***OFFICIAL CFP Rankings Show Watch Thread***

[Kettes]

Arizona State has a better argument here for sure but for ISU there really isn't a marquee win to hang your hat on. It would be one thing if the Big 12 had 4 teams tied at the top with 2 losses because they all beat each other but that isn't really the case. Most of them never played each other so even within your own conference there wasn't even an opportunity for many quality wins. That's more of a fluke than anything else but makes it tough to argue.

Would have, if Iowa had been as good as they claimed to be.

 

[Cyclonsin]

If Boise and SMU both lose, I wouldn't be surprised if the Big 12 winner jumps all the way to # 8 in the rankings which would give them the 3rd seed in the playoffs. Conference championships are supposed to carry a lot of weight. Here's what the final rankings might look like if Oregon, Texas and ISU win.

1. Oregon 13-0
2. Texas 12-1
3. Notre Dame 11-1
4. Ohio State 10-2
5. Penn State 11-2
6. Georgia 10-3
7. Tennessee 10-2
8. Iowa State 11-2
9. Indiana 11-1
10. Clemson 10-3
11. Alabama 9-3
12. UNLV 11-2
13. Miami 10-2

I'm now less concerned about Clemson jumping Iowa State. In Week 10, the committee ranked 7-1 ISU at #17 and 6-2 Clemson at #23. Why would they now put a 3-loss Clemson ahead of a 2-loss ISU?

With all due respect, are you freaking insane?

 

[StLouisClone]

With all due respect, are you freaking insane?

We'll see how it plays out. Last year Texas jumped from #7 to #3 after beating #18 Okie State in the Big 12 championship. We've seen big moves before.

 

[KidSilverhair]

So, putting the fantasy aside and returning to reality - what teams do you believe are unfairly ranked and should be included in the field of 12?

I had a long post all typed out here, but it was going to say basically the same thing, so - I think, given the way the system is devised, the 11 spots that were all but certain after last week’s games aren’t that bad. I know you think that’s a “gotcha,” but my biggest problems are with the system itself.

Oregon
Penn State
Texas
Georgia
Notre Dame
ACC champion
Big XII champion
MWC champion
Ohio State
Tennessee
Indiana

If SMU loses the ACC game, I’d lean towards keeping them in. In a truly unbiased world, I’d have BYU be in this conversation for the last spot if SMU wins, along with Alabama, Ole Miss, and Miami. I can see an argument putting Indiana somewhere in that group, but you can’t leave a 1-loss B1G team out, no matter how weak their schedule.

My issues are with the seedings, the bloated conferences that create wildly unbalanced schedules that prevent us from seeing who are truly the “best” teams in those conferences, and the system that starts with the bias of preseason rankings and sees that carry weight all the way through the season. I don’t care if Boise State goes 12-1, they still played a MWC schedule and shouldn’t get a bye.

Here’s the AP preseason top 15. Do we think Mizzou would be where they are now if they hadn’t started from 11? Would Alabama and Ole Miss have been able to survive losses to Vandy, Oklahoma, Kentucky, and Florida without a top 6 head start?

Georgia
Ohio State
Oregon
Texas
Alabama
Ole Miss
Notre Dame
Penn State
Michigan
Florida State
Missouri
Utah
LSU
Clemson
Tennessee

We shouldn’t have any weekly rankings at all until about Week 4 or 5 - not like the brand names still wouldnt matter, but at least maybe teams wouldn’t get credit for beating a woeful-but-still-ranked Florida State, or maybe might suffer some more serious consequences for losing a home game to Northern Illinois.

 

[cyclones500]

Arizona State has a better argument here for sure but for ISU there really isn't a marquee win to hang your hat on. It would be one thing if the Big 12 had 4 teams tied at the top with 2 losses because they all beat each other but that isn't really the case. Most of them never played each other so even within your own conference there wasn't even an opportunity for many quality wins. That's more of a fluke than anything else but makes it tough to argue.

I agree w/ the fluke and was almost no round-robin among the top teams. But Boise's opportunity for a quality win was far lower.

I realize the committee doesn't use actual metrics, or doesn't appear to do so. Looking at Sagarin, eight Big 12 teams are ranked higher than Boise. MWC is #8 league (it counts Pac-12, too, though, so actually #7) .... Big 12 is #2. BSU's best win is #44 UNLV; ISU has 3 higher than that (Baylor, KSU and Utah). And yes, ISU has two losses worse than BSU's one, I won't attempt to argue that in a head-to-head comparison.

