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

[Red Five 41595]

1 minute ago, LonghornSean said:

The only explanation is that these are actually predictions for what the current rankings will be. 

Has to be. None of those have a chance of happening. 

[Beau Vine 55824]

9 hours ago, JBJ said:

Look at Bama's schedule.  Wyoming is better than: MTSU, USF, MSU, Arkansas, Kentucky, Chattanooga, and Auburn.

Massey has Wyoming #72, Auburn #33, UK #39, MSU #48, and Arkie #58.   

Log off and go play outside.

[JBJ 3780]

7 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

Massey has Wyoming #72, Auburn #33, UK #39, MSU #48, and Arkie #58.   

Log off and go play outside.

Look at what you just posted.  Massey has Auburn #33. They just got dominated by his #89 team.  Please.

Edited November 22, 2023 by JBJ

[Beau Vine 55824]

3 minutes ago, JBJ said:

Look at what you just posted.  Massey has Auburn #33. They just got dominated by his #89 team.  Please.

Computer rankings don't hinge on one game, you know.  

[Tex Long 4614]

Funny how the most crucial element to our successful inclusion in the playoffs is the inability of our DC to call a defense that can hold a three-point lead for just over a minute in one game. Did good otherwise, but...

Or, for a lot of Surly, the inability of the OC to gain a ten-point lead after 59 minutes of foobaw. 

We can still get in, and we still have the same task going forward:

Kick the shit outta Tech. Then kick the shit outta whatever half-ass bedraggled crew slithers into Jerrahworld the next week. 

That's all we can do, let the chips fall where they may.

 

 

 

Oh, and 0U sucks.

Hook'em.

[JBJ 3780]

Just now, Beau Vine said:

Computer rankings don't hinge on one game, you know.  

I fully understand.  I actually have my own. 

Look at Auburn's resume yourself.  Is #33 reasonable?  #33 generally means you have a decent chance to upset a top team.  What are their odds against Bama, two scores?  The people with money on the line don't agree.

[Beau Vine 55824]

1 minute ago, JBJ said:

I fully understand.  I actually have my own. 

Look at Auburn's resume yourself.  Is #33 reasonable?  #33 generally means you have a decent chance to upset a top team.  What are their odds against Bama, two scores?  The people with money on the line don't agree.

Honestly, I think Auburn at #33 is wildly overrated.  But not more overrated than Wyoming being ahead of half the SEC.

[Reynolds Woodcock 5064]

Has anyone talked about how KSU is clearly under ranked by 4 spots? They lost at #7, #9 and #20, with the first being a walk off 61 yard field goal, the second being in overtime and the third being by one touchdown. They should be right behind LSU as the second highest ranked 3 loss team.

I still can’t believe we pulled that game out with Murphy at quarterback. 

[Bamboozled73 341]

1 minute ago, Beau Vine said:

Honestly, I think Auburn at #33 is wildly overrated.  But not more overrated than Wyoming being ahead of half the SEC.

Wyoming played better against Texas than Alabama did in Tuscaloosa the previous week. 

[Beau Vine 55824]

1 minute ago, Bamboozled73 said:

Wyoming played better against Texas than Alabama did in Tuscaloosa the previous week. 

 

16 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

Computer rankings don't hinge on one game, you know.  

 

[gmr548 16681]

Look at Bama's schedule.  Wyoming is better than: MTSU, USF, MSU, Arkansas, Kentucky, Chattanooga, and Auburn.

That group as a whole only has 5 P5 wins. 2 are against each other, 2 are against Florida, and 1 is against Vandy.

I would not concede a purely subjective assertion that Wyoming is better than half of those teams, but more to the point you can make the same subjective argument Wyoming is better than Rice, Baylor, Houston, BYU, TCU, and Tech.

That group only has 16 power 5 wins with an extra conference game, and it is mostly circular. All but two being against each other, quasi P5 Big 12 newcomers/bottom dwellers Cincinnati/UCF, and Arkansas. UH did get WVU on the Hail Mary so good for them. Tech, who Wyoming beat, has is 3-1 against that group and lost to BYU on a third string QB. They also add one of the two outside P5 wins with a 3 point win over Kansas, who was on their third string QB.

