Jump to content

THE College Football Playoff Rankings Thread [MICH,WASH,TEX,ALA]


texifornia

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 6.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

4 hours ago, Candi Fisther said:

Oregon’s AD is chairman of CFP committee. See y’all at the sugar bowl.

No, he is not.  He's not even on the committee.  NC State's AD is the chair.  Please quit doing this to these desperate rubes...

4 hours ago, dcar00 said:

well that is interesting.

https://collegefootballplayoff.com/sports/selectioncommittee/roster

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, immamac said:

The last 5 pages have been the same posts over and over again. It really does feel like some of you may have lost your got damned minds. 

Our heads are exploding. This is reverse 2008. 

We got fucked in 2008 because we beat a “good” OU team. 

We are getting fucked now because we lost to a “shitty” OU team.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Hermanator said:

Absolutely we're in the conversation if we had beaten an in state scrub team instead of Alabama week 2. We'd arguably be in almost the same position we're in now. Alabama would be ranked ahead of us as an undefeated team but the same situation would exist where one of Georgia or them would lose the SEC title game. The difference is we'd be more likely to see 2 SEC teams in no matter who lost where as now it's only possible if Alabama wins. 

We'd still need FSU to lose and we'd need Oregon to win and hope the committee sees how in every conceivable metric we're above Oregon. Same as now. Our chances would be lower simply because the SEC would have 2 undefeated teams instead of 1 but we'd 100 percent be in the conversation. 

Next year it all doesn't matter as the key will be finish the SEC schedule with 2 or fewer losses. Chances are we get in a 12 team playoff with a 10-2 record in the SEC most years. 

this. there is no reason to schedule good OOC.  The SEC has proven this over and over again.  Yes you have to only have 1 or zero losses in conf play.  no one punishes you for not giving yourself a "chance" at a loss by scheduling a Minnesota or a Georgia Tech instead of Mich or USC.

Oregon didn't give themselves a chance to be beat by scheduling Portland State.  They played an FCS.  they should be considered 10-1. not 11-1.

they know the committee will just say "sure their SOS sucks and they scheduled FCS Portland State but had they scheduled Boise State they would have beaten them anyway".  
 

The tough OOC game helping in any signficant way is a myth.  the loss column and beating teams by 30+ is what matters.

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

The committee has been consistently clear in how they see things this year. Many are chosing not to listen to what they have said.

Oregon > Texas > Bama > Georgia (if ranking one loss teams)

I don't like their order either, but they have been pretty clear.

Agree but I just don't understand the primacy of Oregon in the eyes of the committee.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, UTEE97 said:

I feel like the committee is going by the average margin of victory to rank the one-loss teams. It's done in soccer and many other international sports. Can someone check into the average scoring differentials among Oregon, tOSU, Texas and Bama?

I feel like they’re saying “ooo offense score lots points” and acting like the Pac 12 became a good conference at some point. For some reason OSU was essentially a top 10 team for UW & UO to feast on. Their one decent win on the season was at Utah. The rest of the Pac 12 was absolutely overhyped from the jump. USC? trash. Colorado? flash in the pan that anyone with a brain could see but still ended up ranked in the top 20 for UO to smoke. Arizona? Ari-fucking-zona? give me a break. 

You have the UW AD who i bet has a preference on who makes it, the NCST AD as the chair who probably doesn’t want to give FSU any more reason to leave the ACC, and the KSU AD who was chosen by the Big 12 to replace CDC on the playoff committee and was “dumbfounded” when he found out the exit fees weren’t going to be as much as they were expecting.

I have no idea why UT is behind OSU & UO based upon on the field results, but I don’t think margin of score is going to be the deciding factor.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

No, he is not.  He's not even on the committee.  NC State's AD is the chair.  Please quit doing this to these desperate rubes...

https://collegefootballplayoff.com/sports/selectioncommittee/roster

Lame committee roster, wow. Not as potentially biased against us as I would have thought but the I doubt the Kansas state and Baylor guy are on our side. Token woman is not that impressive geez. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Hondo said:

No it doesn't.  You're getting suckered into assuming a transitive relation between football games.

If you go by your logic, Oklahoma's win would be the best of the season because they beat the team that beat the team that beat UGA.

But then Oklahoma State's win over Oklahoma would be the best.  If they beat Texas, then they'll have beaten the team that beat the team that beat UGA AND the team that beat the team that beat the team that beat UGA.  Oklahoma State should be in the CFP.

 

 

 

No, that has nothing to do with it. If Alabama beats Georgia then Alabama will be higher ranked than Georgia. By definition that makes Texas's win on the road at Alabama better than Alabama's win at a neutral site against Georgia. Alabama winning on Saturday vaults them much higher in the rankings and makes it the best win of the season. Right now based on rankings Michigan can argue their win over Ohio State is the best of the season (I don't agree with that because it was closer and at home, but Ohio State is currently ranked higher than Alabama). Alabama would also be higher than Ohio State.

Edited by Huckleberry
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Huckleberry said:

No, that has nothing to do with it. If Alabama beats Georgia then Alabama will be higher ranked than Georgia. By definition that makes Texas's win on the road at Alabama better than Alabama's win at a neutral site against Georgia.

Except they won’t leave Alabama out. 
 

They should leave out Michigan for cheating and FSU for sucking and not playing anybody.
 

More likely Louisville and Georgia win and we are in the easy way. 
 

there’s no way we’re behind Oregon but if they beat Washington they will be #3 probably. 
 

This all finally goes away next year thank God 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dahobbs said:

It isn't logical. You're rooting for a scenario that locks us in to a single possibility to advance. If all games were played simultaneously, maybe it makes sense. But since we will not know the outcomes at the same time, we will want each outcome to give us the highest number of chances to advance. This is simple game theory. 

 

There are a litany of posters here that take the committee’s guidelines as gospel, ignoring the word guidelines. There will be an SEC champ in. That’s indisputable. There will be a PAC 12 champ in. That’s indisputable. I’d rather not open the possibility of multiple teams from either conference getting in. That’s what could very easily happen with chaos, combined with a lackluster performance by us at 11 AM Saturday. 

The committee’s job is to put the best 4 teams in. Period. Posters have said the media doesn’t decide. The committee does, and of course this is correct, but the committee isn’t an infallible robot. It’s comprised of people no more intelligent than Rece Davis, Joey Galloway and Bohls. If we beat OSU the way we beat KSU or the way OSU beat BYU, and there’s a very tight SEC game with Bama winning, that’s a terrible scenario for us. If UW loses in triple OT, that’s a terrible scenario for us. This is really simple, root for Louisville, UGA, and UW in order of importance. 

I agree that tOSU sitting there isn’t an issue - if we look good. The fact that the committee should tell us everything we need to know about how they’ll operate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jewish Wang said:

There are a litany of posters here that take the committee’s guidelines as gospel, ignoring the word guidelines. There will be an SEC champ in. That’s indisputable. There will be a PAC 12 champ in. That’s indisputable. I’d rather not open the possibility of multiple teams from either conference getting in. That’s what could very easily happen with chaos, combined with a lackluster performance by us at 11 AM Saturday. 

The committee’s job is to put the best 4 teams in. Period. Posters have said the media doesn’t decide. The committee does, and of course this is correct, but the committee isn’t an infallible robot. It’s comprised of people no more intelligent than Rece Davis, Joey Galloway and Bohls. If we beat OSU the way we beat KSU or the way OSU beat BYU, and there’s a very tight SEC game with Bama winning, that’s a terrible scenario for us. If UW loses in triple OT, that’s a terrible scenario for us. This is really simple, root for Louisville, UGA, and UW in order of importance. 

I agree that tOSU sitting there isn’t an issue - if we look good. The fact that the committee should tell us everything we need to know about how they’ll operate. 

No it isn't. I am disputing it. ESPN's own playoff projector disputes it. Look up the definition of the word. 

No their job isnt to put the best 4 teams in. It is to put the 4 most deserving teams in based on their body of work. Otherwise FSU would be #8 right now.

Edited by The_Great_Hornsby
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Jewish Wang said:

There are a litany of posters here that take the committee’s guidelines as gospel, ignoring the word guidelines. There will be an SEC champ in. That’s indisputable. There will be a PAC 12 champ in. That’s indisputable. I’d rather not open the possibility of multiple teams from either conference getting in. That’s what could very easily happen with chaos, combined with a lackluster performance by us at 11 AM Saturday. 

The committee’s job is to put the best 4 teams in. Period. Posters have said the media doesn’t decide. The committee does, and of course this is correct, but the committee isn’t an infallible robot. It’s comprised of people no more intelligent than Rece Davis, Joey Galloway and Bohls. If we beat OSU the way we beat KSU or the way OSU beat BYU, and there’s a very tight SEC game with Bama winning, that’s a terrible scenario for us. If UW loses in triple OT, that’s a terrible scenario for us. This is really simple, root for Louisville, UGA, and UW in order of importance. 

