FLBear5630 said:

---

LTBear19 said:

---

With all this talk about whether SMU or Miami deserve to be in over Alabama, the real conversation should revolve around Indiana's credentials.

They have beaten ZERO ranked teams.

And when they did play against a ranked opponent (Ohio State) they were absolutely drilled (38-15).

Their best win was against a 7-5 Michigan team (which they barely beat at home, mind you - 20-15). In fact, that is their only victory against a team with a winning record.

Even Boise State can claim a better resume than the Hoosiers.

Here is a breakdown of their schedule (and opponent records):

FIU (4-8)
Western Illinois (4-8)
UCLA (5-7)
Charlotte (5-7)
Maryland (4-8)
Northwestern (4-8)
Nebraska (6-6)
Washington (6-6)
Michigan State (5-7)
Michigan (7-5)
OSU (10-2)
Purdue (1-11)

Look, I understand that you can only play the teams in front of you, and had they at least battled OSU down to the wire, I could possibly overlook this 'weak sauce' schedule.

But if we're comparing resumes, I'd absolutely put SMU, Miami, and probably even a 3-loss Bama Team in over the Hoosiers.

---

B10 got 5 in of 12. That is BS. SEC's argument is with B10, not ACC.
Oregon
Texas
OSU
All belong. You can make an argument for PSU. Ind? No way, if any slot should go to SEC it is IN.

I can go B10 and SEC 4 each to get a playoff. But part of the fun of the playoff is to give the have nots a Cinderella shot. More blue bloods, with 3 losses? Who wants to see that?
For those that are saying Cinderella can't win, Vandy beat Bama

---

B10 only got four teams

GoldenBear007 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

LTBear19 said:

---

With all this talk about whether SMU or Miami deserve to be in over Alabama, the real conversation should revolve around Indiana's credentials.

They have beaten ZERO ranked teams.

And when they did play against a ranked opponent (Ohio State) they were absolutely drilled (38-15).

Their best win was against a 7-5 Michigan team (which they barely beat at home, mind you - 20-15). In fact, that is their only victory against a team with a winning record.

Even Boise State can claim a better resume than the Hoosiers.

Here is a breakdown of their schedule (and opponent records):

FIU (4-8)
Western Illinois (4-8)
UCLA (5-7)
Charlotte (5-7)
Maryland (4-8)
Northwestern (4-8)
Nebraska (6-6)
Washington (6-6)
Michigan State (5-7)
Michigan (7-5)
OSU (10-2)
Purdue (1-11)

Look, I understand that you can only play the teams in front of you, and had they at least battled OSU down to the wire, I could possibly overlook this 'weak sauce' schedule.

But if we're comparing resumes, I'd absolutely put SMU, Miami, and probably even a 3-loss Bama Team in over the Hoosiers.

---

B10 got 5 in of 12. That is BS. SEC's argument is with B10, not ACC.
Oregon
Texas
OSU
All belong. You can make an argument for PSU. Ind? No way, if any slot should go to SEC it is IN.

I can go B10 and SEC 4 each to get a playoff. But part of the fun of the playoff is to give the have nots a Cinderella shot. More blue bloods, with 3 losses? Who wants to see that?
For those that are saying Cinderella can't win, Vandy beat Bama

---

B10 only got four teams

---

I was wrong, wrongky attributed ND to B10 when counting. Brian cramp on my part.

LTBear19 said:

---

That is 100% subjective.

What we do know is that they got stomped out by the only good team they faced.

---

And Georgia got bludgeoned by Ole Piss. Hanging an entire hypothesis on a single game isn't wise. Especially when to do so you're completely overlooking Indiana's SOR.

People need to get over this idea that it's easy to go 11-1. It's not. Ever. In any conference.

I think it's fine to state that any team with a weak strength of schedule should have to go 11-1 to earn an at-large bid into the playoff and make a second loss disqualifying. But if going 11-1 was easy, more teams would do it. Even the G5 leagues don't usually have a team survive their season with one loss or fewer.

Looking at the schedules before the season started:


SMU's inaugural ACC game was scheduled against a Florida St team that went 12-1 the year before and was preseason pick to be conference champs. No one predicted the greatest one season collapse in modern college football history.

Indiana's schedule featured both participants in the 2023 National Championship game. No one expected both of them to be bastions of mediocrity in 2024.