It’s the same shit.

[Texasborn91 1083]

Wake me up after championship Saturday…. 

[Js1 86939]

5 minutes ago, Texasborn91 said:

Wake me up after championship Saturday…. 

Okay but you’re going to miss thanksgiving 

[Treefidy 1504]

12 hours ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

Lol at the Big 10/secsecsec favoritism....and yet, some of y'all still want Bama to win out so you can have a UGA/UT fight for fourth. You're fucking crazy for wanting that battle....fight the Pac or anyone else, but don't leave it to the committee to choose between 12-1 UGA and 12-1 Texas  

 

Getting into a beauty contest with any of the 3 UGA/UM/OSU is not great for us because of the collective recent histories.     UGA win locks up a spot and we are still in a beauty contest with B1G loser, ideally UM.  Bama win changes the narrative about who should be ranked higher, UT or Bama.

Meanwhile, a blowout game how does the committee justify taking one CCG loser over the other?   UGA and fOSU have 3 wins in 8 appearances combined,  plus fOSU also get left out before as a 12-1 champ for a 12-1 non-champ because it was Bama.  Plus OSU didn’t have the benefit of beating SEC champ on their resume  

 

I think it’s a lot better chance UGA and fOSU cancel each other out making them less likely to repeat 2018

[Jewish Wang 111]

2 hours ago, blutow said:

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.    

This is 100% wrong. Bama must be eliminated because with a win, both Bama and UGA will be ahead of us and both likely make the playoff. It is crazy people think this would benefit us - and legitimately think we’d be ahead of UGA if this happens. Our win wouldn’t be devalued at all (unless a blowout) with the clear #1 beating them - and us, and nobody else. 

[blutow 238]

1 hour ago, Treefidy said:

Getting into a beauty contest with any of the 3 UGA/UM/OSU is not great for us because of the collective recent histories.  

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.   

[Jewish Wang 111]

3 minutes ago, blutow said:

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.   

A 12-1, 2-time defending champ UGA with 22 wins in a row prior to getting knocked off by Bama absolutely gets in over us. You’re crazy if you think otherwise. 

I suspect a UM or OSU team that didn’t make its CCG does not. But I don’t know that. 

Edited November 22, 2023 by Jewish Wang

[blutow 238]

4 minutes ago, Jewish Wang said:

This is 100% wrong. Bama must be eliminated because with a win, both Bama and UGA will be ahead of us and both likely make the playoff. It is crazy people think this would benefit us - and legitimately think we’d be ahead of UGA if this happens. Our win wouldn’t be devalued at all (unless a blowout) with the clear #1 beating them - and us, and nobody else. 

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.   

[Jewish Wang 111]

1 minute ago, blutow said:

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.   

Maybe, but it won’t be to put Texas in. UGA would still be ahead of us. Bama winning is disastrous, and the cute, contrarian thinking about this game is insane to me. 

[Beantown Express 2.0 6586]

2 minutes ago, blutow said:

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.   

I wouldn’t be so sure about that. Ohio State plays a really close game at Michigan and barely loses, the asshat pundits will be saying both are two of the best teams in college football and both deserve to be in the playoffs.  Same could be said for a Bama close victory over Georgia.  You will suddenly hear, both deserve to be in.  Look at the great game we just watched and UGA and Bama are definitely two of the top 4 teams.  Not saying it’s right but the committee has screwed this up before so why stop now.  I figure a Final Four of Michigan, Bama, UGA and Ohio State is what some folks would argue for. 

 

Oh, and Oregon is beating up on a bunch of bad teams and has only played one good team, Washington, and lost that one.  I find it interesting that the committee would throw out head to head (UT versus Bama) and SOS (UT versus Oregon) and just go with the eye test.  It wouldn’t shock me but it’s fucked up. 

[The_Great_Hornsby 3586]

8 minutes ago, blutow said:

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.   

Jewish wang has been saying this shit for weeks. He knows nothing and is clueless about how the CFP works. Dont waste your breath on him. 

[The_Great_Hornsby 3586]

2 minutes ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

I wouldn’t be so sure about that. Ohio State plays a really close game at Michigan and barely loses, the asshat pundits will be saying both are two of the best teams in college football and both deserve to be in the playoffs.  Same could be said for a Bama close victory over Georgia.  You will suddenly hear, both deserve to be in.  Look at the great game we just watched and UGA and Bama are definitely two of the top 4 teams.  Not saying it’s right but the committee has screwed this up before so why stop now.  I figure a Final Four of Michigan, Bama, UGA and Ohio State is what some folks would argue for. 

 

Oh, and Oregon is beating up on a bunch of bad teams and has only played one good team, Washington, and lost that one.  I find it interesting that the committee would throw out head to head (UT versus Bama) and SOS (UT versus Oregon) and just go with the eye test.  It wouldn’t shock me but it’s fucked up. 

Jesus people. We arent Baylor. They arent putting a 1 loss non conference champ Michigan with 1 ranked win or a 1 loss Georgia who would have a loss to the team we beat, a weaker SOS, and no conf championship over a 1 loss Big 12 champ Texas with a win over the SEC champ. They wont and if you think otherwise you can kiss my ass. 

[Jewish Wang 111]

Just now, The_Great_Hornsby said:

Jewish wang has been saying this shit for weeks. He knows nothing and is clueless about how the CFP works. Dont waste your breath on him. 

I know quite a bit about it. I’m sorry a large portion of our fan base insists on being emotionally brainless about this. Here’s one web site I pay attention to:

http://www.playoffstatus.com/ncaafootball/ncaafootballtournpartprob.html

According to this site, if we win out, we have 49% shot, versus Bama’s table-running 69% shot. I think we out to be lower in that scenario but I realize a lot can happen. I think Bama however ought to be much higher in their scenario. What is most interest is UGA’s 93% shot with a loss, which most assuredly is assumed to be SECCCG. 

I’ll post more probabilities like this.  But they’re all directionally similar. And yet I am the clueless one. 

[hook me 2140]

 

3 minutes ago, Jewish Wang said:

A 12-1, 2-time defending champ UGA with 22 wins in a row prior to getting knocked off by Bama absolutely gets in over us. You’re crazy if you think otherwise. 

I suspect a UM or OSU team that didn’t make its CCG does not. But I don’t know that. 

Why? They lose the most difficult game on their schedule but they deserve to go because last years team was so good? This is a terrible take

 

4 minutes ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

I wouldn’t be so sure about that. Ohio State plays a really close game at Michigan and barely loses, the asshat pundits will be saying both are two of the best teams in college football and both deserve to be in the playoffs.  Same could be said for a Bama close victory over Georgia.  You will suddenly hear, both deserve to be in.  Look at the great game we just watched and UGA and Bama are definitely two of the top 4 teams.  Not saying it’s right but the committee has screwed this up before so why stop now.  I figure a Final Four of Michigan, Bama, UGA and Ohio State is what some folks would argue for. 

 

Oh, and Oregon is beating up on a bunch of bad teams and has only played one good team, Washington, and lost that one.  I find it interesting that the committee would throw out head to head (UT versus Bama) and SOS (UT versus Oregon) and just go with the eye test.  It wouldn’t shock me but it’s fucked up. 

The CFP committee is not leaving 12-1 UT at home in favor of a Big 10 team that didn't make it's conference championship or the Pac 12 title game loser or the SEC title game loser. It's not happening. The only years something like has happened has been years where there weren't viable options for the 4th spot. 

[Jewish Wang 111]

2 minutes ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

Jesus people. We arent Baylor. They arent putting a 1 loss non conference champ Michigan with 1 ranked win or a 1 loss Georgia who would have a loss to the team we beat, a weaker SOS, and no conf championship over a 1 loss Big 12 champ Texas with a win over the SEC champ. They wont and if you think otherwise you can kiss my ass. 

Well we’ve already bet, so I’ll just take your money instead of kissing your ass. 

[Jewish Wang 111]

Just now, hook me said:

Why? They lose the most difficult game on their schedule but they deserve to go because last years team was so good? This is a terrible take

Deserve has zero to do with my “terrible take”.  I’m telling you how it will probably be. 

