FB Playoff selection watch

[arnie]

Marshall's schedule is certainly weak, but you should probably backtrack on that specific statement.

You have a point- but if we lose to Pitt this week, I don't think we're worse than Akron. Of course a CUSA team can pick off a Power 5 team, but the list of teams Marshall has played and will play or very weak. If they want to be a "player" they need to upgrade their OOC.

[Wander]

You have a point- but if we lose to Pitt this week, I don't think we're worse than Akron. Of course a CUSA team can pick off a Power 5 team, but the list of teams Marshall has played and will play or very weak. If they want to be a "player" they need to upgrade their OOC.

I'm just saying the division you have in your head is a little oversimplified, and you're vastly overrating the strength of the ACC (also, Akron isn't in CUSA). For example, computer numbers suggest that the difference between the SEC West and the ACC Coastal is bigger than the gap between the ACC Coastal and Conference USA East.

If the committee is going to put a huge weight on strength of schedule, fine. I support that! But be consistent about it - if you're going to rank 1-loss East Carolina (or Duke!) ahead of undefeated Marshall, you should also rank 1-loss Auburn ahead of undefeated FSU. You have to apply the same strength of schedule argument to the SEC-ACC gap as you do to the ACC-CUSA gap.

[Duvall]

You have a point- but if we lose to Pitt this week, I don't think we're worse than Akron. Of course a CUSA team can pick off a Power 5 team, but the list of teams Marshall has played and will play or very weak. If they want to be a "player" they need to upgrade their OOC.

Which is why this system is broken - it takes two sides to schedule an out-of-conference game. A team may not be *able* to upgrade its schedule.

[Wander]

One more example, using Sagarin numbers. 1-loss Ohio State's strength of schedule is ranked 60th. 2-loss teams LSU, Oklahoma, UCLA, and West Virgina have strength of schedules 9th, 11th, 12th, and 13th respectively. Ohio State is ranked ahead of all of those teams.

Believe it or not, I actually wouldn't mind Marshall being unranked - as long as a consistent standard is applied and Ohio State is below all the teams I mentioned, and FSU is placed below Auburn (and maybe Alabama and Ole Miss). The fact that this isn't the case shows that the same old inconsistency is still in the system, and that it's still biased in favor of teams that have famous names.

[OldPhiKap]

The previous systems didn't have ESPN hyping them as evolutionary leaps forward, though.

You raise a different point, with which I think we are simpatico. The hype of this poll at this point is silly, although hype exists every week with the others too. In a perfect OPK-controlled world, no polls would come out until halfway through the season and the big poll would not come out until before the final week. But hell, we already have Kenpom polls on basketball. ;-)

As to the original point -- I would rather argue about who got left out at 5, than who got left out at 3 (like the BCS years). Or, for all the years before, argue about who would have beaten whom although they did not play in a bowl against each other. There will always be an argument no matter where the line is drawn.

[Dev11]

There will always be an argument no matter where the line is drawn.

Seth Greenberg thinks college football needs a 72 team playoff.

[OldPhiKap]

Seth Greenberg thinks college football needs a 72 team playoff.

And VT would be 73! Ultimate bubble boy.

(In true DES fashion, I need to point out the clean assist there Dev11)

[HK Dukie]

I'm just saying the division you have in your head is a little oversimplified, and you're vastly overrating the strength of the ACC (also, Akron isn't in CUSA). For example, computer numbers suggest that the difference between the SEC West and the ACC Coastal is bigger than the gap between the ACC Coastal and Conference USA East.

If the committee is going to put a huge weight on strength of schedule, fine. I support that! But be consistent about it - if you're going to rank 1-loss East Carolina (or Duke!) ahead of undefeated Marshall, you should also rank 1-loss Auburn ahead of undefeated FSU. You have to apply the same strength of schedule argument to the SEC-ACC gap as you do to the ACC-CUSA gap.

Perhaps it is your ranking system that is oversimplified. It's not just who has the best winning percentage and strong SoS for the CFP rankings. They are looking at each team on a holistic basis. On this basis Marshall didn't make the cut. Can't say I disagree but don't really care either way.

The methodology does matter and it appears to be an improvement over the national polls (in particular with regard to head to head matchups). And yes, there is a very good case for Duke to be ranked ahead of Marshall.

For all the disdain the ACC gets in the national media, it is kind of nice to have 4 ACC teams ranked.

[throatybeard]

I'm just enjoying the hell out of this for the time being. When Bama ascends to their cultural inheritance and beats Mississippi State 35-10 in Tuscaloosa, then I'll resign myself to the cruelty of the secret fate of all life. I'm scared of the "Rebel Black Bears" up in Oxford, too. Not a good year for MSU to have its best roster since 1941. Road games at LSU, OM, and Bama. Least we got Auburn at home.

