|
|
Taking questions on CFB
| Haunting Puppy | 10/26/17 | | razzle stead | 10/26/17 | | Haunting Puppy | 10/26/17 | | razzle stead | 10/26/17 | | Haunting Puppy | 10/26/17 | | Lascivious mexican step-uncle's house | 10/26/17 | | Haunting Puppy | 10/26/17 | | Sinister bawdyhouse giraffe | 10/26/17 | | Haunting Puppy | 10/26/17 | | Lascivious mexican step-uncle's house | 10/26/17 | | Sinister bawdyhouse giraffe | 10/26/17 | | Transparent apoplectic rehab corn cake | 10/26/17 | | charcoal temple | 10/26/17 | | Haunting Puppy | 10/26/17 | | Lascivious mexican step-uncle's house | 10/26/17 | | Electric candlestick maker menage | 10/26/17 | | Lascivious mexican step-uncle's house | 10/26/17 | | Electric candlestick maker menage | 10/26/17 | | charcoal temple | 10/26/17 | | Lascivious mexican step-uncle's house | 10/26/17 | | charcoal temple | 10/26/17 | | Lascivious mexican step-uncle's house | 10/26/17 | | charcoal temple | 10/26/17 | | Lascivious mexican step-uncle's house | 10/26/17 | | charcoal temple | 10/26/17 | | Lascivious mexican step-uncle's house | 10/26/17 | | charcoal temple | 10/26/17 | | charcoal temple | 12/03/17 | | Lascivious mexican step-uncle's house | 12/04/17 | | charcoal temple | 12/04/17 | | Electric candlestick maker menage | 10/26/17 | | Jade Toilet Seat Turdskin | 10/26/17 | | cyan passionate den sweet tailpipe | 10/26/17 | | Drab clown | 10/26/17 | | Haunting Puppy | 10/26/17 | | Lascivious mexican step-uncle's house | 10/26/17 | | charcoal temple | 10/26/17 | | Carnelian impertinent school roommate | 10/26/17 | | Haunting Puppy | 10/26/17 | | Big-titted Boyish Water Buffalo | 10/26/17 | | Soul-stirring fishy nursing home | 10/26/17 | | Lascivious mexican step-uncle's house | 10/26/17 | | racy kitchen marketing idea | 10/26/17 | | Lascivious mexican step-uncle's house | 10/26/17 | | Haunting Puppy | 10/26/17 | | Jet codepig tanning salon | 10/26/17 | | Haunting Puppy | 10/26/17 | | charcoal temple | 10/26/17 | | pearl weed whacker | 10/26/17 | | fragrant sapphire whorehouse pozpig | 10/26/17 | | Lascivious mexican step-uncle's house | 10/26/17 | | fighting claret ratface organic girlfriend | 10/26/17 | | Haunting Puppy | 10/27/17 | | Lascivious mexican step-uncle's house | 10/26/17 | | Slippery exciting round eye yarmulke | 10/26/17 | | Lascivious mexican step-uncle's house | 10/26/17 | | Haunting Puppy | 10/27/17 | | Haunting Puppy | 10/29/17 |
Poast new message in this thread
|
Date: October 26th, 2017 11:01 AM Author: charcoal temple
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: charcoal temple
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: Lascivious mexican step-uncle's house
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: charcoal temple
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: charcoal temple
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: Lascivious mexican step-uncle's house
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: Haunting Puppy
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: fragrant sapphire whorehouse pozpig
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: Lascivious mexican step-uncle's house
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: Haunting Puppy
Bama
OSU
Notre Dame
USC
Michigan
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3775087&forum_id=6#34544839) |
|
|