PDA

View Full Version : The College Football Playoff



Pages : [1] 2

Olympic Fan
10-17-2016, 07:18 PM
We're two weeks away from the first playoff poll, but I would argue that we're down to 13 teams left with a realistic chance of being in the playoffs.

My reasoning is this a team either has to be unbeaten or a one-loss team from a power conference. Houston might have made it unbeaten, but not with a loss to Navy. But Louisville, with a loss to Clemson, is still in the running.

Here are the unbeaten teams that are still in the chase:

Alabama
Texas A&M
Washington
Michigan
Ohio State
Nebraska
Clemson
Baylor
West Virginia

Also: Boise State has an outside chance if they stay unbeaten. I should mention that Western Michigan is also unbeaten, but I don't believe they can win a spot in the playoffs, even with a perfect record. There is a spot in the major bowls for a non-power 5 team, but I think WMU will have a hard time beating Boise, Houston and maybe even Navy of that spot.

At the moment, there are just three one-loss power five teams:
Louisville
Utah
Florida

Obvious this list will change a lot by the first poll, much less by selection Sunday -- this week alone, Alabama and Texas A&M meet, so one has to lose. Only one of the three Big Ten teams can finish unbeaten. Only one of the two unbeaten Big 12 teams can stay that way.

Until I'm proven wrong, I believe:

(1) Any unbeaten power 5 team is a lock for the playoffs (technically, it's possible to have six unbeaten P5 teams -- one from each P5 conference plus Notre Dame, but that's extremely unlikely to ever happen).

(2) Any two loss team is out. Again, there is always an extreme set of circumstances that could let a two-loss team in, but I don't think it will happen.

That still leaves us with a handful of real contenders for the four playoff spots. It will be fun to track the contenders and cross them out as they get to two losses.

Wander
10-17-2016, 07:50 PM
I think we should include Boise State in the main list. They have a win over a Pac-12 team (Washington State) that I'm going to predict will enter the rankings and steadily rise through them over the next month until they're a Top 10-15 team. I agree that I don't find it likely that they'll make it in, but it's not impossible to imagine.

I also feel pretty good about the following prediction: in the first decade of the playoffs (assuming it stays at 4 teams), we'll see a 2-loss team make it in at least once, and more likely multiple times. I agree that for now, we shouldn't worry ourselves too much about it, but we should keep it in the back of our mind.

My third prediction is that we end up with both Ohio State and Michigan in this year's playoffs.

ipatent
10-17-2016, 09:02 PM
I'd expect that Alabama and one of Ohio State/Michigan win out and end up 1-2 at the end of the regular season. If Clemson wins at FSU after the bye week (I'm not sure I'd bet on that they way they've been playing), it is also likely to win out and be no worse than #3 at the end of the season.

Washington has a pretty favorable schedule, with only the game at Utah looking like a risk. If they win there they'll get a playoff berth.

Texas A&M plays in Tuscaloosa next week, a likely loss. Nebraska has to play in Columbus in a few weeks, and probably won't win that game. If Clemson or Washington falters, I see it being a judgment call for the fourth slot between the Michigan/OSU loser, Louisville, Clemson and Baylor if it wins out.

If Alabama loses, it would still be a strong pick to make the final four.

gurufrisbee
10-17-2016, 09:31 PM
Alabama
Texas A&M
Washington
Michigan
Ohio State
Nebraska
Clemson
Baylor
West Virginia
Boise State
Louisville
Utah
Florida
.

Bama and Tex AM play each other Saturday. The winner is almost assuredly the SEC West champ. Florida is in the driver's seat for the East (although with road games at Arkansas, LSU, and Florida State I think it's super unlikely Florida doesn't have another loss before the SEC title game.

Michigan has a cake walk until they play at Ohio St (no, at Iowa is not a tough game). Ohio St still has to host Nebraska. Nebraska actually has a tough back to back road games with Wisconsin and then the Buckeyes. Seems very possible that Ohio State might beat Nebraska and then face them again in the Big Can't Count title game.

Clemson has a bye this week then a good game at Florida State. If they get through that, they should coast to the ACC title game (and then it's Cheaters/Va Tech/Pitt). Louisville has a pretty easy schedule the rest of the way other than a tough non conference game at Houston, but they need two Clemson losses to get to the ACC title game.

Washington will be favored in every game but road games at Utah and Wazzu will be tough and USC is resurgent. Utah has that tough game vs the Huskies and what could be a winner take the south game at Colorado. Actually a solid chance that Washington and Utah could play a second time against each other in the Pac 12 title game.

Baylor and West Virginia both still play Oklahoma (Baylor does it on the road), both still play at Texas, both still host TCU, and finish the season against each other (Baylor again on the road).

Boise State still has a few good games with BYU and at Wyoming and a Mountain West title game vs San Diego State.




(1) Any unbeaten power 5 team is a lock for the playoffs (technically, it's possible to have six unbeaten P5 teams -- one from each P5 conference plus Notre Dame, but that's extremely unlikely to ever happen).

(2) Any two loss team is out. Again, there is always an extreme set of circumstances that could let a two-loss team in, but I don't think it will happen.
.

1- absolutely (unless there are more than four)
2- could happen but won't this year



I also feel pretty good about the following prediction: in the first decade of the playoffs (assuming it stays at 4 teams), we'll see a 2-loss team make it in at least once, and more likely multiple times. I agree that for now, we shouldn't worry ourselves too much about it, but we should keep it in the back of our mind.

My third prediction is that we end up with both Ohio State and Michigan in this year's playoffs.

2 loss team in the playoff will happen - but not this year.

Both Ohio State and Michigan - possible.

I think an undefeated Bama is almost a lock for being in. Heck, a one loss Bama is almost a lock for being in.

The Ohio St - Michigan winner is almost a lock for being in (assuming they don't bizarrely lose two other games).

Then you really have three big questions:
* Clemson
* Washington
* Big 12 winner

If Clemson is undefeated they are in. If they have one loss, but are the ACC champion, it's a tough call.
Same thing with Washington from the Pac 12.
The Big 12 winner has to be undefeated, but if they are undefeated they get a spot (unless there are four other undefeateds).

Avvocato
10-17-2016, 10:25 PM
We're two weeks away from the first playoff poll, but I would argue that we're down to 13 teams left with a realistic chance of being in the playoffs.

My reasoning is this a team either has to be unbeaten or a one-loss team from a power conference. Houston might have made it unbeaten, but not with a loss to Navy. But Louisville, with a loss to Clemson, is still in the running.

Here are the unbeaten teams that are still in the chase:

Alabama
Texas A&M
Washington
Michigan
Ohio State
Nebraska
Clemson
Baylor
West Virginia

Also: Boise State has an outside chance if they stay unbeaten. I should mention that Western Michigan is also unbeaten, but I don't believe they can win a spot in the playoffs, even with a perfect record. There is a spot in the major bowls for a non-power 5 team, but I think WMU will have a hard time beating Boise, Houston and maybe even Navy of that spot.

At the moment, there are just three one-loss power five teams:
Louisville
Utah
Florida

Obvious this list will change a lot by the first poll, much less by selection Sunday -- this week alone, Alabama and Texas A&M meet, so one has to lose. Only one of the three Big Ten teams can finish unbeaten. Only one of the two unbeaten Big 12 teams can stay that way.

Until I'm proven wrong, I believe:

(1) Any unbeaten power 5 team is a lock for the playoffs (technically, it's possible to have six unbeaten P5 teams -- one from each P5 conference plus Notre Dame, but that's extremely unlikely to ever happen).

(2) Any two loss team is out. Again, there is always an extreme set of circumstances that could let a two-loss team in, but I don't think it will happen.

That still leaves us with a handful of real contenders for the four playoff spots. It will be fun to track the contenders and cross them out as they get to two losses.

The interesting questions also arise when you consider what happens if some of the teams on your list lose. For example, if Alabama falls to Texas A&M this weekend, and they both win out. Suddenly, an undefeated A&M is in, and a one-loss Alabama becomes hard to exclude. I personally like giving the benefit of the doubt to conference champions, but Alabama may be a different story. The Big Ten can do a round robin. Would a one-loss Big Ten Champion get in? What if Clemson, Washington, A&M are all undefeated, and Alabama has one loss? So much time for so much to happen. When the playoff was created, the concern by the old school college football people was that the importance of the regular season would wane. Not the case at all. We're already debating who may make the Final Four. Fun stuff.

Bob Green
10-18-2016, 04:51 AM
Washington has a pretty favorable schedule, with only the game at Utah looking like a risk. If they win there they'll get a playoff berth.



Do not forget about the Pac 12 Championship Game. There is a chance Washington will have to beat Utah twice to secure a playoff berth.

Bob Green
10-18-2016, 04:57 AM
Obvious this list will change a lot by the first poll, much less by selection Sunday -- this week alone, Alabama and Texas A&M meet, so one has to lose. Only one of the three Big Ten teams can finish unbeaten. Only one of the two unbeaten Big 12 teams can stay that way.

It will be fun to track the contenders and cross them out as they get to two losses.

I agree it is going to be a lot of fun to track the contenders. There is a lot to like about the College Football Playoff. My four at this moment in time:

1. Alabama
2. Ohio State
3. Washington
4. Clemson

On Clemson, the health status of running back Wayne Gallman is a big caveat. He has to play for the Tigers to keep winning. No Gallman = no undefeated season/college football playoff.

ipatent
10-18-2016, 08:11 AM
Do not forget about the Pac 12 Championship Game. There is a chance Washington will have to beat Utah twice to secure a playoff berth.

Good point, but any rematch won't be at altitude.

Avvocato
10-19-2016, 11:44 AM
An espn.com piece on the topic: http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/17827382/college-football-playoff-scenarios-throw-things-chaos

Bob Green
10-23-2016, 06:21 AM
My four at this moment in time:

1. Alabama
2. Ohio State
3. Washington
4. Clemson



1. Alabama
2. Washington
3. Michigan
4. Clemson

ipatent
10-23-2016, 10:31 AM
1. Alabama
2. Washington
3. Michigan
4. Clemson

It'll be interesting to see how far Ohio State drops. The ratings scheme in college football has always penalized losses later in the season more than earlier ones. Will they fall behind Louisville? Not if I was voting.

Big shot in the arm for the Nittany Lion fans. As fans of a school with a legendary coach in another sport, can you imagine the disillusionment they've suffered the past several years?

gurufrisbee
10-23-2016, 10:54 AM
It'll be interesting to see how far Ohio State drops. The ratings scheme in college football has always penalized losses later in the season more than earlier ones. Will they fall behind Louisville? Not if I was voting.


I imagine they and Louisville will be very close to each other for the 5/6 spots. But if they beat Nebraska in two weeks I could see them sliding back into the top four, even if none of them have lost. They are a blue blood in college football and the same rules don't apply to them.

Wander
10-23-2016, 11:11 AM
I imagine they and Louisville will be very close to each other for the 5/6 spots. But if they beat Nebraska in two weeks I could see them sliding back into the top four, even if none of them have lost. They are a blue blood in college football and the same rules don't apply to them.

I agree. Perhaps they will drop behind Louisville this week, but it is pretty clear that a 12-1 Ohio State will be above a 12-1 Louisville at the end of the season.

You were right in the other thread about my 90% number being too low. Basically the only way for a 12-1 Ohio State team to miss the playoffs would be for Washington, Clemson, and Baylor or West Virginia to all go undefeated, which has a ~1% chance of happening. Then let's assign a collective 1% chance to all other wacky scenarios that involve things very unlikely to happen like a 12-1 SEC champion Florida.

So I'll now estimate that chance of a 12-1 Ohio State team making the playoffs at 98%.

JasonEvans
10-23-2016, 11:21 AM
I imagine they and Louisville will be very close to each other for the 5/6 spots. But if they beat Nebraska in two weeks I could see them sliding back into the top four, even if none of them have lost. They are a blue blood in college football and the same rules don't apply to them.

Louisville lost at Clemson (Lou had the ball inside the Clemson 10 with a chance to win as the final seconds ticked off). Ohio St lost at Penn St. While Penn St is certainly a quality opponent, I would argue there is no question that Louisville's loss was to a far stronger team and is therefore more forgivable. Right now, Lou is ahead of Ohio St.

Ohio St has a chance to move up via the season-ending Michigan game and the Big Ten playoff game. If Ohio St can manage to win out (which would include wins over Michigan and Nebraska as well as the Big Ten Championship) I still think they very likely make the playoff.

-Jason "I'd love to find a way to get 2 ACC teams in, though we likely need Washington to lose for that to be even a small a possibility" Evans

gurufrisbee
10-23-2016, 12:04 PM
I agree. Perhaps they will drop behind Louisville this week, but it is pretty clear that a 12-1 Ohio State will be above a 12-1 Louisville at the end of the season.

You were right in the other thread about my 90% number being too low. Basically the only way for a 12-1 Ohio State team to miss the playoffs would be for Washington, Clemson, and Baylor or West Virginia to all go undefeated, which has a ~1% chance of happening. Then let's assign a collective 1% chance to all other wacky scenarios that involve things very unlikely to happen like a 12-1 SEC champion Florida.

So I'll now estimate that chance of a 12-1 Ohio State team making the playoffs at 98%.

Ha ha. I actually think the best chance of a 12-1 Ohio State team missing would be to have a 12-1 Florida SEC champ, because the Gators would be in and if you give two other spots to undefeated Washington and Clemson then the fourth spot coming down to 12-1 Ohio st vs 12-1 Bama is about the only way Ohio St doesn't get in. I don't even think an undefeated Big 12 champ comes close to beating out a one loss Buckeyes. But you basically covered all that. Nicely done.


Louisville lost at Clemson (Lou had the ball inside the Clemson 10 with a chance to win as the final seconds ticked off). Ohio St lost at Penn St. While Penn St is certainly a quality opponent, I would argue there is no question that Louisville's loss was to a far stronger team and is therefore more forgivable. Right now, Lou is ahead of Ohio St.

Ohio St has a chance to move up via the season-ending Michigan game and the Big Ten playoff game. If Ohio St can manage to win out (which would include wins over Michigan and Nebraska as well as the Big Ten Championship) I still think they very likely make the playoff.

-Jason "I'd love to find a way to get 2 ACC teams in, though we likely need Washington to lose for that to be even a small a possibility" Evans

It's not just about the losses. Louisville has one good team they have beaten and Florida State isn't as good as they were thought to be then. Ohio State has Wisconsin and Oklahoma (when the Sooners didn't have their super WR, but right now I think most might believe those are both better teams than the Noles). Other than at Wisconsin, Ohio State won all other games by at least three TDs. So they have beaten the weaker teams by a lot. Right or wrong, the Duke game looks a lot more like an underwhelming win for Louisville. I'm not saying I wouldn't put Louisville ahead of them - but I won't be surprised at all if the actual polls don't.

The best shot for two ACC teams probably has been crushed mostly by Houston falling apart. That was really Lousiville's best shot to have a big game to surge back into the top four conversation.

Washington football for me is Duke basketball. I'm trying very hard to be good in responding to your rooting for that. Grrrr. It's actually a decent possibility - our game next week is at Utah and our leader in sacks is out with an injury. USC has gotten much better after they changed QBs and will likely be on a five game winning streak when they play the Huskies. Which might seem like nothing since there is a very solid chance the Cougars will be on a nine game winning streak when we go there the day after Thanksgiving for our huge rivalry game. There is still a very good possibility of Washington getting a loss.

Bob Green
10-29-2016, 08:26 AM
Washington (7-0) at Utah (7-1) today at 3:30 Eastern is the Game of the Day for College Football Playoff implications. I will definitely be tuning in at the conclusion of Duke - Georgia Tech. A win by Washington will ramp up the excitement level for the Apple Cup on 11/25 as the Washington State Cougars (5-2) are also undefeated in the Pac 12 at 4-0. The Cougars still have to face the Colorado Buffaloes on 11/19.

Pac 12 has the potential to be very interesting down the stretch.

Bob Green
10-29-2016, 07:15 PM
Washington improves to 8-0 with a 31-24 victory over Utah. On the decisive 58 yard punt return for a TD, there were potentially three illegal blocks in the back with no flags thrown.

Olympic Fan
10-29-2016, 07:23 PM
Washington improves to 8-0 with a 31-24 victory over Utah. On the decisive 58 yard punt return for a TD, there were potentially three illegal blocks in the back with no flags thrown.

I saw the same thing -- one of them, near midfield was absolutely blatant. I was amazed that in several replays, the announcers never mentioned them.

The win keeps Washington in the Final Four (at the moment).

West Virginia drops out of the national title picture with a loss to Oklahoma State (Bama, OSU, Clemson, Louisville might get in with one loss, but not West Virginia).

As of thus moment (Clemson at FSU pending in less than an hour), I think the four playoff teams are Alabama, Michigan, Clemson and Washington.

Baylor and a bunch of one-loss teams have to keep winning and hope for help.

Tripping William
10-29-2016, 07:32 PM
I saw the same thing -- one of them, near midfield was absolutely blatant. I was amazed that in several replays, the announcers never mentioned them.

The win keeps Washington in the Final Four (at the moment).

West Virginia drops out of the national title picture with a loss to Oklahoma State (Bama, OSU, Clemson, Louisville might get in with one loss, but not West Virginia).

As of thus moment (Clemson at FSU pending in less than an hour), I think the four playoff teams are Alabama, Michigan, Clemson and Washington.

Baylor and a bunch of one-loss teams have to keep winning and hope for help.

And Baylor is in a tight one at Texas at the moment.

Tripping William
10-29-2016, 07:56 PM
Stick a fork in 'em. They done.

bob blue devil
10-29-2016, 08:09 PM
i bet there'll be a fair amount of misguided hype for the conference to be first with 2 teams in the playoff - if louisville and clemson keep winning, the acc has a fair shot.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
10-29-2016, 08:16 PM
i bet there'll be a fair amount of misguided hype for the conference to be first with 2 teams in the playoff - if louisville and clemson keep winning, the acc has a fair shot.

Why do you call it misguided? There don't seem to be a lot of dominant teams out there. Do you see the ACC as undeserving?

kmspeaks
10-29-2016, 08:22 PM
Stick a fork in 'em. They done.

During the WVU game Brady Quinn was whining that if not for the botched ending of the Central Michigan game Oklahoma State would be a one loss team and, if they won out, Big 12 champs with a shot at the playoff. Now he can add the conference won't get a team in the playoff to the list of unfortunate consequences he rattled off today. Of course he made no mention of the fact that Oklahoma State could have a) taken a knee, b) defended the hail mary, or c) not have been in a 1 possession game with a middle of the pack MAC team and then that call doesn't happen or matter anyway.

bob blue devil
10-29-2016, 08:43 PM
Why do you call it misguided? There don't seem to be a lot of dominant teams out there. Do you see the ACC as undeserving?

my comment was not specific to the acc, nor to this season. i believe there are a lot of superior methods of assessing conference quality than whether you get 2 teams in the playoff (it's like assessing basketball conference quality by # of bids). i'd love it if the acc could pull it off this season and win the title too - lots of positive attention for that!

Newton_14
10-29-2016, 08:52 PM
Washington improves to 8-0 with a 31-24 victory over Utah. On the decisive 58 yard punt return for a TD, there were potentially three illegal blocks in the back with no flags thrown.


I saw the same thing -- one of them, near midfield was absolutely blatant. I was amazed that in several replays, the announcers never mentioned them.

The win keeps Washington in the Final Four (at the moment).

West Virginia drops out of the national title picture with a loss to Oklahoma State (Bama, OSU, Clemson, Louisville might get in with one loss, but not West Virginia).

As of thus moment (Clemson at FSU pending in less than an hour), I think the four playoff teams are Alabama, Michigan, Clemson and Washington.

Baylor and a bunch of one-loss teams have to keep winning and hope for help.

If Refs are going to be that blind/ignorant/asleep at the wheel on blocks in the back that lead directly to game winning, Touch Downs on games with a high impact on the National Scene like this one, and in Regular Season games with teams in the hunt for a Division Win and a better bowl like Duke/Miami last season, then the powers that be should make plays like that reviewable for the block in the back or other penalties. It just isn't right for a team to be allowed to win a game based on blatant, obvious block in the back penalties that go uncalled for whatever reason.

Rant Over

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
10-29-2016, 08:53 PM
my comment was not specific to the acc, nor to this season. i believe there are a lot of superior methods of assessing conference quality than whether you get 2 teams in the playoff (it's like assessing basketball conference quality by # of bids). i'd love it if the acc could pull it off this season and win the title too - lots of positive attention for that!

Ah, I misunderstood. Carry on!

ipatent
10-30-2016, 12:31 AM
With Clemson and Washington surviving today, the Michigan-Ohio State game looms large. If Michigan wins, the current top four will probably stand. If OSU wins, then it gets interesting.

Olympic Fan
10-30-2016, 12:41 AM
Four unbeaten teams went down today -- Baylor and West Virginia (bye-bye Big 12), Nebraska and Boise State.