[The_Great_Hornsby 3586]

1 minute ago, Jewish Wang said:

I know quite a bit about it. I’m sorry a large portion of our fan base insists on being emotionally brainless about this. Here’s one web site I pay attention to:

http://www.playoffstatus.com/ncaafootball/ncaafootballtournpartprob.html

According to this site, if we win out, we have 49% shot, versus Bama’s table-running 69% shot. I think we out to be lower in that scenario but I realize a lot can happen. I think Bama however ought to be much higher in their scenario. What is most interest is UGA’s 93% shot with a loss, which most assuredly is assumed to be SECCCG. 

I’ll post more probabilities like this.  But they’re all directionally similar. And yet I am the clueless one. 

Can you shut the fuck up about this nonsense until Bama actually beats Georgia and we are in this situation. Nobody thinks you are right outside of like 2 other braindead morons on this board. There is 0% chance they are putting Georgia above us. They wont. Nobody is being emotional except you and the dumbfucks that cant picture a world without Georgia in the playoffs. Georgia's playoffs starts with Bama. Get over it. 

[Jewish Wang 111]

ESPN has us at 29% if we win out, which sounds more reasonable: https://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/_/page/cfbplayoffpredictor/cfb-playoff-predictor

Bama at 32%.  UGA at 76% if they lose SEC CCG. 

What is interesting is ESPN argues UGA is probably in no matter what and is more than twice as likely as conference winners Bama and Texas to make it. 

I like these percentages less than the other one but again they tell the same story. 

[Jewish Wang 111]

5 minutes ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

Can you shut the fuck up about this nonsense until Bama actually beats Georgia and we are in this situation. Nobody thinks you are right outside of like 2 other braindead morons on this board. There is 0% chance they are putting Georgia above us. They wont. Nobody is being emotional except you and the dumbfucks that cant picture a world without Georgia in the playoffs. Georgia's playoffs starts with Bama. Get over it. 

[TheBryMan81 2630]

3 hours ago, JBJ said:

Look at what you just posted.  Massey has Auburn #33. They just got dominated by his #89 team.  Please.

According to this very reputable and data driven website, New Mexico St is also better than us. So careful, glass houses and such.

https://www.myteamisbetterthanyourteam.com/path;winner=New Mexico St;loser=Texas;sport=CFB;year=2023;method=2

 

[Lou_Sassle 2990]

16 minutes ago, Jewish Wang said:

I know quite a bit about it. I’m sorry a large portion of our fan base insists on being emotionally brainless about this. Here’s one web site I pay attention to:

http://www.playoffstatus.com/ncaafootball/ncaafootballtournpartprob.html

According to this site, if we win out, we have 49% shot, versus Bama’s table-running 69% shot. I think we out to be lower in that scenario but I realize a lot can happen. I think Bama however ought to be much higher in their scenario. What is most interest is UGA’s 93% shot with a loss, which most assuredly is assumed to be SECCCG. 

I’ll post more probabilities like this.  But they’re all directionally similar. And yet I am the clueless one. 

Lol, you "statistics" nerds crack me up. Too bad the games aren't played on computers or spreadsheets.

Edited November 22, 2023 by Lou_Sassle

[Jewish Wang 111]

3 minutes ago, Lou_Sassle said:

Lol, you "statistics" needs crack me up. Too bad the games aren't played on computers or spreadsheets.

I’m sorry data and probabilities crack you up, Lou. I’m aware games are played on the field, and I love college football. I’ll be there Friday and will kick Yormark in the balls if that chicken fucker shows up. But we have 2 weeks left and are running out of time for upsets to help us, while winning our last 3 games against meh opponents by an average of 5 points. You know, games that were actually played on the field. 

[TheBryMan81 2630]

19 minutes ago, Jewish Wang said:

I know quite a bit about it. I’m sorry a large portion of our fan base insists on being emotionally brainless about this. Here’s one web site I pay attention to:

http://www.playoffstatus.com/ncaafootball/ncaafootballtournpartprob.html

According to this site, if we win out, we have 49% shot, versus Bama’s table-running 69% shot. I think we out to be lower in that scenario but I realize a lot can happen. I think Bama however ought to be much higher in their scenario. What is most interest is UGA’s 93% shot with a loss, which most assuredly is assumed to be SECCCG. 

