College Playoff Rankings

Eli

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,507
If I was duke I'd be pissed. Even though you haven't played a great schedule you have one loss and that one loss is still better than ugag 2 losses.
 

Eli

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,507
And how does uga jump up 5 spots and we jump up only two spots beating the same caliber of team?
 

TechnicalPossum

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
801
Here is why I am irritated. It has become apparent that this system still has not eliminated poll anchoring of teams and conference.

Let's say our only loss this year was UNC. Would we be ranked above the two loss teams that started ranked? I highly doubt it. It looks like the only way to get a shot at the playoff is to start ranked and keep winning or be in the SEC. Even FSU has kept winning and kept dropping.
 

jeffgt14

We don't quite suck as much anymore.
Messages
5,789
Location
Mt Juliet, TN
I still think the PAC-12 is the most overrated conference. Worst thing that could've happened was that mediocre Arizona State team beating an overrated Notre Dame squad. I have no words for how FSU dropped to 3rd and I hate FSU more than anybody here.
 

OldJacketFan

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,348
Location
Nashville, TN
This year is toast as far as figuring out how to rate the teams. As I previously said the best model is an 8 team playoff, the Power5 conference winners regardless of overall record and 3 at large. It makes every game important and rewards a complete season's effort. I actually like the model of how it's being done this year moreso than I have in past years. You have all regions represented by the committee and the play on the field will settle the final four. But I think 8 make for a truer picture of getting to the best team in a given year.
 

33jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,636
Location
Georgia
This year is toast as far as figuring out how to rate the teams. As I previously said the best model is an 8 team playoff, the Power5 conference winners regardless of overall record and 3 at large. It makes every game important and rewards a complete season's effort. I actually like the model of how it's being done this year moreso than I have in past years. You have all regions represented by the committee and the play on the field will settle the final four. But I think 8 make for a truer picture of getting to the best team in a given year.

I think most agree we need 8 teams. But we wont for a while...i am curious what the old bcs rankings would name as its top 4 up to now. Just to see.
 

MGTfan

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
692
Location
Atlanta, GA
Fortunately, next year we should start ranked and play a tough schedule. IF we start 3-0 with a win over ND next season, I imagine we could be in the top ten. That's a long ways away though.
 

Animal02

Banned
Messages
6,269
Location
Southeastern Michigan
This year is toast as far as figuring out how to rate the teams. As I previously said the best model is an 8 team playoff, the Power5 conference winners regardless of overall record and 3 at large. It makes every game important and rewards a complete season's effort. I actually like the model of how it's being done this year moreso than I have in past years. You have all regions represented by the committee and the play on the field will settle the final four. But I think 8 make for a truer picture of getting to the best team in a given year.

Just go to 16 and kill all the meaningless bowl games.......they will never mean the same any more anyway.
 

OldJacketFan

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,348
Location
Nashville, TN
Just go to 16 and kill all the meaningless bowl games.......they will never mean the same any more anyway.

My problem with 16 teams is it my have too much of an impact on the regular/conference season. I just don't see having a 2-3 loss team in the playoffs. With 8 it would be almost impossible to be a conference champion with more than 2 losses and the 3 at large give an unlucky, so to speak, one loss Power5 team a shot and undefeated non Power5 team a shot. To me, that's the best workable solution.
 
Top