10-31-2017, 04:39 PM
CFP Georgia #1, ND #3, Stanford #21
10-31-2017, 04:43 PM
Quote:1. Georgia, 8-0
2. Alabama, 8-0
3. Votre Dame, 7-1
4. Clemson, 7-1
5. Oklahoma, 7-1
6. Ohio State, 7-1
7. Penn State, 7-1
8. TCU, 7-1
9. Wisconsin, 8-0
10. Miami, 7-0
11. Oklahoma State, 7-1
12. Washington, 7-1
13. Virginia Tech, 7-1
14. Auburn, 6-2
15. Iowa State, 6-2
16. Mississippi State, 6-2
17. U$C, 7-2
18. UCF, 7-0
19. LSU, 6-2
20. NC State, 6-2
21. Stanford, 6-2
22. Arizona, 6-2
23. Memphis, 7-1
24. Michigan State, 6-2
25. Washington State, 7-2
Thought it was worth pointing out that only 5 of 12 teams in the top 4 at this time of year actually went to the playoffs (i.e. less than half).
Quote:Lets be blunt, these rankings dont matter. Only five of the 12 teams ranked in the first top four in the first three seasons of the College Football Playoff have made the playoff. So its hard to put a ton of stock in a set of rankings that will change multiple times for sometimes curious reasons until the binding and final set on Dec. 3.
Quote:1. Georgia, 8-0
2. Alabama, 8-0
3. Votre Dame, 7-1
4. Clemson, 7-1
5. Oklahoma, 7-1
6. Ohio State, 7-1
7. Penn State, 7-1
8. TCU, 7-1
9. Wisconsin, 8-0
10. Miami, 7-0
11. Oklahoma State, 7-1
12. Washington, 7-1
13. Virginia Tech, 7-1
14. Auburn, 6-2
15. Iowa State, 6-2
16. Mississippi State, 6-2
17. U$C, 7-2
18. UCF, 7-0
19. LSU, 6-2
20. NC State, 6-2
21. Stanford, 6-2
22. Arizona, 6-2
23. Memphis, 7-1
24. Michigan State, 6-2
25. Washington State, 7-2
Thought it was worth pointing out that only 5 of 12 teams in the top 4 at this time of year actually went to the playoffs (i.e. less than half).
Quote:Lets be blunt, these rankings dont matter. Only five of the 12 teams ranked in the first top four in the first three seasons of the College Football Playoff have made the playoff. So its hard to put a ton of stock in a set of rankings that will change multiple times for sometimes curious reasons until the binding and final set on Dec. 3.
10-31-2017, 05:33 PM
The Committee gives a lot of weight to who you beat while the fans focus on the losses.Â
Georgia getting tons of credit for its early win @ N.otre Dame. That appears to be the best win of the year so far.
Oklahoma also getting a big bump for its victory at Columbus vs. Ohio State.
All of the top teams will have a chance to play at least one other top team and move up before conference championship games except for Wisconsin and UW.
Wisconsin has played no ranked teams. In fact, they may not play any ranked teams until the conference championship game.
Similarly, Washington has played no ranked teams yet. If Stanford and WSU stumble down the stretch and fall out of the top 25, UW may not play any ranked teams either during the regular season. They seem very vulnerable even if they win out.
Alabama's schedule has proven to be surprisingly easy so far in retrospect. No signature wins though they have been pretty dominant in conference. They play their toughest opponents in November - Miss St, Auburn and LSU.
Georgia getting tons of credit for its early win @ N.otre Dame. That appears to be the best win of the year so far.
Oklahoma also getting a big bump for its victory at Columbus vs. Ohio State.
All of the top teams will have a chance to play at least one other top team and move up before conference championship games except for Wisconsin and UW.
Wisconsin has played no ranked teams. In fact, they may not play any ranked teams until the conference championship game.
