2024 CFB polls/rankings - Texas #2/ #2 /#2 (CFP/AP/Coaches)

[statsman 5533]

Klatt thinks Bama is in regardless of who wins the ACC CG. 

[kevwun 15969]

Klatt had a good point about SMU if they lose this weekend, they will have lost to the only 2 good teams they played which is hard to argue against.

Edited 7 hours ago by kevwun

[dcar00 14633]

17 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Then don't lose to 6-5 Michigan at home as a 20 point favorite

 

can you imagine the howling if we had lost to Florida, beat aggy, and were 10-2 and in without playing a conf champ game?

[The Dog 44335]

There's only one way to settle this. 

6-6 Playoff!

[Burt Macklin 19156]

16 hours ago, satyanash said:

Alabama jumps up to #11, ahead of Miami at #12. Sickening.

Of course Ole Miss stays at #13, and ESPN explains it away as them having a "bad Florida loss". But zero mention of Alabama’s losses, instead they handwave it away with "oh, everyone in this cluster has some bad losses, but look at Alabama’s wins!!1!"

Your constant fixation on number of losses without accounting for strength of schedule is getting very tiresome.

Miami has played one team in the top 20 of F+ all year: 8-4 Louisville in a back and forth shootout. Bama played 4 teams in the top 20 and went 3-1.

Miami only played 3 teams in the top 40 all year. Bama played 7. 

Miami got an absolute cakewalk of a schedule and still dropped two games. There's no legitimate basis for claiming they absolutely deserved a playoff spot. 

15 hours ago, satyanash said:

Looks like we have our answer.

 

 

19 minutes ago, kevwun said:

Klatt had a good point about SMU if they lose this weekend, they will have lost to the only 2 good teams they played which is hard to argue against.

Exactly. I don't get why people act like SMU will be robbed if they lose to Clemson and are out. You can mess around with the cutoffs, but SMU has only played one team in the top 20 and they lost to them. Clemson will be their second. If they go 0-2 against top 20 teams (neither of which are in the top 15), there's no reason why they should get to be in the CFP. On the flip side, Clemson is 0-3 against top 20 teams, so if SMU is even one of the 20 best teams in the country, they should be able to handle Clemson and guarantee their spot in the CFP.

People need to stop fixating so much on number of losses when there's such huge schedule disparity. The ACC is an absolute fucking joke of a conference. Their bad teams are horrible, and the ACC's top 3 teams (SMU, Miami, Clemson) didn't play each other.  Duke is 46th in F+ and they went 1-3 against teams in the top 50. They are 9-3 because they go to play 8 teams outside of the top 50 in CFB. That's not a power conference schedule and shouldn't be treated as such. 

1 hour ago, Js1 said:

I mean, the OU team that lost to LSU by 2 TD, lost to fucking paper tiger Mizzou, almost lost to Auburn, scored 3 points against Texas, 26 point loss to SoCar, and almost lost to Houston? 

Most likely would have lost to SMU, Duke, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Syracuse, Miami.  

The Bama game is a total outlier.  It says nothing about OU and everything about Bama either overlooking OU or just not preparing well for them. 

This is a great example of people not understanding how bad the ACC is. Oklahoma is 31st in F+. They would be favored on a neutral field against all of Duke (46th), Georgia Tech(42nd), and Syracuse (50th). Oklahoma would not have had to play all 3 of SMU, Clemson, and Miami, and they would probably be 9-3 instead of Duke. 

 

It really shouldn't be this hard to understand that you can't just compare records straight up, especially when you're talking about ACC teams versus the SEC. 

[Pancho 45582]

1 hour ago, kevwun said:

Whiny Kiffin is not amusing. 

 

[Js1 85970]

2 minutes ago, Pancho said:

 

Same. Kiffin is funny and a personality CFB needs 

[DaysOff 8040]

Man, if they could just expand the playoffs from 4 to 12, it would solve all the gripes about teams being left out.

