[OutsiderFan]

Everyone seems to be assuming the winner of Alabama and LSU is going to run the table and be a shoe-in for the playoff.  But as a famous former college teammate of Burt Reynolds like to say, not so fast, my friend...

The fly in the SEC ointment is Ole Miss, a team with two losses, including a bad OOC loss to Memphis, but also a head-to-head tie breaking win over Alabama in the SEC West.  No mater what happens in the LSU-Bama game, Ole Miss controls its own destiny over both of them.  If Ole Miss does win out, they will go to the SEC CG, and probably play Florida, which could itself have two losses, or could be trying to impress the committee facing a two loss Florida State that hasn't beat a team with a pulse all year, if they lose to Clemson.

How does a 2-loss Ole Miss or possibly even 1-loss Florida get in the playoff over:

1. An undefeated or 1-loss B1G champ
2. An undefeated Clemson
3. An undefeated or 1 loss Baylor, TCU, or Oklahoma
4. A 1-loss Stanford or Utah
5. A 1-loss Notre Dame

So as much of a big deal as everyone will make the LSU-Bama game out to be, it really isn't the biggest game for the SEC on the calendar.  That game is November 21 in Oxford, MS when Ole Miss hosts LSU.  There is a good chance the SEC cannibalizes itself out of the playoff.  Of course, so too could the Pac-12. 

The Pac-12's only playoff hope is Stanford now because Utah's big loss isn't going to be forgotten, so there better not be any cannibalization involving Stanford in the Pac-12!

[OutsiderFan]

Everyone seems to be assuming the winner of Alabama and LSU is going to run the table and be a shoe-in for the playoff.  But as a famous former college teammate of Burt Reynolds like to say, not so fast, my friend...

The fly in the SEC ointment is Ole Miss, a team with two losses, including a bad OOC loss to Memphis, but also a head-to-head tie breaking win over Alabama in the SEC West.  No mater what happens in the LSU-Bama game, Ole Miss controls its own destiny over both of them.  If Ole Miss does win out, they will go to the SEC CG, and probably play Florida, which could itself have two losses, or could be trying to impress the committee facing a two loss Florida State that hasn't beat a team with a pulse all year, if they lose to Clemson.

How does a 2-loss Ole Miss or possibly even 1-loss Florida get in the playoff over:

1. An undefeated or 1-loss B1G champ
2. An undefeated Clemson
3. An undefeated or 1 loss Baylor, TCU, or Oklahoma
4. A 1-loss Stanford or Utah
5. A 1-loss Notre Dame

So as much of a big deal as everyone will make the LSU-Bama game out to be, it really isn't the biggest game for the SEC on the calendar.  That game is November 21 in Oxford, MS when Ole Miss hosts LSU.  There is a good chance the SEC cannibalizes itself out of the playoff.  Of course, so too could the Pac-12. 

The Pac-12's only playoff hope is Stanford now because Utah's big loss isn't going to be forgotten, so there better not be any cannibalization involving Stanford in the Pac-12!

[Canalejas]

Florida State is not in the SEC.

[Canalejas]

Florida State is not in the SEC.

[dabigv13]

Not gonna happen dude. A 2 loss SEC champ will go to the playoffs every single year.

[dabigv13]

Not gonna happen dude. A 2 loss SEC champ will go to the playoffs every single year.

[cardcoug]

Not gonna happen dude. A 2 loss SEC champ will go to the playoffs every single year.

Do you have some sort of argument or evidence to support this? Seems pretty implausible to me when you actually break down the things the playoff committee considers in their deliberations.

[cardcoug]

Not gonna happen dude. A 2 loss SEC champ will go to the playoffs every single year.

Do you have some sort of argument or evidence to support this? Seems pretty implausible to me when you actually break down the things the playoff committee considers in their deliberations.

[Hank 91]

They were actually talking about this possibility on one of the shows this week. They all agreed that Ole Miss is good enough to run the table and also agreed that even if they did that they'd have no real shot at getting into the playoffs, thereby shutting out the SEC.

[Hank 91]

They were actually talking about this possibility on one of the shows this week. They all agreed that Ole Miss is good enough to run the table and also agreed that even if they did that they'd have no real shot at getting into the playoffs, thereby shutting out the SEC.

[dabigv13]

Obviously it's a statement without definitive proof. But given how much love the SEC has in the polls and how they dominate the national discussion, a SEC champ game winner even with two losses, will go to the playoffs.

I don't agree with the fairness of it, but I think that's how it shakes out.

[dabigv13]

Obviously it's a statement without definitive proof. But given how much love the SEC has in the polls and how they dominate the national discussion, a SEC champ game winner even with two losses, will go to the playoffs.

I don't agree with the fairness of it, but I think that's how it shakes out.

[dabigv13]

And really, I could write the argument for why that team should beat out a 1 loss Stanford for that spot. Lost to Northwestern!!!! Faced 6 freshman quarterbacks! Out of a weak Pac12 that might be the 4th or 5th best conference!

Again, not that I believe it, but still.

[dabigv13]

And really, I could write the argument for why that team should beat out a 1 loss Stanford for that spot. Lost to Northwestern!!!! Faced 6 freshman quarterbacks! Out of a weak Pac12 that might be the 4th or 5th best conference!

Again, not that I believe it, but still.

[Hank 91]

One day there might be a season in which there are four undefeated Power 5 teams and everyone else in the country has at least two losses. Until that happens, there will always be controversy, especially within the fanbases of the teams ranked fifth and sixth. It's just the way it is. The good news for us is that if we end up ranked fifth or sixth, we get the best consolation prize in college football.

[Hank 91]

One day there might be a season in which there are four undefeated Power 5 teams and everyone else in the country has at least two losses. Until that happens, there will always be controversy, especially within the fanbases of the teams ranked fifth and sixth. It's just the way it is. The good news for us is that if we end up ranked fifth or sixth, we get the best consolation prize in college football.

[winflop]

One day there will be an 8-team playoff so that the champion of ever major conference will automatically get into the playoff.

12-1 Stanford gets screwed out of the playoff if:
- Clemson and Baylor/TCU run the table
- SEC & B1G champions have no more than one loss

[winflop]

One day there will be an 8-team playoff so that the champion of ever major conference will automatically get into the playoff.

12-1 Stanford gets screwed out of the playoff if:
- Clemson and Baylor/TCU run the table
- SEC & B1G champions have no more than one loss

[VFRing98]

One day there will be an 8-team playoff so that the champion of ever major conference will automatically get into the playoff.

12-1 Stanford gets screwed out of the playoff if:
- Clemson and Baylor/TCU run the table
- SEC & B1G champions have no more than one loss

When you lose to Northwestern, you really don't have much of an argument.

I'm guessing we drop one out of Oregon/Cal/ND/conf champ. But if we don't, and get shut out of the playoff, I'm not overly indignant about it. The blemish on our resume is a big one.

[VFRing98]

One day there will be an 8-team playoff so that the champion of ever major conference will automatically get into the playoff.

12-1 Stanford gets screwed out of the playoff if:
- Clemson and Baylor/TCU run the table
- SEC & B1G champions have no more than one loss

When you lose to Northwestern, you really don't have much of an argument.

I'm guessing we drop one out of Oregon/Cal/ND/conf champ. But if we don't, and get shut out of the playoff, I'm not overly indignant about it. The blemish on our resume is a big one.

[82lsju]

I'm guessing we drop one out of Oregon/Low APR U/ND/conf champ. But if we don't, and get shut out of the playoff, I'm not overly indignant about it. The blemish on our resume is a big one.

not sure our loss to Northwestern this year is any worse than tOSU's loss at home to Virginia Tech 35-21 last year.  VT ended the regular season 6-6 with wins over William & Mary, tOSU, Western Michigan, UNC, Duke, and UVA

[82lsju]

I'm guessing we drop one out of Oregon/Low APR U/ND/conf champ. But if we don't, and get shut out of the playoff, I'm not overly indignant about it. The blemish on our resume is a big one.

not sure our loss to Northwestern this year is any worse than tOSU's loss at home to Virginia Tech 35-21 last year.  VT ended the regular season 6-6 with wins over William & Mary, tOSU, Western Michigan, UNC, Duke, and UVA

[stupac2]

One day there will be an 8-team playoff so that the champion of ever major conference will automatically get into the playoff.

12-1 Stanford gets screwed out of the playoff if:
- Clemson and Baylor/TCU run the table
- SEC & B1G champions have no more than one loss

I'd be surprised if a one-loss B1G champ got in over us.

But it seems to me like we're spending an awful lot of time talking about these playoff scenarios when none of us can do anything at all about it and there are far too many unknowns to have any kind of reasonable estimation of how it plays out.

I think that if we win out we're in, but are there scenarios where that's not true? Probably, who knows? We'll find out if we get there. And, if we do win out and get screwed, I'm pretty damn happy with a Rose Bowl berth.

[stupac2]

One day there will be an 8-team playoff so that the champion of ever major conference will automatically get into the playoff.

12-1 Stanford gets screwed out of the playoff if:
- Clemson and Baylor/TCU run the table
- SEC & B1G champions have no more than one loss

I'd be surprised if a one-loss B1G champ got in over us.

But it seems to me like we're spending an awful lot of time talking about these playoff scenarios when none of us can do anything at all about it and there are far too many unknowns to have any kind of reasonable estimation of how it plays out.

I think that if we win out we're in, but are there scenarios where that's not true? Probably, who knows? We'll find out if we get there. And, if we do win out and get screwed, I'm pretty damn happy with a Rose Bowl berth.

[CornFed]

[quote author=winflop link=topic=13348.msg137007#msg137007 date=1445807937]
One day there will be an 8-team playoff so that the champion of ever major conference will automatically get into the playoff.

12-1 Stanford gets screwed out of the playoff if:
- Clemson and Baylor/TCU run the table
- SEC & B1G champions have no more than one loss

I'd be surprised if a one-loss B1G champ got in over us.

But it seems to me like we're spending an awful lot of time talking about these playoff scenarios when none of us can do anything at all about it and there are far too many unknowns to have any kind of reasonable estimation of how it plays out.

I think that if we win out we're in, but are there scenarios where that's not true? Probably, who knows? We'll find out if we get there. And, if we do win out and get screwed, I'm pretty damn happy with a Rose Bowl berth.
[/quote]

Who is this calm and cool poster and what have you done w/ Stupac2? 

[CornFed]

[quote author=winflop link=topic=13348.msg137007#msg137007 date=1445807937]
One day there will be an 8-team playoff so that the champion of ever major conference will automatically get into the playoff.

12-1 Stanford gets screwed out of the playoff if:
- Clemson and Baylor/TCU run the table
- SEC & B1G champions have no more than one loss

I'd be surprised if a one-loss B1G champ got in over us.

But it seems to me like we're spending an awful lot of time talking about these playoff scenarios when none of us can do anything at all about it and there are far too many unknowns to have any kind of reasonable estimation of how it plays out.

I think that if we win out we're in, but are there scenarios where that's not true? Probably, who knows? We'll find out if we get there. And, if we do win out and get screwed, I'm pretty damn happy with a Rose Bowl berth.
[/quote]

Who is this calm and cool poster and what have you done w/ Stupac2? 

[FarmDad.01]

@Outsider Fan: 1) A "shoe-in" would be a team from the University of Florsheim. 2) Thanks for unearthing the factoid that Lee Corso played (and also roomed) with a man who went on to date Sally Field, beard Dinah Shore and marry Loni Anderson.

[FarmDad.01]

@Outsider Fan: 1) A "shoe-in" would be a team from the University of Florsheim. 2) Thanks for unearthing the factoid that Lee Corso played (and also roomed) with a man who went on to date Sally Field, beard Dinah Shore and marry Loni Anderson.

[Mick]

We lost our first game by ten.  We beat the team that just beat #3 Utah by ten.  All of our other victories have been by at least 17.  We're a blowout machine.  If we win out, and win by 14+ every time, I think we're in.

[Mick]

We lost our first game by ten.  We beat the team that just beat #3 Utah by ten.  All of our other victories have been by at least 17.  We're a blowout machine.  If we win out, and win by 14+ every time, I think we're in.

[cardcoug]

Obviously it's a statement without definitive proof. But given how much love the SEC has in the polls and how they dominate the national discussion, a SEC champ game winner even with two losses, will go to the playoffs.

I don't agree with the fairness of it, but I think that's how it shakes out.

And really, I could write the argument for why that team should beat out a 1 loss Stanford for that spot. Lost to Northwestern!!!! Faced 6 freshman quarterbacks! Out of a weak Pac12 that might be the 4th or 5th best conference!

Again, not that I believe it, but still.

You may well be right about this, but I'm still somewhat confident that the selection process is going to eliminate a lot of this crap. When polls were controlling things, I would be in complete agreement with your take. Stupid non sequiturs, the preseason pecking order, the history of the programs involved, who played on which network and at what time, etc... could be a determining factor. But if one of the little arguments you mention is going to carry any weight now, a committee member is going to have to present it to a room full of people who have a bunch of evidence laid out in front of them, and who are making decisions only after a lot of back and forth where many other arguments are presented as well. I think that people are much more likely to make rational decisions in such hyper-critical contexts than they would be otherwise. If one person says "7 freshman quarterbacks!" someone else will say, "well, here's what those freshman quarterbacks did on average this season and here's what they did against Stanford", etc...  In contrast, I wouldn't be surprised if some voters fill out their ballots while sitting on the toilet after checking the scores online.

