Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, 'stache said:

Lol, okay, it's directly responsive to the topic, while acknowleding the differences in the leagues. I get that a bunch of people here think the Big XII is terrible and should just shut down or join the NAIA, but it's just dumb.

This is more logic fallacy delivery on your end. 

No one is claiming that the Big 12 is terrible and the other hyperbole you sling with it. 

I said the Big 12 needs to stop scheduling the FCS teams and add more P4 teams. I said the Big 12 doesn’t get the benefit of the doubt that the SEC does, competition-wise, whether that is fair or not. That led to your descent into buffoonish rhetoric. 

“hey morons, we already play P4 teams!” - again, no one claimed they didn’t  

“yeah, well let’s look at the SEC scheduling then whaddubout that, huh!” - SEC scheduling is irrelevant to the Big 12 scheduling issues 

“oh sure, you guys just hate the Big 12. i guess we should just shut it down then, meanies!” - this is a bullshit, losing approach to fruitful community discussion, you fucking baby

I guess this behavior works somewhere  The okie state sites? The Cloak Room? In psyche wards somewhere? With elementary school classrooms? Regardless, it’s bandwidth drain here.

 

1 hour ago, notre dame joe said:

Another reason to hate/ignore many playoff games. 

 

I give Boise a share of the 2009 title.

Not seeing a big12 exclusion this year.  You would need multiple 13-0/12-1 teams from the G5 AND the polarization that got an 11-1 IU team to also occur in the SEC.  It doesn't have to be the Big12 champion, they can take a non-champ with fewer losses. 

 

For scheduling wins vs quality OOC I think the difference is infinitesimal.  The inflated playoff leaves room for both the two big conferences and any small team with a pretty W-L column.  

It’s not that hard to see Big 12 exclusion this year. You’re overstating the improbability of it. No one is claiming it is probable either. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
58 minutes ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

The Big XII is not terrible. I don't wish for its demise. I wish it would schedule more compelling nonconference games to make me want to watch it. I wish the rest of the conference had scheduled more compelling nonconference games when we were actually in the conference to raise its profile. Then maybe we wouldn't have had to throw our lot in with all these sister fuckers and mouthbreathers.

But don't feed us that bullshit about scheduling. It's going to continue to bite the conference in the ass. Put on your big girl panties and schedule OU for fuck's sake. 

 

7 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

This is more logic fallacy delivery on your end. 

No one is claiming that the Big 12 is terrible and the other hyperbole you sling with it. 

I said the Big 12 needs to stop scheduling the FCS teams and add more P4 teams. I said the Big 12 doesn’t get the benefit of the doubt that the SEC does, competition-wise, whether that is fair or not. That led to your descent into buffoonish rhetoric. 

“hey morons, we already play P4 teams!” - again, no one claimed they didn’t  

“yeah, well let’s look at the SEC scheduling then whaddubout that, huh!” - SEC scheduling is irrelevant to the Big 12 scheduling issues 

“oh sure, you guys just hate the Big 12. i guess we should just shut it down then, meanies!” - this is a bullshit, losing approach to fruitful community discussion, you fucking baby

I guess this behavior works somewhere  The okie state sites? The Cloak Room? In psyche wards somewhere? With elementary school classrooms? Regardless, it’s bandwidth drain here.

 

It’s not that hard to see Big 12 exclusion this year. You’re overstating the improbability of it. No one is claiming it is probable either. 

I guess I just fundamentally disagree that adding an 11th P4 opponent every season would make any sort of a difference in perception of the league come CFP time. The helmet schools will always get that benefit of the doubt, as will the second tier SEC schools, without ever being questioned for playing FCS and G6 schools. If anything, playing a tougher noncon schedule just increases the possibility of an extra CFP killing loss since our margin outside of winning the conference title is razor thin. As far as my school goes, we have Oregon home and away the next two seasons, then @Arky, then Bama home and away. I just hope we get shit back on track for at least some of those years, our non-con shouldn't be questioned in the Oregon/Bama years, and Arky always might be decent.  

Edited by 'stache
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)

next year you open with fcs tenneessee martin skyhawks

26 your 3rd game is fcs murray state racers

27 you open with fcs western illinois leathernecks

play a top g5 or middling p2

but get the fuck out with this fcs shit

only iowa and iowa state get a pass because they are forced to play uni

 

Edited by Hagbard Celine
Posted
1 hour ago, 'stache said:

Lol, okay, it's directly responsive to the topic, while acknowleding the differences in the leagues. I get that a bunch of people here think the Big XII is terrible and should just shut down or join the NAIA, but it's just dumb.

no

no no no no no

hell no man

no

the difference is your goddamn schedule

STOP SCHEDULING FCS BULLSHIT and you will get a lot of friends around here

Posted
9 minutes ago, 'stache said:

 

I guess I just fundamentally disagree that adding an 11th P4 opponent every season would make any sort of a difference in perception of the league come CFP time. The helmet schools will always get that benefit of the doubt, as will the second tier SEC schools, without ever being questioned for playing FCS and G6 schools. If anything, playing a tougher noncon schedule just increases the possibility of an extra CFP killing loss since our margin outside of winning the conference title is razor thin. As far as my school goes, we have Oregon home and away the next two seasons, then @Arky, then Bama home and away. I just hope we get shit back on track for at least some of those years, our non-con shouldn't be questioned in the Oregon/Bama years, and Arky always might be decent.  

This is a fine response to the point, not that I agree with it. You could have just posted this the first time and taken a good position. 

Posted
Just now, Hagbard Celine said:

next year you open with fcs tenneessee martin skyhawks

26 your 3rd game is fcs murray state racers

27 you open with western illinois leathernecks

play a top g5 or middling p2

but get the fuck out with this fcs shit

only iowa and iowa state get a pass because they are forced to play uni

 

I want to make sure I'm following the conversation. Are you suggesting that only the Big XII teams should avoid FCS opponents to try and improve its perception in the new landscape, or that everyone should stop schduling FCS? The disconnect I keep having is the criticisms of Big XII teams playing FCS when literally every program but Texas does that every year. I get the sense that maybe some are talking specifically about the Big XII to help perception and improve the chance of getting mroe than one team into the CFP. I'm just not sure it would change anything in that regard.

Posted
16 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I want to make sure I'm following the conversation. Are you suggesting that only the Big XII teams should avoid FCS opponents to try and improve its perception in the new landscape, or that everyone should stop schduling FCS? The disconnect I keep having is the criticisms of Big XII teams playing FCS when literally every program but Texas does that every year. I get the sense that maybe some are talking specifically about the Big XII to help perception and improve the chance of getting mroe than one team into the CFP. I'm just not sure it would change anything in that regard.

Here's an interesting way to look at it.  Compare the schedule strengths of the teams in the Big 12 versus those in the SEC.  I'll use Sagarin, you can check it out with ESPN or whatever.

In general, they bottom out fairly close, but the SEC has many more teams with truly tough schedules.  (Texas is not one of them.)  To be fair, according to Sagarin's metrics, the SEC has the most difficult conference SOS, and the B12 is #2, just ahead of B1G.

Food for thought.

Big 12:

image.png.d8bdc510df2e802d39dc995d25882ac0.png

 

SEC:

image.png.5fbb95828b6d400f9dcd148cc8044078.png

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
31 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I want to make sure I'm following the conversation. Are you suggesting that only the Big XII teams should avoid FCS opponents to try and improve its perception in the new landscape, or that everyone should stop schduling FCS? The disconnect I keep having is the criticisms of Big XII teams playing FCS when literally every program but Texas does that every year. I get the sense that maybe some are talking specifically about the Big XII to help perception and improve the chance of getting mroe than one team into the CFP. I'm just not sure it would change anything in that regard.

our position is that EVERYONE should nut up and if you can't play 9 conference games then don't schedule FCS at all

if you aspire to be part of the conversation at thanksgiving then no fcs at all regardless of conference

kent state?  go ahead, schedule down, we don't care

same with new mexico state - we don't care who you play

but the osu cowboys........?

play tulsa!  you've won 10 in a row, their last win was '98; that's a threat for an extra loss?  if you lose that game you don't belong in the argument at thanksgiving anyway

play north texas! you're 10-1 all time and haven't played them in 30 fucking years!   you have a shitload of alumni in north texas - play at fair park the week after Texas-0u?

another idea to get a recruiting/alumni game in north texas would be new mexico - you have never played them

arkansas state - you played a home/away 05/06 and won both - would they be a test? - they shouldn't be - not when you have your shit together - this year yes they would be

get creative with the slot and give yourself an argument at nut cutting time

the enemy of your enemy is your friend - a lot of us here want you to pull yourself up in your new environment - we don't blame you for the debacle in '15 - but we need a reason to back you now

join us - come over from the dark side

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
7 hours ago, 'stache said:

I just don't think they can "punish" SMU for losing the CCG. If they play Miami and lose then either Miami is the lone ACC team, or Miami and SMU are both in, they can't just let Clemson leapfrog SMU in that scenario. Otherwise, they are confirming all of the concerns that CCG's can be a negative with more risk than reward. They are trying desparately to avoid that perception.

Who is they?  The committee hasn't said anything about that either way...and won't

Posted

Not that I disagree but why does it seem like everyone is projecting us to be the conference champions over Georgia?

It's like it's not even a debate, it's just an assumption that it'll happen.

We're going to have our hands full with Georgia's defense.  

Posted
1 minute ago, ATXbronco said:

Not that I disagree but why does it seem like everyone is projecting us to be the conference champions over Georgia?

It's like it's not even a debate, it's just an assumption that it'll happen.

We're going to have our hands full with Georgia's defense.  

These things are lazy they just take current highest CFP ranked team and project them to win the CCG

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, ATXbronco said:

Not that I disagree but why does it seem like everyone is projecting us to be the conference champions over Georgia?

