Jump to content

FINAL 2024 CFB polls/rankings - Texas #3/ #4 /#3 (CFP/AP/Coaches)


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

Agreed. We might be able to lose a second game, but it can't be aggy if we want to get to playoffs as things are unfolding now.

And I don't think most Texas fans have come to grips with that yet.  I think everyone would have assumed a 10-2 Texas team is in a 12 team playoff.  I certainly would have.  But between Big 10 having a massive gap after top 4 teams resulting in no parity, Michigan win not paying dividends, Notre Dame riding that win @ A&M to carry them through despite having the worst loss of all candidates and SEC having a ton of 2 loss teams, it's pretty much becoming a certainty absent 1-2 teams losing as a 2 TD favorite 

Edited by Skipper
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Magus Ossis said:

What would 16 look like? Autobids for top 6 conference champs and top 3 CCG losers, 7 at large? Retain top auto-seeding of conference champions? Conferences won't like a plan that diminishes the value of their CCG unless they are highly confident in the offsetting gains stemming from the new way, and maybe not even then.

If BIG/SEC get their way they'd get 4 auto bids each. I'd imagine Big 12 and ACC would get 2, highest ranked g6 or two plus ND, and 3 at larges? It has been reported that BIG and SEC are already pushing for that 4 auto bids

I'd imagine that if you play in the CCG you'd get the autobid from the conference so it would be something like 

SEC CCG Teams(2)
BIG CCG Teams(2)
Big 12 CCG Teams(2)
ACC CCG Teams(2)

That is 8 teams there.

2 highest ranked SEC teams auto bid that aren't in CCG
2 highest ranked BIG teams auto bid that aren't in CCG
1 Highest Ranked g6 conference champion
3 At Large bids OR 2 At Large bids and Notre Dame


Personally i see a big push by SEC or BIG to get ND to join.

Edited by BurntOrange&White
Posted
39 minutes ago, Skipper said:

And I don't think most Texas fans have come to grips with that yet.  I think everyone would have assumed a 10-2 Texas team is in a 12 team playoff.  I certainly would have.  But between Big 10 having a massive gap after top 4 teams resulting in no parity, Michigan win not paying dividends, Notre Dame riding that win @ A&M to carry them through despite having the worst loss of all candidates and SEC having a ton of 2 loss teams, it's pretty much becoming a certainty absent 1-2 teams losing as a 2 TD favorite 

Not sure they are leaving out a 2 loss Texas for a 1 loss Indiana (and Notre Dame isnt out of the woods yet, they very well may lose again, they lost to northern illinois lol). The most likely team to lose by a random upset in the SEC is definitely Ole Miss. Would also be beneficial if Tenn beats UGA and knocks them out of the playoff picture this week. 

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

Would also be beneficial if Tenn beats UGA and knocks them out of the playoff picture this week. 

That would help but it still probably doesn’t get us in if we lose to A&M absent Ohio State completely embarrassing Indiana. In that scenario, Tennessee, Bama, A&M and Ole Miss are probably all in ahead of us due to SOS, so we still need the SEC to get a 5th team somehow.

Edited by Reynolds Woodcock
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
44 minutes ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

Not sure they are leaving out a 2 loss Texas for a 1 loss Indiana (and Notre Dame isnt out of the woods yet, they very well may lose again, they lost to northern illinois lol). The most likely team to lose by a random upset in the SEC is definitely Ole Miss. Would also be beneficial if Tenn beats UGA and knocks them out of the playoff picture this week. 

Maybe not but the howls from the media and every non-Texas fanbase would be awful.  It's already starting, how "Texas doesn't have any top 25 wins," there is a huge article in the Athletic that basically says Georgia should be ranked above Texas since they won head-to-head even though UGA has 2 losses because "UGA has three top 25 wins to Texas' zero"

Quote

 

Georgia, Texas and the folly of ranking teams by number of losses

Georgia, Texas and the folly of ranking teams by number of losses
By Stewart Mandel
Nov 12, 2024

390


On Oct. 19, Georgia went to sold-out Darrell K Royal Memorial Stadium and dominated then-top-ranked Texas 30-15, notching seven sacks and forcing three fumbles in one of the most impressive defensive performances by any team this season.