Meantime, I'm doing a touchdown dance if/when Mississippi State plants Arkansas' face in the mud. I've taught my little boy to ring my bass cowbell at the appropriate intervals.

[throatybeard]

Which is why this system is broken - it takes two sides to schedule an out-of-conference game. A team may not be *able* to upgrade its schedule.

You're right. No one except Nick Saban and five hundred of my Facebook contacts and similar people are arguing with this.

"Week in and week out the SEC is..." Well no duh it is. At least the West.

But we've actually reached a point where the undefeated top team in the ACC has to justify itself because (a) no one with something to lose will schedule a non-power conference school, yes, but now, even when they do, (b) even the likes of Florida State can't be respected for their conference schedule. This used to be Boise State's problem, TCU's problem before they snuck back into the Texas conference. Now, Florida freaking State is apparently a bad guy in the power calculus because they had the gall to schedule a resurgent Notre Dame as their best OOC opponent. Seriously, here, ND is considered a mark against FSU, and Dame is better than they've been for the last three years in like two decades. Our Lady of Northern Indiana was top ten when that game happened, and ESPNMouse is acting like that's a crappy win for FSU.

Look, I like the SEC West, I do. But we've reached this insane point where it's like, the national media thinks FSU is terrible, despite winning the whole thing last year, because Clemson isn't great.

God help you if you're Southern Miss or Boise or Fresno or Marshall. Florida State (!!!!) can't get respect? They won the whole thing LY!

The most amazing thing to me of all is that Mississippi State, who only won the SEC once in 1941, is temporarily thriving in this insanity. And that school doesn't have the GDP to pay people off. Dan Mullen must be doing a hell of a job. When I was there, we couldn't even get 2-for-1s with CUSA schools. They were like, okay, UAB, we will go 2-for-2.

Y'all make me gotta lie down.

[gcashwell]

You're right. No one except Nick Saban and five hundred of my Facebook contacts and similar people are arguing with this.

"Week in and week out the SEC is..." Well no duh it is. At least the West.

But we've actually reached a point where the undefeated top team in the ACC has to justify itself because (a) no one with something to lose will schedule a non-power conference school, yes, but now, even when they do, (b) even the likes of Florida State can't be respected for their conference schedule. This used to be Boise State's problem, TCU's problem before they snuck back into the Texas conference. Now, Florida freaking State is apparently a bad guy in the power calculus because they had the gall to schedule a resurgent Notre Dame as their best OOC opponent. Seriously, here, ND is considered a mark against FSU, and Dame is better than they've been for the last three years in like two decades. Our Lady of Northern Indiana was top ten when that game happened, and ESPNMouse is acting like that's a crappy win for FSU.

Look, I like the SEC West, I do. But we've reached this insane point where it's like, the national media thinks FSU is terrible, despite winning the whole thing last year, because Clemson isn't great.

God help you if you're Southern Miss or Boise or Fresno or Marshall. Florida State (!!!!) can't get respect? They won the whole thing LY!

The most amazing thing to me of all is that Mississippi State, who only won the SEC once in 1941, is temporarily thriving in this insanity. And that school doesn't have the GDP to pay people off. Dan Mullen must be doing a hell of a job. When I was there, we couldn't even get 2-for-1s with CUSA schools. They were like, okay, UAB, we will go 2-for-2.

Y'all make me gotta lie down.

Let me preface this by saying, "I'm a Bama fan."

Florida State suffers from a two main problems this year. The first is that the eyeball test makes them look worse than they were last year. The second problems is that everybody hates Jameis and wants to downplay everything they do.

Mississippi State has been one of those schools we have been waiting for. We have been hearing for the past few years how good their recruiting classes have been. I guess it is finally starting to pay off.

[duke blue brewcrew]

If the committee is going to put a huge weight on strength of schedule, fine. I support that! But be consistent about it - if you're going to rank 1-loss East Carolina (or Duke!) ahead of undefeated Marshall, you should also rank 1-loss Auburn ahead of undefeated FSU. You have to apply the same strength of schedule argument to the SEC-ACC gap as you do to the ACC-CUSA gap.

What is consistent about comparing the strength of schedule for the SEC-West against the ACC-Coastal when referencing who FSU has played? I agree with your priciple, but FSU plays in the Atlantic. I don't know the numbers that support my assumption that there is a big difference in the strength of the Atlantic over the Coastal. I will say that currently, there are three teams from the Atlantic ranked in the AP Tope 25, (FSU, Clemson and Louisville) and only one from the Coastal, (Duke). So what is the gap between the ACC-Atlantic vs. the SEC-West, and what is the gap between the ACC-Atlantic and Conference USA-East? That's the true measurement for this conversation. I'm interested in knowing that answer...anyone know? This as close as I have come to an answer: http://sagarin.com/sports/cfsend.htm. It does suggest that the gap is greater between the SEC-W than CUSA-E. That said, the gap isn't a significant one, especially when you account for three SEC-W teams nationally ranked in the Top 5 and four in the Top 10.