Of course the committee isn't going to be perfect, but lets not forget that there is actually no such thing as "perfect" here. There is no answer to the question "who are the best 4 teams" or even "who has the best 4 resumes". If we could somehow prevent teams from changing in any way and force them to play thousands of games against each other, then their overall records would settle the question. But when looking at a real football season, there are many different reasonable criteria one can and should play a role in figuring out who the "best" 4 teams are. These different criteria will yield different answers, and there is no obviously correct standard for how to put them all together. In basically everything except college football, being "best" is completely irrelevant.  What matters is winning the series of games that we all simply agree, by convention, are to count as the important ones (the playoffs), and that is the goal everybody strives for. The Patriots were the best team of 2008 according to basically any reasonable measure, but we've decided as a society that we don't give a shit because they lost the Superbowl.  Since we can't fit everyone who would have a real chance of winning into CFB's version, some teams are going to get "screwed" unless you have something like 4 undefeated conference champions and nobody else with less than two losses.

Generally speaking, there will usually be 5-8 teams that have a reasonable case for inclusion, and I am confident that the 4 teams that get in will always be from that group. I don't think you can do any better than that, in principle. So I think a two loss SEC champion would only get in over a 1 loss Stanford if things play out such that it actually makes some sense. This year, if Stanford and Ole Miss win out, there would probably be no reasonable case to be made for Ole Miss. We would have as many or more good wins, their Memphis loss isn't much better than our loss, if it is at all, and they got absolutely throttled by Florida.

[cardcoug]

Obviously it's a statement without definitive proof. But given how much love the SEC has in the polls and how they dominate the national discussion, a SEC champ game winner even with two losses, will go to the playoffs.

I don't agree with the fairness of it, but I think that's how it shakes out.

And really, I could write the argument for why that team should beat out a 1 loss Stanford for that spot. Lost to Northwestern!!!! Faced 6 freshman quarterbacks! Out of a weak Pac12 that might be the 4th or 5th best conference!

Again, not that I believe it, but still.

You may well be right about this, but I'm still somewhat confident that the selection process is going to eliminate a lot of this crap. When polls were controlling things, I would be in complete agreement with your take. Stupid non sequiturs, the preseason pecking order, the history of the programs involved, who played on which network and at what time, etc... could be a determining factor. But if one of the little arguments you mention is going to carry any weight now, a committee member is going to have to present it to a room full of people who have a bunch of evidence laid out in front of them, and who are making decisions only after a lot of back and forth where many other arguments are presented as well. I think that people are much more likely to make rational decisions in such hyper-critical contexts than they would be otherwise. If one person says "7 freshman quarterbacks!" someone else will say, "well, here's what those freshman quarterbacks did on average this season and here's what they did against Stanford", etc...  In contrast, I wouldn't be surprised if some voters fill out their ballots while sitting on the toilet after checking the scores online.

Of course the committee isn't going to be perfect, but lets not forget that there is actually no such thing as "perfect" here. There is no answer to the question "who are the best 4 teams" or even "who has the best 4 resumes". If we could somehow prevent teams from changing in any way and force them to play thousands of games against each other, then their overall records would settle the question. But when looking at a real football season, there are many different reasonable criteria one can and should play a role in figuring out who the "best" 4 teams are. These different criteria will yield different answers, and there is no obviously correct standard for how to put them all together. In basically everything except college football, being "best" is completely irrelevant.  What matters is winning the series of games that we all simply agree, by convention, are to count as the important ones (the playoffs), and that is the goal everybody strives for. The Patriots were the best team of 2008 according to basically any reasonable measure, but we've decided as a society that we don't give a shit because they lost the Superbowl.  Since we can't fit everyone who would have a real chance of winning into CFB's version, some teams are going to get "screwed" unless you have something like 4 undefeated conference champions and nobody else with less than two losses.

Generally speaking, there will usually be 5-8 teams that have a reasonable case for inclusion, and I am confident that the 4 teams that get in will always be from that group. I don't think you can do any better than that, in principle. So I think a two loss SEC champion would only get in over a 1 loss Stanford if things play out such that it actually makes some sense. This year, if Stanford and Ole Miss win out, there would probably be no reasonable case to be made for Ole Miss. We would have as many or more good wins, their Memphis loss isn't much better than our loss, if it is at all, and they got absolutely throttled by Florida.

