2024 CFB polls/rankings - Texas #3/ #2 /#2 (CFP/AP/Coaches)

[tbone_ 14293]

Yes, the CCG games need to go away, If conference leaders have identical records, make them co-champions or whatever, and the highest ranked team to get the autobid. It’s not a great game now given the expanded playoff, just lets players get injured w/o adavancing interest, except to networks and advertisers.

This. Meaningless now.

Other than when we beat Georgia to win the fucking SECSECSECSEC.

[TxEx84 437]

8 hours ago, statsman said:

Do we know which side of the bracket the Cotton Bowl is the semifinal for (which seeds feed it) and which side the Orange Bowl is the semifinal for?

Bowl games are not assigned to brackets.  Highest seed gets choice.

[TxEx84 437]

9 hours ago, StassneyHorn said:

Looking at tickets online and the Georgia side tickets are noticeably less than Texas side.

The Texas tickets have not been distributed yet.  Prices will change when those tickets hit the market.

[statsman 5519]

Here are the Sagarin rating final regular season numbers:

http://sagarin.com/sports/cfsend.htm
 
Sagarin does a sophisticated least squares algorithm that has a goal of assigning a rating to teams that helps explain game outcomes, and therefore can predict potential game outcomes. Sagarin differentials correlate positively with Vegas point spreads and even outcomes. 
 
Texas is #2. We are half a point behind #1 NotreDame, meaning we would be half point dogs on a neutral field. That’s great for Texas, but to me, the interesting thing is the distribution at the top end of the scales. Looking at these for several years, usually the top teams have Sagarin ratings in the mid to high 90s. This year, the top teams are around 90. 
 
Does this mean there is more parity? I think so. I would attribute that to the portal, in that teams aren’t forced to go through seasons with flawed position groups, as they were before. 
 
also of note- five of the top 10 are SEC teams. Three are B1G. SMU is the lone ACC team in the top 10. 
 
The first B12 team comes in at 17. 

[Huckleberry 33590]

2 minutes ago, statsman said:

Here are the Sagarin rating final regular season numbers:

http://sagarin.com/sports/cfsend.htm
 
Sagarin does a sophisticated least squares algorithm that has a goal of assigning a rating to teams that helps explain game outcomes, and therefore can predict potential game outcomes. Sagarin differentials correlate positively with Vegas point spreads and even outcomes. 
 
Texas is #2. We are half a point behind #1 NotreDame, meaning we would be half point dogs on a neutral field. That’s great for Texas, but to me, the interesting thing is the distribution at the top end of the scales. Looking at these for several years, usually the top teams have Sagarin ratings in the mid to high 90s. This year, the top teams are around 90. 
 
Does this mean there is more parity? I think so. I would attribute that to the portal, in that teams aren’t forced to go through seasons with flawed position groups, as they were before. 
 
also of note- five of the top 10 are SEC teams. Three are B1G. SMU is the lone ACC team in the top 10. 
 
The first B12 team comes in at 17. 

He also has the Big 12 as the 2nd best conference, which you conveniently omitted.

[WBT 20759]

7 hours ago, dcar00 said:

Seeds 1-4 are artificially generated via conf champ bye.  the only way to fix it is rank 1-12.

Why does it need fixing?

[TexArcher 38426]

8 hours ago, El Squared said:

Yes, the CCG games need to go away, If conference leaders have identical records, make them co-champions or whatever, and the highest ranked team to get the autobid. It’s not a great game now given the expanded playoff, just lets players get injured w/o adavancing interest, except to networks and advertisers.

 

7 hours ago, dcar00 said:

Seeds 1-4 are artificially generated via conf champ bye.  the only way to fix it is rank 1-12.

 

Strongly disagree with all of this.

The CCG's are for championships.  Co-champs have always been stupid and unsatisfying to both sets of fans.  Championships go on the wall, championship games are good for recruiting, and the games themselves are massively interesting to fans, including neutrals.

And giving the byes to 4 conference champions keeps some of the drama of the regular season.  3-loss aggy was still alive for a playoff spot because they had a chance to upset Texas and then win the CCG.  It keeps more teams alive longer, which makes more games late in the season matter, which is a good thing.

Seeds 1-4 are artificially generated?  By games on the field, as opposed to pollsters' ranking them 1-12 and bestowing byes based on the eye test?  Yeah, this is just wrong.

