The CardBoard
First CFP rankings - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: First CFP rankings (/thread-12977.html)


First CFP rankings - JeffInCorvallis - 11-01-2016

Many weeks to go, so it doesn't really mean anything BUT, Texas A&M #4?  WSU #25?  Seriously?

Re: First CFP rankings - cardcrimson - 11-01-2016

SEC bias at it's finest. . . .

Re: First CFP rankings - BostonCard - 11-01-2016

Strength of schedule, and, to date, Washington doesn't really have one.  Their toughest game was 7-2 Utah this last week, and after that, 5-3 Stanford.  Their opponents:
2-6 Rutgers
4-4 Idaho
2-6 FCS Portland State
2-6 Arizona
3-5 Oregon
2-6 Oregon State

We'd be 6-1 against that schedule (not counting a game against ourselves).

Their remaining opponents:
4-4 Cal
5-3 USC (who is on an upswing)
5-4 ASU (who is collapsing)
6-2 Washington State
likely the P12 conference championship.  That gives them an opportunity of three more good wins.

BC

Re: First CFP rankings - SamuelMcF - 11-01-2016

I'm more shocked that A&M, who lost to #1 by 19 points, sits at #4 while Louisville, who lost to #2 by 6 points in one of the best games so far this season, is at #7. For that matter, OSU at #6 lost to #12 Penn State by 3 and probably shouldn't be ahead of Louisville either.

Re: First CFP rankings - OutsiderFan - 11-01-2016

I get the SOS argument, but I remember last year it was all about being undefeated.  If there is a 1-loss team ahead of Washington it should be Louisville or Ohio State, IMO.







Re: First CFP rankings - thunder_chik - 11-01-2016

Florida State with 3 losses at #22?  Did I read that right?

Re: First CFP rankings - CTcard - 11-01-2016

(11-01-2016, 06:51 PM)thunder_chik link Wrote:Florida State with 3 losses at #22?  Did I read that right?

Yeah, that's a little questionable.

But, I think the 25 teams in the CFP rankings exactly match the 25 teams in the AP top 25, with a small shuffling of the order. So, it's not out of the mainstream.

UW at #5 isn't a big deal. If they win out they will be in the playoff. If they lose once and still win the Pac 12, then they will most likely be in the playoff - unless that loss is really something horrendous.

Re: First CFP rankings - BostonCard - 11-01-2016

Two of those losses are to Louisville (grant it, in a blowout) and Clemson (in a tight game).

Sagarin gives FSU the 4th toughest schedule in the country, and ranks them 12th(!)

FWIW, we have the 2nd toughest schedule and are ranked 19th.

If you go by the CF Playoff rankings, our three losses are all to top-25 teams (#5 UW, #15 Colorado, #25 WSU).

BC

Re: First CFP rankings - DC 86 - 11-02-2016

ESPN's FPI ranks FSU as the 10th best team in the country, having played the second toughest schedule (Stanford being the hardest). Besides the road loss to Louisville their losses to Clemson and North Carolina came down to the final gun.

Arguments about the CFP rankings really come down to what the committee is supposed to be measuring. Losing three games is significant,  but it would be impossible to find 22 FBS teams that would be 5-3 having played FSU's schedule, and there aren't 22 teams that would be favored over FSU on a neutral field this weekend, so from that standpoint the ranking seems more than reasonable.

I thought there were some mystifying rankings in this first iteration of the season, but it's refreshing that the committee is not simply going down the list of undefeated teams, one-loss teams, two-loss teams, etc but is putting weight on strength of schedule and on the exact nature of results. Not only is it more accurate but it motivates teams to schedule more challenging games.

Nebraska's #10 CFP ranking is the most questionable to me, I expect that they will be exposed in violent fashion in Columbus on Saturday.

Re: First CFP rankings - fullmetal - 11-02-2016

I shouldn't be surprised at this $EC bias, but the rankings have managed to upset me once again.  Sure A&M beat UCLA, but that was a home game in OT...and even Stanford beat UCLA (at UCLA).

Re: First CFP rankings - DC 86 - 11-02-2016

(11-02-2016, 11:56 AM)fullmetal link Wrote:I shouldn't be surprised at this $EC bias, but the rankings have managed to upset me once again.  Sure A&M beat UCLA, but that was a home game in OT...and even Stanford beat UCLA (at UCLA).

Agreed. A&M needed OT to beat UCLA (actually not a home game, but close enough, it was played at AT&T in the metroplex) and even though they gave Alabama a game they ultimately lost by 19 points.

I think Louisville (which is ranked #7) is the team with the best argument for being ranked in the top 4 ahead of UW. They beat FSU by 43 and their only loss was on the road at Clemson in a game they were leading until Clemson scored a TD (and two-point conversion) with 3:14 left to win by 6. Louisville drove to the Clemson 12 and took four shots at the end zone at the end of the game.