 

[KidSilverhair]

I don't even know where to begin with all this.
Boise State moves up a spot for barely beating a bad Oregon team at home. I know that teams had to jump up due to Miami plummeting but still...
Alabama moves up 2 spots after beating an unranked Auburn at home while South Carolina moves up only 1 spot after being #12 Clemson on the road. Miami ahead of South Carolina and Ole Miss despite having zero quality wins and two losses to unranked teams.

I knew Alabama was getting the nod, it was written in the stars, big name brand bias is as obvious as it's ever been.
It's funny seeing the chairman on ESPN talking about "data points" in terms of not moving the teams that aren't playing this week yet they largely ignored the "data point" of Alabama beating Auburn at home compared to South Carolina beating Clemson on the road. Completely ignored it, gave Alabama more credit for being an unranked team compared to the #12 team. I'm not surprised but it's still appalling to see it play out in real time.

Don’t forget Alabama moved up in the rankings after beating Mercer.

 

[ISU_Guy]

I had a long post all typed out here, but it was going to say basically the same thing, so - I think, given the way the system is devised, the 11 spots that were all but certain after last week’s games aren’t that bad. I know you think that’s a “gotcha,” but my biggest problems are with the system itself.

Oregon
Penn State
Texas
Georgia
Notre Dame
ACC champion
Big XII champion
MWC champion
Ohio State
Tennessee
Indiana

If SMU loses the ACC game, I’d lean towards keeping them in. In a truly unbiased world, I’d have BYU be in this conversation for the last spot if SMU wins, along with Alabama, Ole Miss, and Miami. I can see an argument putting Indiana somewhere in that group, but you can’t leave a 1-loss B1G team out, no matter how weak their schedule.

My issues are with the seedings, the bloated conferences that create wildly unbalanced schedules that prevent us from seeing who are truly the “best” teams in those conferences, and the system that starts with the bias of preseason rankings and sees that carry weight all the way through the season. I don’t care if Boise State goes 12-1, they still played a MWC schedule and shouldn’t get a bye.

Here’s the AP preseason top 15. Do we think Mizzou would be where they are now if they hadn’t started from 11? Would Alabama and Ole Miss have been able to survive losses to Vandy, Oklahoma, Kentucky, and Florida without a top 6 head start?

Georgia
Ohio State
Oregon
Texas
Alabama
Ole Miss
Notre Dame
Penn State
Michigan
Florida State
Missouri
Utah
LSU
Clemson
Tennessee

We shouldn’t have any weekly rankings at all until about Week 4 or 5 - not like the brand names still wouldnt matter, but at least maybe teams wouldn’t get credit for beating a woeful-but-still-ranked Florida State, or maybe might suffer some more serious consequences for losing a home game to Northern Illinois.

"We shouldn’t have any weekly rankings at all until about Week 4 or 5"

Signed Yours Truly, Florida State University

 

[KidSilverhair]

Boise State being ahead of Big 12 champ could be argued, but is almost entirely indirect.

Defeated UNLV (which beat Houston and KU)
Defeated Wazzu (which beat Tech; but which also lost to Wyoming).

No other wins are high-quality.

Regarding the "Best win is good loss" to UO ... what does the margin have to be for that to qualify? It was 3, but what if it had been 7? 10? Anything that covered the spread? (No recollection what the line was for that game). Obviously it isn't going to harm a team's profile losing to #1 team, but it seems to be the primary "proof" of worthiness.

Yes, BSU should be in, but assumption that it's absolutely the #4 AQ is a bit puzzling, to say the least.

A 3-point loss to Oregon is a “good“ loss. A 4-point win over Wyoming is a “good” win. Please try to keep up, lol.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

I specifically said that several of those teams didn't have marquee wins either. I was comparing us to several of those teams on your list (which you seemed to cherry pick which teams to include).

But if you think we had a difficult schedule (0 games against current ranked teams) and are upset that we are #16 in the CFP rankings, which I said feels about right, I'm not sure you what to tell you.

Difficult? No. Easy? Also no.

The Big 12 had a ton of parity so no they weren't a bunch of top 10-15 games but it was a ton of like vs like. Even the very bottom of the conference were nt push overs. Jesus, the bottom half of the B1G was absolute dog nuts but nobody wants to talk about that.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

Blow it all up. These at-large bids ruin it. It should be auto-bids only, you should have to win your conference to get into a playoff, like how most other sports are... not possible now of course that the SEC and Big Ten gobbled up all the big brands making conferences lopsided. They complain now when they get left out but are still cashing the check. They'll expand the playoff, add more auto bids for the SEC and we'll have the same issues.

LOL Reece Davis was crying on the show last night saying that the autobids need to go away so more SEC teams can have bids.

 

[Cyclonsin]

We'll see how it plays out. Last year Texas jumped from #7 to #3 after beating #18 Okie State in the Big 12 championship. We've seen big moves before.

#7 to #3 isn't even in the same stratosphere as #16 to #8.

Besides, they moved Texas that way because they had to in order to get Bama in at 4 without looking completely ridiculous.

In my opinion, the highest we can possibly be ranked is 14th with an ISU win and a BSU loss. If Clemson beats #8 in their CCG, I'd bet they pass us up.

 

[Statefan10]

The committee gets to pick and choose which data points they want to use for different teams and it should not be that way. You can't point to SOS and wins against ranked opponents for a team like Alabama when comparing them to Miami, but then use different criteria when BYU wants to argue why someone like Boise State is ranked above them.

 

[Gonzo]

SCar lost to both Bama and Ole Miss. Of those three SEC teams, whom are all essentially tied, they unfortunately have to be out for that reason alone.

I've got no dog in this fight but Ole Miss lost to unranked Kentucky, unranked Florida, and unranked LSU. I get the H2H thing, but those are really bad losses for the Rebs, compared to much "better" losses to ranked teams for South Carolina.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

The committee is grading Boise on the record and that they only lost by 3 to Oregon, but overlook their SOS, while other teams like Alabama they are saying their SOS is the most important factor, over having three loses.

This committee like the ones before it will make up any rule or judge teams differently from season to season. They understand their goal is to get as many SEC teams into the playoff on a yearly basis as possible. Next season they will use the strength of the roster as the most important factor and how many players the SEC team has that will be playing on Sunday's. Whatever they can sell to the media they will go with, and if it means screwing over the ACC or B12, they have no problem with that.

This is my major complaint. IMO the committee needs to publish their selection criteria or have a "metric" like how NET is used for the NCAA tournament. There has to be some visibility to the process. Is the NCAA tournament selection perfect? No, but there is still a "guide" that everyone has visibility too. As far as SOS goes, there needs to be a true adjusted metric for this instead of the committee picking and choosing between SOS, adjusted SOS, or SOR. There is way too much money in play for this to take place behind a curtain. Fine, stack the deck in favor of the B1G and SEC but do it with consistent metrics and logic. I get it when it was 4 teams but with 12 this should not be a moving target every year.

 

[CloneIce]

I had a long post all typed out here, but it was going to say basically the same thing, so - I think, given the way the system is devised, the 11 spots that were all but certain after last week’s games aren’t that bad. I know you think that’s a “gotcha,” but my biggest problems are with the system itself.

Oregon
Penn State
Texas
Georgia
Notre Dame
ACC champion
Big XII champion
MWC champion
Ohio State
Tennessee
Indiana

If SMU loses the ACC game, I’d lean towards keeping them in. In a truly unbiased world, I’d have BYU be in this conversation for the last spot if SMU wins, along with Alabama, Ole Miss, and Miami. I can see an argument putting Indiana somewhere in that group, but you can’t leave a 1-loss B1G team out, no matter how weak their schedule.

My issues are with the seedings, the bloated conferences that create wildly unbalanced schedules that prevent us from seeing who are truly the “best” teams in those conferences, and the system that starts with the bias of preseason rankings and sees that carry weight all the way through the season. I don’t care if Boise State goes 12-1, they still played a MWC schedule and shouldn’t get a bye.

Here’s the AP preseason top 15. Do we think Mizzou would be where they are now if they hadn’t started from 11? Would Alabama and Ole Miss have been able to survive losses to Vandy, Oklahoma, Kentucky, and Florida without a top 6 head start?

Georgia
Ohio State
Oregon
Texas
Alabama
Ole Miss
Notre Dame
Penn State
Michigan
Florida State
Missouri
Utah
LSU
Clemson
Tennessee

We shouldn’t have any weekly rankings at all until about Week 4 or 5 - not like the brand names still wouldnt matter, but at least maybe teams wouldn’t get credit for beating a woeful-but-still-ranked Florida State, or maybe might suffer some more serious consequences for losing a home game to Northern Illinois.

Mizzou went 9-3 with an out of conference win over BC. They are ranked behind all the two loss P5 teams and behind several 3 loss teams. I guess you could move them down a couple spots, but at his point it seems like you are just nitpicking whether a team should be a couple spots lower.

I get your point on the preseason poll bias but sports are for fun and fans like polls and they drive conversation and thus money - polls are subjective and aren’t going away. On the flip side - they help ISU in basketball at this point.

Rankings are never going to be perfect. But at this point you agree with them on every playoff spot except the 12th spot and whether SMU should be guaranteed it - which has been the main discussion point I’ve heard among the talking heads this week. So overall, it seems like they did a pretty good job on identifying the field. Like I said before, I don’t understand the angst.

I also agree that Boise should be ranked lower. I recognize I may be biased on that one but I think it’s a screw up due to their “good loss.”

 

[harimad]

I think you and I are saying the same thing, kinda. Tiebreakers hold too much weight, because conferences are too big and you can’t always get a clear-cut champion because the schedules aren‘t the same. That’s the biggest issue I have with the system right now - there’s no on-field way to adequately determine conference championship game teams, which only amplifies the arguments and conflicts over who’s “deserving.”

It stinks that Iowa State is in a four-way tie for best record in the conference with three teams that they didn’t even play. But it’s nice that the tiebreakers went our way, at least.

Getting rid of divisions was a bad idea. Divisions at least made certain that the teams being considered for a CCG berth had played each other.

 

[harimad]

We'll see how it plays out. Last year Texas jumped from #7 to #3 after beating #18 Okie State in the Big 12 championship. We've seen big moves before.

You'll never see the above described scenario happen for Iowa State. I also question your sanity.

In their minds, we're nobodies, we're an annoyance, and we are undeserving of the same consideration as the blue bloods.

 

[Statefan10]

I've got no dog in this fight but Ole Miss lost to unranked Kentucky, unranked Florida, and unranked LSU. I get the H2H thing, but those are really bad losses for the Rebs, compared to much "better" losses to ranked teams for South Carolina.

I get that, and losses should matter, but SC's "ranked losses" were to Ole Miss and Alabama. I get that they're one of the hottest teams at the moment but when you have three teams and one of them lost to both of them, that team should be put behind them.

 

[NetflixAndClone]

If Boise and SMU both lose, I wouldn't be surprised if the Big 12 winner jumps all the way to #8 in the rankings which would give them the 3rd seed in the playoffs. Conference championships are supposed to carry a lot of weight. Here's what the final rankings might look like if Oregon, Texas and ISU win.

1. Oregon 13-0
2. Texas 12-1
3. Notre Dame 11-1
4. Ohio State 10-2
5. Penn State 11-2
6. Georgia 10-3
7. Tennessee 10-2
8. Iowa State 11-2
9. Indiana 11-1
10. Clemson 10-3
11. Alabama 9-3
12. UNLV 11-2
13. SMU 11-2
14. Miami 10-2

I'm now less concerned about Clemson jumping Iowa State. In Week 10, the committee ranked 7-1 ISU at #17 and 6-2 Clemson at #23. Why would they now put a 3-loss Clemson ahead of a 2-loss ISU?

I hope you are right but everything I heard make it sound like the ACC is #3 no matter if it is Clemson or SMU. That is one of the reasons why SMU being 8 matters. Even if Clemson wins they can point to a top 10 win during the CCG week while the big 12 can only say 15/16.

You just know the reasoning they will say is [win over 8 > win over 15] and they will ignore the 3 losses.

 

[NYCYFan]

#7 to #3 isn't even in the same stratosphere as #16 to #8.

Besides, they moved Texas that way because they had to in order to get Bama in at 4 without looking completely ridiculous.

In my opinion, the highest we can possibly be ranked is 14th with an ISU win and a BSU loss. If Clemson beats #8 in their CCG, I'd bet they pass us up.

Clemson is almost surely passing the Big 12 Champ. They're one spot behind and are playing the #8 team, I think folks need to be prepared for Iowa State to play in the 1st round if they win the CCG.
There's a very real chance that Boise State gets the #3 seed which is nuts but that's the system we have.