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

[Chad 1728]

If Bama wins they're in, end of story. It doesn't matter that Texas defeated them in their house. A 1 loss SEC champ will most likely always be selected to the playoff, plus they would have the better resume with wins over Tennessee, UGA, LSU and Ole Miss. KSU losing yesterday didn't help Texas in the SOS department. I can definitely envision a healthy UL team knocking of a crippled FSU team in the ACC championship. UW needs to win the Pac 12 championship game. There is a glimmer of hope yet if some pieces fall into place for Texas to become the #4 seed. I'd call a Big 12 championship with a NY6 win a huge success with a 13-1 record, big step up from 8-5.

 

[victory88 5659]

6 minutes ago, TexEx15 said:

Then there is also no way a 12-1 Oregon should get in over 12-1 Texas.

Exactly.  Those rankings came out halfway through the season.  Let the conference championship games play out and let them the. decide with an entire body of work.  They will have to then pick between two teams with equal record, both conference champions.  One with a top 10 strength of schedule, best win of the year, beating 4 ranked opponents, and finally playing and winning big.  When the talking heads pull up those graphics on tv showing Texas and Oregon’s resume, you tell me which way all those committee members will lean.  Oregon was beating overrated Utah and Colorado teams when they were “looking” good.  Klatt has already jumped Texas ahead of FSU in his latest rankings.  This will work itself out if Texas wins big and if any of Washington losing, FSU losing or Bama winning out plays out.  The only scenario where Texas gets left out is the undefeated stay undefeated.

[Jewish Wang 111]

31 minutes ago, blutow said:

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.      

I’d rather not tempt fate with the Committee, who’s shown a tremendous bias toward SEC over the years. Rooting for chaos is distinct from rooting for Bama to win. It’s contrarian and cute and utterly stupid. 

17 minutes ago, mwaadeeb said:

There you go again, saying nonsense and wrong and all your bullshit. 

See above and shut your face dweeb. 

[blutow 222]

3 minutes ago, Js1 said:

For the love of Texas, I will be a huge UGA and UW and Louisville fan. Do not want to be up against a 12-1 Oregon and a 12-1 Bama

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.  

[Jewish Wang 111]

1 minute ago, blutow said:

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.  

Probably because a close UW loss leaves them hanging around like this tOSU narrative. 

[Js1 85110]

Just now, blutow said:

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.  

13-0 UW knocks out Oregon. Just want them out of the equation entirely. I’d rather we have to be put up against 12-1 Bama if it comes to that than 12-1 Oregon. 

Friendly reminder the Pac 12 CCG is Friday night so we should know what our chances of making the CFP with a win are by the time we get up on Saturday. 

[blutow 222]

1 minute ago, Jewish Wang said:

Rooting for chaos is distinct from rooting for Bama to win.

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.      

[utee94 15746]

1 minute ago, victory88 said:

Exactly.  Those rankings came out halfway through the season.  Let the conference championship games play out and let them the. decide with an entire body of work.  They will have to then pick between two teams with equal record, both conference champions.  One with a top 10 strength of schedule, best win of the year, beating 4 ranked opponents, and finally playing and winning big.  When the talking heads pull up those graphics on tv showing Texas and Oregon’s resume, you tell me which way all those committee members will lean.  Oregon was beating overrated Utah and Colorado teams when they were “looking” good.  Klatt has already jumped Texas ahead of FSU in his latest rankings.  This will work itself out if Texas wins big and if any of Washington losing, FSU losing or Bama winning out plays out.  The only scenario where Texas gets left out is the undefeated stay undefeated.

Exactly, all of this.  Plus, Texas turns on more TV sets than Oregon, and ESPN put up around 3 BILLION dollars for the current playoff contract. 

[gmr548 16517]

29 minutes ago, LebongJames said:

I see no way Bama winning helps us at this point. It’s pretty straight forward in my opinion.

Need Oregon to beat Washington 

Need FSU to lose

We should get in if either of these happen. Also Michigan losing to Iowa somehow would be great.