I agree that tOSU sitting there isn’t an issue - if we look good. The fact that the committee should tell us everything we need to know about how they’ll operate. 

From an ESPN article this evening:

No. 8 Alabama: Path to the playoff: Win the SEC and hope Texas loses. Or win the SEC and have Florida State lose; that would leave Michigan, the Pac-12 champion, Alabama and Texas in the top four. The selection committee would consider one-loss Georgia and one-loss Ohio State in this scenario, but it would be difficult for them to justify, considering Alabama would have knocked off its top team, and Texas would have a win against the SEC champs. If Texas loses but Florida State wins, the top four could be Michigan, the Pac-12 champion, Florida State and Alabama.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jewish Wang said:

There are a litany of posters here that take the committee’s guidelines as gospel, ignoring the word guidelines. There will be an SEC champ in. That’s indisputable. There will be a PAC 12 champ in. That’s indisputable. I’d rather not open the possibility of multiple teams from either conference getting in. That’s what could very easily happen with chaos, combined with a lackluster performance by us at 11 AM Saturday. 

The committee’s job is to put the best 4 teams in. Period. Posters have said the media doesn’t decide. The committee does, and of course this is correct, but the committee isn’t an infallible robot. It’s comprised of people no more intelligent than Rece Davis, Joey Galloway and Bohls. If we beat OSU the way we beat KSU or the way OSU beat BYU, and there’s a very tight SEC game with Bama winning, that’s a terrible scenario for us. If UW loses in triple OT, that’s a terrible scenario for us. This is really simple, root for Louisville, UGA, and UW in order of importance. 

I agree that tOSU sitting there isn’t an issue - if we look good. The fact that the committee should tell us everything we need to know about how they’ll operate. 

If multiple teams from a single conference get in, it means that 2 of Michigan, FSU, and Texas lost. That's it. If we win, we aren't getting passed up for a team that isn't a conference champion. 

Im not just taking what the committee says their guidelines are as gospel. I'm also looking at the results of the last decade to determine what they do. The rules are blindingly obvious. They look at overall record. And then they look at conference champions. They've only had to move beyond those metrics one time to select the four playoff teams. I don't think this is the year they change that. 

Edited by Dahobbs
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, hook me said:

I feel like they’re saying “ooo offense score lots points” and acting like the Pac 12 became a good conference at some point. For some reason OSU was essentially a top 10 team for UW & UO to feast on. Their one decent win on the season was at Utah. The rest of the Pac 12 was absolutely overhyped from the jump. USC? trash. Colorado? flash in the pan that anyone with a brain could see but still ended up ranked in the top 20 for UO to smoke. Arizona? Ari-fucking-zona? give me a break. 

You have the UW AD who i bet has a preference on who makes it, the NCST AD as the chair who probably doesn’t want to give FSU any more reason to leave the ACC, and the KSU AD who was chosen by the Big 12 to replace CDC on the playoff committee and was “dumbfounded” when he found out the exit fees weren’t going to be as much as they were expecting.

I have no idea why UT is behind OSU & UO based upon on the field results, but I don’t think margin of score is going to be the deciding factor.

These people have their minds made up about who they think good programs are. What happens on the field don't seem to matter. 

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

No their job isnt to put the best 4 teams in. It is to put the 4 most deserving teams in based on their body of work. Otherwise FSU would be #8 right now.

Are we sure about that? I'm not sure that's how they view it. 

With the TCU egg causing a joke of a title game last year I could see the committee being extra careful to not have that again. That could be costly to FSU although it would be a surprise to leave an undefeated team out because of injury. Will be interesting to see what happens. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MuellerHorn said:

My disagreement rests with the Oregon argument. I understand an undefeated UW is a 100% lock over Texas; but how is Oregon, as Pac-12 champion, not a lock over Texas? They've already been ranked ahead of Texas week after week and their title game win would be drastically better than Texas'.

It's because people are hung up on the fact that Oregon should not currently be in front of Texas based on resumes, and somehow those people think the committee might correct that AFTER Oregon beats an undefeated team to win their conference.  I don't understand it, but that seems to be the argument.

 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

It's because people are hung up on the fact that Oregon should not currently be in front of Texas based on resumes, and somehow those people think the committee might correct that AFTER Oregon beats an undefeated team to win their conference.  I don't understand it, but that seems to be the argument.

 

Texas beat an undefeated team as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

No it isn't. I am disputing it. ESPN's own playoff projector disputes it. Look up the definition of the word. 

No their job isnt to put the best 4 teams in. It is to put the 4 most deserving teams in based on their body of work. Otherwise FSU would be #8 right now.

