Started By
Message
re: UGA as a CFP 4-seed
Posted on 11/4/25 at 3:19 pm to DawgTired
Posted on 11/4/25 at 3:19 pm to DawgTired
quote:We're on a message board. We can talk about whatever we want.
I don't think we should be talking about a first round bye.
If you want to act scared and not engage in discussion of hypotheticals, that's your prerogative, not our obligation
0
Posted on 11/4/25 at 3:25 pm to Buckeye06
quote:Good citation. I'm very curious to see how much precedent last year actually set also. What we're talking about here, and you reference, is obviously a highly visible scenario when it occurs, and could be almost annual.
All I need is to see that in 2024 Penn State stayed ahead of Ohio State when both teams had 2 losses. Penn State lost AT HOME to Ohio State and stayed ahead of them.
With respect to another precedent, auto-bids for the G4 conferences, we've already done away with. I'm likewise betting some CCG losers with a 2nd, or even 3rd, loss, will not be making the field going forward. Perhaps will happen to GT, UVA, TTech, Cincy, or even Texas (if they win out and UGA loses another)
Posted on 11/4/25 at 3:29 pm to Demosthenian
quote:
Good citation. I'm very curious to see how much precedent last year actually set also. What we're talking about here, and you reference, is obviously a highly visible scenario when it occurs, and could be almost annual.
Obviously they are changing this thing a bit annually. They are now seeding teams far more correctly (it may never be perfect), so maybe they will also start taking that into account.
But they made it a point to say they will not be punishing CCG losers much if at all last season.
OSU had more top 25 wins than PSU and Texas combined last year, yet they were ranked ahead of OSU with the same number of losses including the CCGs. So to me they made it clear last year, but as said, maybe they are tinkering as they go still
Posted on 11/5/25 at 7:55 am to Demosthenian
I meant if you don't actually go to the championship game. Obviously if you go and lose, particularly if you lose a very taxing and physical game which the game often is that would be a worst case scenario
Posted on 11/5/25 at 9:03 am to Demosthenian
If Bama gets to the SECG and loses, yes, they will be behind GA.
The loss in that game doesn't count for nothing, but it does count for something.
The Committee would see it as Bama having 1.5 losses and all that would happen is they would switch positions with GA.
Their FSU loss was bad and still counts regardless of the week it was played.
Regardless, I want to skip the SECG game and play the first round in Athens.
The loss in that game doesn't count for nothing, but it does count for something.
The Committee would see it as Bama having 1.5 losses and all that would happen is they would switch positions with GA.
Their FSU loss was bad and still counts regardless of the week it was played.
Regardless, I want to skip the SECG game and play the first round in Athens.
This post was edited on 11/5/25 at 9:12 am
Posted on 11/5/25 at 9:05 am to Demosthenian
wouldnt it be easier to jump 2 loss Bama?
and let's not forget, you lost at HOME. and struggled to beat a below avg Auburn team and an average TN team.
be thankful you're as close as you are.
and let's not forget, you lost at HOME. and struggled to beat a below avg Auburn team and an average TN team.
be thankful you're as close as you are.
This post was edited on 11/5/25 at 9:09 am
Posted on 11/5/25 at 9:12 am to NWLA_Bama
Oh we have been fricked by that, I think it depends on the brand. We were on e 1st all season in the playoff ranking and got lowered to sixth after one loss.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 9:17 am to truth22
quote:
and let's not forget, you lost at HOME. and struggled to beat a below avg Auburn team and an average TN team.
The Aggies have only played two teams with a pulse so far this year. You'll lose to both Missouri and Texas. No SEC championship appearance and another year not sniffing the playoffs
Posted on 11/5/25 at 9:46 am to Demosthenian
If we'd looked dominant in most or all of our games outside of the Bama game, maybe that could happen. I'd still doubt it, but as inconsistent as we've looked all year there's no way we would get placed above a conference champion or a single loss SEC championship or even Big10 championship game loser
Posted on 11/5/25 at 10:14 am to Demosthenian
The committee goes out of its way to not penalize CCG losers because they don’t want conferences to get rid of the CCG
UGA’s only path up is if the teams in front lose regular season games IMO
UGA’s only path up is if the teams in front lose regular season games IMO
Posted on 11/5/25 at 10:18 am to DawgTired
Reminder that last year the 5-8’s that hosted a game all won the first round, and 1-4’s with byes all lost in the second round. It’s something they need to reconsider if the trend continues. It’s kind of ridiculous that only 5-8 get a homefield advantage. And rust is real.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 10:41 am to Demosthenian
The danger is playing like shite and losing bad in the SECCG. Recency bias is real, I don't care what anybody says.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 11:17 am to genro
Yep. It’s not a good omen.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 12:02 pm to NWLA_Bama
quote:
The teams in the conference title game shouldn't be punished just because they lost.
