THE College Football Playoff Rankings Thread [MICH,WASH,TEX,ALA]

[C-Man 27274]

1 minute ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Logically I agree with this, but I just refuse to believe that the committee would leave out the SEC.

[gmr548 16617]

NSIAP...
 

McElroy lol

[gmr548 16617]

I think this is the model. Personally, I'd give all the conference champs the top four or five auto-bids and then seed all the wild cards after that. Yes, you'll perhaps get a situation or two where a lesser team is seeded higher but I'm 100% in favor of rewarding conference champs first and foremost. That should be the first goal. I know we're about to enter the SEC and reap all the advantages that brings with it but I'm not in favor of a scenario where you wind up with four SEC teams seeded in the top eight or whatever you could get. For example, if we were to have a 12-team playoff this year we'd likely have both Michigan and Ohio State in the top 4. That shouldn't happen.

Aren’t the top 4 conference champs the first round byes though? Or did that get scrapped?

[ChickenNuggets 1634]

2 hours ago, Tex Long said:

This is what I like about Klatt. He's pretty much straight up about his opinions, and he doesn't have a problem owning his mistakes after the fact.

Same is true of Josh Pate, although he has some pretty annoying takes on SEC and particularly aggy. I think Late Kick and TexAgs are owned by the same people, so it's kinda understandable... but it's still pretty annoying.

Pate has been gargling Lucci's balls lately...

[UTGrad98 2282]

I'm laughing today at the amount of posts this past week on this thread for the 3 or 4 possible scenarios coming up this weekend. Thats what 14 years of wandering the desert will do. Like rats fighting over a crumb of food. This thread is our catharsis. 14 years of pent up demand all crashing down on 3 scenarios. 

[C-Man 27274]

11 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

Aren’t the top 4 conference champs the first round byes though? Or did that get scrapped?

I don't know. I hope that's the format because that's what I'd do.

[Pimphand 5910]

49 minutes ago, chemHORN said:

What if Michigan, Georgia, and Washington all lost then FSU and Texas won.  Now that would be a shit show.  Everybody has 1 loss except FSU.  lol

[Had Enough 2088]

Not yet.
But it will be when we introduce this 12 team playoff. Then we'll see. It is not unheard of for some two loss team to be absolutely destroying people by the end of the season, but in the past it was too little too late.
Next year maybe it won't be.

So you want it be comparable?

The NFL has fewer teams with more balanced schedules.

Seeding will matter a ton. Who gets a bye, who gets a home game. That will matter more in college and will get scrutiny beyond what the NFL gets due to imbalanced schedules. So we’ll try harder to make it right.

[MonkeyDoughnut 10357]

[Pimphand 5910]

Roll tide keep the SEC out ;-)

[conVINCEd 21469]

If their QB sucks again but they stumblefuck their way to an ugly win,  FSU should be out. I would say the same thing about us if Quinn went down with a season ending injury and we managed to eke out a win over OSU with the Maaliik experience we got vs. KSU.  

[chemHORN 1241]

21 minutes ago, Pimphand said:

 

16 minutes ago, Pimphand said:

Roll tide keep the SEC out 😉

So Either Alabama or Oregon get the 1st round bye.  If that first scenario plays out I'm okay with them ranking Bama ahead of us so we can get the bye.  

Edited November 30, 2023 by chemHORN

[Codaxx 5861]

3 minutes ago, chemHORN said:

 

So Either Alabama or Oregon get the 1st round bye.  If that first scenario plays out I'm okay with them ranking Bama ahead of us so we can get the bye.  

You know the system is screwed up, when Bama and Texas fans would argue the other team should be the higher seed. 

[Red Five 40895]

7 minutes ago, Codaxx said:

You know the system is screwed up, when Bama and Texas fans would argue the other team should be the higher seed. 

"But y'all beat us already. You really should be ahead."

"No no, y'all play in the SEC man! And you just beat Georgia! Don't worry about it, we'll take the four seed..."

[The Dog 44152]

16 minutes ago, Codaxx said:

You know the system is screwed up, when Bama and Texas fans would argue the other team should be the higher seed. 

and the absurdity of the scenario that requires Iowa to beat Michigan.