That leaves the Big Four -- Alabama, Michigan, Clemson and Washington ... plus (ta-da!) Western Michigan. I doubt WMU gets in the playoff mix, but they are clearly positioned to get the Power Six bowl bid that's reserved for the best "other five team".

The Big Four I mentioned will clearly be the top four in the first poll next week.

Losses could still upset things.

I'd say the next co0ntenders in line (in order) are:

(1) Ohio State (because they get a shot at Michigan).

(2) Louisville (but Houston's slump has hurt their case)

(3) Florida (if the Gators win out, beat FSU, then upset Bama in the SEC title game, it makes a good case)

Wander
10-30-2016, 12:44 AM
I agree with the posts above mentioning the possibility of a playoff with 2 teams from one conference. The most likely scenario for that to happen probably includes Ohio State and Michigan. Two ACC teams is not completely implausible, but I don't think Louisville's resume is going to look quite as good at the end of the season as we thought it would mid-season.

bob blue devil
10-30-2016, 08:14 AM
I agree with the posts above mentioning the possibility of a playoff with 2 teams from one conference. The most likely scenario for that to happen probably includes Ohio State and Michigan. Two ACC teams is not completely implausible, but I don't think Louisville's resume is going to look quite as good at the end of the season as we thought it would mid-season.

agree that michigan & osu could create a strong argument, but that one is very dependent on osu winning out, and that path includes games against nebraska, michigan and the tbd west champ. osu is playing mediocre right now, so that is well below a 50/50 bet in my eyes.

texas a&m has an easier path and, if they finished with 1 loss, would probably have the upper hand over a 1-loss louisville too. but i'd put them substantially below 50/50 as well as they still have lsu and mediocre, but dangerous, ole miss and miss st. aggie fans know their team loves to break their hearts.

i think a 1 loss big 12 champ might sneak back into the conversation (depending on the still not clearly established value of being a conference champion), but both wvu and baylor aren't all that good and have plenty of potential challenges left (including oklahoma and each other).

of course for any of this to be relevant something weird needs to go down, since we have clear favorites for the 4 slots today. i think in order for things to open up, either clemson or washington needs to not win their conference title games. beyond that, alabama in theory could drop 2, but, well... that seems really unlikely.

here are some fun scenarios i'd love people's opinions on, what if wisconsin or nebraska wins the big 12 championship over michigan? or a 2 loss florida wins the sec title over alabama? how do those teams stack up (even against each other - do you still take michigan over wisconsin)? if washington loses pac 12 title game, are they still likely to be ahead of louisville (or a 2 loss pac 12 champ colorado or utah for that matter)? i guess the point is that there is waaaay too much football left to be played (and uncertainty about the process) to really say much - there are probably still a dozen or so live teams.

Wander
10-30-2016, 11:28 AM
here are some fun scenarios i'd love people's opinions on, what if wisconsin or nebraska wins the big 12 championship over michigan? or a 2 loss florida wins the sec title over alabama? how do those teams stack up (even against each other - do you still take michigan over wisconsin)? if washington loses pac 12 title game, are they still likely to be ahead of louisville (or a 2 loss pac 12 champ colorado or utah for that matter)? i guess the point is that there is waaaay too much football left to be played (and uncertainty about the process) to really say much - there are probably still a dozen or so live teams.

I totally agree that there are a lot more live teams than people generally talk about. I think the best way to categorize them at this point is by tiering them into teams that control their own destiny and teams that need help. I'd say...

Teams that are basically guaranteed to make the playoffs if they win out
Alabama, Florida, Auburn, Michigan, Ohio State, Nebraska, Clemson, Washington

Teams that could make the playoffs if they win out, and some realistic other stuff happens
Baylor, West Virginia, Oklahoma, Wisconsin, Texas A&M, Louisville

Teams that could make the playoffs if they win out, and some highly unlikely other stuff happens
Western Michigan, every power 5 team with 2 losses not listed above

Auburn and Oklahoma are the least talked about teams on my list, but that will change if they keep winning.

bob blue devil
10-30-2016, 12:06 PM
I totally agree that there are a lot more live teams than people generally talk about. I think the best way to categorize them at this point is by tiering them into teams that control their own destiny and teams that need help. I'd say...

Teams that are basically guaranteed to make the playoffs if they win out
Alabama, Florida, Auburn, Michigan, Ohio State, Nebraska, Clemson, Washington

Teams that could make the playoffs if they win out, and some realistic other stuff happens
Baylor, West Virginia, Oklahoma, Wisconsin, Texas A&M, Louisville

Teams that could make the playoffs if they win out, and some highly unlikely other stuff happens
Western Michigan, every power 5 team with 2 losses not listed above

Auburn and Oklahoma are the least talked about teams on my list, but that will change if they keep winning.

this simplifies things quite nicely. just focusing on your top line, we can bracket it a bit given many of those are on collision courses.

Teams that are basically guaranteed to make the playoffs if they win out
At most one of: Alabama, Florida, Auburn,
At most one of: Michigan, Ohio State, Nebraska,
Clemson,
Washington

Of course, this just reinforces the simple 4 conference champ/big 12 out scenario is pretty obvious at the moment. if clemson or washington don't win their conferences, well, that's the obvious way to start making things spicy.

Auburn is interesting. I'm not confident, but I think they would lose a 3 team tie with alabama and A&M (it would go to alabama) if it came to that. I don't think a 2-loss not conference champ auburn is likely to get in and they'd probably be behind 1 loss not conference champ A&M (who has the head-to-head) and potential 1 loss conference champ alabama (who has the conference championship) in that scenario.

Wander
10-30-2016, 12:17 PM
Auburn is interesting. I'm not confident, but I think they would lose a 3 team tie with alabama and A&M (it would go to alabama) if it came to that. I don't think a 2-loss not conference champ auburn is likely to get in and they'd probably be behind 1 loss not conference champ A&M (who has the head-to-head) and potential 1 loss conference champ alabama (who has the conference championship) in that scenario.

Oops, you're right... Auburn would likely not win a 3-way tie with Alabama and Texas A&M (it depends on what the east teams do). So move Auburn down to the second tier of "needs help that is realistic." Good call.

ipatent
10-30-2016, 02:02 PM
Teams that are basically guaranteed to make the playoffs if they win out
Alabama, Florida, Auburn, Michigan, Ohio State, Nebraska, Clemson, Washington

Florida would have a very nice resume if they win out, but I don't think they would be a cinch to make the playoffs without a few of the others stumbling.

bob blue devil
10-30-2016, 02:19 PM
Florida would have a very nice resume if they win out, but I don't think they would be a cinch to make the playoffs without a few of the others stumbling.

interesting. could you provide 4 teams who would be ahead of florida in a scenario where florida wins out?

devildeac
10-30-2016, 02:29 PM
Four unbeaten teams went down today -- Baylor and West Virginia (bye-bye Big 12), Nebraska and Boise State.

That leaves the Big Four -- Alabama, Michigan, Clemson and Washington ... plus (ta-da!) Western Michigan. I doubt WMU gets in the playoff mix, but they are clearly positioned to get the Power Six bowl bid that's reserved for the best "other five team".

The Big Four I mentioned will clearly be the top four in the first poll next week.

Losses could still upset things.

I'd say the next co0ntenders in line (in order) are:

(1) Ohio State (because they get a shot at Michigan).

(2) Louisville (but Houston's slump has hurt their case)

(3) Florida (if the Gators win out, beat FSU, then upset Bama in the SEC title game, it makes a good case)

Western Michigan is my dark horse candidate as they also have a Harbaugh on the coaching staff:

http://www.wmubroncos.com/sports/2009/6/11/3749215.aspx#football


(friend of the family :))

OldPhiKap
10-30-2016, 02:29 PM
6780

Georgia-Florida yesterday from the Bob Uecker seats in Jacksonville. UF's defense looked strong although to be fair UGa's offense was fairly inept. UF's offense was pretty much sweep runs and button hooks -- not much in the way of deep threat bombs or power runs. Great punting game and kick-offs, shaky FG kicker. At least, that was my impression from one game -- I do not pretend to have studied them all year.

UF deserves the ranking it has, which is somewhere in the second ten. If they win out and beat Alabama, obviously they are a contender for the playoffs. Their last four games are @ Arkansas; host the Gamecocks; @ LSU and then @ FSU. Plus Alabama in the conference championship. You win that out, you're certainly poised to argue that you are a top-4 team.

6781

ipatent
10-30-2016, 02:58 PM
interesting. could you provide 4 teams who would be ahead of florida in a scenario where florida wins out?

Any combination of an undefeated Clemson, an undefeated Washington, an undefeated or one loss Michigan, a one loss Ohio State, a one loss Texas A&M, a one loss Louisville and even a one loss Alabama with a close loss to Florida in the SEC title game could edge a one loss Florida out. Florida would have an argument, but I don't think its a cinch.

bob blue devil
10-30-2016, 03:38 PM
Any combination of an undefeated Clemson, an undefeated Washington, an undefeated or one loss Michigan, a one loss Ohio State, a one loss Texas A&M, a one loss Louisville and even a one loss Alabama with a close loss to Florida in the SEC title game could edge a one loss Florida out. Florida would have an argument, but I don't think its a cinch.

you are implicitly saying the following teams with 1 loss and no conference championship would be ahead of a 1 loss SEC champion florida team that has just finished the season with wins at lsu, at florida st. and in the title game against one of then top 10 alabama, texas a&m or auburn:
- louisville (best win home against fsu, 2nd best win ??? home vs. wake? at houston?)
- michigan (best win home against wisconsin, 2nd best win ??? home vs. psu, colorado?)
- texas a&m (best wins at auburn, home against lsu)
- alabama (head to head loss to finish the season for the conference championship)
* OSU either has 2 losses (and presumed to be out) or is conference champion and presumed to be in ahead of michigan

i don't see it, but, then again, i think the conference championship is worth something. if you value conference championship at zero, i see how you could start making the argument for these teams. it would be really funny to watch the committee try to explain why they took texas a&m or alabama over a 1-loss conference champ florida - everyone would go completely nuts!

i guess this is also partly of strength of victory vs. strength of loss situation - all of those teams would have a 'less bad' loss than at tennessee.

OldPhiKap
10-30-2016, 03:54 PM
you are implicitly saying the following teams with 1 loss and no conference championship would be ahead of a 1 loss SEC champion florida team that has just finished the season with wins at lsu, at florida st. and in the title game against one of then top 10 alabama, texas a&m or auburn:
- louisville (best win home against fsu, 2nd best win ??? home vs. wake? at houston?)
- michigan (best win home against wisconsin, 2nd best win ??? home vs. psu, colorado?)
- texas a&m (best wins at auburn, home against lsu)
- alabama (head to head loss to finish the season for the conference championship)
* OSU either has 2 losses (and presumed to be out) or is conference champion and presumed to be in ahead of michigan

i don't see it, but, then again, i think the conference championship is worth something. if you value conference championship at zero, i see how you could start making the argument for these teams. it would be really funny to watch the committee try to explain why they took texas a&m or alabama over a 1-loss conference champ florida - everyone would go completely nuts!

i guess this is also partly of strength of victory vs. strength of loss situation - all of those teams would have a 'less bad' loss than at tennessee.

Agreed. I don't see how a one-loss SEC team, in about every year over the last twenty, is not a top-four team. The league is just that good, even if weighed towards the West division many of those years.

Having said that, Florida won't be that team.

bob blue devil
10-30-2016, 03:59 PM
Agreed. I don't see how a one-loss SEC team, in about every year over the last twenty, is not a top-four team. The league is just that good, even if weighed towards the West division many of those years.

Having said that, Florida won't be that team.

and thank goodness for that!

OldPhiKap
10-30-2016, 04:08 PM
and thank goodness for that!

Don't tell Stray Gator!

bob blue devil
10-30-2016, 04:11 PM
Don't tell Stray Gator!

i won't if you won't. i don't need to be on the bad side of someone so sharp!

OldPhiKap
10-30-2016, 04:19 PM
i won't if you won't. i don't need to be on the bad side of someone so sharp!

Damn straight, Skippy!

And he also seems like a darn nice guy, had a chance to meet him briefly before the Notre Dame game.

That remaining schedule is pretty daunting under the Best of circumstances, though.

ipatent
10-30-2016, 04:32 PM
i don't see it, but, then again, i think the conference championship is worth something. if you value conference championship at zero, i see how you could start making the argument for these teams. it would be really funny to watch the committee try to explain why they took texas a&m or alabama over a 1-loss conference champ florida - everyone would go completely nuts!.

You make an excellent argument, and it might prevail, but I'd bet a one loss Alabama would get in over Florida even if Florida beats Alabama in the title game. Then who do you leave out to put Florida in the final four if Washington, Clemson and Michigan are unbeaten.

OldPhiKap
10-30-2016, 04:37 PM
You make an excellent argument, and it might prevail, but I'd bet a one loss Alabama would get in over Florida even if Florida beats Alabama in the title game. Then who do you leave out to put Florida in the final four if Washington, Clemson and Michigan are unbeaten.

It seems to me that the committee would view an Alabama-Florida game in that scenario as a play-off (or more appropriately, play-in) game.

sagegrouse
10-30-2016, 04:40 PM
You make an excellent argument, and it might prevail, but I'd bet a one loss Alabama would get in over Florida even if Florida beats Alabama in the title game. Then who do you leave out to put Florida in the final four if Washington, Clemson and Michigan are unbeaten.

Picking the loser of the SEC title game, if the Gators are the winner, will sink the entire Florida peninsula, break the Internet, and result in the pillorying of the selection committee.

Wander
10-30-2016, 04:45 PM
Any combination of an undefeated Clemson, an undefeated Washington, an undefeated or one loss Michigan, a one loss Ohio State, a one loss Texas A&M, a one loss Louisville and even a one loss Alabama with a close loss to Florida in the SEC title game could edge a one loss Florida out. Florida would have an argument, but I don't think its a cinch.

Undefeated teams, sure. But I don't understand why any non-conference champion would have any argument whatsoever over a 1-loss SEC champion Florida. bob blue devil lays out the individual scenarios well. Louisville's best win is at home against a team that Florida will have beaten on the road.

The SEC East sucks and is undertalked about in its suckage this year, but by beating FSU, LSU, and the SEC West champion (all away from home!), Florida would be a lock. Of course, I doubt Florida will actually win those 3 games, but that's another story.

ipatent
10-30-2016, 05:05 PM
It seems to me that the committee would view an Alabama-Florida game in that scenario as a play-off (or more appropriately, play-in) game.

They might, and computer rankings aren't officially used, but SOS, etc. that factor into the Sagarin ratings are used, so they may gave you and idea how things would play out..Michigan and Ohio State get a lot of respect in these, and Bama is off the charts. A Florida win over Bama may be seen as an outlier.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaaf/sagarin/

bob blue devil
10-30-2016, 05:42 PM
They might, and computer rankings aren't officially used, but SOS, etc. that factor into the Sagarin ratings are used, so they may gave you and idea how things would play out..Michigan and Ohio State get a lot of respect in these, and Bama is off the charts. A Florida win over Bama may be seen as an outlier.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaaf/sagarin/

i don't disagree that you could make an argument that a 1 loss not conference champ michigan or alabama would actually be a better team than 1 loss conference champ florida. and the committee's job first and foremost is to rank teams by how good they are... that said, i would be stunned if the committee ignored the optics and regarded a florida win over bama in an sec title game as an 'outlier' (even though it may actually be one). the response would be AMAZING! plus, while it's not clear, the description of how the committee is supposed to rank things would tilt the scale toward florida.

the website related to the playoff is actually quite confusing when it comes to the criteria - there is an explanation in the FAQ (http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/faqs) as well as a "protocol (http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/selection-committee-protocol)" section. the "protocol" is written as a proposal, rather than an actual governing document - quite odd this was posted rather than a final version... maybe someone else on here knows where the official version is.

in case anyone is interested in the committee's criteria per the FAQ:


What is the mission of the selection committee?
The committee’s task is to select the best teams, rank the teams for inclusion in the playoff and selected other bowl games and then assign the teams to bowl sites.

What criteria does the selection committee use to rank the teams?
The committee selects 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 that may have affected a team’s performance during the season or likely will affect its postseason performance.

Selection committee members have flexibility to examine whatever data they believe is relevant to inform their decisions. They also review a significant amount of game video. Among the many factors the committee members consider are strength of schedule, head-to-head results, comparison of results against common opponents and conference championships won. The playoff group has retained SportSource Analytics to provide the data platform for the committee’s use. This platform allows the committee members to compare and contrast teams on every level possible. Each member evaluates the data at hand, and then the individuals will vote to produce a group decision.

Olympic Fan
11-01-2016, 06:43 PM
The first rankings will be announced in a few minutes and if Alabama, Michigan, Clemson and Washington aren't the top four (in some order), we'll have some major fireworks.

It will be really interesting to see how the one-loss teams are ranked ... and that could change going forward (for instance, I could see Louisville ahead of Ohio State at the moment, but if OSU wins out and Louisville wins out, the OSU win over Michigan would trump the Louisville win over Houston).

I'll be back in an hour or so.

Wander
11-01-2016, 07:10 PM
Getting in under the wire to make my prediction that Louisville fans are going to be disappointed with these rankings throughout the season.

Wander
11-01-2016, 07:12 PM
OK, I'm not sure I actually made it under the wire, but I did post that before I saw the rankings. Not surprised at all. Louisville is way overhyped.

pfrduke
11-01-2016, 07:16 PM
I would take the committee more seriously, and as a body not interested in media spin and controversy, if it didn't do silly things like put Washington behind Texas A&M

MarkD83
11-01-2016, 07:22 PM
http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/17946539/college-football-playoff-alabama-clemson-michigan-lead-texas-edging-washington

Look at the rankings on the right side of the screen in the box.

Notre Dame is #4. Am I missing something?

Troublemaker
11-01-2016, 07:23 PM
Is there a site that accurately simulates the BCS rankings? I'm guessing no, because there seems to be suspense in these releases when, if such a site existed, there should be none?

Olympic Fan
11-01-2016, 07:25 PM
Surprise. surprise ... Texas A&M ahead of Washington.

Frankly, that's BS (and more evidence of the committee's SEC slurping)

Top 10
1. Alabama
2. Clemson
3. Michigan
4. Texas A&M
5. Washington
6. Ohio State
7. Louisville
8. Wisconsin
9. Auburn
10. Nebraska

Not as bad for Louisville as the ESPN talking heads think. They need Michigan to give Ohio State a second loss and they need LSU to give Texas A&M another loss ... but the two teams behind them both have two losses. The only way a two-loss Wisconsin or a two-loss Auburn jumps them is by winning a conference title. Yeah, the Cards need a lot o help ... but knew that.

I repeat my earlier mantra - no way an unbeaten power 5 team gets left out ... no way a two-loss team get in (and know you can come up with a convoluted scenario where that happens, but it won't -- it's convoluted).

BTW: The Big 12 is dead.

tbyers11
11-01-2016, 07:25 PM
http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/17946539/college-football-playoff-alabama-clemson-michigan-lead-texas-edging-washington

Look at the rankings on the right side of the screen in the box.

Notre Dame is #4. Am I missing something?

The inset box in that article (for some reason) links to the week 11 rankings from 2015

pfrduke
11-01-2016, 07:26 PM
http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/17946539/college-football-playoff-alabama-clemson-michigan-lead-texas-edging-washington

Look at the rankings on the right side of the screen in the box.

Notre Dame is #4. Am I missing something?

The box is from sometime last season.

ipatent
11-01-2016, 07:28 PM
Wow, Texas A&M in the top 4, and with a favorable schedule the rest of the way will be tough to knock out. If Michigan loses to Ohio State, the Big 10 could be left out.

Wander
11-01-2016, 07:40 PM
Great work by the committee. I still think Washington will be fine in the end if they win out. The rankings also support my earlier assertion that Wisconsin and Auburn are absolutely serious contenders, if they win out.

Avvocato
11-01-2016, 07:40 PM
Although I, too, am surprised to see A&M at #4, these rankings are much more fluid than typical AP and Coaches polls. It's not uncommon for teams to flip positions even after wins by the applicable teams. Quality wins, conference championships, eye test (and SEC affiliation) all play a role week to week. Interesting to watch it unfold and see where people are.

gurufrisbee
11-01-2016, 07:49 PM
As a huge Washington Huskies fan, I choose to follow the wisdom of the adage about 'if you can't say something nice....'.

I do think it's a bummer that UCLA is one of the few teams Washington doesn't get to play this season, since it's so close to them having a common opponent with TAMU. Of course that is definitely me being over confident in what the concept that the Huskies might have done better against the 10th best team in our conference than needing overtime to beat them at home.

Dukehky
11-01-2016, 08:16 PM
I noticed that Duke is conspicuously absent from the top 4? What a snub, they just want ratings.

ipatent
11-01-2016, 08:17 PM
The current scenario is a pretty good argument for an eight team playoff, which we'll probably see someday because of the revenue potential.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
11-01-2016, 08:21 PM
I noticed that Duke is conspicuously absent from the top 4? What a snub, they just want ratings.