Similarly, Washington has played no ranked teams yet. If Stanford and WSU stumble down the stretch and fall out of the top 25, UW may not play any ranked teams either during the regular season. They seem very vulnerable even if they win out.
Alabama's schedule has proven to be surprisingly easy so far in retrospect. No signature wins though they have been pretty dominant in conference. They play their toughest opponents in November - Miss St, Auburn and LSU.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
The Committee gives a lot of weight to who you beat while the fans focus on the losses.Â
Georgia getting tons of credit for its early win @ N.otre Dame. That appears to be the best win of the year so far.
Oklahoma also getting a big bump for its victory at Columbus vs. Ohio State.
All of the top teams will have a chance to play at least one other top team and move up before conference championship games except for Wisconsin and UW.
Wisconsin has played no ranked teams. In fact, they may not play any ranked teams until the conference championship game.
Similarly, Washington has played no ranked teams yet. If Stanford and WSU stumble down the stretch and fall out of the top 25, UW may not play any ranked teams either during the regular season. They seem very vulnerable even if they win out.
Alabama's schedule has proven to be surprisingly easy so far in retrospect. No signature wins though they have been pretty dominant in conference. They play their toughest opponents in November - Miss St, Auburn and LSU.
Georgia getting tons of credit for its early win @ N.otre Dame. That appears to be the best win of the year so far.
Oklahoma also getting a big bump for its victory at Columbus vs. Ohio State.
All of the top teams will have a chance to play at least one other top team and move up before conference championship games except for Wisconsin and UW.
Wisconsin has played no ranked teams. In fact, they may not play any ranked teams until the conference championship game.
Similarly, Washington has played no ranked teams yet. If Stanford and WSU stumble down the stretch and fall out of the top 25, UW may not play any ranked teams either during the regular season. They seem very vulnerable even if they win out.
Alabama's schedule has proven to be surprisingly easy so far in retrospect. No signature wins though they have been pretty dominant in conference. They play their toughest opponents in November - Miss St, Auburn and LSU.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
10-31-2017, 05:36 PM
(10-31-2017, 05:33 PM)Spiny_Norman link Wrote:Alabama's schedule has proven to be surprisingly easy so far in retrospect. No signature wins though they have been pretty dominant in conference. They play their toughest opponents in November - Miss St, Auburn and LSU.
As long as the $EC continues to play just 8 conference games with a November bye/high school team on the schedule, they are illegitimate.
(10-31-2017, 05:33 PM)Spiny_Norman link Wrote:Alabama's schedule has proven to be surprisingly easy so far in retrospect. No signature wins though they have been pretty dominant in conference. They play their toughest opponents in November - Miss St, Auburn and LSU.
As long as the $EC continues to play just 8 conference games with a November bye/high school team on the schedule, they are illegitimate.
10-31-2017, 05:49 PM
So just curious as to what the software will do to (not even paraphrasing) the first graffiti I saw on Tech's campus, back in 1981. Bold letters on the wall next to the Rose Bowl Field.
Eat shit and die you gravy sucking Dawgs!!
Eat shit and die you gravy sucking Dawgs!!
Yeah, I just stare at my desk, but it looks like I'm working .I'd say in a given week I probably only do about fifteen minutes of real, actual, work. Peter Gibbons
So just curious as to what the software will do to (not even paraphrasing) the first graffiti I saw on Tech's campus, back in 1981. Bold letters on the wall next to the Rose Bowl Field.
Eat shit and die you gravy sucking Dawgs!!
Eat shit and die you gravy sucking Dawgs!!
Yeah, I just stare at my desk, but it looks like I'm working .I'd say in a given week I probably only do about fifteen minutes of real, actual, work. Peter Gibbons
10-31-2017, 08:14 PM
(10-31-2017, 05:49 PM)jacketree link Wrote:So just curious as to what the software will do to (not even paraphrasing) the first graffiti I saw on Tech's campus, back in 1981. Bold letters on the wall next to the Rose Bowl Field.
Eat stuff and die you gravy sucking Dawgs!!
