re: College Football Playoff to tweak the way it evaluates teams during the 2025 season

quote:

---

If my memory is correct, every CFP ranking so far has matched what the BCS rankings would have been

---

Per Fake BCS rankings LINK

2024 BCS Rank
Oregon
Texas
Penn St
Notre Dame
Georgia
Ohio St
SMU
Indiana
Tennessee
Boise St
Alabama
South Carolina
****************************************************************
13. Arizona State
14. Miami
15. Iowa State
16. Mississippi

**18. Clemson

Clemson and Arizona State don't make the playoff based on pure BCS ranking.

2024 CFP ranking:

1. Oregon (13–0)
2. Georgia (11–2)
3. Texas (11–2)
4. Penn State (11–2)
5. Notre Dame (11–1)
6. Ohio State (10–2)
7. Tennessee (10–2)
8. Indiana (11–1)
9. Boise State (12–1)
10. SMU (11–2)
11. Alabama (9–3) out
12 Arizona State (11–2) Conf Champ
***********************************************************************************
13. Miami (FL) (10–2) out
14. Ole Miss (9–3) out
15. South Carolina (9–3) out
16. Clemson (10–3) Playoff - Conf Champ

So we going to 9 sec games next year? I hope so

quote:

---

Presumably it brings a team with a 9-3 record who played a tough schedule and beat good opponents into play over an 11-1 team who played a light schedule and beat no one of note (see Indiana and SMU)

---

I’m all for that 100%.
I think.

Good, there were a handful of 9-3 SEC teams that IMO were easily better than Indiana and SMU last year.

Hell, there were a couple 4-loss SEC teams that were probably better than Indiana and SMU

If you don’t have a single Top15 win on your resume you shouldn’t be eligible for an at-large IMO. 12-0 or 11-1 or 10-2 versus a crap schedule isn’t enough for me.

quote:

---

Clemson and Arizona State don't make the playoff based on pure BCS ranking.

---

Here is the fake BCS I looked at that came out right after the conference championship game. The only team that was different was Clemson, but as the ACC champ, they were an AQ team, so the result would have been the same in terms of teams. The CFP does resede, and Tennessee got screwed by that, but they were not winning the Natty either way.

Here are the BCS simulated rankings I saw

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.

Also on 247, the same thing as what I posted above.

https://247sports.com/longformarticle/how-bcs-rankings-would-shape-the-college-football-playoff-bracket-with-alabama-smu-at-large-debate-241620086/#2562147

1. Oregon Ducks — 1.000
2. Georgia Bulldogs — 0.9500
3. Notre Dame Fighting Irish — 0.9037
4. Texas Longhorns — 0.8603
5. Ohio State Buckeyes — 0.8112
6. Penn State Nittany Lions — 0.7972
7. Tennessee Volunteers — 0.7172
8. Indiana Hoosiers — 0.6880
9. Boise State Broncos — 0.6577
10. Arizona State Sun Devils — 0.6266
11. Alabama Crimson Tide — 0.5752
12. SMU Mustangs — 0.5630

13. Clemson Tigers — 0.5124
14. South Carolina Gamecocks — 0.5072
15. Miami Hurricanes — 0.4541
16. Ole Miss Rebels — 0.4387
17. BYU Cougars — 0.3620
18. Iowa State Cyclones — 0.2539
19. Army Black Knights — 0.2372
20. Illinois Fighting Illini — 0.1894
21. Missouri Tigers — 0.1720
22. Colorado Buffaloes — 0.1370
23. Syracuse Orange — 0.1222
24. Memphis Tigers — 0.0694
25. UNLV Rebels — 0.0655

quote:

---

Why is college football always changing when Bama feels slighted?

---

it probably goes back to the rumor of bear Bryant being gay.
he probably has sucked off everybody associated with cfb in the past and they're still paying Bama back for that

quote:

---

The changes come after 9-3 Alabama was the first team left out of the playoff

---

The horror!

quote:

---

while imposing a greater penalty for losing to such a team.”

---

Like, say...Northern Illinois?

As it should be. We should be rewarded more if we play Clemson close than if we crushed North Texas.