Why is SMU 11 and Clemson 12?

Likely because Clemson has 1 more loss and SMU was ranked higher before they played.

Bc the committee took a bag from SMU. That’s what this is all about

quote:

---

They just played and Clemson won.

---

I'm not certain how many times this needs to be stated, but going into the weekend SMU was ranked 8th and Clemson was ranked 17th. Do you think that winning on a last second field goal should move Clemson up 6 spots in the polls?

Clemson isn't actually ranked 12th, they are ranked 16th, but the CFP rules say that the 5th highest ranked conference champion will be slated at 12th. SMU is ranked 10th, but pushed down to the 11th spot because Arizona State got the 4th seed due to being the 4th highest ranked conference champion.

It's really not that hard to understand.

Agreed- Clemson played 2 top 15 squads non conference in USCe and Georgia vs BYU for the ponies. Clemson also played a tougher ACC schedule. Committee is just going by fewest # of W’s.

The guy that posted the rules 3 times?

Clemson ended up like 15th or something. They get 12 seed automatically.

If they were ranked 10, they would be the 10 seed

Yes

Alabama should have both the 11 and 12 spots.

I really wanted SMU at Texas and send Dabos arse to Happy Valley

quote:

---

Do you think that winning on a last second field goal should move Clemson up 6 spots in the polls?

---

I think they should have gained more than one spot, and that SMU should have moved down more than 2 spots. Let’s not act like the game was that close from start to finish. Yes Clemson pulled a Clemson in the 4th quarter, but they were up 17 at the half and still up 17 after 3 quarters, never behind the entire game, and that tie lasted all of 16 seconds. So yeah they still had to win by a last second field goal, but it’s not like game was going back and forth the entire game and just waiting for whoever had the ball last.

Clemson and SMU were both 8-1 against ACC teams with Clemson winning head to head and the conference championship. Where records separate was Clemson playing and losing to #2 Georgia and #15 South Carolina while SMU was playing and losing to #17 BYU and playing and defeating an unranked TCU. SEC versus Big 12 made difference in record not SMU being better.

I think the bigger problem was they knew Clemson had better resume and the head to head over SMU, but seeding a 3 loss Clemson above a 2 loss SMU based on the SEC teams being stronger opponents opens the door for Bama and Ole Miss to rightfully complain about being left out behind SMU and its weaker schedule. The committee could not argue against them at that point as they would have already acknowledged it by seeding Clemson at 11. A 3 loss conference champion they can wash their hands of and say they had to, but they would have had to put themselves out there to actually rank a 3 loss team into play offs over a 2 loss SMU and a 1 loss Indiana even if it’s correct. Keeping Clemson at 12 helped them avoid this and continue to focus on record even as strength of schedule isn’t equal which is completely goes against the goal of having best teams in the playoffs at start of the season.