https://collegefootballplayoff.com/sport...e-protocol
"...9. PAIRINGS FOR SEMIFINALS
The team ranked No. 1 by the selection committee will play team No. 4 in the semifinals. Team No. 2 will meet team No. 3.

When assigning teams to sites, the committee will place the top two seeds at the most advantageous sites, weighing criteria such as convenience of travel for its fans, home‐crowd advantage or disadvantage and general familiarity with the host city and its stadium. Preference will go to the No. 1 seed....

All displaced conference champions and the highest‐ranked champion from a non‐contract conference, as ranked by the committee, will participate in selected other bowl games and will be assigned to those games by the committee. If berths in the selected other bowl games remain available after those teams have been identified, the highest‐ranked other teams, as ranked by the committee, will fill those berths in rank order.

(Note: A “displaced conference champion” is a champion of a contract conference that does not qualify for the playoff in a year when its contract bowl hosts a semifinal game.)

The committee shall create the best matchups in these bowl games in light of the following considerations. None of these considerations shall affect the ranking of teams. Also, none of these considerations will be controlling in determining the assignment of teams to available bowl games.

The committee will use geography as a consideration in the pairing of teams and assigning them to available bowl games.

The committee will attempt to avoid regular‐season rematches when assigning teams to bowls.

To benefit fans and student‐athletes, the committee will attempt to avoid assigning a team, or conference, or the highest‐ranked champion of a non‐contract conference, to the same bowl game repeatedly.

The committee will consider regular‐season head‐to‐head results when assigning teams to bowls.

The committee will consider conference championships when assigning teams to bowls...."

So they only talk about 1-4 and 2-3 in the semi-finals but specifically mention avoiding rematches for the "otther bowls."

Seems like a clear intent to ignore it when assigning teams to semi-finals.

(12-04-2022 02:38 AM)bullet Wrote:  https://collegefootballplayoff.com/sport...e-protocol
"...9. PAIRINGS FOR SEMIFINALS
The team ranked No. 1 by the selection committee will play team No. 4 in the semifinals. Team No. 2 will meet team No. 3.

When assigning teams to sites, the committee will place the top two seeds at the most advantageous sites, weighing criteria such as convenience of travel for its fans, home‐crowd advantage or disadvantage and general familiarity with the host city and its stadium. Preference will go to the No. 1 seed....

All displaced conference champions and the highest‐ranked champion from a non‐contract conference, as ranked by the committee, will participate in selected other bowl games and will be assigned to those games by the committee. If berths in the selected other bowl games remain available after those teams have been identified, the highest‐ranked other teams, as ranked by the committee, will fill those berths in rank order.

(Note: A “displaced conference champion” is a champion of a contract conference that does not qualify for the playoff in a year when its contract bowl hosts a semifinal game.)

The committee shall create the best matchups in these bowl games in light of the following considerations. None of these considerations shall affect the ranking of teams. Also, none of these considerations will be controlling in determining the assignment of teams to available bowl games.

The committee will use geography as a consideration in the pairing of teams and assigning them to available bowl games.

The committee will attempt to avoid regular‐season rematches when assigning teams to bowls.

To benefit fans and student‐athletes, the committee will attempt to avoid assigning a team, or conference, or the highest‐ranked champion of a non‐contract conference, to the same bowl game repeatedly.

The committee will consider regular‐season head‐to‐head results when assigning teams to bowls.

The committee will consider conference championships when assigning teams to bowls...."

So they only talk about 1-4 and 2-3 in the semi-finals but specifically mention avoiding rematches for the "otther bowls."

Seems like a clear intent to ignore it when assigning teams to semi-finals.

Who was asked the other day if Ryan Day's seat wasn't getting the teensiest bit warm after losing to Michigan 2 years in a row. I suspect getting into the playoffs guarantees he's still ice cold, though a 2nd lopsided loss to Michigan could make for fun and interesting drama to uninterested 3rd parties such as myself.

If the CFP does not factor in rematches for the playoffs, and if it makes the IMO error of putting TCU in the playoffs, then the proper seedings should be Georgia, Michigan, Ohio State and TCU.

Georgia is #1, and should not have to play a very talented, and thus dangerous, OSU team, while Michigan gets to feast on TCU. It should be the opposite - Georgia gets to cruise past TCU while UM and OSU play. Plus, UM did dominate OSU once, they should be able to do it again.

(12-04-2022 08:10 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  If the CFP does not factor in rematches for the playoffs, and if it makes the IMO error of putting TCU in the playoffs, then the proper seedings should be Georgia, Michigan, Ohio State and TCU.

Georgia is #1, and should not have to play a very talented, and thus dangerous, OSU team, while Michigan gets to feast on TCU. It should be the opposite - Georgia gets to cruise past TCU while UM and OSU play. Plus, UM did dominate OSU once, they should be able to do it again.

I agree. In fact, I think it follows mathematically!

The three directives of the CFP committee:

Prime Directive: If possible, all four teams in the top 4 positions should have at most one loss.

Secondary Directive: If a team is ranked and loses, then in the subsequent ranking, the team should be either unranked or ranked strictly lower than they were in the week before their loss.

Tertiary Directive: If team A is ranked higher than team B and team A performs "better" than team B, then in the subsequent rankings, team A should be ranked higher than team B.

From the Prime Directive, the only four candidates for spots 1-4 are 1. Georgia, 2. Michigan, 3. TCU, and 5. Ohio State. From the Secondary Directive, we know that TCU's ranking must decrease, so they must be ranked #4. Georgia is ranked higher than Michigan and defeated a ranked team while Michigan defeated an unranked team by nearly the same margin, so Georgia performed better than Michigan. Ergo, by the Tertiary Directive, Georgia must be ranked higher than Michigan. Similarly, Michigan was ranked higher than Ohio State and won a game whereas Ohio State did not play a game. Thus, Michigan performed better than Ohio State. By the Tertiary Directive, Michigan must be ranked higher than Ohio State. The only ranking that satisfies these requirements are 1. Georgia, 2. Michigan, 3. Ohio State, 4. TCU.

The thing is, TCU was not one spot above OSU, so if it is notionally dropped down to the spot that USC previously held, it would still be above OSU, and it would have been, if USC had won, Georgia vs TCU, That School Up North versus USC.

But USC did lose, so that spot is vacant, the notional number four spot in the previous ranking becomes third by elimination, and OSU stumbles into the fourth spot. They can only move up by elimination, since after their ill-disciplined display in the second half of their game against That School Up North, they did not play in Week 14.

(12-04-2022 11:51 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  The thing is, TCU was not one spot above OSU, so if it is notionally dropped down to the spot that USC previously held, it would still be above OSU, and it would have been, if USC had won, Georgia vs TCU, That School Up North versus USC.

But USC did lose, so that spot is vacant, the notional number four spot in the previous ranking becomes third by elimination, and OSU stumbles into the fourth spot. They can only move up be elimination, since after their ill-disciplined display in the second half of their game against That School Up North, they did not play in Week 14.

That makes sense, but IMO this logic was a big break for Michigan and a bad one for Georgia. Michigan, the #2, gets to play a team it can beat easily, whereas #1 Georgia has to face a very talented, much more dangerous OSU team.

Michigan basically gets almost a free pass to the title game, IMO. That should have belonged to Georgia.

(12-04-2022 01:13 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-04-2022 11:51 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  The thing is, TCU was not one spot above OSU, so if it is notionally dropped down to the spot that USC previously held, it would still be above OSU, and it would have been, if USC had won, Georgia vs TCU, That School Up North versus USC.

But USC did lose, so that spot is vacant, the notional number four spot in the previous ranking becomes third by elimination, and OSU stumbles into the fourth spot. They can only move up be elimination, since after their ill-disciplined display in the second half of their game against That School Up North, they did not play in Week 14.

That makes sense, but IMO this logic was a big break for Michigan and a bad one for Georgia. Michigan, the #2, gets to play a team it can beat easily, whereas #1 Georgia has to face a very talented, much more dangerous OSU team.

Michigan basically gets almost a free pass to the title game, IMO. That should have belonged to Georgia.

I bet you 3 rep points Quo that TCU takes Michigan. They've played in a tougher conference and they will start fast. McCarthy was sharp enough against a Purdue team which managed to beat Florida Atlantic by 2 and lost to Syracuse. I'm not sure they've faced anyone but Ohio State who has size and speed and the pressure upon him will be much greater with TCU. And as to Georgia, they were going to have to get through Ohio State in one game or the other to win it.

I see that Kansas St is a 5.5 point underdog vs Alabama.

So much for the posts on here that TCU would be a 14+ point underdog vs Alabama.

(12-04-2022 01:48 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  I see that Kansas St is a 5.5 point underdog vs Alabama.

So much for the posts on here that TCU would be a 14+ point underdog vs Alabama.

The Wildcats have a decent shot against Alabama. K State plays solid defense. That's what TCU couldn't handle when they played them. Alabama and TCU are both built for shootouts this year. I don't know what happened to the Tide's defense, but it's barely a C grade by Alabama standards. What they have this year we called a matador defense. They wave their red cape and shout, "Ole'" as the backs run through or as the receivers run by it. That's why Alabama lost twice and was too close in two more and why Auburn (a pitiful Auburn team at that) had more rushing yards against it than any Saban coached Alabama team had ever given up.

(12-04-2022 12:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-03-2022 10:46 PM)AuzGrams Wrote:  That was kinda pathetic to me that Saban is defending a 10-2 season for what he’s done for Alabama, the SEC.

Well, it is his job to stand up for his team.

Middling SEC teams beat the ACC champion and the Pac-12 champion.

Meanwhile the Big 12 Champion lost to a G5 champion.

In my opinion wins in the Big 12 are simply not comparable to wins in the SEC.

I would expect Alabama to beat TCU by 2 to 3 touchdowns, probably be a 15-point favorite. So I think he should be speaking out.

Happened that the G5 champion lost to a very sorry Southern Mississippi team.

(12-04-2022 01:48 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  I see that Kansas St is a 5.5 point underdog vs Alabama.

So much for the posts on here that TCU would be a 14+ point underdog vs Alabama.

That spread will also drop as half the bama players opt out of the bowl to prep for the Combine.

I guess we've figured out who #5 is between bama and tOSU...it was bama. With tOSU failing upward to 4.

(12-04-2022 02:46 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(12-04-2022 01:48 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  I see that Kansas St is a 5.5 point underdog vs Alabama.

So much for the posts on here that TCU would be a 14+ point underdog vs Alabama.

That spread will also drop as half the bama players opt out of the bowl to prep for the Combine.

I guess we've figured out who #5 is between bama and tOSU...it was bama. With tOSU failing upward to 4.

They didn't say how many Bama players were on the board, but of the top 20 NFL prospects, Ohio St. had 7 and UGA 6. Top 5 were all Ohio St., UGA or TCU.

From what we've seen, most people leaving will sit out. I don't think I'd play if I were Bryce Young, as banged up as he has been. But then maybe its required by his Dr. Pepper NIL deal!

(12-04-2022 03:07 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-04-2022 02:46 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(12-04-2022 01:48 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  I see that Kansas St is a 5.5 point underdog vs Alabama.

So much for the posts on here that TCU would be a 14+ point underdog vs Alabama.

That spread will also drop as half the bama players opt out of the bowl to prep for the Combine.

I guess we've figured out who #5 is between bama and tOSU...it was bama. With tOSU failing upward to 4.

They didn't say how many Bama players were on the board, but of the top 20 NFL prospects, Ohio St. had 7 and UGA 6. Top 5 were all Ohio St., UGA or TCU.

From what we've seen, most people leaving will sit out. I don't think I'd play if I were Bryce Young, as banged up as he has been. But then maybe its required by his Dr. Pepper NIL deal!

That's a good point actually. Could NIL deals get players to go back to actually playing in bowl games outside of the CFP? I could definitely see that in the contracts, and I think that would be wonderful if so. It's so frustrating to see significant numbers of kids sitting out.

(12-04-2022 01:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-04-2022 01:13 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-04-2022 11:51 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  The thing is, TCU was not one spot above OSU, so if it is notionally dropped down to the spot that USC previously held, it would still be above OSU, and it would have been, if USC had won, Georgia vs TCU, That School Up North versus USC.

But USC did lose, so that spot is vacant, the notional number four spot in the previous ranking becomes third by elimination, and OSU stumbles into the fourth spot. They can only move up be elimination, since after their ill-disciplined display in the second half of their game against That School Up North, they did not play in Week 14.

That makes sense, but IMO this logic was a big break for Michigan and a bad one for Georgia. Michigan, the #2, gets to play a team it can beat easily, whereas #1 Georgia has to face a very talented, much more dangerous OSU team.

Michigan basically gets almost a free pass to the title game, IMO. That should have belonged to Georgia.

I bet you 3 rep points Quo that TCU takes Michigan. They've played in a tougher conference and they will start fast. McCarthy was sharp enough against a Purdue team which managed to beat Florida Atlantic by 2 and lost to Syracuse. I'm not sure they've faced anyone but Ohio State who has size and speed and the pressure upon him will be much greater with TCU. And as to Georgia, they were going to have to get through Ohio State in one game or the other to win it.

Alright JR, rep-points challenge accepted!

Plus, if I (Michigan) lose, I will post a new thread apologizing to TCU and those who supported them, because I have been vociferously against their inclusion in the playoffs. I don't expect you to do the same in reverse as you have not been as vocal the other way. I have, so I should have to eat crow if I am wrong.

(12-04-2022 01:48 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  I see that Kansas St is a 5.5 point underdog vs Alabama.

So much for the posts on here that TCU would be a 14+ point underdog vs Alabama.

As others have noted, I think that Alabama is likely to see a lot of top players opt out of the bowl game.

Whereas if it was a playoff game, they would play. So I suspect that Vegas is expecting a weakened Alabama team to show up in the Sugar Bowl, not the full-force team that would have played in the playoffs.

Kansas State, not having that kind of talent, will imo likely arrive at full strength

Had it been the playoffs, I think the line would be double that 5.5, at least.

(12-04-2022 03:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-04-2022 01:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-04-2022 01:13 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-04-2022 11:51 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  The thing is, TCU was not one spot above OSU, so if it is notionally dropped down to the spot that USC previously held, it would still be above OSU, and it would have been, if USC had won, Georgia vs TCU, That School Up North versus USC.

But USC did lose, so that spot is vacant, the notional number four spot in the previous ranking becomes third by elimination, and OSU stumbles into the fourth spot. They can only move up be elimination, since after their ill-disciplined display in the second half of their game against That School Up North, they did not play in Week 14.

That makes sense, but IMO this logic was a big break for Michigan and a bad one for Georgia. Michigan, the #2, gets to play a team it can beat easily, whereas #1 Georgia has to face a very talented, much more dangerous OSU team.

Michigan basically gets almost a free pass to the title game, IMO. That should have belonged to Georgia.

I bet you 3 rep points Quo that TCU takes Michigan. They've played in a tougher conference and they will start fast. McCarthy was sharp enough against a Purdue team which managed to beat Florida Atlantic by 2 and lost to Syracuse. I'm not sure they've faced anyone but Ohio State who has size and speed and the pressure upon him will be much greater with TCU. And as to Georgia, they were going to have to get through Ohio State in one game or the other to win it.

Alright JR, rep-points challenge accepted!

Plus, if I (Michigan) lose, I will post a new thread apologizing to TCU and those who supported them, because I have been vociferously against their inclusion in the playoffs. I don't expect you to do the same in reverse as you have not been as vocal the other way. I have, so I should have to eat crow if I am wrong.

Back in the early 70's two of my best friends (they were brothers) got skeet shotguns for Christmas. They each got a case of skeet loads for those 12 gauges (over and under). They promptly went to a pasture out back of their home and opened up on a bunch of grackles. Their father was a doctor in WWII in Africa. He had a deep respect for life. He made his sons pick up the dead birds, clean them, and had his wife make them a grackle pie. They were required to eat all of it. They never opened up on targets of opportunity again.

Sometimes eating a little crow, or grackle, is a healthy reminder for anyone, not just you, who opens up on a target of opportunity. We have way too much of that around here. Some of it is in the open, and some of it is in reputation knocks. What you are is opinionated. You have to take a number to claim that title around here.

I don't see the opinionated as a problem as long as they own it, and you always have. Young punks taking random shots at birds they don't agree with, especially when they don't forward a solid counter argument, or in many cases even attempt one, are about to draw my peculiar interest.

I posted a thread in the important threads section called the 10 Commandments of AUP for the CS/CR forum. Drive by shootings are one of the "Thou shalt not" commandments.

So, forgive me for using your gracious acceptance of a bet for an opportunity to bring this to the board's attention, but ignorance of the law shall not be a defense.

And Quo, when the talking heads at ESPN hype a school, or talk one down, the betting reflects it, and since the house wins 85% of the time that means what they sell never happens. And PT Barnum prevails, "A sucker is born every minute."

Just look at the lines in these playoff games yesterday. The obvious wasn't obvious at all!

(12-04-2022 03:23 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-04-2022 01:48 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  I see that Kansas St is a 5.5 point underdog vs Alabama.

So much for the posts on here that TCU would be a 14+ point underdog vs Alabama.

As others have noted, I think that Alabama is likely to see a lot of top players opt out of the bowl game.

Whereas if it was a playoff game, they would play. So I suspect that Vegas is expecting a weakened Alabama team to show up in the Sugar Bowl, not the full-force team that would have played in the playoffs.

Kansas State, not having that kind of talent, will imo likely arrive at full strength

Had it been the playoffs, I think the line would be double that 5.5, at least.

Paul Finebaum of all people said Saban using that argument was kind of ridiculous, that we don't look at things based on point spreads. That Alabama had been favored in all but 2 games going back to 2009. If we did it based on point spreads, Saban would have 14 or 15 MNCs instead of 6.

(11-27-2022 12:27 AM)Just Joe Wrote:  Top 3 are easy (3 undefeateds), I think number 4 is too (USC). Who’s on deck if TCU or USC slips up next week? A 2 loss Alabama or an Ohio St that just got blown out at home.

Have them meet on the field instead of getting in by sitting on the couch. If USC needs to play a 13th game, so do they.

(12-04-2022 03:54 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-04-2022 03:23 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-04-2022 01:48 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  I see that Kansas St is a 5.5 point underdog vs Alabama.

So much for the posts on here that TCU would be a 14+ point underdog vs Alabama.

As others have noted, I think that Alabama is likely to see a lot of top players opt out of the bowl game.

Whereas if it was a playoff game, they would play. So I suspect that Vegas is expecting a weakened Alabama team to show up in the Sugar Bowl, not the full-force team that would have played in the playoffs.

Kansas State, not having that kind of talent, will imo likely arrive at full strength

Had it been the playoffs, I think the line would be double that 5.5, at least.

Paul Finebaum of all people said Saban using that argument was kind of ridiculous, that we don't look at things based on point spreads. That Alabama had been favored in all but 2 games going back to 2009. If we did it based on point spreads, Saban would have 14 or 15 MNCs instead of 6.

Well, point spreads and favorites aren't perfect, but they are usually right. IIRC, the favorite has won about 75% of the time this CFB season.

IMO it is a good "eye test" metric, it tells us what the collective hive mind of bettors thinks.

I mean, what is Alabama's winning % since 2009? It's pretty good.

That said, IMO Alabama deserved a spot over TCU based on results on the field. To me, losing two games in the SEC is better than losing one in the B12. The SEC is just a better league, I think.

(12-04-2022 03:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-04-2022 01:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-04-2022 01:13 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-04-2022 11:51 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  The thing is, TCU was not one spot above OSU, so if it is notionally dropped down to the spot that USC previously held, it would still be above OSU, and it would have been, if USC had won, Georgia vs TCU, That School Up North versus USC.

But USC did lose, so that spot is vacant, the notional number four spot in the previous ranking becomes third by elimination, and OSU stumbles into the fourth spot. They can only move up be elimination, since after their ill-disciplined display in the second half of their game against That School Up North, they did not play in Week 14.

That makes sense, but IMO this logic was a big break for Michigan and a bad one for Georgia. Michigan, the #2, gets to play a team it can beat easily, whereas #1 Georgia has to face a very talented, much more dangerous OSU team.

Michigan basically gets almost a free pass to the title game, IMO. That should have belonged to Georgia.

I bet you 3 rep points Quo that TCU takes Michigan. They've played in a tougher conference and they will start fast. McCarthy was sharp enough against a Purdue team which managed to beat Florida Atlantic by 2 and lost to Syracuse. I'm not sure they've faced anyone but Ohio State who has size and speed and the pressure upon him will be much greater with TCU. And as to Georgia, they were going to have to get through Ohio State in one game or the other to win it.

Alright JR, rep-points challenge accepted!

Plus, if I (Michigan) lose, I will post a new thread apologizing to TCU and those who supported them, because I have been vociferously against their inclusion in the playoffs. I don't expect you to do the same in reverse as you have not been as vocal the other way. I have, so I should have to eat crow if I am wrong.

That's a weird hill to die on. I'd give Michigan the advantage, but I bet the line is less than a TD. Maybe if they were playing Georgia.