Stanford has had 4 really good seasons 2010-2013 and then this year(2014 was 8-5). They had 7 losing seasons in a row before that. I don't call that CFB royalty. Hell moo had a great run with Rivers. All this has been with USC really struggling.
Win and We're in
- Thread starter ethanga62890
- Start date
I'm with you on that. I'm just saying they are human. But OSU also is a football school. That's why Baylor and TCU got left out. And the Championship was there excuse to put OSU in and leave the other two out. OSU ended up being the right call.But it never hurts to be known as a good football team or program. And UNC is not thought of as a good football program. Stadford has done it,Winning, for 8 to 10 years. We can't say the same. That is why they also thinl they think the Coastal is weak and that's why a program like ours to win it. Makes them think that way. Not bashing us. Just trying to think like committee member. And your eye test thing. Do u really think that we are a Top 4 team. My thought is no. But a beat down of Clemson would open my eyes too. I just don't know how really good our opponents have been this year. We haven't played an elite or football power this year. Clemson is the game to prove and show we are deserving. But to be honest I think they should use the BCS computers system to pick the Top 4. I just believe humans vote with heart and past history. Now a computer can't do eye test. But it's not going to vote a football power/ money maker in over a even or little better school be use of past history or money. Because to me. FSU was the team that needed to be left out. They were undefeated. But to the eye test and the way they won didn't look good at all.
Last edited:
I agree we don't really meet the eye test of a top 4 team but I really don't think Iowa is or Oklahoma either. Baylor and TCU just don't have the teams that they usually do and Ok State would struggle defensively against a 4AA HS team. Iowa avoided all the B1G powers just as we avoided FSU and Clemson in the regular season.
Look at what you posted. Yeah they have had losing seasons in the past 10 seasons. But only two 8-5 and four 10 or more season the last six. The committee isn't suppose to account that. But in the back of your mind you know they do.
We've looked like a top 4 team when we don't turn the ball over. That's been our problem and except for one game, where we won and probably helped develop us (comeback against GA Tech), the only reason we lost a game or even struggled to dominate had to do with turnovers.
So yep, I think we look like a top 4 team this year, possibly a top 2 team. The only team that looks particularly dominant to me is Michigan State. I'd say Ohio State but they've been off a lot and haven't earned it since they will be 3rd in their conference. Other than that, I see teams have a great year in managing to win but not dominate.
In that respect, we do look like a top 4 team (minus the turnovers) because we tend to dominate the game. But yep, haven't played a top 10 team yet. We'll see against Clemson.
My biggest concern is how will our offensive line do and turnovers. If we play well, like we can, and protect the ball, the only way to actually beat our offense, imo, comes down to dominating the trenches. If our RBs break the line of scrimmage, we are getting yardage. If Quise isn't under a TON of pressure, we're marching down field and scoring.
We'll see.
It's all perspective. I see your point. And it makes since. I personally just don't think so. But Beating Clemson would change my mind. Our Offence is GREAT. But no disrespect. I just want to see if our defense is Championship Caliber. Don't get me wrong Gene and Company has done a great job. And one of the reasons we are here. I just want to see what they can do against what will be the best offense we have faced this year. Because as we know defense wins Championships. I just want to see if our bend but don't break defense works against a balances and Top 15 offense.
Good point. I think our defense will do an adequate job, and it will probably come down to not turning the ball over and whether our O-line can hold well and open up some lanes. But that's all predicated on Quise and company executing.
Who knows? Defense kept us in the game against VA Tech for some stretches. Could be our senior linebackers are the stars of the game. That's college football. You just don't know.
But think the D will keep their score down to a respectable level and the key will be our offense functioning at the levels we're capable of.
42-30....Heels win.
Obviously we'd have to beat Clemson first, and that will require by far our best performance of the year, but IF we win, I don't see how they can give the shaft to a 1-loss P5 Conference Champion on a 12-game win streak in favor of a 2-loss team or a non-champion, and retain any semblance of credibility.
I've been trying not to think about it, and just focus on the HUGE tilt we have coming up on Saturday, but I fully expect, if we win, for the committee to give us the business.
I've been trying not to think about it, and just focus on the HUGE tilt we have coming up on Saturday, but I fully expect, if we win, for the committee to give us the business.
Hope your right. I believe we can win also. But it's just Carolina Football. I think I'm probally still in shock we are even in the conversation.
Ho
Hope your right!!!! And we should all as friend should only be worried about Clemson. We have to win this game first.