Now you know. :-\
(10-31-2017, 05:49 PM)jacketree link Wrote:So just curious as to what the software will do to (not even paraphrasing) the first graffiti I saw on Tech's campus, back in 1981. Bold letters on the wall next to the Rose Bowl Field.
Eat stuff and die you gravy sucking Dawgs!!
Now you know. :-\
10-31-2017, 08:51 PM
No good until there are 16 teams in the tournament. The vast majority of players are students second so what's the big deal with a few extra games.
10-31-2017, 11:04 PM
Gravy was turned into gravy.
Only changed one word.
Techies have always been fairly transparent in terms of our view of the so-called flagship.
Would really prefer that our national title remain more recent than theirs, especially after giving it up to Clemson.
Only changed one word.
Techies have always been fairly transparent in terms of our view of the so-called flagship.
Would really prefer that our national title remain more recent than theirs, especially after giving it up to Clemson.
Yeah, I just stare at my desk, but it looks like I'm working .I'd say in a given week I probably only do about fifteen minutes of real, actual, work. Peter Gibbons
Gravy was turned into gravy.
Only changed one word.
Techies have always been fairly transparent in terms of our view of the so-called flagship.
Would really prefer that our national title remain more recent than theirs, especially after giving it up to Clemson.
Only changed one word.
Techies have always been fairly transparent in terms of our view of the so-called flagship.
Would really prefer that our national title remain more recent than theirs, especially after giving it up to Clemson.
Yeah, I just stare at my desk, but it looks like I'm working .I'd say in a given week I probably only do about fifteen minutes of real, actual, work. Peter Gibbons
11-01-2017, 03:05 AM
We would still be in the mix if not for the SDSU clusterf**k. Early loss to the Troejams was regrettable, but not deadly. Now, even if we run the table, the Corvallis debacle will relegate us to some good but not CFB bowl.
In the good old days (71-72) punching above our weight in the Rose Bowl against tOSU and the Annarborites was an achievement. These days, beating Wisconsin and Iowa and losing stupidly to MSU is meh.
We spend a lot of our intellectual street cred every year admitting marginal admits who are potential NFL players. Is it a good tradeoff? I'm still not sure.
In the good old days (71-72) punching above our weight in the Rose Bowl against tOSU and the Annarborites was an achievement. These days, beating Wisconsin and Iowa and losing stupidly to MSU is meh.
We spend a lot of our intellectual street cred every year admitting marginal admits who are potential NFL players. Is it a good tradeoff? I'm still not sure.
All models are wrong; some models are useful......
George Box
We would still be in the mix if not for the SDSU clusterf**k. Early loss to the Troejams was regrettable, but not deadly. Now, even if we run the table, the Corvallis debacle will relegate us to some good but not CFB bowl.
In the good old days (71-72) punching above our weight in the Rose Bowl against tOSU and the Annarborites was an achievement. These days, beating Wisconsin and Iowa and losing stupidly to MSU is meh.
We spend a lot of our intellectual street cred every year admitting marginal admits who are potential NFL players. Is it a good tradeoff? I'm still not sure.
In the good old days (71-72) punching above our weight in the Rose Bowl against tOSU and the Annarborites was an achievement. These days, beating Wisconsin and Iowa and losing stupidly to MSU is meh.
We spend a lot of our intellectual street cred every year admitting marginal admits who are potential NFL players. Is it a good tradeoff? I'm still not sure.
All models are wrong; some models are useful......
George Box
11-01-2017, 08:04 AM
(11-01-2017, 03:05 AM)Stymie link Wrote:We would still be in the mix if not for the SDSU clusterf**k. Early loss to the Troejams was regrettable, but not deadly. Now, even if we run the table, the Corvallis debacle will relegate us to some good but not CFB bowl.
In the good old days (71-72) punching above our weight in the Rose Bowl against tOSU and the Annarborites was an achievement. These days, beating Wisconsin and Iowa and losing stupidly to MSU is meh.