 

Edited yesterday at 01:26 PM by TexArcher

[statsman 5519]

1 hour ago, Huckleberry said:

He also has the Big 12 as the 2nd best conference, which you conveniently omitted.

I never pay much attention to those- conferences don’t play games, but teams do. Looking at it, I see there is a greater difference between the first and second conference than there is between the second and fourth. 

[The_Great_Hornsby 3352]

56 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

 

 

Strongly disagree with all of this.

The CCG's are for championships.  Co-champs have always been stupid and unsatisfying to both sets of fans.  Championships go on the wall, championship games are good for recruiting, and the games themselves are massively interesting to fans, including neutrals.

And giving the byes to 4 conference champions keeps some of the drama of the regular season.  3-loss aggy was still alive for a playoff spot because they had a chance to upset Texas and then win the CCG.  It keeps more teams alive longer, which makes more games late in the season matter, which is a good thing.

Seeds 1-4 are artificially generated?  By games on the field, as opposed to pollsters' ranking them 1-12 and bestowing byes based on the eye test?  Yeah, this is just wrong.

 

The best solution to all of this is to require that everyone play an out of conference opponent in their final week of the regular season and that means the entire conference slate has been played prior to the final week. Then you have the conference championship games among the teams that qualified while everyone plays one of their out of conference opponents. The teams that had their games cancelled can play each other so they get a full schedule.  

[dcar00 14615]

1 hour ago, TexArcher said:

 

 

Strongly disagree with all of this.

The CCG's are for championships.  Co-champs have always been stupid and unsatisfying to both sets of fans.  Championships go on the wall, championship games are good for recruiting, and the games themselves are massively interesting to fans, including neutrals.

And giving the byes to 4 conference champions keeps some of the drama of the regular season.  3-loss aggy was still alive for a playoff spot because they had a chance to upset Texas and then win the CCG.  It keeps more teams alive longer, which makes more games late in the season matter, which is a good thing.

Seeds 1-4 are artificially generated?  By games on the field, as opposed to pollsters' ranking them 1-12 and bestowing byes based on the eye test?  Yeah, this is just wrong.

 

yes because of what the 5 seed gets.  especially in the 2nd round.  the 4 seed is not the 4th highest ranked team and may be the 11th highest ranked team because they won the mountain west.  would you rather be the 5 seed playing Boise at home and then ASU at neutral site to get to the semis or say Alabama or Ohio State at a neutral site.

The NCAA tournament ranks 1-64 and then goes from there. 

I understand the drama part.  if say aggy won they get in but they should be the 11th or 12th seed. if the conf champs were aggy, ASU, Boise, Oregon, Clemson, that's great they all get in, but  3 of those should not be seeds 2,3,4.

 

 

Edited 23 hours ago by dcar00

[Chuckie Finster 22782]

1 hour ago, TexArcher said:

 

 

Strongly disagree with all of this.

The CCG's are for championships.  Co-champs have always been stupid and unsatisfying to both sets of fans.  Championships go on the wall, championship games are good for recruiting, and the games themselves are massively interesting to fans, including neutrals.

And giving the byes to 4 conference champions keeps some of the drama of the regular season.  3-loss aggy was still alive for a playoff spot because they had a chance to upset Texas and then win the CCG.  It keeps more teams alive longer, which makes more games late in the season matter, which is a good thing.

Seeds 1-4 are artificially generated?  By games on the field, as opposed to pollsters' ranking them 1-12 and bestowing byes based on the eye test?  Yeah, this is just wrong.

 

Yeah, I'm fine with the current structure.  The byes for conference champions angle might be the only thing keeping any eyes outside the SEC/BIG which is good for the sport.  If you REALLY want to make conference championships meaningless, take away that bye week reward.

There were years where I was absolutely convinced the Big 12 was stronger than the SEC as a whole, but pollsters did not agree.  This ensures that those champions will have a fair shot to prove themselves.

Also, I've seen a lot of whining about the 5-seed path and how it's not fair.  More often than not, the 5 seed will be a top 2-3 team in the country.  Some years, it will be a team that was #1 and lost in the conference championship game.  A decent draw of seeds, but having to play one extra game, seems like a fair result.