Grayson Allen something something...

bob blue devil
11-01-2016, 09:11 PM
re texas a&m vs. washington - i hadn't really thought about it much, but i guess i can see where the committee is coming from. washington has only played 2 teams with winning records (home vs. unranked stanford 5-3, and at #16 utah 7-2), which is slightly less impressive than a&m with 3 such games (at #9 auburn 6-2, home vs. unranked tennessee 5-3, and home vs. unranked arkansas 5-3). and why would you hold a road loss against alabama against any team at this point? that said, i agree with those who think the committee valued the sec too highly in general, which is probably just a result of typical human biases. i'd also bet that the committee gives washington a bump if they win the pac12 championship because 1) they are then conference champs and 2) that's another HQ scalp on their resume (although a&m would have lsu to probably counterbalance this second point).

louisville vs. ohio state is a clear illustration that the committee cares more about who you've beaten than who you've lost to. it will be interesting to see if a potentially 2 loss ohio state (either nebraska or michigan) remains ahead of a 1 loss louisville. it would be inconsistent if they don't stay ahead, but it would also be really tough to stomach given louisville's only loss is clemson (which the committee is basically saying shouldn't count as a negative at all). having games against the bottom two of the coastal may bite louisville this year.

ipatent
11-01-2016, 09:28 PM
Washington will probably get in if it wins out, but I'll bet Les Miles wishes he was coaching in the PAC-12 this year.

bob blue devil
11-02-2016, 06:27 AM
here is a fun tool to play with (http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-college-football-predictions/).

it gives you probabilistic projections of who will make the playoffs with some ability to adjust scenarios. to quantitatively model how the committee thinks must have been an... interesting... project.

gurufrisbee
11-05-2016, 03:30 PM
And in case there was any doubt that the college football playoff ranks were badly wrong when they first came out....

Thank you Mississippi State.

#GoDawgs

Wander
11-05-2016, 03:38 PM
With Texas A&M losing, Auburn now doesn't have to worry about tiebreakers regarding winning the SEC west if they win out. That means if 2-loss Auburn wins out, they will most likely be in the playoff. 2-loss Wisconsin also would have a fantastic chance. Oklahoma less so but still alive.

arnie
11-05-2016, 04:38 PM
With Texas A&M losing, Auburn now doesn't have to worry about tiebreakers regarding winning the SEC west if they win out. That means if 2-loss Auburn wins out, they will most likely be in the playoff. 2-loss Wisconsin also would have a fantastic chance. Oklahoma less so but still alive.

2 teams from State of Alabama would be in playoff if that happened? Tough to leave 1-loss Bama out and they'd be ahead of 1-loss Louisville, and 1-loss BIG non champ. Or would they leave out Auburn? Of course Auburn shouldn't beat Bama and ACC/BIG may not have 1-loss non champ; but if all that happened; will make for lots of controversy.

gurufrisbee
11-05-2016, 04:49 PM
With Texas A&M losing, Auburn now doesn't have to worry about tiebreakers regarding winning the SEC west if they win out. That means if 2-loss Auburn wins out, they will most likely be in the playoff. 2-loss Wisconsin also would have a fantastic chance. Oklahoma less so but still alive.

I'm not sure any two loss team has that great of a chance at making the playoff. Bama, Michigan, Clemson, and Washington all have pretty good chances of being undefeated and they all clearly have the four spots guaranteed if they do.

Now clearly if Auburn finishes with 2 losses, that would include beating Bama and winning the SEC. That's impressive and obviously bumps out Bama from being undefeated. But they would still be behind undefeated Mich, Clem, and Wash. There would be an interesting discussion with them and the likes of a possible one loss Bama, two loss Ohio State, one loss Louisville, two loss Oklahoma, etc..

Two loss Wisconsin is also interesting. Clearly this suggests they win the Big Can't Count, which would mean them winning the re-match against Ohio State or Michigan. Now again, they would be far behind an undefeated Bama, Clemson, and Washington. But it would be an interesting conversation with them and a one loss LVille, probably a one loss Michigan, or two loss Oklahoma.

I think the two loss Oklahoma is the most interesting. The last three games are all ranked teams in Baylor, WV, and Ok St. They would be finishing on a nine game winning streak with three big wins in a row.

YmoBeThere
11-05-2016, 05:52 PM
Did the potential for an ACC National Champion go out the window today?

gurufrisbee
11-05-2016, 06:11 PM
Did the potential for an ACC National Champion go out the window today?

Report I heard was Watson was available to go back in the 2nd half if he had been needed. Doesn't sound like too bad of an injury.

ipatent
11-05-2016, 06:12 PM
Looks like Florida's hypothetical path will be a moot point after today as well, down by 14 to the Razorbacks with a quarter to go.

YmoBeThere
11-05-2016, 06:25 PM
Report I heard was Watson was available to go back in the 2nd half if he had been needed. Doesn't sound like too bad of an injury.

Okay, thanks. I hadn't seen any more updates on his situation.

sagegrouse
11-05-2016, 07:28 PM
Looks like Florida's hypothetical path will be a moot point after today as well, down by 14 to the Razorbacks with a quarter to go.

Don't you believe the thorough discussion on DBR of all possibilities for the Gators to go to the College Football Playoff actually doomed their chances?

-jk
11-05-2016, 07:30 PM
Don't you believe the thorough discussion on DBR of all possibilities for the Gators to go to the College Football Playoff actually doomed their chances?

I suspect there're some boards more focused on Gator football that enraged the Weaux gods. We're too tangential. Well, except for that Stray fellow...

-jk

OldPhiKap
11-05-2016, 07:36 PM
Don't you believe the thorough discussion on DBR of all possibilities for the Gators to go to the College Football Playoff actually doomed their chances?


I suspect there're some boards more focused on Gator football that enraged the Weaux gods. We're too tangential. Well, except for that Stray fellow...

-jk

More focused, sure. But more influential? Not a chance.

Wander
11-05-2016, 09:33 PM
I'm not sure any two loss team has that great of a chance at making the playoff. Bama, Michigan, Clemson, and Washington all have pretty good chances of being undefeated and they all clearly have the four spots guaranteed if they do.

Now clearly if Auburn finishes with 2 losses, that would include beating Bama and winning the SEC. That's impressive and obviously bumps out Bama from being undefeated. But they would still be behind undefeated Mich, Clem, and Wash. There would be an interesting discussion with them and the likes of a possible one loss Bama, two loss Ohio State, one loss Louisville, two loss Oklahoma, etc..

Two loss Wisconsin is also interesting. Clearly this suggests they win the Big Can't Count, which would mean them winning the re-match against Ohio State or Michigan. Now again, they would be far behind an undefeated Bama, Clemson, and Washington. But it would be an interesting conversation with them and a one loss LVille, probably a one loss Michigan, or two loss Oklahoma.

I don't think there's any chance whatsoever Louisville (who could conceivably end the season without a win over a ranked team) or Oklahoma would be ahead of 2-loss SEC Champion Auburn or 2-loss BigWhatever Champion Wisconsin. Set the wins and losses side by side. The resumes just don't match up.

Of course, I don't expect Auburn to win a road game at Alabama, so in that sense I agree with you that there's not a great chance a 2 loss team makes the playoff. But that's another story.

gurufrisbee
11-05-2016, 10:11 PM
I don't think there's any chance whatsoever Louisville (who could conceivably end the season without a win over a ranked team) or Oklahoma would be ahead of 2-loss SEC Champion Auburn or 2-loss BigWhatever Champion Wisconsin. Set the wins and losses side by side. The resumes just don't match up.

Of course, I don't expect Auburn to win a road game at Alabama, so in that sense I agree with you that there's not a great chance a 2 loss team makes the playoff. But that's another story.

Yes, it's pretty impossible with their love of Alabama and the SEC that if Auburn won the Iron Bowl and the conference that they wouldn't be highly considered. Of course the SEC title game could be a truly ugly 6-3, turnover filled slopfest win over Kentucky.

I do think Louisville with their Heisman trophy winner could be a major player in the whole discussion if they keep blowing people out and finish with one loss. One loss versus two is a very big card to play.

I think Wisconsin's biggest struggle is that no one really believes they are as good as Michigan or Ohio State (and by no one, I mean those who actually get to decide these things). They've been beaten by both of them. Let's say Michigan beats Ohio State (which Wisconsin did not) and then loses a terribly close, maybe controversial decision in the Big Can't Count title game. Wisconsin with two loses and no win over Ohio State vs Michigan with one loss and a win over Ohio State and they split against each other.

ipatent
11-05-2016, 10:32 PM
The playoff was a good idea, but it gives six or seven teams an incentive to run up scores instead of three or four.

pfrduke
11-05-2016, 11:41 PM
Saturday night hot take: based on what Ohio State is doing to Nebraska, the committee will leapfrog the Buckeyes past Washington regardless of whether the Huskies beat Cal. Because controversy.

Olympic Fan
11-06-2016, 12:05 AM
I don't think there's any chance whatsoever Louisville (who could conceivably end the season without a win over a ranked team) or Oklahoma would be ahead of 2-loss SEC Champion Auburn or 2-loss BigWhatever Champion Wisconsin. Set the wins and losses side by side. The resumes just don't match up.

Of course, I don't expect Auburn to win a road game at Alabama, so in that sense I agree with you that there's not a great chance a 2 loss team makes the playoff. But that's another story.

Don't see why we keep getting hung up on unlikely scenarios. As you say, Auburn ain't likely to beat Alabama, so why make a big deal of it.

Louisville still needs a lot of help. Texas A&M's loss helps, but all that will do is move Louisville up to No. 6.

Now, their chances depend on Michigan beating Ohio State (they'd jump two-loss Ohio State; if Ohio State wins, they're probably behind both one-loss OSU and one-loss Michigan).

But even that only moves them up to No. 5.

They still need for Clemson or Washington to lose -- and maybe to lose twice. To me, that's farfetched too.

I think we are REALISTICALLY down to five schools for four places: Clemson, Bama, Washington, Michigan and Ohio State.

The committee might jump Washington with Ohio State this week, but it's no big deal in the long run. If Washington wins out in the Pac 12 and finishes unbeaten, they are in (ahead of the Michigan-Ohio State loser for sure ... conference championships matter a lot -- which is part of Louisville's problem).

gurufrisbee
11-06-2016, 12:35 AM
Saturday night hot take: based on what Ohio State is doing to Nebraska, the committee will leapfrog the Buckeyes past Washington regardless of whether the Huskies beat Cal. Because controversy.

After the way they destroyed Nebraska, this is absolutely going to happen.

subzero02
11-06-2016, 01:32 AM
Don't see why we keep getting hung up on unlikely scenarios. As you say, Auburn ain't likely to beat Alabama, so why make a big deal of it.

Louisville still needs a lot of help. Texas A&M's loss helps, but all that will do is move Louisville up to No. 6.

Now, their chances depend on Michigan beating Ohio State (they'd jump two-loss Ohio State; if Ohio State wins, they're probably behind both one-loss OSU and one-loss Michigan).

But even that only moves them up to No. 5.

They still need for Clemson or Washington to lose -- and maybe to lose twice. To me, that's farfetched too.

I think we are REALISTICALLY down to five schools for four places: Clemson, Bama, Washington, Michigan and Ohio State.

The committee might jump Washington with Ohio State this week, but it's no big deal in the long run. If Washington wins out in the Pac 12 and finishes unbeaten, they are in (ahead of the Michigan-Ohio State loser for sure ... conference championships matter a lot -- which is part of Louisville's

While the game is in Tuscaloosa this year and the Tide is rolling, I would not assume anything in this rivalry. Auburn is currently 7-2 and is in the midst of a 6 game winning streak. Their two losses came against an undefeated Clemson squad and a 1 loss Texas A and M squad. They probably should've lost to LSU, but they found a way to win.

Wander
11-06-2016, 01:41 AM
Don't see why we keep getting hung up on unlikely scenarios. As you say, Auburn ain't likely to beat Alabama, so why make a big deal of it.

More than half of the season is over and Auburn is one of 7 teams that probably controls their own playoff destiny. I find that interesting and worth discussing.

Auburn winning on the road against Alabama may be a very long shot, but Wisconsin beating Michigan or Ohio State on a neutral field isn't. As gurufrisbee pointed out, Wisconsin doing that doesn't make them a lock for the playoff... but it gives them a fantastic chance. Not necessarily calling it to happen, but I think it's well within the realm of what's realistically possible.

I'm not sure 1-loss Louisville would be ahead of 2-loss Ohio State or 2-loss Oklahoma at the end of the season. Their chances of making the playoff are lower than most people think IMO.

YmoBeThere
11-06-2016, 06:21 AM
I would think Louisville's less than impressive win versus UVA and to a lesser extent not beating us by more has to be the biggest impediment to getting the #4 spot.

bob blue devil
11-06-2016, 07:35 AM
agree with those saying louisville's path is pretty narrow at best. i think this is their best hope:
- louisville wins out. i'm sorry, but i can't help myself.
- clemson wins out. need that loss to be tossed out in the committee's eyes.
- michigan wins out. first, a 1-loss michigan is still probably ahead of louisville, so it's best for louisville if they don't help another big 10 team get a HQ victory on their resume. now, i really don't know if a 1 loss louisville is better than a 2 loss osu in the committee's eyes. the committee already said osu is ahead of louisville, osu extended that lead by beating nebraska yesterday and a loss against michigan is the type of loss the committee seems to be disregarding in its rankings. louisville ahead of 2 loss psu is not completely obvious, but seems pretty darn likely.
- auburn and florida lose one more game each. first, a 1-loss alabama is still ahead of louisville so it's best for louisville if alabama doesn't help another team from the SEC get in. i believe a 2 loss sec champ auburn is ahead of louisville (this is debatable, but feels very likely to me). a 2 loss SEC champ florida is still in the mix (wait, i thought florida just died?).* this would be a great test case for the importance of conference championships. a 2 loss florida would finish the season with wins against lsu, florida st. and alabama/auburn away from home. of course they also have not great losses at tennessee and arkansas... the 1 thing i guarantee is that, if a 2 loss florida won the sec title, the media will treat them as being a viable option for a playoff spot.
- washington doesn't win the pac 12. this doesn't at all assure louisville a spot, but it at least starts to create the possibility louisville is ahead of all pac12 teams. a lot of football still to be played in this conference. usc beating wsu to win the pac 12 might be a good formula for louisville.
- i think the big12 is dead relative to a 1 loss louisville, but a 2 loss champ oklahoma or 1 loss champ wvu could be in the conversation. either one would add some decent wins to their resume from here. one more loss each and i'm not sure any discussion of this conference could be justified.

*as others have pointed out, florida isn't very good, so why sweat it? well, why not? the playoff is new, the oddities of its selection process have not at all been ironed out. i like to discuss to hear new perspectives.

gurufrisbee
11-06-2016, 10:07 AM
agree with those saying louisville's path is pretty narrow at best. i think this is their best hope:
- louisville wins out. i'm sorry, but i can't help myself.
- clemson wins out. need that loss to be tossed out in the committee's eyes.
- michigan wins out. first, a 1-loss michigan is still probably ahead of louisville, so it's best for louisville if they don't help another big 10 team get a HQ victory on their resume. now, i really don't know if a 1 loss louisville is better than a 2 loss osu in the committee's eyes. the committee already said osu is ahead of louisville, osu extended that lead by beating nebraska yesterday and a loss against michigan is the type of loss the committee seems to be disregarding in its rankings. louisville ahead of 2 loss psu is not completely obvious, but seems pretty darn likely.
- auburn and florida lose one more game each. first, a 1-loss alabama is still ahead of louisville so it's best for louisville if alabama doesn't help another team from the SEC get in. i believe a 2 loss sec champ auburn is ahead of louisville (this is debatable, but feels very likely to me). a 2 loss SEC champ florida is still in the mix (wait, i thought florida just died?).* this would be a great test case for the importance of conference championships. a 2 loss florida would finish the season with wins against lsu, florida st. and alabama/auburn away from home. of course they also have not great losses at tennessee and arkansas... the 1 thing i guarantee is that, if a 2 loss florida won the sec title, the media will treat them as being a viable option for a playoff spot.
- washington doesn't win the pac 12. this doesn't at all assure louisville a spot, but it at least starts to create the possibility louisville is ahead of all pac12 teams. a lot of football still to be played in this conference. usc beating wsu to win the pac 12 might be a good formula for louisville.
- i think the big12 is dead relative to a 1 loss louisville, but a 2 loss champ oklahoma or 1 loss champ wvu could be in the conversation. either one would add some decent wins to their resume from here. one more loss each and i'm not sure any discussion of this conference could be justified.

*as others have pointed out, florida isn't very good, so why sweat it? well, why not? the playoff is new, the oddities of its selection process have not at all been ironed out. i like to discuss to hear new perspectives.

Yes, Louisville (and basically any team not named Bama, Clemson, Michigan, or Washington) really has their best chance at getting in the playoff by having three of those four teams lock up spots and then snagging the fourth spot. Clemson isn't losing two more games, so Louisville isn't going to play for the ACC title spot, so what you really want is Louisville to look like a super strong 1 loss team that makes it look the ACC deserves two strong teams and no other conference does and most conferences don't even deserve one.

Bama losing would open the door for the SEC looking like they might deserve two strong teams. Auburn is the only one strong enough to make that a real possibility and they play each other so it's easier to have Bama eliminate the possibility.

Ohio State - Michigan is a big threat. Wisconsin is involved, but I'm not sure if they would actually help or hurt. If Michigan runs the table, they are in and Ohio State with two losses and not even making the Big Can't Count title game is probably too far out. Ohio State runs the table, they are in and Michigan with just one loss and not making the title game is very much a factor. If Wisconsin gets the upset they become a factor as conference champ but with two losses to both those other schools it gets very murky and it's even possible that they might pull all three of them out of the running - or it might be enough to get Wisconsin and a second one in, depending on what everyone else is doing.

Washington is definitely a problem for LVille. An undefeated Huskies are in. Good news for LVille is that USC is playing great right now and Wazzu is going to be on a nine game winning streak when the Huskies have to go play there to finish the regular season. Those are going to be two very tough games. And the Pac 12 title game. One loss Huskies don't get in over one loss LVille.

The playoff is a nice idea. It's definitely better than the BCS, which itself was much, MUCH better than just allowing the polls to decide the champion. But it's too limited. What is one of the reasons why March Madness is the best post season tournament in any sport, by far? The fact that you know without a shadow of a doubt that every team with even a semi-legit argument that they were the best team in the nation and could have won the tournament was in it. The best teams don't always win, but no one ever argues that those teams that miss the bubble had a real shot to win it all. You have to do the same thing with football. Which means 16 teams. Yes, usually 8 would be enough, but not always. 16 will. It gives you the room to throw in the Western Michigan and Boise States when they go undefeated and to get 1, 2, even 3 teams in from big conferences with a lot of talent at the top.

Here is my vision for the 16.
A:5 major conference champs.
B:5 spots reserved for a second team from those 5 major conferences.
C:3 spots for the other group of 5 conferences
D:3 total wild card spots (3rd team from major conferences, more group of 5, independents)

This year it would look like:
A: Bama, Clemson, Michigan, Washington, Oklahoma (obviously, I'm just speculating based on where we are now)
B: Auburn, LVille, Ohio St, Wazzu, West Virginia
C: Western Michigan, San Diego St, Troy
D: Wisconsin, Tex A&M, Utah (yes, I know it prob should be some other baby poop blue school, but I won't)

Seed em, set it up, let it play through late December/early Jan.

1 Bama vs 16 Troy
2 Clemson vs. 15 SD St
3 Michigan vs. 14 Western Michigan
4 Washington vs 13 Tex A&M
5 Oklahoma vs 12 Utah
6 Ohio St vs 11 Wazzu
7 Louisville vs 10 West Virginia
8 Auburn vs 9 Wisconsin

bob blue devil
11-06-2016, 11:28 AM
i'm probably in the minority, but i hope they don't expand the playoffs. i don't know if an extended playoff will make things more fun for the fans, because i think some of the fun in the playoff will come at the expense of regular season games that really matter. in a 16 team playoff, how much does michigan-osu really matter at the end of the season? or the pac12 title game? and so forth. also, i don't think a 16 team playoff results in a better likelihood of the "best" team winning the title. suppose that alabama is definitely the best team this year - well, it's more likely they win 2 games against top competition than 4.

in the current structure, there is no school with a legitimate claim to having been the best team in the regular season who does not get in. sure, it's a shame if a 1-loss louisville doesn't get in, but you have a cupcake schedule, you knew what was probably on the line when you played clemson, and you came up short (and you still have a chance to get in if things fall your way).

i think 4 is perfect - as it is we're talking about the possibilities of 2 loss teams getting in. why extend the seasons of these student athletes (aside from money)? of course, i think a 64 team basketball tournament is too much as well (again, unless your only goal is fan $s)...

sagegrouse
11-06-2016, 11:47 AM
i'm probably in the minority, but i hope they don't expand the playoffs. i don't know if an extended playoff will make things more fun for the fans, because i think some of the fun in the playoff will come at the expense of regular season games that really matter. in a 16 team playoff, how much does michigan-osu really matter at the end of the season? or the pac12 title game? and so forth. also, i don't think a 16 team playoff results in a better likelihood of the "best" team winning the title. suppose that alabama is definitely the best team this year - well, it's more likely they win 2 games against top competition than 4.

in the current structure, there is no school with a legitimate claim to having been the best team in the regular season who does not get in. sure, it's a shame if a 1-loss louisville doesn't get in, but you have a cupcake schedule, you knew what was probably on the line when you played clemson, and you came up short (and you still have a chance to get in if things fall your way).

i think 4 is perfect - as it is we're talking about the possibilities of 2 loss teams getting in. why extend the seasons of these student athletes (aside from money)? of course, i think a 64 team basketball tournament is too much as well (again, unless your only goal is fan $s)...

I agree with you. There are also the bowl games, which have been sacrosanct for almost a century (I have no idea what "sacrosanct" means, but it is on my vocabulary improvement list). The choice of four allows the CFP to utilize three of the four (or five) major bowls, while allowing the others to reward deserving who just missed the playoffs.

Olympic Fan
11-06-2016, 12:09 PM
i'm probably in the minority, but i hope they don't expand the playoffs. i don't know if an extended playoff will make things more fun for the fans, because i think some of the fun in the playoff will come at the expense of regular season games that really matter. in a 16 team playoff, how much does michigan-osu really matter at the end of the season? or the pac12 title game? and so forth. also, i don't think a 16 team playoff results in a better likelihood of the "best" team winning the title. suppose that alabama is definitely the best team this year - well, it's more likely they win 2 games against top competition than 4.

in the current structure, there is no school with a legitimate claim to having been the best team in the regular season who does not get in. sure, it's a shame if a 1-loss louisville doesn't get in, but you have a cupcake schedule, you knew what was probably on the line when you played clemson, and you came up short (and you still have a chance to get in if things fall your way).

i think 4 is perfect - as it is we're talking about the possibilities of 2 loss teams getting in. why extend the seasons of these student athletes (aside from money)? of course, i think a 64 team basketball tournament is too much as well (again, unless your only goal is fan $s)...

Actually, I'd like to see it expand -- but to eight teams, not 16.

I'd want a guaranteed spot for the five P5 champions -- championships should mean something -- then three wild-card spots (total wild card, no guarantee for the Group of five or anything else). That's enough.

We'd still have debate between the 7-8-9-10 teams, but if you expand to 16, you get the same debate with the 15-16-17-18 teams (just as we still do with the last at large picks in the NCAA Tournament).

Wander
11-06-2016, 12:09 PM
There are also the bowl games, which have been sacrosanct for almost a century (I have no idea what "sacrosanct" means, but it is on my vocabulary improvement list). The choice of four allows the CFP to utilize three of the four (or five) major bowls, while allowing the others to reward deserving who just missed the playoffs.

Bowl games are crap. They're in existence to make some companies some money, not because they're what's best for football. The stands are mostly empty, even for some of the large ones like the Orange Bowl. I hope to see bowls completely die in my lifetime.

(The Rose Bowl has some nice tradition around it, but that's basically it).

Expanding to 8, 12, or 16 teams would be great.

budwom
11-06-2016, 12:43 PM
Bowl games are crap. They're in existence to make some companies some money, not because they're what's best for football. The stands are mostly empty, even for some of the large ones like the Orange Bowl. I hope to see bowls completely die in my lifetime.

(The Rose Bowl has some nice tradition around it, but that's basically it).

Expanding to 8, 12, or 16 teams would be great.

I largely agree, the big winners in bowl games are the bowl committees who shower themselves with perks and money.

ipatent
11-06-2016, 12:57 PM
Revenue opportunities beckon, it's inevitable that the CFP will eventually expand. Eight teams would settle most questions, although there will always be Western Michigans out there.

bob blue devil
11-06-2016, 01:48 PM
Revenue opportunities beckon, it's inevitable that the CFP will eventually expand. Eight teams would settle most questions, although there will always be Western Michigans out there.

Argh... so true!

Wander
11-12-2016, 07:30 PM
Auburn is officially gone.

The West Virginia-Oklahoma winner next week has a nice shot at sneaking into the playoff, depending on what else happens.

Clemson... maybe, maybe not. Need help. A playoff that includes 2 Big Ten teams and leaves out the ACC is very possible.

ipatent
11-12-2016, 07:31 PM
Clemson loses, this shakes everything up.

gurufrisbee
11-12-2016, 08:07 PM
It all feels a little funny since more and more Alabama looks completely untouchable.

They have a spot locked. At this point, I feel like it would taking losing to Auburn AND losing the SEC title game to keep them out.

Also feels like the Michigan-Ohio St winner is in. Sure, it could be Ohio St who could turn around and get a second loss in the Big Can't Count title game, but still feels like the winner of that game will be such a super high #2 in the poll it might not matter.

Washington gets it if they stay undefeated, but they have a tough game right now with USC and an even tougher one at Wazzu and then the Pac 12 title game.

I'm biased as a Husky fan, but I want to believe those are three spots that will happen.

The fourth is Clemson's if they win the ACC. And Ohio St-MIchigan loser if they don't.

At least that is what I am saying now.

Wander
11-12-2016, 08:31 PM
The fourth is Clemson's if they win the ACC. And Ohio St-MIchigan loser if they don't.


I think if Michigan is the loser, they could surpass ACC champion Clemson. Or they could not. We don't really have enough data from the committee to know exactly how much they value a conference championship.

Not to sound like a broken record, but Wisconsin, Oklahoma, and West Virginia are still in the mix with various degrees of realism. I guess technically Florida too, but the chance that they beat LSU, FSU, and Alabama is probably around 1%.

Here's a fun fact: If Pitt had not beaten Penn State early in the season, the Big Ten champion could have easily been decided by a random drawing!

Bob Green
11-12-2016, 08:36 PM
Halftime: Wake Forest 12, Louisville 3.

VA_BDevil
11-12-2016, 09:08 PM
Does anyone know if 3 ranked ACC teams have lost to 3 unranked ACC teams on the same weekend before (which would be the case this weekend if Wake Forest holds on)?

dukie’s_daughter
11-12-2016, 09:13 PM
I don't know the answer to the question, but wouldn't Wake make the fourth?

3. Pitt over Clemson
2. GT over VPI
And...
1. DUKE over the cheats!!!

VA_BDevil
11-12-2016, 09:56 PM
Ah, forgot about the battle of the Techs. You are correct.

But I think I've jinxed the Deacs. They are now trailing in the 4th.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
11-12-2016, 11:06 PM
UW out, UM on the ropes. Crazy day for football.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
11-12-2016, 11:32 PM
Mass hysteria in NCAA football today. Love the carnage.

duketaylor
11-13-2016, 12:10 AM
Two, 3 and 4 lose today, completely changes possibilities. I posed earlier today, before the upsets, that Wisconsin was not out of the picture. Now they are squarely in it, I think. Very interesting day. Washington's done, IMO. OSU very much in as well as Louisville with their huge 4th qtr. Kinda think Big Ten can land 2, plus 'Bama and an ACC team. Don't see any other teams with a real shot. Bama, Clemson, Louisville, OSU, Michigan, Wisky. May be some other options, but I think this is most likely. I think best 4 would be the first 3 I have above and Big 10 winner, or 2 from Big 10 and better of Clemson or Louisville. VT will likely face one of them in the ACC Champ game, but VT isn't worthy.

Just my musings. Strange day, indeed.

Wander
11-13-2016, 01:07 AM
Awesome day. Say hello to our newest playoff contender, Penn State, who could now very realistically win the Big Ten. By my count, the realistic playoff contenders are:

Alabama, Michigan, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Penn State, Clemson, Louisville, Oklahoma, West Virginia, Washington

Very unlikely darkhorses include teams like Colorado and Oklahoma State.

ipatent
11-13-2016, 07:29 AM
We now have five one-loss teams competing for the three playoff slots behind Alabama. Of those five, Louisville and Washington have weaker strength of schedules than Clemson, Michigan and Ohio State. On the other hand Clemson has had several squeakers. Right now Michigan looks like the strongest of the one-loss teams. There are some two-loss teams that might be stronger than a one loss team and one of Michigan and Ohio State will have at least two losses by season's end.

Looks like controversy. My guess is that the committee will go with conference champions to resolve who gets in among the top five or six if the picture is this muddled at the end of the year, but there is no guarantee that a one loss conference champion like Washington will be in the top five or six because of its weaker schedule. We'll see how far they drop this week.

If conference depth was a factor, the Big Ten would win hands down as far as getting a second team in.

Troublemaker
11-13-2016, 08:03 AM
Loser of OSU-Michigan is now out, right?

Clemson and Washington can still both make it if they are both 1-loss conference champions. I suspect one of them will slip up again, though.

Louisville has to win out and hope that Clemson wins out.

Current CFP prediction by me:

(1) Alabama vs (4) Louisville
(2) Ohio St vs (3) Clemson

Wander
11-13-2016, 09:24 AM
Louisville has to win out and hope that Clemson wins out.


I think Louisville's best path is to hope Clemson somehow loses against Wake Forest so they can sneak into the ACC championship. Otherwise, there's just too many teams they can fall behind.

Washington's schedule doesn't look as bad as it once did. If they win out, they may finish the season with wins of 4 ranked teams and the 1 loss to a ranked team (compare that to Louisville). They are no longer a lock if they win out, but still in decent shape.

Olympic Fan
11-13-2016, 12:54 PM
I still think some of you are overestimating the chances of two-loss teams. It's possible, but EXTREMELY unlikely. For it to happen, the two loss team ABSOLUTELTY, POSITIVELY has to win its conference championship ... and even that might not be enough.

I really don't think Saturday changed a lot -- not with three of the top four taking their first loss. I think the new top four this week will still include Alabama, Michigan and Clemson. I think Ohio State will jump Washington (and maybe Clemson) ... Louisville might too. But it will be the same Top Six.

Nice that we eliminated pretenders Auburn and Texas A&M.

Right now, I guess the real Final Four will be (1) Alabama (duh!); (2) the Michigan-Ohio State winner (I'm assuming neither losses to anybody else); Clemson (I'm assuming they don't lose again) and then a close call between Washington and Louisville ... my guess would be Washington on the strength on the conference title.

Folks, a conference title is important to the committee ... at least it has been so far. I know we have just two years to evaluate results, but the eight finalists in those two years were all conference champions. Two years ago, they shut out 11-1 TCU and 11-1 Baylor because neither won the clearcut Big 12 title. It's a major criteria and until I see differently, I'm sticking with that.

We could get a major test of that theory if Ohio State beats Michigan. That could put Penn State (assuming they get by Michigan State) in the Big Ten title game -- probably against Wisconsin. Would the committee pick a two-loss conference champ over a one loss non-champ? Or could that be the ticket for the Big Ten to get two teams -- Ohio State and the PSU-Wisconsin winner? There is now no reasonable scenario where Ohio State AND Michigan get in -- one of them will be a two-loss non-champ.

You want real chaos, pull for that scenario in the Big Ten. And add this (unlikely) scenario -- Florida State hammers SEC East champ Florida in the regular season finale ... then Florida upsets Alabama in the SEC title game. What happens then?

bob blue devil
11-13-2016, 01:01 PM
Awesome day. Say hello to our newest playoff contender, Penn State, who could now very realistically win the Big Ten. By my count, the realistic playoff contenders are:

Alabama, Michigan, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Penn State, Clemson, Louisville, Oklahoma, West Virginia, Washington

Very unlikely darkhorses include teams like Colorado and Oklahoma State.

agree entirely regarding your earlier point about the value of conference championships being a huge wild card. do you think if any of the following win out and are conference champs that they would have a shot: nebraska, washington state, utah, usc? wsu would be a fascinating case study.

vick
11-13-2016, 02:36 PM
agree entirely regarding your earlier point about the value of conference championships being a huge wild card. do you think if any of the following win out and are conference champs that they would have a shot: nebraska, washington state, utah, usc? wsu would be a fascinating case study.

You all might be right about the importance of conference championships, but I'm not sure we should be that confident about it.

In 2014, the top 10 in the AP poll were (playoff position in parentheses):

1. Alabama (1)
2. FSU (3)
3. Oregon (2)
4. Baylor (5)
5. Ohio State (4)
6. TCU (6)
7. Mich St. (8)
8. Miss St. (7)
9. Ole Miss (9)
10. Georgia Tech (12)

Likewise 2015:

1. Clemson (1)
2. Alabama (2)
3. Michigan State (3)
4. Oklahoma (4)
5. Stanford (6)
6. Iowa (5)
7. Ohio State (7)
8. Notre Dame (8)
9. Florida State (9)
10. UNC (10)

So for all the reading of tea leaves, the reality is the committee hasn't really deviated from the AP poll--only once has there been a difference of more than one position. Given that I personally think it's fairly unlikely OSU falls below #3 if they win out, I have to think they're in pretty good shape should they do so.

Wander
11-13-2016, 04:48 PM
agree entirely regarding your earlier point about the value of conference championships being a huge wild card. do you think if any of the following win out and are conference champs that they would have a shot: nebraska, washington state, utah, usc? wsu would be a fascinating case study.

I think any team that can become a power conference champion is *technically* alive, including those you listed, but a lot of them require an insanely unlikely chain of events to make it and are probably not worth thinking about right now. Hard to imagine a team that lost to a 1AA team making it, right? But this statement doesn't include all the 2 loss teams. Wisconsin and Oklahoma may not be favored to make the playoffs, but are realistically alive. I mean, Wisconsin probably doesn't even need any help - they are almost certainly in if they win out.

Reilly
11-13-2016, 05:08 PM
The committee has published criteria? Conf champs listed #1? Are the criteria listed in order of importance?

ipatent
11-13-2016, 05:11 PM
The AP top 25 is out and Louisville has moved up to #3, which suggests they'll be in if they win out, even over #5 Clemson. Let's see what the playoff poll says.

vick
11-13-2016, 06:19 PM
The committee has published criteria? Conf champs listed #1? Are the criteria listed in order of importance?

They do indeed (http://d30ratpzqzalg7.cloudfront.net/CD-drupal-cfp-PROD/s3fs-public/CFP%20Selection%20Committee%20Protocol.pdf?tV3FOZ6 8If3qops3X7XJQFmkEd00PiAY), though nothing indicates it's in order of importance. Specifically:

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 key injuries that may have affected a team’s performance during the season or likely will affect its postseason performance

That's a gigantic amount of wiggle room, because right off the bat, what do you mean by "comparable"? Is a two-loss team really comparable to a one-loss team, if so, why? Later on they say they will "consider a wide variety of data and information." That would, of course, be quite bad (http://masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm) for the Penn States and West Virginias of the world.

These are the sorts of predictions that rarely make you look good, because too much can happen in three weeks, but I'll stand by my prediction that if both Ohio State and Penn State win out, Ohio State will make the playoffs. The humongous quality gap in every metric will ultimately be too much to ignore.

Olympic Fan
11-13-2016, 07:31 PM
The AP top 25 is out and Louisville has moved up to #3, which suggests they'll be in if they win out, even over #5 Clemson. Let's see what the playoff poll says.

As you note, this is the AP poll, not the committee's poll. I'd be willing to bet a significant amount of money that when the poll is released Tuesday night, Clemson will be ahead of Louisville.

Why? After all. both teams have exactly the same 9-1 record

But ...

(1) Clemson has a head-to-head victory over Louisville

(2) Clemson has played the stronger schedule (No. 7 nationally, vs. No. 16 nationally)

And while Louisville did have some impressive victories early, they have not been all that impressive in three of their last four games -- barely beating Duke, having to score in the final minute to beat Virginia (probably the worst team overall in the ACC) and trailing Wake Forest into the fourth quarter.

I'm even more confident that if both teams win out, Clemson will be ahead of Louisville. In addition to the two reasons cited above (head-to-head and stronger schedule), you'll also have:

(3) a better overall record (Clemson will be 12-1 to Louisville's 11-1)

(4) Clemson will have a P5 conference championship and Louisville won't.

Note: That's three major listed criteria

The Tigers have no more margin of error vs. Louisville, but as it now stands they are and will remain ahead of the Tigers.

PS: And, vick, I don't understand (or agree with) your statement:

So for all the reading of tea leaves, the reality is the committee hasn't really deviated from the AP poll--only once has there been a difference of more than one position. Given that I personally think it's fairly unlikely OSU falls below #3 if they win out, I have to think they're in pretty good shape should they do so

The fact is that the committee DID deviate from the AP poll in 2014 when No. 5 Ohio State got in ahead of No. 4 Baylor. The Buckeyes conference title trumped Baylor's better ranking. True, it was just one place, but it was an important one place -- the difference between being in and being out of the playoffs.

Wander
11-13-2016, 08:35 PM
Not only do I agree with Oly's point above, but in addition to being behind Clemson, Louisville should easily be behind Michigan as well. Yes, Louisville's loss is better than Michigan's loss, but Michigan's wins are far, far better. Michigan has not one, not two, but three wins that are better than Louisville's best win. That's more than enough to make up for the Clemson vs. Iowa factor. Louisville will be, at best, #5 in this week's rankings, and while that makes it sound like they're close, unlike some of the teams behind them, there isn't a lot of room for them to grow. They have a far lower chance of making the playoffs than most people on ESPN think...

gurufrisbee
11-13-2016, 08:47 PM
Louisville has a GREAT chance at making the CFP.....

if Wake beats Clemson.

Wander
11-13-2016, 08:51 PM
One underrated point of discussion that doesn't get brought up very much: the SEC totally sucks this year. Go ahead and look at the non-Alabama teams, and try and tell me who is the best team, or who has the best non-conference win. Florida? Georgia's quasi-home game against UNC? Whatever. If the ACC does really well against the SEC in the final weekend of the season, you'll be able to reasonably make the argument that the SEC is the worst of the power five conferences.

Alabama might be so far ahead of everyone else in the country that it doesn't matter, but still.

ipatent
11-13-2016, 09:13 PM
One underrated point of discussion that doesn't get brought up very much: the SEC totally sucks this year. Go ahead and look at the non-Alabama teams, and try and tell me who is the best team, or who has the best non-conference win. Florida? Georgia's quasi-home game against UNC? Whatever. If the ACC does really well against the SEC in the final weekend of the season, you'll be able to reasonably make the argument that the SEC is the worst of the power five conferences.

Alabama might be so far ahead of everyone else in the country that it doesn't matter, but still.

The SEC West is very strong, 5-5 Ole Miss per Sagarin is #1 in strength of schedule, #18 overall, and would be in contention in many other Power 5 conferences.

Bob Green
11-15-2016, 09:39 PM
1. Alabama
2. Ohio State
3. Michigan
4. Clemson
5. Louisville
6. Washington

I've no problem with the rankings at this time because Conference Championships are not yet being considered (obviously). However, no matter how you dice and slice it, Ohio State has a Penn State problem.

Wander
11-15-2016, 10:22 PM
However, no matter how you dice and slice it, Ohio State has a Penn State problem.

I disagree. I highly doubt Ohio State is going to drop from #2 to #5 or lower by... beating #3 Michigan. If Ohio State wins out, they are almost certainly fine, despite not being conference champions. This may or may not result in two Big 10 playoff teams, but that is a separate discussion.

gurufrisbee
11-15-2016, 11:02 PM
Very interesting.

If Ohio State beats Michigan, but doesn't get into the conference title game due to Penn State and then Wisconsin beats the Nittany Lions there, is it possible that they get ZERO teams in the CFP? Obviously this assumes Bama, Washington, Oklahoma all keep winning and Clemson and Louisville keep it up as well.

crf30
11-16-2016, 01:32 AM
Predicting the playoff is such a weird mind game.

If OSU wins out, it would be stupid for Louisville to jump them. Because the only reason for that happening would be that OSU didn't win a conference championship, but likely, neither will Louisville...

What happens in the scenario where OSU beats Michigan, then PSU beats Wisconsin in the title game? That certainly vaults PSU over Wisconsin (duh) and probably Michigan as well. It will be interesting to see what would happen if PSU and OSU would end up having adjacent rankings... could the committee still put OSU ahead when their loss is to the team they would be one spot ahead of? And PSU's loss to Pitt doesn't look as bad now that Pitt beat Clemson as well.

I think first they would value the conference championship, but they would do it first by dropping Louisville, simply because I think OSU was one of the preordained favorites so they'll get the nod. Washington is kind of hard to call, but if they win out you have to assume they're in, but that's a big if. If they don't win the Pac-12 that swings the door open for another team.

But then all this talk of winning the conference... if Alabama loses in the conference championship, they're 100% still in. It is just a funny setup for the whole thing, especially this year when there isn't a clear top tier (besides Alabama).

gurufrisbee
11-17-2016, 10:04 PM
Louisville's chances are slipping away pretty fast tonight.

ipatent
11-18-2016, 09:14 AM
Louisville's chances are slipping away pretty fast tonight.

Count Louisville out, and Clemson's best win got tarnished a bit as well. Houston probably gave the loser of the OSU-Michigan game a nice New Years present.

Wander
11-18-2016, 10:03 AM
It's too bad Houston was upset in a couple of conference games. If there was ever a non-Power 5 team that could make a very serious argument for the 4 team playoff, it'd be one with wins over Oklahoma and Louisville.

Troublemaker
11-18-2016, 10:10 AM
Count Louisville out, and Clemson's best win got tarnished a bit as well. Houston probably gave the loser of the OSU-Michigan game a nice New Years present.

I dunno. Two losses and no conference championship? That'll be tough. But I guess if Washington loses another game, there might not be another choice.

JasonEvans
11-18-2016, 10:25 AM
I dunno. Two losses and no conference championship? That'll be tough. But I guess if Washington loses another game, there might not be another choice.

If Clemson and Washington win out, the four will be those two plus Bama plus the winner of OSU-Mich. But, if either Clemson or Washington lose a game, it opens the door to a 2 loss team. The loser of OSU-Mich is as likely a pick as anyone, though it will not be a slam dunk by any measure.

Bob Green
11-18-2016, 11:05 AM
If Clemson and Washington win out, the four will be those two plus Bama plus the winner of OSU-Mich.

The OSU-Michigan winner also has to win the Big10 Championship Game...oh, wait...if OSU beats Michigan there is a good chance Penn State will be in the Championship Game. Lots of football left to play so I am not ready to dismiss conference championships or the lack of being a conference champion from the equation. My opinion hasn't changed, Ohio State has a Penn State problem.

Olympic Fan
11-18-2016, 11:51 AM
Count Louisville out, and Clemson's best win got tarnished a bit as well. Houston probably gave the loser of the OSU-Michigan game a nice New Years present.

I strongly disagree with this -- the loser of the Michigan-Ohio State game is out.

Louisville's loss could help the Oklahoma-West Virginia winner or the Big Ten Champion (Wisconsin, Penn State). All of these would be ahead of the two-loss, non-champion OSU-Michigan winner.

I agree that as of today, Alabama, Clemson (if they win out) and Washington (if they win out) and the OSU-Michigan winner are the final four.

Wisconsin, Penn State, Oklahoma and West Virginia are all ahead of the OSU-Michigan loser.

Olympic Fan
11-20-2016, 12:40 PM
Okay, nothing really significant happened this weekend ... after Louisville's bad loss to Houston Thursday night.

Bama, Clemson and No. 6 Washington all won easily ... Ohio State and Michigan struggled a bit but both won.

To me, that means that the only change at the top is that Washington moves up to No. 5 and Wisconsin likely moves to No. 6.

But I think Bama, Clemson and Washington are in position to win out and get in.

That leaves one spot for the Big Ten. I want to say the Ohio State-Michigan winner, but if that's Ohio State, then we get a probable Penn State-Wisconsin Big Ten title game. Does that committee favor a one-loss non-champ in Ohio State (coming off a win over top 5 Michigan) over a two-loss Big Ten champ?

Obviously, if Clemson or Washington loses one of its final two games, that opens the door for two Big Ten teams. Or, if Michigan beats Ohio State, that simplifies things.

Great closing rush by Oklahoma and Southern Cal, but too little too late.

ipatent
11-20-2016, 06:50 PM
Okay, nothing really significant happened this weekend ... after Louisville's bad loss to Houston Thursday night.

Bama, Clemson and No. 6 Washington all won easily ... Ohio State and Michigan struggled a bit but both won.

To me, that means that the only change at the top is that Washington moves up to No. 5 and Wisconsin likely moves to No. 6.

But I think Bama, Clemson and Washington are in position to win out and get in.

That leaves one spot for the Big Ten. I want to say the Ohio State-Michigan winner, but if that's Ohio State, then we get a probable Penn State-Wisconsin Big Ten title game. Does that committee favor a one-loss non-champ in Ohio State (coming off a win over top 5 Michigan) over a two-loss Big Ten champ?

Obviously, if Clemson or Washington loses one of its final two games, that opens the door for two Big Ten teams. Or, if Michigan beats Ohio State, that simplifies things.

Great closing rush by Oklahoma and Southern Cal, but too little too late.

Agreed. There's also the issue of seeding, big advantage being the three seed over the four this year.

Bob Green
11-25-2016, 09:58 AM
For the record, I'll be rooting for:

1. Ohio State over Michigan, Penn State over Michigan State
2. Washington over Washington State, Utah over Colorado
3. Clemson over South Carolina, N.C. State over North Carolina, Virginia Tech over Virginia
4. Alabama over Auburn

The main scenario I want to see is Penn St winning the Big Ten Championship to force the committee to make a choice between Penn State and Ohio State. What will the committee decide when forced to choose between an 11-1 Ohio State team and a 11-2 conference champion Penn State with a head-to-head victory over Ohio State?

In order to force the committee to choose, there needs to be three other locks to prevent two Big Ten teams from making the Top 4. Alabama and Clemson are locks if they win out and I believe Washington will be as well if they win out including a PAC 12 Championship Game victory over USC to avenge their only loss.

Lots of football left to play. Lots of different scenarios are possible.

gurufrisbee
11-25-2016, 10:16 AM
For the record, I'll be rooting for:

1. Ohio State over Michigan, Penn State over Michigan State
2. Washington over Washington State, Utah over Colorado
3. Clemson over South Carolina, N.C. State over North Carolina, Virginia Tech over Virginia
4. Alabama over Auburn

The main scenario I want to see is Penn St winning the Big Ten Championship to force the committee to make a choice between Penn State and Ohio State. What will the committee decide when forced to choose between an 11-1 Ohio State team and a 11-2 conference champion Penn State with a head-to-head victory over Ohio State?

In order to force the committee to choose, there needs to be three other locks to prevent two Big Ten teams from making the Top 4. Alabama and Clemson are locks if they win out and I believe Washington will be as well if they win out including a PAC 12 Championship Game victory over USC to avenge their only loss.

Lots of football left to play. Lots of different scenarios are possible.

I'm absolutely rooting for every one of those games the same, except I want Colorado over Utah. Ironically, for the same reason of getting Washington locked in to the playoff. I don't think avenging the USC loss goes nearly as far as beating a Colorado team that is going to be ranked even higher than USC could be.

sagegrouse
11-25-2016, 11:15 AM
I'm absolutely rooting for every one of those games the same, except I want Colorado over Utah. Ironically, for the same reason of getting Washington locked in to the playoff. I don't think avenging the USC loss goes nearly as far as beating a Colorado team that is going to be ranked even higher than USC could be.

I agree with the first part of your post, Guru, but not with the second.

Go Buffs!!!

Wander
11-25-2016, 06:37 PM
For the record, I'll be rooting for:

1. Ohio State over Michigan, Penn State over Michigan State
2. Washington over Washington State, Utah over Colorado
3. Clemson over South Carolina, N.C. State over North Carolina, Virginia Tech over Virginia
4. Alabama over Auburn

The main scenario I want to see is Penn St winning the Big Ten Championship to force the committee to make a choice between Penn State and Ohio State. What will the committee decide when forced to choose between an 11-1 Ohio State team and a 11-2 conference champion Penn State with a head-to-head victory over Ohio State?

In order to force the committee to choose, there needs to be three other locks to prevent two Big Ten teams from making the Top 4. Alabama and Clemson are locks if they win out and I believe Washington will be as well if they win out including a PAC 12 Championship Game victory over USC to avenge their only loss.

Lots of football left to play. Lots of different scenarios are possible.

I'm going to guess that the choice would be between Penn State and Clemson, not Ohio State, in this scenario. There's simply no way that a team ranked #2 is going to drop out of the top 4 by adding a win over a top 3 team.

I think Clemson is in more trouble than most think. Washington and Penn State/Wisconsin are behind Clemson now, but could very well jump over them by beating Washington State, Colorado/USC, and Wisconsin/Penn State (compared to Clemson's remaining games against two weaker teams).

Indoor66
11-25-2016, 07:00 PM
You got you wish as State took care of the crying cheaters. They can order up 2nd place Divisional rings & banner.😁😎

Bob Green
11-26-2016, 06:12 AM
I'm going to guess that the choice would be between Penn State and Clemson, not Ohio State, in this scenario. There's simply no way that a team ranked #2 is going to drop out of the top 4 by adding a win over a top 3 team.

I think Clemson is in more trouble than most think. Washington and Penn State/Wisconsin are behind Clemson now, but could very well jump over them by beating Washington State, Colorado/USC, and Wisconsin/Penn State (compared to Clemson's remaining games against two weaker teams).

Your points make a lot of sense and in the end you may well be proven correct. My interest is in specifically seeing how much value is given to two criteria:

1. Head-to-head competition
2. Conference Championship

If Penn State wins the Big Ten Championship (still a big if at this point), the committee must ignore the two criteria listed above in order to put Ohio State in the CFP over Penn State. Leaving Clemson out is certainly an option although that devalues criteria #2.

The sooner the CFP expands to eight teams, with the five P5 conference champions as automatic qualifiers, the better.

gurufrisbee
11-26-2016, 10:09 AM
There is a humorous MASSIVE fault in the logic of the whole system for the playoff people to keep saying how much conference titles mean to them but having a playoff of only four teams with five major conferences.

MulletMan
11-26-2016, 10:52 AM
Your points make a lot of sense and in the end you may well be proven correct. My interest is in specifically seeing how much value is given to two criteria:

1. Head-to-head competition
2. Conference Championship

If Penn State wins the Big Ten Championship (still a big if at this point), the committee must ignore the two criteria listed above in order to put Ohio State in the CFP over Penn State. Leaving Clemson out is certainly an option although that devalues criteria #2.

The sooner the CFP expands to eight teams, with the five P5 conference champions as automatic qualifiers, the better.

I think the one thing that you're leaving out is that those criteria are used if the resumes are similar. Right now the resumes between OSU and PSU are not similar. If both win out, OSU will have beaten Oklahoma, Wisconsin, Michigan and Nebraska with road wins at Norman, Madison and East Lansing and thier lone loss being on the road to a top 10 team. PSU will have beaten OSU, and Wisconsin. No road wins to speak of and Wisconsin on a neutral field. PSU was slaughtered by Michigan and the Pitt loss was at a neutral sight, I believe. So clearly OSU has a stronger resume.

Now, having said that, I think head to head should hold more weight, but the committee had maintained that it's a tie breaker...not a determinant.

sagegrouse
11-26-2016, 11:13 AM
Is a one-loss team guaranteed a spot in the playoff? I think "yes." There are five with one or fewer losses: Bama, Ohio State, Michigan, Clemson and Washington (and Ohio State plays Michigan). If Ohio State beats Michigan, it appears that Ohio State would lose out to Penn State in making the Big Ten playoffs (assumes PSU beats MSU). Would Wisconsin or Penn State beat out either Clemson or Washington, if both are one-loss conference champions? I don't think so, but I have been wrong before. For one thing, putting two Big Ten teams in the CFP is more of a reach than putting (in other years) two SEC teams -- the Big Ten is not clearly a superior conference.
Of the current top five, who is most likely to lose? Well, duh, either Michigan or Ohio State, since they are playing each other. But beyond that. Alabama has Auburn and Florida. Of course, Bama could lose one of these and still make the playoffs. Clemson has the Gamecocks at home and the Hokies for the ACC championship. Clemson should win out. UDub has either Colorado (Go Buffs!) or USC for the PAC-12 title and would be an underdog against surging USC. If Michigan beats Ohio State or Ohio State wins and Penn State loses, then either would be favorite in the Big Ten championship against Wisconsin. In other words, the Big Ten is a confusing mess and could result in a passel of two-loss teams, one of which would probably get into the CFP.
If Washington loses and the Big Ten only gets one team in the CFP, who's next? Well next in line are Oklahoma, Colorado, and Oklahoma State. Either the Sooners or the Cowboys are guaranteed to be a two-loss team and conference champion. Would either get the nod over a Colorado team that beats Utah today and UDub next weekend? I think Oklahoma would but not State, which lost to Central Michigan at home. On the other hand, Colorado needs to beat Utah and then (by assumption in this para.) beat the Huskies.

I hope this makes sense. Looks like a great two weekends of college football. Go Duke!

Bob Green
11-26-2016, 11:24 AM
I think the one thing that you're leaving out is that those criteria are used if the resumes are similar.

Now, having said that, I think head to head should hold more weight, but the committee had maintained that it's a tie breaker...not a determinant.

I guess I'm guilty of leaving it out because I disagree with it. I agree with you head to head should hold more weight. A head to head victory coupled with a conference championship should hold significant more weight.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
11-26-2016, 04:05 PM
Whew.. what a game between OSU/UM

gurufrisbee
11-26-2016, 04:06 PM
Ohio State just won in double OT. Bye Michigan. Too bad - a Michigan win could have kept it simple if they had won the conference title next week.

Now it's got great potential to be messy. Penn State wins and Ohio State misses the Can't Count Title game, so it opens it big for two teams getting in.

In non playoff news - Syracuse and Pitt are playing a game with no defense at all. I actually have to wonder if their basketball teams will combine for that many points.

Wander
11-26-2016, 06:04 PM
Ohio State just won in double OT. Bye Michigan. Too bad - a Michigan win could have kept it simple if they had won the conference title next week.

Now it's got great potential to be messy. Penn State wins and Ohio State misses the Can't Count Title game, so it opens it big for two teams getting in.


Crazy thought of the day: is it still possible that Ohio State and Michigan both get in? I know it sounds insane, but several people have talked in this thread about conference championships and head-to-head both being tiebreakers. Well, if Wisconsin beats Penn State in the championship game, one "tiebreaker" (championship) goes in Wisconsin's favor and one "tiebreaker" (head to head) goes in Ohio State's and Michigan's favor. So the championship/head to head stuff is a wash and then you just compare resumes straight up. Michigan and Ohio State's resumes would seem to stack up pretty nicely.

The more intuitive way to put it: is the #3 team goes on the road and plays the #2 team to double overtime... isn't that consistent with both teams being top 4 teams?

I don't think it will happen, but an argument could be made.

gurufrisbee
11-26-2016, 06:31 PM
If Clemson and Washington both lost their conference title games, then I could see it possibly happening, but I doubt very much that the Big Can't Count title game winner won't be ranked above Michigan when the dust settles so it would seem like it would take the committee taking THREE Big Can't Count teams and they might as well just quit and hide if they tried that.

arnie
11-26-2016, 06:55 PM
If Clemson and Washington both lost their conference title games, then I could see it possibly happening, but I doubt very much that the Big Can't Count title game winner won't be ranked above Michigan when the dust settles so it would seem like it would take the committee taking THREE Big Can't Count teams and they might as well just quit and hide if they tried that.

I think three Big whatevers might get in if Clempsun and highly overrated Washington lose. Don't like it and everyone screams, but only Oklahoma might be a default. Would put the committee in a strange predicament.

JasonEvans
11-26-2016, 07:37 PM
I think that when the rankings come out next week it will be:

1. Bama
2. tOSU
3. Clemson
4. Michigan
5. Washington

Now, I think that if Washington wins the Pac 12 then they are likely to leap Michigan, but I think Mich still has a shot.

-Jason "if Washington is smart, they are rooting HARD for Colorado right now. I doubt UDubb wants any part of USC in the P12 championship game" Evans

Newton_14
11-26-2016, 08:36 PM
I think that when the rankings come out next week it will be:

1. Bama
2. tOSU
3. Clemson
4. Michigan
5. Washington

Now, I think that if Washington wins the Pac 12 then they are likely to leap Michigan, but I think Mich still has a shot.

-Jason "if Washington is smart, they are rooting HARD for Colorado right now. I doubt UDubb wants any part of USC in the P12 championship game" Evans

I hope you are right as I have to admit I would love to see Bama/Mich go at it in the semi-finals. I think Mich might be the only team that can give Bama a test. Clemson so should have won that title game last year. They went toe to toe with Bama, and I thought showed they were every bit as good as Bama, but big plays to the tightend, and the kicking game killed them. This year, I don't think Clemson can compete with Bama the way they did last season.

ipatent
11-26-2016, 08:51 PM
I hope you are right as I have to admit I would love to see Bama/Mich go at it in the semi-finals. I think Mich might be the only team that can give Bama a test. Clemson so should have won that title game last year. They went toe to toe with Bama, and I thought showed they were every bit as good as Bama, but big plays to the tightend, and the kicking game killed them. This year, I don't think Clemson can compete with Bama the way they did last season.

Doesn't look like anyone is going to slow Alabama down.

Wander
11-26-2016, 09:09 PM
I hope you are right as I have to admit I would love to see Bama/Mich go at it in the semi-finals. I think Mich might be the only team that can give Bama a test. Clemson so should have won that title game last year. They went toe to toe with Bama, and I thought showed they were every bit as good as Bama, but big plays to the tightend, and the kicking game killed them. This year, I don't think Clemson can compete with Bama the way they did last season.

Agree with all of this. I think the four best teams are Alabama, Ohio State, Michigan, and Oklahoma, with Michigan having the best chance at competing with Alabama. Note that the Michigan defense on the road essentially held the Ohio State offense to 3 points in regulation today...

gurufrisbee
11-26-2016, 11:27 PM
I think three Big whatevers might get in if Clempsun and highly overrated Washington lose. Don't like it and everyone screams, but only Oklahoma might be a default. Would put the committee in a strange predicament.

Not overrated in the slightest.


I think that when the rankings come out next week it will be:

1. Bama
2. tOSU
3. Clemson
4. Michigan
5. Washington

Now, I think that if Washington wins the Pac 12 then they are likely to leap Michigan, but I think Mich still has a shot.

-Jason "if Washington is smart, they are rooting HARD for Colorado right now. I doubt UDubb wants any part of USC in the P12 championship game" Evans

A lot of Washington fans wanted Utah to win because they wanted revenge with USC. I still maintain it's better to play Colorado and it has nothing to do with USC's talent. Colorado is going to be ranked higher and even beating USC will just provide a lot of time for the committee to fixate on UW's one loss.


Agree with all of this. I think the four best teams are Alabama, Ohio State, Michigan, and Oklahoma, with Michigan having the best chance at competing with Alabama. Note that the Michigan defense on the road essentially held the Ohio State offense to 3 points in regulation today...

I think the four best teams are Alabama, Clemson, Washington, and Oklahoma. The only thing wildly overrated is the entire conference that can't count. All this talk of two or three teams getting in the playoff is repulsive - they don't deserve any.

Wander
11-26-2016, 11:30 PM
OK, so we're done to:

Lock: Alabama
Near-lock: Ohio State
Possibilities: Clemson, Washington, Penn State, Wisconsin, Michigan, Oklahoma, Colorado

That's it. Some of the "possibilities" are more likely than others, obviously, but I don't think any of them fall into the category of "absolute 100% locks if they win next week."

gurufrisbee
11-26-2016, 11:36 PM
, but I don't think any of them fall into the category of "absolute 100% locks if they win next week."

I think Clemson is.

Olympic Fan
11-26-2016, 11:41 PM
I think that when the rankings come out next week it will be:

1. Bama
2. tOSU
3. Clemson
4. Michigan
5. Washington

Now, I think that if Washington wins the Pac 12 then they are likely to leap Michigan, but I think Mich still has a shot.

-Jason "if Washington is smart, they are rooting HARD for Colorado right now. I doubt UDubb wants any part of USC in the P12 championship game" Evans

I strongly disagree about Michigan. A two-loss team that finished third in their division -- and is without is its starting QB? They are dead meat under any realistic scenario.

After this weekend's games, I'm betting next Tuesday's rankings will be:

1. Bama
2. OSU
3. Clemson
4. Washington
5. Wisconsin
6. Penn State

Oddly, No. 2 OSU is the safest pick since they don't have another game. Although I think Bama is in even if by some miracle they lose to Florida.

Clemson and Washington need to win next weekend, but if they do, it's simple. If one of them loses, then it opens the door for the Wisconsin-Penn State winner.

PS Any slight, outside chance for Southern Cal died when Colorado beat Utah to claim the Pac 12 South title.

ipatent
11-27-2016, 10:22 AM
This year's Big 10 may not get two teams in, but it is likely the deepest conference in college football history. Even Minnesota and Iowa aren't bad, and there's no doubt that Michigan State would be better than 3-9 in any other conference other than the SEC West, which may be the deepest division in college football history.

gurufrisbee
11-27-2016, 10:41 AM
This year's Big 10 may not get two teams in, but it is likely the deepest conference in college football history. Even Minnesota and Iowa aren't bad, and there's no doubt that Michigan State would be better than 3-9 in any other conference other than the SEC West, which may be the deepest division in college football history.