[Texas Wahoo 3419]

 

[TexEx15 17569]

Here is your rooting guide for this weekend in case you somehow don’t get it yet, which it appears there are a few that don’t.

In order of importance. 1 is obviously non-negotiable. Then any combination of 2 or 3 should get the job done.

1. Texas win

2. FSU loss

3. Bama win

[Drifterwood 164]

We would never start Arch over our defending national champion QB Ewers. He will have to wait his turn.

National champion QB Ewers is not at Texas in 2024

[ITHorn 801]

Klatt gets a lot of shit, but I love that he isn't afraid to put his honest opinion out there for better or worse. Will be Interesting to see the swing in the media as far as pro Texas sentiment goes in any of these chaos scenarios. 

[burntorangebongos 10752]

1 hour ago, conVINCEd said:

If their QB sucks again but they stumblefuck their way to an ugly win,  FSU should be out. I would say the same thing about us if Quinn went down with a season ending injury and we managed to eke out a win over OSU with the Maaliik experience we got vs. KSU.  

Nope

[NashLonghorn 272]

10 minutes ago, ITHorn said:

Klatt gets a lot of shit, but I love that he isn't afraid to put his honest opinion out there for better or worse. Will be Interesting to see the swing in the media as far as pro Texas sentiment goes in any of these chaos scenarios. 

I remember him commenting how in the 2005 season Texas destroyed him and Colorade in the Big 12 Championship game 70-3 and he mentioned a few times he was knocked into next week.  He wasn't bitter, in fact, he was in awe of  Vince Young and Texas.  Straight shooter.  LOL that game looked like someone was playing Madden 2005

Edited November 30, 2023 by NashLonghorn

[GreenspointTexas 9678]

Id give my left pinky toe to get Texas into the playoffs this year, but a 13-0 conference-winning FSU should get the nod over any one loss teams, period

 

crazy to argue otherwise this year

[The_Great_Hornsby 3283]

Just now, GreenspointTexas said:

Id give my left pinky toe to get Texas into the playoffs this year, but a 13-0 conference-winning FSU should get the nod over any one loss teams, period

 

crazy to argue otherwise this year

Joel is saying that screwing Texas out of a head to head win is more egregious than screwing FSU who is going to be chopped liver for whoever they play. I do not think he was advocating for it. He was just making a point. 

[WBT 20670]

3 hours ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Trying to sort out two spots between 13-0 FSU, 12-1 Georgia, 12-1 Alabama, 12-1 Texas is impossible to get right.

Only because of 15 years of secsecsec propaganda.  FSU and Texas are the obvious answer.

[Pancho 45021]

4 minutes ago, GreenspointTexas said:

Id give my left pinky toe to get Texas into the playoffs this year, but a 13-0 conference-winning FSU should get the nod over any one loss teams, period

 

crazy to argue otherwise this year

 

I mean, 99% of people, whether on this thread or in media, are saying exactly that—if FSU wins Saturday they are (and should be) in. 

At the same time, the same 99% of people are saying a.) FSU isn’t one of the 4 best teams with their QB out and b.) they are going to get murdered and a more competitive, deserving team would be better. That doesn’t mean they are saying FSU shouldn’t be in if they win.

 

Both can be true at the same time. 

[Codaxx 5861]

17 minutes ago, burntorangebongos said:

Nope

Didnt Florida beat an undefeated FSU team to a win title in a rematch game, where FSU had to play their back-up QB.. Thinking maybe in the 90s? 

Edited November 30, 2023 by Codaxx

[dcar00 14375]

3 hours ago, immamac said:

Well since you know it’s kind of the rules that happens then yeah it’s gonna happen lol. 

I'm just saying that with that many there is a good chance the conf champs are in the top 12 ranking wise so you don't have a conf champ come from outside the top 12 often(stealing spots like in the NCAA tourney)

[chemHORN 1241]

Just wait.  In a few days time when we find out we are playing FSU in the first round, we will all be booking our hotels in Houston.

[MrBig 5443]

I forgot Cade McNamara is at Iowa now even though he’s not playing. I hope this gives Iowa some kind of help because they are hopeless.

