody would say Washington was better than those teams.

I shrinked the time frame to target your original assertion that Notre Dame only made the final because Oregon and Texas were on the other side of the bracket.

Can you quote me on where I said that?

You said the game that should have been the natty was in the quarterfinals, thus implying that Oregon was the second best team. The two best teams played for the championship.

To repeat, can you quote me on where I implied this:

Notre Dame only made the final because Oregon and Texas were on the other side of the bracket.

Saying that the game that should have been the natty was played in the quarterfinals directly implies that Oregon was the second best team, and then saying that the next game that should have been the natty was played in the semifinals, directly implying that Texas was the next best team.

Unless you were suggesting that the game that should have been the natty should not have been between the two best teams, which is a very bizarre position but at least gets you out of your contradiction.

[thspfc]

Saying that the game that should have been the natty was played in the quarterfinals directly implies that Oregon was the second best team

Yes

and then saying that the next game that should have been the natty was played in the semifinals, directly implying that Texas was the next best team.

Yes

That's great but where is the part where I said the "only reason Notre Dame made the natty was because of UO and UT being on the other side of the bracket"? Where did I say that? I would say you're putting words in my mouth, but we're not even arguing the same point anymore.

Have I ever downplayed ND's wins over Indiana, Georgia, and Penn St, and everything they did in the regular season (beyond saying they weren't the 2nd best team in the country)? Have I ever said that there's no other reason they should've been in that game?

Unless you were suggesting that the game that should have been the natty should not have been between the two best teams, which is a very bizarre position but at least gets you out of your contradiction.

I don't even know what this means. Can you quote me on the two sides of this contradiction? What was the first thing I said, and what do you think I might be saying now that contradicts myself?

[Max Rockatansky]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/45271767/sources-college-football-playoff-moving-straight-seeding

The 12-team College Football Playoff will move to a straight seeding model this fall, rewarding the selection committee's top four teams with the top four seeds and a first-round bye, the CFP announced Thursday.

The 10 FBS commissioners and Notre Dame athletic director Pete Bevacqua, who comprise the CFP's management committee, reached the unanimous agreement necessary to make the change during a call on Thursday afternoon.
Editor's Picks

This past season, the four highest-ranked conference champions earned the top four seeds -- regardless of where they were ranked. Now, independent Notre Dame is eligible to earn a first-round bye if the Irish are ranked in the top four.

The 12-team format has only been around for a year and yet this still feels long overdue. Last year's seeding made the whole tournament kinda unserious. The game that should have been the natty happened in the quarterfinals, and once Oregon was out, the next game that should have been the natty happened in the semifinals.

Not sure what you are talking about. The two best teams met in the finals.

Notre Dame was the 4th best team in the country.

Notre Dame lost to Ohio State by 11
Texas lost to Ohio State by 14
Oregon lost to Ohio State by 20

You understand why it's silly to use the margins of victory - not even the results - of 3 games to determine an entire ranking, right?

Generally, yes, but when they are playoff games all occurring within the span of a month, they are more telling.

There's no data to suggest that, at the end of the season, Notre Dame was anything other than the second best team.

That's interesting, because there actually is data to suggest that. A lot of it in fact.

ESPN FPI: 3rd behind OSU and Texas
ESPN SOR: 3rd behind OSU and Oregon
ESPN offensive efficiency: 9th (they're 2nd in defensive efficiency)
Teamrankings.com SOR: 4th behind OSU, Oregon, and Georgia (I am aware they beat Georgia)

Those metrics measure over the entire season. Notre Dame was clearly nowhere close to the second best team early in the season. At the end of the season, they were the second best team, though I'll also note that they were ahead of both Texas and Oregon in one of FPI and SOR, so even accounting for the early season struggles the data supports being among a small number of teams that could be considered to be #2.

Yes, that's all true . . . but this is what I said:

Notre Dame was the 4th best team in the country [last season].

If you shrink the timeframe enough you can draw just about any conclusion you want, including that ND was awful because they lost to a MAC team. Did Notre Dame have the 2nd best playoff run of any team? Yes. Does that automatically make them the second best team? No.

In the NFL, it's undeniable that Washington had a great playoff run last year, probably a better run than the Chiefs, Bills, Ravens, Lions, etc. Nobody would say Washington was better than those teams.

I shrinked the time frame to target your original assertion that Notre Dame only made the final because Oregon and Texas were on the other side of the bracket.

Can you quote me on where I said that?

You said the game that should have been the natty was in the quarterfinals, thus implying that Oregon was the second best team. The two best teams played for the championship.

