Disagree with this. Teams want to schedule challenging OOC games that strengthen their CFP resume. If a team can add an opponent that they think will be ranked at the end of the year why wouldn't they try to have them on their schedule?
OK so Houston and Boise scheduled games against average/mediocre P5 teams. So did UCF. They scheduled Pitt and UNC this year. They scheduled Maryland and Georgia Tech last year. The UNC and GT games both got cancelled due to hurricanes but do you think adding a win over either of those mediocre P5 teams would be enough of a resume bump? Of course not because those teams aren't good. Like Arizona, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State.
Michigan would steamroll them now.
The Indiana team was fortunate to catch Michigan at the beginning of the year and then dance through a weak ACC schedule, adding Vandy, Stanford, Northwestern and Navy ... that’s not a tough schedule. Michigan would steamroll them now.
You prove it.
He has a point.
Let them settle it on the field.
Expand CFP to 8 teams at least, possibly 16.
Prove. It.
… and Michigan’s QB knew his teammates for about 30 days before that game (and Miami is still trying to season kids who either EEd or have been in Coral Gables for a year).
This is the right answer. Automatic qualifiers for the five conference champions. Three at-large bids.
Done and done.
Prove. It.
Nah, I don't want 9-4 Pitt or 8-5 Northwestern in the playoffs just because they pulled off one upset.
Because national perception is still that a win over a G5 school, even a very good one isn't really that big of a deal.
National media and fans still don't give much credence to smaller conference schools so victories against them won't hold much water.
That won't happen and if it does it will ONLY be because everyone else is just that bad. The reality is if you go undefeated none of it matters. Competing for 8th spot says you're not a legit team anyway.
Nah, I don't want 9-4 Pitt or 8-5 Northwestern in the playoffs just because they pulled off one upset.