- 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
CFN says LSU hosed
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:40 pm
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:40 pm
According to Pete Fiutak of College Football News, LSU's ranking at #19 is the biggest mistake in the initial CFP rankings.
CFP mistakes
I agree with him that the disparity between Ole Miss at #4 and LSU at #19 is much too large (given that we just beat them and our only losses are to top 3 teams), but I think his ranking of us at #6 may be a little too generous. Also, I understand the logic of what he's saying about Texas A&M, but does anyone really think the Aggies are the 13th-best team in the country? Anyway, it's interesting food for thought.
CFP mistakes
I agree with him that the disparity between Ole Miss at #4 and LSU at #19 is much too large (given that we just beat them and our only losses are to top 3 teams), but I think his ranking of us at #6 may be a little too generous. Also, I understand the logic of what he's saying about Texas A&M, but does anyone really think the Aggies are the 13th-best team in the country? Anyway, it's interesting food for thought.
25
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:41 pm to profwilson
definitly a head scratcher. i'd like to know how they come up with the rankings say after number 10 or so
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:42 pm to profwilson
quote:
but I think his ranking of us at #6 may be a little too generous.
That's much stupider than the #19 ranking.
I really don't get why so many have their panties in a wad over this. I really don't.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:42 pm to profwilson
It's week 9. Things will shake out in November.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:44 pm to profwilson
The issue is we were completely non competitive for 3.5 quarter s against State and barely even showed a pulse against Auburn. Yes, those two teams are some of the highest ranked, but the losses were very lopsided. That has to be taken into consideration.
Having said that, we are playing much better now, and a win next Saturday will likely get us close to (if not, in) the top 10.
Having said that, we are playing much better now, and a win next Saturday will likely get us close to (if not, in) the top 10.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:44 pm to profwilson
LSU should probably be between 12 and 16. 19 is too low and 6 is way too high.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:46 pm to SouthOfSouth
Doesn't matter if we don't win out
That's my concern at this point
That's my concern at this point
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:46 pm to profwilson
LSU deserves to be around 12-15, but anywhere near the top 10 is asinine. aTm deserves to be somewhere in the mid 30's. OM should be around 6-7, but the committee left them there knowing the winner of OM-AU will be 3 and the loser will be between 9-12.
This post was edited on 10/29/14 at 1:47 pm
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:46 pm to SouthOfSouth
Posted by SouthOfSouth
LSU should probably be between 12 and 16. 19 is too low and 6 is way too high.
This. I thought we would be about 15.
LSU should probably be between 12 and 16. 19 is too low and 6 is way too high.
This. I thought we would be about 15.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:47 pm to SouthOfSouth
quote:
LSU should probably be between 12 and 16. 19 is too low and 6 is way too high.
I was thinking 12 or 13 after OM.
After Bama . . .
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:47 pm to roguetiger15
quote:
definitly a head scratcher. i'd like to know how they come up with the rankings say after number 10 or so
this whole process seems elitist and VERY subjective.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:48 pm to bulldogger
quote:
this whole process seems elitist and VERY subjective
The committee is a fricking joke.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:49 pm to profwilson
I would like to welcome back the much maligned 'eyeball test', which was the reason for the BCS creation. Human bias is back as a huge player in the equation.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:51 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
That's much stupider than the #19 ranking
Yea if the options are #19 and #6 then #19 is absolutely right
I could see LSU ahead of some of the 1-loss teams like a Nebraska who hasn't really beaten anybody. But even some of the "lesser" names like Arizona deserve to be ahead of LSU because they have a big win at Oregon under their belt. Pretty clear, still relatively early on in the process, that the committee ranked in terms of losses with all 1-loss teams given the benefit of the doubt. That'll change soon. I don't see any argument for Oklahoma being ahead of LSU though as the top 2-loss team. ETA: I'd put LSU ahead of Oklahoma, Ohio St, and Nebraska. So I'd guess I'd have them at 16.
This post was edited on 10/29/14 at 1:53 pm
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:51 pm to profwilson
What if Ole Miss was #4 AND Archie was still on the committee? Hmmmm....
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:52 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
I really don't get why so many have their panties in a wad over this. I really don't.
No one should be upset if the reason they are upset is because they somehow think LSU ought to be playing its way into the plyoff this season.
EVERYONE, and I mean EVERY COLLEGE FOOTBALL FAN, ought to be upset with Ole miss at #4 and LSU at #19 if they are interested in a system that somehow reflects reality.
In order to get those two numbers, you'd have to assume that the committee had to have had Ole Miss between #1 and #3 and LSU much further back. So...the committee just moved Ole Miss between 1 and 3 spots down after losing to a team which had to have been outside of their own Top 25 at the very least. And that's an assumption that LSU got a bump after knocking off the #3 ranked Rebs. In reality, we have no clue what the committee took into account with these rankings.
That makes absolutely no sense. At all.
This playoff thing is going to make actual college football fans (those who own season tickets and/or pull for specific teams rather than passive fans that will watch whoever is on) long for the early days of the BCS once we start getting playoffs that are clearly designed to place teams in based on ratings or match-ups rather than what's actually happened on the field.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:52 pm to SCwTiger
If we beat the gumps then I could see us at #11-13th. 3rd n the west wouldn't be horrible considering how young we are at key positions. I would be pleasantly suprised if we win out.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:52 pm to profwilson
We are right where we should be, IMO.
We lost by 5 touchdowns. No one else in contention has done that.
We lost by 5 touchdowns. No one else in contention has done that.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:54 pm to GeauxTigerTM
quote:
EVERYONE, and I mean EVERY COLLEGE FOOTBALL FAN, ought to be upset with Ole miss at #4 and LSU at #19 if they are interested in a system that somehow reflects reality.
But they aren't ranking those two in a bubble, you have to consider all the other teams in between them. You can't just base it on head to head, especially when one team has lost twice (in blowout fashion) and another just once.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:57 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:no it's not. if Auburn and MSU are both top 5 teams, and UM is a top 10 team, then it follows that a team ranked below Auburn and MSU should lose to both of them, and a team ranked above UM should beat them. It just so happens that there is a team that has lost to Auburn and MSU but has beaten UM... and that team is LSU.
That's much stupider than the #19 ranking.
Page 1 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News