2017 Auburn lost only 1 SEC regular season game at LSU. They also lost to reigning National Champion Clemson.

The playoff committee had them ranked #2 heading into the SECCG LINK

Now they lost to UGA in the SECCG and fell to 7 and out of the 4 team playoff. But if SOS didn’t count and tough OOC games were too risky why were they ranked #2 behind only 1 loss Clemson who they had lost to?

While we can’t say for 100% certainty since it was a 4 team playoff and a different committee but it seems like they definitely would have made a 12 team playoff. Clemson OU UGA Ohio State USC were the top 5 conference champs and the highest ranked G5 team UCF was 12 anyway
So my guess based on the 2017 final playoff committee rankings :
1 Clemson 2 OU 3 UGA 4 tOSU get byes
5 Bama vs 12 UCF
6 Wisconsin vs 11 Washington
7 Auburn vs 10 Miami
8 USC vs 9 Penn St

Auburn with 3 loses not only gets in they get a home game. They were ranked ahead of multiple 2 loss teams and undefeated UCF because the committee does consider SOS.

This post was edited on 12/9/24 at 4:40 pm

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by NIH

Member since Aug 2008

122543 posts

Posted on 12/9/24 at 1:39 pm to H-Town Tiger

Between Chicken asking the rant for $100 month donations for NIL and half of the board wanting SEC schools to play cupcakes for 1/3rd of the season, college football is clearly in shambles.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Alt26

Member since Mar 2010

35532 posts

Posted on 12/9/24 at 1:57 pm to H-Town Tiger

Auburn was the shining example of getting screwed by having to play in the SECCG. They blew out Georgia and beat Alabama that season. Their "reward" for beating Alabama was a spot in the SECCG...where they lost to Georgia and allowed Alabama to back in and ultimately win the NC. Without the championship game Auburn was in the CFP

I expected the exact same thing to happen to SMU this season. They enter the championship game "in" the CFP. Yet, a loss put them at risk of falling out of the CFP in favor of a team who didn't have to put their W/L record on the line in an extra, wholly unnecessary game.

Conf. championship games have always been unnecessary "made for TV" events. But if we are going to keep them, the loser shouldn't be penalized in favor of a team that wasn't forced to play in one.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by rolltide32

Fort Payne, AL

Member since Nov 2013

6783 posts

Posted on 12/9/24 at 1:58 pm to NIH

The problem is that earlier committees were mostly comprised of people with high football IQ and the quality of the committee members has degraded significantly overtime and now things like SOS matter less than "optics" "fairness" and "inclusion".

The committee used to have to guys like Barry Alvarez, Tom Osborne, Pat Hayden, and Oliver Luck.

Now we have stooges.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by H-Town Tiger

Member since Nov 2003

61001 posts

Posted on 12/9/24 at 2:14 pm to rolltide32

quote:
The problem is that earlier committees were mostly comprised of people with high football IQ and the quality of the committee members has degraded significantly overtime

How many committee members can you name without googling

You sound like people that let politics rot their brain too much. SOS does factor in other wise 1 loss Indiana would not be behind multiple 2 loss teams. What ultimately killed Bama was Clemson winning the ACX and getting an auto bid. If they lost Bama would be in. They were left with a no win situation. Either punish SMU a team that had to play an extra game others did not or leave out a team with a better schedule and better wins (but 3 losses including 2 bad ones). Neither scenario is good but would have been avoided if Bama had beaten 1 of 2 bad SEC teams

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by H-Town Tiger

Member since Nov 2003

61001 posts

Posted on 12/9/24 at 2:16 pm to Alt26