Still #1
- Thread starter bbqbully
- Start date
Who would you put in over them at this point?
I have to admit that I'm pretty surprised with the committee's selections these past two weeks. Pleasantly so. I have to wonder if the way they're handling the rankings may affect how voters poll in the AP and Coaches over the next few years. I wouldn't mind seeing less reactionary voting all throughout.
I have to admit that I'm pretty surprised with the committee's selections these past two weeks. Pleasantly so. I have to wonder if the way they're handling the rankings may affect how voters poll in the AP and Coaches over the next few years. I wouldn't mind seeing less reactionary voting all throughout.
They just took a little mental break
after MSU and Om kicked their ***.
They were in left field for the Bama game.
I suspect they had a come to Jesus session during their off period.
Like where in the hell is your (five star)manhood?
after MSU and Om kicked their ***.
They were in left field for the Bama game.
I suspect they had a come to Jesus session during their off period.
Like where in the hell is your (five star)manhood?
Last edited:
I keep hearing that at this point the committee is giving emphasis to the team's "body of work." Who they've played, how well they played in their "tough" games, etc. If that is the case, FSU can't hold a candle to us or Oregon. Who have they played? Clemson? ND? Louisville? Those weren't cakewalks for them. FSU would be a middle tier team in the SEC and, though it hurts me to say it, also in the PAC 10.
Yep.
Also: there should be no more talk of SEC bias, though I'm sure there will be. It doesn't bode well for us that Alabama can't break in with one loss. We have to win out. Too many one loss teams this year and it's too late in the year to get a loss.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around a head-to-head matchup only being a tiebreaker if all else is equal. I find that to be borderline insane. If you want to say Baylor's resume isn't nearly as impressive as TCU's right now, that's fine, but if both of them win out and TCU gets the nod over a team that beat them....wow.
I disagree. 7 SEC teams are ranked, including TAMU. I still can't get over the fact that a team who lost 59-0 can be ranked in the Top 25, but they are. If Bama beats MSU, I think MSU stays in the top 4, or certainly in the Top 6, unless its a total blowout. Then if MSU can beat UMiss they will likely get in the playoffs. If we do lose next week, we might want to pull for UMiss to beat Arkansas and stay in the Top 10.
I agree
The one thing everyone talks about is that TCU was up 3 touchdowns in the 4th. The thing nobody talks about is that Baylor had almost 300 more total yards than TCU and lost the turnover 3-1 to TCU and still won the game.
The one thing everyone talks about is that TCU was up 3 touchdowns in the 4th. The thing nobody talks about is that Baylor had almost 300 more total yards than TCU and lost the turnover 3-1 to TCU and still won the game.
Actually don't mind that.
At least you can argue that TCU has a couple of strong wins over KSU and Minnesota. Baylor lost to the 'neers, hasn't played KSU yet, and has nothing of note from OOC. A single win over TCU shouldn't necessarily balance that out.
What I thought was interesting, though, were what seemed to be references to margins of victory when comparing Bama and TCU, when the criteria say this (http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/selection-committee-protocol) --
When circumstances at the margins indicate that teams are comparable, then the following criteria must be considered:
Maybe they felt the need for a 5th tiebreaker
At least you can argue that TCU has a couple of strong wins over KSU and Minnesota. Baylor lost to the 'neers, hasn't played KSU yet, and has nothing of note from OOC. A single win over TCU shouldn't necessarily balance that out.
What I thought was interesting, though, were what seemed to be references to margins of victory when comparing Bama and TCU, when the criteria say this (http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/selection-committee-protocol) --
When circumstances at the margins indicate that teams are comparable, then the following criteria must be considered:
- Championships won
- Strength of schedule
- Head-to-head competition (if it occurred)
- Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory)
Maybe they felt the need for a 5th tiebreaker
I basically took that to mean that the committee wants to see how Baylor handles Kansas State. The only thing that TCU really has over Baylor is beating KState as well as playing and beating Minnesota. From how I interpreted it, if both teams end up with 1 loss and there's little to no parity of deserving teams between and behind them, then they both get in; if there's going to be just one representative from the B12, then Baylor gets in because of the head to head. By season's end, both of their resumes will be similar enough that head to head can warrant Baylor getting the nod over TCU, but both teams stand a shot at making it depending on how a few other games shake up.
I'm not sure that's fair especially when there are teams with worse losses than that. A&M certainly had 3 bad losses with the last one being horrible, but there are teams with close loses to horrible teams. In my opinion, if you're going to take that into account, then you also have to take into account of a 6-3 Utah losing to a 3-7 Washington State, a team that managed to score 59 points against Cal and STILL lost. At this point in time, a lot of teams have plenty of bad losses, but not everyone views certain criteria as being worse than others. For me, who you lost to, is much worse than margin of victory especially when you consider the situations leading up to and during the game.
There's one big difference between TCU and Baylor, besides the fact Baylor hasn't faced K-State yet. TCU beat a 7-2 Minnesota team 30-7. Baylor's non-conference schedule is about as strong as ours is. We'll see how good Minnesota is when they close out with Ohio St., Wisconsin and Nebraska. But right now, I suspect the committee is giving TCU credit for a strong non-conference win.
Utter nonsense? The only reason FSU is #2 in the voting polls is because they started the year at #1 and haven't lost.
When you don't start with a preseason ranking, why is FSU higher than Oregon? Oregon seems, from what I have seen, to be a lethal team. Florida State, from what I have seen, seems to be an incredibly good team that isn't as dominant as Oregon.
Disagree with the rankings?- sure, that's reasonable. But to claim they are utter nonsense and credibility has been lost?- that's just a slight bit much.
They shuffled the lineup to show they are not scared to shake it up. They want to show they are independent thinkers and not puppets of the media or simply going to regurgitate the order of existing polls. This last poll was more of a power play than anything else. They know the polls will shake themselves out for the most part, and that these early polls mean very little.
That is apparently what they are doing, but I can't simply erase from my mind that they've won 20+ games in a row including the national championship last year.
I feel like the committee is working very post hoc to set up a politically acceptable top four. If we were to lose to Bama and win out, we'd clearly have the best resume of the one loss teams, having only lost to a team ranked #5 at the time and now ranked #1 or #2. But we'll have to see should that come to pass.
I feel like the committee is working very post hoc to set up a politically acceptable top four. If we were to lose to Bama and win out, we'd clearly have the best resume of the one loss teams, having only lost to a team ranked #5 at the time and now ranked #1 or #2. But we'll have to see should that come to pass.
And there is no difference in 2 and 3. I guess one will be listed as "Home" on the scoreboard and wear dark jerseys. The other will be listed as visitors and wear white. That's the extent of the difference in being #2 and being #3. So the committee also exerted their power without making a meaningful swap.
As long as they go undefeated, they'll be #1 or #2 (depending on what we do)....
Now if they lose a game, and still win the ACC at 12-1, that #4 spot will be in play for another 1-loss team like Baylor perhaps (or maybe us). The ACC and Big 10 champs will get no respect from the committee unless they're undefeated.
Now if they lose a game, and still win the ACC at 12-1, that #4 spot will be in play for another 1-loss team like Baylor perhaps (or maybe us). The ACC and Big 10 champs will get no respect from the committee unless they're undefeated.
Oh come on.....you don't know what they were thinking. I don't buy any conspiracy theories, agendas, or beliefs that the committee was trying to make a statement. I honestly believe they started the week off with a clean slate, they are getting used to the way they analyze the teams, and the consensus was that Oregon deserved to move ahead of FSU. Moving Oregon up certainly sent a message that their prior rankings were not carved in stone, but I don't think they made the move to intentionally make a statement or a "power play."
So far, I like what I'm seeing. As a couple other posters have pointed out, the committee seems to be using a team's body of work and the eyeball test as key components to their rankings. This bodes well for MSU in my mind as we already have three very strong performances against A&M, Auburn, and LSU, and we'll have at least a couple more chances to make a statement. If we end up getting smoked by Bama and Ole Miss, so be it and we shouldn't be in the title picture. If we win out or only lose one in reasonable fashion, however, I'll like our odds of still getting into the playoffs.
Oh, well then, I stand corrected.**
There is a subtle but significant distinction that Jeff Long tried to draw last night. The rankings make a statement, no doubt. However, the committee is not manipulating their rankings to intentionally make a statement.
There is a subtle but significant distinction that Jeff Long tried to draw last night. The rankings make a statement, no doubt. However, the committee is not manipulating their rankings to intentionally make a statement.
Let's calm it down a little bit. Losing at home to Arizona is not better than winning.
Well, Herbstreit doesn't really have a clue what they were thinking either. He's just speculating. The truth in all of this is having the committee release mid-season rankings was a huge mistake that just opens them up for criticism. They should have just done like the basketball selection committee and announced their bowl pairings at the end of the season.
I don't think it was a "huge mistake" but I have always questioned why they would do it this way. Now that its here, though, I love it. Generates a LOT of conversation, and provides a certain level of transparency to the process. I don't think the committee can be worried about criticism....the #5 and #6 teams were going to be bitching in December no matter what. Personally, I think these rankings have given me confidence in the fairness and impartiality of the committee.
Here's the thing to consider about Baylor and TCU: It doesn't matter where they are ranked right now. If Baylor wins out, they will be in the playoff ahead of TCU on the strength of the head-to-head and having won the conference. Right NOW, the schedules aren't the same, but the Big XII's round-robin scheduling makes all conference schedules equal.
I don't know what's
crazier, A&M being in the top 25 after the beatings administered by MSU, UM and Bama, or ASU being #6 after losing by 5 TDs at home to UCLA. A UCLA team whose best win, at least according to the Sagarin ratings, is #33 Arizona followed by Texas and Memphis, who are ranked within 5 spots of one another in the Sagarin ratings. MEMPHIS is one of UCLA's 2 or 3 best wins of the year. And UCLA beat ASU by 35 at ASU. ASU might finish dead last in the SECW. They'd definitely finish behind MSU, Bama, Auburn, Ole Miss, and probably LSU. I doubt they'd want any part of A&M or Arkansas either, although they might beat those two. It's a damned travesty they are ranked #6 in the CFP.
crazier, A&M being in the top 25 after the beatings administered by MSU, UM and Bama, or ASU being #6 after losing by 5 TDs at home to UCLA. A UCLA team whose best win, at least according to the Sagarin ratings, is #33 Arizona followed by Texas and Memphis, who are ranked within 5 spots of one another in the Sagarin ratings. MEMPHIS is one of UCLA's 2 or 3 best wins of the year. And UCLA beat ASU by 35 at ASU. ASU might finish dead last in the SECW. They'd definitely finish behind MSU, Bama, Auburn, Ole Miss, and probably LSU. I doubt they'd want any part of A&M or Arkansas either, although they might beat those two. It's a damned travesty they are ranked #6 in the CFP.
Definitely agree that I feel they should have held their rankings till the last week. There's a lot about the selection process I don't like even though they've won me over the past couple of weeks. I feel that in order to make this better, quite a few things need to be changed, but so far.. they're not doing too bad.