It's like it's not even a debate, it's just an assumption that it'll happen.

We're going to have our hands full with Georgia's defense.  

The people actually doing true projections and not just aligning with the seeds with the rankings are picking UGA to win.

Posted (edited)

I tried to tell everyone, these 3 loss SEC teams had a shot of making it. 

You either rank them in that position or a shitty 2 loss Big 12 team or some G5 team that hasn't played anybody. Somebody has to make the playoffs. You're picking 1 meh team over another meh team. 

Edited by Rickylovesweed
Posted
Just now, immamac said:

I don't understand why they are doing a conference matchup for round 1 of playoffs. It makes no sense. 

This too. If only 3 SEC teams make the playoff, I'd be surprised if they put two of them in a position to eliminate each other

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 minute ago, immamac said:

I don't understand why they are doing a conference matchup for round 1 of playoffs. It makes no sense. 

I don't think they will care about potential matchups until the final poll this shit is just ceremony right now.

Tulane sitting in the middle of the BDF though is interesting.  Rig 12 gonna have to rig to stay afloat.

  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted
1 minute ago, immamac said:

I don't understand why they are doing a conference matchup for round 1 of playoffs. It makes no sense. 

 ANd a rematch at that. Would be different if it was Texas/Tenn

Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Pimphand said:

I don't think they will care about potential matchups until the final poll this shit is just ceremony right now.

Tulane sitting in the middle of the BDF though is interesting.  Rig 12 gonna have to rig to stay afloat.

This year is why I think the Big 12 is going to be completely screwed in the playoffs.

They have no dominant program in a conference that's the 4th worst power conference. A 2 or 3 loss Big 12 team is going to struggle to make the playoffs just like this year. Them trading wins and losses is a recipe for disaster. 

Edited by Rickylovesweed
Posted
14 minutes ago, TonyTexas said:

IMG_1714.jpeg

Beautiful.  Ohio St, Georgia, and Oregon on the other side of the bracket. 
 

all we’d have to really worry about is ND(and I think they’re gettable).  The rest we should be favored in by a bit. 
 

ohio St has a cake walk to the semis though before they play Georgia/Oregon. 

11 minutes ago, Post Oak said:

I would take that bracket in a heartbeat 

Agreed 

10 minutes ago, Rickylovesweed said:

That bracket would be so perfect. 

Sets up too perfect. 

2 minutes ago, immamac said:

I don't understand why they are doing a conference matchup for round 1 of playoffs. It makes no sense. 

I bet they make tweaks to avoid that when the final standings happen. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted

Am I the only one note even remotely upset by where Ole Miss and Alabama are ranked? 

Would you rank shitty 9-2 teams like BYU, ASU, Tulane, and Iowa State above them? Teams that would have more losses with the same schedule. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
6 minutes ago, immamac said:

I don't understand why they are doing a conference matchup for round 1 of playoffs. It makes no sense. 

I think they don't care about the matchup now.  They will fix it when it comes to the last release if it isn't too ridiculous.

I could see a situation(not this year) where if SEC got 5 and Big 10 got 3 that they would force a first round to eliminate an SEC team.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, Rickylovesweed said:

Am I the only one note even remotely upset by where Ole Miss and Alabama are ranked? 

Would you rank shitty 9-2 teams like BYU, ASU, Tulane, and Iowa State above them? Teams that would have more losses with the same schedule. 

I'm not.  We are in an era of college ball where the the schedules are going to be increasingly divergent.  The reality is that Oklahoma would probably be in the top 25 if they played a B12 or ACC schedule.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Tulane comment the committee guy was funny with Rece leading him on.  well they lost to 2 power 4 teams early but they are really playing well now.  Yes dummy because they are playing mostly shitty G5 teams now.

  • Haha 1
Posted
Just now, Huckleberry said:

Looking at it honestly the biggest issue is Boise State being too high. 

They are being buoyed up by the close loss to Oregon when Oregon was not playing well in the beginning of the season.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Looking at it honestly the biggest issue is Boise State being too high. 

Yeah, they're insanely high.  And it's not like they've blown out everyone in their conference.

Posted
30 minutes ago, Hookem2147 said:

Ole Miss being ranked 14th with 3 losses to unranked teams is beyond embarrassing.

ha.  they beat Georgia by 18 who is regarded as the 2nd coming of Lombardi's Packers...unless of course you are Texas.

 

  • Haha 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Looking at it honestly the biggest issue is Boise State being too high. 

I think the CFP committee is sending a message. 
 
The message is that the B12 rep is pissing them off. Maybe he hogs the snacks. Maybe he smells bad. 

Posted
24 minutes ago, Rickylovesweed said:

Am I the only one note even remotely upset by where Ole Miss and Alabama are ranked? 

Would you rank shitty 9-2 teams like BYU, ASU, Tulane, and Iowa State above them? Teams that would have more losses with the same schedule. 

SECSECSEC

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...