To repeat, can you quote me on where I implied this:

Notre Dame only made the final because Oregon and Texas were on the other side of the bracket.

Saying that the game that should have been the natty was played in the quarterfinals directly implies that Oregon was the second best team, and then saying that the next game that should have been the natty was played in the semifinals, directly implying that Texas was the next best team.

Unless you were suggesting that the game that should have been the natty should not have been between the two best teams, which is a very bizarre position but at least gets you out of your contradiction.

Somewhere Goat Jesus is smiling.

[bugo]

Rich Rodriguez hasn't shown much evidence he can replicate his first term success at West Virginia anywhere else he's coached.

He let the late Ryan Mallett leave Michigan for Arkansas because Mallett was a pocket passer and he ran a scheme meant for a mobile quarterback. A great coach would have modified his offense to make use of such an amazing player. He apparently can't get out of his comfort zone.

[bugo]

How exactly did Indiana show they were worthy?

By winning 11 games in a major conference.

[bugo]

Eh Oklahoma is Dixie. Also congrats Ohio State on winning the natty.

Oklahoma is not a Southern state.

[SEWIGuy]

How exactly did Indiana show they were worthy?

By winning 11 games in a major conference.

Why are we resurrecting debates from five months ago???

[bugo]

Why are we resurrecting debates from five months ago???

I don't know. Ask NWI_Irish96. He's the one who posted to an old thread. Don't fucking blame me.

[Max Rockatansky]

Poor Indiana, their fanbase can't even enjoy one good season of football without the Notre Dame brigade shitting on it.

[SEWIGuy]

Why are we resurrecting debates from five months ago???

I don't know. Ask NWI_Irish96. He's the one who posted to an old thread. Don't fucking blame me.

He posted to a old thread with new information.

You replied to a comment from the day after the first playoff game from a debate that had long petered out.

If you can't tell the difference, I don't know what to say.

[bugo]

Why are we resurrecting debates from five months ago???

I don't know. Ask NWI_Irish96. He's the one who posted to an old thread. Don't fucking blame me.

He posted to a old thread with new information.

You replied to a comment from the day after the first playoff game from a debate that had long petered out.

If you can't tell the difference, I don't know what to say.

Who fucking cares. You need to smoke a bowl and chill the fuck out, bruv.

[SEWIGuy]

Why are we resurrecting debates from five months ago???

I don't know. Ask NWI_Irish96. He's the one who posted to an old thread. Don't fucking blame me.

He posted to a old thread with new information.

You replied to a comment from the day after the first playoff game from a debate that had long petered out.

If you can't tell the difference, I don't know what to say.

Who fucking cares. You need to smoke a bowl and chill the fuck out, bruv.

It's odd message board behavior and your reponse indicates you're kinda pathetic and unaware. So I guess it's to be expected.

[NWI_Irish96]

Poor Indiana, their fanbase can't even enjoy one good season of football without the Notre Dame brigade shitting on it.

I didn't say anything about Indiana. I thought they were accurately rated at #10.

[bugo]

It's odd message board behavior and your reponse indicates you're kinda pathetic and unaware. So I guess it's to be expected.

Like I said, you need to smoke a bowl or drink a beer or snort some cocaine or whatever you dweebs do.

[thspfc]

I don't know. Ask NWI_Irish96. He's the one who posted to an old thread. Don't fucking blame me.

Who fucking cares. You need to smoke a bowl and chill the fuck out, bruv.

I find it funny that the most pissed off person in the thread is the one telling everyone else they need to chill out. I also find it funny, or maybe just sad, that the most pissed off person recommends cocaine as a good method of chilling out.

[SEWIGuy]

I don't know. Ask NWI_Irish96. He's the one who posted to an old thread. Don't fucking blame me.

Who fucking cares. You need to smoke a bowl and chill the fuck out, bruv.

I find it funny that the most pissed off person in the thread is the one telling everyone else they need to chill out. I also find it funny, or maybe just sad, that the most pissed off person recommends cocaine as a good method of chilling out.

I wish the like button was still around.

[Max Rockatansky]

I don't know. Ask NWI_Irish96. He's the one who posted to an old thread. Don't fucking blame me.

Who fucking cares. You need to smoke a bowl and chill the fuck out, bruv.

I find it funny that the most pissed off person in the thread is the one telling everyone else they need to chill out. I also find it funny, or maybe just sad, that the most pissed off person recommends cocaine as a good method of chilling out.

I wish the like button was still around.

Heh, my older brother used to claim it calmed him down.  At the time I think he misunderstood what "calm" actually was.