Arizona St's schedule featured the teams picked to finish 1, 2, 3 and 5 in the Big12 preseason poll. No one expected those teams to finish 16th, 15th, 8th and 13th, respectively.


And on the other hand, Alabama scheduled bravely (for them) with a noncon road game at Wisconsin. No one predicted the Badgers would finish 5-7 and break a 20+ year bowl streak.

jikespingleton said:

---

LTBear19 said:

---

With all this talk about whether SMU or Miami deserve to be in over Alabama, the real conversation should revolve around Indiana's credentials.

They have beaten ZERO ranked teams.

---

Let's talk about UT while we are at it.

They beat 1 ranked team all year. Those *****es should be left out, too.

---

I think there are three 3 loss SEC teams (Bama, Ole Miss, and SC) that have a better case than 2 loss Texas. Texas had a lucky draw and didn't beat anybody that good. Those 3 SEC teams had much tougher draws this year and had meaningful wins.

SIC EM 94 said:

---

Indiana beats Notre Dame…book it!

---

Which begs the question about Notre Dame. They didn't have to win a conference championship and have the worst loss of anyone in the field. Not sure who their best win was . . . maybe A&M?

MT_Bear said:

---

LTBear19 said:

---

That is 100% subjective.

What we do know is that they got stomped out by the only good team they faced.

---

And Georgia got bludgeoned by Ole Piss. Hanging an entire hypothesis on a single game isn't wise. Especially when to do so you're completely overlooking Indiana's SOR.

---

But Georgia had plenty other games to hang its hat on. They played a tough conference schedule and probably as tough of a non-conference schedule as anyone ... they played Clemson and Ga Tech (a rivalry game and when it was playing its best football after beating Miami the week before). All told, they have 4 wins against teams in the playoffs! It'll be pretty amazing if they have much left in the tank.

I just realized why Indiana is in: ESPN wanted them to play ND in their Blue Blood Invitational. Why did they want ND in? Because they have a large national audience. The winner will play Georgia in the next game, mostly likely losing, & thus will pave the way for Georgia to get to the championship game. Of course, my guesswork could be wrong. Since it's all about $$$ this theory is as plausible as any.

Notre Dame had a bad loss, but they're playing as well as anyone and have been for a while now. I wouldn't want to match up with them in the playoff.

historian said:

---

I just realized why Indiana is in: ESPN wanted them to play ND in their Blue Blood Invitational. Why did they want ND in? Because they have a large national audience. The winner will play Georgia in the next game, mostly likely losing, & thus will pave the way for Georgia to get to the championship game. Of course, my guesswork could be wrong. Since it's all about $$$ this theory is as plausible as any.

---

I had UGA going the distance but Carson beck is out for the rest of the year and their backup isn't impressive

I think the committee did a good job.

Bama lost to Vandy and OU. For folks wanting Bama in, let that sink in. If it wasn't for scheduling a 4th cupcake non-conf team, OU would not be in a bowl game. Now, you have the Bama AD and Saban yammering about how Bama shouldn't schedule so hard. Newsflash, Nick: their losses were all IN conference.

Indiana? They deserve in. 1 loss team who played solid all year, and as someone pointed out, they had two teams from the NC game last year on their schedule. They do need to schedule at least one non-conf team with a pulse. You can argue the same for PSU: they really only played Ohio State. They dodged the hard B1G teams, too. Their non-conf featured an underwhelming WVU team.

SMU? a team who had one loss going into the ACC champ game. I'm glad the committee didn't penalize them for that.

We want both in. Why? Like Baylor, they are not blue bloods, and one fear going into this season was: it will be all blue bloods. That sets precedence going forward.

The rest of the field was set.

That Clemson win over SMU kicked a blueblood out and made the committee's job much easier. If SMU would've won, then you have folks arguing over 2-3 SEC teams (Bama, Ole Miss and SoCar), Miami, perhaps Clemson and perhaps Army.

The size of the super conferences has created disparate/unequal conference schedules for their members. Indiana, Penn State, SMU, and even Texas were all beneficiaries of easy conference schedules this year and didn't have to do much to advance to the playoffs. Georgia overcame a difficult draw (it has 4 wins over teams in the playoff field) but lost its quarterback in the grind. Playoff caliber teams like South Carolina and Ole Miss had tough draws and suffered for it.

The Big 10 carries an undue amount of clout because of 2 members and has an inordinate amount of relatively easy wins for its top teams to feast on. It will have teams like Indiana and Penn State getting in every year because of an easy conference draw.