Interesting how different perspectives can be. I've probably seen 30 games from the Big Can't Count this season and the entire conference looks terribly overrated. They remind me a lot of the Big East in basketball a few years when they got like 11 teams in the tournament and completely fell on their face because the reality was A) the padded their schedule with almost everyone playing cream puffs out of conference, B) half the conference was good awful and they padded their schedule by playing them, and C) the top half was fairly balanced among themselves, but not really good compared to the top of any other conference. Yes, yes, I know Michigan beat Colorado and Ohio State beat Oklahoma so maybe they are a little better than that, but for the last two months I haven't seen anything in that conference that was playoff worthy at all.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
11-27-2016, 10:45 AM
I just think it is notable that UM is on the outside looking in based on a one point loss and a double OT loss to a rival ranked #2 in the nation in the road. Any rational person could look at that and say "that could be one of the best four teams in the nation."

I understand the rationale of keeping them out, but that is a damn tough team that has the potential to beat anyone.

SCMatt33
11-27-2016, 10:56 AM
I just think it is notable that UM is on the outside looking in based on a one point loss and a double OT loss to a rival ranked #2 in the nation in the road. Any rational person could look at that and say "that could be one of the best four teams in the nation."

I understand the rationale of keeping them out, but that is a damn tough team that has the potential to beat anyone.

To be fair, it's the loss to Iowa keeping them on the outside. Had they lost only to OSU, they'd be where the Buckeyes are now as a non division champ with a really good arguement (OSU would have won a three way tiebreaker due to PSU's loss to Pitt knocking them out and owning H2H).

Wander
11-27-2016, 11:23 AM
I just think it is notable that UM is on the outside looking in based on a one point loss and a double OT loss to a rival ranked #2 in the nation in the road. Any rational person could look at that and say "that could be one of the best four teams in the nation."

I understand the rationale of keeping them out, but that is a damn tough team that has the potential to beat anyone.

Yup. I've been hammering since this thread started that it's shortsighted to think that "power conference champion" and "0 or 1 losses" are requirements to get into the playoff. It doesn't take an extreme or unusual set of circumstances for these rules to be broken, either - if you go back through the years, you'll find that a 4 team playoff would have broken one or both of these rules about half the time.

If it was up to me, I'd be picking 4 teams out of 5: Alabama, Ohio State, Michigan, Clemson, and Washington. As of now I'd lean very very slightly toward Clemson being the one left out but am open to changing my mind pending good arguments and next week's results. Colorado, Oklahoma, Wisconsin, and Penn State would only be in contention if BOTH Clemson and Washington got upset.

ipatent
11-27-2016, 12:35 PM
If it was up to me, I'd be picking 4 teams out of 5: Alabama, Ohio State, Michigan, Clemson, and Washington. As of now I'd lean very very slightly toward Clemson being the one left out but am open to changing my mind pending good arguments and next week's results. Colorado, Oklahoma, Wisconsin, and Penn State would only be in contention if BOTH Clemson and Washington got upset.

Your assessment is very close to the current computer rankings, but they give Clemson a slight edge over UW. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaaf/sagarin/

If UW survives Colorado and an SC re-match that would probably change.

sagegrouse
11-27-2016, 01:34 PM
Not so Sage observations from the #1 birdbrain on the site:


There are no hard-and-fast rules. If so, why would we need a distinguished panel, who, I assure you, will do SOMETHING.
Ohio State is done and "in" IMHO (where the H seems to be on a slow boat to China).
Alabama is "not done" but still "in." Even an unexpected loss to Florida will not stem the Crimson Tide.
Michigan is done and "not in." I don't see how the Wolverines beat out the winner of Penn State-Wisconsin, and certainly not a victorious Clemson or UDub.
Clemson and Washington will be "in" if they win their conference championships. How do they drop in the rankings with a win?

Then it gets interesting:

If Clemson loses, the beneficiaries will be either the winner of Wisconsin/Penn State or the winner of Oklahoma/Ok. State (NO, it isn't "Okie State').
If Washington loses, then either of the above two or my home state team Colorado, the last being unlikely.
If both lose, then two of the above three.


Also, as not one inclined to have a positive view of Big Ten football, I looked at the record against other Power Five plus Notre Dame conferences and learned something. The Big Ten was 8-4 with the best wins against Oklahoma, Colorado and LSU. By comparison, the SEC was only 5-8, with best wins against Southern California and VPI. Interestingly, the Big Ten had two losses to Div. I-AA teams (ND State and Illinois State).

It's a shame the ACC doesn't have a second strong candidate for the CFP. (Curse you, Louisville for fading at the end of the season!) The ACC this year is 6-3 against the SEC and 3-1 against the Big Ten.

kmspeaks
11-27-2016, 02:23 PM
Not so Sage observations from the #1 birdbrain on the site:


There are no hard-and-fast rules. If so, why would we need a distinguished panel, who, I assure you, will do SOMETHING.
Ohio State is done and "in" IMHO (where the H seems to be on a slow boat to China).
Alabama is "not done" but still "in." Even an unexpected loss to Florida will not stem the Crimson Tide.
Michigan is done and "not in." I don't see how the Wolverines beat out the winner of Penn State-Wisconsin, and certainly not a victorious Clemson or UDub.
Clemson and Washington will be "in" if they win their conference championships. How do they drop in the rankings with a win?

Then it gets interesting:

If Clemson loses, the beneficiaries will be either the winner of Wisconsin/Penn State or the winner of Oklahoma/Ok. State (NO, it isn't "Okie State').
If Washington loses, then either of the above two or my home state team Colorado, the last being unlikely.
If both lose, then two of the above three.


Also, as not one inclined to have a positive view of Big Ten football, I looked at the record against other Power Five plus Notre Dame conferences and learned something. The Big Ten was 8-4 with the best wins against Oklahoma, Colorado and LSU. By comparison, the SEC was only 5-8, with best wins against Southern California and VPI. Interestingly, the Big Ten had two losses to Div. I-AA teams (ND State and Illinois State).

It's a shame the ACC doesn't have a second strong candidate for the CFP. (Curse you, Louisville for fading at the end of the season!) The ACC this year is 6-3 against the SEC and 3-1 against the Big Ten.

I don't disagree with you, but ask the 2014 TCU team how they feel about that statement.

JasonEvans
11-27-2016, 02:41 PM
The ACC this year is 3-1 against the Big Ten.

Ok, who blew that one game. I want to know!

gurufrisbee
11-27-2016, 04:42 PM
I don't disagree with you, but ask the 2014 TCU team how they feel about that statement.

Yes, but wasn't the argument that they repeatedly made against that TCU team that they didn't get in because they didn't have a conference title game to win. That would not be the case with Clemson or Washington. Not that the committee is above being totally inconsistent and illogical, but the situations do seem different due to that.

kmspeaks
11-27-2016, 04:54 PM
Yes, but wasn't the argument that they repeatedly made against that TCU team that they didn't get in because they didn't have a conference title game to win. That would not be the case with Clemson or Washington. Not that the committee is above being totally inconsistent and illogical, but the situations do seem different due to that.

The situations are different for sure, I was just having some fun with sage's statement at the committee's expense. It wasn't a conference championship game but TCU still went from 3 to 6 while winning in the final week of the season.

sagegrouse
11-27-2016, 05:24 PM
Yes, but wasn't the argument that they repeatedly made against that TCU team that they didn't get in because they didn't have a conference title game to win. That would not be the case with Clemson or Washington. Not that the committee is above being totally inconsistent and illogical, but the situations do seem different due to that.


The situations are different for sure, I was just having some fun with sage's statement at the committee's expense. It wasn't a conference championship game but TCU still went from 3 to 6 while winning in the final week of the season.

Truth be known there is a secret "No Disgusting Mascot" clause in the ESPN contract to televise the College Football Playoff. I believe it has only been used to disqualify a "Horned Frog."

kmspeaks
11-27-2016, 05:36 PM
Truth be known there is a secret "No Disgusting Mascot" clause in the ESPN contract to televise the College Football Playoff. I believe it has only been used to disqualify a "Horned Frog."

How long before the Buckeyes are dropped, out of respect for those with peanut allergies?
6902

ipatent
11-27-2016, 05:37 PM
It looks like Alabama, Michigan and Ohio State are going to get in. The computer ratings have Alabama alone on top, Ohio State and Michigan in a grouping a few points behind and Washington and Clemson grouped very closely a few points further back. The committee doesn't use computer ratings per se, but they do reflect quality wins and strength of schedule.

My guess is that UW will lose one of its next two games and the situation will resolve itself with Clemson the clear choice for the fourth slot. However, if UW wins out, its strength of schedule could surpass Clemson's and things could get interesting.

gurufrisbee
11-27-2016, 05:49 PM
It looks like Alabama, Michigan and Ohio State are going to get in. The computer ratings have Alabama alone on top, Ohio State and Michigan in a grouping a few points behind and Washington and Clemson grouped very closely a few points further back. The committee doesn't use computer ratings per se, but they do reflect quality wins and strength of schedule.

My guess is that UW will lose one of its next two games and the situation will resolve itself with Clemson the clear choice for the fourth slot. However, if UW wins out, its strength of schedule could surpass Clemson's and things could get interesting.

Washington only has one more game. Pac 12 championship Friday night against Colorado.

gurufrisbee
11-27-2016, 06:01 PM
While it will be absolutely tragic if they both win and only one gets in, I think the conversation about Clemson vs. Washington is interesting.

Clemson beat Auburn, Louisville, and Florida State this season. Right now ranked 12, 16, 18. None of those wins were by more than 6.
They still play Virginia Tech which just made an incredible leap up from unranked to now being 19th.
They lost to Pitt, which also just jumped from the unranked up to 24th.

Washington only has one win over a team currently in the top 25 - #17 Stanford. They beat them by 38.
They almost have two more, but both Washington State and Utah dropped this week and now would be 28 and 29. Huskoes beat them by 28 and 7.
They still play Colorado who is #9.
They lost to USC, who is #10.

I know I'm biased, but I have a hard time seeing how Clemson's resume is better.

ipatent
11-27-2016, 06:16 PM
Washington only has one more game. Pac 12 championship Friday night against Colorado.

My mistake, in that case I don't think UW's strength of schedule gets close.

Michigan is #5 this week in the polls and has two losses. There no doubt will be arguments that both Clemson and UW will get in if they both win, but my guess is the committee will take note of the fact that the Michigan-OSU game was the only contest between the top five contenders.

sagegrouse
11-27-2016, 06:31 PM
It looks like Alabama, Michigan and Ohio State are going to get in. The computer ratings have Alabama alone on top, Ohio State and Michigan in a grouping a few points behind and Washington and Clemson grouped very closely a few points further back. The committee doesn't use computer ratings per se, but they do reflect quality wins and strength of schedule.

My guess is that UW will lose one of its next two games and the situation will resolve itself with Clemson the clear choice for the fourth slot. However, if UW wins out, its strength of schedule could surpass Clemson's and things could get interesting.


My mistake, in that case I don't think UW's strength of schedule gets close.

Michigan is #5 this week in the polls and has two losses. There no doubt will be arguments that both Clemson and UW will get in if they both win, but my guess is the committee will take note of the fact that the Michigan-OSU game was the only contest between the top five contenders.

Disagree profoundly on Michigan getting in. I expect the selection committee will decide its CFP game was Saturday against Ohio State, and it lost. End of story, although Michigan is indeed a talented and capable football team.

If you have Alabama, Ohio State, and Michigan in the CFP, only one of the legitimate champions of the four other Power Conferences gets in. That's why you have a selection committee -- to make sure the system fairly represents the entire world of Division I football.

Moreover, even if both Clemson and UDub lose, I expect the committee will take the Big Ten champion ahead of Michigan.

burnspbesq
11-27-2016, 08:54 PM
Yay for an old skool Rose Bowl, USC-Michigan.

Newton_14
11-27-2016, 09:02 PM
I just think it is notable that UM is on the outside looking in based on a one point loss and a double OT loss to a rival ranked #2 in the nation in the road. Any rational person could look at that and say "that could be one of the best four teams in the nation."

I understand the rationale of keeping them out, but that is a damn tough team that has the potential to beat anyone.

Fully agree. I'll say it again, in my view, Mich is the one team that can give Alabama trouble. The SEC Title game is going to be a laugher.

I fully believe the four best teams in the Country are Alabama, Michigan, Ohio St, Clemson.

Olympic Fan
11-29-2016, 03:49 PM
Fully agree. I'll say it again, in my view, Mich is the one team that can give Alabama trouble. The SEC Title game is going to be a laugher.

I fully believe the four best teams in the Country are Alabama, Michigan, Ohio St, Clemson.

Actually, if I had to rate the best teams at this moment, I'd put Southern Cal in the top four.

That doesn't mean the Trojans -- of the Wolverines -- deserve to be the playoff. Games have consequences -- else why bother to play out the season?

One aspect of the choice I haven't seen discussed is the difference between a Wisconsin win in the Big Ten title game and a Penn State win.

Obviously, we're going to have a 11-2 Big Ten champ against an 11-1 non-champ Ohio State.

But OSU beat Wisconsin (in Madison). If the Badgers win the title, that makes it easier to pass them up in favor of the Buckeyes. On the other hand, if Penn State wins, they not only have the title that Ohio State lacks, they also have a head-to-head win over the Buckeyes.

Don't get me wrong -- I think Ohio State goes in ahead of either Wisconsin or Penn State -- but a Wisconsin win makes the committee's job a lot easier.

We'll see the rankings tonight, but I'm betting the top four are 1 -- Bama; 2 -- OSU; 3 -- Clemson; 4 -- Washington ... if the three that play this weekend all win, that's your Final Four.

OldPhiKap
11-29-2016, 03:52 PM
We'll see the rankings tonight, but I'm betting the top four are 1 -- Bama; 2 -- OSU; 3 -- Clemson; 4 -- Washington ... if the three that play this weekend all win, that's your Final Four.

Absent some major butt-whooping, I would bet that Bama would get in even if UF somehow won.

Pghdukie
11-29-2016, 04:15 PM
I totally agree that the 3 best teams are Alabama, Ohio St,Clemson. I would also agree the biggest threat match-up wise to Bama is Michigan. The 4th best team IMO is a toss-up, with my vote being Washington. If they lose this week - I would love to see Michigan seeded 4th. I'm a BIG fan bUT I just can't see Penn St or Wisconsin viable.

Bob Green
11-29-2016, 04:32 PM
Don't get me wrong -- I think Ohio State goes in ahead of either Wisconsin or Penn State -- but a Wisconsin win makes the committee's job a lot easier.



Which is exactly why I will be rooting hard for Penn State to win. Long term, the selection criteria needs to be codified. P5 Conference Championships either mean something or they don't. At this time, it appears they mean something when convenient.

crf30
11-29-2016, 04:44 PM
I just can't see how the committee could justify putting Michigan in, after they just lost two of their last three games.

I agree that the top four right now are Alabama, OSU, Clemson, and Washington. If Clemson and Washington win out, I think they're in and it's set. If I was making the decisions, the hardest scenario for me would be if Penn State and Colorado both win their conferences championships.

Like I said, I think Michigan is out. So based on last week's rankings, Wisconsin and Penn State should be 5 and 6, and Oklahoma and Colorado will be 7 and 8. Colorado and PSU would both be beating a team ranked higher than them at the moment. Each team lost to Michigan, and each team lost to a team that went on winning streaks to end the season and ended up ranked and with respectable records (PSU to Pitt, and Colorado to USC. Pitt also is Clemson's only loss).

To continue ragging on Michigan, think of it like this. If Michigan would have just beaten OSU and then lost to Wisconsin in the B10 championship, they would be out, right? So why would they get in if they didn't even play in the conference championship? That only makes sense in the case of OSU, because they don't also have a loss to unranked Iowa keeping them out.

If we are vaulting USC up the rankings because their 3 losses were early, shouldn't the opposite happen to a team whose losses all come at the end (the answer is yes, it just happened to Louisville). I just feel like their is a general consensus that Michigan is a good matchup for Alabama (and they probably are), but that doesn't mean they should just get into the playoff -- you gotta win the games. Otherwise, they should just not even play the regular season. Yes, it's most probable that if PSU plays Alabama in the semi they will get pounded, but they deserved to have the opportunity to get pounded by their recent play.

^Bob Green. Yes, I agree. Forcing the committee to make these decisions now will benefit in the long run.

Wander
11-29-2016, 04:52 PM
Which is exactly why I will be rooting hard for Penn State to win. Long term, the selection criteria needs to be codified. P5 Conference Championships either mean something or they don't. At this time, it appears they mean something when convenient.

I think the committee is doing a great job given the limitations, but ultimately, college football simply doesn't have enough games in a season for an exclusive selection committee-style process to work (I'd like to help solve this by completely banning games against 1-AA teams but that's another story). I don't think the selection criteria needs to be codified, just there needs to be a path for teams to be guaranteed to get in regardless of what a selection committee thinks. You know, like every other sport in the history of the world does.

vick
11-29-2016, 04:55 PM
I just can't see how the committee could justify putting Michigan in, after they just lost two of their last three games.

I agree that the top four right now are Alabama, OSU, Clemson, and Washington. If Clemson and Washington win out, I think they're in and it's set. If I was making the decisions, the hardest scenario for me would be if Penn State and Colorado both win their conferences championships.

Like I said, I think Michigan is out. So based on last week's rankings, Wisconsin and Penn State should be 5 and 6, and Oklahoma and Colorado will be 7 and 8. Colorado and PSU would both be beating a team ranked higher than them at the moment. Each team lost to Michigan, and each team lost to a team that went on winning streaks to end the season and ended up ranked and with respectable records (PSU to Pitt, and Colorado to USC. Pitt also is Clemson's only loss).

To continue ragging on Michigan, think of it like this. If Michigan would have just beaten OSU and then lost to Wisconsin in the B10 championship, they would be out, right? So why would they get in if they didn't even play in the conference championship? That only makes sense in the case of OSU, because they don't also have a loss to unranked Iowa keeping them out.

If we are vaulting USC up the rankings because their 3 losses were early, shouldn't the opposite happen to a team whose losses all come at the end (the answer is yes, it just happened to Louisville). I just feel like their is a general consensus that Michigan is a good matchup for Alabama (and they probably are), but that doesn't mean they should just get into the playoff -- you gotta win the games. Otherwise, they should just not even play the regular season. Yes, it's most probable that if PSU plays Alabama in the semi they will get pounded, but they deserved to have the opportunity to get pounded by their recent play.

^Bob Green. Yes, I agree. Forcing the committee to make these decisions now will benefit in the long run.

I agree with the consensus that Michigan is pretty much dead, but I'm not sure this week's rankings will reflect that. After all, neither Wisconsin or Penn State has won a conference championship yet, and I don't believe the committee has indicated conference runner-up has any special value. Michigan has beaten both of them, in the case of Penn State quite handily. So it would not shock me for the rankings this week to be:

1. Alabama
2. OSU
3. Clemson
4. Washington
5. Michigan
6. Wisconsin
7. Oklahoma
8. Penn State
9. Colorado

I just don't think that means anything regarding the eventual playoff selection. The final Big Ten order is likely to be OSU, Wiscy/PSU winner, Michigan, Wiscy/PSU loser no matter what path we take to get there.

Wander
11-29-2016, 04:57 PM
I just can't see how the committee could justify putting Michigan in, after they just lost two of their last three games.


I just don't see how, right now, you can look at the wins and losses of Colorado, Penn State, and Wisconsin, compare them to the wins and losses of Michigan, and decide that Michigan comes in last. All four of those teams are 10-2, and Michigan has beaten the other three!

Now, after next week when 1 or 2 of those teams have a conference championship may be another story. But right now, how can you rank Michigan behind those teams?

elvis14
11-29-2016, 04:58 PM
Not to distract too much from the discussion about what's really going to happen but I heard a good proposal in the gym this morning. Have 8 playoff teams (yes, I know that's where realism goes away). Those 8 teams are the champions from the 5 power conferences and 3 at large bids. I'd much rather have issues with the 3 at large bids and what may often be seeds 6-8 than having issues with 2, 3 and 4.

It would be really cool to see Clemson avenge last years loss...

Bob Green
11-29-2016, 05:18 PM
Have 8 playoff teams...

I believe that is where the CFP is headed. The unknown is how long it will take to get there.

Pghdukie
11-29-2016, 05:20 PM
This may or may not be the place, but I certainly appreciate Bob Green's input and all of his knowledge pertaining to football. Both DUKE and NCAA in general. BOB, Thanks for your weekly reports and for sharing your knowledge and opinions.

Bob Green
11-29-2016, 05:23 PM
I think the committee is doing a great job given the limitations, but ultimately, college football simply doesn't have enough games in a season for an exclusive selection committee-style process to work (I'd like to help solve this by completely banning games against 1-AA teams but that's another story). I don't think the selection criteria needs to be codified, just there needs to be a path for teams to be guaranteed to get in regardless of what a selection committee thinks. You know, like every other sport in the history of the world does.

I agree the committee is doing a great job with a prime data point being Ohio State winning it all in 2014 after jumping TCU in the last poll. Eliminating games against 1-AA teams is a solid suggestion. Ultimately, an eight team playoff with the five P5 conference champions as automatic qualifiers is where the CFP is headed.

Bob Green
11-29-2016, 05:25 PM
BOB, Thanks for your weekly reports and for sharing your knowledge and opinions.

