Glad they made it, only fair given that the SEC already had 3 teams in, vs 1 for the ACC.

Does this mean more $$$ for Cal?

Bama lost to Oklahoma and Vanderbilt and, no, they aren't good because they are in the SEC

Two former PAC teams getting byes has to be funny

Anarchistbear said:

---

Two former PAC teams getting byes has to be funny

---

This in a relatively down year for the Pac, with UW, USC, OSU Utah and WSU having regressed significantly.

There will be repercussions when the sec writes the new playoff rules with the bio.

Anarchistbear said:

---

Bama lost to Oklahoma and Vanderbilt and, no, they aren't good because they are in the SEC

---

Imagine losing to teams similar in quality to us twice and thinking you deserve to be in the playoffs.

concernedparent said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Bama lost to Oklahoma and Vanderbilt and, no, they aren't good because they are in the SEC

---

Imagine losing to teams similar in quality to us twice and thinking you deserve to be in the playoffs.

---

When you are at #13 you lose it on the field not in committee

Anarchistbear said:

---

concernedparent said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Bama lost to Oklahoma and Vanderbilt and, no, they aren't good because they are in the SEC

---

Imagine losing to teams similar in quality to us twice and thinking you deserve to be in the playoffs.

---

When you are at #13 you lose it on the field not in committee

---

Technically they are #11, but two conference winners go in over them.

Cal88 said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Two former PAC teams getting byes has to be funny

---

This in a relatively down year for the Pac, with UW, USC, OSU Utah and WSU having regressed significantly.

---

I don't know if you can call what happened to Oregon State and Washington State as a 'regression'.

Yes, they got worse, but that is because the teams were gutted when they dropped from a power conference. Basically, if you expect them to be a lot worse because of the personnel losses, is it still considered regression?

Well yes, by definition a regression, for reasons beyond their control.

If the roles were reversed could you imagine that the whole proceeding week all the pundits and SEC honks would be arguing that SMU deserved to leapfrog a higher ranked Bama who was playing in the conference championship? Not a chance. The SEC is so used to special treatment that when they don't get favoritism it is an outrage. Reminds me of other demographics.

I'm glad the ACC wound up getting two teams in, because over the summer more than a few people here were assuring me there would be no chance of that and that the B1G and SEC would simply dominate the playoff berths and there would be no room for anyone else to get more than the one auto-bid. I said those leagues would beat each other up and leave space for the second tier conferences to take advantage. That's what happened.

So the path is there for Cal, if our program can improve enough. If SMU can do it, so can Cal.

sycasey said:

---

I'm glad the ACC wound up getting two teams in, because over the summer more than a few people here were assuring me there would be no chance of that and that the B1G and SEC would simply dominate the playoff berths and there would be no room for anyone else to get more than the one auto-bid. I said those leagues would beat each other up and leave space for the second tier conferences to take advantage. That's what happened.

So the path is there for Cal, if our program can improve enough. If SMU can do it, so can Cal.

---

The path was there for Cal this year with just better coaching, At least this time Wilcox admitted his mistake after only one year. Hopefully he gets it right in year 9, because the schedule looks easy next year too. Playing SMU every year could be a challenge but next year we get them at CMS.

If it was Cal with SMU's record, do we get in?

Econ141 said:

---

Does this mean more $$$ for Cal?

---

Ironically, FSU receives less money than they would have if they hadn't changed the conference revenue share

Econ141 said:

---

Does this mean more $$$ for Cal?

---

Yes.

calumnus said:

---

Hopefully he gets it right in year 9, because the schedule looks easy next year too. Playing SMU every year could be a challenge but next year we get them at CMS.

---

Next year looked easier before the season started, but is it actually?

Minnesota is middle of the pack B1G and beat both LA schools, ranked Illinois, and one point away from Penn State.

BC, Duke, SMU, and Louisville are all solid programs and UNC could be good if Belichick signs on as HC.

Virginia and VT are comparable to us and a coin flip on whether we win.

On top of all that, a number of our defensive starters are seniors will need to be replaced.

I think it will be a challenge to have a winning conference record next year.