 

Oregon is already ranked above Texas by the CFP committee and just added a 24 point win over a ranked team. They are playing an undefeated, top 4 team in the CCG while Texas is playing a team that is ranked because the committee has to get to 25 teams.

Regardless of where one falls on whether a 12-1 Oregon should be ranked over a 12-1 Texas, everyone should understand that a 12-1 Oregon absolutely will be ranked over a 12-1 Texas in the final rankings. There's no rooting interest in the Pac 12 title game unless you think one is a better potential matchup than the other, or if you think one of Dubs or Puddles is a superior mascot (it's Dubs bitch).

[Jewish Wang 111]

1 minute ago, blutow said:

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.      

It increases the number of true competitors for us and is an incredibly stupid thought. 

2 minutes ago, utee94 said:

Exactly, all of this.  Plus, Texas turns on more TV sets than Oregon, and ESPN put up around 3 BILLION dollars for the current playoff contract. 

That simply doesn’t matter. CFP has been just fine without us since….inception. 

[blutow 222]

2 minutes ago, Jewish Wang said:

Probably because a close UW loss leaves them hanging around like this tOSU narrative. 

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.    

[gmr548 16517]

12 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Not a single part of me believes a non-champ Georgia goes over us in any scenario where we finish 12-1. We might get squeezed by a 13-0 UW, 13-0 UM, 13-0 FSU and 12-1 Bama, but we would not be left out in favor of 12-1 non-champ Georgia. We’d be 5th in that scenario.

And there would be a lot of heartburn about 12-1 Bama over 12-1 Texas and I think the committee can just say H2H and leave them out in that scenario. 

Like many, I am most scared about what happens if it’s 13-0 UM, 13-0 Georgia, 13-0 FSU, 12-1 Oregon and 12-1 Texas. 

For the love of Texas, I will be a huge UGA and UW and Louisville fan. Do not want to be up against a 12-1 Oregon and a 12-1 Bama

Yeah I don't get the 2 SEC thinking. 12-1 UGA has home wins over Mizzou and Ole Miss. I guess Tennessee too because the committee keeps ranking them (y tho?). They have no conference championship and no OOC win of significance. They could back in if it is a complete chaos scenario where Texas and other favorites lose in CCGs but at that point what do we care?

[Chad 1728]

5 minutes ago, utee94 said:

Exactly, all of this.  Plus, Texas turns on more TV sets than Oregon, and ESPN put up around 3 BILLION dollars for the current playoff contract. 

I should politely inform you that the committee doesn't give a flying fuck about "prestige", dollars and cents nor TV views, etc. Their duty is to put the most four deserving teams in the bracket.

[UTEE97 3429]

Two conferences (SEC and B1G) are guaranteed to send at least one representative, if not two if other conferences are deemed not worthy by comparison. That's why I think we should root for undefeated champs from those conferences. Then we pick our battles with Pac 12 and ACC and hope our resume looks better assuming we all have the same W-L records. If one of these two conferences has an unbeaten champ, they also go in ahead of us. 

[Codaxx 5602]

22 minutes ago, TexEx15 said:

Then there is also no way a 12-1 Oregon should get in over 12-1 Texas.

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)

 

https://collegefootballplayoff.com/sports/2016/10/24/selection-committee-protocol

that is the committee guidelines on their site.. that should favor Texas

[utee94 15746]

1 minute ago, Jewish Wang said:

That simply doesn’t matter. CFP has been just fine without us since….inception. 

What are you on about?  Texas has never been an option before.  Texas turns on more TV sets than Oregon.  All other things being equal, Texas gets the nod over Oregon.

And all other things aren't even equal.  Texas' resume is better, in addition to being a bigger draw.

Our problems are the undefeated teams, not Oregon.

[Jewish Wang 111]

Just now, utee94 said:

What are you on about?  Texas has never been an option before.  Texas turns on more TV sets than Oregon.  All other things being equal, Texas gets the nod over Oregon.

And all other things aren't even equal.  Texas' resume is better, in addition to being a bigger draw.

Our problems are the undefeated teams, not Oregon.

They’re ranked ahead of us now and will be moreso when they beat UW. We’re not getting in over Oregon and tv sets that haven’t been an option for the CFP in the past when it has killed in ratings aren’t even going to factor in. 

[gmr548 16517]

3 minutes ago, UTEE97 said:

Two conferences (SEC and B1G) are guaranteed to send at least one representative, if not two if other conferences are deemed not worthy by comparison. That's why I think we should root for undefeated champs from those conferences. Then we pick our battles with Pac 12 and ACC and hope our resume looks better assuming we all have the same W-L records. If one of these two conferences has an unbeaten champ, they also go in ahead of us. 

 

2 minutes ago, utee94 said:

What are you on about?  Texas has never been an option before.  Texas turns on more TV sets than Oregon.  All other things being equal, Texas gets the nod over Oregon.

And all other things aren't even equal.  Texas' resume is better, in addition to being a bigger draw.

Our problems are the undefeated teams, not Oregon.

I hope y'all brought enough drugs to share with the whole class. The PAC 12 champion is a lock.

[fellside 1076]

It sucks that Florida State plays last because the cleanest scenario and the super unlikely scenario are total opposites and totally depend on FSU. I wish FSU played first so I knew what to root for.

Clean Easy Scenario: FSU loses, Georgia wins, Washington Wins, Michigan wins. They take the undefeated conference champs and Texas. Hardly any 1 loss teams are left, and the few that are don't merit discussion.

Super Unlikely Scenario: FSU wins so we need as many 1 loss champs as possible to muddy the waters. Bama, Texas, Oregon, Michigan (lol), with Ohio State and Washington suddenly being considered as well.

But it mainly just comes down to FSU losing or a miracle.

[Bevo14 8274]

54 minutes ago, blutow said:

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.      

Not to mention that this scenario has never involved a potential 1 loss p5 champ with a win over one of the 2 sec teams. I would put the chances of both Georgia and Alabama going over us near 0%.

[blutow 222]

4 minutes ago, UTEE97 said:

That's why I think we should root for undefeated champs from those conferences. Then we pick our battles with Pac 12 and ACC and hope our resume looks better assuming we all have the same W-L records. If one of these two conferences has an unbeaten champ, they also go in ahead of us. 

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.   

[victory88 5659]

12 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

Oregon is already ranked above Texas by the CFP committee and just added a 24 point win over a ranked team. They are playing an undefeated, top 4 team in the CCG while Texas is playing a team that is ranked because the committee has to get to 25 teams.

Regardless of where one falls on whether a 12-1 Oregon should be ranked over a 12-1 Texas, everyone should understand that a 12-1 Oregon absolutely will be ranked over a 12-1 Texas in the final rankings. There's no rooting interest in the Pac 12 title game unless you think one is a better potential matchup than the other, or if you think one of Dubs or Puddles is a superior mascot (it's Dubs bitch).

If Bama wins out, you think the committee would pick Oregon over Texas despite Texas being better in every comparable statistic and also having a common opponent that has Texas whipping them?  In this scenario, the committee would pass up Texas to put Oregon in when Texas will have a double digit win on the road against another CFP team in Bama?  It doesn’t matter if Oregon beats Washington.  Both teams will be 1 loss teams.  In this scenario, CFP committee will have to say “Yes, we left out Texas who has a better strength of schedule, beaten more ranked teams, has the best win of the year against another CFP team… but Oregon wins the eye test”.  That isn’t happening man.  If Texas beats okie lite by 20+ points…. The more chaos, the more it favors Texas.

[utee94 15746]

8 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

 

I hope y'all brought enough drugs to share with the whole class. The PAC 12 champion is a lock.

lulzno

An undefeated Washington PAC champ is a lock.  Otherwise, nah.

Edited November 26, 2023 by utee94

[gmr548 16517]

1 minute ago, victory88 said:

If Bama wins out, you think the committee would pick Oregon over Texas despite Texas being better in every comparable statistic and also having a common opponent that has Texas whipping them?  In this scenario, the committee would pass up Texas to put Oregon in when Texas will have a double digit win on the road against another CFP team in Bama?  It doesn’t matter if Oregon beats Washington.  Both teams will be 1 loss teams.  In this scenario, CFP committee will have to say “Yes, we left out Texas who has a better strength of schedule, beaten more ranked teams, has the best win of the year against another CFP team… but Oregon wins the eye test”.  That isn’t happening man.  If Texas beats okie lite by 20+ points…. The more chaos, the more it favors Texas.

