College Playoff Rankings

[33jacket]

Drad will screw tech...clemson is hanging around...tech loses to UGA, he will ensure they jump us to go to the orange bowl on the heels of a USCe win...even though we beat them head to head and have better wins.

the committee is a f-in joke and the system needs to change....

 

[AlabamaBuzz]

My issues with the rankings:

Utah should NOT have jumped us
Auburn is still too high, and we should have been ahead of them due to the severity of their loss to UGAG (and their meltdown against the Aggies)
FSU should not have dropped after a tough road win at da U
Clemson should not be any higher than 25, and probably should not be in the top 25 at all

I agree with those that believe some political rangling is going on in this "transparent" process. Remember, if Oregon plays in the Rose Bowl semi-final, the attendance will most likely be MUCH better. I believe some of this thinking is going on, like how can we maximize attendance at certain bowl games? This committee is starting to look like our congress.... "you wash my back, and I will wash yours"

 

[33jacket]

the problem is they use one criteria for one team. Then use the EXACT OPPOSITE criteria to justify another team
Auburn has 3 losses and is reeling and should not be in the top 20
Utah jumping us should be investigated
USC coming out of nowhere? WHAT?
Two one loss teams jumping FSU? Maybe one but TWO????
Miss St super weak schedule no one is man enough to point out....yet all this respect?
How is clemson in the top 25? These rankings are to reflect today, not what if Watson comes back
no marshall? Even at 25? Come on
Minnesota still in? Why? What is on that resume?

The whole thing is marred...i mean 50% of the rankings are like wtf

but my biggest issue is their criterias are constantly changing team to team

just use the BCS and move on...this is so dumb.

 

[jeffgt14]

My issues with the rankings:

Utah should NOT have jumped us
Auburn is still too high, and we should have been ahead of them due to the severity of their loss to UGAG (and their meltdown against the Aggies)
FSU should not have dropped after a tough road win at da U
Clemson should not be any higher than 25, and probably should not be in the top 25 at all

I agree with those that believe some political rangling is going on in this "transparent" process. Remember, if Oregon plays in the Rose Bowl semi-final, the attendance will most likely be MUCH better. I believe some of this thinking is going on, like how can we maximize attendance at certain bowl games? This committee is starting to look like our congress.... "you wash my back, and I will wash yours"

Don’t confuse idiocracy with an agenda. Sometimes some things are just so idiotic that the only rational explanation is that there is a hidden agenda… and there isn’t. The committee is literally just that dumb and are entirely too subjective.

 

[Oldgoldandwhite]

Now you know why the coaches on the committee are no longer coaching!

 

[Enuratique]

Either they need to just use the freaking BCS ranks to determine everything, or make the entire committee process open (video recordings of their deliberations) so we can see exactly what is going on and who and what is being said to move teams around.

http://www.reddit.com/r/CFB/comments/2mq8pr/week_13_rankings_comparisons_cfp_ap_coaches_bcs/ for an interesting analysis... See anything peculiar about Clemson? Also, Utah and USC are WTFs... By BCS rank, we would be 17 - which I'm fine with, but there are so many other teams that are ranked much higher than they should be.

EDIT: The top 15 are largely OK - it's the back 10 where the committee just said "**** it" and called it a day.

 

[33jacket]

Now you know why the coaches on the committee are no longer coaching!

barry alvarez is a hell of a coach...hall of famer...same with tom osborne
willingham was an ok coach. avg

but why are guys like mike tranghese, who ruined the big east, condoleeza rice, steve wieberg, an army general, radakovich on this committee? What insite and value do they bring?

what is a former miliatry pilot and a secretary of state going to do for college football

this is so f----in dumb i have trouble even contemplating how you justify this committee. Period.

its an agenda pull period.

 

[33jacket]

Either they need to just use the freaking BCS ranks to determine everything, or make the entire committee process open (video recordings of their deliberations) so we can see exactly what is going on and who and what is being said to move teams around.

http://www.reddit.com/r/CFB/comments/2mq8pr/week_13_rankings_comparisons_cfp_ap_coaches_bcs/ for an interesting analysis... See anything peculiar about Clemson? Also, Utah and USC are WTFs... By BCS rank, we would be 17 - which I'm fine with, but there are so many other teams that are ranked much higher than they should be.

EDIT: The top 15 are largely OK - it's the back 10 where the committee just said "**** it" and called it a day.

good look...thanks...you are right, today the top 15 is relatively ok. the back 10 exactly is the issue....and where agendas can be done....since no one is paying attention except pockets for those schools

and we are seeing those agendas

 

[jeffgt14]

It’s kind of funny to see the discrepancies in the Committee’s rankings with the both the AP Poll and the Coach’s poll. I wonder what the committee knows that all the other polls don’t ? BTW, here’s what the BCS rankings would be today if we were using it as our ranking system. At least with these you can see some reasoning for rankings and it uses multiple polls to establish them.

http://sportige.com/college-football-season-week-12-bcs-standings-11-18-2014/

The AP poll here is used in place of the Harris poll since it doesn't exist anymore.

 

[jeffgt14]

Either they need to just use the freaking BCS ranks to determine everything, or make the entire committee process open (video recordings of their deliberations) so we can see exactly what is going on and who and what is being said to move teams around.

http://www.reddit.com/r/CFB/comments/2mq8pr/week_13_rankings_comparisons_cfp_ap_coaches_bcs/ for an interesting analysis... See anything peculiar about Clemson? Also, Utah and USC are WTFs... By BCS rank, we would be 17 - which I'm fine with, but there are so many other teams that are ranked much higher than they should be.

EDIT: The top 15 are largely OK - it's the back 10 where the committee just said "**** it" and called it a day.

Beat me too it.

 

[DTGT]

Don’t confuse idiocracy with an agenda. Sometimes some things are just so idiotic that the only rational explanation is that there is a hidden agenda… and there isn’t. The committee is literally just that dumb and are entirely too subjective.

This committee knows how to line their own pockets. Their recusal policy has gapping loopholes that allow them to be lobbied by corporations (given free stuff/money in exchange for votes) without recusing themselves.

They aren't idiots; they are for sale to the highest bidder. I believe the highest bidder is currently Disney/ESPN as they have vested interest in their 20 year SEC contract.

 

[MidtownJacket]

explain how "Game dominance" doesn't have us higher?

http://espn.go.com/college-football...ankings-alabama-crimson-tide-oregon-ducks-top

Seems like we own the clock and the game past halftime with the lead..

 

[Squints]

the problem is they use one criteria for one team. Then use the EXACT OPPOSITE criteria to justify another team
Auburn has 3 losses and is reeling and should not be in the top 20
Utah jumping us should be investigated
USC coming out of nowhere? WHAT?
Two one loss teams jumping FSU? Maybe one but TWO????
Miss St super weak schedule no one is man enough to point out....yet all this respect?
How is clemson in the top 25? These rankings are to reflect today, not what if Watson comes back
no marshall? Even at 25? Come on
Minnesota still in? Why? What is on that resume?

The whole thing is marred...i mean 50% of the rankings are like wtf

but my biggest issue is their criterias are constantly changing team to team

just use the BCS and move on...this is so dumb.

I agree with just about everything your saying except I actually think you can make a case for Utah being ahead of us. Outside the WSU loss the teams they have lost to are two the #2 team and #15 team which beat the #2 team. I'm not sure I would have put them above us personally but I don't think that one is egregious. But other than that it doesn't look good.

but why are guys like mike tranghese, who ruined the big east, condoleeza rice, steve wieberg, an army general, radakovich on this committee? What insite and value do they bring?

I actually think it's a good idea for people like Rice and the general to be there if they've proven to have a solid working knowledge of the sport. The people I want on the committee completely independent from the system. The working knowledge is pretty key there though.

I think it's the people who are currently or recently involved with CFB that are the biggest issue. They can't overcome their perceptions. I think we're as low as we are because of who we are. They had no faith in us at the beginning of the season and think we're a sham now because of what they thought at the beginning of the year. It looks as if they're not giving the on field results the weight they said they would. When a team like Alabama or Oregon, who've got people slurping them, loses one game they don't fall very far and they shoot back up the rankings when they win. I have zero faith that would happen to us or any of the more covered schools and I think that's bull****.

 

[kg01]

But @Squints, putting non-football folks there is not too far removed from putting fans on the committee. They almost certainly have biases just as those not far-removed from being in the game themselves. Maybe even more so.

Reliance on preseason guesses, er, polls is a major issue here as it always was. And, as you allude to, this blatant SEC maneuvering is comical. Arkansas is crap? Well, Bama barely beat them. Er, Arkansas must be great too. Just unlucky. Yeah, yeah. Like I said, that's a great win by Bama over a stout Arkansas squad. Huh?

I'd rather they just come out and say what they're trying to do.

 

[Squints]

But @Squints, putting non-football folks there is not too far removed from putting fans on the committee. They almost certainly have biases just as those not far-removed from being in the game themselves. Maybe even more so.

Reliance on preseason guesses, er, polls is a major issue here as it always was. And, as you allude to, this blatant SEC maneuvering is comical. Arkansas is crap? Well, Bama barely beat them. Er, Arkansas must be great too. Just unlucky. Yeah, yeah. Like I said, that's a great win by Bama over a stout Arkansas squad. Huh?

I'd rather they just come out and say what they're trying to do.

Yea it's not perfect and a bit of a slippery slope. I think what I really want is people who have a current vested interest in the system to be not involved. I'd be happy with that I guess.

I also think they should forget this weekly release garbage. If these rankings don't matter why release them at all other than to give something to talk about? At least wait two weeks between rankings to give things a chance to solidify or change. I don't like what they're doing to G5 teams either. It seems pretty clear they're blatantly forcing them out and want them to leave and form their own division. G5 teams need to play and beat P5 teams to get ranked but P5 teams are being punished in the rankings for scheduling those G5 teams (unless your MSST). Something's gotta give there.

 

[jeffgt14]

I agree with just about everything your saying except I actually think you can make a case for Utah being ahead of us. Outside the WSU loss the teams they have lost to are two the #2 team and #15 team which beat the #2 team. I'm not sure I would have put them above us personally but I don't think that one is egregious. But other than that it doesn't look good.



I actually think it's a good idea for people like Rice and the general to be there if they've proven to have a solid working knowledge of the sport. The people I want on the committee completely independent from the system. The working knowledge is pretty key there though.

I think it's the people who are currently or recently involved with CFB that are the biggest issue. They can't overcome their perceptions. I think we're as low as we are because of who we are. They had no faith in us at the beginning of the season and think we're a sham now because of what they thought at the beginning of the year. It looks as if they're not giving the on field results the weight they said they would. When a team like Alabama or Oregon, who've got people slurping them, loses one game they don't fall very far and they shoot back up the rankings when they win. I have zero faith that would happen to us or any of the more covered schools and I think that's bull****.

Arizona State did not beat Oregon. Arizona did and Utah plays them this weekend. The only teams they’ve beaten are an overrated UCLA team and an overrated USC team by a combined 5 points. Here’s the thing that pisses me off about this; if you look at every conference and compare to the ACC, they’re essentially all the same as far as having top tier teams, bottom teams, and mediocre teams yet we get judged by our crappy teams. Look at it this way:

ACC Top Tier:
FSU (10-0)
PAC12 Top Tier:
Oregon (9-1)

ACC 2nd Tier:
GT (9-2)
Duke (8-2)
Clemson (7-3)
Louisville (7-3)
Miami (6-4)
PAC12 2nd Tier:
UCLA (8-2)
Arizona St (8-2)
Arizona (8-2)
Utah (7-3)
USC (7-3)

ACC Mediocre:
BC (6-4)
UNC (5-5)
VT (5-5)
NCST (6-5)
PAC12 Mediocre:
Washington (6-5)
Stanford (5-5)
Cal (5-5)

ACC Bottomfeeders:
Pitt (4-6)
UVA (4-6)
Syracuse (3-7)
Wake (2-8)
PAC12 Bottomfeeders:
OSU (5-5)
WSU (3-7)
Colorado (2-8)

I don’t see any differences here and I can’t be the only one who remembers our “Mediocre” Boston College team beating the #1 team in the PAC12 South.

 

[Minawreck]

or our ACC bottom feeder only losing to UCLA due to 3 defensive TD's.

 

[Techster]

There needs to be a rule if you're an active member (coach, AD, board member, etc.) of an NCAA institution, you shouldn't be part of a committee that decides participation of event like the playoffs. There way too many qualified people that you don't need to give anyone reason to question ulterior motives, or give the appearance of impropriety.

 

[ybeenormal]

Though highly unlikely, is it possible for us to win out beating FSU in the acccg for their only loss and then they stay ranked ahead of us to send them to the OB?

 

[Hiram_Jacket]

If we beat FSU in the ACCCG, wouldn't we automatically go to the Orange Bowl? The replacement rule only comes into play when the top team from the ACC is chosen for the CFP. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong...