Dean, with all due respect, Wendell has absolutely earned the right to write how he feels without these sort of responses. I happen to disagree with his conclusion as well, but managed to do so with a decorum level above resorting to screaming obscenities. Let's agree to converse here as intelligent folks who can disagree with an appropriate level of gentlemanly courteousness. Thank you.
I do not consider crap to be an obscenity either. If you would like, I can send you the comment you made below that I deleted. It was far more biting than that, I am sure you may recall.
Again, there are no rules here against disagreement if we can do it at a level higher than the internet has become famous for. I strive for better here and I hope everyone will agree.
I don’t see your point. Bob allowed a guest, well qualified at that, to write a column on his forum.
This was basically free, added content. This did not squeeze out one of Bob’s regular posts, so you didn’t get any less content than normal.
Just because someone else’s opinion differs from yours doesn’t make it “crap.”
The author is just as entitled to his opinion as you are to yours, and I would guess he has lots more experience to base it on than you do.
And of course nobody forced you to read it, although listening to different opinions is one of the ways we learn, not only information, but also how to critically think.
FWiW Bob, I enjoyed this guest column and am not opposed to more of this type of content in the future. Especially when the author has these kind of credentials.
I’ll just echo Chris. I loved the article, thought it was hilarious. And stepping back from who of Texas, Alabama and Florida State most deserved to make it, thought his overall assessment of the history of how the bcs developed pretty spot on.
Best statement that was fully factual that has been written on the subject this week. FSU couldn’t have beaten ANY other team but maybe Iowa that was playing on Championship Weekend other than Louisville. A game against Iowa would probably ended 0-0 after however many OTs you wanted to play.
I went to a college that doesn't have a football team (undefeated UTD), and as such, have never been all that into college football. However, I did enjoy reading the history of the college football championship farce that has been a farce for longer than I've been alive. As a sports fan, I keep up with the chatter about who should be ranked what, based on who they beat, and by how much, and where the game was played. Clearly the playoffs are a much better system, and if you have 5 Power 5 conferences, it stands to reason that the playoffs should have at least 6 teams playing in them. Lastly, as my father-in-law is a Seminoles fan, I will be sure to remind him that the ACC's commissioner shouldn't have blocked the expansion of the playoffs in the first place. Is FSU even favored against Georgia?
In the debate between the best teams and the most deserving ones, I fall firmly on the side of best teams.
My rationale lies in my history as a lifelong Texas fan. The 1968 Longhorns changed to the Wishbone offense that year. Their returning quarterback, Bill Bradley, was a very good player and went on to a distinguished career as a safety in the NFL, but he was not a wishbone quarterback.
Texas suffered a loss and a tie in their first two games with Bradley as the signal caller. Darrell Royal then made the switch to James Street a quarterback who led the team to an undefeated record and SWC championship the rest of the season. They were an unstoppable machine with three great running backs.
It wasn’t only my prejudiced and niece opinion, but one held by several national sportswriters that Texas was the best team in the country by the end of the year. Of course with those two blemishes on their record, there was almost no way for them to win a national championship in that era of the poll-anointed winner. It’s probably even doubtful they would have been invited under the current format, although since there were six major conferences then, I can’t imagine a playoff would have ever flown if there weren’t at least six spots.
This is , of course, just my opinion, but hopefully it can add a little extra context on possible scenarios.
Dean Hinnen's comments aside, I think one thing is very clear form this column: Mr. Barnhouse, given the appropriate number of days' rest, absolutely still has his fastball.
This was a fantastic piece of writing and I enjoyed the contrast with Bob's style.
One of the great but detrimental aspects about sports is that we're all guilty of remembering the past to try to predict the future. As they say on Wall Street, past performance is no guarantee of future results. But it's all we have to go on and we all want to think we know what's gonna happen.
Ohio State did win a national title with a third-string QB. But that's just a historical footnote that, in my opinion, has no bearing on this season.
I'd ask for a stronger argument for FSU's exclusion than "their QB is injured so the team's bad now" and "the ACC's commissioner could have prevented this if he hadn't stood in the way of expanding the playoff," which isn't exactly the Seminoles' fault. The history lesson is perfectly fine, but I'd humbly ask for more of a case to be made for the article's thesis than that, one that takes the opposing perspective seriously instead of just snarkily dismissing it. Maybe Bob's spoiled us on that front.
I appreciate you reading and your comment. I would counter the point about defending or criticizing is that's just a waste of words. I think the committee made the best decision based on there was NO GOOD decision to be made.
The point of the article - which apparently I did a poor job of making - is that college football's post-season has been an unholy mess for decades and that Sunday's announcement was par for an unplayable course.
Well that tore the rag off the bush. Great article. College football is a big ol' mess and personally I don't like where it's headed but it is what it is and it's always about money and always has been. All that said I believe Florida State deserved to be in. Yes they lost their QB but who's to say the backup wouldn't catch fire and along with the defense lead them to the title? And frankly I don't think either Bama or Georgia have their best teams this year and didn't look all that fantastic in their title game. In fact I believe Texas has the best team of the four. So we'll see what happens but to return to the subject at hand yes Florida State got screwed.
Enjoyed the article and was definitely a throw back (born and raised in Dallas and grew up reading all the local sports pages and still do). Didn't have a bone in the fight but played college football and watch lots of it. Florida State was a lock for the playoff until they lost their #1 and 2 QBs. If their 3rd QB would have shown he could lead an even mediocre offensive effort against a Louisville team that lost to a middle SEC team giving up over 30 points the week before then they would have been a lock for the top 4. Instead they looked more like Iowa (great defense, no offense) which didn't look like a team that would have a prayer against an Alabama team that beat a #1 Georgia that hadn't lost in 3 years. The committee made a very unpopular but I feel correct decision (and I don't like Alabama, Saban, or the SEC at all)
Hilarious! "having 100 monkeys on keyboards trying to replicate “War and Peace.” I don't believe that I have heard the way College Football determines the #1 spot any better. I am still laughing. Congrats to Mr. Barnhouse for an excellent brief history.
I have no affiliation to any of the big college teams, so I've only peripherally followed college football as a general football and sports fan. I appreciated this overview of the situation and explaining how we got here. I didn't realize the BCS was relatively recent in 1998, nor that the playoff was already almost 10 years old!
The only thing I'll add is it never made sense to me to have 4 playoff teams in a world with 5 major conferences. Seems like from the very beginning it would've made more sense to have an 8 or 12 team bracket to have the 5 conference winners and some other deserving teams, with the added benefit of throwing in the best of the minor conference teams.
A great read! This old guy loved every monkey written word! Love too that you got the right contractual bowl and conference arrangements, unlike the sham “ACC is the Orange bowl’s historic legacy” garbage that the CFP created.
Thanks Wendell.
Bob, you be sure to invite Wendell back again; you hear?!!
You are no different than the money grubbing TV decision makers that view the "Name Brand" Alabama more valuable than FSU's name brand. Alabama only beat a Auburn team far worse than Louisville because Auburn chose not to play defense on 4th and 31. Don't rush anyone and keep the QB in the pocket. Brilliant strategy that should get their DC fired.
Bama scrapped by a very injured UGA team. Michigan is playing without it's center and Captain, seems that does not matter. Michigan's 2 TD drives were a total of 40 yards on 8 plays. Somehow that doesn't matter. Is your memory so short you don't remember Ohio State winning a National Championship with a 3rd string QB. Guess they didn't belong either!
FSU with a 3rd string QB, who would not be the QB in the playoffs, actually gained more yards than Michigan did against a very bad Iowa team. They played 2 hard games all year and lost combined 54-0. So much for beating a bad Louisville team. Iowa would not score on them either.
This was purely political as ESPN is 100% vested in the SEC and there is no way they could support a CFP without an SEC team even though none played their way actually into the playoffs.
There is no reason to watch this farce of a CFP.
PS - I can;t stand FSU but they were screwed for TV money, That should shock no one. Seems you are in for the money as well if you buy that Alabama was deserving or even a better TEAM.
I think it’s worth noting that Ohio State’s QB3 led his offense to a 59-0 win in the Big 10 title game. FSU’s QB3 led his offense to 100 yards less than Louisville gave up on average during the season and probably half of those yards came on wildcat runs. I feel certain that had FSU shown a modicum of offensive prowess the committee would have kept them in the top 4.
I'm going to quote another article on the topic, which features a name you may recognize:
"The Buckeyes crushed Wisconsin because their defense forced four turnovers (and scored a touchdown), and because they rushed for over 300 yards and 8 YPC. Cardale Jones was awesome, but he only completed 12 passes in that game, and wasn’t the primary offensive threat during Ohio State’s upsets of Alabama or Oregon. That was running back Ezekiel Elliott. Ohio State had the opportunity to complete easier downfield passes because they could build around the true strength of that team…their running game. I mention this only to point out that championship-caliber teams, especially with weeks to prepare, can build gameplans around injuries. The committee decided to ignore what actually happened and substitute what they thought would happen. That’s fanfiction, not football. "
That fierce Alabama team played one Power Five out of conference team and lost. FSU beat Power Five Florida at Florida in a Rivalry game. Alabama is in because of their Name only.
Alabama is in because they beat Georgia. They also played a full SEC schedule, whereas FSU played in the pathetic ACC. A simple look at many independent, non-ESPN affiliated numbers will show you that Bama played a tougher schedule and is a better team.
On top of this, FSU is a 2 TD dog to the same Georgia team Bama just beat.
If the argument is did they DESERVE to go, then the answer is yes. Unfortunately, deserve isn’t one of the criteria stated for picking the CFP teams. I’m not a huge fan of the “eye test”, but any neutral observer can look at the teams in question and tell you Bama would be favored against FSU. This means they’re the better team. Which is why they got in.
This is great stuff, Wendell! Happy you did it!
No, it's not, Bob. I love your work, but if you're going to post crap like this, I'm going to have to reconsider my subscription.
Dean, with all due respect, Wendell has absolutely earned the right to write how he feels without these sort of responses. I happen to disagree with his conclusion as well, but managed to do so with a decorum level above resorting to screaming obscenities. Let's agree to converse here as intelligent folks who can disagree with an appropriate level of gentlemanly courteousness. Thank you.
I don't consider "crap" to be an obscenity, but it's your Substack so you can make the rules. Like I said, I love your work. Wendell is out to lunch.
I do not consider crap to be an obscenity either. If you would like, I can send you the comment you made below that I deleted. It was far more biting than that, I am sure you may recall.
I just believe in calling a spade a spade and BS, BS. What can I say? Can I say "BS" instead of "bullshit"? I'm fine with that.
Again, there are no rules here against disagreement if we can do it at a level higher than the internet has become famous for. I strive for better here and I hope everyone will agree.
I don’t see your point. Bob allowed a guest, well qualified at that, to write a column on his forum.
This was basically free, added content. This did not squeeze out one of Bob’s regular posts, so you didn’t get any less content than normal.
Just because someone else’s opinion differs from yours doesn’t make it “crap.”
The author is just as entitled to his opinion as you are to yours, and I would guess he has lots more experience to base it on than you do.
And of course nobody forced you to read it, although listening to different opinions is one of the ways we learn, not only information, but also how to critically think.
FWiW Bob, I enjoyed this guest column and am not opposed to more of this type of content in the future. Especially when the author has these kind of credentials.
I’ll just echo Chris. I loved the article, thought it was hilarious. And stepping back from who of Texas, Alabama and Florida State most deserved to make it, thought his overall assessment of the history of how the bcs developed pretty spot on.
Best statement that was fully factual that has been written on the subject this week. FSU couldn’t have beaten ANY other team but maybe Iowa that was playing on Championship Weekend other than Louisville. A game against Iowa would probably ended 0-0 after however many OTs you wanted to play.
I went to a college that doesn't have a football team (undefeated UTD), and as such, have never been all that into college football. However, I did enjoy reading the history of the college football championship farce that has been a farce for longer than I've been alive. As a sports fan, I keep up with the chatter about who should be ranked what, based on who they beat, and by how much, and where the game was played. Clearly the playoffs are a much better system, and if you have 5 Power 5 conferences, it stands to reason that the playoffs should have at least 6 teams playing in them. Lastly, as my father-in-law is a Seminoles fan, I will be sure to remind him that the ACC's commissioner shouldn't have blocked the expansion of the playoffs in the first place. Is FSU even favored against Georgia?
FSU opened as 13 point underdogs to Georgia!
In the debate between the best teams and the most deserving ones, I fall firmly on the side of best teams.
