-
Registration is disabled due to constant spammers. Email [email protected] and we will temporarily re-enable registration for you.
CFB Playoff Top 25 Rankings Presented By In-N-Out
- Thread starter bruin
- Start date
coogrfan
Well-Known Member
Two losses, both on the road, by a combined 3 points to a pair of top 10 teams = "showed their ass"?
jobob 5.0
I Am Reborn
Bama STILL doesn't have an offense... so unless they can lobby to change the rules (and, hey, it could happen because... Nick Saban) to increase the play clock to 2 minutes so Derrick Henry can catch his breath in between his 60 - 80 carries next week... Bama gon' go down.
It'll be another 3-2 shitshow. As anemic as UF's offense is, if they can just key on Henry and slow him down, it will be better than Bama's.
Compared to UF's offense Bama's pretty high speed not to mention Bama has an actual FG unit that can like kick XPs and stuff (speaking of shit shows have you seen the Gaytors FG kicking). Bama still has Henry, a lot of speed at WR and Coker at times is effective.
I will be shocked if this isn't like 35-3.
jobob 5.0
I Am Reborn
Dude, don't try to sell me on Bama's FG unit. The same headcase Polack who was money in the Iron Bowl started off the season by missing something like 12 straight field goals. He could revert in an instant.
...I don't see GoGatah getting to 35. Bama's offense sucks, but the D is still pretty stout.
Short fields, turnovers....UF just barely survived Florida Atlantic at home.
It's a stone cold lock to cover the 17 (or whatever the line is).
silverwheels
PLAY LA BAMBA BABY
#BRAND
Rutgers Mike
Dr. Sad
OMG why am I watching this CFB Playoff special on Fox?
Rutgers Mike
Dr. Sad
why would you think that?
DHawkeye
only mostly dead
Wooly
Well-Known Member
This is a good point. If the rise high enough, the ACC Championsip could be a play-in game, like the B1G is now.
If Clemson does lose, how do they stack up to the other 1 loss teams, objectively, not what you think the committee will do?
goblue96
Disney and Curling Expert
Just scrap the whole system and go back to 10-15 bowl games with the mythical national champion selected by writers in their 80's unless the stars align and #1 and #2 are locked into the same bowl game.
It was corrupt and shady but you knew it was corrupt and shady. They didn't give a fuck who was #5 in ESPN's made-for-tv National Championship Playoff. #5 already had too many blemishes to deserve to the mythical national champ anyway.
It was corrupt and shady but you knew it was corrupt and shady. They didn't give a fuck who was #5 in ESPN's made-for-tv National Championship Playoff. #5 already had too many blemishes to deserve to the mythical national champ anyway.
Lightningwar
Administrator
Lets start another playoff debate. Im for 8 teams, 5 conference champion auto qualifier unless the champion is out of the top 15. Then 3 at large bids. First round played at the home field of the higher ranked team.
I am all for this. You could have even included the BCS to rank the at-larges.
fried rice
Who wants to sex Mutombo?
I'm in favor of a 14 team playoff, with matchups determined by geographic location. Title game participants will be determined by a 14-game round robin. Style of play will generally be smashmouth football. We will call this playoff the Southeastern Conference and the flags will be confederate and the south will rise again.
coogrfan
Well-Known Member
Wooly
Well-Known Member
This is the closest to what I prefer.
Though Fried Rice has the wittiest response, as usual.
I'd personally much rather see Western Kentucky, Memphis, Toledo, App State, Bowling Green or San Diego State at that #25 spot.
If it's entire irrelevant who is at #25 (and it is), then why not give it to a team who typically doesn't get the love instead of falling back on the same prejudices?
This "committee" showed what their agenda is in 2014. 2015 has been more of the same. The rankings are nothing more than to justify the inclusion/exclusion of certain teams in their precious final 4, and they will twist the logic to get the 4 they want. As indicated by an undeserving team being included in year 1.
-YTC
If it's entire irrelevant who is at #25 (and it is), then why not give it to a team who typically doesn't get the love instead of falling back on the same prejudices?
This "committee" showed what their agenda is in 2014. 2015 has been more of the same. The rankings are nothing more than to justify the inclusion/exclusion of certain teams in their precious final 4, and they will twist the logic to get the 4 they want. As indicated by an undeserving team being included in year 1.
-YTC
Umm I never said Iowa sucks. I just said I think they will get boat raced if they play one of the other top 5 teams. Tennessee played 2 of them and should have beaten them both. It is just my opinion. At least I have proof that Tennessee would not get boat raced by a top 5 team. I have no proof Iowa won't. Guess we will find out soon.
By including Tennessee in the top 25, you give one more talking point to minimize what was easily the worst loss of the current top 8.
-YTC
-YTC
I don't know where NC is ranked, but losing to SC is worse than losing to Texas imo.
Yep, I agree. That's why I said top 8. UNC is currently #10. Both are gawd-awful losses, doe.
-YTC
jobob 5.0
I Am Reborn
How do you figure?
Gives OU a "quality" road win.
Wooly
Well-Known Member
Well now that UNC only moved up to #10, I think they are effectively out of any chance of making the playoffs. They are not going to jump Stanford or Ohio St. from #10, even if they beat Clemson.
If Bama loses, it's either Stanford or Ohio St. in, and if Clemson loses it's Stanford, Ohio St. or Clemson getting in. Clemson can still get in with 1 loss against a highly ranked UNC team, it's just a matter of preference at that point between those three teams, with Stanford most likely missing out in that scenario.
If Bama loses, it's either Stanford or Ohio St. in, and if Clemson loses it's Stanford, Ohio St. or Clemson getting in. Clemson can still get in with 1 loss against a highly ranked UNC team, it's just a matter of preference at that point between those three teams, with Stanford most likely missing out in that scenario.
- Oklahoma has the worst loss of any team in the top 8.
- Oklahoma defeated Tennessee in September.
- Tennessee has not been ranked at any point since that loss to Oklahoma...until this week.
- Tennessee is still not ranked in either of the prominent media polls, but is ranked in the Playoff Top 25.
- Now, Oklahoma gets to claim a win over a "top 25 team" to add to their resume, which, again, includes the worst loss of any team in the top 8.
There is a 0.0% chance of Clemson getting into the CFP if they lose this weekend. There's simply no possible justification for including Clemson but not UNC in that scenario, and there's no way the ACC is getting 2 teams in.
-YTC
jobob 5.0
I Am Reborn
Gotcha, I thought he was actually trying to minimize the loss itself.
Either way, calling a win "quality" or not based on whether they are 25 or 26th is dumb. Not only that, the committee (and people in general) acknowledge a team can play like dogshit early on, but it's "how they finish that's important," but they don't use the same logic when looking at opponents. It's like they realize a team is not the exact same team all year long, but can't resist comparing common opponents who also may have gotten better/worse over the season.
Brick
Well-Known Member
ESPN already starting the "DURRRR IF NORTH CAROLINA GETS IN EVERYONE WILL ONLY SCHEDULE FCS TEAMS SETTING PRECDENT DURR" talking point. All Herbie talked about last night. Uh, they scheduled an SEC team on a neutral field (south carolina), loss or not. And a lot of FCS teams are on the same level as lower FBS teams. so?
no one is talking about oklahoma playing akron and tulsa
alabama playing middle tennessee state, louisiana monroe, (monroe doesn't have a win against an FBS team), and charleston southern (FCS)
also south carolina is one loss behind texas, and oklahoma was throttled while NC did everything they could to give south carolina the game.
whole thing is such a fucking joke. as long as teams make an attempt to schedule one good OOC program (since they are scheduled so far in advance, no control over how good the opponent is) there is no problem. i'm fine with schools playing two FCS teams since there's no preseason. anyway, no one is playing more than 2 major programs, and 95% are playing two or three shitty schools, regardless if they are FBS or not. who cares if you're favored by 30 points or 50 points? they're auto-wins.
really, everyone not from the big xii or pac-12 should stfu, because they have one extra cupcake game. no one will bring that up ever though, just like the conference championship bs is ignored. ordinary fuckin people mang.
no one is talking about oklahoma playing akron and tulsa
alabama playing middle tennessee state, louisiana monroe, (monroe doesn't have a win against an FBS team), and charleston southern (FCS)
also south carolina is one loss behind texas, and oklahoma was throttled while NC did everything they could to give south carolina the game.
whole thing is such a fucking joke. as long as teams make an attempt to schedule one good OOC program (since they are scheduled so far in advance, no control over how good the opponent is) there is no problem. i'm fine with schools playing two FCS teams since there's no preseason. anyway, no one is playing more than 2 major programs, and 95% are playing two or three shitty schools, regardless if they are FBS or not. who cares if you're favored by 30 points or 50 points? they're auto-wins.
really, everyone not from the big xii or pac-12 should stfu, because they have one extra cupcake game. no one will bring that up ever though, just like the conference championship bs is ignored. ordinary fuckin people mang.
Last edited:
goblue96
Disney and Curling Expert
80-year old cigar-smoking sports writers didn't give a shit who was #5. They gave a shit about selling papers and who the mythical national champion was sold papers.
It wasn't until the "everyone wins a trophy" generation grew up did the argument shift to "inclusion" and who truly is number 1.
Now, leave me alone and get off my lawn, I have a cloud to go yell at.
It wasn't until the "everyone wins a trophy" generation grew up did the argument shift to "inclusion" and who truly is number 1.
Now, leave me alone and get off my lawn, I have a cloud to go yell at.
Lightningwar
Administrator
I am beyond the losses in some of this discussion. OU has a horrible loss. They also have the best resume when it comes to wins of anybody in the top 10. IMO they are playing the best football right now within the top 10.
Lightningwar
Administrator
I think it would be hard to deny K-State or TTU a spot in the CFP if they were playing like OU against their best opponents of the year. I dont think OU is in there due to their name. They are playing their best football against their best opponents right now.
MSUFanatic
Well-Known Member
JSU Zack
How do I IT?
The Vols are a solid team, but we can't play the "if they just did this" game. Alabama likely would have won the national title in 2013 if they just tackled Chris Davis. Al Gore would have been president if he had just won Florida. We can justify almost anything if we use that logic.
On another note, what bowl is UT going to? Music City since Mizzou declined? They're possibly ranked at #25 to garner more interest for the bowl game, which is fine with me. Cities that host bowl games put a lot of money into them, and hosting a ranked team is much more lucrative.
You're right, but if this were those other teams, points that Brick has brought up like TCU missing Boykin and Doctson or Baylor missing Russell would be brought up a lot more than they are now.
OSU would be getting pushed a lot harder if they were going up against an 11-1 Tech team rather than an 11-1 OU team.
Brick
Well-Known Member
The point is people wouldn't be saying that about Texas Tech or Kansas State if they beat Baylor by 10 and TCU by 1.