Edited 23 hours ago by Chuckie Finster

[LTtxfan 49415]

On 10/28/2024 at 5:55 PM, LTtxfan said:

Not a fan of teams playing 3 times unless the 3rd time is in the CFP Championship... I won't be surprised to see conference championship games being eliminated soon.

⬆⬆⬆⬆ 

Go ahead and set up a 16 team playoff

 

Edited 23 hours ago by LTtxfan

[Not a cat 5739]

If bama sneaks in at 12, it's going to completely screw up this theory that 5 is the sweet spot.  I know this isn't the traditional dominant Saban bama team, but I can list a number of teams I'd much rather play in the first round.

[Huckleberry 33590]

But #12 will be one of the B12 winner, Clemson, UNLV, or Boise State if they struggle in a win over UNLV.

Edited 23 hours ago by Huckleberry

[closetojumping 63320]

10 minutes ago, Not a cat said:

If bama sneaks in at 12, it's going to completely screw up this theory that 5 is the sweet spot.  I know this isn't the traditional dominant Saban bama team, but I can list a number of teams I'd much rather play in the first round.

The conversation should be about 6/11. The 12 seed goes to UNLV or the Big 12 winner.  

[Red Five 41089]

2 hours ago, TxEx84 said:

Bowl games are not assigned to brackets.  Highest seed gets choice.

How does this work? The 5/12 game is played on the day/time of the 5 seed's choosing? 

[Huckleberry 33590]

8 minutes ago, Red Five said:

How does this work? The 5/12 game is played on the day/time of the 5 seed's choosing? 

He's referring to the quarters and semis where I think the highest seed picks location (top seed picks first and so on) but TV picks day and time. 

[Valmy77 13446]

8 minutes ago, Red Five said:

How does this work? The 5/12 game is played on the day/time of the 5 seed's choosing? 

Pretty sure it is played at the day and time of the TV networks choosing. It is a home game of the 5th seed though.

Anyway even if the 12 seed is a G5 school or the Big 12 winner it seems rather ridiculous to just assume this is an automatic 50-0 easy game for the 5th seed. Let's at least see the playoff happen a few times first.

[field 238]

5 minutes ago, Red Five said:

How does this work? The 5/12 game is played on the day/time of the 5 seed's choosing? 

The teams do not get to choose the day/time they play.  While the CFP hasn't said one way or the other, my guess is that the first play-in game on 12/20 will be the one that plays into the Fiesta Bowl because that game will be played on 12/31, the day before the other three quarterfinal games on 1/1.  The Fiesta Bowl will get the Big 12 or G5 champ, which means it will likely get the 4 seed.  So it makes sense that the 5/12 game will be played on 12/20.

[field 238]

2 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

He's referring to the quarters and semis where I think the highest seed picks location (top seed picks first and so on) but TV picks day and time. 

Teams do not get to pick the quarterfinal locations.  Those are dictated by historic bowl relationships and rankings (read: SEC - Sugar, Big 10 - Rose, ACC - Peach, Big 12/G5 - Fiesta).  The CFP says that the first seed will receive "preferential placement" for the semifinal games.  

 

CFP Selection FAQ's

 

Spoiler

• The 12 participating teams will be the five conference champions ranked highest by the CFP selection committee, plus the next seven highest-ranked teams.
  
• The ranking of the teams will continue to be done by a selection committee.
  
• The four highest-ranked conference champions will be seeded one through four and will receive a first-round bye. The fifth conference champion will be seeded where it was ranked or at No. 12 if it is outside the top 12 rankings. Non-conference champions ranked in the top four will be seeded beginning at No. 5. Because of this, the seeding, 1 through 12, could look different than the final rankings.
  
• The eight teams seeded No. 5-12 will play in a first round with the higher seeds hosting the lower seeds either on campus or at other sites designated by the higher-seeded institution (No. 12 at No. 5, No. 11 at No. 6, No. 10 at No. 7 and No. 9 at No. 8.).
  
• The selection committee will assign the four highest-ranked conference champions to Playoff Quarterfinals hosted by bowls. This will be done in consideration of historic bowl relationships, then in consideration of rankings. For example, if the Sugar Bowl hosts a Playoff Quarterfinal and the SEC champion is ranked No. 1 and the Big 12 champion is ranked No. 3, the SEC champion would be assigned to the Sugar Bowl and the Big 12 champion would be assigned elsewhere.
  
