Volbound1700 Playoff Watch - Week 8

[michaeljordan_fan]

Yes -- they absolutely have a shot, if Georgia isn't there. And yes, they all laughed. I actually felt bad for Oregon fans after seeing them react like that, because they all laughed.

It's the opposite. Assuming UGA continues to roll, the margin of the loss to Georgia won't matter much when comparing the 3/4/5 teams.

 

[NewPhoneWhoDis]

It's the opposite. Assuming UGA continues to roll, the margin of the loss to Georgia won't matter much when comparing the 3/4/5 teams.

It definitely matters. As long as Georgia is there, whether it is undefeated, or with 1 loss -- they are in over Oregon. If Georgia is undefeated, they are most likely #1 overall. If that is the case -- that means Oregon would need to get up to a 2 or 3 seed, which I don't see a chance of that happening, as no chance the CFP allows a rematch of a game Georgia won by 46 in the CFP. It just isn't happening.

To put it in perspective. Georgia could lose to Tennessee. Not make the SEC CCG, finish with 1 loss and they'd STILL be a unanimous choice over Oregon, because of the game the two played.

Oregon needs Georgia out of the picture.

 

[Volbound1700]

It definitely matters. As long as Georgia is there, whether it is undefeated, or with 1 loss -- they are in over Oregon. If Georgia is undefeated, they are most likely #1 overall. If that is the case -- that means Oregon would need to get up to a 2 or 3 seed, which I don't see a chance of that happening, as no chance the CFP allows a rematch of a game Georgia won by 46 in the CFP. It just isn't happening.

To put it in perspective. Georgia could lose to Tennessee. Not make the SEC CCG, finish with 1 loss and they'd STILL be a unanimous choice over Oregon, because of the game the two played.

Oregon needs Georgia out of the picture.

I agree with a lot of what you say. It shouldn't be that way and I agree with the sentiment of @michaeljordan_fan that the entire resume should define a team and not a game in the opening weekend. However, I think there will be people that will make case for Georgia based on that game.

Oregon's best bet is a 2-loss Georgia or an undefeated Georgia.

 

[Deep Creek]

Conference Champs:
UGA 13-0
tOSU 13-0
Clemson 13-0
Okie State 12-1
Oregon 12-1

1 Loss non champ teams
Bama 11-1
Michigan 11-1
TCU 12-1

This scenario has UGA beating Tenn in season and SEC Champ game.
Okie State beating TCU in Big 12 title game.

Who would be your 4th team?

That's easy. They'll take Bama. That 14th data point doesn't matter if you have the name.

 

[NewPhoneWhoDis]

I agree with a lot of what you say. It shouldn't be that way and I agree with the sentiment of @michaeljordan_fan that the entire resume should define a team and not a game in the opening weekend. However, I think there will be people that will make case for Georgia based on that game.

Oregon's best bet is a 2-loss Georgia or an undefeated Georgia.

Here is the problem with the entire resume for Oregon. The top teams in the PAC this year were Oregon and Utah. They each played a game in OOC where they could have shown CFB the quality of football in the PAC.
Oregon lost by 46. Utah played Florida and they lost.

So if you have the choice of a 1 loss SEC team or a 1 loss PAC team -- I don't see how you could, with a clear conscience, pick any PAC team over a 1 loss SEC team.

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

It definitely matters. As long as Georgia is there, whether it is undefeated, or with 1 loss -- they are in over Oregon. If Georgia is undefeated, they are most likely #1 overall. If that is the case -- that means Oregon would need to get up to a 2 or 3 seed, which I don't see a chance of that happening, as no chance the CFP allows a rematch of a game Georgia won by 46 in the CFP. It just isn't happening.

To put it in perspective. Georgia could lose to Tennessee. Not make the SEC CCG, finish with 1 loss and they'd STILL be a unanimous choice over Oregon, because of the game the two played.

Oregon needs Georgia out of the picture.

