Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

***OFFICIAL CFP Rankings Show Watch Thread***

Gonzo said:
My only issue with that though is what if SMU hadn't made it into the ACC title game and finished the season 11-1 to BYU's 10-2? I wouldn't think a two-loss BYU should get in ahead of a one-loss SMU. So if they get put in over an 11-2 SMU it's 100% punishing them for making it to the ACC title game.

I think they need to adopt some kind of policy mandating that a CCG loss is not considered equal to a regular season loss.
Click to expand...
I would have had them in over 11-1 SMU too. I think if two teams are wihtin one game of each other, head to head is relevant. In SMU's case, their weak arse schedule helped lead to that 11-1 as much as anything. At least BYU played ASU in the Regular Season - which we found out yesterday is tougher than anybody SMU played in the ACC. P.S. Like the new avatar! :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigCyFan and Gonzo
AlaCyclone said:
Meh. Forget the rankings.

Alabama beat more teams with quality records including SEC Champion Georgia (11-2), than SMU did with their best win being over Duke (9-3). Don't get me wrong, as I am not advocating for Alabama (they did not deserve to be in the CFP with 3 losses as an at-large team), but it was not about pre-season rankings.

IMO, BYU (10-2) should have been the last at-large team instead of SMU (11-2) due to the head to head win @ SMU. This is really the only issue I have with the CFP Committee. Otherwise, I though they choose, ranked and seeded as well as they could with the format with which they had to work.
Click to expand...
I don’t disagree on the BYU point, but I’m not going to die on the hill of those two relatively even teams as the last at large.

My huge beef would have been Bama bumping SMU (or BYU), especially after the BS the committee did last year to get Bama in.

All in all, I think the committee did a good job this year, especially given how much of a ******** the reveals were leading up to today
 
  • Agree
Reactions: BigCyFan, CycloneSpinning and AlaCyclone
SolterraCyclone said:
I don’t disagree on the BYU point, but I’m not going to die on the hill of those two relatively even teams as the last at large.

My huge beef would have been Bama bumping SMU (or BYU), especially after the BS the committee did last year to get Bama in.

All in all, I think the committee did a good job this year, especially given how much of a ******** the reveals were leading up to today
Click to expand...
I 100% agree!
 
StLouisClone said:
Nope. Clemson was ranked # 16. So ISU would have also received the 4th bye if we had beaten ASU.
Click to expand...
I agree. Furthermore, they made a point that a 3-loss team that was an AQ (and a marquee brand to boot) was NOT going to be ranked over a 2 loss team in their field including the 2 loss team right in front of them that they literally beat last night. Makes me wonder what would have happened to Georgia if they would have lost last night. Either way, what I thought to be an incompetent committee came up with a solid CFP field considerning the constraints with which they had to deal.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: BigCyFan, CycloneSpinning and 12191987
Gonzo said:
My only issue with that though is what if SMU hadn't made it into the ACC title game and finished the season 11-1 to BYU's 10-2? I wouldn't think a two-loss BYU should get in ahead of a one-loss SMU. So if they get put in over an 11-2 SMU it's 100% punishing them for making it to the ACC title game.

I think they need to adopt some kind of policy mandating that a CCG loss is not considered equal to a regular season loss.
Click to expand...

The whole system is broken when it exclusively relies on media and then a random committee, who all have their own agendas and biases, to choose who makes it and doesn’t.

At large teams need to go. Polls need to go. Everything should be based on conference standings.

Whether that’s 2 teams from each major conference (based on record and that conferences tiebreakers) and 1 (the champ) from 4 G5 conferences voted on by one representative from each G5 champ

or

3 from each major conference based on record with the winner of the CCG getting a bye and loser of the CCG gets to host a third place team from another conference.

Imagine if non-college sports used polls by biased media to determine their post season. It would be slammed as insane. I don’t understand people just accept it in 2024.
 
The easiest solution for the SEC is have Mercer become a member and then play a 16 game schedule against all of the SEC teams.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: BigCyFan
Kinch said:
The easiest solution for the SEC is have Mercer become a member and then play a 16 game schedule against all of the SEC teams.
Click to expand...
This is the kind of outside the box thinking that the SEC needs.
 
I’m kinda wondering if Sankey survives another year at the SEC. He probably does, but man every SEC fan i read on social media wants him fired.
 
P4 Conferences must play at least 10 P4 games. Preferably 9 in conference plus an additional P4 opponent from another P4 Conference. Only one FCS game allowed. Scheduling less than 10 P4 games can be considered by the Committee to be a less difficult schedule. And will be considered when ranking.

Alabama played only 9 P4 opponents on their schedule. 8 SEC games. 1 P4 opponents on with a losing record. 2 weak G5 opponents. FCS team. Alabama should have played 10 P4 teams. Then they would have an argument maybe.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: BigCyFan
I am so freaking confused by all the rhetoric about the non-con scheduling by all the SEC types. None of the three teams that they think should have made the playoff lost a non-con game. What are they talking about?
 
  • Winner
Reactions: aeroclone and SolterraCyclone
goody2012 said:
I am so freaking confused by all the rhetoric about the non-con scheduling by all the SEC types. None of the three teams that they think should have made the playoff lost a non-con game. What are they talking about?
Click to expand...

They just want an excuse to not play the games they scheduled and will use any excuse (even nonsensical ones) to justify the actions they were wanting to take anyway.

The crazy part is Georgia scheduling Clemson in the non con is what separated them from the 3 loss SEC teams. Georgia was never in any danger of missing the playoffs even with a third loss because they legitimately played a hard schedule and was rewarded for that.
 
  • Winner
  • Agree
Reactions: SolterraCyclone, Kinch and BigCyFan
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom