Started By
Message
What are the unwritten criteria used by the committee, for real?
Posted on 12/4/23 at 11:42 am
Posted on 12/4/23 at 11:42 am
Not saying its right or wrong. I just find it interesting.
My understanding is that the CFP Committee is supposed to consider four criteria when teams are deemed comparable, in no particular order:
1. championships won
2. strength of schedule
3. head-to-head competition
4. comparative outcomes of common opponents
5. players or coaches not available
However, imo, there are other considerations that are unwritten criteria to get the best 4 teams, I feel like some are:
1. Recent history of success of the program
2. Recruiting Rankings
3. Vegas Lines
4. All-Time history of success of the program
5. ESPN Narratives
To me, it sure looks like the CFP Committee deliberates as follows:
They pick 4 based on the unwritten criteria, then justify those rankings by picking and choosing which criteria listed first matter more on this particular day.
What other things do they look at, really? How good an offense is? geography? conference? How exciting a star player is?
My understanding is that the CFP Committee is supposed to consider four criteria when teams are deemed comparable, in no particular order:
1. championships won
2. strength of schedule
3. head-to-head competition
4. comparative outcomes of common opponents
5. players or coaches not available
However, imo, there are other considerations that are unwritten criteria to get the best 4 teams, I feel like some are:
1. Recent history of success of the program
2. Recruiting Rankings
3. Vegas Lines
4. All-Time history of success of the program
5. ESPN Narratives
To me, it sure looks like the CFP Committee deliberates as follows:
They pick 4 based on the unwritten criteria, then justify those rankings by picking and choosing which criteria listed first matter more on this particular day.
What other things do they look at, really? How good an offense is? geography? conference? How exciting a star player is?
This post was edited on 12/4/23 at 12:10 pm
8
Posted on 12/4/23 at 11:49 am to L5UT1ger
quote:
My understanding is that the CFP Committee is supposed to consider four criteria when teams are deemed comparable, in no particular order:
Your understanding is incorrect. Those are four MAIN criteria they are supposed to consider but the committee has said for 10 years that they take all factors into consideration. One of the big considerations according to the chairman was they went around the table and asked "if you were the opposing coach who would you NOT want to face". The same four came up again and again
Posted on 12/4/23 at 11:52 am to L5UT1ger
quote:
To me, it sure looks like the CFP Committee deliberates as follows: They pick 4 based on the unwritten criteria, then justify those rankings by picking and choosing which criteria listed first matter more on this particular day.
It’s this. The reason they gave for putting Alabama in the playoff over Florida State is the exact opposite of the reason they gave for sending Liberty to the NY6 over SMU
Posted on 12/4/23 at 11:55 am to L5UT1ger
It’s simple really.
If there is ever any doubt, put Alabama in.
They should rename it the Alabama Invitational. Just pencil Bama in and invite other teams to compete against them.
If there is ever any doubt, put Alabama in.
They should rename it the Alabama Invitational. Just pencil Bama in and invite other teams to compete against them.
This post was edited on 12/4/23 at 11:56 am
Posted on 12/4/23 at 11:59 am to Bulldawg2010
quote:
It’s simple really.
If there is ever any doubt, put Alabama in.
They should rename it the Alabama Invitational. Just pencil Bama in and invite other teams to compete against them.
Melt
Posted on 12/4/23 at 12:01 pm to StopRobot
Benefit of the Doubt Rankings with their trend:
1. Alabama -
2. Ohio State -
3. Michigan up
4. Georgia up
5. Texas up
6. Oklahoma down
7. USC down
8. Notre Dame down
9. Florida State up
10. LSU -
11. Clemson -
12. Oregon up
13. Tennessee -
14. Florida down
15. Penn State –
16. Miami down
17. Auburn down
18. Nebraska way down
19. Texas A&M up ($ impressive and they get clicks)
20. Washington up
21. Wisconsin down
22. Iowa –
23. Utah up
24. West Virginia down
25. Virginia Tech down
26. Oklahoma State up
27. North Carolina –
28. Missouri up
29. Ole Miss up
30. Arizona up
Others receiving votes: Arkansas, SEC, Big Ten, Big 12, ACC, Non Power 5 flavor of the half decade.
Feel free to post your own. Im bored at work today.
