Started By
Message
re: Ranking the 1-Loss Playoff Teams by Quality Wins
Posted on 11/21/19 at 1:07 pm to SummerOfGeorge
Posted on 11/21/19 at 1:07 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
I could pretty easily argue there is a conspiracy to have 4 loss USC ranked #23 (with losses to 6-4 Washington and 6-4 BYU) and 3 loss A&M (with 3 losses to Top 15 teams) unranked.
I agree with you. But again, compare the brands.
My belief is that USC and Texas A&M should be ranked. USC beat Utah, so you have to give them credit for that.
My complaint with the back half of the rankings are all the mid majors that have played no one. Boise State is not a Top 20 team for instance.
quote:
And that would completely flip what you just posted around......which is just another reason why it's stupid to draw a line at #25, as if USC at #23 and Texas A&M at #27 are drastically different because of some arbitrary cut off point.
That's fine. Now do Penn State.
Losing at Top 10 Minnesota by 5 points... in a game in which Penn State had a 1st down at the Minnesota 11 yardline in the final 2 minutes with a chance to go ahead... is not a whole lot different than losing at home to LSU the way Alabama did. I'll give Bama a bit more credit, but not by much considering they lost and never once led in their home stadium.
But Penn State won on the road at #17 Iowa and beat #13 Michigan.... far better than any Alabama win. And yes, Texas A&M might be #26 for all we know, but Indiana and even Pitt are both probably in that "next 5 out category" along with Texas A&M, so again, Penn State's overall quality of wins is MUCH more impressive.
Based solely on quality of wins and losses, Penn State should be ranked ahead of Alabama.
2
Posted on 11/21/19 at 1:09 pm to BHMKyle
quote:
Based solely on quality of wins and losses, Penn State should be ranked ahead of Alabama.
Yea I'd have no issue with that. They should be ahead of Oregon too - and quite frankly, not that far behind Clemson (if at all).
I'd rank them the same way the Strength of Record metric does 1-6
1. LSU
2. Ohio State
3. Georgia
4. Clemson
5. Penn State
6. Alabama
7. Minnesota
8. Oregon
9. Oklahoma
10. Utah
11. Baylor
This post was edited on 11/21/19 at 1:12 pm
Posted on 11/21/19 at 1:35 pm to BHMKyle
You're not wrong, but at the same time if you really want to look at these things you can trace a sort of logic to it.
Why is Minnesota a top 10 team?
Because they beat Penn State, right?
Why were they so much lower prior to that game?
Because they had:
A 7-point win over SDSU (FCS)
A 3-point double OT win over Fresno State (4-6)
A 3-point win over Georgia Southern (6-4 G5)
A 7-point win over Purdue (4-6)
Minnesota was teetering on the bottom of the Top 25, because despite being undefeated they were struggling against teams they shouldn't struggle with. Still they won, so they were ranked.
Then they beat Penn State, and had their signature win. They rocketed up the polls. Almost immediately afterwards, they lost.
If you look at the entire season, the team that has the most argument to be above Alabama is Penn State (as you stated). Their SoR is higher, and is the only one higher out of teams that are not in the top 4 (Alabama's is 6, PSU's is 5). Penn State only struggled with one mediocre team (Pitt) - all other close games were against ranked opponents.
That said, the same argument can be made regarding Oregon and Utah (both with significantly lower SOS than Alabama and Penn State), but both are also ranked above Penn State. If we take the rankings at face value and not presume some maneuvering (i.e. setting up the Utah/Oregon winner to leap frog Alabama, dropping the UGA/LSU loser out, etc), then the committee is also saying that Oregon (1 loss, SOS #44) and Utah (1 loss, SOS #50) are better playoff contenders than Penn State (1 loss, SOS #25).
Why is Baylor behind 3 2-loss teams? The same logic applied to Minnesota could be applied to them, but Minn is above all 3 of those 2-loss teams. Despite Minnesota's SOS (61) being worse than Baylor's (55)
Why is Minnesota a top 10 team?
Because they beat Penn State, right?
Why were they so much lower prior to that game?
Because they had:
A 7-point win over SDSU (FCS)
A 3-point double OT win over Fresno State (4-6)
A 3-point win over Georgia Southern (6-4 G5)
A 7-point win over Purdue (4-6)
Minnesota was teetering on the bottom of the Top 25, because despite being undefeated they were struggling against teams they shouldn't struggle with. Still they won, so they were ranked.
Then they beat Penn State, and had their signature win. They rocketed up the polls. Almost immediately afterwards, they lost.
If you look at the entire season, the team that has the most argument to be above Alabama is Penn State (as you stated). Their SoR is higher, and is the only one higher out of teams that are not in the top 4 (Alabama's is 6, PSU's is 5). Penn State only struggled with one mediocre team (Pitt) - all other close games were against ranked opponents.
That said, the same argument can be made regarding Oregon and Utah (both with significantly lower SOS than Alabama and Penn State), but both are also ranked above Penn State. If we take the rankings at face value and not presume some maneuvering (i.e. setting up the Utah/Oregon winner to leap frog Alabama, dropping the UGA/LSU loser out, etc), then the committee is also saying that Oregon (1 loss, SOS #44) and Utah (1 loss, SOS #50) are better playoff contenders than Penn State (1 loss, SOS #25).
Why is Baylor behind 3 2-loss teams? The same logic applied to Minnesota could be applied to them, but Minn is above all 3 of those 2-loss teams. Despite Minnesota's SOS (61) being worse than Baylor's (55)
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News