Absolutely. Look at the current rankings. Oregon's ahead now and their profile will only improve relative to Texas accounting for a win over Oregon State and then Washington. The decision has already been made. This is not rocket surgery.

[UTEE97 3429]

2 minutes ago, victory88 said:

If Bama wins out, you think the committee would pick Oregon over Texas despite Texas being better in every comparable statistic and also having a common opponent that has Texas whipping them?  In this scenario, the committee would pass up Texas to put Oregon in when Texas will have a double digit win on the road against another CFP team in Bama?  It doesn’t matter if Oregon beats Washington.  Both teams will be 1 loss teams.  In this scenario, CFP committee will have to say “Yes, we left out Texas who has a better strength of schedule, beaten more ranked teams, has the best win of the year against another CFP team… but Oregon wins the eye test”.  That isn’t happening man.  If Texas beats okie lite by 20+ points…. The more chaos, the more it favors Texas.

I don't disagree that Texas should be ahead, and I believe there is a good chance that the committee puts us ahead of Oregon this week. If they don't do it now, they won't do it after Oregon beats UW.

[bangkok 89]

the majority of you are sucking the cocks of the status quo.

we’re not making it if washington, georgia, michigan, and fsu all win next week, and rightfully so.

but we should be in if we win, and any of the above mentioned teams lose.

we’ve got a h2h win over alabama on the road, a better schedule and wins than oregon including a dominating performance against a common opponent, and both louisville and iowa are not contenders.

you guys act like texas is second fiddle to the best, and that’s ridiculous.

it’s this simple: texas is the best choice for the cfp, unless all of the 4 above us win.

[victory88 5659]

6 minutes ago, utee94 said:

lulzno

An undefeated Washington PAC champ is a lock.  Otherwise, nah.

Mother fucking this!  The worst thing for Texas is Michigan, UGA, FSU, Washington winning out.  If any of those 4 teams losses, we are likely in.  If Oregon wins, we really need Bama to win out.  

[Jewish Wang 111]

2 minutes ago, UTEE97 said:

I don't disagree that Texas should be ahead, and I believe there is a good chance that the committee puts us ahead of Oregon this week. If they don't do it now, they won't do it after Oregon beats UW.

Why would they do it now?  They just beat the #16 team by 24.  They certainly won’t after they beat UW.  We have no shot against Oregon. 0%.  We also have 0% against a 12-1 Bama team. Y’all are smoking crack if you think otherwise. 

[UTGrad98 2259]

Some of you mother fuckers are starting to piss me off. 

[Jewish Wang 111]

1 minute ago, victory88 said:

Mother fucking this!  The worst thing for Texas is Michigan, UGA, FSU, Washington winning out.  If any of those 4 teams losses, we are likely in.  If Oregon wins, we really need Bama to win out.  

[bangkok 89]

2 minutes ago, Jewish Wang said:

Why would they do it now?  They just beat the #16 team by 24.  They certainly won’t after they beat UW.  We have no shot against Oregon. 0%.  We also have 0% against a 12-1 Bama team. Y’all are smoking crack if you think otherwise. 

you dumb fuck. we’re better than both of these teams, it’s proven on the field.

[UTEE97 3429]

Just now, Jewish Wang said:

Why would they do it now?  They just beat the #16 team by 24.  They certainly won’t after they beat UW.  We have no shot against Oregon. 0%.  We also have 0% against a 12-1 Bama team. Y’all are smoking crack if you think otherwise. 

Because we now have played a common opponent. When records are the same, you look at H2H and results against common opponents. They ranked Oregon ahead when we were barely escaping with wins while Oregon just hammered Utah who was considered one of the best teams at the time. Now that win doesn't look as impressive any more and we have started to dominate. So a lot has changed that warrant a reevaluation of the rankings of these two teams.

