Started By
Message
re: Ranking the 1-Loss Playoff Teams by Quality Wins
Posted on 11/21/19 at 11:24 am to WG_Dawg
Posted on 11/21/19 at 11:24 am to WG_Dawg
In 2017 Bama was on the bubble and got in because the main competition had 2 losses including a blowout.
In 2019 Bama is on the bubble and likely out because the main competition will have 1 competitive loss.
Seems to me like the system is working perfectly.
In 2019 Bama is on the bubble and likely out because the main competition will have 1 competitive loss.
Seems to me like the system is working perfectly.
This post was edited on 11/21/19 at 11:33 am
2
Posted on 11/21/19 at 11:25 am to WG_Dawg
I think it'd be really hard to put in Oregon/Utah or Baylor/Oklahoma over LSU, who would be 12-1 with 4x as many Top 25 wins and a loss to a Top 4 team.
I just can't see that happening.
I just can't see that happening.
Posted on 11/21/19 at 11:25 am to BHMKyle
Get a job Kyle
Posted on 11/21/19 at 11:25 am to PEPE
quote:
Not sure what's up your behind then.
I was agreeing with you ya dingus. What's up my behind is people liek the OP that think bama has some kind of free backdoor pass which couldn't be farther from the truth.
quote:
In 2017 Bama was on the bubble and got in because the main competition had 2 losses including a blowout.
In 2019 Bama is on the bubble and likely out because the main competition will have 1 competitive loss.
Seems to me like the system is working perfectly.
Yes I know, I've been saying exactly this for a monht and a half.
Posted on 11/21/19 at 11:26 am to PEPE
quote:
In 2017 Bama was on the bubble and got in because the main competition had 2 losses including a blowout.
In 2019 Bama is on the bubble and likely out because the main competition will have 1 competitive loss.
It's pretty simple, really
Posted on 11/21/19 at 11:27 am to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
I think it'd be really hard to put in Oregon/Utah or Baylor/Oklahoma over LSU, who would be 12-1 with 4x as many Top 25 wins and a loss to a Top 4 team.
I just can't see that happening.
While I think all of america knows that LSU would wipe the floor with any of those 4 teams, and I'm fully on board with LSU being the most deserving, the committee has clearly shown that they value conference titles EXTREMELY highly. While I agree that they'd probably be in decent shape it wouldn't shock me in the slightest is a 1-loss Oregon went instead.
Posted on 11/21/19 at 11:29 am to WG_Dawg
I meant to be replying to op, sorry for confusion.
Posted on 11/21/19 at 11:47 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
you need to realize that kirk fricking herbstreit isn't on the committee and doens't mean jack shite to who the committee picks.
ESPN controls the Playoff. Yes, Kirk Herbstreit is singularly more powerful than any one person when it comes to deciding the first four teams.... including every single member of the committee.
Each week ESPN has a show to reveal the rankings precisely so they can create the narrative and shape public opinion. If you think Herbstreit and the platform he has each week to message out to the committee, the voters, and the general public is meaningless then you haven't been paying attention.
quote:
You need ot understand these people are paid to generate discussion and ratings and get people talking.
Yes, and they are paid out of TV dollars that the playoff generates. So of course Ohio State gets in over Baylor or TCU.... of course Alabama gets in over any other team that's within reason. In the end, its all about $$$. Always.
quote:
If they came out and said "look people, bama is done and has zero chance unless we have mass chaos" it's not as beneficial to them.
Of course not.... because its beneficial to them to have Bama in the playoff. They'll say just that about any other team. Just not Bama. That's the entire point.
Posted on 11/21/19 at 11:50 am to BHMKyle
quote:
ESPN controls the Playoff. Yes, Kirk Herbstreit is singularly more powerful than any one person when it comes to deciding the first four teams.... including every single member of the committee.
quote:
of course Alabama gets in over any other team that's within reason
there wasn't another team wtihin reason. Ohio State had 2 losses.
quote:
Just not Bama. That's the entire point.
You have clearly gone off the rails with this conspiracy. Let me ask you...can you put together a compelling case for ohio state going in 2017? You want to say "bama didn't beat anyone" and fine, that has some merit. But I'd like ot know how you can say with ironclad certainty that OSU deserved to go more with 1 extra loss, includign one about as bad as ours to SC this year, while keeping in mind bama's lone loss was on the road to the #2 team.
Posted on 11/21/19 at 11:56 am to BHMKyle
2017 UGA???
Posted on 11/21/19 at 12:00 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
the resume of the team they were competing against had 1 more loss and a 30-point beatdown to a putrid iowa team, while bama's lone loss was to the #2 team in the coutnry.
No, that's not true. Bama's one loss was to Auburn who had 3 losses and was #7 in the Final Playoff Rankings.
How about #6 Wisconsin? Like Bama, they had 1 loss and did not win their conference... at least they won their division though. Which means they were 12-1 while Alabama was 11-1.
Compare their losses:
Wisconsin lost to #5 Ohio State by 6 points
Alabama lost to #7 Auburn by 12 points
Compare the quality wins:
Wisconsin beat #21 Northwestern
Alabama beat #17 LSU and #23 Mississippi State
Now I agree that Alabama should be ranked ahead of Wisconsin because they had one extra quality win. But aside from playing and beating the #23 team, thats literally the only difference between 12-1 Wisconsin and 11-1 Alabama. Yet Wisconsin was not even in the discussion. Why? BECAUSE THEY ARE FREAKING WISCONSIN and NOT ALABAMA.
Both teams were coming off a loss. Both teams failed to win their conference. Wisconsin at least won their division and played an extra game. But in the end, Alabama beat #17 and #23 while Wisconson only beat #21.