I’ll post more probabilities like this.  But they’re all directionally similar. And yet I am the clueless one. 

How does this website quantify into a percentage the thoughts and emotions of (presumably) logical human beings that will sit and discuss their own opinions a few weeks into the future? With no historical precedent because past committees were made up of different humans with different opinions?

[JBJ 3780]

The fun thing about these odds machines is that the maker has to input who would be taken in the "tie scenarios" anyhow.  Posting them to "prove" one team will be favored in a virtual tie is actually useless.

[MrX 794]

Can’t see the Big 10 also-ran having a shot. If it’s Ohio State they couldn’t beat Michigan’s backup coach, so why let them in with the big boys. If it’s Michigan their total lack of résumé will doom them. 

Georgia would perhaps have a better case, but at Texas’s expense?  Hard to get around “Georgia lost to a team that Texas beat on the road” argument. 

1-loss Georgia over a 1-loss PAC12 champ is probably a more interesting discussion. 
 

 

[Jewish Wang 111]

1 minute ago, TheBryMan81 said:

How does this website quantify into a percentage the thoughts and emotions of (presumably) logical human beings that will sit and discuss their own opinions a few weeks into the future? With no historical precedent because past committees were made up of different humans with different opinions?

Consider it a black box of fuckery, which all models are in reality. None of us knows what is going to happen the next 2 rounds of games. But I have a fair idea we are getting left out, think the common knowledge on this site is exclusive to emotional Horn fans, and have accordingly bet on it. I’ll bet more money. 

[Jewish Wang 111]

3 minutes ago, JBJ said:

The fun thing about these odds machines is that the maker has to input who would be taken in the "tie scenarios" anyhow.  Posting them to "prove" one team will be favored in a virtual tie is actually useless.

Correct. Look at Vegas odds. We are 6th to make it. Right on par with UW (at #7) and decidedly ahead of FSU, interestingly. Decidedly BEHIND Bama at #5. And of course UGA, but that’s not representative about the SEC CCG loser argument I’m making. 

[Jewish Wang 111]

6 minutes ago, MrX said:

Can’t see the Big 10 also-ran having a shot. If it’s Ohio State they couldn’t beat Michigan’s backup coach, so why let them in with the big boys. If it’s Michigan their total lack of résumé will doom them. 

Georgia would perhaps have a better case, but at Texas’s expense?  Hard to get around “Georgia lost to a team that Texas beat on the road” argument. 

1-loss Georgia over a 1-loss PAC12 champ is probably a more interesting discussion. 
 

 

Agreed on Big 10 unless some really weird shit happens in that game Saturday. UGA will undoubtedly have a better case if they keep it close. It won’t be tough to get around that transitive argument for UGA at all. If UT, UO and UGA are the 3 teams for the final 2 spots, I think we are odd man out unless we start blowing teams out. 

[oh_snap 694]

43 minutes ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

Oh, and Oregon is beating up on a bunch of bad teams and has only played one good team, Washington, and lost that one.  I find it interesting that the committee would throw out head to head (UT versus Bama) and SOS (UT versus Oregon) and just go with the eye test.  It wouldn’t shock me but it’s fucked up. 

So long as Horns win by more than 8 against tech, I suspect the committee will move us ahead of Oregon after this weekend citing similar records and performance against common opponents. 

[hook me 2140]

16 minutes ago, Jewish Wang said:

Correct. Look at Vegas odds. We are 6th to make it. Right on par with UW (at #7) and decidedly ahead of FSU, interestingly. Decidedly BEHIND Bama at #5. And of course UGA, but that’s not representative about the SEC CCG loser argument I’m making. 

Sportsbook Review has us at 5th just behind OSU and ahead of FSU, UW, & Bama.

Edited November 22, 2023 by hook me

[JBJ 3780]

15 minutes ago, hook me said:

Sportsbook Review has us at 5th just behind OSU and ahead of FSU, UW, & Bama.

