Updated Playoff Odds

rmilia1 said:
This list is ridiculous lol
Click to expand...
It’s because some of those teams haven’t played yet. It’s an advantage to those that have lost
 
duckboy33 said:
Georgia will now have to beat Alabama or they will get a second loss. This 4th spot could be up for grabs and I’m all for it
Click to expand...
If Georgia has two loses and both of them are to Alabama they are in. You can't penalize them for losing twice to the same school in my opinion.

Two loses to Alabama or Clemson for that matter is superior to losses and to Iowa State and Kansas State.

You can't throw a one loss team in ahead of them just because they had an easier schedule.
 
Wild Turkey said:
If Georgia has two loses and both of them are to Alabama they are in. You can't penalize them for losing twice to the same school in my opinion.

Two loses to Alabama or Clemson for that matter is superior to losses and to Iowa State and Kansas State.

You can't throw a one loss team in ahead of them just because they had an easier schedule.
Click to expand...
Sure you can.
 
Codaxx said:
It’s because some of those teams haven’t played yet. It’s an advantage to those that have lost
Click to expand...
Sure that is part of it but how does NW and indiana have better odds than Iowa or Minnesota? How is Wisky 40% but Oregon and USC are wayyy less ? Etc
 
Wild Turkey said:
If Georgia has two loses and both of them are to Alabama they are in. You can't penalize them for losing twice to the same school in my opinion.

Two loses to Alabama or Clemson for that matter is superior to losses and to Iowa State and Kansas State.

You can't throw a one loss team in ahead of them just because they had an easier schedule.
Click to expand...

The committee isn't going to give Georgia three chances to try to beat Alabama. They have to beat them next time.
 
duckboy33 said:
The committee isn't going to give Georgia three chances to try to beat Alabama. They have to beat them next time.
Click to expand...
No big 12 school is getting in and no PAC team either even if someone is undefeated. You possibly could have a ND but chances are they have two loses to Clemson at that point (or maybe not because I have no idea how they are incorporated into the ACC).

There aren't going to many viable options.
 
Wild Turkey said:
No big 12 school is getting in and no PAC team either even if someone is undefeated. You possibly could have a ND but chances are they have two loses to Clemson at that point (or maybe not because I have no idea how they are incorporated into the ACC).

There aren't going to many viable options.
Click to expand...
You realize other conferences have a seat at the CFP table, right? They aren't going to give Georgia 3 tries at Alabama unless everyone in the Big 12 has two losses and there's no undefeated PAC team.
 
Wild Turkey said:
If Georgia has two loses and both of them are to Alabama they are in. You can't penalize them for losing twice to the same school in my opinion.

Two loses to Alabama or Clemson for that matter is superior to losses and to Iowa State and Kansas State.

You can't throw a one loss team in ahead of them just because they had an easier schedule.
Click to expand...
Jawja gonna clobber Bama next time they play anyway. That way they both get in because errrrryone wants to see Ga/Bama Part Tres.
 
duckboy33 said:
You realize other conferences have a seat at the CFP table, right? They aren't going to give Georgia 3 tries at Alabama unless everyone in the Big 12 has two losses and there's no undefeated PAC team.
Click to expand...
If the committee does what it is supposed to do then that's exactly what I expect them to do. The PAC reduced schedule and late start is a joke and disqualifies them from participation his year. Midocre Auburn teams have beaten he PAC champion two years straight. Without cross conference games there is zero reason to even consider a PAC team.

If there is an undefeated Big 12 team then they will get the nod and possibly a one loss. Other than that Georgia would get in with two losses to Alabama.
 
Wild Turkey said:
If the committee does what it is supposed to do then that's exactly what I expect them to do. The PAC reduced schedule and late start is a joke and disqualifies them from participation his year. Midocre Auburn teams have beaten he PAC champion two years straight. Without cross conference games there is zero reason to even consider a PAC team.

If there is an undefeated Big 12 team then they will get the nod and possibly a one loss. Other than that Georgia would get in with two losses to Alabama.
Click to expand...
Auburn also beat Alabama last year. That would be a silly reason to disqualify Alabama this season. Go google who the chairman of the CFP committee is
 
duckboy33 said:
Auburn also beat Alabama last year. That would be a silly reason to disqualify Alabama this season. Go google who the chairman of the CFP committee is
Click to expand...
That shouldn't have anything to do with it. The sole purpose is to put the best 4 teams in period.

You guys are always wanting to expand or make in conference champs only because you want an easy path. That's BS and should be the best 4 teams only. I give a fuck who the chairman is and the fact your bringing that up implies you think they will be bias so they shouldn't be there.
 
Wild Turkey said:
That shouldn't have anything to do with it. The sole purpose is to put the best 4 teams in period.

You guys are always wanting to expand or make in conference champs only because you want an easy path. That's BS and should be the best 4 teams only. I give a fuck who the chairman is and the fact your bringing that up implies you think they will be bias so they shouldn't be there.
Click to expand...

I didn't imply there will be bias. My point was that the chairman of the committee isn't going to let a conference he's affiliated with be discounted before a single game is played. With no OOC games, it will be harder than ever to really tell who the four best teams are. But that said, if UGA loses to Alabama twice by 2-3 touchdowns and there's someone undefeated in the PAC, mine as well see if they are good enough to challenge Bama vs. the team we all watched fail to do it twice.

Conference politics has always been part of the committee's decisions. It's why they've never had a single year where a choice was particularly controversial (with all due respect to TCU). Look at 2014, everyone knew Florida State was squeaking out close wins with a bad schedule. All the advanced statistics showed they weren't a top 4 team. But they were undefeated so the committee put them in there (and then they lost by 39). The committee has to deal with the conference politics, an undefeated conference champ isn't getting left out in normal years. With the PAC only playing 7 games, they could be left out for a one loss team but I really doubt they are going to be left out for a two loss team.

ESPN seems to agree since they are giving Oregon and USC a somewhat reasonable chance to make the playoffs. About the same odds they are giving them to finish undefeated. And ESPN knows all the people who work on the committee and talk to them very often.

That said, we all need to take a breathe. We are a far ways away from the playoff. I don't think the PAC 12 champion will finish undefeated this year and I think it's very likely the Big 12 champ will have two losses.
 
duckboy33 said:
I didn't imply there will be bias. My point was that the chairman of the committee isn't going to let a conference he's affiliated with be discounted before a single game is played. With no OOC games, it will be harder than ever to really tell who the four best teams are. But that said, if UGA loses to Alabama twice by 2-3 touchdowns and there's someone undefeated in the PAC, mine as well see if they are good enough to challenge Bama vs. the team we all watched fail to do it twice.

Conference politics has always been part of the committee's decisions. It's why they've never had a single year where a choice was particularly controversial (with all due respect to TCU). Look at 2014, everyone knew Florida State was squeaking out close wins with a bad schedule. All the advanced statistics showed they weren't a top 4 team. But they were undefeated so the committee put them in there (and then they lost by 39). The committee has to deal with the conference politics, an undefeated conference champ isn't getting left out in normal years. With the PAC only playing 7 games, they could be left out for a one loss team but I really doubt they are going to be left out for a two loss team.

ESPN seems to agree since they are giving Oregon and USC a somewhat reasonable chance to make the playoffs. About the same odds they are giving them to finish undefeated. And ESPN knows all the people who work on the committee and talk to them very often.

That said, we all need to take a breathe. We are a far ways away from the playoff. I don't think the PAC 12 champion will finish undefeated this year and I think it's very likely the Big 12 champ will have two losses.
Click to expand...
You play 6 games and Washington is probably the only one with a heartbeat unless Chip surprises.

You wouldn't just have to beat everyone you would have to blow them all out of the water. Then even if you got in you're gonna get your ass beat down in an embarrassing fashion. It makes no sense for you to be there.
 
Wild Turkey said:
You play 6 games and Washington is probably the only one with a heartbeat unless Chip surprises.

You wouldn't just have to beat everyone you would have to blow them all out of the water. Then even if you got in you're gonna get your ass beat down in an embarrassing fashion. It makes no sense for you to be there.
Click to expand...

Last year, Oklahoma got run off the field in the first half and lost by over 40 points. The committee, despite all of Okie's defensive problems and history of losing playoff games, still put them in over Georgia. All because Oklahoma had one less loss. It's how the committee operates. You can make the argument that it shouldn't but they've acted in a very predictable manner.
 
ericd7633 said:
If Auburn runs the table they are getting in, they obviously won't, but should they, they will. Ou and Texas shouldn't because of the awful Big 12.
Click to expand...
No Kansas State? No Iowa state?

still ridiculous
 
Wild Turkey said:
If Georgia has two loses and both of them are to Alabama they are in. You can't penalize them for losing twice to the same school in my opinion.

Two loses to Alabama or Clemson for that matter is superior to losses and to Iowa State and Kansas State.

You can't throw a one loss team in ahead of them just because they had an easier schedule.
Click to expand...
It’s ridiculous to list auburn on this list.
 
duckboy33 said:
Last year, Oklahoma got run off the field in the first half and lost by over 40 points. The committee, despite all of Okie's defensive problems and history of losing playoff games, still put them in over Georgia. All because Oklahoma had one less loss. It's how the committee operates. You can make the argument that it shouldn't but they've acted in a very predictable manner.
Click to expand...
Oklahoma played a full schedule in a normal year.

Nothing about this year is normal and not playing a full schedule is your conferences fault. You made the bed so sleep in it and quite crying about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top