The Big 12 has much more parity, so schedule difference will probably not be as dramatic. The SEC has some easier games (Vandy, Miss State, Arkansas) but has more strength from top to bottom than it's had in a long time. The Big 10 by contrast has a boatload of easier wins (Northwestern, Minnesota, Rutgers, Maryland, Purdue, Nebraska, UCLA, Indiana . . . in most years). Indiana feasted on teams like that this year. I think the Big 10 will probably be getting 4 teams in for years to come until the Big 12 and ACC can demonstrate they are on par with the Big 10.

For everyone on here who pumped up Indiana a few weeks back (talking about how 'deserving' they were), tonight's outcome proved why you can't (and shouldn't) just go by record, as it can often times be deceiving.

I'm not going to necessarily say that Bama or Miami should have been in the CFP instead of the Hoosiers, but there should have AT LEAST been a discussion about Indiana being worthy of a spot.

For those who missed it - Tonight's game was 27-3 up until the final 90 seconds.

And unlike regular season trap games, players and coaches knew exactly what was on the line tonight, and the end result was still a beat-down.

Schedules are not created equally, and you have to take that into consideration when identifying the CFP participants (and not be blindly fooled by a team's record against soft competition).

And while limiting the subjectivity is preferred, there were concerns with Indiana that should have been examined much more closely (like the 38-15 loss to the one really good team they played all year - Ohio State). Had they not completely been blown out in that game, then the warning signs would not have been as obvious, imo.

But if we're being honest, I think Bama/ND in South Bend would have been a much better matchup than the snoozefest we witnessed tonight.

I'm not gonna call out anyone by name, but we had some on here saying Indiana would have been able to handle Georgia.

LTBear19 said:

---

For everyone on here who pumped up Indiana a few weeks back (talking about how 'deserving' they were), tonight's outcome proved why you can't (and shouldn't) just go by record, as it can often times be deceiving.

I'm not going to necessarily say that Bama or Miami should have been in the CFP instead of the Hoosiers, but there should have AT LEAST been a discussion about Indiana being worthy of a spot.

For those who missed it - Tonight's game was 27-3 up until the final 90 seconds.

And unlike regular season trap games, players and coaches knew exactly what was on the line tonight, and the end result was still a beat-down.

Schedules are not created equally, and you have to take that into consideration when identifying the CFP participants (and not be blindly fooled by a team's record against soft competition).

And while limiting the subjectivity is preferred, there were concerns with Indiana that should have been examined much more closely (like the 38-15 loss to the one really good team they played all year - Ohio State). Had they not completely been blown out in that game, then the warning signs would not have been as obvious, imo.

But if we're being honest, I think Bama/ND in South Bend would have been a much better matchup than the snoozefest we witnessed tonight.

I'm not gonna call out anyone by name, but we had some on here saying Indiana would have been able to handle Georgia.

---

On the other hand Indiana probably would have scored at least one touchdown against Oklahoma.

I don't remember anyone saying Indiana could handle GA. It's been clear since the OSu game that Indiana was a fraud.
That said I seriously doubt Bama fares much better in South Bend last night. Bama is pretty one-dimensional on offense. ND would have shut them down rather easily imo.
I think you'll see similar results in today's games. I doubt that SMU keeps it close at Penn St. And Clemson will have to play out of their minds to beat Texas.
Firm believer that Tenn is also likely a paper tiger and will get handled in Columbus.

LTBear19 said:

---

For everyone on here who pumped up Indiana a few weeks back (talking about how 'deserving' they were), tonight's outcome proved why you can't (and shouldn't) just go by record, as it can often times be deceiving.

I'm not going to necessarily say that Bama or Miami should have been in the CFP instead of the Hoosiers, but there should have AT LEAST been a discussion about Indiana being worthy of a spot.

For those who missed it - Tonight's game was 27-3 up until the final 90 seconds.

And unlike regular season trap games, players and coaches knew exactly what was on the line tonight, and the end result was still a beat-down.

Schedules are not created equally, and you have to take that into consideration when identifying the CFP participants (and not be blindly fooled by a team's record against soft competition).

And while limiting the subjectivity is preferred, there were concerns with Indiana that should have been examined much more closely (like the 38-15 loss to the one really good team they played all year - Ohio State). Had they not completely been blown out in that game, then the warning signs would not have been as obvious, imo.

