CFP Rankings

michaeljordan_fan said:
He's coping with UGA getting the shit beat out of them last weekend
Click to expand...
ericd7633 said:
I did have a good chuckle when I saw UGA as the first team out.
Click to expand...
I am coping quite well, as you can see. Have you seen me throw a tantrum like others? No, we got our ass whipped and I said that soon after the game. I think we are exactly where we should be ranked. And, we have everything in our power to get in ... if we beat UTjr, and the GaTech, we will be 10-ish unless a lot of other teams lose.

You have to know where we are today doesn't matter for us. If we win, we are in. Lose and we are out and we should be.

I've said since early in the year that we are off for some reason. Beck has digressed, and our OL has played horribly. Candidly, our coaches have laid eggs a number of times. I have a feeling we will have a shake-up after the season.

If you are gloating because UGA isn't up at the top, you are picking the wrong Dawg fan to think you are getting one over on me, LOL.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
I mean, do you not think that SOS is important? Because that is very ignorant. You and ND will have a chance to show that your weaker schedule isn't a big deal. Maybe it won't, but maybe it will be. We can revisit it then.
Click to expand...

This argument is so lame. Having a tough schedule doesn't make you a good team. Being a good team makes you a good team. In college basketball, Gonzaga routinely has the weakest schedule of any top 10/15 team. Yet, they've had a ton of success in the tournament.

Also last I checked, ND beat the team currently leading the SEC by double digits on the road.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
I mean, do you not think that SOS is important? Because that is very ignorant. You and ND will have a chance to show that your weaker schedule isn't a big deal. Maybe it won't, but maybe it will be. We can revisit it then.
Click to expand...
Looks like it is only important when it is needed. Whatever "otherwise comparable teams" means and how they decide teams are.

The committee will select the teams using a process that distinguishes among otherwise comparable teams by considering:
  • 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.
 
ericd7633 said:
This argument is so lame. Having a tough schedule doesn't make you a good team. Being a good team makes you a good team. In college basketball, Gonzaga routinely has the weakest schedule of any top 10/15 team. Yet, they've had a ton of success in the tournament.

Also last I checked, ND beat the team currently leading the SEC by double digits on the road.
Click to expand...
It's not lame at all. There wouldn't be 10 different SOS standings if it was. The Committee wouldn't look at it and take it into consideration if it was. Stated like someone with the 73rd toughest schedule.

In a sport where you have 134 teams, 10 conferences, where you have huge disparities between conferences - P2 > other-P4 > G6, if you don't weigh SOS, you might as well put all the undefeated teams in and have a bunch of G5 teams. Well, they don't do that for reasons that are obvious to everyone. IU had 5 one-loss teams in front of it last week, 3 this week. Why do you suppose that is if SOS is so lame?

FWIW, I obviously agree that a tough SOS doesn't make you a good team. Of course it doesn't. There are numerous teams with tough SOS that arent' good at all this year. FFS, 2-6 are UF, MSU, OU, FSU, and Ky. So of course SOS doesn't make you good. But, in a fair system, if the group seeding the top 12 teams ignores SOS, you don't need such a group. Just go wins and losses. But they know SOS isn't lame, so they do things like put teams with more losses in front of other teams who have played weak schedules to get fewer losses. I can't believe I have to explain this to you.
 
Deep Creek said:
Looks like it is only important when it is needed. Whatever "otherwise comparable teams" means and how they decide teams are.

The committee will select the teams using a process that distinguishes among otherwise comparable teams by considering:
  • 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.
Click to expand...
FSU will forever hate that last bullet point!
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
It's not lame at all. There wouldn't be 10 different SOS standings if it was. The Committee wouldn't look at it and take it into consideration if it was. Stated like someone with the 73rd toughest schedule.

In a sport where you have 134 teams, 10 conferences, where you have huge disparities between conferences - P2 > other-P4 > G6, if you don't weigh SOS, you might as well put all the undefeated teams in and have a bunch of G5 teams. Well, they don't do that for reasons that are obvious to everyone. IU had 5 one-loss teams in front of it last week, 3 this week. Why do you suppose that is if SOS is so lame?

FWIW, I obviously agree that a tough SOS doesn't make you a good team. Of course it doesn't. There are numerous teams with tough SOS that arent' good at all this year. FFS, 2-6 are UF, MSU, OU, FSU, and Ky. So of course SOS doesn't make you good. But, in a fair system, if the group seeding the top 12 teams ignores SOS, you don't need such a group. Just go wins and losses. But they know SOS isn't lame, so they do things like put teams with more losses in front of other teams who have played weak schedules to get fewer losses. I can't believe I have to explain this to you.
Click to expand...

You said ND and Oregon will be able to prove that having a weaker schedule isn't a big deal. That implies you think they are where they are because of a weak schedule. Which is why I said what I said.

And no shit, SOS is important in terms of selecting/seeding. But just because UGA played a more difficult schedule doesn't mean Jack shit when they get on a field with Oregon or Indiana or whoever. That's my point.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
It's not lame at all. There wouldn't be 10 different SOS standings if it was. The Committee wouldn't look at it and take it into consideration if it was. Stated like someone with the 73rd toughest schedule.

In a sport where you have 134 teams, 10 conferences, where you have huge disparities between conferences - P2 > other-P4 > G6, if you don't weigh SOS, you might as well put all the undefeated teams in and have a bunch of G5 teams. Well, they don't do that for reasons that are obvious to everyone. IU had 5 one-loss teams in front of it last week, 3 this week. Why do you suppose that is if SOS is so lame?

FWIW, I obviously agree that a tough SOS doesn't make you a good team. Of course it doesn't. There are numerous teams with tough SOS that arent' good at all this year. FFS, 2-6 are UF, MSU, OU, FSU, and Ky. So of course SOS doesn't make you good. But, in a fair system, if the group seeding the top 12 teams ignores SOS, you don't need such a group. Just go wins and losses. But they know SOS isn't lame, so they do things like put teams with more losses in front of other teams who have played weak schedules to get fewer losses. I can't believe I have to explain this to you.
Click to expand...

SOS is one metric used to differentiate comparable teams.

If they claim with the eye test that they are not comparable, then it is skipped.
 
ericd7633 said:
You said ND and Oregon will be able to prove that having a weaker schedule isn't a big deal. That implies you think they are where they are because of a weak schedule. Which is why I said what I said.
Click to expand...
Exactly what I said, and it's true. I think there are a number of teams ranked where they are because they haven't had to play stronger schedules this year. UI and Texas are the most obvious. I think I am stating the obvious.

ericd7633 said:
And no shit, SOS is important in terms of selecting/seeding. But just because UGA played a more difficult schedule doesn't mean Jack shit when they get on a field with Oregon or Indiana or whoever. That's my point.
Click to expand...
Seriously? Don't you think a battle-tested UGA would have the edge over IU? One team will have played 5 top 25 teams, the other will have played 1 and then not another ranked team all year. And you don't think that is an advantage for UGA?
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
Exactly what I said, and it's true. I think there are a number of teams ranked where they are because they haven't had to play stronger schedules this year. UI and Texas are the most obvious. I think I am stating the obvious.


Seriously? Don't you think a battle-tested UGA would have the edge over IU? One team will have played 5 top 25 teams, the other will have played 1 and then not another ranked team all year. And you don't think that is an advantage for UGA?
Click to expand...
The uga team that showed up Saturday gets smacked around by Indiana
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
Enjoy it for now B1G. You are going to have to prove this on the field. I feel it won't go how you think it will.
Click to expand...
B1G will likely get exposed, as it always does. Oregon and Ohio state have a punchers chance at winning it all, but PSU at 4 and IU at 5 is hilarious because both schools would be lucky to be .500 in the SEC.
 
Sgt Brutus said:
B1G will likely get exposed, as it always does. Oregon and Ohio state have a punchers chance at winning it all, but PSU at 4 and IU at 5 is hilarious because both schools would be lucky to be .500 in the SEC.
Click to expand...
I actually think Ore and tOSU are really good teams. I expect that both will go far in the CFP. I agree totally on PSU and IU.
 
michaeljordan_fan said:
The uga team that showed up Saturday gets smacked around by Indiana
Click to expand...
Perhaps. I would have to see how Indiana does against tOSU first. We simply do not know how good IU is—that is what SOS, in this case, does not allow us to know. If they had played a couple of decent teams, we might know. That said, I totally agree that if our O that showed up at OM shows up against UTjr or GaTech, we likely get two more losses and could lose at IU. It's the worst I have seen the team play in many years.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
Exactly what I said, and it's true. I think there are a number of teams ranked where they are because they haven't had to play stronger schedules this year. UI and Texas are the most obvious. I think I am stating the obvious.


Seriously? Don't you think a battle-tested UGA would have the edge over IU? One team will have played 5 top 25 teams, the other will have played 1 and then not another ranked team all year. And you don't think that is an advantage for UGA?
Click to expand...

No, I don't. Despite IU having played an easy schedule, they are a good team. UGA is also a good team. As is Oregon, who has played 2 ranked teams. I have no clue what would happen if UGA played IU or Oregon. My guess would be IU and Oregon would win, because they are better teams.
 
No Love?

iu
 
Screw all of you. All I want is:

1. Ohio State to beat Michigan
2. Ohio State to get into the playoffs.
3. Ohio State to beat whomever gets put in front of them in said playoffs.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
FSU will forever hate that last bullet point!
Click to expand...
Yeah, that’s the committee’s trump card ot Skinner’s Constant aka Flannegan’s Fanagling Factor.

“We” wanted to add something other than just an algorithm based mainly on human polls. I much prefer a committee rather than a bunch of sheeple voters. Even if I scratch my head and disagree with them in their early rankings. I believe they got the correct four teams in every year…even if the order may have been left open for debate.
 
michaeljordan_fan said:
SOS is one metric used to differentiate comparable teams.

If they claim with the eye test that they are not comparable, then it is skipped.
Click to expand...
100% correct. And they also can claim “game control” which is also used it to differentiate…even though the term “game control” is no where in their requirement. Nearly every CFP chair has used that term when asked how decided some of the positioning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top