[Hagbard Celine 11024]

12 hours ago, F250 said:

This graphic doesn't make sense. I don't see The world class fighting texas aggy listed.

the graphic is illegal on the grounds of eSiPn conspiracy to outshine aggy

also missing are the brethren who have told us repeatedly they are a national brand

[Hagbard Celine 11024]

12 hours ago, B00M said:

@Huckleberry bring back adjusted stats please lol 

you stupid sips, the only stat that matters is SUCCESS RATES

[Hagbard Celine 11024]

3 hours ago, Pam Cummings said:

Alabama has no business in the playoffs. I hate the rankings and am just glad that our team did what they needed to do and didn't leave it up to a bunch of weird ever-changing standards.

the easter egg in all of the analysis was dinich declaring the eye test more important this year

that's the bat signal

[B00M 6604]

40 minutes ago, Burt Macklin said:

Your constant fixation on number of losses without accounting for strength of schedule is getting very tiresome.

Miami has played one team in the top 20 of F+ all year: 8-4 Louisville in a back and forth shootout. Bama played 4 teams in the top 20 and went 3-1.

Miami only played 3 teams in the top 40 all year. Bama played 7. 

Miami got an absolute cakewalk of a schedule and still dropped two games. There's no legitimate basis for claiming they absolutely deserved a playoff spot. 

 

Exactly. I don't get why people act like SMU will be robbed if they lose to Clemson and are out. You can mess around with the cutoffs, but SMU has only played one team in the top 20 and they lost to them. Clemson will be their second. If they go 0-2 against top 20 teams (neither of which are in the top 15), there's no reason why they should get to be in the CFP. On the flip side, Clemson is 0-3 against top 20 teams, so if SMU is even one of the 20 best teams in the country, they should be able to handle Clemson and guarantee their spot in the CFP.

People need to stop fixating so much on number of losses when there's such huge schedule disparity. The ACC is an absolute fucking joke of a conference. Their bad teams are horrible, and the ACC's top 3 teams (SMU, Miami, Clemson) didn't play each other.  Duke is 46th in F+ and they went 1-3 against teams in the top 50. They are 9-3 because they go to play 8 teams outside of the top 50 in CFB. That's not a power conference schedule and shouldn't be treated as such. 

This is a great example of people not understanding how bad the ACC is. Oklahoma is 31st in F+. They would be favored on a neutral field against all of Duke (46th), Georgia Tech(42nd), and Syracuse (50th). Oklahoma would not have had to play all 3 of SMU, Clemson, and Miami, and they would probably be 9-3 instead of Duke. 

 

It really shouldn't be this hard to understand that you can't just compare records straight up, especially when you're talking about ACC teams versus the SEC. 

Yeah but, like, are we really expected to support our arguments? 

Edited 6 hours ago by B00M

[Hagbard Celine 11024]

3 hours ago, satyanash said:

byu are getting screwed worse than anyone else but per the viewership graphics the playoff has room for at most 2 teams not in the Top 18 / 50% category ("brands that matter")

this year smu and boise/unlv most probably take those 2 slots

it's absurd that an 11-2 rig12 champion could be left out, and the brethren are behind the rig12 ccg winner

gump should be behind all of them

Alabama coach Kalen DeBoer joined the College GameDay podcast after the rankings were announced this week, and he shared his reaction.

“You don’t know,” DeBoer said. “It’s a hard decision I understand the committee has to make. I totally get it. Trying to balance everything. There are so many good teams in the country, not just the top but throughout. You don’t know how it’s going to come out. Certainly pleased and understand, I guess selfishly, from our end, where we feel we belong. Feeling that we’re one of those teams that should be in the playoff. A little biased of course, but also, stepping back and have some perspective with our kind of season that we’ve had, the teams we play, the wins we had in particular. I just really feel like we belong there and have that type of team that can go the distance given this type of opportunity.”

[chainsaw 10051]

2 minutes ago, Hagbard Celine said:

byu are getting screwed worse than anyone else but per the viewership graphics the playoff has room for at most 2 teams not in the Top 18 / 50% category ("brands that matter")

this year smu and boise/unlv most probably take those 2 slots

it's absurd that an 11-2 rig12 champion could be left out, and the brethren are behind the rig12 ccg winner

gump should be behind all of them

Alabama coach Kalen DeBoer joined the College GameDay podcast after the rankings were announced this week, and he shared his reaction.