But if we're being honest, I think Bama/ND in South Bend would have been a much better matchup than the snoozefest we witnessed tonight.

I'm not gonna call out anyone by name, but we had some on here saying Indiana would have been able to handle Georgia.

---

In the first round of the tourney there are always these games. Either it is a playoff and the winners from Conferences get in to determine a Nat Champion (Win your league) or an invitational. If it is a invitational say it and be done with it, but it is just another tourney. Can't cherry pick teams and then crown. Ole Miss, Miami, a host of teams can beat IU. ND actually underperformed.

Dinging Indiana in CFP is fair.

But only if you also ding every SEC team. Beyond any doubt the SEC games the system.
Only 8 conference games. Imbalanced schedules so they avoid the best teams playing one another to the utmost. November buy games to minimize weird "team is beat down" upsets.

The P4 need to require a minimum of 11 games against other P4 teams and the same number of conference games for every conference. And put some parameters on achieving balanced schedules.

All of that said, the Big Ten is in danger of getting totally exposed this CFP.
Limiting each conference to three teams needs another look.

IowaBear said:

---

I don't remember anyone saying Indiana could handle GA. It's been clear since the OSu game that Indiana was a fraud.
That said I seriously doubt Bama fares much better in South Bend last night. Bama is pretty one-dimensional on offense. ND would have shut them down rather easily imo.
I think you'll see similar results in today's games. I doubt that SMU keeps it close at Penn St. And Clemson will have to play out of their minds to beat Texas.
Firm believer that Tenn is also likely a paper tiger and will get handled in Columbus.

---

Trust me. It happened. If you go back through this thread you'll see who the culprit was.

But to be fair, there wasn't just one kool-aid drinker on here.

Here was a comment from another Hoosier Hero:

"Indiana beats Notre Dame…book it!"

Please note the special emphasis on the "book it!" part.

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

Dinging Indiana in CFP is fair.

But only if you also ding every SEC team. Beyond any doubt the SEC games the system.
Only 8 conference games. Imbalanced schedules so they avoid the best teams playing one another to the utmost. November buy games to minimize weird "team is beat down" upsets.

The P4 need to require a minimum of 11 games against other P4 teams and the same number of conference games for every conference. And put some parameters on achieving balanced schedules.

All of that said, the Big Ten is in danger of getting totally exposed this CFP.
Limiting each conference to three teams needs another look.

---

I may be old school, but IMO it has to be earned during the season. You have to win your Conference, if you want to tie it to Divisions? I am good. But I want to see it tied to something earned, not a star chamber deeming who gets in or who doesn't.

I agree, B10 is about to get exposed. I think SMU gives PSU all they can handle and would not be surprised for the upset.

SMU is the school that scares me in this area, they have the money, institutional knowledge and political win to be on the SEC scale. The rest of us, not so sure. From what I can see UT and SMU are the ones with the resources to win in this era.

OP was right. Props.

Thanks for the props.

whitetrash said:

---

Looking at the schedules before the season started:


SMU's inaugural ACC game was scheduled against a Florida St team that went 12-1 the year before and was preseason pick to be conference champs. No one predicted the greatest one season collapse in modern college football history.

Indiana's schedule featured both participants in the 2023 National Championship game. No one expected both of them to be bastions of mediocrity in 2024.

Arizona St's schedule featured the teams picked to finish 1, 2, 3 and 5 in the Big12 preseason poll. No one expected those teams to finish 16th, 15th, 8th and 13th, respectively.


And on the other hand, Alabama scheduled bravely (for them) with a noncon road game at Wisconsin. No one predicted the Badgers would finish 5-7 and break a 20+ year bowl streak.

---

Likewise a year ago, no one here especially the fire Aranda at all cost people, could have predicted that if Baylor kept Aranda, that Baylor would have a significantly better season than UW, Michigan, FSU, Wisc, USC the list kind of goes on just in the next season.

Perhaps that is one thing the portal and NIL cause is volatility. Which also bit us in 22 and 23. Maybe no one can stay on top for long like the old days which created the blue blood class to begin with.

PartyBear said:

---

whitetrash said:

---

Looking at the schedules before the season started:


SMU's inaugural ACC game was scheduled against a Florida St team that went 12-1 the year before and was preseason pick to be conference champs. No one predicted the greatest one season collapse in modern college football history.