Disagree that the possibility doesn’t exist (as does like every media member), and I have a bet with a repetitive copy/paste jackass under certain parameters. 

That is absolutely the goal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

If multiple teams from a single conference get in, it means that 2 of Michigan, FSU, and Texas lost. That's it. If we win, we aren't getting passed up for a team that isn't a conference champion. 

Im not just taking what the committee says their guidelines are as gospel. I'm also looking at the results of the last decade to determine what they do. The rules are blindingly obvious. They look at overall record. And then they look at conference champions. They've only had to move beyond those metrics one time to select the four playoff teams. I don't think this is the year they change that. 

There’s never been a year like this. Hence this talk and argument. I’m not overly concerned with UW losing - mainly because I think Oregon will crush them, and the PAC 12 doesn’t have the cachet that the SEC does. But I’m slightly concerned with a “they’re 1-1 on the season” narrative there. If UGA loses a close one, and FSU and Mich hold serve, you can bet your ass every bit of precedence in the last decade will be debated and challenged. You’re speaking as if UGA being left out is a foregone conclusion, and you’re 100% wrong. This is EXACTLY the year they change that. And rules?  There are no rules. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

It's because people are hung up on the fact that Oregon should not currently be in front of Texas based on resumes, and somehow those people think the committee might correct that AFTER Oregon beats an undefeated team to win their conference.  I don't understand it, but that seems to be the argument.

 

It’s the same people that were sure the committee would come to its senses THIS week after they saw the result of the Tech game and realize they were making a big mistake this whole time by having Oregon over Texas.

But I’m sure if/when Oregon beats undefeated Washington the Committee will for sure move them below Texas. For sure.  

  • Haha 3
  • Prepare your anus 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jewish Wang said:

No, they’ll be in as one of 3 or 4 remaining undefeateds. The fact that you of all people are using an eye test argument is hilariously ironic. 

You are so hard to debate with because you cant even follow your own logic because you are a dolt.

You said "The committee’s job is to put the best 4 teams in. Period." 

I said, "No their job isnt to put the best 4 teams in. It is to put the 4 most deserving teams in based on their body of work. Otherwise FSU would be #8 right now." (But FSU will obviously be in with a win based on their body of work)

Then you said, "That is absolutely the goal." Referring to putting the 4 best teams in.

I said "So we should expect FSU to be out even if they win? lol" (Because they clearly arent one of the four best teams at the moment)

Then you popped off with the retarded comment that you made above. Be better. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, Alabama v Georgia, just like Michigan v OSU,  IS A PLAYOFF GAME.  Call them both quarterfinals.  Ohio St is currently out barring multiple upsets.  And Georgia with a loss would be out barring multiple upsets. 

Bottom line:  If Texas wins AND Florida St loses...Texas IS IN.  

PERIOD.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did anyone see tOSU being ranked above us coming? What in the actual fuck? They have no chance of winning the conference, but let's just put them ahead of other 1-loss teams who do have a chance to win their conferences. It's temporary though, just for giggles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There’s a metric regarding non-champs that you all are forgetting - having a reg season win over the champ - applies to Wash/Oregon but only them. 

And no one is projecting Wash to make it if they lose.

Georgia is the only potential CCG loser with a shot at making the top 4 and that’s because they are currently #1 - if they were 2 or lower the odds would increase for them to miss out - but they are currently #1 so they have a shot.

No one else has a shot as a non-champ - tOSU, sorry you’re out - you have zero path.

other CCG participants, doesn’t matter if your lone loss is in the CCG - lose and you’re out. 

Except UGA, and we’ve already discussed them.

So, conference champs.

I think Bama is in with a win.

and if Wash, Mich, and FSU all win - they’re in and Texas and UGA are out.

If two of those 3 lose, UT and UGA are both in.

But if just one of those 3 falls, then obviously a 1 spot opens up and I can see a scenario where UT’s loss to OU weighs more than their win over Bama and over #1 Georgia’s lone loss being to the conf champ Bama. UGA in, Horns out.

So, Texas best shot? Go Cardinals

Equally good for Texas but less likely to happen - Go Haweyes

An Oregon win? I agree that Texas chances here are massive with a win over SEC champ but I don’t trust the committee to again rank that win over the negative loss to OU vs the Duck’s loss to Udub.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve just come to terms with the fact that we’re having this endless round and round discussion means it will all probably be moot/moo after the games are played.. The undefeateds will all win, leaving us on the outside looking in with no real leg to stand on.

 

Thats just our fucking luck in these things.