[Js1 85587]

2 minutes ago, chemHORN said:

Just wait.  In a few days time when we find out we are playing FSU in the first round, we will all be booking our hotels in Houston.

Jokes on you, I already live in Houston.

And no, my extra bedrooms will not have a Surly discount.  In fact, there's a degenerate Surly poster tax.

[blutow 238]

3 minutes ago, Pancho said:

 

I mean, 99% of people, whether on this thread or in media, are saying exactly that—if FSU wins Saturday they are (and should be) in. 

At the same time, the same 99% of people are saying a.) FSU isn’t one of the 4 best teams with their QB out and b.) they are going to get murdered and a more competitive, deserving team would be better. That doesn’t mean they are saying FSU shouldn’t be in if they win.

 

Both can be true at the same time. 

It keeps coming back to "best team" vs. "most deserving team".  FSU is clearly not one of the 4 best teams without their QB, but very deserving as an undefeated P5 champ.  I could live with the committee putting a priority over "deserving" over "best" (or the other way around), but it's maddening that they have no consistency from team to team.  Oregon is clearly the least deserving of the 1 loss teams, but the committee views them as the best.  I can live with that, Oregon has won the eye test.  But if you want to use "best" as the main criteria, it should be applied to all contenders and FSU should be out.      

[The_Great_Hornsby 3283]

7 minutes ago, blutow said:

It keeps coming back to "best team" vs. "most deserving team".  FSU is clearly not one of the 4 best teams without their QB, but very deserving as an undefeated P5 champ.  I could live with the committee putting a priority over "deserving" over "best" (or the other way around), but it's maddening that they have no consistency from team to team.  Oregon is clearly the least deserving of the 1 loss teams, but the committee views them as the best.  I can live with that, Oregon has won the eye test.  But if you want to use "best" as the main criteria, it should be applied to all contenders and FSU should be out.      

FSU wasnt one of the four best teams with their QB healthy. I definitely dont think they are even a top 10 team anymore with him out. Maybe #20-25.

[blutow 238]

8 minutes ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

FSU wasnt one of the four best teams with their QB healthy. I definitely dont think they are even a top 10 team anymore with him out. Maybe #20-25.

Let's hope Louisville comes in motivated.  I haven't seen them play this year, but they have won some games.  If they win, they will be losing a cut of the $6m conference payout the ACC would have received w/ FSU making the playoffs. 

[BachelorTrek 3062]

1 minute ago, blutow said:

Let's hope Louisville comes in motivated.  I haven't seen them play this year, but they have won some games.  If they win, they will be losing a cut of the $6m conference payout the ACC would have received w/ FSU making the playoffs. 

Louisville embarrassed neuter-dumb 33-20 this season, and it wasn't that close.... was 33-13 until the dohmers got a garbage TD with 1:35 left.

[dcar00 14375]

18 minutes ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

FSU wasnt one of the four best teams with their QB healthy. I definitely dont think they are even a top 10 team anymore with him out. Maybe #20-25.

people don't realize how bad the ACC is this year since Clempson, Clempson'd.

[chemHORN 1241]

21 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

people don't realize how bad the ACC is this year since Clempson, Clempson'd.

The same can be said for the PAC12 in my opinion.  A few were ranked high to start the season.  Nobody in the Pac 12 played anybody in OOC play and they won all of them giving way more of them lofty rankings than deserved. (Oregon Beat Tech by 1 score and probably should've lost that game). Then they just played each other with those lofty rankings and made it look like they were good.  I said it earlier in this thread but I think we will find out in the playoff that the Pac12 were frauds this year.  

 

Edit: Utah barely slid by a bad Baylor team too. 

Edited November 30, 2023 by chemHORN

[chemHORN 1241]

11 minutes ago, chemHORN said:

The same can be said for the PAC12 in my opinion.  A few were ranked high to start the season.  Nobody in the Pac 12 played anybody in OOC play and they won all of them giving way more of them lofty rankings than deserved. (Oregon Beat Tech by 1 score and probably should've lost that game). Then they just played each other with those lofty rankings and made it look like they were good.  I said it earlier in this thread but I think we will find out in the playoff that the Pac12 were frauds this year.  

