blutow

OU was no longer undefeated when the first CFP rankings came out. They had just lost to Kansas 3 days prior and had almost lost to UCF the prior week. It made our loss look pretty bad while Oregon was rolling (eye test and win against Utah right before rankings). If OU stayed undefeated (like washington did), we never would have been behind Oregon. I never understood why everyone was so happy about OU losing when it was bad for Texas, best case was we beat an undefeated OU in the CCG (would have been good on so many levels). I like to see OU to lose as much as the next guy, but not when it hurts Texas.

I'm not sure anyone is saying they are totally ignoring that stuff, just that guidelines are squishy at best.

That would be great for Texas, but how does bama jump Oregon and Texas after barely surviving a terrible Auburn team while Texas and Oregon had strong games?

Agree, but they have ignored it to this point and their strength of schedule is getting a bump (relative to Texas) both this week and next. On the margin of victory, I'm just highlighting that they specifically call out that it can't be used when looking at common opponents (so while I'm sure they are looking it at, they can't use that to explain externally why we might jump oregon). I'm saying they probably did the initial rankings without really giving it much thought and I'm concerned they aren't going to make a correction because they can't find a good reason to change it (short of admitting they screwed up).

The problem is that they need a narrative to support a change (they aren't going to say they just screwed it up and are now fixing it). While common opponents matter (tech), their guidelines specifically say that margin of victory is not rewarded for common opponents. While I don't think our performance at tech will be ignored, it's still tough to have us jump Oregon this week when they convincingly beat a ranked OSU in a rivalry game. And that just leaves the CCG's where they will be playing a top 4 washington while we are playing ~20th OSU. The week of the initial rankings was right after Oregon beat Utah and OU lost to Kansas (after almost losing to UCF the week prior), making our loss look pretty bad. If OU had kept rolling, we never would have been ranked below Oregon, ironic that OU shitting the bed has a decent likelihood of keeping us out of the playoffs this year.

hmmm.... There will be 4 unbeaten conference champs in that scenario and we won't have anyone with the same w-l record left to debate with. We want as many 1 loss conference champs as possible, including Bama and Oregon. No guarantee we get in over either of those, but there is a chance.

The more of those there are, the better. Again, I believe the chances of a non-champ getting a spot are already near zero and the more 1 loss "deserving" non-champs there are, the lower the likelihood that any of them get in.

Bama winning is the biggest form of chaos that could happen next week as it relates to Texas. If Georgia wins that game (likely), the committee has a huge sigh of relief.

Why UW? I agree that it's a long shot we jump 12-1 Oregon (since we haven't already and their case only gets stronger), but 13-0 UW is definitely in.

+100, that is my hope and why I think it can only be good if Bama beats Georgia. Yeah, I agree that SEC should be on the bubble if Georgia doesn't win, I'm just not sure the football gods would allow that. The talk of 2 teams from SEC or B1G is silly in my opinion. I get the argument that OSU or Georgia might still be one of the best 4 teams in the country, but that's not how it works. Results/championships matter. If the committee was just picking the best 4 teams, FSU wouldn't even be in the discussion right now.

I'm sitting on the fence between both camps. I think there is a decent chance the committee doesn't have the balls to exclude the SEC and will have to let Bama in if they win the conference. If that happens, I hope the discussion would be "well, we can't exclude Texas if we include Bama, let's take another look at FSU and Oregon.....". I think Bama winning is a long shot, but that scenario absolutely gives us a better shot than if Georgia wins (where there is a 100% guarantee they get a spot while also making our win over Bama less valuable).

It's only nonsense if you believe 2 SEC teams get in. I know you think that (and anything is possible with a human committee), but that scenario is way, way crazier than the other scenarios. The only time it's happened in the past is when the non-champ goes in over a 2 loss champ. It's looking like it will be 5 very deserving champs. It's not the best team on paper, the results of the games have to matter to some degree.