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dcar00 said:

this. there is no reason to schedule good OOC.  The SEC has proven this over and over again.  Yes you have to only have 1 or zero losses in conf play.  no one punishes you for not giving yourself a "chance" at a loss by scheduling a Minnesota or a Georgia Tech instead of Mich or USC.

Oregon didn't give themselves a chance to be beat by scheduling Portland State.  They played an FCS.  they should be considered 10-1. not 11-1.

they know the committee will just say "sure their SOS sucks and they scheduled FCS Portland State but had they scheduled Boise State they would have beaten them anyway".  
 

The tough OOC game helping in any signficant way is a myth.  the loss column and beating teams by 30+ is what matters.

Counterpoint -- scheduling Bama OOC and winning that game is the ONLY thing that really gives us a chance at getting into the playoffs this year. (Now, if we, Bama and Georgia all end up 12-1 and one or both of those go ahead of us, then yes, it will prove that scheduling games like makes little sense.)

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BluTechsan said:

There’s a metric regarding non-champs that you all are forgetting - having a reg season win over the champ - applies to Wash/Oregon but only them. 

And no one is projecting Wash to make it if they lose.

Georgia is the only potential CCG loser with a shot at making the top 4 and that’s because they are currently #1 - if they were 2 or lower the odds would increase for them to miss out - but they are currently #1 so they have a shot.

No one else has a shot as a non-champ - tOSU, sorry you’re out - you have zero path.

other CCG participants, doesn’t matter if your lone loss is in the CCG - lose and you’re out. 

Except UGA, and we’ve already discussed them.

So, conference champs.

I think Bama is in with a win.

and if Wash, Mich, and FSU all win - they’re in and Texas and UGA are out.

If two of those 3 lose, UT and UGA are both in.

But if just one of those 3 falls, then obviously a 1 spot opens up and I can see a scenario where UT’s loss to OU weighs more than their win over Bama and over #1 Georgia’s lone loss being to the conf champ Bama. UGA in, Horns out.

So, Texas best shot? Go Cardinals

Equally good for Texas but less likely to happen - Go Haweyes

An Oregon win? I agree that Texas chances here are massive with a win over SEC champ but I don’t trust the committee to again rank that win over the negative loss to OU vs the Duck’s loss to Udub.

 

 

Ohio State absolutely has a path, which is why it's telling they're ahead of Texas and Bama in today's rankings. They probably only need wins by Oklahoma State and Louisville to slide into the fourth and final spot. It would be Michigan, Pac-12 champ, SEC champ and them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, C-Man said:

Ohio State absolutely has a path, which is why it's telling they're ahead of Texas and Bama in today's rankings. They probably only need wins by Oklahoma State and Louisville to slide into the fourth and final spot. It would be Michigan, Pac-12 champ, SEC champ and them.

I missed my edit window and my brain hurts to try and correct my error with further explanation but what you point out isn’t it as I was focused on Texas’ path which by default begins with a win vs oSu.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, troph said:

Lame committee roster, wow. Not as potentially biased against us as I would have thought but the I doubt the Kansas state and Baylor guy are on our side. Token woman is not that impressive geez. 

It doesn't matter who is on the committee this year.  No one, and I mean no one is on our side. Baylor is probably leading the Oregon narrative.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Prepare your anus 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dcar00 said:

this. there is no reason to schedule good OOC.  The SEC has proven this over and over again.  Yes you have to only have 1 or zero losses in conf play.  no one punishes you for not giving yourself a "chance" at a loss by scheduling a Minnesota or a Georgia Tech instead of Mich or USC.

Oregon didn't give themselves a chance to be beat by scheduling Portland State.  They played an FCS.  they should be considered 10-1. not 11-1.

they know the committee will just say "sure their SOS sucks and they scheduled FCS Portland State but had they scheduled Boise State they would have beaten them anyway".  
 

The tough OOC game helping in any signficant way is a myth.  the loss column and beating teams by 30+ is what matters.

In the 12 team playoff era, playing tough OOC games will probably be more beneficial from a team development standpoint. Teams will start taking more of an NFL mindset of prepping for the "real season" instead of focusing so much on the beauty contest. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Rickylovesweed said:

The more I think about this, I actually think playing Oklahoma State helps us if they can stay ranked in the top 25 with a loss. 

1) We add another top 25 win if Oklahoma State stays in the top 25. 

2) Our loss doesn't become worse with OU adding a 3rd loss. 

Thoughts? 

It's all Calvin Ball, so wtf knows. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • immamac changed the title to THE College Football Playoff Rankings Thread [MICH,WASH,TEX,ALA]

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...