ADVERTISEMENT

CFB Playoff Rankings

Oklahoma has wins at Ohio St and at Oklahoma St and against TCU. And their loss was too a good ISU team. I just don’t see how they’re ranked behind Clemson. Neither should Miami and neither should Wisconsin. That Clemson loss to Syracuse is bad

This just shows that what you did last year still matters and it's why I think there are several scenarios where 11-1 bama gets in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wcw3au1
I can see the committee giving them as much credit for wins over AU, Va Tech, NC State and @Louisville as Okie for winning against tOSU, TCU, and Okie St giving up 52 points. Good thing is, it will work itself out whether they were 2 or 6 this week. If they win out, they deserve to be Top 4 IMO
 
I think the committe ranks the teams based on their remaining schedules in order to purposefully cause movement in the top of the polls in order to generate interest, except where they have no other choice as is the case with bama. Every team, including bama has the potential to fall out of the discussion. Every team except bama has the potential to move up just by winning out. Had the committee ranked bama 1, Miami 2, OU 3, like they should be right now, there wouldn’t be any change until we beat bama, Miami and OU slide up 1 spot each, and the. Nothing again until after the first round of the playoff. That would be boring. But, I could be wrong.
 
Oklahoma has wins at Ohio St and at Oklahoma St and against TCU. And their loss was too a good ISU team. I just don’t see how they’re ranked behind Clemson. Neither should Miami and neither should Wisconsin. That Clemson loss to Syracuse is bad

Can they not play the card that their QB was injured that game?
 
  • Like
Reactions: midnighttulips
This just shows that what you did last year still matters and it's why I think there are several scenarios where 11-1 bama gets in.

They also put HUGE emphasis at times on "who have you beat". It's kinda selective when they decide to ignore it, but it's about as consistent a measuring stick as anything else they use. Losing matters less in this system, who you beat (and even who you play) matters more. Clemson is getting credit for beating AU, VT and NCState. Wisconsin needs some W's that matter.

I also think the committee is setting up a scenario where OSU might get in if they win out, which they likely will. They made a jump from 13 to 9 and they've got a few easy jumps in front of them (ND, Wisconsin for starters plus at least one SEC team, likely 2). If bama runs the table OSU is getting in. It will be bama/ACC winner/OU/OSU. Its gonna get tricky if we beat bama, because then OSU needs to likely win a head to head argument with Saban U. They both would have a "really good loss", but OSU scheduled theirs out of conference and the UA schedule takes a hit by FSU sucking. But OSU lost an additional game in conference, and it's not a great loss. But they'd be conference champs who finished the year beating MSU, Michigan and Wisconsin. They just blew out MSU. I tend to think they need to look amazing and blow out all 3 teams by 40-ish points to really get the attention of the committee and give them a reason to put them above Saban.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WDE_Tarp
I think the committe ranks the teams based on their remaining schedules in order to purposefully cause movement in the top of the polls in order to generate interest, except where they have no other choice as is the case with bama. Every team, including bama has the potential to fall out of the discussion. Every team except bama has the potential to move up just by winning out. Had the committee ranked bama 1, Miami 2, OU 3, like they should be right now, there wouldn’t be any change until we beat bama, Miami and OU slide up 1 spot each, and the. Nothing again until after the first round of the playoff. That would be boring. But, I could be wrong.

They also put HUGE emphasis at times on "who have you beat". It's kinda selective when they decide to ignore it, but it's about as consistent a measuring stick as anything else they use. Losing matters less in this system, who you beat (and even who you play) matters more. Clemson is getting credit for beating AU, VT and NCState. Wisconsin needs some W's that matter.

I also think the committee is setting up a scenario where OSU might get in if they win out, which they likely will. They made a jump from 13 to 9 and they've got a few easy jumps in front of them (ND, Wisconsin for starters plus at least one SEC team, likely 2). If bama runs the table OSU is getting in. It will be bama/ACC winner/OU/OSU. Its gonna get tricky if we beat bama, because then OSU needs to likely win a head to head argument with Saban U. They both would have a "really good loss", but OSU scheduled theirs out of conference and the UA schedule takes a hit by FSU sucking. But OSU lost an additional game in conference, and it's not a great loss. But they'd be conference champs who finished the year beating MSU, Michigan and Wisconsin. They just blew out MSU. I tend to think they need to look amazing and blow out all 3 teams by 40-ish points to really get the attention of the committee and give them a reason to put them above Saban.
yep
 
I think they just like to look at the polls and tweak a couple spots to make it look like they know more than everyone. Too funny these clips of these ouldes looking at their computers like they're breaking down all the #s.
Yeah. They show this big board room with a bunch of computers to make us think they’re breaking down some serious analytics and metrics, but then their reasonings are completely objective. “Uh...their qb got injured.” Thanks Bob!
 
I think they just like to look at the polls and tweak a couple spots to make it look like they know more than everyone. Too funny these clips of these ouldes looking at their computers like they're breaking down all the #s.
The worst thing they do every week, or the best I guess for my entertainment, is to send that guy out to "explain" their process. Every single time I've watched they either contradict themselves in the same interview or they contradict last weeks interview. It's consistently inconsistent logic. One team gets hurt for a loss while it had injury issues and the next question another team gets a pass on a loss because of injury issues. One team gets bumped up for scheduling tougher OOC games and then the next week they refuse to downgrade someone just because their schedule worked out to be weaker than they had thought.
 
I think they just like to look at the polls and tweak a couple spots to make it look like they know more than everyone. Too funny these clips of these ouldes looking at their computers like they're breaking down all the #s.
giphy-downsized-large.gif
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT