(12-10-2019 11:15 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 11:08 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 10:57 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 10:14 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 02:11 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  They dominated 7-5 ASU who beat Oregon
They dominated 7-5 Cal
They beat 7-5 Washington

That’s two more P5 teams with a winning record than Bama did. Three if you consider 7-5 BYU as a de-facto P5. They even have a win over a meh 6-6 team by blowout like Bama does too. (WSU compared to MSU)

I would imagine that if you were forced to bet your life on the outcome of an Alabama vs Utah bowl game this year, and were given a betting line of Alabama giving 10 points, you'd still pick Alabama without batting an eye.

Nobody in their right mind thinks Utah would beat Alabama.

They aren’t tasked with “who would you bet on?”. They are tasked with weighing resume as well.

IIRC, the CFP has always said there job is to pick the "best teams", where "best" isn't
defined by any given technical criterion but rather is just the overall impression created by a conglomeration of many factors.

We all know Alabama is better than Utah. Nobody thinks Utah would beat Alabama. So yes, the "bet on" criterion is a good way to think about it, because it captures and summarizes all those factors.

IMO, Alabama is WAY under-ranked. If Alabama were to play any of the teams ranked after #5 in the CFP, they would be a favorite against all of them, and a pretty big favorite, at least 7 points. Penn State is the only one that would give me pause about who would win the game, and it would take me about 5 seconds to say "Alabama" to that as well. And I don't think you believe otherwise.

And the computers say UVA is the #33 team. They shouldn't be ranked, it is purely a courtesy to the ACC and Orange Bowl to (a) avoid embarrassment for the former and (b) excuse the Orange Bowl from having to invite someone, thus creating hard feelings. UVA is 'rank' not ranked.

So why play the games if we aren’t going to hold beating NO ONE of consequence against someone?

At some point it has to matter

Clemson beat absolutely nobody of consequence and yet they are in the playoffs.

True, they didn't lose to anybody like Alabama did, but again that could be because they didn't play anyone of consequence.

But we can all see that this is basically the same Clemson team that Dabo has had the past 5 years. It's obvious to the eyes.

(12-10-2019 11:15 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 11:08 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 10:57 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 10:14 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 02:11 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  They dominated 7-5 ASU who beat Oregon
They dominated 7-5 Cal
They beat 7-5 Washington

That’s two more P5 teams with a winning record than Bama did. Three if you consider 7-5 BYU as a de-facto P5. They even have a win over a meh 6-6 team by blowout like Bama does too. (WSU compared to MSU)

I would imagine that if you were forced to bet your life on the outcome of an Alabama vs Utah bowl game this year, and were given a betting line of Alabama giving 10 points, you'd still pick Alabama without batting an eye.

Nobody in their right mind thinks Utah would beat Alabama.

They aren’t tasked with “who would you bet on?”. They are tasked with weighing resume as well.

IIRC, the CFP has always said there job is to pick the "best teams", where "best" isn't
defined by any given technical criterion but rather is just the overall impression created by a conglomeration of many factors.

We all know Alabama is better than Utah. Nobody thinks Utah would beat Alabama. So yes, the "bet on" criterion is a good way to think about it, because it captures and summarizes all those factors.

IMO, Alabama is WAY under-ranked. If Alabama were to play any of the teams ranked after #5 in the CFP, they would be a favorite against all of them, and a pretty big favorite, at least 7 points. Penn State is the only one that would give me pause about who would win the game, and it would take me about 5 seconds to say "Alabama" to that as well. And I don't think you believe otherwise.

And the computers say UVA is the #33 team. They shouldn't be ranked, it is purely a courtesy to the ACC and Orange Bowl to (a) avoid embarrassment for the former and (b) excuse the Orange Bowl from having to invite someone, thus creating hard feelings. UVA is 'rank' not ranked.

So why play the games if we aren’t going to hold beating NO ONE of consequence against someone?

At some point it has to matter

Sure didn't hold Utah to that same standard. Auburn has wins over Oregon(who murdered Utah) and Alabama.

AT some point it has to matter.

(12-10-2019 10:57 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 10:14 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 02:11 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 10:23 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 06:18 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  Bama is ranked as low as they are because they have no top 25 wins and only have one win against a winning P5 team by 13 against Texas A&M who is unranked and 7-5. At some point that has to matter.

They lost close to LSU? So did unranked Texas

They lost close to Auburn? So did A&M

Actually beating good teams matters.

Then why is Utah #11?

They dominated 7-5 ASU who beat Oregon
They dominated 7-5 Cal
They beat 7-5 Washington

That’s two more P5 teams with a winning record than Bama did. Three if you consider 7-5 BYU as a de-facto P5. They even have a win over a meh 6-6 team by blowout like Bama does too. (WSU compared to MSU)

I would imagine that if you were forced to bet your life on the outcome of an Alabama vs Utah bowl game this year, and were given a betting line of Alabama giving 10 points, you'd still pick Alabama without batting an eye.

Nobody in their right mind thinks Utah would beat Alabama.

They aren’t tasked with “who would you bet on?”. They are tasked with weighing resume as well.

When you combine the two Bama has a serious lack of good wins and a weak SOS where they lost to the best teams they played.

You can dispute what they should be ranking but given what they are tasked with it shouldn’t be a surprise that they have them there.

Folks in Vegas probably think that Texas A&M, Iowa State, Washington, and others would beat UVA but the Hoos actually won enough games to get a resume that warrants inclusion. They won 9, beat four bowl teams, lost only to bowl teams, and only Clemson was out of hand.

I may not bet on them but at some point what you’ve done matters as much or more than who you’d place bets on.

Not really. It has absolutely nothing to do with "deserves" or resume. Its who they think is best. Maybe they have looked at Utah and think they are pretty good. But Alabama has looked pretty good in every game. Utah has not looked so good in their two games with decent competition.

Sagarin has Alabama #4 (apparently due to MOV). They are 0-2 vs. top 10 and 1-2 vs. top 30 with a 54 schedule.
Utah is #14. They are 0-1 vs. top 10 and 1-2 vs. top 30 with a 49 schedule.
Auburn by contrast is #10. They are 2-2 vs. top 10 and 3-3 vs. top 30 with a #2 schedule. Only Ohio St. and LSU (3-0) have more than 1 win vs. top 10.

(12-10-2019 11:23 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 02:21 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 09:48 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Just my takes on the final CFP rankings:

Yay ... The CFP got the Final 4 right, in terms of the teams and the seedings.

Nay ..... Alabama is criminally under-ranked.

Alabama at #13? Does anyone doubt even this wounded, Tua-less Alabama would be a favorite over every team ranked ahead of them at least up until #5? And probably over Georgia too? Heck probably over Oklahoma? You'd have to get to the three unbeaten teams to choose over them.

If you had to bet your life on the winner of these games in a bowl on a neutral field, who would you bet on over Alabama?

Auburn? Nope. Auburn needed miracles - not just a 'doink' missed FG but TWO freak pick-sixes and the refs giving them a FG try at the end of the half to squeak out a 3-point win over Bama at home.

Penn State? Not a chance. Maybe keep it to 10 point margin.
Wisconsin? Alabama would beat them by 20.
Florida? Please. Alabama wins that game 31 - 14.
Utah? Are you serious? Even worse than Wisky and Florida.
Oregon? Don't make me laugh. Alabama would mow them down.
Baylor? Are you kidding?

Seriously, Alabama should be ranked #5 or so. And i HATE Alabama, LOL.

Yay .... Got the G5 rankings all right. Not only Memphis #1, but then Boise and App State ahead of Cincy, but also getting Navy in as well. Five G5 teams in from three different conferences, and deservedly so. Heck if anything, Air Force should have been in there too. Banner year for the G5.

Nay ... Utah ranked way too high. Does anyone think Utah could beat any of the four teams ranked behind them? It didn't matter because they didn't make the NY6 anyway but still

More generally, this shows IMO a flaw in the CFP approach, namely, teams not getting stung bad for losing CCGs. It's like the committee is saying "well, they play an extra game against a good team while others stay home, so we won't punish them much". That is dumb thinking. A game is DATA and can't be ignored!

Look at the ranked CCG game losers this past week ... nobody fell much at all. It makes no sense. When you lose, especially if you get routed, you should FALL just as if it was October.

Bottom line ... Cincy should be behind Navy, Wisky should be behind Penn State.

Heck, we can say a similar thing about H2H, the CFP overrates it. Auburn should be behind Alabama, Michigan behind Notre Dame. H2H is a tie-breaker, not a be-all.

Anyway.

Quo you need to do your homework on the 1 second given to Auburn at the end of the first half. Rules require that time on the clock be reviewed and Auburn had just gained a first down which stops the clock. The game officials, the head of the officials, and the SEC office all confirmed that it was the correct call. Now when Saban asked for 1 more second a few years ago that was a miracle.

And another thing, defense is part of the game, and backup QB's are ripe for the picking.

Now I agree that Alabama should be ranked higher, but razzing Auburn over the 1 second is just wrong as it was plainly within the rules. Sell that troll elsewhere.

But your general premise I agree with. The committee got the right 4 teams and in the correct order. And Alabama should be higher. But all of the rankings after #4 were just ESPN bowl placement and promotional material and are meaningless compared to the AP.

That's Auburn/Alabama thing at end of half, I think we're going to find some sort of rules change. At least a 2-3 second run off. A team shouldn't benefit from something where if it was done properly they couldn't get a play off. If the clock had stopped with 1 second to go, marked ready to play, and spike- time would have run out.

Yes, well said.

IMO, a simple fix would just be a "no substitution" rule before the clock restart on a time-remaining replay review unless the team wanting to substitute has a timeout they can use to actually stop the clock.

That wouldn't prevent a team from spiking the ball or snapping the ball and running another play with the same personnel they had before the stoppage, but then again, since the clock does stop for the movement of the changes, it is possible they could have done that anyway even if the correct timing call had been made on the field.

But setting up for a FG is impossible.

(12-10-2019 11:30 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 11:15 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 11:08 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 10:57 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 10:14 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I would imagine that if you were forced to bet your life on the outcome of an Alabama vs Utah bowl game this year, and were given a betting line of Alabama giving 10 points, you'd still pick Alabama without batting an eye.

Nobody in their right mind thinks Utah would beat Alabama.

They aren’t tasked with “who would you bet on?”. They are tasked with weighing resume as well.

IIRC, the CFP has always said there job is to pick the "best teams", where "best" isn't
defined by any given technical criterion but rather is just the overall impression created by a conglomeration of many factors.

We all know Alabama is better than Utah. Nobody thinks Utah would beat Alabama. So yes, the "bet on" criterion is a good way to think about it, because it captures and summarizes all those factors.

IMO, Alabama is WAY under-ranked. If Alabama were to play any of the teams ranked after #5 in the CFP, they would be a favorite against all of them, and a pretty big favorite, at least 7 points. Penn State is the only one that would give me pause about who would win the game, and it would take me about 5 seconds to say "Alabama" to that as well. And I don't think you believe otherwise.

And the computers say UVA is the #33 team. They shouldn't be ranked, it is purely a courtesy to the ACC and Orange Bowl to (a) avoid embarrassment for the former and (b) excuse the Orange Bowl from having to invite someone, thus creating hard feelings. UVA is 'rank' not ranked.

So why play the games if we aren’t going to hold beating NO ONE of consequence against someone?

At some point it has to matter

Clemson beat absolutely nobody of consequence and yet they are in the playoffs.

True, they didn't lose to anybody like Alabama did, but again that could be because they didn't play anyone of consequence.

But we can all see that this is basically the same Clemson team that Dabo has had the past 5 years. It's obvious to the eyes.

And Clemson would have faced long odds had they lost as a result.

If you lose to the only top teams you play you’ve effectively eliminated yourself.

This isn’t get Vegas’s favorites for an invitational- you have to win big games to win a title.

(12-10-2019 11:36 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 11:15 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 11:08 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 10:57 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 10:14 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I would imagine that if you were forced to bet your life on the outcome of an Alabama vs Utah bowl game this year, and were given a betting line of Alabama giving 10 points, you'd still pick Alabama without batting an eye.

Nobody in their right mind thinks Utah would beat Alabama.

They aren’t tasked with “who would you bet on?”. They are tasked with weighing resume as well.

IIRC, the CFP has always said there job is to pick the "best teams", where "best" isn't
defined by any given technical criterion but rather is just the overall impression created by a conglomeration of many factors.

We all know Alabama is better than Utah. Nobody thinks Utah would beat Alabama. So yes, the "bet on" criterion is a good way to think about it, because it captures and summarizes all those factors.

IMO, Alabama is WAY under-ranked. If Alabama were to play any of the teams ranked after #5 in the CFP, they would be a favorite against all of them, and a pretty big favorite, at least 7 points. Penn State is the only one that would give me pause about who would win the game, and it would take me about 5 seconds to say "Alabama" to that as well. And I don't think you believe otherwise.

And the computers say UVA is the #33 team. They shouldn't be ranked, it is purely a courtesy to the ACC and Orange Bowl to (a) avoid embarrassment for the former and (b) excuse the Orange Bowl from having to invite someone, thus creating hard feelings. UVA is 'rank' not ranked.

So why play the games if we aren’t going to hold beating NO ONE of consequence against someone?

At some point it has to matter

Sure didn't hold Utah to that same standard. Auburn has wins over Oregon(who murdered Utah) and Alabama.

AT some point it has to matter.

Even then Utah has wins over three P5’s with winning records and two by blowout.

Bama? A decent win Vs Texas a&m who hasn’t got an above .500 win on their resume.

Both have one win Vs a .500 P5 team.

It’s the same standard and now that they’ve both lost twice they are closely ranked.

(12-10-2019 11:40 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 10:57 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 10:14 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 02:11 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 10:23 PM)bullet Wrote:  Then why is Utah #11?

They dominated 7-5 ASU who beat Oregon
They dominated 7-5 Cal
They beat 7-5 Washington

That’s two more P5 teams with a winning record than Bama did. Three if you consider 7-5 BYU as a de-facto P5. They even have a win over a meh 6-6 team by blowout like Bama does too. (WSU compared to MSU)

I would imagine that if you were forced to bet your life on the outcome of an Alabama vs Utah bowl game this year, and were given a betting line of Alabama giving 10 points, you'd still pick Alabama without batting an eye.

Nobody in their right mind thinks Utah would beat Alabama.

They aren’t tasked with “who would you bet on?”. They are tasked with weighing resume as well.

When you combine the two Bama has a serious lack of good wins and a weak SOS where they lost to the best teams they played.

You can dispute what they should be ranking but given what they are tasked with it shouldn’t be a surprise that they have them there.

Folks in Vegas probably think that Texas A&M, Iowa State, Washington, and others would beat UVA but the Hoos actually won enough games to get a resume that warrants inclusion. They won 9, beat four bowl teams, lost only to bowl teams, and only Clemson was out of hand.

I may not bet on them but at some point what you’ve done matters as much or more than who you’d place bets on.

Not really. It has absolutely nothing to do with "deserves" or resume. Its who they think is best. Maybe they have looked at Utah and think they are pretty good. But Alabama has looked pretty good in every game. Utah has not looked so good in their two games with decent competition.

Sagarin has Alabama #4 (apparently due to MOV). They are 0-2 vs. top 10 and 1-2 vs. top 30 with a 54 schedule.
Utah is #14. They are 0-1 vs. top 10 and 1-2 vs. top 30 with a 49 schedule.
Auburn by contrast is #10. They are 2-2 vs. top 10 and 3-3 vs. top 30 with a #2 schedule. Only Ohio St. and LSU (3-0) have more than 1 win vs. top 10.

Are we trying to determine best if they played 100 times or are we trying to determine a champion on the field? Each ranking system between the CFP rankings or Sagarin is aimed at one of the teo targets.

(12-09-2019 01:29 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-09-2019 11:45 AM)dbackjon Wrote:  Alabama isn't that good without Tua.

They didn't belong in the NY6 bowl.

H2H can't be ignored. Why else play the games?

they did play a top 12 team on the road to basically a draw. Hardly call that not that good.

Strange, I thought they lost.

They got the Top 4 right, which I think is the key. So no CFP playoffs. There should be no argument there.

Rankings can be questioned 5-13, sure. But rankings are not Purely the ranking within "Vegas Odds", measuring them up. It's also what you "earn".

I would rank a P12 Champ with 1L, in a down year for the P12 -- over an SEC team with 2L who didn't make the SEC Championship game. Even if, say, Vegas Odds would probably have them as the favorite by 5-7 pts.