• With the four highest-ranked conference champions assigned to bowls, their four Playoff Quarterfinal opponents will be dictated by the bracket (i.e., No. 1 vs. No. 8/9 winner, No. 4 vs. No. 5/12 winner, No. 2 vs. 7/10 winner; No. 3 vs. 6/11 winner.)
  
• The College Football Playoff bracket will follow the selection committee’s rankings, with no modifications made to avoid rematches between teams that may have played during the regular season or are from the same conference.
  
• The bracket will remain in effect throughout the playoff (i.e., no re-seeding).
  
• The highest seed will receive preferential placement for the Playoff Semifinal bowl assignment.
  
• All 11 games will be under the CFP umbrella with the administrative policies determined by the CFP.

 

[General Specific 3368]

 
Strongly disagree with all of this.
The CCG's are for championships.  Co-champs have always been stupid and unsatisfying to both sets of fans.  Championships go on the wall, championship games are good for recruiting, and the games themselves are massively interesting to fans, including neutrals.
And giving the byes to 4 conference champions keeps some of the drama of the regular season.  3-loss aggy was still alive for a playoff spot because they had a chance to upset Texas and then win the CCG.  It keeps more teams alive longer, which makes more games late in the season matter, which is a good thing.
Seeds 1-4 are artificially generated?  By games on the field, as opposed to pollsters' ranking them 1-12 and bestowing byes based on the eye test?  Yeah, this is just wrong.
 

CCG’s are about the $ most years. Take this year for B10 and SEC for example, Oregon won all their games in conference, Texas finished with one loss. A case could be made that these two teams are their conference champions.

The CCG puts Oregon and Texas in jeopardy, and for what, fans, $, recruiting (no visits are allowed). The two heavyweights in each conference get to play one more game risking injury and a loss. All for what, since both the winner and loser are getting in this year. Sounds meaningless to most if you can already call Oregon and Texas champions.

Meanwhile, Tennessee, and Ohio State get a bye while the CCG happens? Sure, they may play a higher seeded opponent the first week.

Texas will play Georgia with a decent chance of playing them a third time if it all works out. When should Georgia be eliminated? How many chances do they get?

Either reduce the playoff format to 8 with CCG’s that mean something (elimination if you lose), or expand to 16 and get ride of them.

It’s better today than the polls picking 1 & 2. It’s better than the BCS. Hell, it’s better than the 4 team playoff, but it still sucks!

[ztejas 43752]

1 minute ago, General Specific said:

CCG’s are about the $ most years. Take this year for B10 and SEC for example, Oregon won all their games in conference, Texas finished with one loss. A case could be made that these two teams are their conference champions.

The CCG puts Oregon and Texas in jeopardy, and for what, fans, $, recruiting (no visits are allowed). The two heavyweights in each conference get to play one more game risking injury and a loss. All for what, since both the winner and loser are getting in this year. Sounds meaningless to most if you can already call Oregon and Texas champions.

Meanwhile, Tennessee, and Ohio State get a bye while the CCG happens? Sure, they may play a higher seeded opponent the first week.

Texas will play Georgia with a decent chance of playing them a third time if it all works out. When should Georgia be eliminated? How many chances do they get?

Either reduce the playoff format to 8 with CCG’s that mean something (elimination if you lose), or expand to 16 and get ride of them.

It’s better today than the polls picking 1 & 2. It’s better than the BCS. Hell, it’s better than the 4 team playoff, but it still sucks!

Agreed. It's a stupid fucking system that is already being exposed in its first year. 

Hopefully we can dial it in better in the coming years.

[Fud 9569]

The 7 vs 10 matchup will almost certainly be an SEC vs Big 10 game, and they probably won't put Texas and Georgia on the same side of the bracket, so I don't think a two-seed Texas will see Georgia as the seven seed. I think we'd see something like Penn State (7) vs Bama (10), or Tennessee (7) vs Indiana (10) to avoid the third matchup before the title game

If SMU sneaks in as an at-large, they'll be the 11 seed and we'll miss them 

[ztejas 43752]

The more I think about it the more I think that SMU dog walks Clemson and a lot of this discussion is silly. 

