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

[Hermanator 7519]

7 minutes ago, HookEm said:

Massey has exactly this data:

Computer Composite Ranking

Here is what the composite looks like if you eliminate the high and low 10% models for each team:

There is a lot of talk about "helmets" and conference bias, but crowd sourcing the computer models eliminates almost all of that.  And surprise, the unbiased composite model is actually pretty close to the CFP rankings.  Alabama is above Ole Miss, South Carolina, and Miami.  

The highlighted teams still have games to play.  If Army beats Tulane and UNLV beats Boise, I'm not CERTAIN that Army will be below UNLV in this model. They are very close as it stands. Unfortunately, Army will play #52 Navy after the CFP brackets have been announced. What a stupid decision that was.  

 

If auto bids for conference champions were removed that would be a pretty accurate top 12 teams in the country. As accurate as it's going to get. SC and Ole Miss are the 2 teams getting knocked out for weak conference auto bids. I'm expecting the Big 12 winner and Boise/UNLV to get handled rather easily in their first game, but we'll see. 

And major lulz at Miami's bitch ass still out if it was done without a committee. 

[Hagbard Celine 11113]

On 12/5/2024 at 7:45 AM, Huckleberry said:

People in this thread love to use "who would be favored" against the Big 12 when talking about top SEC teams. Why are none of you discussing the fact that Iowa State and Arizona State would both be favored over Boise State? Yormark is correct that the MWC winner should not be seeded higher than the B12 winner even if his reasoning is inaccurate. Boise State is overranked.

the committee should put tonight's winner and the rig winner in the 8/9 for the potential yormark comedy when unlv beats asu

[Js1 86412]

4 minutes ago, Hermanator said:

If auto bids for conference champions were removed that would be a pretty accurate top 12 teams in the country. As accurate as it's going to get. SC and Ole Miss are the 2 teams getting knocked out for weak conference auto bids. I'm expecting the Big 12 winner and Boise/UNLV to get handled rather easily in their first game, but we'll see. 

And major lulz at Miami's bitch ass still out if it was done without a committee. 

The computers would absolutely put Bama in over OM, SoCar and Miami so it’s pointless to bitch that much about it. 

[HookEm 2484]

If #14 ISU gets a win over #17 ASU, I would expect them to jump ahead of Miami, Souf Carolina and Ole Miss.  So they would likely get in even without an auto-bid if this was the system.  #15 Boise will also likely jump a few of them with a win over #31 UNLV.  Not sure it would be enough to get in though.

[dcar00 14867]

19 minutes ago, HookEm said:

Massey has exactly this data:

Computer Composite Ranking

Here is what the composite looks like if you eliminate the high and low 10% models for each team:

There is a lot of talk about "helmets" and conference bias, but crowd sourcing the computer models eliminates almost all of that.  And surprise, the unbiased composite model is actually pretty close to the CFP rankings.  Alabama is above Ole Miss, South Carolina, and Miami.  

The highlighted teams still have games to play.  If Army beats Tulane and UNLV beats Boise, I'm not CERTAIN that Army will be below UNLV in this model. They are very close as it stands. Unfortunately, Army will play #52 Navy after the CFP brackets have been announced. What a stupid decision that was.  

 

jsut looked at the AAC.  so if Navy was 7-1 and Army 8-0, this week's game would have been for the AAC championship and next week's game would have been the Army Navy game?

 

[Js1 86412]

5 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

jsut looked at the AAC.  so if Navy was 7-1 and Army 8-0, this week's game would have been for the AAC championship and next week's game would have been the Army Navy game?

 

Yes but next week is basically a glorified exhibition 

['stache 22088]

10 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Yes but next week is basically a glorified exhibition 

That's what it's always been and is still enormously popular. I looked out of curiousity and it's not an AAC conference game, each got the same number of AAC opponents as the rest of the conference and next week is a non-conference game. 

