Started By
Message
re: Predict Tonight’s CFP ranking
Posted on 12/2/25 at 9:41 am to DarthRebel
Posted on 12/2/25 at 9:41 am to DarthRebel
quote:
Are we going to ignore the fact Kiffin got us 3 losses last year with an even better team
Let them have their moment. The pre-preseason national champs don’t like facts
0
Posted on 12/2/25 at 9:42 am to DarthRebel
quote:
3. Georgia - For now, will see if committee drops them after SECCG loss
"will see if"?
I'm curious what universe exists where UGA would lose to bama and NOT drop.
Posted on 12/2/25 at 9:43 am to RolltidePA
quote:
That said, I think they still move them ahead of A&M on the strength of wins and I hate to say this, quality of loss.
Posted on 12/2/25 at 9:44 am to Jugbow
quote:
Is that why ole miss matched all offers?
Do you people actually think before you post
He is a great coach, of course we wanted to keep him. At the same time, he can be a dumb coach. You cannot say this team has 4 losses without Kiffin, when we had 3 losses with him last year with a better overall team. This years group of players stepped up when they had to.
Posted on 12/2/25 at 9:47 am to DarthRebel
You left off the ACC champion
Posted on 12/2/25 at 9:48 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
I'm curious what universe exists where UGA would lose to bama and NOT drop.
The extra games are supposed to have less impact. If UGA loss on a last second FG or a Referee mistake that favors Bama, does the committee really drop them.
It goes back to, if they do, we are going to get to a point teams opt out of championship games. Then will the committee punish teams for skipping out on games??? Championship games should probably not matter at all, and also remove the auto-bid that comes from one. Duke getting in with 5 losses is a horrible possibility. If they want to make CGs still mean something, they should expand to 16 teams and no byes for top 4.
Posted on 12/2/25 at 9:52 am to Zgeo
Based on the latest odds from FanDuel these are the implied rankings by % odds to make the playoffs. The top 6 were just made up odds as those teams are off the board as they are locks.
1. Ohio State - ~99%
2. Indiana - ~99%
3. Georgia - ~99%
4. Texas Tech - ~99%
5. Oregon - ~99%
6. Texas A&M - ~99%
7. Ole Miss - ~98% (implied from +5500 to not make)
8. Oklahoma - ~96% (implied from +2200 to not make)
9. Alabama - ~95% (from -2000 to make)
10. Notre Dame - ~79% (from -375 to make)
11. BYU - ~20% (from +390 to make)
12. Miami - ~16% (from +540 to make)
13. Texas - ~5% (from +1800 to make)
14. Vanderbilt - ~2% (from +4000 to make)
1. Ohio State - ~99%
2. Indiana - ~99%
3. Georgia - ~99%
4. Texas Tech - ~99%
5. Oregon - ~99%
6. Texas A&M - ~99%
7. Ole Miss - ~98% (implied from +5500 to not make)
8. Oklahoma - ~96% (implied from +2200 to not make)
9. Alabama - ~95% (from -2000 to make)
10. Notre Dame - ~79% (from -375 to make)
11. BYU - ~20% (from +390 to make)
12. Miami - ~16% (from +540 to make)
13. Texas - ~5% (from +1800 to make)
14. Vanderbilt - ~2% (from +4000 to make)
Posted on 12/2/25 at 9:52 am to DarthRebel
quote:
If UGA loss on a last second FG or a Referee mistake that favors Bama, does the committee really drop them.
Uhh...yes. Unequiovically 100000% yes. You lose, you drop. Simple as that.
I mean think about it logically. We would have the same number of losses as bama, lost to them twice, and they'd be SEC Champions, so in your scenario they catapult from 10 to 2. So you have the Big 10 champ at 1, bama at 2, us at 3? Why doesn't the same logic apply to the Big 10 loser as the SECCG loser?
People are absolutely losing their minds over the "a CCG loss won't hurt a team" sentiment, which is just not true. CCG losers will absolutely be punished as they shoud. Because, ya know...they lost a game. Losses should matter.