You're welcome. Although sometimes I think it is quantity over quality. I love discussing college football.

ipatent
11-29-2016, 05:37 PM
To continue ragging on Michigan, think of it like this. If Michigan would have just beaten OSU and then lost to Wisconsin in the B10 championship, they would be out, right? So why would they get in if they didn't even play in the conference championship? That only makes sense in the case of OSU, because they don't also have a loss to unranked Iowa keeping them out..

You make a good argument, but the computer rankings (Sagarin) do a pretty good job of weighing the strength of schedules and outcomes over the course of a season. Algorithms can vary and produce slightly different results, but we have a clear order with a decent amount of separation among the top five, and UW and Clemson are as far behind Michigan as Michigan is behind Alabama:

Alabama 103.65
Ohio State 100.72
Michigan 98.37
Clemson 93.92
Washington 93.87

The computer doesn't take conference championships into account, but if you want the four best teams over the course of the season the first three are clear, and it's a close call between Clemson and UW for the last slot. Of course, the committee could put a heavy emphasis on the conference championship and leave Michigan out, but it would set quite a precedent, because you won't have many years when the strength difference between a conference champion and a non-champion under consideration is so pronounced.

arnie
11-29-2016, 05:47 PM
You make a good argument, but the computer rankings (Sagarin) do a pretty good job of weighing the strength of schedules and outcomes over the course of a season. Algorithms can vary and produce slightly different results, but we have a clear order with a decent amount of separation among the top five, and UW and Clemson are as far behind Michigan as Michigan is behind Alabama:

Alabama 103.65
Ohio State 100.72
Michigan 98.37
Clemson 93.92
Washington 93.87

The computer doesn't take conference championships into account, but if you want the four best teams over the course of the season the first three are clear, and it's a close call between Clemson and UW for the last slot. Of course, the committee could put a heavy emphasis on the conference championship and leave Michigan out, but it would set quite a precedent, because you won't have many years when the strength difference between a conference champion and a non-champion under consideration is so pronounced.

As I postulated earlier, better hope both Clemson and Washington don't lose this weekend. If so, we might have 3 Big whatevers in the playoff.

brevity
11-29-2016, 06:13 PM
Let me preface this by stating that I probably don't care*.

That said, I'm not sure why people are so interested in Big Ten head-to-head matchups when that criterion is doomed to fail:

Michigan (at home) beat Penn State 49-10
Penn State (at home) beat Ohio State 24-21
Ohio State (at home) beat Michigan 30-27

How can the committee single out any one of those scores as a determining factor and ignore the others?

*This is my annual rant as the last logical person alive. Western Michigan could go 13-0 and maybe crack the CFP top 15, which is why I hate college football. Their players (so far) did everything asked of them on the field, while the players of every team ahead of them besides Alabama did not. The likely #2 team right now is Ohio State, and their players should wear tattoos on their foreheads that say "Penn State's b----" because deep down, in their DNA, that's who they are. College football has been so corrupted that almost every fan thinks like a scheduler and not a player, and that is fundamentally wrong.

devildeac
11-29-2016, 06:16 PM
You make a good argument, but the computer rankings (Sagarin) do a pretty good job of weighing the strength of schedules and outcomes over the course of a season. Algorithms can vary and produce slightly different results, but we have a clear order with a decent amount of separation among the top five, and UW and Clemson are as far behind Michigan as Michigan is behind Alabama:

Alabama 103.65
Ohio State 100.72
Michigan 98.37
Clemson 93.92
Washington 93.87

The computer doesn't take conference championships into account, but if you want the four best teams over the course of the season the first three are clear, and it's a close call between Clemson and UW for the last slot. Of course, the committee could put a heavy emphasis on the conference championship and leave Michigan out, but it would set quite a precedent, because you won't have many years when the strength difference between a conference champion and a non-champion under consideration is so pronounced.

Waiting for Mike Corey to chime in here about m*chigan...

;)

sagegrouse
11-29-2016, 06:17 PM
As I postulated earlier, better hope both Clemson and Washington don't lose this weekend. If so, we might have 3 Big whatevers in the playoff.

Yeah, it's interesting to speculate on things like this. I do believe one reason there are humans in the loop is to maintain the credibility of the CFP and avoid a "National Championship" playoff with three of the four teams from one conference, which most believe is not substantially better than the other conferences. Or even worse, having two teams from the same conference, but omitting that conference's champion.

Kindly,
Sage Grouse
'Heck, if Duke had avoided all the dumb mistakes against Northwestern, the Big Ten would have been 0-4 against the ACC'

crf30
11-29-2016, 06:42 PM
I agree with the consensus that Michigan is pretty much dead, but I'm not sure this week's rankings will reflect that. After all, neither Wisconsin or Penn State has won a conference championship yet, and I don't believe the committee has indicated conference runner-up has any special value. Michigan has beaten both of them, in the case of Penn State quite handily. So it would not shock me for the rankings this week to be:

1. Alabama
2. OSU
3. Clemson
4. Washington
5. Michigan
6. Wisconsin
7. Oklahoma
8. Penn State
9. Colorado

I just don't think that means anything regarding the eventual playoff selection. The final Big Ten order is likely to be OSU, Wiscy/PSU winner, Michigan, Wiscy/PSU loser no matter what path we take to get there.

That's fair.



I just don't see how, right now, you can look at the wins and losses of Colorado, Penn State, and Wisconsin, compare them to the wins and losses of Michigan, and decide that Michigan comes in last. All four of those teams are 10-2, and Michigan has beaten the other three!

Now, after next week when 1 or 2 of those teams have a conference championship may be another story. But right now, how can you rank Michigan behind those teams?

Because Michigan's losses are recent. Simple as that. If Penn State had won against Pitt but lost last week to Michigan State, they would have dropped out of the top ten. When Michigan lost to Iowa, they didn't drop at all. Like I said earlier, it (theoretically) depends when you win too. That's why USC is trending up right now. I mean, in Michigan's past 3 games, they're 1-2. I just can't see how such a cold streak merits a trip to the CFP.


You make a good argument, but the computer rankings (Sagarin) do a pretty good job of weighing the strength of schedules and outcomes over the course of a season. Algorithms can vary and produce slightly different results, but we have a clear order with a decent amount of separation among the top five, and UW and Clemson are as far behind Michigan as Michigan is behind Alabama:

Alabama 103.65
Ohio State 100.72
Michigan 98.37
Clemson 93.92
Washington 93.87

The computer doesn't take conference championships into account, but if you want the four best teams over the course of the season the first three are clear, and it's a close call between Clemson and UW for the last slot. Of course, the committee could put a heavy emphasis on the conference championship and leave Michigan out, but it would set quite a precedent, because you won't have many years when the strength difference between a conference champion and a non-champion under consideration is so pronounced.

Maybe that's the point I'm driving at. "Over the course of the season" only matters in that you have to win throughout the season in order to be near the top of the heap at the end. But to differentiate between the teams that are close, who has been the better team recently should matter. As was mentioned by someone else, such was the case when OSU jumped over TCU and ended up winning it all. Now I'm not saying throw USC in there like some are, because they have that third loss that the others don't. But among 2 loss teams, I can't see Michigan having lost two of three as being deserving of a selection ahead of other teams that are on considerable winning streaks.

Wander
11-29-2016, 07:15 PM
Because Michigan's losses are recent. Simple as that. If Penn State had won against Pitt but lost last week to Michigan State, they would have dropped out of the top ten. When Michigan lost to Iowa, they didn't drop at all. Like I said earlier, it (theoretically) depends when you win too. That's why USC is trending up right now. I mean, in Michigan's past 3 games, they're 1-2. I just can't see how such a cold streak merits a trip to the CFP.


I agree that a lot of people think this way, but I've never been a fan of it, and I think it's fading away now that we have a selection committee. IMO the only reason that Michigan is "cold" and that USC is "hot" is because USC had the good fortune of playing their hardest game as their first game, and Michigan played their hardest game as their last game.

USC is vastly overrated - they're definitely good, but not Top 5 like a lot of people are talking about.

Troublemaker
11-29-2016, 07:23 PM
Just a hunch, but I think if Michigan has any chance at all, they'll need PSU to beat Wisconsin. Because Michigan beat PSU 49-10 and only beat Wisconsin 14-7. So I suspect Wisconsin would jump them but not PSU.

Hopefully Clemson and Washington win so it's all moot.

ipatent
11-29-2016, 07:34 PM
We're conditioned by the old AP poll system to think losses late in the season should hurt more than earlier ones, and a loss of any type should cause a team to drop in the rankings.

If the goal is to pick the best four teams, why should #3 drop in the playoff calculations if it loses to #2 late in the season?

Troublemaker
11-29-2016, 07:37 PM
Just a hunch, but I think if Michigan has any chance at all, they'll need PSU to beat Wisconsin. Because Michigan beat PSU 49-10 and only beat Wisconsin 14-7. So I suspect Wisconsin would jump them but not PSU.

Hopefully Clemson and Washington win so it's all moot.

However... apparently the selection committee chairman was interviewed, and things sound promising for Michigan.

Stewart MandelVerified account ‏@slmandel (https://twitter.com/slmandel) 3m3 minutes ago (https://twitter.com/slmandel/status/803759727096176640)
Hocutt: Committee spent almost 2 hours (!) the last 2 days on Washington vs. Michigan. "A lot of committee members were really struggling."


Nick BaumgardnerVerified account ‏@nickbaumgardner (https://twitter.com/nickbaumgardner) 10m10 minutes ago (https://twitter.com/nickbaumgardner/status/803756680274182144)
Hocutt: "The separation between Washington at No. 4 and Michigan at No. 5 is extremely small."


Nick BaumgardnerVerified account ‏@nickbaumgardner (https://twitter.com/nickbaumgardner) 8m8 minutes ago (https://twitter.com/nickbaumgardner/status/803757443163574276)
And based on those comments, if Colorado beats Washington, it sure sounds like they're ready to put Michigan in the playoff.


Steve LorenzVerified account ‏@TremendousUM (https://twitter.com/TremendousUM) 11m11 minutes ago (https://twitter.com/TremendousUM/status/803756828987428864)
Biggest takeaway from Hocutt: If Washington loses, Michigan is in. Sure seemed that way.

crf30
11-29-2016, 08:13 PM
I agree that a lot of people think this way, but I've never been a fan of it, and I think it's fading away now that we have a selection committee. IMO the only reason that Michigan is "cold" and that USC is "hot" is because USC had the good fortune of playing their hardest game as their first game, and Michigan played their hardest game as their last game.

USC is vastly overrated - they're definitely good, but not Top 5 like a lot of people are talking about.

Then do you disagree with my earlier point that if Penn State had beaten Pitt (so they would have been an even stronger contender with only one loss) but then lost to Michigan State that they would have dropped out of the top ten?
I agree that USC is being slightly overrated, although if they would have played in their conference championship and won they would probably deserve a top ten spot.


We're conditioned by the old AP poll system to think losses late in the season should hurt more than earlier ones, and a loss of any type should cause a team to drop in the rankings.

If the goal is to pick the best four teams, why should #3 drop in the playoff calculations if it loses to #2 late in the season?

Then are we just ignoring that they lost to Iowa and didn't drop? (Granted that was the week a bunch of the top teams took a loss).
As I said above, PSU would have dropped in a similar scenario.

I guess to me, it seems like there are a predetermined set of teams that the committee thinks deserve it. And to be honest, yeah, Michigan is probably one of the top 4 teams in the country (I'd pick them over Washington for sure). But on any given day, any team can lose, and Michigan lost those games. Maybe 9 times out of 10 they would beat Iowa, but they lost. Just because we know they are clearly a better football team, doesn't mean they get a pass for not performing.

(Basketball analogy) We wouldn't get outraged when Duke doesn't win the ACC and as a result gets a 2-seed, would we? Even when we know that Duke is one of the top 4 teams in the country. We know they deserve the 2-seed because they didn't perform well to close out the season. Kind of like how we are number one in KenPom but not in the polls. Losses matter.

I just feel like we're throwing out too much of the actual content of the season based on the fact that we know these teams are more talented (or better based on whatever metric).

To follow up on the basketball analogy, one of the reasons no one bats an eye when we get a 2-seed is we know we can still win, and the better teams will (IF THEY PERFORM and win), be there at the end. So maybe they do just need to expand the CFP. But, yeah, the stakes do get raised in November. A lot of coaches say that all their games in November feel like playoff games. But in this case, the result didn't end up having the ramifications of a playoff loss for Michigan either time, and that doesn't seem correct.


Another point of discussion: Do you guys determine the significance of a game retroactively or based on what the stakes were in the at the time of the match-up? Is OSU's loss to unranked PSU or to #7 PSU? Is PSU's loss to unranked Pitt or to #24 Pitt? Did Michigan beat unranked Colorado or #8 Colorado?

Wander
11-29-2016, 08:40 PM
Another point of discussion: Do you guys determine the significance of a game retroactively or based on what the stakes were in the at the time of the match-up? Is OSU's loss to unranked PSU or to #7 PSU? Is PSU's loss to unranked Pitt or to #24 Pitt? Did Michigan beat unranked Colorado or #8 Colorado?

Retroactively. I don't think the other way makes sense (barring injury situations you could come up with).

Michigan sitting at #5 above Wisconsin, Penn State, and Colorado is exactly what I expected. Good job to the committee for getting it right. Next week is the interesting one...

gurufrisbee
11-29-2016, 11:36 PM
This whole discussion is off base from the beginning. The Big Can't Count shouldn't be considered for multiple bids, they should be debating whether they deserve any at all. The entire conference is overrated and a mirage. Should be Bama, Washington, Clemson, and Oklahoma.

And the real debate should be why Clemson would possibly be ranked above Washington.

Olympic Fan
11-30-2016, 01:39 AM
Michigan is dead meat.

Sure, they look good vs. a bunch of teams close to them in the rankings (Washington, Colorado, Wisconsin, Penn State) but that's today.

Next Sunday, two of those three will have conference championships and Michigan won't. That's a huge factor. It's not the end-all, be-all -- Ohio State is in without a conference championship, but the chances of TWO non-champions in the four-team playoffs is non-existent. It's very much like two years ago when TCU was No. 3 in the next-to-last poll, won big on the final weekend, and finished No. 6 in the final poll -- passed by three schools that won conference championships.

Bama, Ohio State are locks for the final four.

Clemson and Washington are locks if they win their conference championship game.

If one of them loses, then the Wisconsin-Penn State winner slips in.

If both of them lose, then that opens the door for the Oklahoma-OSU winner.

There is NO scenario that could put Michigan -- the third-place team in their division of the Big Ten -- without its starting QB -- in the final four.

Wander
11-30-2016, 09:43 AM
If both of them lose, then that opens the door for the Oklahoma-OSU winner.


Oklahoma and OSU are both officially out. Colorado is ranked ahead of both of them now, and Colorado plays a higher ranked team than Oklahoma/OSU next week, and Colorado would have a conference championship of a tougher conference. So it's impossible for Colorado to be jumped by Oklahoma and OSU if Washington loses.

SCMatt33
11-30-2016, 10:29 AM
Oklahoma and OSU are both officially out. Colorado is ranked ahead of both of them now, and Colorado plays a higher ranked team than Oklahoma/OSU next week, and Colorado would have a conference championship of a tougher conference. So it's impossible for Colorado to be jumped by Oklahoma and OSU if Washington loses.

I don't think it's likely, but it's not impossible. Remember, how they play factors in as well. If there's a 60-0 type game for OU and Colorado wins 2-0 on a bad snap out of the end zone and the game is low scoring because of bad offense more than good defense, there might be a small chance of them getting the nod.

I also don't think it's impossible for Michigan to get in. If you're the committee and you're sitting there after Clemson and Washington both lose, and the Big 12 winner did nothing crazy to make you reconsider them, you have to fill two spots with either the big ten winner, Colorado, or Michigan. I don't see how you leave out the team that beat BOTH of the other two, especially if it's Penn State. In that case, Michigan not only beat both, but beat them by an average of 28 points. That would certainly meet my definition of "unequivocally better" to ignore conference titles.

Wander
11-30-2016, 10:38 AM
I also don't think it's impossible for Michigan to get in. If you're the committee and you're sitting there after Clemson and Washington both lose, and the Big 12 winner did nothing crazy to make you reconsider them, you have to fill two spots with either the big ten winner, Colorado, or Michigan. I don't see how you leave out the team that beat BOTH of the other two, especially if it's Penn State. In that case, Michigan not only beat both, but beat them by an average of 28 points. That would certainly meet my definition of "unequivocally better" to ignore conference titles.

It's pretty remarkable that Michigan has wins over all three teams it's competing against. That can't be ignored and could easily cancel out the "conference championship" factor. I don't know if it would, but as you say it is definitely not impossible.

vick
11-30-2016, 11:08 AM
It's pretty remarkable that Michigan has wins over all three teams it's competing against. That can't be ignored and could easily cancel out the "conference championship" factor. I don't know if it would, but as you say it is definitely not impossible.

For what it's worth, the selection committee head said yesterday that they don't consider any of the four criteria to differentiate "comparable" teams (championships, strength of schedule, head-to-head, and record against comparable opponents) to be more important than the others. I find it hard to believe Wisconsin wouldn't jump Michigan with a win (harder schedule, close game head-to-head), but there might be some wiggle room with Penn State. I'd still bet against it, but having second thoughts about considering them "dead."

sagegrouse
11-30-2016, 11:17 AM
Fool's Errand: It hasn't been said here, but I have argued it for years about the basketball Tournament Selection Committee. There aren't enough interconference games to confidently assess the relative strengths of the five Power Conferences; moreover, those that do occur tend to be early in the season.

The Big Ten cum Fourteen appears to have played only 12 games against the "P5 plus Notre Dame," going 8-4. On the other hand, there are 63 conference games, so there is a ton of data on relative strengths inside the Big Ten. The teams collectively had some nice wins against Colorado, Oklahoma and LSU, but all were early in the season and home games, to boot. The Big Ten also had two losses to Div. I-AA schools (ND State and Illinois State) and was only 1-3 versus the ACC.

I would urge the CFP Selection Committee to show some humility and recognize that it is just guessing about relative strengths of conferences. Accordingly, it should give greater weight to geographic (or conference) diversity. I think that's what the committee will do, but we'll find out in a few days.

Wander
11-30-2016, 11:26 AM
For what it's worth, the selection committee head said yesterday that they don't consider any of the four criteria to differentiate "comparable" teams (championships, strength of schedule, head-to-head, and record against comparable opponents) to be more important than the others. I find it hard to believe Wisconsin wouldn't jump Michigan with a win (harder schedule, close game head-to-head), but there might be some wiggle room with Penn State. I'd still bet against it, but having second thoughts about considering them "dead."

Yup - Michigan should be rooting for Penn State. I'm also not sure if Michigan would get the nod over Penn State, but it's an easier argument than Wisconsin, and it's certainly not the case that Michigan is completely dead.

Troublemaker
11-30-2016, 11:47 AM
Yeah, if it boils down to Michigan vs PSU for the last spot, I'll predict that the humans will choose Michigan (whether they should or not). 49-10 will speak loudly.

Maybe Washington and Clemson will both win, and it'll be easy and non-controversial to select the 4 teams.

I agree with sage's post, btw.

crf30
11-30-2016, 11:59 AM
I think a major factor that we haven't discussed and isn't necessarily a criteria is quality wins vs. bad losses. Because Michigan's loss to Iowa is certainly the worst loss that any of the contending teams have.

Wander
11-30-2016, 12:05 PM
I think a major factor that we haven't discussed and isn't necessarily a criteria is quality wins vs. bad losses. Because Michigan's loss to Iowa is certainly the worst loss that any of the contending teams have.

It's a good point, but Michigan's loss to Iowa is the same in quality as Penn State's loss to Pitt. Which again goes back to Michigan needing to root for Penn State instead of Wisconsin (and for Clemson or Washington to lose, obviously).

tbyers11
11-30-2016, 12:15 PM
It's a good point, but Michigan's loss to Iowa is the same in quality as Penn State's loss to Pitt. Which again goes back to Michigan needing to root for Penn State instead of Wisconsin (and for Clemson or Washington to lose, obviously).

Or Clemson's loss to Pitt should they lose to VT. Although losing to VT would be about the same quality of loss as well.

I agree with those that think it is all neat and tidy if Clemson and Washington win. If either of them (or both lose) then you've got a free-for-all between the losing school(s), Michigan and the Wisconsin/PSU winner

ipatent
11-30-2016, 12:15 PM
I don't think it's likely, but it's not impossible. Remember, how they play factors in as well. If there's a 60-0 type game for OU and Colorado wins 2-0 on a bad snap out of the end zone and the game is low scoring because of bad offense more than good defense, there might be a small chance of them getting the nod.

The guidelines specifically forbid incenting margin of victory, but in a close call it is bound to have some effect.

crf30
11-30-2016, 12:45 PM
The guidelines specifically forbid incenting margin of victory, but in a close call it is bound to have some effect.

I thought it forbade considering margin of victory when comparing common opponent games. Could be wrong though.

Olympic Fan
11-30-2016, 12:47 PM
It's a good point, but Michigan's loss to Iowa is the same in quality as Penn State's loss to Pitt. Which again goes back to Michigan needing to root for Penn State instead of Wisconsin (and for Clemson or Washington to lose, obviously).

Pitt is now No. 25 in the poll.

Michigan's loss to unranked Iowa is worse than Penn State's loss to Pitt (or Clemson's loss to Pitt).

It is the worst loss for any of the contending teams.

Wander
11-30-2016, 12:49 PM
I agree with those that think it is all neat and tidy if Clemson and Washington win. If either of them (or both lose) then you've got a free-for-all between the losing school(s), Michigan and the Wisconsin/PSU winner

Yeah, that's the bottom line summary. Two schools that are locks (Alabama and Ohio State), two schools that are locks if they win (Clemson and Washington), and four schools that have varying chances but definitely need Clemson and/or Washington to lose (Michigan, Penn State, Wisconsin, Colorado).

Note that no matter what happens, what I pointed out in the beginning of this thread is true - we'll either have a non-champion, a team with 2 losses, or both. Except that to be true in about 50% of all seasons.

Wander
11-30-2016, 12:51 PM
Pitt is now No. 25 in the poll.

Michigan's loss to unranked Iowa is worse than Penn State's loss to Pitt (or Clemson's loss to Pitt).

It is the worst loss for any of the contending teams.

Iowa would be #26 or #27. It's essentially the same as losing to Pitt on the road. Clemson's loss is worse since it came at home (although at tybers11 pointed out, that doesn't matter, since Clemson will either be obviously ahead of Michigan if they win or obviously behind Michigan if they lose).

Olympic Fan
11-30-2016, 01:10 PM
Iowa would be #26 or #27. It's essentially the same as losing to Pitt on the road. Clemson's loss is worse since it came at home (although at tybers11 pointed out, that doesn't matter, since Clemson will either be obviously ahead of Michigan if they win or obviously behind Michigan if they lose).

26 or 27? That's a huge leap. This is a team that lost at home to North Dakota State ... and that was blown out by Penn State the week before they upset overrated Michigan.

There are a bunch of 8-4 teams not ranked that have better credentials (an didn't lose to an FCS school).

SoCalDukeFan
11-30-2016, 01:19 PM
USC's toughest game was certainly their first against Alabama. But late in the season they beat Colorado and Washington and the Washington win was on the road. I think the fact that USC lost to Stanford and Utah and also did not win their division disqualifies them from the playoffs but they are playing very good football right now. Would love to see USC vs a Big 10 school in the Rose Bowl.

Winning your conference should mean something in the playoff race. No one thinks the basketball tournament is the best 68 teams but all conference champs got a shot. I think you should first put in the 4 winners of the conference championship games and then see is another school is deserving of knocking one of them out.

Lastly if Alabama beats Florida then they would have established themselves as that best team this year. Why not forget the playoffs and just give them the trophy? It seems like many want to have a playoff to determine the champ on the field but want to ignore conference champions.

SoCal

ipatent
11-30-2016, 01:22 PM
26 or 27? That's a huge leap. This is a team that lost at home to North Dakota State ... and that was blown out by Penn State the week before they upset overrated Michigan.

There are a bunch of 8-4 teams not ranked that have better credentials (an didn't lose to an FCS school).

Iowa is higher than Pitt in the Sagarin ratings.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaaf/sagarin/2017/team/

vick
11-30-2016, 01:22 PM
26 or 27? That's a huge leap. This is a team that lost at home to North Dakota State ... and that was blown out by Penn State the week before they upset overrated Michigan.

There are a bunch of 8-4 teams not ranked that have better credentials (an didn't lose to an FCS school).

Iowa is #22 in the AP poll (ahead of Pitt, at #24). Doesn't seem like a huge leap to me.

Also while North Dakota State is an FCS school, they're a very good one who would probably be favored against a number of ACC schools (including quite possibly Duke).

tbyers11
11-30-2016, 01:24 PM
26 or 27? That's a huge leap. This is a team that lost at home to North Dakota State ... and that was blown out by Penn State the week before they upset overrated Michigan.

There are a bunch of 8-4 teams not ranked that have better credentials (an didn't lose to an FCS school).

The SRS computer ratings have Iowa at #26 and Pitt at #34. Without any bias toward what schools/conferences are overrated that suggests they are similar teams

North Dakota St is an FCS school, but they are 5-time defending FCS champs and are 10-1 this year.

Wander
11-30-2016, 01:25 PM
26 or 27? That's a huge leap. This is a team that lost at home to North Dakota State ... and that was blown out by Penn State the week before they upset overrated Michigan.

There are a bunch of 8-4 teams not ranked that have better credentials (an didn't lose to an FCS school).

I'm not going to get dragged into an argument about how much worse a 1-point loss on the road to Iowa is than a 3-point loss on the road to Pitt. The point is that they're close enough to be comparable and splitting hairs between the two wouldn't matter except in the most extreme of tiebreaker scenarios.

I'm not necessarily predicting Michigan will make it in if Clemson/Washington loses, but it's pretty clear from the selection committee that it's within the realm of possibility and that they're not completely "dead." Just as it's clear that it doesn't take an extreme once-in-a-lifetime set of circumstances for a 2 loss team to make it in.

SCMatt33
11-30-2016, 01:26 PM
I thought it forbade considering margin of victory when comparing common opponent games. Could be wrong though.

That's how I read it. The term "margin of victory" is only included for that single bullet point. So the committee can't say "Well Penn State lost to Michigan by 39, but Colorado only lost by 17, so therefore Colorado is better". They CAN say "Well Michigan beat the pants off of Penn State by 39, and that trumps a conference title". Will the committee use that logic, we don't know, but it's not forbidden.

crf30
12-01-2016, 10:37 AM
I agree that a lot of people think this way, but I've never been a fan of it, and I think it's fading away now that we have a selection committee. IMO the only reason that Michigan is "cold" and that USC is "hot" is because USC had the good fortune of playing their hardest game as their first game, and Michigan played their hardest game as their last game.

USC is vastly overrated - they're definitely good, but not Top 5 like a lot of people are talking about.

Thought about this a little more. Had Michigan's games vs. OSU and Iowa been flipped, I bet they drop a lot more after the second loss. Since they were undefeated when they lost to Iowa, they didn't drop. But had they went from a 1 loss team to a 2 loss team with a loss to Iowa, they would have dropped quite a bit I think. So in this regard they are benefitting from having their hardest game last.


Yeah, that's the bottom line summary. Two schools that are locks (Alabama and Ohio State), two schools that are locks if they win (Clemson and Washington), and four schools that have varying chances but definitely need Clemson and/or Washington to lose (Michigan, Penn State, Wisconsin, Colorado).

Note that no matter what happens, what I pointed out in the beginning of this thread is true - we'll either have a non-champion, a team with 2 losses, or both. Except that to be true in about 50% of all seasons.

I would say that no matter what happens, we will definitely have a non-champion in the playoff (OSU). We might end up getting two of them, and a 2 loss team, if Michigan gets in.


That's how I read it. The term "margin of victory" is only included for that single bullet point. So the committee can't say "Well Penn State lost to Michigan by 39, but Colorado only lost by 17, so therefore Colorado is better". They CAN say "Well Michigan beat the pants off of Penn State by 39, and that trumps a conference title". Will the committee use that logic, we don't know, but it's not forbidden.

I wonder if they can say, "Penn State beat the pants of Iowa, and the next week Michigan lost to Iowa," (that's not comparing margins of victory, since both teams didn't win) or if they just say PSU beat them, Michigan didn't.

(If you guys can't tell, I will be disappointed if Michigan gets in).

Bob Green
12-02-2016, 09:01 PM
I'm getting ready to watch the Pac 12 Championship Game. Washington's pass oriented offense versus Colorado's #1 pass defense. Hopefully it is an entertaining game.

In other bowl related news, if Navy beats Temple on Saturday, it could paralyze the bowl game announcements:

http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/18189507/conference-bowl-officials-considering-plans-navy-midshipmen-win-american-athletic-conference


A Temple win against Navy on Saturday would eliminate the Midshipmen from Cotton Bowl contention and allow all the bowl selections to be announced Sunday, prompting one bowl official to admit "I don't want to be un-American, but nearly everyone in the bowl industry, quite frankly, is rooting against Navy."

Go Navy!!!

YmoBeThere
12-02-2016, 10:44 PM
Both of these teams look awful.

arnie
12-02-2016, 11:29 PM
Both of these teams look awful.

Colorado certainly looks awful. UW looking better for playoff spot.

gurufrisbee
12-03-2016, 12:42 AM
Those are two of the best defenses in the nation. But one of them still scored 41 points. Unless your name is Alabama, there is no one with a clearly better resume.

Olympic Fan
12-03-2016, 12:51 AM
Washington's 41-10 win certainly simplifies things.

36 hours before the selection show and we know three of the final four -- Alabama, Ohio State and now Washington.

The only game that really matters Saturday is Clemson-Virginia Tech. If Clemson wins, everything works out smoothly -- no drama and no chaos.

If the Hokies pull the upset, then it opens the door for the Big Ten champ.

I'm assuming that even if Alabama were to lose to Florida -- which I do not expect -- the Tide is still in the final four.

The Penn State-Wisconsin game only has impact if Clemson loses.

gofurman
12-03-2016, 02:04 AM
Iowa is #22 in the AP poll (ahead of Pitt, at #24). Doesn't seem like a huge leap to me.

***Also while North Dakota State is an FCS school, they're a very good one who would probably be favored against a number of ACC schools (including quite possibly Duke).


THIS - North Dakota State has won 5 or 6 CONSECUTIVE games v FBS opponents ... 5 consecutive FCS national titles etc. they are far better than the App State team that won 3 national titles and famously beat Michigan. Most FBS teams are (correctly) ranked below NDSU. NDSU also sent Carson Wentz as the number two overall player in last years draft at QB as most of you know

While a team vying for an FBS title should probably lose to NDSU let's not underestimate the because of FCS label. They. Just. Win. It's scary to think hiw good they might be if they played w FBS 85 scholarships

YmoBeThere
12-03-2016, 06:13 AM
Colorado certainly looks awful. UW looking better for playoff spot.

I gave up at half time, at that point UW's quarterback was maybe 1 of 6 passing. It'll be interesting to see what they do against 'bama.

bob blue devil
12-03-2016, 07:11 AM
Washington's 41-10 win certainly simplifies things.

36 hours before the selection show and we know three of the final four -- Alabama, Ohio State and now Washington.

The only game that really matters Saturday is Clemson-Virginia Tech. If Clemson wins, everything works out smoothly -- no drama and no chaos.

If the Hokies pull the upset, then it opens the door for the Big Ten champ.

I'm assuming that even if Alabama were to lose to Florida -- which I do not expect -- the Tide is still in the final four.

The Penn State-Wisconsin game only has impact if Clemson loses.

agree with your scenarios - it looks pretty simple at the moment.

if clemson wins at least we have the fun wrinkle of osu getting in ahead of its conference champ. i kind of wish that wasn't possible, but don't have a good solution. here's a wacky idea - have the committee rank the teams, but then have the top four teams earn a spot for their conference rather than themselves. then the slots get occupied by conference champ first, then by rank within conference. so then osu's slot gets occupied by big10 champ, alabama's slot goes to florida if they lose to florida, if clemson loses, big10 gets another slot for osu. wow, the talking heads would hate that and it would be pretty unfair, but it would be a lot of fun - conference championship games would be even more huge!

i wonder if alabama loses how far they would drop. i mean, what is their best win? against now 3 loss usc way back at the start of the season? home against now 4 loss auburn? i'd definitely move them behind osu. tougher call vs. clemson (assuming they win) and washu.

SCMatt33
12-03-2016, 11:20 AM
I wonder if they can say, "Penn State beat the pants of Iowa, and the next week Michigan lost to Iowa," (that's not comparing margins of victory, since both teams didn't win) or if they just say PSU beat them, Michigan didn't.

(If you guys can't tell, I will be disappointed if Michigan gets in).

Technically, they CAN say whatever they want. If they wanted to consider margin, they can just throw it into their nebulous general eye test type thoughts. Within the specific bullet point of common opponents supposedly only used to separate close teams, they aren't supposed to incentivize margin of victory. Whether that mean they will qualitatively use how dominant a team was, who knows, but certainly they'll consider that Penn State beat them and Michigan didn't. Though they'll also consider that Penn State got them at home and Michigan got them on the road. Of course, they'll also consider all of the common games, which if Penn State wins today, they'll be 7-0 against that group while Michigan will be 5-2. Of coursthe, they also consider championships won, strength of schedule, and head to head in that same group of bulllet points.

Of course, I'm just rooting that Clemson can make this all moot after last night took one path away for these teams.

Olympic Fan
12-03-2016, 11:27 AM
Assuming wins by Clemson and Alabama today, I think it's pretty safe to say the playoffs will be:

No. 1 Alabama vs. No. 4 Washington

No. 2 Ohio State vs. No. 3 Clemson

If Clemson loses, I see Washington moving up to No. 3 and the Penn State-Wisconsin winner getting the No. 4 spot.

I really don't know what happens if Alabama loses ... except they are still in the top four. But do they stay at No. 1 or drop to No. 2 (or even No. 3 behind Clemson)? Tough call -- losing to Florida at this point would be a pretty bad loss. Of course, I don't expect it to happen.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
12-03-2016, 11:35 AM
Based on absolutely nothing but what the media seems to think of the Alabama program, I suspect it would take an act of God to get the out of the #1 spot. I don't expect them to lose today, but I think they would have to reallg get smacked around to slip in the eyes of the committee.

gurufrisbee
12-03-2016, 11:37 AM
I think it's dangerous to rule out almost any possibility at this point.

Could they move Washington to 3? Absolutely. The Huskies easily have just as good of a resume as Clemson and more than anything the committee wants to create controversy and buzz and attention and get ratings. They absolutely get better ratings in the semifinals creating a rematch of last year's championship game as well as a traditional old Rose Bowl type match up on the other side.

Could they move Washington to 5? Absolutely. The committee would get more controversy and buzz than ever by moving Michigan in at 4. Or they could try to justify their inclusion of a non conference winner by at least including the winner of that conference.

The last thing this is actually about is getting the four best/most deserving teams in.

vick
12-03-2016, 12:07 PM
I think it's dangerous to rule out almost any possibility at this point.

Could they move Washington to 3? Absolutely. The Huskies easily have just as good of a resume as Clemson and more than anything the committee wants to create controversy and buzz and attention and get ratings. They absolutely get better ratings in the semifinals creating a rematch of last year's championship game as well as a traditional old Rose Bowl type match up on the other side.

Could they move Washington to 5? Absolutely. The committee would get more controversy and buzz than ever by moving Michigan in at 4. Or they could try to justify their inclusion of a non conference winner by at least including the winner of that conference.

The last thing this is actually about is getting the four best/most deserving teams in.

I think it is extremely unlikely the committee moves Washington below Michigan by this point. I would be happy to offer massive odds to anyone who wants to take the other side of that bet.

The committee is not as random as people think and I would argue that most of the "controversies" arise when people want to inject criteria beyond trying to identify the four best teams (e.g., "how can you not consider USC--their losses were in September!" "Well obviously we should only have conference champions," etc.).

gurufrisbee
12-03-2016, 12:21 PM
I think it is extremely unlikely the committee moves Washington below Michigan by this point. I would be happy to offer massive odds to anyone who wants to take the other side of that bet.

The committee is not as random as people think and I would argue that most of the "controversies" arise when people want to inject criteria beyond trying to identify the four best teams (e.g., "how can you not consider USC--their losses were in September!" "Well obviously we should only have conference champions," etc.).

Agreed - they aren't random. They are fairly predictable in that they are motivated by creating controversies and buzz and not at all interested in actually getting the four best/most deserving teams in those spots, unless it will get them the best ratings and most revenue.

Olympic Fan
12-03-2016, 12:39 PM
I think it's dangerous to rule out almost any possibility at this point.

Could they move Washington to 3? Absolutely. The Huskies easily have just as good of a resume as Clemson and more than anything the committee wants to create controversy and buzz and attention and get ratings. They absolutely get better ratings in the semifinals creating a rematch of last year's championship game as well as a traditional old Rose Bowl type match up on the other side.

Could they move Washington to 5? Absolutely. The committee would get more controversy and buzz than ever by moving Michigan in at 4. Or they could try to justify their inclusion of a non conference winner by at least including the winner of that conference.

The last thing this is actually about is getting the four best/most deserving teams in.

Let me get this straight.

Washington is No. 4 ahead of No. 5 Michigan in the next-to-the-last poll.

Washington beats No. 8 Colorado 41-10 to win a conference championship, while Michigan -- third in its division -- is idle.

And you're suggesting the committee could "Absolutely" move Michigan to four and drop Washington to five?

I'm sorry, the situation is open to a lot of variables, but that suggestion is ludicrous.

vick
12-03-2016, 01:00 PM
Agreed - they aren't random. They are fairly predictable in that they are motivated by creating controversies and buzz and not at all interested in actually getting the four best/most deserving teams in those spots, unless it will get them the best ratings and most revenue.

This is just not consistent with the evidence. Let's look at computer rankings, which are of course imperfect but not biased toward controversy. In 2014 (http://www.masseyratings.com/cf/arch/compare2014-15.htm), prior to bowls, the "composite" rankings were as follows:

1. Alabama (in playoff)
2. Oregon (in playoff)
3. TCU
4. Ohio St. (in playoff)
5. Baylor
6. Florida St. (in playoff)

Likewise, 2015 (http://www.masseyratings.com/cf/arch/compare2015-14.htm):

1. Alabama (in playoff)
2. Clemson (in playoff)
3. Oklahoma (in playoff)
4. Ohio St.
5. Michigan St. (in playoff)

So in 2014, the team that "shouldn't" have gotten in was the undefeated defending national champion on a 29-game winning streak! Sounds "deserving" to me. In 2015, they selected Mich. St. over Ohio St., which was the right decision but hardly a controversy-generating move, nor one that you would do to generate ratings.

The "problem" such as it is is that the term "best/most deserving" doesn't actually work to begin with, since those aren't the same thing. Frankly, the only team which has any real gripe in my view is TCU '14 (but then of course they would have been victimized by the head-to-head vs. Baylor).

Wander
12-03-2016, 01:10 PM
Could they move Washington to 5? Absolutely. The committee would get more controversy and buzz than ever by moving Michigan in at 4. Or they could try to justify their inclusion of a non conference winner by at least including the winner of that conference.

The last thing this is actually about is getting the four best/most deserving teams in.

I don't know what's rubbed you the wrong way about the committee, but there is an exact 0% chance of Michigan jumping Washington. 0%. There is a chance that Michigan could be ahead of the Penn State/Wisconsin winner, which I'm sure some people would find controversial although it shouldn't be (you can make a reasonable argument for or against it).

I don't see any evidence that they're motivated by creating controversies or whatever.

gurufrisbee
12-03-2016, 01:48 PM
Let me get this straight.

Washington is No. 4 ahead of No. 5 Michigan in the next-to-the-last poll.

Washington beats No. 8 Colorado 41-10 to win a conference championship, while Michigan -- third in its division -- is idle.

And you're suggesting the committee could "Absolutely" move Michigan to four and drop Washington to five?

I'm sorry, the situation is open to a lot of variables, but that suggestion is ludicrous.


I don't know what's rubbed you the wrong way about the committee, but there is an exact 0% chance of Michigan jumping Washington. 0%. There is a chance that Michigan could be ahead of the Penn State/Wisconsin winner, which I'm sure some people would find controversial although it shouldn't be (you can make a reasonable argument for or against it).

I don't see any evidence that they're motivated by creating controversies or whatever.

You're entitled to your opinions, of course, but it absolutely can happen. Michigan gets better ratings and their fans will travel better. That alone makes it absolutely possible. We all saw what happened to TCU and Baylor two seasons ago. The committee threw all logic and basis in what had actually happened on the field during the season and picked the four teams that got it the best shot at revenue through ratings and travelling fans. Up until the final call, the committee is about generating attention and that's why you see ridiculous things like Texas A&M and other laughable things during the season. But the final one is about revenue. Pure and simple.

Troublemaker
12-03-2016, 01:55 PM
You're entitled to your opinions, of course, but it absolutely can happen. Michigan gets better ratings and their fans will travel better. That alone makes it absolutely possible. We all saw what happened to TCU and Baylor two seasons ago. The committee threw all logic and basis in what had actually happened on the field during the season and picked the four teams that got it the best shot at revenue through ratings and travelling fans. Up until the final call, the committee is about generating attention and that's why you see ridiculous things like Texas A&M and other laughable things during the season. But the final one is about revenue. Pure and simple.

Completely different situations, imo, but I have a feeling you're performing a reverse-jinx anyway. Congrats on the Pac-10 title and locking up a playoff spot. Impressive performance by the Huskies.