1. No one is claiming Oregon gets in over Georgia.
2. Committee gives 0 shits about rematches.

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

Here is the problem with the entire resume for Oregon. The top teams in the PAC this year were Oregon and Utah. They each played a game in OOC where they could have shown CFB the quality of football in the PAC.
Oregon lost by 46. Utah played Florida and they lost.

So if you have the choice of a 1 loss SEC team or a 1 loss PAC team -- I don't see how you could, with a clear conscience, pick any PAC team over a 1 loss SEC team.

Conference championships matter to the committee. The exception would be a H2H scenario like a 11-1 UGA who lost to Tennessee (but beat Oregon).

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

2-loss SEC champ is not getting in over 1-loss P5 champs.

Sorry that you have to face reality.

I am not an LSU fan, so I don't have a Dawg in the hunt. But 2 loss LSU as the SECC isn't going to get left out if they win out and there aren't 4 zero loss teams. The way the committee works, is that the first eval is subjective - there are no objective considerations which means that they don't look at conference champs, head to head, common opponents, etc. They look to see if there are 4 teams they deem best. It's an eyeball check. Only if two teams are deemed comparable do they then look at the subjective things like I listed above.

This was purposefully done to allow a team to have a bad first few games, but come back at the end. Even more so for a team that lost a player for a while who then came back and the team at the end of the year was clearly one of the top 4, even if they lost a game or two.

The case for LSU would be that they have a new coach, they are trending in the right direction big time - they will have won 7 straight including wins against Bama and either no. 1 UGA or UTjr which would make up for the previous loss. That team would compare very well against 1 loss PAC or B12 champs, but I agree they wouldn't get in over 4 undefeated teams. We know the PAC won't have an undefeated CC, and it isn't likely that TCU will be. That would then mean you might have Clemson and tOSU or UM, and then all other conferences with 1 or more loss for their champ. Compare LSU as I have described them v. the champs in the PAC or B12 an their wins over Bama, UGA/UTjr, and the wins in the SECW would put them in a position of being subjectively considered one of the best 4. At that point none of the objective things matter.

Look, LSU could lose two more games. I am not saying they will do this. But they looked really good against UF and Ole Miss, and Kelly is a good coach even if an asshole.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Conference championships matter to the committee. The exception would be a H2H scenario like a 11-1 UGA who lost to Tennessee (but beat Oregon).

But they don't.

Officially per the documentation, conference championships only matter if, when comparing two teams, you determine that they aren't substantially equal. At the get go, the committee is charged with subjectively selecting the best 4 teams at the time of the CFP:

Mission

• The committee’s task will be to select the best teams, rank the teams for inclusion in the playoff and selected other bowl games and then assign the teams to sites.

They have stated on numerous occasions, but mostly with tOSU over PSU, and leaving out TCU, that their subjective determination as to which of the teams are the top 4 overrides any objective categorization (e.g., conference champs, head-to-head). With tOSU they found that they were the better team than PSU even though they didn't play for the B1GC and had a big loss - that's the best argument for UTjr over LSU. TCU just didn't stand up to comparison with the 4 other teams ... they weren't deemed comparable, subjectively.

If they find that two teams being considered are comparable, then and only then they can then evaluate:

Principles:

• The committee will select the teams using a process that distinguishes among otherwise comparable teams by considering:
  • Conference championships won,
  • Strength of schedule,
  • Head‐to‐head competition,
  • Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory), and,
  • Other relevant factors such as unavailability of key players and coaches that may have affected a team’s performance during the season or likely will affect its postseason performance.