[Jewish Wang 111]

Just now, bangkok said:

you dumb fuck. we’re better than both of these teams, it’s proven on the field.

You’re speaking to me as if I am the Committee. Why?  When the Committee tells you who they are, believe them. As opposed to having fantasy dance through your empty head. 

[Codaxx 5602]

6 minutes ago, Jewish Wang said:

Why would they do it now?  They just beat the #16 team by 24.  They certainly won’t after they beat UW.  We have no shot against Oregon. 0%.  We also have 0% against a 12-1 Bama team. Y’all are smoking crack if you think otherwise. 

That is the problem with the early rankings. The committee tried to say the Utah win was the same as the Bama win. That looks completely stupid now. Let’s not pretend that we haven’t seen teams leap frogged in the final rankings.. all I know is the committee has written guidelines. Those are Championships, SOS, head to Head, and comparative outcomes of common opponents. Those are written on their website, those are not my criteria. Based on their website, there isn’t a single criteria that puts Oregon over Texas 

Edited November 26, 2023 by Codaxx

[victory88 5659]

6 minutes ago, Jewish Wang said:

Why would they do it now?  They just beat the #16 team by 24.  They certainly won’t after they beat UW.  We have no shot against Oregon. 0%.  We also have 0% against a 12-1 Bama team. Y’all are smoking crack if you think otherwise. 

You might be a bigger pussy than satayanah

[Jewish Wang 111]

Just now, UTEE97 said:

Because we now have played a common opponent. When records are the same, you look at H2H and results against common opponents. They ranked Oregon ahead when we were barely escaping with wins while Oregon just hammered Utah who was considered one of the best teams at the time. Now that win doesn't look as impressive any more and we have started to dominate. So a lot has changed that warrant a reevaluation of the rankings of these two teams.

A result against tech in Lubbock in week 2?  They’ve pretty much already said our win in Tuscaloosa in week 2 doesn’t mean much. Why would a close road win mean anything?  They’re ALREADY AHEAD OF US AND SLATED TO PLAY AN UNDEFEATED IN A CCG. THEY WILL NOT BE RANKED BELOW US. 

[Red Five 40665]

"Oregon is one spot ahead of Texas now so Texas can't pass them" is a really dumb take. 

[UTEE97 3429]

1 minute ago, Jewish Wang said:

A result against tech in Lubbock in week 2?  They’ve pretty much already said our win in Tuscaloosa in week 2 doesn’t mean much. Why would a close road win mean anything?  They’re ALREADY AHEAD OF US AND SLATED TO PLAY AN UNDEFEATED IN A CCG. THEY WILL NOT BE RANKED BELOW US. 

Since it's impossible to play the common opponent in the same week, so yes, one team would have to play them earlier than the other. I am not sure how that invalidates the results against the common opponent. Then why consider it at all?

[Jewish Wang 111]

1 minute ago, Codaxx said:

That is the problem with the early rankings. The committee tried to say the Utah win was the same as the Bama win. That looks completely stupid now. Let’s not pretend that we haven’t seen teams leap frogged in the final rankings.. all I know is the committee has written guidelines. Those are Championships, SOS, head to Head, and comparative outcomes of common opponents. Those are written on their website, those are not my criteria. Based on their website, there isn’t a single criteria that puts Oregon over Texas 

Okay, fair enough?  But they’re not gonna change it.  Not with a 24-point win over #16 and probable win against #4. Bitch all you want, but not at me, and stop living in fantasy land. 

Just now, victory88 said:

You might be a bigger pussy than satayanah

I’m just a realist. This isn’t a wildass prediction. This is staring you in the face. You know it and everyone on this board knows it, but yet some of you insist on being delusional Aggy. 

[Jewish Wang 111]

1 minute ago, UTEE97 said:

Since it's impossible to play the common opponent in the same week, so yes, one team would have to play them earlier than the other. I am not sure how that invalidates the results against the common opponent. Then why consider it at all?

I’m not really sure they do. It’s a consideration if they’re between two teams, I guess, but they’re not here. 

[UTGrad98 2259]

The committee rankings so far are not meaningless but in years past the final ranking to determine the 4 teams has sometimes drastically changed that last week. That's why we need fsu to lose OR chaos with as many 1 loss teams as possible. We stack up well on both fronts. Oregon being ahead of us right now means fuck all. Same if osu is ahead of us Tuesday. It doesn't fucking matter what this week's rankings look like. We could still be 7th and it wouldn't change a thing. 

[UTEE97 3429]

2 minutes ago, Jewish Wang said:

I’m not really sure they do. It’s a consideration if they’re between two teams, I guess, but they’re not here. 

Yes they do. It's explicitly mentioned in their selection guidelines.

[victory88 5659]

5 minutes ago, Jewish Wang said:

Okay, fair enough?  But they’re not gonna change it.  Not with a 24-point win over #16 and probable win against #4. Bitch all you want, but not at me, and stop living in fantasy land. 

I’m just a realist. This isn’t a wildass prediction. This is staring you in the face. You know it and everyone on this board knows it, but yet some of you insist on being delusional Aggy. 

Your entire premise is flawed bc the committee has already moved teams around ahead of us.  They have had no reason to move Texas until now.  Now we have a common opponent and look good too.  Also, when the rankings came out, we had no idea how long Quinn was going to be out and we’re ranked with our back ok QB.  

Edited November 26, 2023 by victory88

[Red Five 40665]

If it comes down to Oregon vs Texas for spot number four (Michigan, Georgia, FSU would be the top three) then I would put the odds at about 60-40 that Oregon gets the spot. But it absolutely could happen that they don't. 

[Jewish Wang 111]

Hope I’m wrong. I’ll bow out. Getting neg bombed by FORTY NINE TO ZERO. 

[blutow 222]

2 minutes ago, Red Five said:

"Oregon is one spot ahead of Texas now so Texas can't pass them" is a really dumb take. 

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.  

[Dbeasy 14969]

I have no idea why people think Texas would beat out Oregon for the last spot. The committee has already put them ahead of us and their last game win would be against a top four opponent. Oregon is in if they win, and we are out. Unless, somehow Bama beating Georgia causes  enough committee members to vote Texas to avoid the head to head issue. But I doubt it. 

And as to one loss Georgia getting in, there are only one or two people that keep saying that and they need to stfu. That is not happening over a one loss conference champ Texas. No way. Impossible. 

[Codaxx 5602]

6 minutes ago, Jewish Wang said:

A result against tech in Lubbock in week 2?  They’ve pretty much already said our win in Tuscaloosa in week 2 doesn’t mean much. Why would a close road win mean anything?  They’re ALREADY AHEAD OF US AND SLATED TO PLAY AN UNDEFEATED IN A CCG. THEY WILL NOT BE RANKED BELOW US. 

Why would  double digit win a on the road vs a top 8 team matter? Why the fuck would it not? Texas is the only team to win in Bama by double digits since Saban arrived. 

I am pointing out that information changes throughout the year. Your point of view is the inherent flaw in rankings. One of the reasons the PAC gets respect this year is due to early wins over TCU and Florida. Neither of those teams are going bowling this year, so those wins should mean little now. Unfortunately, people are stubborn. They have a hard time adjusting their opinions, when information changes. Perhaps hubris will stop the Committee from following their written guidelines, but we shall see. 

[The_Great_Hornsby 3329]

To take it out of the hands of the committee we need Louisville or Iowa to win. Everything else is gonna be a beauty pageant. 

I give Louisville a 65% chance to win. They score points much more effectively than Florida and can put some scoreboard pressure on their shitty backup QB. 

I give Iowa a 1% chance to win. They can't score and they really do not pose any threat at all. 

 

[Codaxx 5602]

4 minutes ago, blutow said:

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.  

There is also SOS, which highly favors both Texas and Bama over Oregon. Not to mention you are saying margin of victory doesn’t matter, but it’s literally the basis for Oregon being ahead of Texas and Bama. They are getting a bump for blowing out shitty PAC teams