2024 CFB polls/rankings - Texas #3/ #4 /#4 (CFP/AP/Coaches)

[David Dennison 19518]

I'd switch Alabama and South Carolina.

[Codaxx 6243]

4 hours ago, UTGrad98 said:

Some playoff thoughts after yesterday. 

We want Oregon to win vs Penn st as it guarantees us a 5 seed at worst. ND is not going to jump us for the 5 seed or else the big 10 and sec will explode. 

Teams playing in conference championships don't really get a bye. They have to play an extra game in order for the chance at a bye. I think you will start to see very liberal rotations and resting starters in the big 10 and sec championships during years where both teams playing are getting in regardless of outcome. Injuries later in the year are more common and it gives teams a chance to build depth for the playoff push. 

I think you will see a preference in years to come to be in a position like tenn and Ohio st are in this year.

The way they have the 12 team playoff set up is stupid but it may be the most fair way to do this without invalidating the lesser conferences. ¹

There is a lot of moving parts. There is 0 guarantee that Texas will get a 5 seed with a loss. Texas needs to take care of business, get the Bye, and a chance at the 1 seed 

[Codaxx 6243]

13 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

We could be. We need better playcalling, better QB play, and better WR play from people not named Golden.

But then again every team has some pretty big issues. 

Agree. The OL and the defense set the floor for this team. To hit reach their ceiling the passing game needs to show up. 

[The_Great_Hornsby 3593]

5 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

I'd switch Alabama and South Carolina.

Same but it wont happen

4 minutes ago, Codaxx said:

There is a lot of moving parts. There is 0 guarantee that Texas will get a 5 seed with a loss. Texas needs to take care of business, get the Bye, and a chance at the 1 seed 

Correct, we will be the 5 or 6 seed. And I could see Bama being at 11 or 12 depending on the outcome of next week's games. Would really prefer to avoid them in Round 1. 

[ATXbronco 4486]

NCAA isn't the NFL and you can't get rid of all conference championship games.

The NFL is limited to 32 teams and two conferences.  

NCAA FBS consists of 134 teams and ten conferences.

 

NCAA needs conference championships for the lesser conferences that are unlikely to ever sniff the expanded playoffs.

[dec3169 556]

4 hours ago, Js1 said:

I want the trophy 

Did the university get a welcome letter for joining the SEC?  If so, frame it and put it in the trophy case between the SEC Championship trophy and the golden vagina.

[Surly Bevo 25717]

3 minutes ago, ATXbronco said:

NCAA isn't the NFL and you can't get rid of all conference championship games.

The NFL is limited to 32 teams and two conferences.  

NCAA FBS consists of 134 teams and ten conferences.

 

NCAA needs conference championships for the lesser conferences that are unlikely to ever sniff the expanded playoffs.

Well until the SEC and B1G break away and do their own thing. 

[dec3169 556]

2 minutes ago, Surly Bevo said:

Well until the SEC and B1G break away and do their own thing. 

National Collegiate Football League?  NCFL

[The_Great_Hornsby 3593]

9 minutes ago, ATXbronco said:

NCAA isn't the NFL and you can't get rid of all conference championship games.

The NFL is limited to 32 teams and two conferences.  

NCAA FBS consists of 134 teams and ten conferences.

 

NCAA needs conference championships for the lesser conferences that are unlikely to ever sniff the expanded playoffs.

Notice how the big conferences dont play volleyball conf championship tourneys, it is because of the fact that they arent needed. Small conferences can still play theirs, but SEC and BIG 10 dont need to. 

[Js1 87174]

Just now, The_Great_Hornsby said:

Notice how the big conferences dont play volleyball conf championship tourneys, it is because of the fact that they arent needed. Small conferences can still play theirs, but SEC and BIG 10 dont need to. 

The SEC is bringing theirs back next year 

[closetohumping 17803]

8 minutes ago, Surly Bevo said:

Well until the SEC and B1G break away and do their own thing. 

Big 12 coming along

[Rex Kramer 1535]

39 minutes ago, Zeus said:

Bye week

 knock them out of the playoff

 pride in being the sec champ

UGA is in no matter what, Florida Man. 

[dcar00 14946]

27 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

I'd switch Alabama and South Carolina.