[satyanash 15225]

Ross Dellenger: Is there a better way to choose a CFP field? As committee faces backlash, leaders in the sport ponder changes

Quote

Dan Radakovich sat on the very first College Football Playoff selection committee. He was part of the group that made the controversial decision to choose Ohio State over TCU or Baylor as the final team into the 2014 field. He was on the committee in 2016 too, when members kept out Big Ten champion Penn State for the Pac-12’s Washington. And, in his final year on the committee, Radakovich and members selected both Alabama and Georgia instead of a Big Ten team.

Now, years later, as Miami’s athletic director, he is on the other end of the decision. The Hurricanes, 10-2 and ranked No. 12 nationally, are apparently eliminated from the playoff field barring something extraordinary. Radakovich is left disappointed over what he terms some “head-scratching” decisions from a group on which he once served.

“I always thought it was a body of work. Having sat in that room, I know the committee has a hard job,” he told Yahoo Sports this week. “You just hope there are enough facts being put forward to let people know that this is a good football team, has incredible offensive statistics and a Heisman Trophy candidate leading the way.”

Heading into a weekend of conference championship games, the CFP selection committee is at the center of intense scrutiny, perhaps more than ever before. It has left many within the industry asking a question: Is there a better way to choose playoff teams? It’s no secret that SEC and Big Ten leaders are exploring changes to a future playoff format, as well as an expected re-examination of the selection process.

One has spoken out publicly about it this week. “I’d like to see us a little more objective,” Tennessee athletic director Danny White said on a local radio broadcast, SportsTalk. “I don’t think there was anything wrong with the ranking system of the old BCS. The problem was the old BCS was only two teams.” This week’s ranking reveal has thrust college leaders into public sparring.

Athletic directors are embroiled in social media spats over the rankings, coaches are questioning the committee’s process and commissioners are even openly blistering the group’s decisions. The controversy has fueled the college football media engine. And that’s exactly what the CFP’s television partner, ESPN, wants. “My personal opinion is we come out with the rankings too early,” said Bob Bowlsby, the former Big 12 commissioner and architect of the 12-team format.

“Doing it every week is hard on the chair and the committee. Two polls, one midseason and one at the end, would be better. But ESPN would flip out.” Under the new CFP television contract agreed to in the spring, ESPN pays the conferences more than $1 billion annually for rights to the playoff. That includes six shows in which the latest rankings are revealed.

This week’s penultimate rankings show caused more of a stir than normal. Committee chair Warde Manuel revealed that those teams not playing this weekend are locked into their current order. For instance, Miami could not leap ahead of Alabama to get the potential last spot into the field. Or Tennessee cannot hop over Ohio State to get a first-round home game.

For many in the college football world, it was a stunning admission that removes much of the suspense in Sunday’s final reveal and has sparked a week of moaning, groaning and outright attacks on the 13-member committee. “You guys actually meet for days and come up with these rankings?” said Ole Miss coach Lane Kiffin, his team a spot behind Miami at No. 13, in a tweet earlier this week. "Do you actually watch the quality of players, teams and road environments or just try and make the ACC feel relevant?”

Then there was Iowa State athletic director Jamie Pollard, who criticized the committee’s positioning of SMU, Boise State and Indiana for their weak schedules. “Message is clear — win as many games as possible regardless of who you play,” he posted on social media. “Time to rethink non-conference scheduling.”

Meanwhile, commissioners from the Big 12 and ACC chided committee members for various decisions. Brett Yormark, of the Big 12, scolded the group for positioning Boise State ahead of his highest-ranked team, No. 15 Arizona State, and ACC’s Jim Phillips says Miami “deserves better from the committee.”

The 13-member committee is made up of a variety of members from various parts of college football. Nearly half of the group is active athletic directors, one each from the Power Four conferences and two from the Group of Five level. There are four former football coaches, two former players and a former sports reporter who covered college football. The roster and bios are publicly available.

Committee members are appointed by conference commissioners and university presidents who sit on the CFP’s governing boards. They hold staggered terms that normally last three to four years, and they are recused when members discuss their own schools or a school where they have a conflict. For instance, Arkansas athletic director Hunter Yurachek is recused during discussions around South Carolina and SMU (he has sons who work at each school).