Posted on 12/2/25 at 10:03 am to SummerOfGeorge
That leaves off the group of five conference winner
So you have to squeeze a group of five conference winner into the top 12
You have to have the four power conference winners
One group of five conference winner
And let’s face it, Notre Dame
That leaves you six total open spots, excluding conference winners
So you have to squeeze a group of five conference winner into the top 12
You have to have the four power conference winners
One group of five conference winner
And let’s face it, Notre Dame
That leaves you six total open spots, excluding conference winners
Posted on 12/2/25 at 10:04 am to Old Sarge
quote:
That leaves off the group of five conference winner
So you have to squeeze a group of five conference winner into the top 12
You have to have the four power conference winners
One group of five conference winner
And let’s face it, Notre Dame
That leaves you six total open spots, excluding conference winners
Correct, the top 10 are getting in. Top 9 if BYU beats Texas Tech.
Posted on 12/2/25 at 10:10 am to SummerOfGeorge
But you’re let list leaves off the group of five conference winner
That’s mandatory
That’s mandatory
Posted on 12/2/25 at 10:11 am to Old Sarge
quote:
But you’re let list leaves off the group of five conference winner
That’s mandatory
The list isn't ranking who will be in the playoffs. It's the expected rankings.
Tulane, North Texas, James Madison, Duke, Virginia haven't and won't be ranked in the Top 15 the last few weeks and won't this week.
Posted on 12/2/25 at 10:14 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
Uhh...yes. Unequiovically 100000% yes. You lose, you drop. Simple as that.
Then why play the game when you are sitting on a bye. Think of the NFL when teams have playoffs locked up and just play their scrubs and do not care if they lose. They do not get dropped. Yes there is no committee in NFL deciding this, however the NFL model is what we are going to.
If Georgia earned the 3 or 4 seed in regular season, then end of story. Basketball #1 seeds lose in conference tournaments all the time, and retain that #1 seed.
Everyone plays 12 games, period. If teams play a 13th game, they should be able to drop their worse game for consideration
. In that case you would drop a Bama. Completely stupid idea, but the committee is making dumb ideas reality.
Posted on 12/2/25 at 10:14 am to Hugh McElroy
First, the AP already has Ole Miss and #6 and A&M at #7
Second, this chart is BS. A&M has a single win against a team currently ranked (Notre Dame #9)
Ole Miss has two, and one of them is against a team ranked higher (Oklahoma #8, Tulane #25).
Posted on 12/2/25 at 10:18 am to RolltidePA
quote:
Ole Miss has two, and one of them is against a team ranked higher (Oklahoma #8, Tulane #25).
#25 Tulane lol.
Posted on 12/2/25 at 10:21 am to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
What will be interesting is how they explain Notre Dame/Miami and head to head if the 2 are #10 and #12. Hard to say they aren't in similar "buckets" at that point.
The committee might save face by putting them both in the playoff. Wait and see if Duke wins the ACC
Posted on 12/2/25 at 10:22 am to DarthRebel
quote:
Then why play the game when you are sitting on a bye
are you insinuating UGA should forfeit and not play?
As to "why play"...well this is obvious and goes without saying. But a win puts you in a top 4 seed and a 1st round bye, in addition to that minor little "being SEC Champions" thing.
quote:
Think of the NFL
I will not, beucase this isn't the NFL
quote:
Basketball #1 seeds lose in conference tournaments all the time, and retain that #1 seed.
They have 30+ games of data to go on compared to 13
quote:
but the committee is making dumb ideas reality.
the entire state of CFB has been getting dumber by the year lately, no argument here.
Posted on 12/2/25 at 10:22 am to FootballFrenzy
quote:
#25 Tulane lol.
A ranked win is a ranked win. Something that A&M has only done once this season.
Posted on 12/2/25 at 10:24 am to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
We've learned that explaining things is not a problem for them - they're awful at it either way. But A&M losing (their best win, a loss) and Miami drilling Pitt (their 2nd best actual win) gives them some decent ammo to fix what they screwed up all along.
Just curious but how many women are on this committee?
Posted on 12/2/25 at 10:25 am to RolltidePA
The chart is 100% accurate. It is standard to count "ranked wins" as "wins against teams that were ranked when you beat them." That's the standard usage across TV and media. If you want to look at wins against teams that finished the year ranked, that data can only be considered in retrospect (from the end of the season), and is usually indicated as such, as in "wins against teams that finished the year ranked)
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News