In the preamble, they state as one point that:

• Strength of schedule, head‐to‐head competition and championships won must be specifically applied as tie‐breakers between teams that look similar;

My argument is that if LSU runs the table, meaning they have beaten UGA and Bama, that they will be seen as comparable to UTjr who will have beaten LSU and Bama, yet lost to UGA. You then look at the 5 conditions they have to look at, and LSU wins 3 of 4, with one tie:

• Conference championships won - Advantage LSU
• Strength of schedule - not sure, OOC may go to UTjr, but IC may go to LSU
• Head‐to‐head competition - UTjr
• Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory) - LSU (having beaten Bama and UGA, while UTjr will have beaten Bama but lost to UGA in this scenario)
• Other relevant factors such as unavailability of key players and coaches that may have affected a team’s performance during the season or likely will affect its postseason performance - LSU as they will have shown a trend of a team, with a new coach, who started slow and got better and better each week culminating with a CC win.

With UTjr only winning the head to head, and the deference that the committee seems to have for the SECC, I think they would pick LSU first, and then UTjr if they are top 4.

CFP Selection Committee Protocol​

CFP Selection Committee Protocol

collegefootballplayoff.com

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

I am not an LSU fan, so I don't have a Dawg in the hunt. But 2 loss LSU as the SECC isn't going to get left out if they win out and there aren't 4 zero loss teams. The way the committee works, is that the first eval is subjective - there are no objective considerations which means that they don't look at conference champs, head to head, common opponents, etc. They look to see if there are 4 teams they deem best. It's an eyeball check. Only if two teams are deemed comparable do they then look at the subjective things like I listed above.

This was purposefully done to allow a team to have a bad first few games, but come back at the end. Even more so for a team that lost a player for a while who then came back and the team at the end of the year was clearly one of the top 4, even if they lost a game or two.

The case for LSU would be that they have a new coach, they are trending in the right direction big time - they will have won 7 straight including wins against Bama and either no. 1 UGA or UTjr which would make up for the previous loss. That team would compare very well against 1 loss PAC or B12 champs, but I agree they wouldn't get in over 4 undefeated teams. We know the PAC won't have an undefeated CC, and it isn't likely that TCU will be. That would then mean you might have Clemson and tOSU or UM, and then all other conferences with 1 or more loss for their champ. Compare LSU as I have described them v. the champs in the PAC or B12 an their wins over Bama, UGA/UTjr, and the wins in the SECW would put them in a position of being subjectively considered one of the best 4. At that point none of the objective things matter.

Look, LSU could lose two more games. I am not saying they will do this. But they looked really good against UF and Ole Miss, and Kelly is a good coach even if an asshole.

You can post all that drivel, but it really doesn't matter. The committee is not going to put a 2-loss SEC champ in over a 1-loss P5 champ,

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

But they don't.

Officially per the documentation, conference championships only matter if, when comparing two teams, you determine that they aren't substantially equal. At the get go, the committee is charged with subjectively selecting the best 4 teams at the time of the CFP:

Mission

• The committee’s task will be to select the best teams, rank the teams for inclusion in the playoff and selected other bowl games and then assign the teams to sites.

They have stated on numerous occasions, but mostly with tOSU over PSU, and leaving out TCU, that their subjective determination as to which of the teams are the top 4 overrides any objective categorization (e.g., conference champs, head-to-head). With tOSU they found that they were the better team than PSU even though they didn't play for the B1GC and had a big loss - that's the best argument for UTjr over LSU. TCU just didn't stand up to comparison with the 4 other teams ... they weren't deemed comparable, subjectively.

If they find that two teams being considered are comparable, then and only then they can then evaluate:

Principles:

• The committee will select the teams using a process that distinguishes among otherwise comparable teams by considering:
  • Conference championships won,
  • Strength of schedule,
  • Head‐to‐head competition,
  • Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory), and,
  • Other relevant factors such as unavailability of key players and coaches that may have affected a team’s performance during the season or likely will affect its postseason performance.