The group meets a couple of times a year outside of football season. Their weekly gatherings begin in mid-October from a fourth-floor space in the Gaylord Texan, a palatial resort just north of Dallas in Grapevine. They are issued iPads for watching edited game footage and have at their disposal mounds of data and metrics from a computer monitor within their meeting room at the Gaylord. Their criteria for ranking teams is quite simple and publicly available on the CFP’s website:

1.     strength of schedule
2.     head-to-head competition
3.     comparative outcomes of common opponents
4.     other relevant factors such as unavailability of key players and coaches that may affect performance

The selection committee idea arose out of a move away from a system — the computer-based BCS — that created years of controversy and consternation. Leaders wanted to introduce the human element — real eyes on real games making real decisions. After all, most other NCAA championships are determined through such a committee.

“It works in every other NCAA championship. This one shouldn’t be any different,” said Bill Hancock, the former executive director of the BCS and then the CFP. “Each one of those committees receives criticism from the teams that barely miss the field.”

In creating the committee, Jack Swarbrick said, “No one wanted to live through the computer era again. It was more reputation than reality but no one wanted to go back to that.” Perhaps now that sentiment has changed? White, the Tennessee athletic director, is calling for an “objective computer-based ranking system.” “We’ve introduced this really subjective ranking process that I think is unnecessary,” he said.

Over the last 10 years of the four-team playoff, the BCS rankings have been mostly identical to the CFP’s poll. Only small differences existed in the latest CFP rankings when compared to the BCS. Penn State, No. 3 in the CFP, and No. 4 Notre Dame would flip if using the BCS formula. The same goes for No. 8 SMU and No. 7 Tennessee. The BCS favors the Mustangs. If the BCS were used to complete a 12-team playoff bracket, Alabama, like it is in the CFP poll, would be the last at-large into the field. South Carolina, and not Miami, would be the first team out, according to the BCS formula.

The selection committee still has a difficult job. The 12-team playoff introduces three total stress points for committee decisions, all of them with significant ramifications:

•     What four conference champions get the first-round byes?
•     What four teams get the home games?
•     And, perhaps most important, what teams are the last in the field as at-large selections?

All three are the subject of public criticism from administrators and coaches. “When we went from four to 12, conventional wisdom is that it would be easier for the committee,” Hancock said. “But we on the inside knew that wouldn’t be true. In fact, it’s more difficult.”

If SMU beats Clemson, the committee must decide if the Mountain West champion receives the fourth and final first-round bye over the Big 12 champion. Members must then determine the site of first-round home games: Does the Big Ten and SEC championship game runner-ups get to host, along with current projections Ohio State and Notre Dame?

Finally, there’s the third stress point, which only gets suspenseful if No. 17 Clemson upsets SMU. The Tigers can steal a bubble team’s spot. They would receive the auto bid granted to one of the five highest-ranked conference champions. The committee would be left with one spot for two teams: SMU or Alabama. The politicking is at full throat.

“You go 11-1 and 8-0 in one of the unquestioned top three conferences in America, you can’t say you aren’t in the top 12,” said SMU coach Rhett Lashlee, a warning to the committee as well as a shot at the Big 12. “You wish you wouldn’t have to politick like this.” In the future, some hope the politicking is reduced with a change to the format that limits the ability of the selection committee.

The Big Ten and SEC contend that they hold decision-making powers over a future format. During negotiations in the spring among CFP leagues, the Big Ten proposed a 14-team playoff featuring multiple automatic qualifiers for the power conferences: three each for the SEC and Big Ten; two each for the ACC and Big 12; one reserved for the best G5 champion; and three at-large spots. The 3-3-2-2-1 concept was roundly rejected.

However, despite the pushback, the multi-AQ format is expected to be further examined this coming spring as the SEC and Big Ten look to change not only the format but explore the selection process. Will the selection committee be in for an overhaul? Is that really needed? “It’s difficult to insulate yourself from allegations of bias,” Bowlsby said. “Everybody comes from some place. You are a product of your history and judgements and vantage points. Somebody is going to be left out.”