We spend a lot of our intellectual street cred every year admitting marginal admits who are potential NFL players. Is it a good tradeoff? I'm still not sure.
If we run the table we will be relegated to the fiesta bowl as PAC-12 champions.
BC
(11-01-2017, 03:05 AM)Stymie link Wrote:We would still be in the mix if not for the SDSU clusterf**k. Early loss to the Troejams was regrettable, but not deadly. Now, even if we run the table, the Corvallis debacle will relegate us to some good but not CFB bowl.
In the good old days (71-72) punching above our weight in the Rose Bowl against tOSU and the Annarborites was an achievement. These days, beating Wisconsin and Iowa and losing stupidly to MSU is meh.
We spend a lot of our intellectual street cred every year admitting marginal admits who are potential NFL players. Is it a good tradeoff? I'm still not sure.
If we run the table we will be relegated to the fiesta bowl as PAC-12 champions.
BC
11-01-2017, 12:12 PM
(10-31-2017, 08:51 PM)Phogge link Wrote:No good until there are 16 teams in the tournament. The vast majority of players are students second so what's the big deal with a few extra games.
De-valuing the regular season? I hate that we lost to San Diego State but I love that the game meant so much, and that every game in the season has significant playoff and bowl implications.
(10-31-2017, 08:51 PM)Phogge link Wrote:No good until there are 16 teams in the tournament. The vast majority of players are students second so what's the big deal with a few extra games.
De-valuing the regular season? I hate that we lost to San Diego State but I love that the game meant so much, and that every game in the season has significant playoff and bowl implications.
11-01-2017, 12:25 PM
(10-31-2017, 08:51 PM)Phogge link Wrote:No good until there are 16 teams in the tournament. The vast majority of players are students second so what's the big deal with a few extra games.
That would be a season way too long. I'd be satisfied with an 8-team playoff; just shorten the regular season to 11 games with only 2 out-of-conference opponents plus mandatory conference playoff. All conference champs participate, with 3 "wild cards".
Pax et Bonum
(10-31-2017, 08:51 PM)Phogge link Wrote:No good until there are 16 teams in the tournament. The vast majority of players are students second so what's the big deal with a few extra games.
That would be a season way too long. I'd be satisfied with an 8-team playoff; just shorten the regular season to 11 games with only 2 out-of-conference opponents plus mandatory conference playoff. All conference champs participate, with 3 "wild cards".
Pax et Bonum
11-01-2017, 12:32 PM
(11-01-2017, 12:25 PM)thunder_chik link Wrote:[quote author=Phogge link=topic=17862.msg209621#msg209621 date=1509508305]
No good until there are 16 teams in the tournament. The vast majority of players are students second so what's the big deal with a few extra games.
That would be a season way too long. I'd be satisfied with an 8-team playoff; just shorten the regular season to 11 games with only 2 out-of-conference opponents plus mandatory conference playoff. All conference champs participate, with 3 "wild cards".
[/quote]
I could even support an 8 team playoff while retaining a 12 game season. It does make the season longer for the four "best" teams in the country, and that is not ideal. However, I don't think there is much chance one could get "buy-in" from the other Universities to the 11 game season. Too much money to be made selling TV the 12th game.
(11-01-2017, 12:25 PM)thunder_chik link Wrote:[quote author=Phogge link=topic=17862.msg209621#msg209621 date=1509508305]
No good until there are 16 teams in the tournament. The vast majority of players are students second so what's the big deal with a few extra games.
That would be a season way too long. I'd be satisfied with an 8-team playoff; just shorten the regular season to 11 games with only 2 out-of-conference opponents plus mandatory conference playoff. All conference champs participate, with 3 "wild cards".
[/quote]
I could even support an 8 team playoff while retaining a 12 game season. It does make the season longer for the four "best" teams in the country, and that is not ideal. However, I don't think there is much chance one could get "buy-in" from the other Universities to the 11 game season. Too much money to be made selling TV the 12th game.
11-01-2017, 01:31 PM
(11-01-2017, 12:32 PM)Goose link Wrote:[quote author=thunder_chik link=topic=17862.msg209682#msg209682 date=1509564305]
[quote author=Phogge link=topic=17862.msg209621#msg209621 date=1509508305]
No good until there are 16 teams in the tournament. The vast majority of players are students second so what's the big deal with a few extra games.
That would be a season way too long. I'd be satisfied with an 8-team playoff; just shorten the regular season to 11 games with only 2 out-of-conference opponents plus mandatory conference playoff. All conference champs participate, with 3 "wild cards".
[/quote]
I could even support an 8 team playoff while retaining a 12 game season. It does make the season longer for the four "best" teams in the country, and that is not ideal. However, I don't think there is much chance one could get "buy-in" from the other Universities to the 11 game season. Too much money to be made selling TV the 12th game.
[/quote]
An 8-game playoff is also not that many extra games, since all 4 extra teams would already being going to bowls. So you'd have one extra game in round 2, and one extra in round 3. I get that extra games are more chances for injury, etc, but if we actually believe that then dialing the season back to 11 would be a much bigger deal for player safety since it's on the order of 70 fewer games. But no one actually wants to do that.
(11-01-2017, 12:32 PM)Goose link Wrote:[quote author=thunder_chik link=topic=17862.msg209682#msg209682 date=1509564305]
[quote author=Phogge link=topic=17862.msg209621#msg209621 date=1509508305]
No good until there are 16 teams in the tournament. The vast majority of players are students second so what's the big deal with a few extra games.
That would be a season way too long. I'd be satisfied with an 8-team playoff; just shorten the regular season to 11 games with only 2 out-of-conference opponents plus mandatory conference playoff. All conference champs participate, with 3 "wild cards".
[/quote]
I could even support an 8 team playoff while retaining a 12 game season. It does make the season longer for the four "best" teams in the country, and that is not ideal. However, I don't think there is much chance one could get "buy-in" from the other Universities to the 11 game season. Too much money to be made selling TV the 12th game.
[/quote]
An 8-game playoff is also not that many extra games, since all 4 extra teams would already being going to bowls. So you'd have one extra game in round 2, and one extra in round 3. I get that extra games are more chances for injury, etc, but if we actually believe that then dialing the season back to 11 would be a much bigger deal for player safety since it's on the order of 70 fewer games. But no one actually wants to do that.
11-01-2017, 04:15 PM
(11-01-2017, 01:31 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:An 8-game playoff is also not that many extra games...
I'm thinking about 6 extra...in your scenario.
(11-01-2017, 01:31 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:An 8-game playoff is also not that many extra games...
I'm thinking about 6 extra...in your scenario.
11-01-2017, 04:39 PM
We currently have 3 playoff games (2 semifinals and a final).
If we went to 8 teams we would have 7 playoff games (4 quarter finals, 2 semifinals and a final).
And we would have 2 less regular bowl games because the 4 new entrants into the playoffs wouldnt play in regular bowl games.
So net we could expand the playoffs to 8 teams and it adds a total of 2 additional games.
Is there something wrong with my math? This is all about 2 additional games?
If we went to 8 teams we would have 7 playoff games (4 quarter finals, 2 semifinals and a final).
And we would have 2 less regular bowl games because the 4 new entrants into the playoffs wouldnt play in regular bowl games.
So net we could expand the playoffs to 8 teams and it adds a total of 2 additional games.
Is there something wrong with my math? This is all about 2 additional games?
We currently have 3 playoff games (2 semifinals and a final).
If we went to 8 teams we would have 7 playoff games (4 quarter finals, 2 semifinals and a final).
And we would have 2 less regular bowl games because the 4 new entrants into the playoffs wouldnt play in regular bowl games.
So net we could expand the playoffs to 8 teams and it adds a total of 2 additional games.