[CrazedZooChimp]

Obviously it's a statement without definitive proof. But given how much love the SEC has in the polls and how they dominate the national discussion, a SEC champ game winner even with two losses, will go to the playoffs.

I don't agree with the fairness of it, but I think that's how it shakes out.

In not sure any of that is true.  If Alabama, the highest one loss team, lost a second game, the polls would have them certainly below us, likely several other one loss teams, and definitely all the undefeated teams.

Of course, if ole Miss wind the SEC, does an undefeated Memphis get a shot at the playoffs...

[CrazedZooChimp]

Obviously it's a statement without definitive proof. But given how much love the SEC has in the polls and how they dominate the national discussion, a SEC champ game winner even with two losses, will go to the playoffs.

I don't agree with the fairness of it, but I think that's how it shakes out.

In not sure any of that is true.  If Alabama, the highest one loss team, lost a second game, the polls would have them certainly below us, likely several other one loss teams, and definitely all the undefeated teams.

Of course, if ole Miss wind the SEC, does an undefeated Memphis get a shot at the playoffs...

[Mick]

I don't think any two-loss teams get in the playoffs.

Both SEC teams lost in the semifinals, and Oregon absolutely annihilated Florida State.  Does the SEC pervasive myth mean they should have had both of those spots, including the spot where the team lost by 39?

It reminds me of the USC vs. Oklahoma Orange Bowl in 2005.  Commentator Craig James went on and on about how the Pac-10 was overrated and Oklahoma was going to win big.  He thought USC was overrated because it had close games against Stanford, Ca.l and UCLA.  All three talking heads (James, Aaron Taylor) predicted USC.  Bob Griese said USC had a bad supporting cast (Reggie Bush, LenDale White, Matt Leinart, STeve Smith, Dwayne Jarrett, Dominique Byrd).  And USC had finished first in the 2003 and 2004 final polls.  USC was ahead at the half, 38-10, which was the most points Oklahoma had ever given up in a full bowl game.

West coast football doesn't get enough respect.

[Mick]

I don't think any two-loss teams get in the playoffs.

Both SEC teams lost in the semifinals, and Oregon absolutely annihilated Florida State.  Does the SEC pervasive myth mean they should have had both of those spots, including the spot where the team lost by 39?

It reminds me of the USC vs. Oklahoma Orange Bowl in 2005.  Commentator Craig James went on and on about how the Pac-10 was overrated and Oklahoma was going to win big.  He thought USC was overrated because it had close games against Stanford, Ca.l and UCLA.  All three talking heads (James, Aaron Taylor) predicted USC.  Bob Griese said USC had a bad supporting cast (Reggie Bush, LenDale White, Matt Leinart, STeve Smith, Dwayne Jarrett, Dominique Byrd).  And USC had finished first in the 2003 and 2004 final polls.  USC was ahead at the half, 38-10, which was the most points Oklahoma had ever given up in a full bowl game.

West coast football doesn't get enough respect.

[CTcard]

Both SEC teams lost in the semifinals, and Oregon absolutely annihilated Florida State.
...
West coast football doesn't get enough respect.

Maybe east coast football doesn't get enough respect if we don't know what conference teams are in.

[CTcard]

Both SEC teams lost in the semifinals, and Oregon absolutely annihilated Florida State.
...
West coast football doesn't get enough respect.

Maybe east coast football doesn't get enough respect if we don't know what conference teams are in.

[stupac2]

[quote author=Mick link=topic=13348.msg137200#msg137200 date=1445881165]
Both SEC teams lost in the semifinals, and Oregon absolutely annihilated Florida State.
...
West coast football doesn't get enough respect.

Maybe east coast football doesn't get enough respect if we don't know what conference teams are in.
[/quote]

I assume he meant that both SEC teams lost in their Big Six bowl games, since the SEC obviously didn't have two playoff teams.

[stupac2]

[quote author=Mick link=topic=13348.msg137200#msg137200 date=1445881165]
Both SEC teams lost in the semifinals, and Oregon absolutely annihilated Florida State.
...
West coast football doesn't get enough respect.

Maybe east coast football doesn't get enough respect if we don't know what conference teams are in.
[/quote]

I assume he meant that both SEC teams lost in their Big Six bowl games, since the SEC obviously didn't have two playoff teams.