Those resumes are actually very comparable. But Alabama got into the playoff and Wisconsin was not even in the discussion. THATS THE ENTIRE POINT.
Alabama always gets that second look. They always get the benefit of the doubt. The eye test alyways favors them.
Any other team with a similar resume (like Wiconsin!) is not even worthy of discussion. They are eliminated.
That's the point.
Posted on 11/21/19 at 12:14 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
can you put together a compelling case for ohio state going in 2017?
Of course I can.
Ohio State won a Conference Title... against an opponent that came into the game with a perfect 12-0 record. Alabama didn't even win their division.
That right there is compelling enough.
But I'll go on...
Ohio State played the #2, #6, #9, and #16 teams
Alabama played the #7, #17 and #23 teams
Ohio State literally played four opponents that were deemed better than Alabama's second toughest opponent.
One of Ohio State's losses was to the Final Committee Ranking #2 team in the country back in Week 2... Had Alabama played an opponent like that, there's a good chance they would have also had a second loss.
The fact that Bama lost the only game it played all season to a Top 16 ranked team (by double digits) does not inspire much hope that they would have defeated the #2 team in the regular season had they played them.
So yes, Ohio State had a second loss. But they played a MUCH more difficult schedule. And the Conference Championship should offset that fact. Especially since the committee says that Conference Championships have a lot of meaning.
IMO, there are always multiple factors:
Conference Championship?- Ohio State wins that category
Strength of Schedule- Ohio State wins that category
Quality Wins- Ohio State wins that category
Comparing losses- Alabama wins that category
But in the end, "eye test" wins out. As it always will when Alabama is involved.
Posted on 11/21/19 at 12:29 pm to BHMKyle
quote:
But in the end, "eye test" wins out. As it always will when Alabama is involved.
Alabama finished the regular season ranked higher than Ohio State in most all computer polls - including the old BCS, Sagarin, Strength of Record, etc.
Posted on 11/21/19 at 12:46 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
You have clearly gone off the rails with this conspiracy
It's not a conspiracy if it happens over and over again.
Look at this season.... It's already happening:
#5 Alabama- ZERO wins against Top 25 teams
#6 Oregon- Win over #23 USC
#8 Penn State- Wins over #13 Michigan and #17 Iowa
#9 Oklahoma- Win over #14 Baylor and #22 Iowa State
#10 Minnesota- Win over #8 Penn State
There are literally four other 1-loss teams who each have much better quality wins compared to Alabama. Yet which of the above ranks the highest?
Drum roll please....
IT'S ALABAMA!!!
What a shocker.
And yes, you can say their loss was to the #1 team in the country, but to anyone who watched that game knows it was never close. LSU dominated from start to finish. Alabama never once led. LSU led by more than one score for over 30 minutes of game time. Again, Alabama led for zero seconds in the game. Bama also scored on a 1-play 85 yard pass with 1:21 to go in the game to make it look more respectable, but it was a beatdown in Bryant Denny to anyone who watched.
Penn State lost on the road to a Top 10 team in a game that was much closer throughout.... yet they have two wins over Top 17 teams. Remember, Bama has zero wins over Top 25 teams. There is no reason right now for Penn State to be ranked behind Bama other than "brand". Zero.
Posted on 11/21/19 at 12:51 pm to BHMKyle
quote:
#5 Alabama- ZERO wins against Top 25 teams
#6 Oregon- Win over #23 USC
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.
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.
This post was edited on 11/21/19 at 12:55 pm
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.
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 1:24 pm to BHMKyle
Melt, bitch.
Posted on 11/21/19 at 1:24 pm to SummerOfGeorge
I agree with that.
I guess my point is that Alabama always seems to get that extra bump, and its always explained away as "eye test". They always get that extra benefit of the doubt and that second look. Other teams are thrown to the side without any contemplation despite having the same type of resume.
My own personal opinion is that Quality Wins and Conference Championships should be most meaningful. The Playoff Committee also espouses these as major factors, only they have no problem ignoring them and reverting back to "eye test" if it fits their narrative which is why I have a problem with the rankings being decided by a committee.
I don't mind a loss especially if its to a Top 4 or 5 team if the team in question has other major wins that make up for it. But if you can't beat a single Top 15 team, you shouldn't even be in the discussion.
I guess my point is that Alabama always seems to get that extra bump, and its always explained away as "eye test". They always get that extra benefit of the doubt and that second look. Other teams are thrown to the side without any contemplation despite having the same type of resume.
My own personal opinion is that Quality Wins and Conference Championships should be most meaningful. The Playoff Committee also espouses these as major factors, only they have no problem ignoring them and reverting back to "eye test" if it fits their narrative which is why I have a problem with the rankings being decided by a committee.
I don't mind a loss especially if its to a Top 4 or 5 team if the team in question has other major wins that make up for it. But if you can't beat a single Top 15 team, you shouldn't even be in the discussion.
Posted on 11/21/19 at 1:25 pm to BHMKyle
Ranking them by horrible losses is more like what the committee does and has universal acceptance. For instance you gotta wonder about a team that manages to lose by multiple scores at home to a pitiful rival school next door down on their luck and just waiting til the hammer drops on their staff. Even though that loser appears to have improved and has been blessed with great injury luck (selectors don't like placing a team who is just a shell of what they were) they just edged a 3 loss school on the road who beat them down physically til they seemingly quit in the 4th quarter.
First three selections are without doubt strong dogs but after that you got a school that has had 1,000 year injury issues and and may very well get beat again plus one or two that are just at times....dogs. However a couple can still prove themselves.
First three selections are without doubt strong dogs but after that you got a school that has had 1,000 year injury issues and and may very well get beat again plus one or two that are just at times....dogs. However a couple can still prove themselves.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News