- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Kelly supports the Bama over FSU decision
Posted on 12/7/23 at 5:46 pm to OceanMan
Posted on 12/7/23 at 5:46 pm to OceanMan
quote:
But, they haven’t always been the ones selected. No undefeated P5 champ has ever been, until this year.
I'm only talking about this year. Every year is it's own consideration. That an undefeated P5 conference champ didn't make it this year is based on this year's circumstances. Ever been what? Excluded?
quote:
So their qualification over FSU was being ranked ahead of them.
Yes in that they'd have to have a very good reason to drop them below FSU when they were ahead of them all season and also undefeated and with better CCG wins.
quote:
You are only comparing them to FSU, why is that?
UW and UMich were ahead of Bama and Texas by a wide margin and didn't have CCG wins that gave any doubt.
quote:
I’m sorry, but it really appears that you are not willing to support your assertion that all 5 teams had a similar record and thus needed to have a tie-breaker applied. And you pretty clearly went through the undefeated teams first, then to the one loss teams. You are just recalling what happened and rationalizing it.
Nothing to be sorry about. They all do have similar pedigree and records. UW and Mich weren't going to be lowered based on their SoS and CCG. UGA losing moved them to 1 and 2. That leaves Texas, Bama, and FSU.
quote:
Would it have been justifiable for the rankings to be 1.UT 2. Bama 3. FSU 4. Washington?
No. You reference the tie-breaker, but it's a five-way tie, essentially. UT and Bama can't jump Michigan and UW because of their CCG wins and SoS. UGA and Oregon losing and a 1-loss runner up Ohio St puts Bama, UTx, and FSU in consideration for 3-5. FSU had the unfortunate draw of their ACC opponents. So, yes, I think they look at it as a re-rank of the top 5, but there's wasn't enough to warrant dropping Mich and UW. Had they had weaker CCG opponents, you might have seen a different scenario play out.
I think it could have easily played out with FSU getting in with Bama or UTx being left out. It would not have been indefensible nor unreasonable for any two of those 3 making it to the final two spots.
Posted on 12/7/23 at 7:10 pm to DakIsNoLB
quote:
I'm only talking about this year.
This is what you said.
quote:
Power 5 conference winners who are really the only teams considered for the CFP
So are you just saying thats what happened this year? Because other teams have been considered that did not fit that criteria.
quote:
That an undefeated P5 conference champ didn't make it this year is based on this year's circumstances. Ever been what? Excluded?
Yes, ever been excluded. Further, if you look at ranking the playoffs year over year, record is the prime factor in determining not only who gets in, but the seeding. Clearly, the committee has discretion in regard precedent. But when looking at the guidelines, and trying to understand the hierarchy, I believe the opening paragraph that includes “similar record and pedigree” has been demonstrated to mean that undefeated is the primary consideration
quote:
UW and UMich were ahead of Bama and Texas by a wide margin and didn't have CCG wins that gave any doubt.
UW won by 3 pts. Define doubt.
quote:
UW and Mich weren't going to be lowered based on their SoS and CCG
This means nothing. You have yet to quantify any of this.
quote:
No. You reference the tie-breaker, but it's a five-way tie,
But you keep making it a three way tie. And I’m trying to tell you that UT and Bama don’t need to be tied to eachother, because of the tie breaker.
quote:
UT and Bama can't jump Michigan and UW because of their CCG wins and SoS.
This is not a reason. Quantity it, at least a little
quote:
UGA losing moved them to 1 and 2. That leaves Texas, Bama, and FSU.
This is just what happened again. I see you already moved them to the end of the list but I don’t think they should have been.
quote:
I think it could have easily played out with FSU getting in with Bama or UTx being left out. It would not have been indefensible nor unreasonable
It would have been the most defensible with Bama out, which is the point of all these posts. To believe FSU should have been left out, is to believe that your entire Roster needs to stay available for the playoffs. You must start with the assumption that they, not all undefeated teams, deserved to defend their case against Bama AND UT.
I know what happened, you don’t have to explain it to me. I’m trying to explain how it happened, and give my opinion that I don’t think it’s good for the sport. it’s a further step in the direction to quasi professional, yet Top-Heavy realignment of college sports that will be supported by Gambling more than fandom.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News