After we beat Clemson, it's going to make the committee sweat. It's seasons like this that will bring about the necessary changes. To keep a 1-loss, Top 10, power conference winner out of the playoffs, in favor of some name brand that has more losses and lacks a conference crown, is going to stick-out like a sore thumb... if they make that mistake. UNC may not be a perennial football powerhouse, but you have to reward performance. It took us a bit longer to get to the Top 10 because of the 1st-week loss and our lackluster past in football. Iowa is not a perennial powerhouse either. I guess you have to gain respect and keep it. That's not easy.
The problem with the CFP committee's criteria is that they seem to be very fluid. In football terms, they keep moving the goal posts. I fully expect to get screwed even if we beat Clemson. So we might as well go ahead and beat them to force the committee's hand. (That's tongue in cheek, of course, but it's going to take some kind of situation like that for them to ever expand the playoffs.)
What's going to happen is they are going to hedge there bets with the poll this week and keep us in the 8 or 9 range so is we do beat Clemson they can justify not putting us in because they don't think we should jump 4 or 5 teams.
I fully expect there to be 2, 2 loss teams ahead of us FSU, and Stanford.
My best guess.........
1 Clemson
2 Bama
3 OU
4 Iowa
5 MSU
6 Stanford
7 OSU
8 FSU
9 UNC
What do yall think?
I fully expect there to be 2, 2 loss teams ahead of us FSU, and Stanford.
My best guess.........
1 Clemson
2 Bama
3 OU
4 Iowa
5 MSU
6 Stanford
7 OSU
8 FSU
9 UNC
What do yall think?
Wouldn't surprise me one bit they are going to do what it takes to keep us out and make sure football name makes it in.
Apparently the CFB Committee seems to be incapable of counting. We beat Clemson and we have one loss and we beat the #1 team for our conference championship. It would be an absurd notion to NOT allow us in the CFB playoffs. There should be NO 2-loss teams in the final 4. And there should ONLY be conference winners in the final 4. I don't care if Woody Hayes rises from the grave and plays Jingle Bells on his rib cage and promises not to punch a Clemson player if the Buckeyes lose.
Don't underestimate how far Clemson will fall in the rankings if y'all beat us.
Agreed. If UNC, Iowa, and USC all win - Clemson should get that last spot over a two loss MSU, non conference championship game playing OSU, 2 loss ND that they beat, etc. They'd probably deserve it over 1-loss Iowa if MSU were to win the B1G as well...
Nope the committee want Ohio State with a passion. Even if we beat Clemson by 20 or more. They will not put us in the Top 4. We are out guys. They don't want us in.
sadly, I believe you are correct... and I HATE OSU with a passion, so that's going to be doubly sucky
I'm sorry, but ohio state is fools gold. They aren't going in. They mirror UNC in every significant category and aren't gonna play for their conference championship. They're sitting ducks like Free Shoes and ND.
The agenda is on display. UNC at 10 in CFP, but 8 in AP and coaches. USC at 20 in CFP, but 24 in AP and coaches.
Now they'll be able to say Stanford beat a top 20 team (if they do) in the PAC12 championship game, and justify leaving UNC out even with a win by saying they can't jump 6 spots at the end.
I was in the "win and we're in" camp until these rankings. Now I think it's pretty clear we need either Florida or USC to win this weekend, if not both. An Iowa win would help, because then OSU's loss would then be to a 2 loss MSU that might fall out of the top 10.
Now they'll be able to say Stanford beat a top 20 team (if they do) in the PAC12 championship game, and justify leaving UNC out even with a win by saying they can't jump 6 spots at the end.
I was in the "win and we're in" camp until these rankings. Now I think it's pretty clear we need either Florida or USC to win this weekend, if not both. An Iowa win would help, because then OSU's loss would then be to a 2 loss MSU that might fall out of the top 10.
Well, I'd favor USC to beat Stanford even though if Stanford wins, they don't deserve it over us. Nor Clemson.
Truth is that Clemson, even if they lose, probably deserves to be in over Ok State, Stanford and Ohio State. But somehow if they want to keep the ACC out, they'll probably talk some BS about body of work when it comes to us, even though that's a BS narrative since our body of work is pretty doggone good, and then switch and talk about how Clemson didn't win the ACC.
Just looks like they have no real objective metrics whatsoever.
If we beat Clemson, and they let Clemson in over us based on overall record, fine. I disagree but then dispense with the charade winning a conference has anything to do with it at all. But absolutely Stanford should not be in over us, or Clemson. Nor should Ohio State. If we beat Clemson, both of us would have a better record, having beaten better teams, than Ohio State.