“You don’t know,” DeBoer said. “It’s a hard decision I understand the committee has to make. I totally get it. Trying to balance everything. There are so many good teams in the country, not just the top but throughout. You don’t know how it’s going to come out. Certainly pleased and understand, I guess selfishly, from our end, where we feel we belong. Feeling that we’re one of those teams that should be in the playoff. A little biased of course, but also, stepping back and have some perspective with our kind of season that we’ve had, the teams we play, the wins we had in particular. I just really feel like we belong there and have that type of team that can go the distance given this type of opportunity.”

Losing to Kansas really gets treated like two losses though

[Hagbard Celine 11024]

3 hours ago, Pam Cummings said:

I'm not so sure that Alabama is better than Syracuse. Seriously, it's embarrassing.

dinich declared the eye test was this year's deciding criteria

orangemen on a "roll"

gump in freefall

[Crockett 504]

23 minutes ago, Hagbard Celine said:

also missing are the brethren who have told us repeatedly they are a national brand

Stop making stuff up. We have a national fan base. Any game anywhere in the country we show up in large numbers. 

[chainsaw 10051]

1 minute ago, Crockett said:

Stop making stuff up. We have a national fan base. Any game anywhere in the country we show up in large numbers. 

[Hagbard Celine 11024]

2 hours ago, kevwun said:

Whiny Kiffin is not amusing.  Maybe don't lose to 3 mediocre to bad conference teams next time Lane.

disagree - kiffin is the new pirate - stir the shitstorm lane!

[Pam Cummings 9718]

7 minutes ago, Crockett said:

Stop making stuff up. We have a national fan base. Any game anywhere in the country we show up in large numbers. 

That is weird. All the way down to 18 with just 2 losses eh. Not even a chance at it.

[Zeus 6513]

Lane Kiffin being a crybaby bitch

[Hagbard Celine 11024]

21 minutes ago, Crockett said:

Stop making stuff up. We have a national fan base. Any game anywhere in the country we show up in large numbers. 

2% of the united states are lds

for comparison, 20% are catholiic

90% of byu fans are in the corridor (az-ut-id)

let's come back to this in the offseason when we need topics to argue

[statsman 5533]

There was a P5 when the 12 team CFP was approved, with four conference champions byes. It was always known that one of the SEC (Ha!), B1G (Ha!), PAC (eyes roll), ACC and B12 wouldn’t get a bye. Everyone assumed that, without UT and OU, it would usually be the B12, and occasionally the ACC champ that would not get a bye. 

[Tex-19 2914]

Conference championship games are so dumb in this setup. 1-loss teams with similarly weak schedules like Indiana and ND are locked in but SMU is at risk because they made their CCG?

And I presume Texas could drop below ND with a CCG loss? 

It makes no sense. If you think Bama is better than SMU, put them there now but don't punish teams for having an extra game.

[Pancho 45582]

2 hours ago, kevwun said:

Klatt had a good point about SMU if they lose this weekend, they will have lost to the only 2 good teams they played which is hard to argue against.

 

Which is why the idea of SMU just not playing in starting to take off (but they are going to play). Some podcasters are bringing up ND and how they don’t have to play this weekend and they are in

 

[Js1 85970]

2 minutes ago, Pancho said:

 

Which is why the idea of SMU just not playing in starting to take off (but they are going to play). Some podcasters are bringing up ND and how they don’t have to play this weekend and they are in

 

But when Kiffin said it, everyone called him a bitch

[gofuckyourself 8740]

The "our whole team got Covid" only works when playing Wake Forest in a bowl game.

[Pancho 45582]

3 minutes ago, Js1 said:

But when Kiffin said it, everyone called him a bitch

 

I said “he actually makes a great point” but I was talking to myself in my car on the way to work.

 

 

[Tex-19 2914]

Lane was right about CCGs.

He is not right about Ole Miss deserving to get in with 3 losses.

[Js1 85970]

3 minutes ago, Tex-19 said:

Lane was right about CCGs.

He is not right about Ole Miss deserving to get in with 3 losses.

i agree with that. 

[dcar00 14633]

28 minutes ago, Tex-19 said:

Conference championship games are so dumb in this setup. 1-loss teams with similarly weak schedules like Indiana and ND are locked in but SMU is at risk because they made their CCG?