Last year, it was Alabama over Florida State for the final spot. This year? Alabama over Miami, according to the current situation. “The committee’s job is very difficult,” Radakovich said. “Everybody on the committee looks at it through different eyes. Some based on analysis and data, some look through a coaches’ lens. It’s a blend of all those views. I thought we’d done enough.”

 

[Hermanator 7519]

23 minutes ago, HookEm said:

If #14 ISU gets a win over #17 ASU, I would expect them to jump ahead of Miami, Souf Carolina and Ole Miss.  So they would likely get in even without an auto-bid if this was the system.  #15 Boise will also likely jump a few of them with a win over #31 UNLV.  Not sure it would be enough to get in though.

If you did away with the committee and auto bids it would make sense to do away with the conference title games. Just to keep the number of games played equal across all teams and remove an advantage or disadvantage of getting an extra win or loss while others don't get the opportunity. 

[Js1 86412]

7 minutes ago, 'stache said:

That's what it's always been and is still enormously popular.

As it should be 

[Hagbard Celine 11113]

22 hours ago, Red Five said:

It's so crazy to get shit on for our schedule in the year we joined the SEC and played the defending national champions on the road. I'm really sorry Michigan, OU, Florida, and Arkansas were all down this year and Texas should try harder in the future to prevent that from happening. 

Also aggy would be borderline top 10 right now had they beaten us, at home. 

 

21 hours ago, Hermanator said:

I don't think so at all. But we'll get a chance to see as the G5 Champ and the big 12 champ will take the field in the playoffs. Hopefully they get matched with SEC or Big 10 teams in the first round and we'll see what they do. 

the brilliance of the12-team playoff is everyone gets to faafo

pat runs out of success rates if sark lifts the crystal football

[Hagbard Celine 11113]

20 hours ago, Pam Cummings said:

Nothing pisses me off more than listening to SEC people forgive Alabama's OU loss with "hurr durr tough conference" while not giving Texas ANY credit for beating who the fuck they were supposed to beat.

or pile-driving our rival in to the ground for the 2nd time in 3 years which does not happen very often across all of college football

oh yeah, it was a league game this time

[Guadaloopy 11100]

One of my clients is based in Brentwood, TN.  Lots of Vol fans.  To a man, they are all rooting for Texas tomorrow because they think a UGA loss will let Tennessee jump ahead into a hosting slot.  They do NOT want to go to Happy Valley in December.  Funny, because all of the talk so far from them this year is the standard "Texas didn't play a real SEC schedule this season."  Now they are all on board for Texas to help them out.

[Huckleberry 34189]

8 minutes ago, Guadaloopy said:

One of my clients is based in Brentwood, TN.  Lots of Vol fans.  To a man, they are all rooting for Texas tomorrow because they think a UGA loss will let Tennessee jump ahead into a hosting slot.  They do NOT want to go to Happy Valley in December.  Funny, because all of the talk so far from them this year is the standard "Texas didn't play a real SEC schedule this season."  Now they are all on board for Texas to help them out.

They had the exact same SEC schedule as Texas this season except they were home against Alabama and we were at A&M which is close to a wash with standard homefield advantage considered. 

[Guadaloopy 11100]

Just now, Huckleberry said:

They had the exact same SEC schedule as Texas this season except they were home against Alabama and we were at A&M which is close to a wash with standard homefield advantage considered. 

A point I made several times.

[Huckleberry 34189]

That's fair, you said one of your clients, you didn't say your genius client. 

[texastough 1137]

I'm sure its been discussed but nobody will be rooting harder for SMU tomorrow than the committee. You know that with a loss, they would want to drop SMU out of the field -- but would have no explanation for dropping them 4 spots while the losers of the SEC and B1G ccg's only drop behind the auto top 4 bids.

[HenryJames 66870]

Derp.

Edited December 6 by HenryJames

[The Dog 44650]

['stache 22088]

5 minutes ago, The Dog said:

Reminds me of a few of OSU's seasons, lol. 

