You can cancel that reservation. The new CFP rankings just released were not kind to the Big 12.
Playoffs
- Thread starter Newell
- Start date
lol I don't know exactly how his computer model works to determine the rankings, but I think they use a bunch of different data points like strength of schedule, recruiting rankings, injuries, etc.
pretty sure they use it to make bets
in any case, I thought it reinforced the fact that Boise getting the bye over a Big 12 champ is ridiculous
Unpopular opinion: JP should not be tweeting at other ADs.
I have huge problems with the CFP and committee but the SMU AD isn't responsible for any of them.
If JP wants to do something, talk to people in power about a potential antitrust exemption that can lead to a better future for the sport where the decisions are made by those playing and hosting the games and not just those broadcasting them.
This is pretty much a direct response to an ACC AD (forget whether it was VA Tech or or Clemson) calling out ISU's nonconference SOS, which literally became the narrative that put ISU as the lowest #2 seed and in danger of falling to the 3 line in the NCAA tournament this last year.
Basically what you're saying is ISU should take it when it's done to us and not go on the offensive when it works in the other direction.
KidSilverhair
Well-Known Member
What the hell is this “power rating” measuring? Vibes?
Undefeated Oregon beat Ohio State, yet Ohio State is number 1 even after losing at home to Michigan? Ole Miss who lost to Florida and LSU at number 2? Freaking Tulane?
Sometimes the mania to try to rank teams using something other than, you know, actual results on the field results in completely bonkers lists like this. The games have to matter, people, otherwise why the hell are we even playing them? Maybe we should just look at recruiting rankings and the name on the front of the jersey and just decide who’s best from that, we won’t need games at all.
Pate's Power Ratings (not rankings) are purely to determine who would be favored if they played on a neutral field right now. That's it. It isn't to determine who should be ranked where, or to reward good wins, or to punish bad losses.
Today, if OSU and Oregon played again on a neutral field, OSU would be favored by Vegas.
It's not that hard to figure out.
Today, if OSU and Oregon played again on a neutral field, OSU would be favored by Vegas.
It's not that hard to figure out.
KidSilverhair
Well-Known Member
Reason 7,428 why I don’t gamble.
I can’t figure out why Ole Miss would be favored over every team but Ohio State on a neutral field considering they lost to Kentucky at home, and Georgia beat them by 18 at home, but whatever.
The Alabama Ole Miss debate has been an interesting one to follow,
On merit, Alabama making this playoff is a farce. Whether you go by resume, eye test, or stats they are not one of the 12 best teams.
I'd be a lot more mad about this in previous years, when a Nick Saban coached team could be the 11 seed and win the whole thing. This Alabama team probably won't win a game regardless of who they end up playing and almost certainly won't win three. So if the committee needs to see this Alabama team get beat by 10 at Notre Dame to break them from their "Alabama must be in" narrative, so be it.
On merit, Alabama making this playoff is a farce. Whether you go by resume, eye test, or stats they are not one of the 12 best teams.
I'd be a lot more mad about this in previous years, when a Nick Saban coached team could be the 11 seed and win the whole thing. This Alabama team probably won't win a game regardless of who they end up playing and almost certainly won't win three. So if the committee needs to see this Alabama team get beat by 10 at Notre Dame to break them from their "Alabama must be in" narrative, so be it.
maybe? I would actually be ok with this honestly.
but most of these playoff teams in question still had a non conference game against another P4 right?
they just had one less conference game?
So wouldn't it just make more sense for Iowa and iowa state to keep the Iowa game, play one less Big12/BigTen game and fill it with a team like UMass?
the part people forget about with the Big12 is we need the TV revenue and they are not going to be thrilled about replacing one weeks worth of match ups with dud games.
From a "fun" aspect, I'd hate getting rid of Cy-Hawk. But from a practical and "what is best for ISU", it probably is best to replace them with a cupcake.
This would be fixed if the CFB committee was consistent in their analysis of teams. On one had, they say the Big 10 is so great. And then when ISU wins at 8-4 Iowa, who is the Big 10's 6th best team out of 18, ISU basically gets no credit for the win. If that continues, there is no benefit to playing Iowa each year for Iowa State.
kind of on the same lines the committee wants to see the Big12 lose (its pretty obvious they don't think much of the league) and is going to put the Big12 in the worse possible position they can, so they can say I told you so. that is why I think you will see ASU/ISU get a 12 seed and get their marching orders into a hostile environment. Just so they can say I told you so.
I don't think people understand that this road game is going to be completely different than any of these sleepy Saturdays where a team like Tennessee, Penn State or Notre Dame slept through on Week 3, etc.
its going to have college game day is at your stadium vibes.