['stache 21916]

I think SMU is in even with a loss and even over Alabama. They said that teams would not be punished for participating in CCGs so if they are in before the game they should be in afterward regardless of outcome. SMU would be in if the seeding was today. The Big XII runner-up isn't in as of right now so only the champ gets in this year. If they let Bama in over a runner-up SMU who should be viewed as a one loss team vs a three loss Bama the committee will do to CCGs what they said they would not, and even though its the ACC, it would not be good for the system. But I really think SMU wiill win and will be the only ACC team in so Bama will get a spot.

Edited 22 hours ago by 'stache

['stache 21916]

23 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

Pretty sure it is played at the day and time of the TV networks choosing. It is a home game of the 5th seed though.

Anyway even if the 12 seed is a G5 school or the Big 12 winner it seems rather ridiculous to just assume this is an automatic 50-0 easy game for the 5th seed. Let's at least see the playoff happen a few times first.

The AP has ASU at No. 12 and ISU at No. 16. I think the winner will jump Bama to No. 11 and get the 11 seed with Bama getting the 12 seed, assuming SMU wins the ACC CCG and is the only ACC team in the field.

[Daichee Bell 2988]

14 hours ago, Wilcox Cummingtonite said:

Y’all are crazy if you think Bama is getting left out of the 1st 12 team playoff. They’re in as the 11 seed.

DeBoer doesn’t carry the same weight as Saban. Think it could happen. 

Edited 22 hours ago by Daichee Bell

[Js1 85784]

Is Lane Kiffin politicking for Ole Miss on Twitter the new "Mack Brown appears on halftime shows to lobby for Texas to get in a BCS bowl over Cal?" 

[Crockett 503]

4 hours ago, statsman said:

Why would BYU get in ahead of Alabama?

Well for starters, Alabama has 3 losses. They also got smoked by Oklahoma, a 6-6 team, and only scored 3 points. BYU beat the likely ACC champ on the road and its two losses are by a combined 9 points. 

[Fud 9569]

29 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I think SMU is in even with a loss and even over Alabama. They said that teams would not be punished for participating in CCGs so if they are in before the game they should be in afterward regardless of outcome. SMU would be in if the seeding was today. The Big XII runner-up isn't in as of right now so only the champ gets in this year. If they let Bama in over a runner-up SMU who should be viewed as a one loss team vs a three loss Bama the committee will do to CCGs what they said they would not, and even though its the ACC, it would not be good for the system. But I really think SMU wiill win and will be the only ACC team in so Bama will get a spot.

This is all still up in the air. We'll see on Tuesday. Most likely they'll sort it to keep their options open for another week. 

[Valmy77 13446]

9 minutes ago, Crockett said:

Well for starters, Alabama has 3 losses. They also got smoked by Oklahoma, a 6-6 team, and only scored 3 points. BYU beat the likely ACC champ on the road and its two losses are by a combined 9 points. 

So what Alabama got blown out by shitty teams? They are called 'Alabama' so they are in.

[dcar00 14615]

10 minutes ago, Crockett said:

Well for starters, Alabama has 3 losses. They also got smoked by Oklahoma, a 6-6 team, and only scored 3 points. BYU beat the likely ACC champ on the road and its two losses are by a combined 9 points. 

They beat Georgia which is the litmus test for college football...apparently.

[WBT 20759]

51 minutes ago, General Specific said:

CCG’s are about the $ most years. Take this year for B10 and SEC for example, Oregon won all their games in conference, Texas finished with one loss. A case could be made that these two teams are their conference champions.

That's how it worked for those 2 conferences this year but the CCG will be needed more as the conferences have gotten too big AND dropped divisions.  Eventually a conference is going to have 3 teams go undefeated in conference and 1 will be left out of the CG due to strength of schedule.

Edited 21 hours ago by WBT

[WBT 20759]

41 minutes ago, 'stache said:

They said that teams would not be punished for participating in CCGs so if they are in before the game they should be in afterward regardless of outcome.

Has anyone on the committee said this or has this been media speculation?  I don't watch the tuesday espn show.

There already too few games to rank the teams.  It seems silly to ignore the CGs.

[TexArcher 38426]

1 hour ago, LTtxfan said:

⬆⬆⬆⬆ 

Go ahead and set up a 16 team playoff

 

This is a dangerous road.  If we go to 16, eventually somebody will want to make it 32, then aggy is making the playoffs about 1/3 of the time, which makes a farce of the whole thing.

 

 

 

Snicker.  Chortle.  Wheeeeeeeeeeeee!!

[Pancho 45512]

11 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

So what Alabama got blown out by shitty teams? They are called 'Alabama' so they are in.

 

Yup, they are going to find a way to get Alabama in. 

 

[Huckleberry 33590]

4 minutes ago, WBT said:

Has anyone on the committee said this or has this been media speculation?  I don't watch the tuesday espn show.

There already too few games to rank the teams.  It seems silly to ignore the CGs.

Agreed, plus you're saying that the winner should get a benefit but the loser should suffer no consequence. That's silly and is exactly why I think I've only heard conference commissioners and their media lackeys make this argument. 

Yes losing a CCG against a highly ranked opponent shouldn't hurt you very much but that's the same with any matchup of top teams. 

[statsman 5519]

28 minutes ago, Crockett said:

Well for starters, Alabama has 3 losses. They also got smoked by Oklahoma, a 6-6 team, and only scored 3 points. BYU beat the likely ACC champ on the road and its two losses are by a combined 9 points. 

OK, so you claim Alabama is less deserving than BYU, because it has one more loss, and one of the two 6-6 teams that beat it, did so solidly. 
 
OK, Army has one less loss than BYU. Army lost to a CFP team, on the road, while BYU’s worst loss was at home to a 5-7 Kansas team. 
 
Do you agree Army has a better argument than BYU for an at large?

[Tex Long 4511]

15 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

Snicker.  Chortle.  Wheeeeeeeeeeeee!!

You've spelt "whoop" incorrectly.

[BurntOrange&White 40477]

 

My projections for tomorrow, they've had the same as I have the last two weeks. A shit ton will change from this to post CCG.

 

 

We have the chance for a Clemson 12 if they win and a Boise 3 seed if they win with Arizona St getting the 4 if they win - CCG scenarios

[Burt Macklin 19113]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

think SMU is in even with a loss and even over Alabama. They said that teams would not be punished for participating in CCGs so if they are in before the game they should be in afterward regardless of outcome.

The committee has said a lot of things and their hit rate on following through isn’t great. I don’t buy that teams wont be punished for losing. Especially if SMU loses. Their SOS is around 75th depending on the metric you use and their best win currently is an 8-4 Louisville. The only team currently in the top 25 they’ve played all year is BYU and they lost. If they also lose to Clemson and have no top 25 wins all year, the committee is absolutely going to punish them. 
 

And that’s probably the right move. SMU doesn’t deserve to be in the playoff if they don’t beat Clemson this week. Their schedule has been easier than every other CFP contender and their ELS (expected number of losses for a team 2 standard deviations above the mean) is .6 (84th in the country), so they’re actually underperforming the record  a playoff-quality team should have with their schedule currently. 

Edited 21 hours ago by Burt Macklin

[HookEm 2471]

I think the committee is going to want to put 4 SEC teams into the tourney.  Selecting Bama would result in the most backlash, especially after last year.  They have two good alternatives in Ole Miss and South Carolina. My guess is that if SMU loses, one of them will get in over Bama.  I want it to be South Carolina just to see the meltdown by Ole Miss and Bama, who both beat the cocks.

[The Dog 44193]

1 hour ago, Fud said:

The 7 vs 10 matchup will almost certainly be an SEC vs Big 10 game, and they probably won't put Texas and Georgia on the same side of the bracket, so I don't think a two-seed Texas will see Georgia as the seven seed. I think we'd see something like Penn State (7) vs Bama (10), or Tennessee (7) vs Indiana (10) to avoid the third matchup before the title game

If SMU sneaks in as an at-large, they'll be the 11 seed and we'll miss them 

This - I don't believe the committee when they say they don't care about rematches. There's no way UGA and Texas are facing each other any earlier than the semis. They'll rank the teams accordingly to avoid that.

59 minutes ago, ztejas said:

The more I think about it the more I think that SMU dog walks Clemson and a lot of this discussion is silly. 

Neither team has any really good wins other than SMU's win at Louisville (who beat Clemson). Both Sagarin and Massey have this game as a toss-up. I think that's due to Clemson's games against USCe and UGA (even though they were losses).

A lot of the national coverage is assuming a Clemson win over SMU with SMU getting the last at large. Bama getting in is completely dependent on SMU winning and the committee ignoring the other 2 loss teams.

35 minutes ago, Crockett said:

Well for starters, Alabama has 3 losses. They also got smoked by Oklahoma, a 6-6 team, and only scored 3 points. BYU beat the likely ACC champ on the road and its two losses are by a combined 9 points. 

The only 3 loss team that is getting in would be Georgia if they lose next week. Their schedule was brutal and have a boatload of quality wins. 

23 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

They beat Georgia which is the litmus test for college football...apparently.

Georgia has been doing all of the heavy lifting for Bama and Ole Miss - largely due to their win in Austin.

Something we need to consider is what happened last year - the #1 team losing its conference championship game changed things dramatically. Alabama beating Georgia knocked out TWO teams from the top four last year. 

Here were the week 13 rankings:

1. UGA

2. Michigan

3. Washington

4. FSU

5. Oregon

6. Ohio State

7. Texas

8. Alabama

And then week 14 with Bama beating UGA:

1. Michigan

2. Washington

3. Texas

4. Alabama

5. FSU

6. UGA

7. Ohio State

8. Oregon

Both Massey and Sagarin consider Oregon and Penn State a toss-up. What if PSU beats the Ducks?

[BurntOrange&White 40477]

How exactly does the bowl selection work for the second round?

[6th Street 6606]

This 12 team playoff is fucking stupid. Should be 6 max with 2 byes. The rest is just filler for TV ratings. 

[The Dog 44193]

10 minutes ago, HookEm said:

I think the committee is going to want to put 4 SEC teams into the tourney.  Selecting Bama would result in the most backlash, especially after last year.  They have two good alternatives in Ole Miss and South Carolina. My guess is that if SMU loses, one of them will get in over Bama.  I want it to be South Carolina just to see the meltdown by Ole Miss and Bama, who both beat the cocks.

The problem with South Carolina is that they lost to both Bama and Ole Miss. 

The problem with both Bama and Ole Miss is each has a terrible loss (Bama to OU and Ole Miss to Kentucky). 

That's why Finebaum thinks all three get left out - there's no point in debating the three when there are other 2-loss teams available to consider.

[Js1 85784]

11 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

This 12 team playoff is fucking stupid. Should be 6 max with 2 byes. The rest is just filler for TV ratings. 

People who advocate for fewer teams and games are so weird to me. 

Edited 20 hours ago by Js1

[markstanco 12667]

12 hours ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

0% chance Oregon loses to Pedo St. They are the definition of Charlie Brown kicking a football. 

You can take Oregon and Penn state out and add tOSU and Michigan last week and that statement would be the same. Yet here we are. 

[closetojumping 63320]

8 minutes ago, The Dog said:

This - I don't believe the committee when they say they don't care about rematches. There's no way UGA and Texas are facing each other any earlier than the semis. They'll rank the teams accordingly to avoid that.

Neither team has any really good wins other than SMU's win at Louisville (who beat Clemson). Both Sagarin and Massey have this game as a toss-up. I think that's due to Clemson's games against USCe and UGA (even though they were losses).

A lot of the national coverage is assuming a Clemson win over SMU with SMU getting the last at large. Bama getting in is completely dependent on SMU winning and the committee ignoring the other 2 loss teams.

 

I understand that the computers like Clemson enough to have them matching SMU, but I view that as evidence of bias. I don't know how they're biased, but I've lived long enough to know that designers weave their biases into their creations. Some sort of weighting to recent history in prior seasons or some shit wouldn't be surprising.

I bring that up only because I think having Clemson as a pick'em against SMU is fucking dumb. Clemson doesn't have the dudes that they've had in the past. SCar looked substantially bigger than Clemson on both fronts. On the SMU end, they are very fast and not lacking for size compared to Clemson. They also have an electric QB that will give the same Clemson defense that shit itself against Sellers fits. 

[BurntOrange&White 40477]

14 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

This 12 team playoff is fucking stupid. Should be 6 max with 2 byes. The rest is just filler for TV ratings. 

The 12 team playoff has created more viewership and talk about the sport. Byes shouldn't exist