On the other hand, that would give Alabama two losses, and their win over Georgia was razor thin AND Alabama is the #4 seed right now with Georgia at #5. I would think an Alabama loss to A&M (#3 seed) would have to push them down at least one spot. I would be surprised if they did not drop them behind Georgia.
I get it. Alabama beat Georgia in the regular season, but FSU beat Alabama and nobody would argue FSU should be ranked ahead of Alabama. Even if FSU only had three losses, no one would argue they should be ranked ahead of Alabama. Why? Because they lost a game more than Alabama.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 12:05 pm to Raoul_Duke
quote:
No. Everyone wins out and the losers of the CCG’s are the 3 and 4 seeds. Unless there’s a blowout
So your argument is that after the conference championship games...no matter how they turn out... no changes in the rankings at all?
No need to play them at all, then.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 12:06 pm to DawgTired
quote:
There's no guarantee we're making the playoffs at all. I don't think we should be talking about a first round bye.
This is the truth, right here. Texas and GT could beat Georgia, and we could drop completely out of the playoffs altogether.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 12:15 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
On the other hand, that would give Alabama two losses, and their win over Georgia was razor thin AND Alabama is the #4 seed right now with Georgia at #5. I would think an Alabama loss to A&M (#3 seed) would have to push them down at least one spot. I would be surprised if they did not drop them behind Georgia.
I get it. Alabama beat Georgia in the regular season, but FSU beat Alabama and nobody would argue FSU should be ranked ahead of Alabama. Even if FSU only had three losses, no one would argue they should be ranked ahead of Alabama. Why? Because they lost a game more than Alabama.
There are multiple positions that can be taken and justified. It's why I was hoping these "new enhanced metrics" were going to play more of a role in the rankings than they are apparently going to. For example, in the case of Alabama losing the SECCG to aTm and ending the season with two losses and assuming UGA wins out but doesn't go to the SECCG. I would rather move away from "the eye test" bull crap and go to the metrics and if UGA came out ahead of Bama, then so be it, put them ahead. If not, then so be it as well.
The enhanced metrics were supposed to take another element of human judgment out of it to get closer to being objective. But going from last night's CFP rankings, the "eye test" is going to once again be the deciding factor.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 12:16 pm to TexasOnTop
quote:
The committee made it very clear last year that a team won't be punished for losing a conference championship.
Not really. Teams have dropped in the rankings after conference championship games every year.
Penn State moved from #3 to #4 and Texas moved from #2 to #3 after the conference championship game last year.
You can argue they stayed in the playoffs, but when they made a G5 team one of the top 4 teams for the playoffs it knocked Penn State out of a bye.
Texas was dropped from #2 seed to the #5 seed when they and Georgia swapped places after the conference championship game.
Yes, the seeds were influenced by giving the BIG 12 and a G5 team automatic byes, but when Penn Stat and Texas lost that dropped them from getting a first round bye. They definitely were affected by their losses in their conference games last year.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 12:17 pm to Demosthenian
In your scenario you are 5th.
Does Georgia really want to miss the SECCG this bad? You guys seem giddy about 3rd place.
Does Georgia really want to miss the SECCG this bad? You guys seem giddy about 3rd place.
This post was edited on 11/5/25 at 12:18 pm
Posted on 11/5/25 at 12:22 pm to NWLA_Bama
quote:
For example, in the case of Alabama losing the SECCG to aTm and ending the season with two losses and assuming UGA wins out but doesn't go to the SECCG. I would rather move away from "the eye test" bull crap and go to the metrics and if UGA came out ahead of Bama, then so be it, put them ahead. If not, then so be it as well.
I was not arguing that Georgia should be put ahead of Alabama, fwiw. Alabama beat us on the field and i would understand if Alabama stayed ahead. All I am saying is that it would be strange for them NOT to move in the rankings after any kind of loss.
quote:Just going by eye test, I would say ovverall Alabama has looked better. Georgia's defense just hasn't looked good, yet we manage to pull out wins. But sooner or later that kind of winning tends to catch up to teams.
The enhanced metrics were supposed to take another element of human judgment out of it to get closer to being objective. But going from last night's CFP rankings, the "eye test" is going to once again be the deciding factor.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News