Same here.  Dunno what the other guy is looking at.

[blutow 238]

4 minutes ago, oh_snap said:

So long as Horns win by more than 8 against tech, I suspect the committee will move us ahead of Oregon after this weekend citing similar records and performance against common opponents. 

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)

 

[Js1 86939]

It is almost pathetic and hilarious to watch Texas fans twist themselves into a 12-1 Texas being left out in favor of non-champ Georgia or non-division winner Ohio State/Michigan.

I honestly think a handful of Texas fans want us to miss the playoffs.  So they can be right. 

While everyone else will be rightly mad that a 12-1 Texas is left out, they can run around like:

[Jewish Wang 111]

23 minutes ago, hook me said:

Sportsbook Review has us at 5th just behind OSU and ahead of FSU, UW, & Bama.

No oddsmaker would have us ahead of Bama

Team	DraftKings	FanDuel	BetMGM	Caesars	bet365
Georgia	+240	+230	+225	+240	+225
Michigan	+260	+280 🔥	+275	+240 ❄️	+240
Ohio State	+600	+500	+500	+700 🔥	+500
Oregon	+600 ❄️	+650	+700	+700	+650
Alabama	+700	+750	+700	+750	+700
Texas	+1300 ❄️	+1400	+1400	+1400	+1400
Washington	+1500 🔥	+1300	+1200	+1400 🔥	+1200
Florida State	+3000	+3000	+3300 🔥	+1400 ❄️	+2800
Louisville	+15000	+17000 🔥	+10000	+10000	+15000
Iowa	+100000	+100000	+50000	+200000 🔥	N/A

[LonghornSean 4072]

Texas could very well be left out at 12-1 based on how things are looking. But 12-1 UGA going over us is not something I’m worried about at all.

This year, with so many remaining CFP contenders, the SEC championship game is basically a quarterfinal.

[JBJ 3780]

You aren't posting the odds that you think you are.

Those would imply UGA has a ~30% chance to make the playoffs.

[TheBryMan81 2630]

20 minutes ago, blutow said:

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)

 

I think that the first ranking was based off of Oregon just having destroyed Utah, which looked impressive at the time, and Texas struggling to close out inferior opponents.

But now Utah isn't even a ranked win, but the committee hasn't felt the need to adjust

[Texas Wahoo 3627]

1 hour ago, Jewish Wang said:

I know quite a bit about it. I’m sorry a large portion of our fan base insists on being emotionally brainless about this. Here’s one web site I pay attention to:

http://www.playoffstatus.com/ncaafootball/ncaafootballtournpartprob.html

According to this site, if we win out, we have 49% shot, versus Bama’s table-running 69% shot. I think we out to be lower in that scenario but I realize a lot can happen. I think Bama however ought to be much higher in their scenario. What is most interest is UGA’s 93% shot with a loss, which most assuredly is assumed to be SECCCG. 

I’ll post more probabilities like this.  But they’re all directionally similar. And yet I am the clueless one. 

Doesn't our 49% include the probability that UGA beats Bama, while Bama's 69% assumes that UGA loses obviously.  Texas' percentage to make it when winning out might be much higher in the Bama beats UGA scenario.

[JGrayDBU 369]

Tech has a winning record, correct? Hate to say this, but we need to beat Tech by at least 28 points, and we all know that is NOT gonna happen.  We might lead Tech by 28 in the first half, but then close it out by winning by 10 or less. 

I don't think margin of victory means as much in the Rig 12 game, though.  A 12-1 Texas that finally got motivated and destroyed Tech to me theoretically means we are in.  Under that scenario, I am not worried a bit.  If we beat tech by 14 or less, and win in the Rig 12 game by a small amount, there is a reasonable chance we're left out, but we can't say we didn't know it was coming. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jewish Wang 111]

1 minute ago, Texas Wahoo said:

Doesn't our 49% include the probability that UGA beats Bama, while Bama's 69% assumes that UGA loses obviously.  Texas' percentage to make it when winning out might be much higher in the Bama beats UGA scenario.

In that model it is appreciably lower at best and close to 0% at worst.