Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
12 hours ago, JBJ said:

 1     Ohio State    (1)
 2     Indiana    (2)
 3     Texas A&M    (3)
 4     Georgia    (4)
 5     Texas Tech    (5)
 6     Ole Miss    (6)
 7     Oregon    (7)
 8     Oklahoma    (8)
 9     Notre Dame    (9)
 10     Alabama    (10)
 11     BYU    (11)
 12     Utah    (12)
 13     Miami    (13)
 14     Texas    (17)
 15     Vanderbilt    (15)

 16     Michigan    (18)
 17     USC    (15)
 18     Virginia    (19)
 19     Tennessee    (20)
 20     Tulane    (24)
 21     Arizona State    (25)
 22     Washington    (NR) 
 23     Missouri    (22)
 24     Iowa    (NR)
 25     Illinois    (21)


 

My guess. 20+ is a crapshoot and I haven't really agreed with the teams the committee has put there.

They will rank another ACC team - probably SMU who is 23 in FPI and 18 in Sagarin. I think they want a ranked ACCCG so people bitch about the autobid less. 

Posted
7 hours ago, satyanash said:

 

The most presitigous bowl game outside of the CFP is probably the (Cheez-It) Citrus Bowl, which theoretically matches the top non-CFP Big Ten team against the top non-CFP SEC team (although in reality we know the SEC picks and chooses bowl matchups, so it could be anyone). 

So you’re saying you still can’t spell Citrus without UT?

  • Haha 1
  • Rage+1 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
3 hours ago, The Dog said:

Gonna be wild to see Indiana at #1 after Michigan beats Ohio State again.

I think that is a potential nightmare for Notre Dame and other bubblers. I have heard if UM>OSUe the Big ten championship game will be between IU and Oregon.  But then they have to put Michigan in the playoff and of course Ohio State is there too.  So four BUG teams. 

 

Then if they apply head-to-head logic, Oklahoma jumps in based on the win over Michigan. 4 SEC teams too?

 

Posted
3 hours ago, The Dog said:

yeah but it would be really fucking funny. 

How about Mich loses a close game ala 2006 and the talking heads demand a rematch?

 

Specifically because the game is on Fox, ESPN manufacturers a reason so they can broadcast it.

Posted
On 11/21/2025 at 5:32 PM, JBJ said:

I agree on these two points, but models do a decent job of churning all the data and spitting out estimates that are pretty close to reality.  The more quality non-conference games that we get the more reliable it becomes to do this.  However, having done this a number of years, bowls just don't majorly change what the model thinks about teams or conferences, even though that's when half of the good games happen.

The issue with SOS specifically is that there are several different methods trying to measure different things that all call themselves SOS.  When people colloquially use it, they are trying to answer, "How difficult is it (or how good a team do you need to be) to play through a schedule and make the playoff?"  Not all models are even trying to answer that in their SOS rankings, though. (And people will cherry-pick.)

100 percent accurate. And to complicate things further, stats start doing counter-intuitive things that go against the way people colloquially talk about a “difficult” schedule. 
 

Two simplified models for the five game “meat” of two schedules:

Team A: Four games where they have a 75 percent chance of winning, one game that is very hard against a very good opponent and they have a 25 percent chance of winning. 

Team B: Five games, they are all favored, all have a 60 percent chance of winning. 

The probability of running the table for both teams is basically identical (a bit under 8 percent), and in fact Team B has a slightly lower chance. But most fans and observers will greatly reward Team A because of that one very good win, and comparatively dismiss Team B because they are all games that they “should have won.”
 

And that’s where a committee needs to plunge beyond surface “best wins/losses” discussions and get deeper on analytics when weighing teams.

In general, humans tend to do two things when looking back at events have have happened whether sports, elections, or games of chance: 

1. Are over-impressed when something happens that is “against the odds,” even something that only has a 10 or 5 percent chance of happening WILL happen. And when it does, it doesn’t mean the original odds were wrong. 

2. Are under-impressed when something happens that the “odds favor,” as cumulatively these things begin plummeting quickly.

Posted
On 11/23/2025 at 9:54 PM, ztejas said:

They will rank another ACC team - probably SMU who is 23 in FPI and 18 in Sagarin. I think they want a ranked ACCCG so people bitch about the autobid less. 

Yep.

Actually ranked both SMU and Pitt - both above Tulane. 

Posted

1. Ohio State (11-0)

2. Indiana (11-0)

3. Texas A&M (11-0)

4. Georgia (10-1)

5. Texas Tech (10-1)

6. Oregon (10-1)

7. Ole Miss (10-1)

8. Oklahoma (9-2)

9. Notre Dame (9-2)

10. Alabama (9-2)

11. BYU (10-1)

12. Miami (9-2)

13. Utah (9-2)

14. Vanderbilt (9-2)

15. Michigan (9-2)

16. Texas (8-3)

17. USC (8-3)

18. Virginia (9-2)

19. Tennessee (8-3)

20. Arizona State (8-3)

21. SMU (8-3)

22. Pitt (8-3)

23. Georgia Tech (9-2)

24. Tulane (9-2)

25. Arizona (8-3)

Posted
3 minutes ago, RockyMountainHighHorn said:

Didn’t need to be behind Michigan though 

Ohio state will take care of them finally this year. They are ass and Day has finally learned to not play like an idiot (hopefully). I think it really comes down to getting one of OU or Bama losing. Vandy will lose to Tenn.

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, SarksJuggs said:

Safe to say….its joever 

 

Sure, I mean all we need to to beat A&M soundly, hope Ohio State, Tennessee, Auburn, and LSU all win, and then hope our win over A&M helps us pass Utah/BYU. 

Edited by hornbri
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

doesn't matter.  they desperately want BYU or Utah in.  

Maybe, but they're just gonna get throttled by a Big 10 or SEC team.

Having said that, they should totally expand the field to 24 teams like FCS.

Edited by David Dennison
Posted
13 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Or, you know, beat a really bad Florida team.

Not true, they're weighting all wins the same and all losses the same. The number in the column is all that matters. We'll have to finish it Michigan and Ohio State games due to moving to the SEC and the deal with Fox. 

 

But after this there's literally zero point in scheduling tough OOC games. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
Just now, RoyalBevo21 said:

Not true, they're weighting all wins the same and all losses the same. The number in the column is all that matters. We'll have to finish it Michigan and Ohio State games due to moving to the SEC and the deal with Fox. 

 

But after this there's literally zero point in scheduling tough OOC games. 

If we had beaten Florida we'd be in with a win on Friday.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

doesn't matter.  they desperately want BYU or Utah in.  

For what it's worth. I think Texas gets in over BYU or Utah. BYU beating Tech is the bigger issue for us. 

Just now, David Dennison said:

If we had beaten Florida we'd be in with a win on Friday.

If we had scheduled Minnesota, the same statement would be true. 

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
Just now, Stringer said:

It doesn’t matter, but what happened last week that made them decide Michigan was all of a sudden better than us?

So strange

The loss column, this committee doesnt give a single fuck about the quality or circumstance of your loss. That's what happened. They are setting up a win and in situation for Michigan to bump Bama if they beat OSU. 

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

But we didn't. Beat Florida and it doesn't matter.

Correct. But we also should never play another preseason game like that going forward, it cost us a chance to dance. 

Posted
Just now, Stringer said:

It doesn’t matter, but what happened last week that made them decide Michigan was all of a sudden better than us?

So strange

loss column so that if chaos happens all over the place and Mich beats OSU and we beat aggy.  Mich goes.  they had to fix that from last week.

Posted
1 minute ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Maybe because Michigan is better than us now

not a chance.  MIch lost to the only 2 good teams on their schedule and only one of those is in the playoff.  they had to fix it for the loss column just in case the world burns.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

We can stop pretending there are 4 power conferences any time now.

There are 1.5 power conferences. We need to set up a relegation/promotion system. Fucking idiotic to have damn near 20 team conferences. 

Edited by The_Great_Hornsby
Posted
3 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

We can stop pretending there are 4 power conferences any time now.

When the B1G and the SEC will stop pretending anyone below their Top 2-3 is elite.

Posted
11 minutes ago, Iceman said:

When the B1G and the SEC will stop pretending anyone below their Top 2-3 is elite.

Well, sure.  Elite is a strong word.

But the SEC has 7 teams at 9-2 or better.

Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, BluTechsan said:

What has Oregon done that BYU and Utah have not?

BYU and Utah have each played 2 ranked opponents all year, and that's only because they played each other.  The Big 12 is Tech and a bunch of crap.  And the ACC is worse.

 

2 minutes ago, BluTechsan said:

And how many of those teams has aggy played?

Yeah, aggy's had a miracle draw.  That doesn't make the Big 12 good at football.

Please stop.

Edited by TexArcher
Posted
4 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

BYU and Utah have each played 2 ranked opponents all year, and that's only because they played each other.  The Big 12 is Tech and a bunch of crap.  And the ACC is worse.

 

Yeah, aggy's had a miracle draw.  That doesn't make the Big 12 good at football.

Please stop.

I’m not saying that. The top is of that conference is. No one - NO ONE - is claiming the Big12 deserves equal representation. But 5 bids to 1 bid is borderline excessive 

I’m pointing out the moving target and how one’s rooting interests color the view of said target

Posted
6 minutes ago, BluTechsan said:

I’m not saying that. The top is of that conference is. No one - NO ONE - is claiming the Big12 deserves equal representation. But 5 bids to 1 bid is borderline excessive 

I’m pointing out the moving target and how one’s rooting interests color the view of said target

Well, I'm not a fan of the SEC.  My rooting interest is Texas.

But if the 5th best team in the SEC is better than the 2nd best team in the ACC or Big 12, then it isn't excessive at all.  

If that is how it shakes out, we can come back to this and you can tell me if you think the lowest ranked SEC playoff team would lose on a neutral field to BYU or Utah.  But I doubt you'll persuade many people.

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...