Is there something wrong with my math? This is all about 2 additional games?
If we went to 8 teams we would have 7 playoff games (4 quarter finals, 2 semifinals and a final).
And we would have 2 less regular bowl games because the 4 new entrants into the playoffs wouldnt play in regular bowl games.
So net we could expand the playoffs to 8 teams and it adds a total of 2 additional games.
Is there something wrong with my math? This is all about 2 additional games?
I don't believe that we would see a contraction in the number of bowl games, more likely the four additional playoff teams would be replaced by four new bowl participants within the same number of total bowls. We already have teams with losing records being granted bowl eligibility, we will simply see an expansion of that phenomenon instead of two bowl games ceasing to exist. If anything we will see more bowl games in the future regardless of playoff expansion.
Having said that, I don't think it matters; the "additional games" argument is sometimes used but we all know it is a hypocritical one. Making students play additional games was one of the principal anti-playoff arguments for thirty years, all the while the schedule was expanding from 11 games to 12 games to 12 games and a conference championship game.
Having said that, I don't think it matters; the "additional games" argument is sometimes used but we all know it is a hypocritical one. Making students play additional games was one of the principal anti-playoff arguments for thirty years, all the while the schedule was expanding from 11 games to 12 games to 12 games and a conference championship game.
I don't believe that we would see a contraction in the number of bowl games, more likely the four additional playoff teams would be replaced by four new bowl participants within the same number of total bowls. We already have teams with losing records being granted bowl eligibility, we will simply see an expansion of that phenomenon instead of two bowl games ceasing to exist. If anything we will see more bowl games in the future regardless of playoff expansion.
Having said that, I don't think it matters; the "additional games" argument is sometimes used but we all know it is a hypocritical one. Making students play additional games was one of the principal anti-playoff arguments for thirty years, all the while the schedule was expanding from 11 games to 12 games to 12 games and a conference championship game.
Having said that, I don't think it matters; the "additional games" argument is sometimes used but we all know it is a hypocritical one. Making students play additional games was one of the principal anti-playoff arguments for thirty years, all the while the schedule was expanding from 11 games to 12 games to 12 games and a conference championship game.
11-01-2017, 06:11 PM
(11-01-2017, 04:39 PM)TreesAndBirds link Wrote:Is there something wrong with my math? This is all about 2 additional games?I would say yes, it is all about two additional games. The 8 teams could play in existing bowl games to cut the number of teams down to 4. The next week, there would be 2 games instead of 1. The winners play the week after. So for 2 teams, the season is two weeks longer, and for two other teams, the season is 1 week longer compared to the present system. I would argue that is minimal overall impact. Certainly the idea of a college sport dragging on so long can be questioned. However, reducing the regular season would reduce the number of dollars the conferences can charge the TV folks. That would be a very hard sell. The two extra games would, however, be an easy sell. More money for the rights.
IF we want to have national playoffs, we need to do this. The present system will always have at least one "major" conference champion left out. Other good teams that lost one game, or are from a "mid-major" don't have any chance. 8 is enough.
(11-01-2017, 04:39 PM)TreesAndBirds link Wrote:Is there something wrong with my math? This is all about 2 additional games?I would say yes, it is all about two additional games. The 8 teams could play in existing bowl games to cut the number of teams down to 4. The next week, there would be 2 games instead of 1. The winners play the week after. So for 2 teams, the season is two weeks longer, and for two other teams, the season is 1 week longer compared to the present system. I would argue that is minimal overall impact. Certainly the idea of a college sport dragging on so long can be questioned. However, reducing the regular season would reduce the number of dollars the conferences can charge the TV folks. That would be a very hard sell. The two extra games would, however, be an easy sell. More money for the rights.
IF we want to have national playoffs, we need to do this. The present system will always have at least one "major" conference champion left out. Other good teams that lost one game, or are from a "mid-major" don't have any chance. 8 is enough.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »