|
|
Taking questions on CFB
| histrionic wagecucks shrine | 10/26/17 | | mind-boggling navy background story library | 10/26/17 | | histrionic wagecucks shrine | 10/26/17 | | mind-boggling navy background story library | 10/26/17 | | histrionic wagecucks shrine | 10/26/17 | | self-absorbed kitchen | 10/26/17 | | histrionic wagecucks shrine | 10/26/17 | | provocative space haunted graveyard | 10/26/17 | | histrionic wagecucks shrine | 10/26/17 | | self-absorbed kitchen | 10/26/17 | | provocative space haunted graveyard | 10/26/17 | | Aromatic lettuce stage | 10/26/17 | | Pale school new version | 10/26/17 | | histrionic wagecucks shrine | 10/26/17 | | self-absorbed kitchen | 10/26/17 | | Wonderful home hunting ground | 10/26/17 | | self-absorbed kitchen | 10/26/17 | | Wonderful home hunting ground | 10/26/17 | | Pale school new version | 10/26/17 | | self-absorbed kitchen | 10/26/17 | | Pale school new version | 10/26/17 | | self-absorbed kitchen | 10/26/17 | | Pale school new version | 10/26/17 | | self-absorbed kitchen | 10/26/17 | | Pale school new version | 10/26/17 | | self-absorbed kitchen | 10/26/17 | | Pale school new version | 10/26/17 | | Pale school new version | 12/03/17 | | self-absorbed kitchen | 12/04/17 | | Pale school new version | 12/04/17 | | Wonderful home hunting ground | 10/26/17 | | mahogany pocket flask | 10/26/17 | | Lascivious Heaven Generalized Bond | 10/26/17 | | anal tank | 10/26/17 | | histrionic wagecucks shrine | 10/26/17 | | self-absorbed kitchen | 10/26/17 | | Pale school new version | 10/26/17 | | appetizing elite queen of the night | 10/26/17 | | histrionic wagecucks shrine | 10/26/17 | | Alcoholic center | 10/26/17 | | Abusive Violent Wrinkle | 10/26/17 | | self-absorbed kitchen | 10/26/17 | | Clear son of senegal chapel | 10/26/17 | | self-absorbed kitchen | 10/26/17 | | histrionic wagecucks shrine | 10/26/17 | | Massive nowag | 10/26/17 | | histrionic wagecucks shrine | 10/26/17 | | Pale school new version | 10/26/17 | | Swashbuckling Coral Stag Film Toilet Seat | 10/26/17 | | Rusted cumskin | 10/26/17 | | self-absorbed kitchen | 10/26/17 | | contagious area immigrant | 10/26/17 | | histrionic wagecucks shrine | 10/27/17 | | self-absorbed kitchen | 10/26/17 | | Sickened Affirmative Action Blood Rage | 10/26/17 | | self-absorbed kitchen | 10/26/17 | | histrionic wagecucks shrine | 10/27/17 | | histrionic wagecucks shrine | 10/29/17 |
Poast new message in this thread
|
Date: October 26th, 2017 11:01 AM Author: Pale school new version
I don't really disagree,
but...
if we treat Florida State like a 2-4 team, Alabama hasn't really played anyone either
but Alabama (probably correctly) is the near unanimous #1 because of the obvious talent they put out on the field, moreso than because of a resume of quality wins they've collected
Ohio State's ranking is similar, they don't really have a resume of quality wins, but they have obvious talent they put out on the field
you're entitled to your opinion as to whether that's a fair basis for ranking teams (personally, I'm sort of over sweating the rankings in October, come December, I'll agree that that's a shitty basis for ranking teams)
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3775087&forum_id=6#34533008) |
|
Date: October 26th, 2017 12:04 PM Author: Pale school new version
That's a good question
I'm not sure I'm impressed with the ability of the committee to be consistent as you seem to be
We have, what a three year history to work off of?
-----
Year 1, they put in Ohio State over TCU and Baylor, seemingly on the basis of Ohio State blowing out Wisconsin in the Big 10 title game, and the Big XII not having a title game
Year 2, conceivably Ohio State or maybe Stanford would have given the playoff a better team than Michigan State, but Michigan State beat Ohio State head to head, and Stanford had 2 losses, so it was pretty straight forward for the committee to go with the 4 teams it went with
year 3, they could have gone with Penn State over Ohio State, who they beat head to head, and Penn State won their conference (though they needed tie breakers to get to the conference championship game), Penn State had two losses
-----------
idk, I'm not sure we have a clear picture as to what the committee will base their decisions on, all in all, in three years they've been spared any truly controversial scenarios
I suspect a good rule of thumb, is that losses is the first order differentiator, then generally who would be the betting favorite is the second order differentiator (ahead of merit of the resume)
----------
such that, I suspect, if Alabama losses a close game in the SEC championship game
they'll make it, even though, maybe they shouldn't
I suspect that if Ohio State wins out, they'll make it over ND, even if based on resume, maybe they shouldn't
I suspect the same is true of Clemson
I'm not sure if the same is true of Oklahoma
it will be interesting to see what the committee will do if its between a 1 loss Ohio State and a 1 loss Oklahoma
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3775087&forum_id=6#34533465) |
|
Date: October 26th, 2017 12:33 PM Author: self-absorbed kitchen
They've been consistent in that it seems like they've gone with:
1- Record
2- Who did you beat that you can point to
3- Conference championships/game control
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3775087&forum_id=6#34533658) |
|
Date: October 26th, 2017 12:51 PM Author: Pale school new version
Do you think Alabama is out if they lose in the SEC CG? Especially if they lose close?
----------
idk, my first assumption is that the committee cares first and foremost about their own legitimacy, such that they're not going to risk their legitimacy to remain consistent
maybe an Alabama loss in the SEC CG would be a good test of that
------
as a function of that assumption, style points matter, and public perceptions matter, (history matters too, but at this point, that's functionally set)
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3775087&forum_id=6#34533807) |
|
Date: October 26th, 2017 1:01 PM Author: Pale school new version
I guess they do try to seed it #1 vs #4, and #2 vs #3, huh?
the winner of that game will almost certainly be #1, so to avoid the rematch, they need to make the argument as to why the loser is #3
yeah, that's tough
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3775087&forum_id=6#34533886) |
|
Date: October 26th, 2017 1:08 PM Author: self-absorbed kitchen
They either have to make the argument or openly admit they're avoiding a rematch. Let's say TCU wins out, Penn State wins out, Notre Dame wins out, Georgia/Alabama win by 3 TDs in the SECCG.
You going to put the SECCG loser in a spot where they absolutely have to be the 4 seed and set up a rematch?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3775087&forum_id=6#34533979)
|
|
Date: October 26th, 2017 12:44 PM Author: histrionic wagecucks shrine
Dude. James Madison has a higher Sagarin ranking than the following teams:
Boston a College
Pitt
Ole Miss
Nebraska
Tennessee
Vanderbilt
Virginia
Kentucky
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3775087&forum_id=6#34533752) |
Date: October 26th, 2017 12:47 PM Author: Rusted cumskin
Michigan is not good. But is Michigan just not good, or are they actually bad
Is Michigan State good? Or just not bad
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3775087&forum_id=6#34533777) |
|
Date: October 26th, 2017 12:55 PM Author: self-absorbed kitchen
I don't think MSU is good. As an ND fan, I'd love for them to be good. But I just don't think they are.
Michigan's offense is atrocious. It's really a major strike against Harbaugh that he's been incapable of even making that a competent offense. His excuses at this point are poor. He's had 3 years to develop a QB.
The argument that they lost so many guys in the draft doesn't really hold water. 9/11 were defensive players. None were QBs or OL, which is where they've really had trouble.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3775087&forum_id=6#34533841) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2017 7:15 PM Author: histrionic wagecucks shrine
Bama
OSU
Notre Dame
USC
Michigan
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3775087&forum_id=6#34544839) |
|
|