Barely three weeks later, the latest AP Poll has the Horns (8-1) back up to No. 3 in the country, while Georgia (7-2), which lost 28-10 at Ole Miss on Saturday, dropped to No. 11.

It is a classic example of the oldest tradition in college football polls: ranking teams by number of losses. Texas has one. Georgia has two.

But in this new era of mega-conferences, in which two teams in the same league can play wildly different schedules, defaulting to the number of losses is just plain lazy. The College Football Playoff selection committee, which issues its new rankings Tuesday at 8:30 p.m. ET, needs to do better.

Kirby Smart’s Bulldogs have already played three current top-10 teams — Alabama (7-2), Texas and Ole Miss (8-2) — all on the road. And they played a fourth Top 25 team, Clemson (7-2), at a neutral site. The Dawgs are 2-2 in those games, beating Texas and Clemson (34-3) handily, losing a close game at Alabama (41-34) and losing badly at Ole Miss.

Texas, for its part, has played one current Top 25 team — Georgia — which it lost to at home by two touchdowns.

The Athletic looked at four rankings of strength of schedule. Georgia’s schedule was No. 1 in three of them and No. 3 in the other. Texas’ ranged from No. 46 to No. 80. Georgia has played six road/neutral-site games and just three home games. Texas is the exact opposite with six home games and three road/neutral-site games.

Georgia should arguably be ranked above Texas, not eight spots behind it, given those disparate resumes — not to mention the Dawgs played the Horns and won by 15 points.

Georgia has not looked great recently, especially on offense, but that’s at least in part because it has played such a brutal schedule. The more elite opponents a team plays, the more opportunities it has to lose, especially on the road. If Texas — or Oregon or Ohio State, for that matter — had already played three top-10 teams and a fourth Top 25 team, all away from home, it’d likely have an extra loss by now, too.

The Horns belong somewhere in the top 10. Seven of their eight wins have been lopsided. And just about every computer rating has them in the top three as well.

But the committee tells us all the time how much importance it places on resumes, and Texas has not even beaten anyone in the AP’s “others receiving votes” category. Its “best” win to date was at 6-4 Vanderbilt. Its only other foe with a winning record is 6-3 Colorado State.

The Horns will get one more chance to meaningfully boost their resume when they visit top-15 Texas A&M on Nov. 30. If they win and finish 7-1 in the conference, they will be heading to the SEC Championship Game, where they can earn an automatic CFP berth and render all of this moot.

In the meantime, Georgia is playing yet another top-10 foe this weekend, 8-1 Tennessee, at home. Beating the Vols would give Georgia three Top 25 wins, something only one other team in the country, Alabama, can claim. That would be three more than Texas would have, given it faces unranked Arkansas this week.

One would hope the AP voters and committee will use common sense at that point and flip them. But, of course, Georgia would still have one more loss than Texas. It might be asking too much for pollsters to scrap an 80-year-old tradition.

 

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Js1 said:

Think they align the QFs to conference bowl site tie-ins and in the semis, top seed left gets first pick of which SF site they want 

Yeah, it’s that second part that’s not clear.

 I can’t tell what the bold is trying to say:

“Traditional contract-bowl relationships will be the top priority when the committee assigns teams to Playoff Quarterfinal sites, but such priority cannot be guaranteed because of the bracket. For example, if the Big 12 Conference champion were ranked No. 1 and the Southeastern Conference champion were ranked No. 2, then the Big 12 champion would be assigned to the Sugar Bowl. 

The committee will use geographic proximity for the No. 1 seed when assigning the Playoff Semifinal sites.
 

https://collegefootballplayoff.com/sports/2016/10/24/selection-committee-protocol
 

is that supposed to say the “highest remaining seed”? Or do they actually mean, “we’ll defer to the #1 seed (Oregon today) on where they want to play, but if they get knocked off, #2 seed, we don’t care where you want to play, we get to decide.”

At any rate, cutting to the chase, what are the chances we get Cotton if we’re the #2 seed? Will Oregon as the 1 seed want Orange? If Ohio St beats Oregon, are they the #1 or would we be if we run the table?

Edited by UTexasFight
Posted
1 hour ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

Would also be beneficial if Tenn beats UGA and knocks them out of the playoff picture this week. 

Nico may not play. UGA is already a 10-point favorite and will be at home. I don't see Tennessee winning this one is Nico is out.

1 hour ago, Reynolds Woodcock said:

That would help but it still probably doesn’t get us in if we lose to A&M absent Ohio State completely embarrassing Indiana. In that scenario, Tennessee, Bama, A&M and Ole are probably all in ahead of us due to SOS, so we still need the SEC to get a 5th team somehow.

Texas, and fans of other SEC schools, should absolutely want IU to get blown out. They've played a really bad schedule and might get left out with a blowout loss to OSU. That is the easiest path for the SEC to get five in. Miami, ND, SMU, and Clemson losing another helps too. Hopefully Army beats ND and the ACC winner is a two-loss team; or a situation where no doubt that only one ACC team should get in at the end because the others have two-three losses.

18 minutes ago, markstanco said:

I dont see it.  I bet the line opens that week at 10-14 points which I still think will be low. 

Yep. OSU is going to blow them out. I think it'll be way worse than 10-14 points. Day needs that after the past three seasons.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
13 hours ago, Hook1997 said:

The playoff anger index from ESPN with SMU 2nd with a blind comparison to Texas…..   They reaching a bit. 

IMG_7894.jpeg

IMG_7895.jpeg

Yeah that's fucking dumb. I don't think anyone is saying SMU is as good as Texas or should be ranked as high. 

What doesn't jibe is that SMU has a better ACC resume now than FSU does - with a non-con loss to undefeated #6 in the CFP. Miami kicked the shit out of Florida - we kicked the shit out of TCU. Miami could have easily lost to Va Tech and Cal - SMU could have easily lost to Duke (who the Canes also fucked around with). 

It seems incogruous to have BYU and Miami so high and then SMU 5 spots back. In this case it should work itself out as the ACC likely just gets 1 bid but that doesn't give the CFP a free pass to put out a bad slate of rankings. 

I would also have both Bama and Ole Miss ahead of Miami.

Boise State is fucking overrated as well. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
2 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Can't get to 16 teams fast enough and byes get eliminated. Lets pray for 2026!

 

2 hours ago, Magus Ossis said:

What would 16 look like? Autobids for top 6 conference champs and top 3 CCG losers, 7 at large? Retain top auto-seeding of conference champions? Conferences won't like a plan that diminishes the value of their CCG unless they are highly confident in the offsetting gains stemming from the new way, and maybe not even then.

 

2 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

If BIG/SEC get their way they'd get 4 auto bids each. I'd imagine Big 12 and ACC would get 2, highest ranked g6 or two plus ND, and 3 at larges? It has been reported that BIG and SEC are already pushing for that 4 auto bids

I'd imagine that if you play in the CCG you'd get the autobid from the conference so it would be something like 

SEC CCG Teams(2)
BIG CCG Teams(2)
Big 12 CCG Teams(2)
ACC CCG Teams(2)

That is 8 teams there.

2 highest ranked SEC teams auto bid that aren't in CCG
2 highest ranked BIG teams auto bid that aren't in CCG
1 Highest Ranked g6 conference champion
3 At Large bids OR 2 At Large bids and Notre Dame


Personally i see a big push by SEC or BIG to get ND to join.

You can't get rid of byes and still have CCGs. That's fucking stupid. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
27 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

If that happens this year Ryan Day is for sure getting fired haha

Unless he makes the playoffs and wins a game +.  If he finds a way to lose to Michigan AND doesnt make the 12 team, you may be right (although it will be incredibly dumb on behalf of fOSU). 

Posted
5 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

CCGs will always stay even without byes because TV money.

You could do 24. CCG participants get a bye into the 2nd round. Then you have 16 teams play for those 8 slots. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Horn of Gabriel said:

Maybe not but the howls from the media and every non-Texas fanbase would be awful.  It's already starting, how "Texas doesn't have any top 25 wins," there is a huge article in the Athletic that basically says Georgia should be ranked above Texas since they won head-to-head even though UGA has 2 losses because "UGA has three top 25 wins to Texas' zero"

 

Yeah unless Notre Dame loses another game, Texas likely has to win their next 3 games to earn a spot in the CFP playoffs...

Posted
14 hours ago, msucolt45 said:


I actually watch his show each M-F during lunch. They actually bring great guests on a daily basis, even after you get “past” some of the regular show/staff characters. Over the years I’ve even grown to the the staff “schtick” and insight.

Pat’s staff/crew actually brings great insight into CFB/NFL, not counting his daily guests! Watch it with an “open mind” around 11-1 on ESPN and you might be surprised.

Hook’em!!!

If they have to run a scrolling disclaimer on the bottom not to sue ESPN, I have no interest. It’s usually on at the gym, on mute, thank god 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
34 minutes ago, ztejas said:

Yeah that's fucking dumb. I don't think anyone is saying SMU is as good as Texas or should be ranked as high. 

What doesn't jibe is that SMU has a better ACC resume now than FSU does - with a non-con loss to undefeated #6 in the CFP. Miami kicked the shit out of Florida - we kicked the shit out of TCU. Miami could have easily lost to Va Tech and Cal - SMU could have easily lost to Duke (who the Canes also fucked around with). 

It seems incogruous to have BYU and Miami so high and then SMU 5 spots back. In this case it should work itself out as the ACC likely just gets 1 bid but that doesn't give the CFP a free pass to put out a bad slate of rankings. 

I would also have both Bama and Ole Miss ahead of Miami.

Boise State is fucking overrated as well. 

If SMU, Clemson and Miami all win out up to the ACCCG, I'd rather see two from the ACC, than a fourth from the Big 10 and potentially the SEC. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Hagbard Celine said:

another loss and we're cooked, doesn't matter who it's against

BEAT PIG

move on

This is where I'm at.

Just win, baby.

Beat A&M and go to the SECCG (and assure a playoff spot) in our first season in the SEC? That's wildly succesful for this season.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

If SMU, Clemson and Miami all win out up to the ACCCG, I'd rather see two from the ACC, than a fourth from the Big 10 and potentially the SEC. 

I'm obviously fine with that myself but they have the 1st place team in the conference ranked 14th. 

Not sure how you wind up with a 2nd bid out of that. I guess ND losing would help. I mean they're telling us in this set of rankings that the ACCCG loser isn't going to get any respect. 

Posted
2 hours ago, cmontexas said:

Ohio State could also hilariously lose to Michigan

I think OSU loses to IU. Pretty confident actually. 

Pretty confident they won't lost to Michigan, but would love if they lost both.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
3 hours ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

Would also be beneficial if Tenn beats UGA and knocks them out of the playoff picture this week. 

I think TN/UGA is likely going to end up viewed as an elimination game.  Particularly to the extent one team wins somewhat comfortably.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
28 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

I think OSU loses to IU. Pretty confident actually. 

Pretty confident they won't lost to Michigan, but would love if they lost both.

It wouldn't surprise me but best thing that could happen if you want potential for more SEC bids (giving us cushion) is for OSU to blow IU out of the water potentially knocking them out.   OSU has that @PSU win in their back pocket if they lose again.  To be clear, I'm not sold on PSU but it is what it is.

Posted
11 minutes ago, Skipper said:

It wouldn't surprise me but best thing that could happen if you want potential for more SEC bids (giving us cushion) is for OSU to blow IU out of the water potentially knocking them out.   OSU has that @PSU win in their back pocket if they lose again.  To be clear, I'm not sold on PSU but it is what it is.

I get what you're saying. I'm just not now, and hopefully never will be, in a place where I'm pulling for a team I despise to win so my team makes the playoffs.

I'd rather know, Texas wins out, they make the CFP. They don't, shit happens. Don't lose and you don't have to go full hopium praying for teams I dislike to win. That's aggie shit and nothing I'm interested in being a part of in my view of the world.

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
3 hours ago, Skipper said:

I think TN/UGA is likely going to end up viewed as an elimination game.  Particularly to the extent one team wins somewhat comfortably.

I'm not sure I see any way the loser of that game makes the playoff. It would take some chaos.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
27 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Going to be honest the BCS poll looks superior 

image.thumb.png.fa5bdd15bfefb2e37ff3ef70994adf2a.png

Yeah it has basically every change inside the top 15 I would make. Tenn > BYU, everyone over Miami, BSU behind Miami/SMU.

I'd maybe have Indiana above PSU.

Posted
4 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Interesting thread:

 

 

I mean, it's basically what Stewart Mandel said earlier this week.

And yes, we are benefiting from the committee ignoring SOR and just looking at record.   The committee will do whatever they want, and justify whatever they do, but they are, as usual, giving deferential treatment to preseason rankings, which is why they should not exist until week 5 or 6. 

BYU: No. 2(!) SOR, No. 6 CFP

Indiana: No. 6 SOR, No. 5 CFP

Texas: No. 10 SOR, No. 3 CFP

Penn State: No. 5 SOR, No. 4 CFP

Tennessee: No. 9 SOR, No. 7 CFP

Notre Dame: No. 13 SOR, No. 8 CFP

Georgia: No, 3(!) SOR, No. 12 CFP

Miami: No. 7 SOR, No. 9 CFP

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
15 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Going to be honest the BCS poll looks superior 

image.thumb.png.fa5bdd15bfefb2e37ff3ef70994adf2a.png

We always should have kept the BCS rankings it just sucked some years and picking 2 vs 3 but the amount of grievances you have once you are > 10 is really just pointless anyways but it is orders of magnitude better than the stupid committee running a 100% opaque bias riddled piece of shit process.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Pimphand said:

We always should have kept the BCS rankings it just sucked some years and picking 2 vs 3 but the amount of grievances you have once you are > 10 is really just pointless anyways but it is orders of magnitude better than the stupid committee running a 100% opaque bias riddled piece of shit process.

I am convinced that the CFP uses the BCS formula to create their rankings. Instead of using AP/Coaches poll they each do their own rankings and use that for the human element. It makes no sense that they had to create this committee full of subjective people to create rankings when the BCS system worked, technically, but would be even better in a 4+ team playoff vs just picking two teams.

Edited by BurntOrange&White
Posted
15 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Interesting thread:

 

 

What an insanely melodramatic take. Is that what the committee did last season when then put two different 1 loss teams into the playoff ahead of undefeated FSU?

  • Hook 'Em 9
Posted
1 minute ago, cmontexas said:

What an insanely melodramatic take. Is that what the committee did last season when then put two different 1 loss teams into the playoff ahead of undefeated FSU?

They had to put those teams in....if you read the entire thread you'd see their premise. 

Posted (edited)

You are what your resume says you are- which includes your overall record, conference record, quality wins/losses, margin of victory/defeat, and everyone’s favorite the good ol “eye test.”

Yes, sure Georgia has some nice ranked wins, but also has two ranked losses in watch they looked like warmed over dogshit for most of both games. They have also looked awful in a couple of games against terrible opponents (hi Florida and MSU). Inconsistent , uninspired, and undisciplined. Turnover machine.
 

Last I checked, losing games to top 25 ranked teams is still…losing football games. If the situation were reversed, nobody in the national media would give a fuck if Texas was the one getting “screwed,” so fuck em. We got fucked in the ass in 2008 with the best resume I’ve ever seen. “Should have won all your games” they said.

Hope Georgia loses another one to Tennessee this week so they can keep crying about their low ranking and top 25 wins while being saddled with and ignoring their 3 conference losses which would put them in the bottom half of the SEC.

Edited by Wilcox Cummingtonite
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted

Is crazy how we’re the number 2 team in the playoffs right now but with 1 loss these last three games we can go from lock to 1st team out with two losses. 
 

Hope we play loose and not tight!! 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
1 hour ago, cmontexas said:

What an insanely melodramatic take. Is that what the committee did last season when then put two different 1 loss teams into the playoff ahead of undefeated FSU?

FSU wouldve been in if Travis didnt get hurt though. So your point isnt really valid. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

Massey Composite Dec 3, 2023

  1. Michigan
  2. Washington
  3. Texas
  4. Ohio State
  5. Alabama
  6. Georgia
  7. Florida State

Reminded me of 2014 when undefeated FSU skated through an easy ACC schedule, was also 7th in the composite IIRC, then was pounded by 39 points in the semi-final.

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
30 minutes ago, El Hornarino said:

Massey Composite Dec 3, 2023

Did Massey fudge his calcs for injury?  It's been a long time since I've paid attention to the various "objective" ranking schemes.

Posted (edited)

No, FSU was not that great last year but obviously losing Travis made them even worse. They were top 10 quality with him but looked like a damn bottom 10 team without him. 

Even with Daniels's rookie performance I still might give Travis the hindsight Heisman. Which was obviously created in January of 2006 for all the idiots who messed that one up (hi Bohls!).

Also, the composite is not Massey's rating. It averages dozens of systems. 

Edited by Huckleberry
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Js1 said:

I mean, it's basically what Stewart Mandel said earlier this week.

And yes, we are benefiting from the committee ignoring SOR and just looking at record.   The committee will do whatever they want, and justify whatever they do, but they are, as usual, giving deferential treatment to preseason rankings, which is why they should not exist until week 5 or 6. 

BYU: No. 2(!) SOR, No. 6 CFP

Indiana: No. 6 SOR, No. 5 CFP

Texas: No. 10 SOR, No. 3 CFP

Penn State: No. 5 SOR, No. 4 CFP

Tennessee: No. 9 SOR, No. 7 CFP

Notre Dame: No. 13 SOR, No. 8 CFP

Georgia: No, 3(!) SOR, No. 12 CFP

Miami: No. 7 SOR, No. 9 CFP

The issue here is thinking the CFP Committee cared so heavily about SOR (or using janky SOR analytics - UGA at number 3?)

----

This my simulated CFP Top 25

image.png.d7e552e273ad7b5548bd3538b2ef2b64.png

BYU: No. 12 sim, No. 6 CFP

Indiana: No. 3 sim, No. 5 CFP

Texas: No. 4 sim, No. 3 CFP

Penn State: No. 5 sim, No. 4 CFP

Tennessee: No. 9 sim, No. 7 CFP

Notre Dame: No. 6 sim, No. 8 CFP

Georgia: No, 11 sim, No. 12 CFP

Miami: No. 8 sim, No. 9 CFP

-----

BYU is the only outlier and it's for being overrated, not underrated.

Edited by JBJ
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Js1 said:

I mean, it's basically what Stewart Mandel said earlier this week.

And yes, we are benefiting from the committee ignoring SOR and just looking at record.   The committee will do whatever they want, and justify whatever they do, but they are, as usual, giving deferential treatment to preseason rankings, which is why they should not exist until week 5 or 6. 

BYU: No. 2(!) SOR, No. 6 CFP

Indiana: No. 6 SOR, No. 5 CFP

Texas: No. 10 SOR, No. 3 CFP

Penn State: No. 5 SOR, No. 4 CFP

Tennessee: No. 9 SOR, No. 7 CFP

Notre Dame: No. 13 SOR, No. 8 CFP

Georgia: No, 3(!) SOR, No. 12 CFP

Miami: No. 7 SOR, No. 9 CFP

It’s really weird that you’re focusing so much on SOR when it’s primarily used as just a part of evaluating a team’s performance, not its own standalone metric. Why should the committee overvalue strength of record while ignoring how well a team actually plays in those games? On top of that, their actual strength of schedule has been a joke. They’re around 70th in SOS in most metrics and that’s with SMU propping them up despite them playing SMU early when they were rotating QBs and were a drastically worse team than they are now. 

BYU has had a bunch of lucky outcomes against mediocre to bad teams to go undefeated. All their SOR really shows is they’ve been lucky this year. When you look at how they actually play in those games, it’s pretty obvious they’re not even remotely underrated at No. 6 and they’re actually pretty overrated there. 
Theyre 21st in FEI, 28th in FPI. Wanting them to be overrated even more because they’ve been lucky against a weak schedule makes no sense. 
 

 

Edited by Burt Macklin
  • Hook 'Em 2

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...