On Wednesday, December 6, 2023 at 10:51:40 AM UTC-6, JGibson wrote:
> Forget the fact that they lost to Notre Dame during the season but ended up ranked ahead of Notre Dame for the national title at the end. Why did they get chosen for the Orange Bowl against Nebraska (where FSU was an 18.5 point favorite but barely won) when both Nebraska and West Virginia (who won the conference that included both Miami and Notre Dame-beater Boston College) were undefeated?

Look, I don't agree with the decision to not take FSU this year. but 1993(and the underlying thought process and reasons for the decision)
and this year's decision are entirely compatible and logically consistent.

In 1993 due to the overall body of work of FSU(compared to ND and WVU) the decision was made to put them in that game and then vote them #1 based on that(and the vote wasn't even close, nor should it have been). They felt those things overshadowed the 1 loss.

In 2023 the committee focused mostly on eye test without their qb and then secondarily overall body of work(best win LSU probably vs an alabama best win that is.....well as humongous as it gets) to keep FSU out(and put bama and texas in). They felt those things, like in 1993, overshadowed the loss difference.

Also I was old enough to remember 1993 well. That was *not* controversial at all at the time and there was very little debate. Everyone acknowledged that ND won the hth in a close game in south bend(and yes it was a close game at the end.....perhaps if ND had played the 4th qtr like they did the first 3 it wouldnt have been a close game and they may have garnered more consideration), but the *overwhelming* advantage FSU had over ND across the board when looking at the rest of the schedule and results more than made up for that.

note that I do believe HTH has value and in many cases should be a deciding factor, but certainly not in 93 when I didn't think the resumes were very similar. And the voters overwhelmingly felt that way too.

As for WVU.....lol.....I mean c'mon, anyone who watched 30 seconds of what SS did to them boys from morgantown knows WVU never should have been near a national title game.

On 2023-12-10, michael anderson <mianderson79@gmail.com> wrote:
> In 2023 the committee focused mostly on eye test without their qb and
> then secondarily overall body of work(best win LSU probably vs an
> alabama best win that is.....well as humongous as it gets) to keep FSU
> out(and put bama and texas in). They felt those things, like in 1993,
> overshadowed the loss difference.

If they had their QB and had pounded Louisville, they'd get in and
the committee would have an impossible decision to leave out the
SEC champion due to Texas win at Alabama. But the QB got injured and
gave them an out, and they made the right decision. I am no SEC
fanboi, but how do you leave out the conference that has won 13 of
the 17 CFPs? Talk about your asterisks...

--
Life is a long lesson in humility. -- James Barrie

On Saturday, December 9, 2023 at 8:29:46 PM UTC-6, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:
> On 2023-12-10, michael anderson <miande...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In 2023 the committee focused mostly on eye test without their qb and
> > then secondarily overall body of work(best win LSU probably vs an
> > alabama best win that is.....well as humongous as it gets) to keep FSU
> > out(and put bama and texas in). They felt those things, like in 1993,
> > overshadowed the loss difference.
> If they had their QB and had pounded Louisville, they'd get in and
> the committee would have an impossible decision to leave out the
> SEC champion due to Texas win at Alabama. But the QB got injured and
> gave them an out, and they made the right decision. I am no SEC
> fanboi, but how do you leave out the conference that has won 13 of
> the 17 CFPs? Talk about your asterisks...

I actually think the 'right' outcome(after Bama beat Georgia) was to take Bama and FSU and leave Texas out. In my view(like in 93, where they got it right) the Texas hth win over Alabama shouldn't have been enough to discount Alabama's more than humongous win over georgia. I realize in the minority there, but hth shouldn't always trump everything.....

>
> --
> Life is a long lesson in humility. -- James Barrie

On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 10:41:07 -0800 (PST), RSFC Moderator <rsfcmoderator@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, December 9, 2023 at 7:08:59?PM UTC-5, michael anderson wrote:
>
>> Also I was old enough to remember 1993 well. That was *not* controversial at all at the time and there was very little debate. Everyone acknowledged that ND won the hth in a close game in south bend(and yes it was a close game at the end.....perhaps if ND had played the 4th qtr like they did the first 3 it wouldnt have been a close game and they may have garnered more consideration), but the *overwhelming* advantage FSU had over ND across the board when looking at the rest of the schedule and results more than made up for that.
>
>This is false--- the controversy bit not the age bit. A look at the rsfc archives shows heated discussion similar to this year: WVU was unbeaten and had as many top 20 wins as FSU. FSU's margins of victory were higher--- including against common opponent Miami. FSU stats were better. Still, FSU lost to ND who lost to BC who lost to unbeaten WVU.

who lost to Florida who lost to FSU.

WVU beat #17 Louisville, #4 Miami by 3, and #11 BC.
FSU beat #21 Clemson, #13 NC, #3 Miami by 18. lost to #2 ND, beat #6 Florida

WVU did indeed howl and claim they were hosed, they were, after all, 13-0, while FSU had lost a game and was 12-1. WVU played one top 10 team and FSU
played 3. Sounds like today, doesn't it, with FSU ironically on the other side this time.

During the WVU- Florida Sugar Bowl game, one announcer commented on 2 loss Florida dominating and destroying 13-0 WVU, (UF won by 34) and Brent
Musberger, the second announcer commented that "the Gators aren't Maryland, folks". An allusion to the fact that schedule strength affects record.