ColoradoHAWKEYE
Well-Known Member
Top 5 will be the same...okie and okie state move up, Florida and Michigan and msu move higher. Not sure of order, don't care. Beat Purdue!
CFP Ranking prediction thread
- Thread starter shonblatt
- Start date
HawkeyeWalker
Well-Known Member
Curious as to what the reasoning is to have Wisc at 25, with 2 losses to 2 teams inside top 5, behind 3-3 loss teams.
Doesn't really matter but that is very strange to me.
Doesn't really matter but that is very strange to me.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
Because while they haven't lost to any bad teams, they haven't beaten any good teams. Teams like USC (Utah) and Ole Miss (Alabama) have really good wins. It's obvious that the commitee is putting a higher premium on quality wins.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
He did talk resume (2 quality road wins). But at the end of the day, the commitee is tasked with putting the 4 best teams in the playoff. And "best" will ALWAYS be subjective...
bcl20
Well-Known Member
That kind of thinking can minimize losses, which kind of has happened and that's irritating.
isnt that what Long meant that Iowa is better based on their resume???
STLhawkeye20
Well-Known Member
Yeah, Long wasn't subjectively saying that Iowa is "better" than Oklahoma State based on the eye-test, I construed his statements as saying that the resume demonstrates that Iowa is the better team.
I don't think he was saying "yeah guys, Iowa's just...errr...better"
How do you come off a bye and pass another team that came off a bye? I can understand Oregon and USC passing Wisconsin based on their wins. Did Ole Miss practice better than Wisconsin this week? Or maybe sign a better recruit?
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
And that is why is BS. They act like a loss doesn't even matter. Oklahoma loses to a putrid Texas and it don't matter because they beat Baylor? Why, I mean why does one good win negate a completely terrible loss and make the committee act like they didn't lose that game?
The whole thing is crap, and I will keep saying it. This kind of stuff is fine when you are talking about a field of 64 teams, but when you are talking about only taking 4 teams, this stuff is just a bunch of BS. All this talk wouldn't even matter if you just had auto bids for the conference champions. Then all the focus would be on seeing who wins the B1G west (MSU, Michigan, OSU) or who was gonna come out of the Pac12 (now they are completely irrelevant on a national stage) which is too bad, it would add to the drama and the fun to the playoffs. The talk in the ACC would be can UNC beat Clemson and get a spot in the playoffs, cause right now it looks impossible for them to make the playoffs under the current system. Heck there would be talk about Ole Miss winning the SEC west if they win out and Bama slips up and loses a game.
Instead all we get is basically pre determined teams from the committee, with one whole conference being completely irrelevant now, and two others where only a 0 loss team can make the playoffs (ACC/B1G). It is complete garbage.
bcl20
Well-Known Member
They just rest better in the SEC
ColoradoHAWKEYE
Well-Known Member
I for sure see your thought process and whole heartedly agree. It may work for us this year, but it shouldn't be so subjective, especially at the top!
Is their any kind of national narrative for this format, or is it a wait until current system plays out its flaws?
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
My complaints aren't about this year and Iowa. If they win the conference they will be in. That couldn't be said for the Big12 last year, the Pac12 this year, and the ACC this year if UNC wins the ACC championship game.
To say that winning your conference doesn't get you into the playoffs goes against every single playoff formate that sports have ever used. This current college football playoff system is crap, and it needs to go away and soon.
Maybe I guess. But if that's the case, he didn't answer the question. Well he answered it like a politician anyway.
D
DDThompson
Guest
Stop it. They did beat Bama at Bama.
Bama can't make it on its own merits right now so they need propped up by Missy.
So if Ole Miss keeps losing they should be near the top 10 by the end of the season.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
I completely disagree. I don't think the process is garbage at all.
You can't do auto bids for conference champions....this isn't an "invitational" time tournament we're talking about here like the NCAA BB tourney. This is a playoff to match the Top 4 teams in the country against each other. Are you trying to tell me that the Wisconsin team that won the B1G a few years back at 8-5 would have any place whatsoever in a playoff? No way.
And I don't think the committee is forgetting Oklahoma's loss at all. But just like wins can't be looked at in a vacuum, neither can losses. As Iowa fans, we know firsthand that rivalry games can sometime bring out the best (or worst) in one of the teams. The Iowa team of 2002, by the end of the year, was playing probably the best football in the country at the time. But we had a loss to Iowa State. Are you saying that a team can't amend for an early season loss by basically destroying every other team on their schedule and still be considered one of the 4 best teams in the country? This Oklahoma team reminds me an awful lot of the Iowa team from 2002....inexplicable loss to a rival, followed by a complete a$$-whooping of every other team on their schedule. If they finish the year by beating a ranked Baylor, TCU and Okie State, they definitely deserve to be considered.....a loss to Texas notwithstanding.
It's conceivable that we may end up the year with no undefeated P5 teams. NC has the firepower to hang with, and beat, Clemson. Both Iowa and OSU are certainly vulnerable. Okie State still has Baylor and Oklahoma to contend with. And if we do, then everyones wins AND losses will be up for scrutiny.....but it's obvious that the committee is putting more emphasis on the sum of a team's quality wins, than they are one Saturday where they may have stubbed their toe. And I don't think there's anything wrong with that process at all.
Wisconsin may not have deserved a spot in a top 4, but they deserved a spot in the playoffs Dean is talking about that allows a spot for all power 5 conference champions. Wisconsin played their way in by winning their division and winning the championship game. Kentucky was the best team in basketball last year but they lost in the playoff. In football, the entire season is a playoff. As far as Oklahoma goes, they may deserve a spot, just not at the expense of an undefeated team.
My best guess on the committee's logic on Ole Miss:
(1) Arkansas manhandled LSU, so the Ole Miss loss to Arkansas does not look as bad as it did previously
(2) Alabama continues to win impressively, so with each passing week Ole Miss is getting more credit for that win.
With respect to Wisconsin, I don't think they have any wins against Power5 teams with winning records, so they should just be happy to be in the top 25.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
That's essentially the NFL Super Bowl model. This is just my opinion, but I have no desire to copy that model. I like the uniqueness of college football and I'm pretty good with the process that's now been put in place.
