Talk:2015 Rose Bowl

Teams: #1 vs. #4 -- or #2 vs. #3

The Rose Bowl will pair either the #1 team against the #4 team, or the #2 team against the #3 team. The decision about which will be made after the regular season, once the final College Football Playoff standings have been announced. Therefore, the article should not say that it will be #1 vs. #4 in the Rose Bowl. It might be -- there's a 50% chance of it -- but that will be decided in December. This is supported by two references currently in the article. On FBSchedules it says, "The team ranked No. 1 by the selection committee will play team No. 4 in the semifinals. Team No. 2 will meet team No. 3.... When assigning teams to sites, the committee will place the top two seeds at the most advantageous sites, weighing criteria such as convenience of travel for its fans, home-crowd advantage or disadvantage and general familiarity with the host city and its stadium. Preference will go to the No. 1 seed." On USA Today it says, "The selection committee's goal will be to protect the top two seeds from playing in road environments in semifinal games. For instance, if Southern Cal was the No. 1 seed and LSU was the No. 4 in 2014, that semifinal could be played in the Rose Bowl but not the Sugar Bowl." And the same is also true for the 2015 Sugar Bowl. I have raised this point repeatedly, in my edit summaries for the article, at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football#Playoff semifinal games, and also at User talk:Ucla90024#CFP semifinal games, but I have received no response. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 23:13, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

@Ucla90024: Now you've changed the article, here, to say that the Rose Bowl will pair the #2 team against the #3 team, instead of #1 against #4. But either statement is still contradicted by the cited references, as I explained in my previous post. So, I'm curious. Why the change? — Mudwater ^(Talk) 23:41, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

@Ucla90024: In your latest edit, changing the article back to saying that the Rose Bowl will feature the #2 team against the #3 team, you said in the edit summary, "see the rankings". So that at least explains your reasoning behind your recent edits, which is appreciated. And looking at the current rankings, and with only one week to go in the regular season, it does seem quite likely that things will play out that way. But it's still possible that the game will have #1 vs. #4, and as editors we shouldn't try to predict the future. Furthermore it's relevant to our readers that the decision will be made after the final rankings are established and that it's not predetermined. That's why the article should say, "The game will feature either the #1 team against the #4 team, or the #2 team against the #3 team," until the actual decision is made, which is now only a few days off. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 11:58, 3 December 2014 (UTC)