 

 

 

Edited December 6 by 'stache

[Tex-19 2946]

I fully support the idea of guaranteeing at least one team from multiple conferences, although Big 12 is lucky to be an auto-bid conference nowadays. The variety is good for the sport and teams barely play out of conference so comparing across conferences is a very rough science.

What's dumb is the reranking after CCGs where someone like Texas or PSU can drop below ND, or SMU drops below Indiana. I mean, imagine making Indiana play tOSU again this weekend and factoring that L in the rankings.

[David Dennison 19316]

Sixteen team playoff. Top four teams from each P4. Everyone else can pound rocks.

[dcar00 14867]

9 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Sixteen team playoff. Top four teams from each P4. Everyone else can pound rocks.

Well yes this has been the answer for 25 years.  64 teams in Div1 and the rest are Div 1AA, Div II, etc.  and shitty ND has to join a conference finally.

[Js1 86412]

I mean, he’s right, but he’ll probably be the first to throw out SOS and conference schedule if Oregon is 9-3 next year 

 

[Huckleberry 34189]

1 hour ago, Tex-19 said:

...although Big 12 is lucky to be an auto-bid conference nowadays.

So you think only the SEC should get automatic bids? Because the Big 12 is better than the ACC still this year and essentially even with the Big Ten. 

[Scuba Saba 34]

"Also aggy would be borderline top 10 right now had they beaten us, at home." Borderland as in personality disorder? 

[Hermanator 7519]

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

Sixteen team playoff. Top four teams from each P4. Everyone else can pound rocks.

That just won't work. The big 12 and ACC will get slaughtered year after year. Those conferences no longer have the money to compete. Their TV deals will be shit compared to the SEC and Big 10 going forward and they know that. 

If they won't go to breaking away from the NCAA to start their own league as a combination of most of the SEC and most of the Big 10 then it will always be unbalanced as there's zero top brand teams in the Big 12. What was the last Big 12 as it stands now National Championship? Colorado over 30 years ago? Then BYU 40 years ago before that one?

The game is completely different now. They got left behind. I wish they could compete, it would make it more fun, but they just can't, and these playoffs year after year will prove that out. They're the basketball equivalent of a 15 to 16 seed. Every now and then one gets a win or two but that's it. 

[squib 1128]

Every single team with 0 or 1 losses has an SoS outside of the top 30.

Of the top 20 SoS teams, only three have less than 4 losses.

 

[LTtxfan 49720]

SIAP...

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2024/12/06/college-football-playoff-bracket-scenarios-conference-championships/76798093007/

 

meh 😋

[Crockett 515]

48 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

So you think only the SEC should get automatic bids? Because the Big 12 is better than the ACC still this year and essentially even with the Big Ten. 

Just a reminder that Arkansas, who beat Tennessee, lost to Oklahoma State, who lost every conference game in the Big 12. 

[David Dennison 19316]

43 minutes ago, Hermanator said:

That just won't work. The big 12 and ACC will get slaughtered year after year. Those conferences no longer have the money to compete. Their TV deals will be shit compared to the SEC and Big 10 going forward and they know that. 

If they won't go to breaking away from the NCAA to start their own league as a combination of most of the SEC and most of the Big 10 then it will always be unbalanced as there's zero top brand teams in the Big 12. What was the last Big 12 as it stands now National Championship? Colorado over 30 years ago? Then BYU 40 years ago before that one?

The game is completely different now. They got left behind. I wish they could compete, it would make it more fun, but they just can't, and these playoffs year after year will prove that out. They're the basketball equivalent of a 15 to 16 seed. Every now and then one gets a win or two but that's it. 

It would work just fine.

[Drew 2825]

14 hours ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

So it looks like prevailing opinion is that if we lose, we will drop to the 5 seed (not the 6) and get a home game against the worst opponent in the playoff, followed by the QF against the Big 12/ACC/Boise State. 

 

If we win, the consensus opinion is that Georgia will be the 7 seed and play Indiana at home and then we rematch them at the Sugar Bowl in LA. So we would play them in back to back games. 