And I presume Texas could drop below ND with a CCG loss? 

It makes no sense. If you think Bama is better than SMU, put them there now but don't punish teams for having an extra game.

If SMU could have bought there way into the SEC or B1G they would have.  They couldn't so there you are.  

They won't be punishing SMU for the extra game, they will be punishing them for not being SEC and not being a blue blood.  Blue bloods, SEC, Big Ten, get a mulligan. If the committee thought they could get away with it they'd have SMU below Bama right now.  but they can't because there is a difference of 2 and not 1 in the loss column.

Their game is obvious.  If they would do something like drop Indiana in favor of SCAR then I might believe they are actually looking a full resumes of teams but they don't. They look at loss column, conf affiliation, historical status/eyeballs that come with that, and then eye test, which is used to confirm all their biases.

[satyanash 14960]

9 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

Their game is obvious.  If they would do something like drop Indiana in favor of SCAR then I might believe they are actually looking a full resumes of teams but they don't. They look at loss column, conf affiliation, historical status/eyeballs that come with that, and then eye test, which is used to confirm all their biases.

Matt Hayes: Time to end the Indiana charade and move beyond the College Football Playoff novelty act

Quote

Let me take you to a cold Connecticut suburb, and the vision of a man nestled in front of a roaring fire with a hot cup of joe. Now imagine Burke Magnus, ESPN's president of content, watching in horror as the cable giant's hottest property was kneecapped by the College Football Playoff selection committee chairman. The biggest weekend of the college football season, followed a day later by the grand reveal of the new 12-team CFP, all minimized with one statement about championship week.

One wildly improper statement. "Those who are not playing (during championship week), we will not adjust those teams," said Warde Manuel, Michigan's athletic director and the CFP selection committee chairman. "They don't have another data point, obviously." No, not obviously. Not at all. If Georgia beats Texas in the SEC championship game – far and away the best conference in college football – that isn't another data point for Ole Miss? The same Ole Miss stranded on the bubble as the No.13 team in the poll?

The same Ole Miss that would then have an 18-point win over the champion of the best conference in college football? That's not a data point? The same Ole Miss that would then have a win over the No. 2 team, and a 24-point win at the No. 14 team (South Carolina). And three one-possession losses, two on prayer fourth-down throws from Kentucky and LSU. As opposed to a resume of 11 wins vs. a schedule of every team with at least five losses.

This can't be what we've come to with the new 12-team CFP.

• Indiana coach Curt Cignetti's CFP pitch: we're good, really, we are!
• Ole Miss coach Lane Kiffin's CFP pitch: The team that won the SEC? We beat them by 18.

I don't want to be the guy that has to keep saying this, but what in the world is Indiana doing in the CFP? Because if you take Manuel at his word – and I'm still not convinced he didn't inadvertently misspeak under the pressure of live television (it's easy to do) – there is no movement in the poll outside of the teams playing this weekend.

That means Indiana, which has no wins vs. the playoff committee's top 25 and one loss of 23 points at Ohio State, is in the tournament. If we're going to start awarding CFP bids to teams with one loss, why not hand one to Army? The Black Knights are beating teams by an average of 17 points per game, and their only blemish is a blowout loss to No. 4 Notre Dame.

This, of course, is ridiculous to the committee because Army plays in the American Athletic, and has an considerably easier path than Indiana. Which is just like Indiana and its easier path than Ole Miss. These are 12 precious spots, a ticket to the big show that should be earned, not allowed because of some random ideal that less losses is more important that big wins. What exactly are we promoting here by sending Indiana to the CFP?

That those who are fortunate to receive a randomly easier schedule than others, get a significant break on the road to the CFP? That's utterly preposterous. I don't blame Indiana, I blame the selection committee. If those 13 members choosing the 12-team playoff can't look at each other and admit the relative ease of schedule for Indiana is the factor in its school-record 11 wins, we've got much bigger problems with this system.

Indiana is a nice story, just like it was in 2020. That season, the Hoosiers were screwed out of a spot in the Big Ten championship game when the conference changed the return to play rules to get Ohio State into the marquee game. Ohio State won the Big Ten, upset Clemson in the playoff semifinals, and lost to Alabama in the national championship game. Indiana lost to 5-5 Ole Miss in the Outback Bowl.