Indiana's schedule featured both participants in the 2023 National Championship game. No one expected both of them to be bastions of mediocrity in 2024.

Arizona St's schedule featured the teams picked to finish 1, 2, 3 and 5 in the Big12 preseason poll. No one expected those teams to finish 16th, 15th, 8th and 13th, respectively.


And on the other hand, Alabama scheduled bravely (for them) with a noncon road game at Wisconsin. No one predicted the Badgers would finish 5-7 and break a 20+ year bowl streak.

---

Likewise a year ago, no one here especially the fire Aranda at all cost people, could have predicted that if Baylor kept Aranda, that Baylor would have a significantly better season than UW, Michigan, FSU, Wisc, USC the list kind of goes on just in the next season.

Perhaps that is one thing the portal and NIL cause is volatility. Which also bit us in 22 and 23. Maybe no one can stay on top for long like the old days which created the blue blood class to begin with.

---

Why does the narrative that things have changed so much for the top programs in NIL permeate in this forum? In the preseason, Ohio State, Oregon, Texas, and Georgia (no order) were believed to be the best programs in the nation, and they all finished in the top 6 of the final CFP rankings - in fact, all top 6 of the final CFP ranking teams started the season in the top 8 of the preseason AP Poll. That's not to say that they went chalk across their schedules, but it is to say that the outcome to this point is largely what was expected for the best teams - the only difference is that there has been more conversation about the 2nd tier since many 2nd tier teams can/have made the playoffs.

Maybe it will change in the future, but the 1st year of the 12 team CFP hasn't resulted in the chaos that some believed that it would.

That may not mean they will be on top 2years from now. Although 10 and more years ago, the same data pretty much did mean they would be on top 2 years and more from now. I'm also not saying Texas will not be on top this time 2 years from now as an example because if it can be predicted that anyone will be it would be Texas and Ohio St. It is just that this is not a given.

Two truisms seem to be reaching a level of clarity:

1) G5 teams are now simply organ donors for the rich and their best players will be harvested annually.
2) Programs that thought they were elite are about to find out how monetary elite differs.
Texas > Bama when money becomes the key component.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

whitetrash said:

---

Looking at the schedules before the season started:


SMU's inaugural ACC game was scheduled against a Florida St team that went 12-1 the year before and was preseason pick to be conference champs. No one predicted the greatest one season collapse in modern college football history.

Indiana's schedule featured both participants in the 2023 National Championship game. No one expected both of them to be bastions of mediocrity in 2024.

Arizona St's schedule featured the teams picked to finish 1, 2, 3 and 5 in the Big12 preseason poll. No one expected those teams to finish 16th, 15th, 8th and 13th, respectively.


And on the other hand, Alabama scheduled bravely (for them) with a noncon road game at Wisconsin. No one predicted the Badgers would finish 5-7 and break a 20+ year bowl streak.

---

Likewise a year ago, no one here especially the fire Aranda at all cost people, could have predicted that if Baylor kept Aranda, that Baylor would have a significantly better season than UW, Michigan, FSU, Wisc, USC the list kind of goes on just in the next season.

Perhaps that is one thing the portal and NIL cause is volatility. Which also bit us in 22 and 23. Maybe no one can stay on top for long like the old days which created the blue blood class to begin with.

---

Why does the narrative that things have changed so much for the top programs in NIL permeate in this forum? In the preseason, Ohio State, Oregon, Texas, and Georgia (no order) were believed to be the best programs in the nation, and they all finished in the top 6 of the final CFP rankings - in fact, all top 6 of the final CFP ranking teams started the season in the top 8 of the preseason AP Poll. That's not to say that they went chalk across their schedules, but it is to say that the outcome to this point is largely what was expected for the best teams - the only difference is that there has been more conversation about the 2nd tier since many 2nd tier teams can/have made the playoffs.

Maybe it will change in the future, but the 1st year of the 12 team CFP hasn't resulted in the chaos that some believed that it would.

---

Things have quite clearly changed. The good Alabama and Georgia teams from three-plus years ago would beat all of those teams you just lised by three touchdowns.

The gap between the top and middle of college football has closed dramatically, which is why Alabama can lose to ****ty Vanderbilt and Oklahoma teams, Tennessee can lose to a ****ty Arkansas team, Ohio State can lose to a ****ty Michigan team, Notre Dame can lose to a ****ty Northern Illinois team, etc., etc.

And when that gap closes -- largely due to a loss of depth to the transfer portal -- you get the parity we saw this year. No one is elite anymore. And in a landscape where no one is elite, upsets can and will happen.

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

whitetrash said:

---

Looking at the schedules before the season started:


SMU's inaugural ACC game was scheduled against a Florida St team that went 12-1 the year before and was preseason pick to be conference champs. No one predicted the greatest one season collapse in modern college football history.

Indiana's schedule featured both participants in the 2023 National Championship game. No one expected both of them to be bastions of mediocrity in 2024.

Arizona St's schedule featured the teams picked to finish 1, 2, 3 and 5 in the Big12 preseason poll. No one expected those teams to finish 16th, 15th, 8th and 13th, respectively.


And on the other hand, Alabama scheduled bravely (for them) with a noncon road game at Wisconsin. No one predicted the Badgers would finish 5-7 and break a 20+ year bowl streak.

---

Likewise a year ago, no one here especially the fire Aranda at all cost people, could have predicted that if Baylor kept Aranda, that Baylor would have a significantly better season than UW, Michigan, FSU, Wisc, USC the list kind of goes on just in the next season.

Perhaps that is one thing the portal and NIL cause is volatility. Which also bit us in 22 and 23. Maybe no one can stay on top for long like the old days which created the blue blood class to begin with.

---

Why does the narrative that things have changed so much for the top programs in NIL permeate in this forum? In the preseason, Ohio State, Oregon, Texas, and Georgia (no order) were believed to be the best programs in the nation, and they all finished in the top 6 of the final CFP rankings - in fact, all top 6 of the final CFP ranking teams started the season in the top 8 of the preseason AP Poll. That's not to say that they went chalk across their schedules, but it is to say that the outcome to this point is largely what was expected for the best teams - the only difference is that there has been more conversation about the 2nd tier since many 2nd tier teams can/have made the playoffs.

Maybe it will change in the future, but the 1st year of the 12 team CFP hasn't resulted in the chaos that some believed that it would.

---

Things have quite clearly changed. The good Alabama and Georgia teams from three-plus years ago would beat all of those teams you just lised by three touchdowns.

The gap between the top and middle of college football has closed dramatically, which is why Alabama can lose to ****ty Vanderbilt and Oklahoma teams, Tennessee can lose to a ****ty Arkansas team, Ohio State can lose to a ****ty Michigan team, Notre Dame can lose to a ****ty Northern Illinois team, etc., etc.

And when that gap closes -- largely due to a loss of depth to the transfer portal -- you get the parity we saw this year. No one is elite anymore. And in a landscape where no one is elite, upsets can and will happen.

---

Only caveat to that is you have to have the money...

If you have the money, you can go from outhouse to Playoff like SMU. I would like to see SMU and ASU win several.

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

whitetrash said:

---

Looking at the schedules before the season started:


SMU's inaugural ACC game was scheduled against a Florida St team that went 12-1 the year before and was preseason pick to be conference champs. No one predicted the greatest one season collapse in modern college football history.

Indiana's schedule featured both participants in the 2023 National Championship game. No one expected both of them to be bastions of mediocrity in 2024.

Arizona St's schedule featured the teams picked to finish 1, 2, 3 and 5 in the Big12 preseason poll. No one expected those teams to finish 16th, 15th, 8th and 13th, respectively.


And on the other hand, Alabama scheduled bravely (for them) with a noncon road game at Wisconsin. No one predicted the Badgers would finish 5-7 and break a 20+ year bowl streak.

---

Likewise a year ago, no one here especially the fire Aranda at all cost people, could have predicted that if Baylor kept Aranda, that Baylor would have a significantly better season than UW, Michigan, FSU, Wisc, USC the list kind of goes on just in the next season.

Perhaps that is one thing the portal and NIL cause is volatility. Which also bit us in 22 and 23. Maybe no one can stay on top for long like the old days which created the blue blood class to begin with.

---

Why does the narrative that things have changed so much for the top programs in NIL permeate in this forum? In the preseason, Ohio State, Oregon, Texas, and Georgia (no order) were believed to be the best programs in the nation, and they all finished in the top 6 of the final CFP rankings - in fact, all top 6 of the final CFP ranking teams started the season in the top 8 of the preseason AP Poll. That's not to say that they went chalk across their schedules, but it is to say that the outcome to this point is largely what was expected for the best teams - the only difference is that there has been more conversation about the 2nd tier since many 2nd tier teams can/have made the playoffs.

Maybe it will change in the future, but the 1st year of the 12 team CFP hasn't resulted in the chaos that some believed that it would.

---

Things have quite clearly changed. The good Alabama and Georgia teams from three-plus years ago would beat all of those teams you just lised by three touchdowns.

The gap between the top and middle of college football has closed dramatically, which is why Alabama can lose to ****ty Vanderbilt and Oklahoma teams, Tennessee can lose to a ****ty Arkansas team, Ohio State can lose to a ****ty Michigan team, Notre Dame can lose to a ****ty Northern Illinois team, etc., etc.

And when that gap closes -- largely due to a loss of depth to the transfer portal -- you get the parity we saw this year. No one is elite anymore. And in a landscape where no one is elite, upsets can and will happen.

---

Alabama lost the greatest coach of all (likely) all time, so it was almost certainly not going to be the same going forward - no one is going to seriously disagree with that - but that does mean that comparing 2024 Alabama to Nick Saban's best teams would be a bit silly.

Beyond the topic of Alabama, again, what parity? If the top 6 final CFP teams were in the top 8 of the preseason AP poll, what parity are we talking about? Is anyone in the business of providing betting opinions claiming that they believe a team outside of those 6 will win the title?

These parity revelations are illusions.

Well…..you are talking about pre season picks that are out a month or so be fore opening weekend? I would hope the analyst can be fairly accurate about that. But they probably wouldn't be very accurate predicting the top 10 for this time next year.

PartyBear said:

---

Well…..you are talking about pre season picks that are out a month or so be fore opening weekend? I would hope the analyst can be fairly accurate about that. But they probably wouldn't be very accurate predicting the top 10 for this time next year.

---

Sure. That won't always be the case, but this is the first year and all we hear is people talking about parity when the only parity involves the 2nd and 3rd tiers of teams. In terms of next year, depending on what happens in the transfer portal between now and when the preseason rankings come out it may be fairly clear who the best teams are again.

Separately, what happened to Indiana and what's currently happening to SMU casts doubt on any real parity there too. Hopefully, ASU and Boise don't suffer similar fates.

So Indiana losing by 10 in South Bend to 11-1 Notre Dame is proof that Alabama should have made the playoffs.

Also, Alabama losing by 21 in Norman to 6-6 Oklahoma is also proof that Alabama belonged in the playoffs?

Your logic is weird. So all-knowing SEC fan, what would the score have been if Alabama would have been there?

When Clemson blew out Alabama for the 2018 championship, did that mean Alabama did not belong? If so, who did?

What's weird is you doubling down on your support of Indiana athletics.

It's obvious you either missed last night's game entirely or you are intentionally overlooking the fact that the game was 27-3 inside of 2 minutes to go.

Just to be clear, Indiana scored a garbage TD (and 2-point conversion) with less than 2 minutes to go in the game. They then gathered an onside kick and tacked on an additional TD (failed 2-point conversion) when the ND defense went into prevent mode and just wanted the clock to run out.

So the final score (like Indiana's 11-1 record) was quite deceiving.

To their credit, Indiana kept on fighting until the very end, but that game had been over for probably an hour before the window dressing was applied.

And as I alluded to earlier, it was clear Bama took OU lightly, and came unprepared to that trap game. They still deserve to get roasted for stinking up the joint that night.

But that's still a different situation than what Indiana just experienced, as the Hoosiers KNEW exactly what was at stake, and they weren't coming into the game overconfident or unsuspecting. And they still got waxed.

But I'll answer your question.

Since 2009, Bama has appeared in 17 BCS Title/CFP Games. Considering Bama's only blowout loss in that stretch of games was that 2018 Clemson loss, I think most on here, including myself, would say that the score wouldn't have been 27-3 with 90 seconds to go.

Unless you want to say the cold weather was going to play a huge factor - a Bama/ND showdown would have likely been a toss-up at best.

You do everything possible to defend Alabama, are you sure you are on the right fan board?

The Indiana-Notre Dame game was in doubt until the failed two point conversion attempt. If Indiana converts that then they are trying an onside kick for the tying score. Who cares that it was 27 to 3. Baylor was down 29 points to Central Florida and won. The game is not over until it is over.

Indiana is a good team and did enough to make the CFP