??? If we have a one loss UGA, Bama only has one loss. It's the only game left.

Bama beating Georgia can only help us. It's the committee's worst nightmare. They will want to put Bama in so bad, but it's really hard to discount that head to head loss to Texas. I'm not ruling out the committee putting Bama in and leaving Texas out in that situation, but it's still better than Georgia winning. If there is a situation where they leave an undefeated FSU out (or push champ Oregon out), a Bama win over Georgia increases the odds of either of those things happening.

If huskies win, they go. If Oregon wins, they probably go, but Texas would at least have an argument.

Oregon got ahead of us because 3 days before the first CFP rankings they beat Utah convincingly (ranked at the time) and OU lost to Kansas after almost losing to UCF the prior week (making our loss to OU look pretty bad). Then OU lost another one the next week. Once they put Oregon in front of us, (which was dumb to start with), nothing dramatic enough has happened to correct it. I doubt the tech win will be enough to shuffle the standings (since Oregon just beat a ranked OSU), but I guess it's possible.

go florida

Yeah, I think the one loss Bama vs. Texas debate is a total shot in the dark and could fall either way. Logically it should be Texas, but we all know the committee members have agendas they are pushing and there are no hard rules. But I still think Bama winning out can only help Texas. I know anything is possible, but a 1 loss (non-champ) Georgia getting in as a 2nd SEC team (over a 1 loss champ Texas or Oregon) is way, way off the deep end in my opinion. The only situations I can remember that a P5 non-champ has gotten in over a champ is when the conference champ has 2 or more losses.

I didn't see tonight's post game, but his comments leading into the ATM game were a little odd. He was overtly complimentary of ATM of player and coaches, with the exception of Jimbo not getting it done despite having everything needed. Could have just been Kiffin being Kiffin and the usual Jimbo hate, but my first thought was that Kiffin was opening a path for the job if it came open soon (or at least make a little noise to get Ole Miss to bump up his current salary). I'd have to think ATM was putting out feelers before firing Jimbo and maybe Kiffin was one of them. Seems like a poor culture fit, but does work with the speculation of ATM wanting to keep some of the defensive coaching staff in place.

I'm not sure the committee share's his view of the world, but pretty good perspective from Pate here.

It's the first time in the CFP era that we've been able to argue about this shit in late November. I'm gonna get my $'s worth. Nothing that is said about anything on this site makes a shit.

The committee dug themselves into a stupid hole when they put Oregon in front of Texas and Bama in the initial rankings. Eye test and timing are the only explanation... I hope they use tech as a reason to adjust, but I seriously doubt that will happen. While they are supposed to consider common opponent results, they are theoretically not supposed to reward based on margin of victory. It's all bullshit, so they will do what they want and clearly we need these late season games to be convincing wins. If you look at what the criteria are supposed to be, a CCG champ Texas should be in good shape against a 1 loss Oregon, Bama, non-champ Georgia, non-champ OSU/Mich etc.. But it all likely comes down to who in that room can push their agenda on the others. Here's what "must" be considered by the committee (but then potentially ignored) - When circumstances at the margins indicate that teams are comparable, then the following criteria must be considered: Championships won Strength of schedule Head‐to‐head competition (if it occurred) Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory)

Yeah, agree to disagree. The SEC (or BIG) isn't getting 2 teams in this year unless there is total chaos. I do think there is decent chance they put Bama in front of Texas if they beat Georgia, but again they are only getting one spot unless everyone start losing this weekend.

There is no situation where an SEC or BIG CCG loser goes in over Texas if we win out (or Oregon if they win out). Yeah, they have let CCG losers in in the past, but under different circumstances.

Yeah, I still like our chances if we win out. But any way you cut it, a Bama win against Georgia helps our chances (even if it means Bama jumps Texas after the win). Bama winning improves the chances of a couple paths where we get in. Bama losing only hurts our chances since our win will be devalued a bit.