 

It seems kind of dumb to me that our prospects of making the CFP SF are better on a loss than a win in the SEC championship this weekend. 

This.

10 hours ago, Hank_Hill said:

Pretty easy for the committee to make that problem go away. 

Also This.

 

I do not think they'll let the possibility of a rematch happen in the first or 2nd round. Maybe the semi finals, as it's too hard to manipulate that far out.

[Js1 86412]

Like I said this morning, if there's anything the NCAA committees are extremely consistent about, it's overseeding and underseeding as needed for storylines and tv and get cute with matchups.  Someone is going to get underseeded so they can try to set up potential 2nd round matchups they think will bring in viewers and someone else is going to get overseeded to avoid 4 northern hosting sites in round 1. 

[notre dame joe 201]

22 hours ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Quick check so I might have missed something, but if you are looking at second halves of non-Georgia games:

• Mississippi State was down 14-6 for the entire 3Q (15 mins)
• Vanderbilt was down 24-17 from 3:11 in the 3rd until 2:00 in the 4th (16:11) and then within 3 for the final 0:46.

330 second half minutes played outside Georgia, the opponent has been within one score for about 32 of them.  So not only are we leading, 90% of the time the other team isn't even within striking distance.

Fucking domination.

ND is up there with Texas by that metric across all 12 games.  We lost NIU in the last minute and otherwise trailed only a few times early in the game.  

[The_Great_Hornsby 3585]

2 hours ago, Drew said:

This.

Also This.

 

I do not think they'll let the possibility of a rematch happen in the first or 2nd round. Maybe the semi finals, as it's too hard to manipulate that far out.

Yes, but if we win it will either be Georgia or Ohio State at the 7 seed (and our QF opponent in New Orleans). If we lose, we will get a home playoff game against the 11/12 seed and then face a bad conference champion. Basically a cakewalk to the SF. So the whole system is broken. I guess that can be the silver lining if we lose. 

[Drew 2825]

yeah not saying it's not better to actually lose for path to the title.

 

But then you're debating playing 3 games for 4.

[Chuckie Finster 22958]

47 minutes ago, notre dame joe said:

ND is up there with Texas by that metric across all 12 games.  We lost NIU in the last minute and otherwise trailed only a few times early in the game.  

Not at all trying to diminish the season Notre Dame has had, as there is no doubt there has been a lot of domination there.  But y'all trailed for more minutes against Miami (OH) (a game that you ended up winning 28-3) than we have combined all season to non-Georgia opponents.  Again, not trying to insult Notre Dame here, but merely trying to highlight how batshit this season has been for the Longhorns when you dig into the numbers.

[justhookit 4202]

4 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Not at all trying to diminish the season Notre Dame has had, as there is no doubt there has been a lot of domination there.  But y'all trailed for more minutes against Miami (OH) (a game that you ended up winning 28-3) than we have combined all season to non-Georgia opponents.  Again, not trying to insult Notre Dame here, but merely trying to highlight how batshit this season has been for the Longhorns when you dig into the numbers.

No, go ahead and diminish it. They lost to fucking NIU and they really didn’t play many other teams worth a shit. SOS is near 60.

[Drew 2825]

3 minutes ago, justhookit said:

No, go ahead and diminish it. They lost to fucking NIU and they really didn’t play many other teams worth a shit. SOS is near 60.

[boilerhorn 1569]

3 hours ago, Crockett said:

Just a reminder that Arkansas, who beat Tennessee, lost to Oklahoma State, who lost every conference game in the Big 12. 

Let's follow the transitive property a little further.  It's a circle.

Texas > Michigan > tOSU > Nebraska > Colorado > Ok St > Ark > Tenn > Bama > Georgia > Texas

And now everyone sucks

[The_Great_Hornsby 3585]

27 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Not at all trying to diminish the season Notre Dame has had, as there is no doubt there has been a lot of domination there.  But y'all trailed for more minutes against Miami (OH) (a game that you ended up winning 28-3) than we have combined all season to non-Georgia opponents.  Again, not trying to insult Notre Dame here, but merely trying to highlight how batshit this season has been for the Longhorns when you dig into the numbers.

I will gladly insult notre dame. They suck and they lost to Norther fucking Illinois. They are, like usual, being propped up by their weak schedule and helmet school hype. They will be going out the playoffs the first time they face a team with a pulse. This pattern of flaming out will continue forever until they decide to join a real conference and not schedule hack schools that dont prepare you for the big boys. 

[The_Great_Hornsby 3585]

22 minutes ago, justhookit said:

No, go ahead and diminish it. They lost to fucking NIU and they really didn’t play many other teams worth a shit. SOS is near 60.

[notre dame joe 201]

39 minutes ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

Yes, but if we win it will either be Georgia or Ohio State at the 7 seed (and our QF opponent in New Orleans). If we lose, we will get a home playoff game against the 11/12 seed and then face a bad conference champion. Basically a cakewalk to the SF. So the whole system is broken. I guess that can be the silver lining if we lose. 

This is based on an assumption that #5 gets to play a team like UNLV at home.  If you posit that the PC allows TV ratings to influence their seeding, then it becomes likely that you are hosting Alabama or some other talented team that lost a few.  And, an IU type 11-1 will always be 5-8 so you don't meet them.

I would not trade places. I think the first round bye is best unless you have a crystal ball that says you always play G5 then Big12. 

5 hours ago, Tex-19 said:

I fully support the idea of guaranteeing at least one team from multiple conferences, although Big 12 is lucky to be an auto-bid conference nowadays. The variety is good for the sport and teams barely play out of conference so comparing across conferences is a very rough science.

What's dumb is the reranking after CCGs where someone like Texas or PSU can drop below ND, or SMU drops below Indiana. I mean, imagine making Indiana play tOSU again this weekend and factoring that L in the rankings.

Well, if you want a benefit for winning the CCG then there should be a detriment for losing it. 

[The_Great_Hornsby 3585]

1 minute ago, notre dame joe said:

This is based on an assumption that #5 gets to play a team like UNLV at home.  If you posit that the PC allows TV ratings to influence their seeding, then it becomes likely that you are hosting Alabama or some other talented team that lost a few.  And, an IU type 11-1 will always be 5-8 so you don't meet them.

I would not trade places. I think the first round bye is best unless you have a crystal ball that says you always play G5 then Big12. 

Well, if you want a benefit for winning the CCG then there should be a detriment for losing it. 

Bama doesnt really scare me, especially at home. I think Texas would win by 2-3 touchdowns. They are not a complete team and teams with good running games and good defenses cause them problems. 

[ztejas 44096]

10 minutes ago, boilerhorn said:

Let's follow the transitive property a little further.  It's a circle.

Texas > Michigan > tOSU > Nebraska > Colorado > Ok St > Ark > Tenn > Bama > Georgia > Texas

And now everyone sucks

Playoff's canceled try again next year. 

[Hagbard Celine 11113]

10 hours ago, David Dennison said:

Sixteen team playoff. Top four teams from each P4. Everyone else can pound rocks.

what's a P4?

[jimmyjazz 46757]

Regarding strength of schedule, I took the CFP rankings (1-12, and didn't go any farther) and looked at W-L vs strength of schedule, both by Sagarin and ESPN (and the average of the two).

 

A couple of things stand out:

-- of the 1-loss teams, their relative order makes sense when one considers strength of schedule

-- of the 2-loss teams, same

 

I can't say (for instance) whether the best 2-loss team should be above any 1-loss teams, but it does make sense that we're above PSU, ND, SMU, IU and Boise State (and that internal order should prevail as well).  The same goes for UGA above tOSU, UTenn and Miami, in order.

 

[Hagbard Celine 11113]

my wish is for domer to draw indiana

since 1959 they've played once in 1991

['stache 22088]

17 minutes ago, Hagbard Celine said:

my wish is for domer to draw indiana

since 1959 they've played once in 1991

That’s fucking insane. 

[F250 29122]

45 minutes ago, Hagbard Celine said:

what's a P4?

There is no P4, it's more like P2 and everyone else.