My rationale lies in my history as a lifelong Texas fan. The 1968 Longhorns changed to the Wishbone offense that year. Their returning quarterback, Bill Bradley, was a very good player and went on to a distinguished career as a safety in the NFL, but he was not a wishbone quarterback.
Texas suffered a loss and a tie in their first two games with Bradley as the signal caller. Darrell Royal then made the switch to James Street a quarterback who led the team to an undefeated record and SWC championship the rest of the season. They were an unstoppable machine with three great running backs.
It wasn’t only my prejudiced and niece opinion, but one held by several national sportswriters that Texas was the best team in the country by the end of the year. Of course with those two blemishes on their record, there was almost no way for them to win a national championship in that era of the poll-anointed winner. It’s probably even doubtful they would have been invited under the current format, although since there were six major conferences then, I can’t imagine a playoff would have ever flown if there weren’t at least six spots.
This is , of course, just my opinion, but hopefully it can add a little extra context on possible scenarios.
Dean Hinnen's comments aside, I think one thing is very clear form this column: Mr. Barnhouse, given the appropriate number of days' rest, absolutely still has his fastball.
This was a fantastic piece of writing and I enjoyed the contrast with Bob's style.
Thanks, Wendell, for the trip down memory lane. It’s quite the story.
Thanks, Greg. Appreciate it.
One of the great but detrimental aspects about sports is that we're all guilty of remembering the past to try to predict the future. As they say on Wall Street, past performance is no guarantee of future results. But it's all we have to go on and we all want to think we know what's gonna happen.
Ohio State did win a national title with a third-string QB. But that's just a historical footnote that, in my opinion, has no bearing on this season.
I'd ask for a stronger argument for FSU's exclusion than "their QB is injured so the team's bad now" and "the ACC's commissioner could have prevented this if he hadn't stood in the way of expanding the playoff," which isn't exactly the Seminoles' fault. The history lesson is perfectly fine, but I'd humbly ask for more of a case to be made for the article's thesis than that, one that takes the opposing perspective seriously instead of just snarkily dismissing it. Maybe Bob's spoiled us on that front.
I appreciate you reading and your comment. I would counter the point about defending or criticizing is that's just a waste of words. I think the committee made the best decision based on there was NO GOOD decision to be made.
The point of the article - which apparently I did a poor job of making - is that college football's post-season has been an unholy mess for decades and that Sunday's announcement was par for an unplayable course.
I can certainly agree with that point. Appreciate the gracious reply.
I got it
Thanks, Chris.
Well that tore the rag off the bush. Great article. College football is a big ol' mess and personally I don't like where it's headed but it is what it is and it's always about money and always has been. All that said I believe Florida State deserved to be in. Yes they lost their QB but who's to say the backup wouldn't catch fire and along with the defense lead them to the title? And frankly I don't think either Bama or Georgia have their best teams this year and didn't look all that fantastic in their title game. In fact I believe Texas has the best team of the four. So we'll see what happens but to return to the subject at hand yes Florida State got screwed.
Alabama won the SEC, which to people's consternation is the deepest conference, and it's only loss was to another team in the playoff.
That just flat trumps FSU.
Your intelligent reply has completely changed my mind.
You are aware the ACC went 6-4 against the SEC in 2023, are you not? https://www.sportingnews.com/us/ncaa-football/news/acc-record-vs-sec-teams-florida-state-college-football-playoff/744908c7e500ba8824a46514
I'm also aware that if a frog had wings he wouldn't bust his ass when he landed. Neither matters here.
Enjoyed the article and was definitely a throw back (born and raised in Dallas and grew up reading all the local sports pages and still do). Didn't have a bone in the fight but played college football and watch lots of it. Florida State was a lock for the playoff until they lost their #1 and 2 QBs. If their 3rd QB would have shown he could lead an even mediocre offensive effort against a Louisville team that lost to a middle SEC team giving up over 30 points the week before then they would have been a lock for the top 4. Instead they looked more like Iowa (great defense, no offense) which didn't look like a team that would have a prayer against an Alabama team that beat a #1 Georgia that hadn't lost in 3 years. The committee made a very unpopular but I feel correct decision (and I don't like Alabama, Saban, or the SEC at all)
Hilarious! "having 100 monkeys on keyboards trying to replicate “War and Peace.” I don't believe that I have heard the way College Football determines the #1 spot any better. I am still laughing. Congrats to Mr. Barnhouse for an excellent brief history.