In the preamble, they state as one point that:

• Strength of schedule, head‐to‐head competition and championships won must be specifically applied as tie‐breakers between teams that look similar;

My argument is that if LSU runs the table, meaning they have beaten UGA and Bama, that they will be seen as comparable to UTjr who will have beaten LSU and Bama, yet lost to UGA. You then look at the 5 conditions they have to look at, and LSU wins 3 of 4, with one tie:

• Conference championships won - Advantage LSU
• Strength of schedule - not sure, OOC may go to UTjr, but IC may go to LSU
• Head‐to‐head competition - UTjr
• Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory) - LSU (having beaten Bama and UGA, while UTjr will have beaten Bama but lost to UGA in this scenario)
• Other relevant factors such as unavailability of key players and coaches that may have affected a team’s performance during the season or likely will affect its postseason performance - LSU as they will have shown a trend of a team, with a new coach, who started slow and got better and better each week culminating with a CC win.

With UTjr only winning the head to head, and the deference that the committee seems to have for the SECC, I think they would pick LSU first, and then UTjr if they are top 4.

CFP Selection Committee Protocol​

CFP Selection Committee Protocol

collegefootballplayoff.com

You can copy and paste, but you fail to recognize that the 1-loss Oregon would be in the "comparable" category.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

You can copy and paste, but you fail to recognize that the 1-loss Oregon would be in the "comparable" category.

Yeah, I'm thinking if Oregon and LSU are comparable, LSU comes out ahead on SOS, they would both be CCs, they didn't play each other, for common opponents LSU will have beaten UGA and Oregon lost by a billion to UGA, and other relevant factors would likely be a wash with both teams trending up after having a rough start. Don't think that's the win you think it is because SEC bias would favor LSU. Just the Fax.

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

Yeah, I'm thinking if Oregon and LSU are comparable, LSU comes out ahead on SOS, they would both be CCs, they didn't play each other, for common opponents LSU will have beaten UGA and Oregon lost by a billion to UGA, and other relevant factors would likely be a wash with both teams trending up after having a rough start. Don't think that's the win you think it is because SEC bias would favor LSU. Just the Fax.

They won't be comparable. LSU lost to FSU.

Amusingly enough, your LSU example would put Oregon in before they even got to the other criteria, which you posted above.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

They won't be comparable. LSU lost to FSU.

Amusingly enough, your LSU example would put Oregon in before they even got to the other criteria, which you posted above.

Here is how the committee works - they would compare LSU in week 13 v. Oregon in week 13 ... that's how the subjective evaluation works ... after winning the SEC is LSU clearly a top 4 team? On a 7 game winning streak, SECC, with wins over two of the top 3 or 4 teams in the country (Bama and UGA/UTjr), I believe they would see LSU as one of the top 4 teams at that stage. If they do, the losses won't matter. That's how it works. That is why tOSU got in with a loss to VaTech in week 1. That's why TCU didn't get in when they were clearly not a top 4 team to the committee. Even if they are deemed comparable, you then go to the objective evals and LSU would be favored in those.

Again, I have no reason to want LSU in. I am a UGA fan. What I am saying would be a result of my team losing at likely not being in the CFP. I am just telling you that if LSU keeps looking like they did against UF and Ole Miss, and they beat Bama, Arkansas and ATM, they will be going into the SECCG with a chance to get into the CFP. BTW, I think LSU could just as easily lose 2 of those 3, but they get Bama at home, at night, after a bye (Bama has one, too). That's going to be wild.

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

Here is how the committee works - they would compare LSU in week 13 v. Oregon in week 13 ... that's how the subjective evaluation works ... after winning the SEC is LSU clearly a top 4 team? On a 7 game winning streak, SECC, with wins over two of the top 3 or 4 teams in the country (Bama and UGA/UTjr), I believe they would see LSU as one of the top 4 teams at that stage. If they do, the losses won't matter. That's how it works. That is why tOSU got in with a loss to VaTech in week 1. That's why TCU didn't get in when they were clearly not a top 4 team to the committee. Even if they are deemed comparable, you then go to the objective evals and LSU would be favored in those.

Again, I have no reason to want LSU in. I am a UGA fan. What I am saying would be a result of my team losing at likely not being in the CFP. I am just telling you that if LSU keeps looking like they did against UF and Ole Miss, and they beat Bama, Arkansas and ATM, they will be going into the SECCG with a chance to get into the CFP. BTW, I think LSU could just as easily lose 2 of those 3, but they get Bama at home, at night, after a bye (Bama has one, too). That's going to be wild.

You clearly have no idea how the committee works based on the drivel you posted above.

Take off the SEC goggles.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

You clearly have no idea how the committee works based on the drivel you posted above.

Take off the SEC goggles.

I actually know exactly how the committee works. I posted quotes from their governing document, and have read it numerous times. I've followed this just like I have conference and CFP expansion - very closely and I am a detail person so I have read everything on it.

Why is it you can't have a civil conversation? You know it's ok that we don't agree on this. I respect you don't think it will happen, and I hope it doesn't as that means UGA will have lost. And I could clearly be wrong and the committee not get past 2 losses. But the fact is that I know exactly how the committee works, having studied it in detail, and I think that LSU should they run the table will cause them to have to really consider it.

As for the SEC goggles, I told you I am not an LSU fan. I do believe there is a SEC-bias and that a 2 loss SECC could get in when only the B1G could get that same preferential treatment. It is what it is ... the SEC champ has never missed the CFP. I don't think it would happen for LSU on a roll.

One of us is evaluating this clearly and respecting the other. You should give that a try.

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

I actually know exactly how the committee works. I posted quotes from their governing document, and have read it numerous times. I've followed this just like I have conference and CFP expansion - very closely and I am a detail person so I have read everything on it.

As for the SEC goggles, I told you I am not an LSU fan. I do believe there is a SEC-bias and that a 2 loss SECC could get in when only the B1G could get that same preferential treatment. It is what it is ... the SEC champ has never missed the CFP. I don't think it would happen for LSU on a roll.

One of us is evaluating this clearly and respecting the other. You should give that a try.

Based on what you are posting about 2-loss teams getting in...it's clear you have no idea.

Feel free to link to an instance of a 2-loss SEC champ getting into the playoff over a 1-loss P5 champ.

 

[Volbound1700]

Here is the problem with the entire resume for Oregon. The top teams in the PAC this year were Oregon and Utah. They each played a game in OOC where they could have shown CFB the quality of football in the PAC.
Oregon lost by 46. Utah played Florida and they lost.

So if you have the choice of a 1 loss SEC team or a 1 loss PAC team -- I don't see how you could, with a clear conscience, pick any PAC team over a 1 loss SEC team.

I would say UCLA and USC are higher up the totem poll in the Pac12 than Utah.

 

[Deep Creek]

This was purposefully done to allow a team to have a bad first few games, but come back at the end.

Counselor, you just described Oregon.

Spoiler

But only if that ass whooping they got from your hairy dawgs even qualifies as "bad" and they finish the "come back".

 

[Volbound1700]

@WhosYourDawggy - I see your point and I think it will be mute in that scenario because I think there will be a slot open without kicking out Pac12 for 2-loss champion.

However, I do think the opening loss to FSU looms large for LSU. If FSU wins 8-9 games, I think it would look better for LSU's resume. If FSU is a 6-6 team, then that may draw some questions.

LSU's home loss to Tennessee also looks very ugly for them.

Tennessee gets questioned about the Pittsburgh game now because Pitt is crapping the bed hard in ACC so that overtime win looks more bad at this point than a solid win like it was at the time. (Pitt was by far our worse game of the season if you watch us. Hendon Hooker was off and we scored only 3 points in the second half. We also had several stupid turnovers in second half including a fumble to give Pitt the ball in our red zone off a punt return).

Edit: Keep in mind that the 2007 2-loss LSU team had a solid OOC win over Virginia Tech and they only loss to ranked teams (both games in OT off fluke plays). Also 2007 saw a lot of chaos with no undefeated teams and only a single 1-loss team in the Power 6 (Ohio State).

For LSU to make it, there would need to be some chaos.