Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Thoughts on new CFP rankings
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Soobahk40050 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,574
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 108
I Root For: Tennessee
Location:
Post: #1
Thoughts on new CFP rankings
Within the top 10 I think the committee got it mostly right.
The SEC I hate to admit is having a down year, but if Georgia beats LSU, I think we still have a good case for 2 teams. If Georgia loses, then that opens the door for either Alabama or, more likely, Utah/Oregon. In the wild case that Utah/Oregon both end up with 2 losses, there is a chance the Big 10 gets two in. And OK is basically eliminated.

So, in order of likelihood:
One team from each P5 with the Big 12 being left out
SEC gets two
BIG gets two

Clemson losing could even mean two SEC vs two Big 10 in the right circumstances.
11-19-2019 11:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,914
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 189
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #2
RE: Thoughts on new CFP rankings
I wish they would have left the BCS computer ratings system in place and just added more teams to the playoffs. I really dislike a room full of "experts" deciding this.
11-20-2019 02:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BePcr07 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,930
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 356
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #3
RE: Thoughts on new CFP rankings
I think LSU, Ohio St, and Clemson win out. I think Ohio St adds wins against ranked Michigan and potential top-10 Penn St and Minnesota. I think Oregon wins out as well, giving us:

Peach Bowl: #1 Ohio St vs #4 Oregon
Fiesta Bowl: #2 LSU vs #3 Clemson
Rose Bowl: Minnesota vs Utah
Sugar Bowl: Alabama vs Oklahoma
Orange Bowl: Georgia vs Virginia Tech
Cotton Bowl: Penn St vs Memphis
11-20-2019 12:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
murrdcu Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,973
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation: 144
I Root For: Arkansas
Location:
Post: #4
RE: Thoughts on new CFP rankings
Wins vs ????????? ?????? Top 25 teams:

- LSU: 3 (#5, #11, #16)

- Georgia: 3 (#11, #15, #16)

- Ohio St: 2 (#12 & #19)

- Baylor: 2 (#21 & #22)

- Penn St: 2 (#13 & #17)

- Oklahoma: 2 (#14 & #22)

- Minnesota: 1 (#8)

- Oregon: 1 (#23)

- Alabama: 0

- Clemson: 0

Found on twitter.

Still two weeks left in season and another week for conference championship games
11-21-2019 08:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


bill dazzle Offline
Craft beer and urban living enthusiast
*

Posts: 10,611
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 970
I Root For: Vandy/Memphis/DePaul/UNC
Location: Nashville
Post: #5
RE: Thoughts on new CFP rankings
(11-20-2019 02:23 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  I wish they would have left the BCS computer ratings system in place and just added more teams to the playoffs. I really dislike a room full of "experts" deciding this.

I would like to see an eight-team playoff but ONLY if a member of the Group of Five is included (assuming, of course, certain requirements are met from that G5 team — such as, say 12 wins and a league title).

Winners of each P5 (though, say, 11 wins is required of each), two at-large teams and the G5 team. Eight teams. It can work.
11-21-2019 08:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BePcr07 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,930
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 356
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #6
RE: Thoughts on new CFP rankings
(11-21-2019 08:59 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(11-20-2019 02:23 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  I wish they would have left the BCS computer ratings system in place and just added more teams to the playoffs. I really dislike a room full of "experts" deciding this.

I would like to see an eight-team playoff but ONLY if a member of the Group of Five is included (assuming, of course, certain requirements are met from that G5 team — such as, say 12 wins and a league title).

Winners of each P5 (though, say, 11 wins is required of each), two at-large teams and the G5 team. Eight teams. It can work.

Unless the rules changes on scheduling requirements, this all but guarantees a split between the power schools and non-power schools because no non-power school will then schedule a power school OOC. They will schedule their 1 allowable FCS game plus 2-3 other non-power schools.

If there is a split, this actually may be the one way to do it and not get sued for being anticompetitive.
11-21-2019 10:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #7
RE: Thoughts on new CFP rankings
(11-21-2019 10:18 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(11-21-2019 08:59 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(11-20-2019 02:23 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  I wish they would have left the BCS computer ratings system in place and just added more teams to the playoffs. I really dislike a room full of "experts" deciding this.

I would like to see an eight-team playoff but ONLY if a member of the Group of Five is included (assuming, of course, certain requirements are met from that G5 team — such as, say 12 wins and a league title).

Winners of each P5 (though, say, 11 wins is required of each), two at-large teams and the G5 team. Eight teams. It can work.

Unless the rules changes on scheduling requirements, this all but guarantees a split between the power schools and non-power schools because no non-power school will then schedule a power school OOC. They will schedule their 1 allowable FCS game plus 2-3 other non-power schools.

If there is a split, this actually may be the one way to do it and not get sued for being anticompetitive.

No, autobids would free up the power schools schedule as OOC losses would not matter that much. The focus would shift to winning the conference. Strength of schedule would be factors along with ranking to determine seeding and for picking the two wild card teams. When you consider that fans are staying away from body bag games, putting together a H/H series with a quality opponent is the perfect remedy. What would go away would be the kickoff games.

As for the rankings, I think the committee is hoping desperately that UGA losses again so they can put Oregon into the playoffs.
(This post was last modified: 11-21-2019 06:44 PM by vandiver49.)
11-21-2019 06:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
Craft beer and urban living enthusiast
*

Posts: 10,611
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 970
I Root For: Vandy/Memphis/DePaul/UNC
Location: Nashville
Post: #8
RE: Thoughts on new CFP rankings
(11-21-2019 10:18 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(11-21-2019 08:59 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(11-20-2019 02:23 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  I wish they would have left the BCS computer ratings system in place and just added more teams to the playoffs. I really dislike a room full of "experts" deciding this.

I would like to see an eight-team playoff but ONLY if a member of the Group of Five is included (assuming, of course, certain requirements are met from that G5 team — such as, say 12 wins and a league title).

Winners of each P5 (though, say, 11 wins is required of each), two at-large teams and the G5 team. Eight teams. It can work.

Unless the rules changes on scheduling requirements, this all but guarantees a split between the power schools and non-power schools because no non-power school will then schedule a power school OOC. They will schedule their 1 allowable FCS game plus 2-3 other non-power schools.

If there is a split, this actually may be the one way to do it and not get sued for being anticompetitive.


That's a good point. Maybe my approach to this would not work.
11-22-2019 11:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.