 

Edit: Utah barely slid by a bad Baylor team too. 

I just looked it up the only 3 ranked matchups (at the time) they played out of conference were Washington State vs Wisconsin, Colorado vs TCU, and Stanford vs Notre Dame.   The only teams on the entire PAC-12's OOC that are still currently ranked are Oklahoma State and Notre Dame.  

Edited November 30, 2023 by chemHORN

[Gucci_Suit 2659]

2 hours ago, chemHORN said:

The same can be said for the PAC12 in my opinion.  A few were ranked high to start the season.  Nobody in the Pac 12 played anybody in OOC play and they won all of them giving way more of them lofty rankings than deserved. (Oregon Beat Tech by 1 score and probably should've lost that game). Then they just played each other with those lofty rankings and made it look like they were good.  I said it earlier in this thread but I think we will find out in the playoff that the Pac12 were frauds this year.  

 

Edit: Utah barely slid by a bad Baylor team too. 

True. I remember pulling for Oregon to win against Tech just for Yormark spite. That was dumb. 

[DanTheHorn 4966]

23 minutes ago, Gucci_Suit said:

True. I remember pulling for Oregon to win against Tech just for Yormark spite. That was dumb. 

Well it worked and that is the reason they won so now I can blame you.

[bullet 1599]

3 hours ago, Codaxx said:

Didnt Florida beat an undefeated FSU team to a win title in a rematch game, where FSU had to play their back-up QB.. Thinking maybe in the 90s? 

You aren't from around here, are you?  It was called Roll left.

[bullet 1599]

2 hours ago, chemHORN said:

The same can be said for the PAC12 in my opinion.  A few were ranked high to start the season.  Nobody in the Pac 12 played anybody in OOC play and they won all of them giving way more of them lofty rankings than deserved. (Oregon Beat Tech by 1 score and probably should've lost that game). Then they just played each other with those lofty rankings and made it look like they were good.  I said it earlier in this thread but I think we will find out in the playoff that the Pac12 were frauds this year.  

 

Edit: Utah barely slid by a bad Baylor team too. 

Well they beat teams like TCU, Baylor, Wisconsin, etc. that weren't nearly as good as they were expected to be.  Not sure Oregon's win over Tech isn't their best ooc win.

[chemHORN 1241]

2 hours ago, Gucci_Suit said:

True. I remember pulling for Oregon to win against Tech just for Yormark spite. That was dumb. 

I was in Vegas (Alabama weekend) and had Oregon covering in a parlay that included Texas moneyline over Alabama.  The Tech pick six to end the game allowed Oregon to cover so I was happy about it then.  Little did I know.  

[Pancho 45021]

Line now FSU -1.5

[Hank_Hill 18896]

25 minutes ago, Pancho said:

Line now FSU -1.5

Any word on their QB? Seems odd

[Sir Ulrich 5191]

1 hour ago, Pancho said:

Line now FSU -1.5

 

I'd assume this is why

[Vic Mackey 47157]

 
I'd assume this is why

I mean that guy was terrible. How is the 3rd string?

[Huckleberry 33100]

That's the thing. I'm not sure that Glenn would be any worse than Rodemaker. Hell, there's a chance he's better.

[Sir Ulrich 5191]

3 minutes ago, Vic Mackey said:

15 minutes ago, Sir Ulrich said:

 
I'd assume this is why

I mean that guy was terrible. How is the 3rd string?

True freshman who was a 4 star outta high school. That's all I've got

[Vic Mackey 47157]

That's the thing. I'm not sure that Glenn would be any worse than Rodemaker. Hell, there's a chance he's better.

Exactly. He's an unknown. At least with the other guy, we knew he was terrible.

[Horn Dogg 3971]

7 minutes ago, Vic Mackey said:

8 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

That's the thing. I'm not sure that Glenn would be any worse than Rodemaker. Hell, there's a chance he's better.

Exactly. He's an unknown. At least with the other guy, we knew he was terrible.

Would you feel comfortable if we were starting Arch this weekend?