It will be interesting where the committee has them.  I expect same placement because they want Bama in.

[satyanash 15550]

AP Poll

1.     Oregon (62)
2.     Texas
3.     Penn State
4.     Notre Dame
5.     Georgia
6.     Tennessee
7.     Ohio State
8.     SMU
9.     Indiana
10.     Boise State
11.     Alabama
12.     Arizona State
13.     South Carolina
14.     Miami [FL]
15.     Ole Miss
16.     Iowa State
17.     BYU
18.     Clemson
19.     UNLV
20.     Colorado
21.     Illinois
22.     Missouri
23.     Syracuse
24.     Army
25.     Memphis

Others receiving votes: Texas A&M 93, Louisville 45, Duke 30, Kansas St. 10, Tulane 9, LSU 6, Louisiana-Lafayette 5, Florida 4, Michigan 1, Baylor 1.

 

Edited December 1 by satyanash

[ztejas 44223]

We'll see what the committee does but it's like that loss for tOSU didn't really matter. 

[satyanash 15550]

Just now, ztejas said:

We'll see what the committee does but it's like that loss for tOSU didn't really matter. 

Neither did Alabama's losses. If Clemson beats SMU in the ACC title game, are they going to jump a three-loss Alabama ahead of 11-2 SMU and 10-2 Miami? It looks like they will.

[Dr Fear 1290]

Horns got 59 of the 62 2nd place votes, one voter had Penn St. ahead, one has Georgia ahead (both with UT at 2) and Stephen Means of Cleveland.com has UT 4th with ND and Penn St. 2/3.

Edited December 1 by Dr Fear

[Pato del Muerto 53451]

So 4 of those top 12 don’t play again before the playoffs, 4 more won’t drop out with a loss in the ccg, smu Boise and asu would just be replaced by the team that beats them. Thats 11 spots filled.  Meaning, I think, that bama’s best and only chance at getting in is Texas beating Georgia.  If playoff ranking matches ap.  Tough to justify jumping Indiana based on how Indiana played this week, but with neither of them playing next week they’d almost have to do it now to have any cover if they care at all. 
 

Oregon

penn st

ohio state

texas

notre dame

twnnessee

acc winner 

big 12 winner 

mwc winner

That’s 9. Must have miscounted above. 
Then Georgia, Indiana, bama? 

Edited December 1 by Pato del Muerto

[ztejas 44223]

8 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Tough to justify jumping Indiana based on how Indiana played this week

I'm not even sure Purdue should be a data point for them. Purdue would struggle to win 7 games against a good FCS slate. 

I also think SCAR should be in over Bama but it won't happen. 

[Pato del Muerto 53451]

1 minute ago, ztejas said:

I'm not even sure Purdue should be a data point for them. Purdue would struggle to win 7 games against a good FCS slate. 

Understood but they can only play who is on the schedule and they beat them up like they were supposed to. 

[The_Great_Hornsby 3593]

11 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

So 4 of those top 12 don’t play again before the playoffs, 4 more won’t drop out with a loss in the ccg, smu Boise and asu would just be replaced by the team that beats them. Thats 11 spots filled.  Meaning, I think, that bama’s best and only chance at getting in is Texas beating Georgia.  If playoff ranking matches ap.  Tough to justify jumping Indiana based on how Indiana played this week, but with neither of them playing next week they’d almost have to do it now to have any cover if they care at all. 
 

Oregon

penn st

ohio state

texas

notre dame

twnnessee

acc winner 

big 12 winner 

mwc winner

That’s 9. Must have miscounted above. 
Then Georgia, Indiana, bama? 

I think the only way Bama *could* miss is with a Clemson win over SMU and SMU still making the playoffs as a 2 loss ACC team. Otherwise, they are in. 

[Wulaw Horn 19579]

8 minutes ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

I think the only way Bama *could* miss is with a Clemson win over SMU and SMU still making the playoffs as a 2 loss ACC team. Otherwise, they are in. 

That’s not going to happen nor should it. 
I too would go with South Carolina over Bama but there are certainly arguments including head to head for Bama.  But, that was a 2 point win for Bama at Bama. That would have SC winning at a neutral field if you believe the 3 point home field advantage. 

[The_Great_Hornsby 3593]

3 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

That’s not going to happen nor should it. 
I too would go with South Carolina over Bama but there are certainly arguments including head to head for Bama.  But, that was a 2 point win for Bama at Bama. That would have SC winning at a neutral field if you believe the 3 point home field advantage. 

Bama is a helmet school with a head to head win over a non-helmet school. Close to a 0% chance they are passing them over for South Carolina. 

 

I do agree though, I personally feel South Carolina deserves the spot. Also, if the championship games are viewed as essentially "extra" games, I could see an argument for a 2 loss SMU getting in over Bama. But I doubt it happens for the same reasons that South Carolina wont make it in over Bama.  

[Wulaw Horn 19579]

8 minutes ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

Bama is a helmet school with a head to head win over a non-helmet school. Close to a 0% chance they are passing them over for South Carolina. 

 

I do agree though, I personally feel South Carolina deserves the spot. Also, if the championship games are viewed as essentially "extra" games, I could see an argument for a 2 loss SMU getting in over Bama. But I doubt it happens for the same reasons that South Carolina wont make it in over Bama.  

The acc gets zero benefit of the doubt from me. Go win that conference or at least don’t lose to BYU and get mouthy about wanting your way in. 
I think they’d probably be unlikely to go 9-3 against bamas schedule. Or South Carolinas. 
I do think they’d go 9-3 or better against our schedule. Maybe not. But it wouldn’t surprise me. 

[ztejas 44223]

14 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

The acc gets zero benefit of the doubt from me. Go win that conference or at least don’t lose to BYU and get mouthy about wanting your way in. 
I think they’d probably be unlikely to go 9-3 against bamas schedule. Or South Carolinas. 
I do think they’d go 9-3 or better against our schedule. Maybe not. But it wouldn’t surprise me. 

The format needs tweaking because if SMU wins we are the 3 seed - if we lose we potentially fall past 12. That doesn't make a ton of sense.

If Clemson wins and BSU wins then BSU is the 3, the B12 winner likely gets the 4 seed and Clemson is maybe on the road to start their playoff?

I guess it's just one season - maybe it will be a bit more clear cut going forward. The SEC and B12 eating themselves alive has made a lot of it weird. 

[Rex Kramer 1535]

Unless SMU gets blown out, which I can’t see, they’re in no matter what. I don’t know why Texas-UGA is terribly relevant for Bama. They need to hope SMU wins, and nothing else. So does Miami, but I can’t see them or USC getting in, no matter what. 

Hard to believe SEC would only be getting 3 teams in when it seemed 4 was a cinch before last weekend and even 5 was more possible than 3. But that’s where I think we will be if Clemson wins a competitive ACC champ. 

[satyanash 15550]

27 minutes ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

Also, if the championship games are viewed as essentially "extra" games, I could see an argument for a 2 loss SMU getting in over Bama. But I doubt it happens for the same reasons that South Carolina wont make it in over Bama.  

11-2 SMU should absolutely make it in over 9-3 'Bama. Losses to unranked Vandy and blOU look far worse than losses to #17 BYU and #18 Clemson.

[The_Great_Hornsby 3593]

1 minute ago, satyanash said:

11-2 SMU should absolutely make it in over 9-3 'Bama. Losses to unranked Vandy and blOU look far worse than losses to #17 BYU and #18 Clemson.

This situation is highly likely to occur so I think we will see the Bama vs SMU discussion put to the test

[ztejas 44223]

All of this is easier of course if SMU fucks Clemson's shit up. 

I don't think Miami deserves an at-large. They played a relatively tame ACC slate and lost 2 of their 8 games and could have lost 2 more.

[thunderlounge 8407]

4 minutes ago, ztejas said:

I don't think Miami deserves an at-large. They played a relatively tame ACC slate and lost 2 of their 8 games and could have lost 2 more.

It would seem the AP agrees, with them down to 14. Will the CFP follow?

[The_Great_Hornsby 3593]

2 minutes ago, ztejas said:

All of this is easier of course if SMU fucks Clemson's shit up. 

I don't think Miami deserves an at-large. They played a relatively tame ACC slate and lost 2 of their 8 games and could have lost 2 more.

Correct, Miami will not get in. I view the championship games as half a loss and the committee alluded to the fact they would view it that way since it is an extra game. SMU would essentially have 1.5 losses to Bama's 3. Even with the SEC boost Bama will get, I think SMU deserves the spot. But I still think it is advantage Bama because of their viewership and name. We will see. 

[Mitch Cumsteen 18962]

SMU getting in over Bama would be something. I just can’t even imagine it. 

[Rickylovesweed 15460]

To me, the teams I want to avoid in the playoffs are the ones with a good OL and DL. 

I don't think you can beat us unless you have good line play. We might ugly it up, but we will destroy you in the trenches and win. 

[JBJ 3817]

I'd have:

In (8): Texas, Notre Dame, Oregon, Indiana, Ohio State, Penn State, Georgia, Tennessee

Win and in (3): SMU/Clemson, Iowa State/Arizona State, Boise State/UNLV

Alabama last in.
 

Gonna be honest though that last spot is a doozy:

Alabama would be favored over the other last-spot teams, but they struggle to sustain drives so are pretty erratic offensively.   Then, when teams can run on them, they can really run on them.  And they don't seem to be getting any better as the season went on.

SMU probably has the best last-spot resume even if they lose, but they just ain't a top 10 team and would struggle to beat a top 10 team.

One could argue USCe is playing their best football right now.  They also have a good defense and QB, so are fairly balanced and capable of beating good teams.  Really hard to say they has a better season than Bama, though - and the head-to-head.

Miami is all offense so could potentially beat anyone but also could lose to anyone.  However. I have a feeling they would run into these playoff defenses and just get pummeled.

[Rex Kramer 1535]

48 minutes ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

This situation is highly likely to occur so I think we will see the Bama vs SMU discussion put to the test

I doubt it. Clemson has talent, less than Bama, but is still a sputtering offensive mess. SMU is objectively a better team. SMU being only a 2.5 point favorite is precisely because of what Clemson did 6-8 years ago when SMU was still wallowing in obscurity with 5-7 seasons. Otherwise I see them as 5 point favorites. 

[perfectchaos007 6780]

We scheduled @ Michigan, we joined the SEC where every team is supposed to be good, we are 11-1 and yet we have zero wins over current AP top 25 teams. Its not our fault we have derailed the seasons of every team we beat. 

[Rex Kramer 1535]

4 minutes ago, JBJ said:

SMU probably has the best last-spot resume even if they lose, but they just ain't a top 10 team and would struggle to beat a top 10 team.

 

Yes, they are. Right now I’d have them ranked about right where they are. At 8. Their only two ranked matchups they played they won by a 41-26 average score. They’ve played a lot of Top 40ish teams and beat them convincingly. I’d love to see them play Bama or Tenn this year. Clemson is good, not great, and will tell us a lot. 

[JBJ 3817]

1 minute ago, Rex Kramer said:

Yes, they are. Right now I’d have them ranked about right where they are. At 8. Their only two ranked matchups they played they won by a 41-26 average score. They’ve played a lot of Top 40ish teams and beat them convincingly. I’d love to see them play Bama or Tenn this year. Clemson is good, not great, and will tell us a lot. 

SMU and Bama are 9 and 10 in my rankings right now.  SMU earned that spot playing a good season and beatign teams consistently, and Bama did it by having all the hallmarks of a good team (even if fairly erratically good) despite them losing too often.

However, if SMU loses to Clemson, it helps to reinforce the the idea that they are just a good bubble team and I don't think the resume is still good enough to favor them over Bama.  I do not expect SMU to lose, fwiw.

[ztejas 44223]

25 minutes ago, JBJ said:

but they just ain't a top 10 team and would struggle to beat a top 10 team.

That's pretty disrespectful unless you think the ACC is just total dogshit.

GaTech didn't have any trouble hanging with a "top 10 team". 

Clemson lost but played a very good SCAR team about dead even.

SMU beat #13 FPI Louisville on the road. Beat the dogshit out of #37 FPI TCU, #50 Cal and #51 Pitt - won a pretty tough game against #47 BC. The only WTF game was @Duke and they just finished 9-3.

At some point you have to get credit for winning games. If you don't include Indiana getting molested in Columbus we've played a better schedule than they have. 

Sagarin - fwiw - doesn't have one team in the country giving a full TD against SMU.

Ohio State and Georgia have fucked around and lost against worse teams than SMU. Notre Dame and PSU just straight up don't scare me. 

Need to back all of that up this weekend but I think we will. We're more dynamic than anyone Clemson has seen all season save maybe UGA - but I like our QB and skill position talent better. 

Clemson is a solid fuckin team though. Won't be a gimme. 

Also - SMU is better than it's season metrics. The team from the first 3 games where Preston Stone was trading series with Jennings is not the same team that we've seen against TCU and in the ACC.

Edited December 1 by ztejas

[ztejas 44223]

I will also say that I don't think we "deserve" a spot if we lose to Clemson - but I'm not the one making the call. I don't think #11 or #12 would be some heinous end of season ranking. I think we are better than Indiana and did more with our season than Bama - but I'm not going to cry if those 2 jump us.

[Rex Kramer 1535]

8 minutes ago, ztejas said:

I will also say that I don't think we "deserve" a spot if we lose to Clemson - but I'm not the one making the call. I don't think #11 or #12 would be some heinous end of season ranking. I think we are better than Indiana and did more with our season than Bama - but I'm not going to cry if those 2 jump us.

Let’s be honest. You’ll cry. 

[ztejas 44223]

4 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

Let’s be honest. You’ll cry. 

Maybe after the game. Not after the rankings reveal.

SMU needs to treat this like a ro16 playoff game. That's basically what it is. When you lose in the playoff you don't advance to the next round. 🤷‍♂️

[Sgt Hulk 14425]

Fuck bama. I want them no where near any playoffs. Eat a dick doboer

[closetojumping 65379]

1 hour ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

Correct, Miami will not get in. I view the championship games as half a loss and the committee alluded to the fact they would view it that way since it is an extra game. SMU would essentially have 1.5 losses to Bama's 3. Even with the SEC boost Bama will get, I think SMU deserves the spot. But I still think it is advantage Bama because of their viewership and name. We will see. 

There is a zero percent chance of Bama getting snubbed for an 11-2 SMU. Zero. You guys batting this notion around haven’t been paying attention.  Time and again, the committees have gone out of their ways to fuck over any and all contenders for a SEC helmet team, particularly Bama. 

SMU brings nothing to the table over big brands with large audiences. They also do not deserve any form of benefit or the doubt. Beat Clemson or go get fucked. 

[dcar00 14946]

3 hours ago, ztejas said:

We'll see what the committee does but it's like that loss for tOSU didn't really matter. 

It seems like the new dynamic is if you are B1G or SEC Loss column then eye test. UNLESS you are new money like Indiana with a shitty SOS.  Then ACC and then Big 12 based on loss column then eye test.  SMU will have some "new money" negative bias.  SOS seems to mean shitall to people again.  it is pretty funny.  all this discussion and it still comes down to loss column and eye test (which include conference strength eye test) to separate equivalent loss column.

one caveat on loss column is the bias only exists for one loss difference between B1G/SEC and ACC/Big 12.  Basically B1G/SEC teams get a mulligan. 

Edited December 1 by dcar00

[The Dog 44854]

 

[atomheartbevo 90636]

1 hour ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

SMU getting in over Bama would be something. I just can’t even imagine it. 

I want SMU to get in just to fuck with aggy.

[billfromlaketravis 11817]

3 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

I want SMU to get in just to fuck with aggy.

This. SMU making it before aggy would a nice little meltdown on TexAgs. 

[Tex-19 3013]

I'm very curious to see how the committee treats CCG losses when seeding. Like would Texas or PSU drop below ND who doesn't have to play one? Seems dumb if so, but I bet they would.

If so, making the CCG and losing is 100% worse than not making it at all. Not only for seeding but also because you get one fewer week off to rest up and heal. 

[Colonel Sanders 1392]

When do Graham Harmon's SEC Power Rankings come out?  I'm hoping we did enough to jump the Aggies.  However, I got to say, I'm still nervous that we left too many points on the field and may come up a little short.