[Wander]

What is consistent about comparing the strength of schedule for the SEC-West against the ACC-Coastal when referencing who FSU has played? I agree with your priciple, but FSU plays in the Atlantic. I don't know the numbers that support my assumption that there is a big difference in the strength of the Atlantic over the Coastal. I will say that currently, there are three teams from the Atlantic ranked in the AP Tope 25, (FSU, Clemson and Louisville) and only one from the Coastal, (Duke). So what is the gap between the ACC-Atlantic vs. the SEC-West, and what is the gap between the ACC-Atlantic and Conference USA-East? That's the true measurement for this conversation.

Yes, of course - I was responding to a post that was touting the ACC Coastal. 1-loss Auburn's schedule is about 40 spots tougher than undefeated FSU's. 1-loss Duke and East Carolina's schedules are about 30 spots tougher than undefeated Marshall's. Now, maybe those Sagarin numbers aren't exactly right, but does anyone want to argue that they are that far off from reality? If they're even sort of close to right, the principle holds: if you're going to leave Marshall unranked, fine, but apply the same standards to everyone and put FSU behind the 1-loss teams with a much better schedule and Ohio State behind the 2-loss teams with a much better schedule.

[duke blue brewcrew]

Yes, of course - I was responding to a post that was touting the ACC Coastal. 1-loss Auburn's schedule is about 40 spots tougher than undefeated FSU's. 1-loss Duke and East Carolina's schedules are about 30 spots tougher than undefeated Marshall's. Now, maybe those Sagarin numbers aren't exactly right, but does anyone want to argue that they are that far off from reality? If they're even sort of close to right, the principle holds: if you're going to leave Marshall unranked, fine, but apply the same standards to everyone and put FSU behind the 1-loss teams with a much better schedule and Ohio State behind the 2-loss teams with a much better schedule.

Fair enough. My ACC pride hates the result, but I agree with the logic.

[Acymetric]

Nooott really. Not that I don't salute your try. The state of Mississippi doesn't really have an analogue to UNCC. A better analogue to UNCC is the school I work at in MO. It's a later, "urban" (read, suburban) 20thC take on the University.

People confusing MSU an OM is just as uninformed as people confusing State and Carolina. It just is.

I mostly brought it up because they are already actively branding themselves that way (especially in athletics), although they haven't officially changed the name.

[BigWayne]

I'm just enjoying the hell out of this for the time being. When Bama ascends to their cultural inheritance and beats Mississippi State 35-10 in Tuscaloosa, then I'll resign myself to the cruelty of the secret fate of all life. I'm scared of the "Rebel Black Bears" up in Oxford, too. Not a good year for MSU to have its best roster since 1941. Road games at LSU, OM, and Bama. Least we got Auburn at home.

Meantime, I'm doing a touchdown dance if/when Mississippi State plants Arkansas' face in the mud. I've taught my little boy to ring my bass cowbell at the appropriate intervals.

Looking at the schedules, my best guess is that we end up with Alabama as a one or two loss team with Ole Miss and Miss St. playing the last game for the SEC West title, similar to what happened in Alabama last year. If any of these three is a one loss team after not winning the SEC West, they are likely to get a second spot for the SEC in the playoff. The only way that doesn't happen is if Georgia wins the SEC champ game or Georgia runs the table and loses the SEC champ game in a close game. Then they would get the second spot. The Miss. teams and Alabama should be rooting for Auburn to beat Georgia for them.

[Bob Green]

What a crushing turn of events for Ole Miss. They lose the game, their slot in the Top 4 and most likely one of their best players. Auburn 35, Ole Miss 31.

[Dev11]

What a crushing turn of events for Ole Miss. They lose the game, their slot in the Top 4 and most likely one of their best players. Auburn 35, Ole Miss 31.

Elsewhere in Mississippi, MSU picks off Arkansas in the end zone with about 20 seconds left to preserve a 17-10 win and their #1 ranking. The two games ended within minutes of each other. The Bulldogs still have games at Alabama and at Ole Miss.

[Dev11]

Georgia somehow got creamed by Florida today, so the SEC East is probably not getting invited to the playoffs even if their representative wins the SEC Championship.

Everybody outside the SEC should be rooting for more craziness in the West. It's no guarantee that the SEC is going to get two teams into the playoff.

[Bob Green]

What a crushing turn of events for Ole Miss. They lose the game, their slot in the Top 4 and most likely one of their best players. Auburn 35, Ole Miss 31.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/...slocates-ankle

Mississippi receiver Laquon Treadwell is out for the season after breaking his left fibula and dislocated his ankle in the Rebels' 35-31 loss to Auburn (No. 3 CFP, No. 4 AP) on Saturday night.

The "most likely" can be dropped from my statement above, Ole Miss' star receiver is done for the year.