re: Utah, Big 12 champ or Bama for final 4th spot?

quote:

---

The 2011 shite is still too fresh.

I understand what you’re saying, and I agree with you, but that bull shite will never fail to be considered when we approach these things

---

I appreciate you at least acknowledging that. You've got to realize though that anything that happened before 2014 is totally irrelevant to playoff selections. It just is. I know 2011 sitcks in LSU fans' craws but the committee has gotten it right every single year and there is nothign to suggest they're going to catapult bama into the playoffs over other 1-lsos teams that won their conference. It hasn't happened before and especially won't start now considering bama doesn't have a single ranked win and may only have 1 at season's end, which by the way would have 4 losses.

quote:

---

appreciate you at least acknowledging that. You've got to realize though that anything that happened before 2014 is totally irrelevant to playoff selections. It just is. I know 2011 sitcks in LSU fans' craws but the committee has gotten it right every single year and there is nothign to suggest they're going to catapult bama into the playoffs over other 1-lsos teams that won their conference. It hasn't happened before and especially won't start now considering bama doesn't have a single ranked win and may only have 1 at season's end, which by the way would have 4 losses.

---

Oh yeah, I agree with all that completely.

quote:

---

You are acting like you know

---

The last month and half that I've been beating this drum, the one constant in all my arguments has been that what I'm saying is based entirely on what the committee has proven to do. I mean it's literally the only real, actual thing we have to go on.

quote:

---

none of the people who have made the decisions in the first couple years are still on the committee

100% turnover.

---

what does this have to do with anything? If anythign it reinforces my point, that there can be high turnover but they still come to the same conclusions.

I've also said many times that the committee could do a 180 and do somethign we haven't seen them do before. That's obviously possible and there's no way to know ahead of time if they will or not. My whole point is that everythign I'm saying it based on actual data points and not just emotion and "bama bias" butthurt.

quote:

---

It does not reinforce your point.

---

it literally does

quote:

---

the members seeing it one way 5 years ago has zero to do with this year bc the committee is different.

---

and 4 years ago, and 3 years ago, and 2 years ago, and last year. They've chosen the same way every time

quote:

---

In other years there have been a clear top 4 so you are using confirmation bias.

---

I'm telling you that a non-champion has NEVER IN PLAYOFF HISTORY made teh playoffs over a P5 champion with less than 2 losses. You can call that confirmation bias if you want but that's simply the black and white facts of the matter.

4. Oklahoma wins out
5. Utah wins out
6. Alabama wins
7. Baylor wins out

quote:

---

However, the one precedent that I am curious about is this one from just last year:

---

you already said it adn kind of glossed over it but I think it's pretty important ot note that whatever the rankings 5-25 are entirely irrelevant. I undersatnd where you're coming from, but I honestly couldn't care less waht teh committee does aside form the playoff rankings because they truly don't matter.

quote:

---

doesn't it seem like the committee will at least be open to considering other resume points (strength of wins and losses etc) when ranking conference champions and non-conference champions?

---

maybe, all I'm going on is the actual decisions they've made.

Also, with our 2nd loss last year we had less than 0 chance of making the playoffs. Any talking head in the media mentioning that was just trying to generate discussion and clicks. And maybe they threw us a bone for playing bama so close, who knows. But we had absolutely no chance to go once we got that 2nd loss. The only competition for that 4th spot was between 1-loss P5 champions in OU and OSU, but OU had a "good" loss to texas while OSU had a complete head scratcher of a loss to purdue.

I DO think that really looking hard at wins and losses will come into play and matter if all else is equal, as in the case of OU and OSU last year like I mentioned above. But if you have a utah or ou/baylor that wins their league competing with a 1-loss bama this year, that isn't "all things equal" as a conference title is the big trump card. Not to mention bama wouldn't even have a very good resume anyway aside from a good loss. But if all you can point to is how good your loss is and not point to any of your wins what does that really say?

Interesting to think that a 12-1 Baylor with 3 Top25 wins would still be on the outside looking in. Probably the case but Utah would have 1 T25 win with a loss to USC. Baylor would have the better win and better loss and more T25 wins. I did notice how the committee was talking last week about how Utah’s one loss was without their stud RB. They also failed to mention that Utah loss to the 3rd strong QB for USC lol.

quote:

---

Interesting to think that a 12-1 Baylor with 3 Top25 wins would still be on the outside looking in. Probably the case but Utah would have 1 T25 win with a loss to USC. Baylor would have the better win and better loss and more T25 wins. I did notice how the committee was talking last week about how Utah’s one loss was without their stud RB. They also failed to mention that Utah loss to the 3rd strong QB for USC lol.

---

I don't disagree that Baylor may be getting the short end of the stick since they (or Minnesota for that matter if they win out) making the playoff would certainly be as much of a "cinderella story" as the college football playoff could provide.

It seems that one area where the committee may be open to (self?) adjustment is the degree to which they value "game control" (i.e., avoiding a lot of close calls/"bad days" against mediocre teams) and advanced metrics.

It will be interesting to see how this actually plays out should a final decision come down to a Baylor vs Alabama (less Top 25 wins but blowing out every middling team + Top 4 advanced metrics).

quote:

---

They need defined requirements.

---

They are already have them.

Best 4 teams. Anything more specific is begging for trouble.

Conference champions? Uh..fricking terrible idea, because conferences are often wildy unbalanced. Why reward the 15th best team just because they are in a conference that reeks even worse than my nuts do?