I have no affiliation to any of the big college teams, so I've only peripherally followed college football as a general football and sports fan. I appreciated this overview of the situation and explaining how we got here. I didn't realize the BCS was relatively recent in 1998, nor that the playoff was already almost 10 years old!
The only thing I'll add is it never made sense to me to have 4 playoff teams in a world with 5 major conferences. Seems like from the very beginning it would've made more sense to have an 8 or 12 team bracket to have the 5 conference winners and some other deserving teams, with the added benefit of throwing in the best of the minor conference teams.
A great read! This old guy loved every monkey written word! Love too that you got the right contractual bowl and conference arrangements, unlike the sham “ACC is the Orange bowl’s historic legacy” garbage that the CFP created.
Thanks Wendell.
Bob, you be sure to invite Wendell back again; you hear?!!
The Conferences competing and maneuvering for position and influence is as entertaining as the game on the field. God help me I love it all.
You are no different than the money grubbing TV decision makers that view the "Name Brand" Alabama more valuable than FSU's name brand. Alabama only beat a Auburn team far worse than Louisville because Auburn chose not to play defense on 4th and 31. Don't rush anyone and keep the QB in the pocket. Brilliant strategy that should get their DC fired.
Bama scrapped by a very injured UGA team. Michigan is playing without it's center and Captain, seems that does not matter. Michigan's 2 TD drives were a total of 40 yards on 8 plays. Somehow that doesn't matter. Is your memory so short you don't remember Ohio State winning a National Championship with a 3rd string QB. Guess they didn't belong either!
FSU with a 3rd string QB, who would not be the QB in the playoffs, actually gained more yards than Michigan did against a very bad Iowa team. They played 2 hard games all year and lost combined 54-0. So much for beating a bad Louisville team. Iowa would not score on them either.
This was purely political as ESPN is 100% vested in the SEC and there is no way they could support a CFP without an SEC team even though none played their way actually into the playoffs.
There is no reason to watch this farce of a CFP.
PS - I can;t stand FSU but they were screwed for TV money, That should shock no one. Seems you are in for the money as well if you buy that Alabama was deserving or even a better TEAM.
I think it’s worth noting that Ohio State’s QB3 led his offense to a 59-0 win in the Big 10 title game. FSU’s QB3 led his offense to 100 yards less than Louisville gave up on average during the season and probably half of those yards came on wildcat runs. I feel certain that had FSU shown a modicum of offensive prowess the committee would have kept them in the top 4.
I'm going to quote another article on the topic, which features a name you may recognize:
"The Buckeyes crushed Wisconsin because their defense forced four turnovers (and scored a touchdown), and because they rushed for over 300 yards and 8 YPC. Cardale Jones was awesome, but he only completed 12 passes in that game, and wasn’t the primary offensive threat during Ohio State’s upsets of Alabama or Oregon. That was running back Ezekiel Elliott. Ohio State had the opportunity to complete easier downfield passes because they could build around the true strength of that team…their running game. I mention this only to point out that championship-caliber teams, especially with weeks to prepare, can build gameplans around injuries. The committee decided to ignore what actually happened and substitute what they thought would happen. That’s fanfiction, not football. "
https://www.extrapointsmb.com/p/college-football-playoff-rankings-even-worse-thought
That fierce Alabama team played one Power Five out of conference team and lost. FSU beat Power Five Florida at Florida in a Rivalry game. Alabama is in because of their Name only.
Alabama is in because they beat Georgia. They also played a full SEC schedule, whereas FSU played in the pathetic ACC. A simple look at many independent, non-ESPN affiliated numbers will show you that Bama played a tougher schedule and is a better team.
On top of this, FSU is a 2 TD dog to the same Georgia team Bama just beat.
If the argument is did they DESERVE to go, then the answer is yes. Unfortunately, deserve isn’t one of the criteria stated for picking the CFP teams. I’m not a huge fan of the “eye test”, but any neutral observer can look at the teams in question and tell you Bama would be favored against FSU. This means they’re the better team. Which is why they got in.