Started By
Message
re: Year by Year Decisions by the CFP Playoff Committee (updated)
Posted on 10/25/19 at 12:25 pm to Oilfieldbiology
Posted on 10/25/19 at 12:25 pm to Oilfieldbiology
clemson in week 2 then LSU midseason
0
Posted on 10/25/19 at 12:26 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
An 11-1 bama going over a 1 loss P5 champ would mean the committee has completely and totally deviated from every year they've picked thus far.
No it wouldn’t. It would mean they determined Bama unequivocally had a top 4 resume.
Posted on 10/25/19 at 12:28 pm to WG_Dawg
Let me clarify it for everyone:
Top 4 resumes get in. If there are teams with similar resumes but one has a conference championship and the other doesn’t, the conference champion will be ranked higher.
Top 4 resumes get in. If there are teams with similar resumes but one has a conference championship and the other doesn’t, the conference champion will be ranked higher.
Posted on 10/25/19 at 12:29 pm to Jon Ham
quote:
would mean the committee has completely and totally deviated from every year they've picked thus far.
quote:
No it wouldn’t
um, yes. It would. Considering they have yet to do that.
Posted on 10/25/19 at 12:29 pm to Jon Ham
Those two aren’t mutually exclusive. They can determine they are a top 4 team and deviate from their historical pattern
Posted on 10/25/19 at 12:30 pm to Jon Ham
quote:
Top 4 resumes get in.
I agree, and the committee has clearly proven that winning your conference is a massive trump card on your resume all other things relatively equal.
Posted on 10/25/19 at 12:31 pm to Oilfieldbiology
quote:
They lost to LSU and who else that season?
Clemson
Posted on 10/25/19 at 12:31 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
'm not completely stuck in my ways...I'm simply pointing out what they've done so far and going by the assumption they will continue to do so. Now, whenever the time comes where they deviate from that and do something different I'll adjust my thinking as that new data is available. I'm certainly not naive enough to think there isn't a single possible scenario out there that won't eventually happen that hasn't yet.
Yeah, I think what you point out above about the extreme difficulty a non conference champion faces is certainly true.
My point was mainly was that the committee has already, in my opinion, set some precedent to establish that "more quality wins" can trump everything else (like with the basketball committee seeds)...
This is yet to affect the final top 4 but it has been reflected consistently in their rankings -- as the data above shows with a 2 loss Georgia finishing 5th last year, with their high ranking of 2 loss AU the year before etc. . .
That said, I think this year's Georgia loss really diminishes the chances this season could be the one where a 1 loss conference champion finishes behind a non-conference champion. I think that scenario would have taken an undefeated UGA in the SEC championship game.
This post was edited on 10/25/19 at 12:37 pm
Posted on 10/25/19 at 12:31 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
-As a follow up to the point above, let’s look at why those 2 non-champs made it. ’16 OSU made it over #5 Penn State because they only had 1 loss compared to 2 for psu. Ditto for ’17 bama who made it over #5 OSU, also because OSU had 2 losses compared to just 1 for bama.
Important to remember that '16 OSU also made it because they had a signature win over big 12 champ Oklahoma in non-conf play. OSU had a marquee non-conf win that Penn State did not, and to just consider conference play is to only consider 75% of those teams' schedules.
People who say a 2-loss team won't make it over a 1-loss team should look at the penultimate rankings in 2017, when 2-loss Auburn was ranked no.2 because they had beated UGA and Bama back to back. They would have been in if they beat UGA and won the SECCG.
Posted on 10/25/19 at 12:33 pm to CrimsonBoz
quote:Well done CrimsonBozo.
a team seems to missing though
Posted on 10/25/19 at 12:34 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
um, yes. It would. Considering they have yet to do that.
It’s only been 5 years, and they haven’t done it because there has yet to be a time where a non-champ had a clearly better resume than a one-loss champ.
Posted on 10/25/19 at 12:34 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
I mean in 2016 they took Ohio State over the team that literally won Ohio State's conference and beat them head to head......and that team had 2 losses while Ohio State had 1.
This happened because Ohio State beat OU non-conference while Penn State didn't play anyone. Conference play is only 75% of a Big Ten team's schedule, not the entire body of work.
Posted on 10/25/19 at 12:37 pm to RogerTempleton
quote:
This happened because Ohio State beat OU non-conference while Penn State didn't play anyone. Conference play is only 75% of a Big Ten team's schedule, not the entire body of work.
I agree - but the flip side would be that Penn State beat Ohio State while Ohio State.......didn't beat Penn State. And Penn State won the conference.
I think overall I'm agreeing with you - there are certain data points that will overrule the general consensus. However, to overrule it, you better have some of those (Auburn in 2017, Ohio State in 2016, etc).
Clemson is clearly more susceptible to all of those types of things this year than any 13-0 team before it (and even more so if it is 12-1).
Posted on 10/25/19 at 12:46 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
Clemson is clearly more susceptible to all of those types of things this year than any 13-0 team before it (and even more so if it is 12-1).
I don't care how lousy their schedule is, a 13-0 P5 champion will never be left out of the playoffs unless there are 5 of them, which would be ridiculously unlikely.
Posted on 10/25/19 at 12:47 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
I don't care how lousy their schedule is, a 13-0 P5 champion will never be left out of the playoffs unless there are 5 of them, which would be ridiculously unlikely.
I agree - there's just no way they do that. Especially if the team is riding a 28 game win streak and is the defending national champ.
Zero shot.
Posted on 10/25/19 at 1:50 pm to Jon Ham
quote:
Let me clarify it for everyone:
Top 4 resumes get in. If there are teams with similar resumes but one has a conference championship and the other doesn’t, the conference champion will be ranked higher.
You're correct that conference chamionship only a "tiebreaker" factor, but it's not the only one. Head-to-head is another one.
This post was edited on 10/25/19 at 1:52 pm
Posted on 10/25/19 at 2:08 pm to TidalSurge1
quote:
Head-to-head is another one.
if all else is equal, absolutely. I think the 2 biggest things the committee has shown to look for thus far are conference championships and least number of losses.
Posted on 10/25/19 at 2:10 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
Can you recall any other situation in which a top 3 or so team won in three straight weeks and dropped in the polls in those three straight weeks? 
Posted on 10/25/19 at 2:16 pm to WG_Dawg
Good and sensible data & analysis...thanks, WG.
Posted on 10/25/19 at 2:16 pm to SCgamecock2988
quote:
Can you recall any other situation in which a top 3 or so team won in three straight weeks and dropped in the polls in those three straight weeks?
UGA started 2008 #1 and by week 4 was ranked #3 despite not losing a game. Hell we dropped to #2 after the opening weekend despite winning by 20 lol
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News