We're not really doing this, are we? We're not really rewarding a team for simply winning games against overmatched competition Instead of rewarding a team that won games against elite competition. This can't be what we've come to with the 12-team CFP.

 

[skipmcgee 269]

Matt Hayes sounds like a buffoon 

[MrX 750]

Hayes is a dumbass. Ole Miss has THREE losses. One of them to 4-8 Kentucky. At some point your bad losses have to mean something. 

[Zeus 6513]

[Wilcox Cummingtonite 3144]

Quote

• Ole Miss coach Lane Kiffin's CFP pitch: The team that won the SEC? We beat them by 18.

[ztejas 43784]

13 hours ago, Halohal said:

Trolling?

 

It's amazing how fucking stupid he is. 

Yeah Kurt - I'm sure that the fucking Mountain West, B12 and ACC are gonna jump Georgia for the 2, 3 and 4 spots.

[satyanash 14960]

Stewart Mandel: Mario Cristobal states Miami’s Playoff case, says Canes were ‘not assessed justly and fairly’

Quote

Miami coach Mario Cristobal said Wednesday his team was not “not assessed justly and fairly” by the College Football Playoff selection committee and hopes it will reconsider its decision to rank the 10-2 Hurricanes at No. 12, one spot below 9-3 Alabama, in its penultimate rankings. As it stands now, Alabama would be the last at-large team to make the cut and Miami the first one out. The Canes dropped from No. 6 to No. 12 following last week’s 32-28 loss at 9-3 Syracuse, which is now the committee’s No. 22 team. “Winning 10 games is exponentially harder than winning nine,” Cristobal said on Wednesday’s episode of “The Audible.” “This whole, ‘This conference is better than that conference,’ some of the teams are, but not all the teams are. Never once were we in a blowout loss against a .500 team.”

Cristobal was referring to Alabama’s 24-3 defeat at 6-6 Oklahoma on Nov. 23, the Tide’s third loss of the season. Selection committee chairman Warde Manuel said Tuesday night that the committee’s placement of Alabama above Miami came down to their performances against top-end teams. The Tide finished the regular season 3-1 against teams in the committee’s current Top 25 while the Canes went 0-1. He also cited Alabama’s 5-1 record against teams with winning records vs. Miami’s 4-2 mark. Cristobal, who was Alabama’s offensive line coach from 2013-16, countered that his team was 4-2 on the road against teams that finished .500 or better while Alabama went 1-3. “I worked at Alabama, and it was an honor to work there, during a time when it (went) on an epic run,” said Cristobal. “But times have changed, football has changed. It’s hard to find a weekend where there’s not several close, tight games and upsets because the margins in college football are super thin. Winning gets harder and harder, and there’s a lot more parity.”

While Cristobal hopes the committee will reassess the two teams, Manuel was adamant Tuesday night that it will not reevaluate teams that have completed their regular seasons. And that would signal that the Miami-Alabama order will not change. The Tide could still miss the CFP, however, if No. 17 Clemson beats No. 8 SMU in this week’s ACC Championship Game and the committee keeps the Mustangs ahead of Alabama. “It needs reexamination and assessment so it can be done the right way,” said Cristobal “So much is on the line.”

 

[Js1 85970]

1 minute ago, satyanash said:

Stewart Mandel: Mario Cristobal states Miami’s Playoff case, says Canes were ‘not assessed justly and fairly’

 

My Miami dude bro, you’re lucky you’re in  the convo still. You should be 8-4

[ztejas 43784]

3 hours ago, Burt Macklin said:

Exactly. I don't get why people act like SMU will be robbed if they lose to Clemson and are out. You can mess around with the cutoffs, but SMU has only played one team in the top 20 and they lost to them. Clemson will be their second. If they go 0-2 against top 20 teams (neither of which are in the top 15), there's no reason why they should get to be in the CFP. On the flip side, Clemson is 0-3 against top 20 teams, so if SMU is even one of the 20 best teams in the country, they should be able to handle Clemson and guarantee their spot in the CFP.

We beat Lousiville on the road who F+ (is that the metric we're using?) has 14th. And Clemson is in the top 15 of that stat at... 15th.

You're all over the place here. I'm fine if SMU misses with a loss to Clemson but let's straighten out the facts a bit. 

I also think the top 6 or so teams in the ACC are pretty solid and the conference really gets bad after that. SMU and Miami had huge OOC wins against TCU and Florida who both wound up being decent. Syracuse beat UNLV OOC. Tech/UGA and Clemson/SCAR both wound up being coin-flips. Louisville played ND within a TD and kicked the shit out of Kentucky in Lexington. 

They way it's shaking out it may just be a one-bid conference but I think 2 ACC bids would be reasonable for the committee to do. As much as I think Miami is a fraud. 

[BurntOrange&White 40781]

Friday night we will have the first ever team lock in a playoff spot in the 12 team playoff in the UNLV/Boise St game.

[UTexasFight 9668]

11 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Friday night we will have the first ever team lock in a playoff spot in the 12 team playoff in the UNLV/Boise St game.

And it will be UNLV.

i hope they give a big ol middle finger to the QB and RB that abandoned ship early in the season 

[MotownHorn 1838]

3 hours ago, DaysOff said:

Man, if they could just expand the playoffs from 4 to 12, it would solve all the gripes about teams being left out.

No one who will be left out has a real legitmate gripe about it IMO

Also, of fucking course they're gonna find any way they can to get Bama in. It's a multibillion dollar TV show in the final analysis

[Texas Wahoo 3577]

26 minutes ago, UTexasFight said:

And it will be UNLV.

i hope they give a big ol middle finger to the QB and RB that abandoned ship early in the season 

It definitely will embolden the strategy of promising NIL money to get kids on campus and then just not paying it, at least for G5 schools.

[The Dog 44335]

38 minutes ago, ztejas said:

I also think the top 6 or so teams in the ACC are pretty solid and the conference really gets bad after that.

It's the top four - SMU, Miami, Louisville, and Clemson.

The rest of the conference is complete ass.

Just to put it into perspective, the rest of the conference has a total of THREE wins against Sagarin's current top 30. Actually, throw Clemson in there and the total wins is still just three. Dabo's boys haven't beaten anyone this year. They suck.

[Huckleberry 33690]

I'm hoping for UNLV to win also because I think Boise is way overranked. And then the B12 game Saturday is for both a berth and a bye so that one will be even more fun. 

[Drew 2699]

17 hours ago, Zeus said:

 

these are the schools that matter

 the committee are just stooges that have to argue why these specific teams always seem to get the benefit of doubt and leap others

 

 my two favorite schools are in so I’m all for it lol fuck the other schools

 

 South Carolina deserved it over Alabama but it’s not worth bitching about

 

 tech coach bitching like a bitch saying big 12 team playing for the sec title blah blah blah shut the fuck up

Aggy must have ran out of TV's...

[The Dog 44335]

5 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

I'm hoping for UNLV to win also because I think Boise is way overranked. And then the B12 game Saturday is for both a berth and a bye so that one will be even more fun. 

That 3 point loss at Oregon is what is carrying them IMHO.

[UTexasFight 9668]

What’s more frustrating.

arguing over who is #12 or arguing over who would be the last team in in a 4 team playoff?

I think we can all agree this was the right year to move to 12.

there would be 6-7 teams with a legitimate argument to be the 4th team (assuming Oregon and Texas win Saturday + Notre Dame)

Penn st 2 losses with one loss to Ohio St

Ohio St with 2 losses but an ugly one to scUM

UGA with 3 losses but all to teams in the top 13

Tenn with 2 losses but an ugly one to Arky

SMU, Indiana, Boise St all with 1 loss

 

[Beau Vine 55061]

1 hour ago, skipmcgee said:

Matt Hayes sounds like a buffoon 

Well, that's because he is a buffoon.  

Moose out front and all.

[Park Gothic 5227]

19 minutes ago, The Dog said:

It's the top four - SMU, Miami, Louisville, and Clemson.

The rest of the conference is complete ass.

Just to put it into perspective, the rest of the conference has a total of THREE wins against Sagarin's current top 30. Actually, throw Clemson in there and the total wins is still just three. Dabo's boys haven't beaten anyone this year. They suck.