They will maintain their ruling biases until they are forced to give them up. For both the SEC and, more so I say, the Big Ten, it is extremely important that there be an acknowledgment on only 3 teams that could ever deserve to be in a 4 team playoff: FSU, Clemson, Miami. UNC good enough to be be part of a 4 team playoff is somehting they will avoid until they are forced to accept it.
I think it's funny that they can't call the OU loss to Texas a bad loss because if they did they would have call it a worthless winot for ND.
Switch the name's on UNC and OSU and we would be in, we would have been better off to have not even played but 11 games by there counting!
Switch the name's on UNC and OSU and we would be in, we would have been better off to have not even played but 11 games by there counting!
We can't just win. We have to win convincingly. And by convincingly, I'm not talking about just the score. But we'll have to thoroughly outplay Clemson. Our win can't be because of Clemson mistakes. We have to win by 14 or more and we have to control the game. Of course we need Iowa and USC to win as well. And I guess we can hope for a miracle UF win over Bama.
If we win the coin flip, take the ball. Score a TD. Then if we can get a turnover (that we create - not just because of a bad play on Clemson's part), score another TD, we'd have the momentum to win the game maybe even pulling away from them early. I think we need a two TD lead at half and then to win by at least that much to have any chance.
If we win the coin flip, take the ball. Score a TD. Then if we can get a turnover (that we create - not just because of a bad play on Clemson's part), score another TD, we'd have the momentum to win the game maybe even pulling away from them early. I think we need a two TD lead at half and then to win by at least that much to have any chance.
If i hear 2 FCS wins one more time i'm gonna drive to Tennessee and start punching babies. (Hyperbole)
I've heard some of the committee members on sports talk shows recently. They all indicate that the committee is weighing our loss to South Carolina (a 3-9 team) heavily against us, and that, along with playing two FCS teams and our poor strength of schedule overall is what they're looking at. Even a win over Clemson probably won't change their minds (they say).
It's just BS. They have no metrics other than their own bias. First, they know SC lost their coach and QB and that we controlled the game and blew it on turnovers. They also know OK lost to Texas and they don't care. That's not a bad loss because it happened a long time ago and you know, our's was just yesterday....
They also know the 2 FCS teams are better than a lot of other FBS teams such as 2 that Stanford played. Or perhaps they are just clueless and not going their jobs? My guess is they are liars hiding their true motives.
They also know or should that our strength of schedule is equal to or better than Ohio State's and much better after we play Clemson, and yet they appear poised to try to sneak them in.
It's ridiculous the crap that comes out of their mouths.
Lastly, strength of schedule shouldn't be a standard. Strength of record should be. They are literally giving more credit for losing a game than winning one with the SOS argument. SOS should only be considered as a factor in strength of record. If you have a stronger SOS due to scheduling 2 stronger teams but LOSE to them, you shouldn't get credit as if you won, and that's what they are doing with Stanford. Of course, SOS matters not one whit if you are Ohio State.
One thing I heard Jeff Long say today is that (unfortunately for us and convenient for them) the committee DOES NOT use Sagrain SOS which has us and OSU so very close. He didn't say which one they used, but that OSU's SOS was no where close to what Sagrain says. I shouldn't be surprised.
He also said he couldn't answer any hypothetical questions about "what if UNC beats Clemson ..." because all the games have not been played.
He also said he couldn't answer any hypothetical questions about "what if UNC beats Clemson ..." because all the games have not been played.
Classic cop-out. Not surprised though, and it makes sense somewhat, because if UNC wins by a point on some fluke botch by Clemson, and Stanford wins 65-0 over USC, then sure, I guess Stanford should go over us.
But I wish he was prodded further. He has full intention of leaving UNC out of it, but doesn't want to say that before he has to, in the hopes that Clemson takes care of business for him, and he can keep his "conference championships matter" narrative going for awhile longer. I realize there's a bunch of scenarios that could play out, and he shouldn't have to go through every single one with a fine toothed comb and describe everything, but still I think it'd be best for all involved to have him state straight up whether a moderate UNC win would put them in or out against a moderate Stanford win and an idle OSU - so we can see once and for all whether conference championships mean anything, whether losses mean anything, or whether who you schedule is all that matters. It'd be the most transparent thing so all teams know what they're in store for at the beginning of the season, rather than making it essentially a crapshoot and opinion based at the end.
Similar threads