1. Alabama -
2. Ohio State -
3. Michigan up
4. Georgia up
5. Texas up
6. Oklahoma down
7. USC down
8. Notre Dame down
9. Florida State up
10. LSU -
11. Clemson -
12. Oregon up
13. Tennessee -
14. Florida down
15. Penn State –
16. Miami down
17. Auburn down
18. Nebraska way down
19. Texas A&M up ($ impressive and they get clicks)
20. Washington up
21. Wisconsin down
22. Iowa –
23. Utah up
24. West Virginia down
25. Virginia Tech down
26. Oklahoma State up
27. North Carolina –
28. Missouri up
29. Ole Miss up
30. Arizona up
Others receiving votes: Arkansas, SEC, Big Ten, Big 12, ACC, Non Power 5 flavor of the half decade.
Feel free to post your own. Im bored at work today.
This post was edited on 12/4/23 at 12:15 pm
Posted on 12/4/23 at 12:03 pm to L5UT1ger
I feel like ESPN has narratives they push all season that tie in to this.
I noticed Oregon was getting National Championship level hype late in the year. Way more than Washington, when they are pretty even on paper imo. Plus Washington beat them head to head earlier in the year.
Still not sure how Washington were -9.5 underdogs to Oregon. I'm thinking Oregon got bonus hype with the Bo Nix Heisman campaign. Or maybe ESPN loves Oregon. Flashy Duck unis and all that.
I'm mainly surprised that Ohio State and UGA aren't in this conversation as much. Both very good teams that lost to another very good team by less than a score. Really coin flip games.
Both OSU and UGA are better than FSU, but it feels like they were ranked lower to soften the blow
I noticed Oregon was getting National Championship level hype late in the year. Way more than Washington, when they are pretty even on paper imo. Plus Washington beat them head to head earlier in the year.
Still not sure how Washington were -9.5 underdogs to Oregon. I'm thinking Oregon got bonus hype with the Bo Nix Heisman campaign. Or maybe ESPN loves Oregon. Flashy Duck unis and all that.
I'm mainly surprised that Ohio State and UGA aren't in this conversation as much. Both very good teams that lost to another very good team by less than a score. Really coin flip games.
Both OSU and UGA are better than FSU, but it feels like they were ranked lower to soften the blow
Posted on 12/4/23 at 12:04 pm to StopRobot
quote:
they take all factors into consideration
Seems like "all factors" without listing those factors is a bit like saying "whatever we feel like that day," no? Im asking for the real factors. Vegas lines, for example, are a factor they use. They dont watch film of each team and break it down. No way. They use the work of others to form their own opinion.
Not trolling. If you take whatever factor you want that day, then there are no real factors.
Posted on 12/4/23 at 12:05 pm to L5UT1ger
quote:
Injuries are supposed to be considered as well
It's not just 'supposed to be considered,' it literally should be the fifth numbered item on your list.
quote:
I mentioned this in another thread, but the same metric would apply to Michigan (who barely had a better SOS than FSU) if Harbaugh had still been suspended.
quote:
unavailability of key players and coaches
Posted on 12/4/23 at 12:06 pm to OldRebYeller
quote:
I feel like ESPN has narratives they push all season that tie in to this.
ESPN narratives is a good one. Agree it is unwritten factor as well.
Posted on 12/4/23 at 12:08 pm to L5UT1ger
1. Does your team start with “Ala” and/or end in “bama”
Posted on 12/4/23 at 12:08 pm to paperwasp
quote:
It's not just 'supposed to be considered,' it literally should be the fifth numbered item on your list
Agree. I didnt list it because I didnt have a 5th one for the bottom. Its in the rules. no doubt.
Like I said, i find it interesting. I know that its not normal to try to have reasonable discourse on this board. lol.
Posted on 12/4/23 at 12:09 pm to L5UT1ger
Hard to say now.
I thought they had been pretty consistent until this year, but my #1, automatically in the playoff criteria from observation was to have any P5 undefeated team in the playoff.
They disregarded it this year, so who knows?
Doesn't really matter anymore with us going to 12 teams. It will be different.
I thought they had been pretty consistent until this year, but my #1, automatically in the playoff criteria from observation was to have any P5 undefeated team in the playoff.
They disregarded it this year, so who knows?
Doesn't really matter anymore with us going to 12 teams. It will be different.
Posted on 12/4/23 at 12:14 pm to StopRobot
When Nick Saban, Reece Davis, Dari Nowkah, and the rest of the Rammer Jammer gang are gone, ESPN will find another cash cow to hang its hat on like it has Bama. What ESPN tells the committee to do, the committee does.
Posted on 12/4/23 at 12:21 pm to L5UT1ger
quote:
However, imo, there are other considerations that are unwritten criteria to get the best 4 teams, I feel like some are:
1. $$$
2. $$$
3. $$$
4. $$$
Fify
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News