re: CFP Rankings Discussion Thread

What's the difference in Miss St and FSU? Other than the fact that Miss St had to play Alabama on the road and FSU hasn't.

FSU has played 3 teams who are 6-5. They won those games by 15, 4, and 4 points. They've played 2 teams who are 5-6 and won by 15 and 6 points. Their best win was against a 4 loss ND by 4. They've given up a ridiculous amount of points to absolutely horrible teams. They're ranked in the 100's in rushing offense, give up 246ypg through the air, and haven't looked like the better team in over half of their games.

I believe they should be in the top 4, but barely, and I mean BARELY. IMO there's no way to hold Miss State's wins against them(all the SEC teams who keep losing) without also holding it against FSU. If Miss State had even won ONE respectable OOC game I'd feel it was criminal to not have them over FSU right now. They didn't though, so I'm ok if they don't make it.

I'm ate up with FSU hate. But it's because I honest to goodness don't feel like they deserve anything after watching them this season. The respect they receive blows my mind.

quote:

---

Rest assured, the committee has now decided to change their criteria.

---

Top 7 stays the same
No major games were played by top 7
Rocket says committee changed their criteria

quote:

---

Jeff Long on Miss St - "they have wins against teams that were previously in the top 25" (lol)

which he HAS to say now, because their resume continues to fall and all the once "quality" wins no longer exist.

So while quality wins over currrent top 25 used to matter, to justify Miss States current ranking..they no longer do

---

I posted about this earlier in the thread but the committee is applying "quality wins" in a very haphazard way. This is particularly striking when they formulate the bottom of the top25 which is important if that "cut off" is going to be such a measuring stick for good wins.



Their lower Top25 rankings and quotes often imply that this week Boise St is a quality win but USC or LSU is not (but stay posted until next week because if Auburn loses away to the #1 team they won't be a quality win anymore either).

However, while their word often reflect this absurdity the Top 10 rankings usually do not.



For example, it's abundantly clear that they still credit a road win at LSU highly (based on the consistent logic that LSU has a number of quality wins). So, even if LSU may fall to #28 in their notes/discussions the win is obviously still being credited and probably a lot more than, say, Ole Miss over Boise St.


This is why their quotes seem so inconsistent.

They could really just get around the whole confusion/issue by saying something like Top25ish meaning simply teams that are back and forth or right around the line all season since that is obviously what is informing their rankings of the Top1o whether they say it or not.

Georgia is also 3-0 vs current top 25 teams beating them by a combined score of 113-28

quote:

---

Keeping MissSt at #4 does two things.

1. The committee has not made up his mind on TCU/Baylor/Ohio State. After those teams have made their final impressions the committee will move them up or down. They cant push MissSt out of the #4 spot yet, because they are not prepared to justify the new #4..yet.

2. Its a safe guard against a potential Bama loss. A backup plan to ensure the SEC is represented in the playoffs in some form.

Rest assured, the committee has now decided to change their criteria. And as such, their credibility continues to fall.

---

I agree for the most part.

quote:

---

After this weekend, they may only have one win over a ranked team (but likely 2).



TCU will only have 1 by the end of the season...way to contradict your own argument.

---

The biggest "news" coming out of this week's rankings is Long saying that the committee is considering where opponents were ranked when games were played.

This seemed to cause an immediate meltdowm among a lot fans and columnists where they imagined and then railed against the most far-fetched of possible applications of this idea.

Long certainly didn't say they are only considering where teams were ranked when games were played but that seems to be the strawman that is usually being attacked.


I hope it simply means that a bit of common sense is prevailing and a welcome corrective to all the incredibly "black and white" lists of "top 25 wins" that change every week based on bottom of the Top25 teams moving a couple of spots in or out of the current rankings. Many because they lose to a team ranked much higher than them, which they should if the rankings are decently accurate.


It most likely means simply that, for example, Ole Miss doesn't lose one quality win and gain a different one simply because the committee puts Boise St at #24 instead of #26 and LSU at
#27 instead of #23 in a given week.
No matter how you feel personally about the "quality" of those 2 wins, for example, it is patently absurd that one should count or not based on such a tiny differential.

Anyone who watches football has a pretty good idea of the relative quality of beating LSU away or Boise St this year regardless of whether they are currently ranked #25 or #26. I expect the committee should certainly feel the same way.

quote:

---

Oklahoma
Kansas State
Minnesota

Good effort though.

ETA: nb4 "Minnesota won't be ranked"

They aren't dropping Minnesota 8 spots for losing on the road to the #14 team. Plus, it gives the committee an excuse to justify ranking Ohio State higher (who also beat the Gophers).

---

This really doesn't matter at all.

Oklahoma, LSU, Minnesota, Auburn, Ole Miss etc etc are all gong to be considered pretty good, quality wins by the committee whether they end up ranked #23 or #27 in their final poll.

Long said as much in his interview.

quote:

---

I wasn't commenting on its relevance, just responding to an incorrect statement.

And TCU will have a bunch of these pretty good, quality wins you speak of.

Oklahoma
Kansas State
Minnesota
@Texas
@West Virginia

TCU and State are going to have very similar resumes. A lot of pretty good wins, and the two very best losses in the country.

---

I agree and I've read your posts and appreciate your opinions as I take a real interest in the whole rankings process and discussion that surrounds it.

Excuse me if my post was a bit blunt but I get frustrated with arguments being brought down to a black and white current top25 cut-off line when every indication is that the committee won't be nearly so reductive.

I do agree that some of Miss St's wins aren't as impressive as they seemed at the time but how they will be considered is somewhere in the middle between say a #10 LSU and a #25 or #27 LSU.

People seem to argue either one or other but seldom recognize the bigger picture.


Of course, there will almost certainly be a couple of upsets that change everything but I agree that if all the favorites win then TCU and Miss St will have the best resumes for the 4th spot but also, like you say, that Baylor will complicate matters by getting the head-to-head nod over TCU.

I actually think that if all that plays out, the committee will probably play their conference champion trump card to get out of the back and forth and put Ohio St 4th even if the overall wins + loss aren't quite as strong.

The Big12 conference championship wouldn't be quite as effective a separation point since it really wouldn't clearly distinguish Miss St from either Baylor or TCU since TCU and Miss St would have done pretty much exactly the same thing in their conference schedules.