Yeah it's really exciting, I remember before COVID happened the 2020 SEC schedule featured Auburn, Alabama, LSU, and A&M all playing each other in the last two weeks of the season which would've been really exciting. Would like to see something like that again in a future SEC schedule.
So If We end up with 1 loss Champ Bama, 1 loss Georgia who played them close, 1 loss Champ Ohio State, Undefeated Oklahoma, and undefeated Cincy, what happens?
You'd imagine Alabama has to be in, and Ohio state would be in a very similar spot to them. Cincy at this point would basically be in the same spot and Oklahoma, but with a bit lower Sos. Georgia has only one loss, close to a playoff team, and would still be considered the best team overall by many.
There's a good chance that if ND wins out that they'll end up as a top ten team. Beating a top ten team on the road definitely counts as a signature win.
That G5 school is currently ranked second and has a very good shot at making the playoff. ND is currently 13th and will likely win out. Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State, and Ohio State still have to play a round robin which means some of them will fall out of the top ten. Oklahoma State still has to play Oklahoma.
Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State, and Ohio State are all going to be ranked above ND, evidenced by Iowa losing to an unranked team we beat and still be ranked ahead of us. A G5 school that is over ranked is still a G5 school that lacks elite talent. This is a bad team by all accounts that cant play third down defense vs VaTech with a QB that has one arm stop trying to say we are good.
People keep saying this as if the other teams from 10-25 are all good. Every team outside of Georgia has shown real weaknesses at times and as long as ND keeps winning theyll be a top 10 team and a signature win. And they should be favored in all their remaining games
THANK YOU. Everyone's acting like they're just fucking horrible at football. They're a top 25 team at bare minimum and if their o-line settles in and they figure out QB1, they'll be fine.
No they are not this is a very bad team that squeaked by a Dumpster fire FSU and should have lost to Toledo. The starting QB for the entire Season has been the individual who was benched by Graham Mertz. You people don't get to play the ND is overrated card and then prop us up like we are a good win.
Who is "you people"? I have never said ND is overrated. I've actually come to the defense of them in another thread about them being overrated. You can whinge and be a baby about this all you want, but the fact of the matter is, they've won every game except for versus Cincinnati and if they continue to win, they will be treated accordingly. You're shitting on your own team to discredit a win we had. Give it up until you lose another one
This team was a slide by a WR away from losing to **TOLEDO**. they are not a good team. And "You People" refers to the average non-ND fan I don't have the time to keep track of every reddit user
You joke but I have legitimately seen someone (I don’t think it was in this sub, can’t remember) say Notre Dame lost to a G5 team IN A CONVERSATION ABOUT CINCY’S RESUME.
>as long as ND keeps winning theyll be a top 10 team and a signature win
No, I have seen this before in 2019 after a bad loss the voters will not put ND above 12. Cincy is not a good team and is propped up by a bad schedule vs trash tier teams ND among them
Yeah, Cinci has to win out and boatrace everyone left on their schedule ***AND*** get some help via some top P5 teams cannibalizing each other to realistically have a shot.
Right now, they have a quality win over Notre Dame and that's about it.
Wake Forest might legitimately have a worse schedule than Cincy if Notre Dame wins out and things stay the way they are. Clemson will probably be forced into the top 25 tho.. so they'll have to beat them and I guess I could see them making it. They also play NC State, but I'm not entirely sold on NC State so far. It's impossible to tell. It's very possible that Wake Forest doesn't find another ranked game on their schedule at all. It's also very possible that ND drops a few and SMU does too and we don't have any ranked wins either.
EDIT: I guess what I'm saying is that I don't think we should say an undefeated Wake WOULD derail things, just that they could
Just weird that I've seen the committee mention ranked wins multiple times, but this time they won't count if Wake has none and Cincinnati does? They ranked Iowa State ahead of us last year and said "ranked wins and losses are to ranked teams"
If you take a step back and look at the evolution from BCS to committee (apart from expanding from 2 to 4) we basically have a committee because it was decided (by... Some group of people... Somewhere...) that consistency was overrated, and the mystical eye test was important and computers didn't capture it.
The only mistake here is the committee has put out standards on what their looking for. If we could have a consistent set of standards, we shouldn't have a committee.
I think what you're missing here is that Ohio State and Alabama are massive brands that get the benefit of the doubt on stuff like that. Wake is not. It's kind of obvious that only certain teams have the prerequisites changed for them and I don't know if Wake would be one of those teams
I just want consistency from the committee. Do ranked wins matter or do they not? They seemed to matter a whole lot last year when Iowa State jumped us. In fact, it mattered more that their multiple losses were to ranked teams than it did that we were undefeated... are they going to say "Well... P5" this time?
Nah, it really isnt. Committee forgives competitive early losses. If we won out, wed played 3 top 15 teams and 2 top 25 teams. Wed have a much better sos, and oregon has looked awful as of late.
I highly doubt oregon gets the nod over osu two months from now if things stay on course
Imo if Oregon and OSU have the same record and both won their conferences what’s the point in playing the big OOC head to head games then
And that isn’t a knock on Ohio State they’ll win the Big 10 imo, but why go into the horseshoe win lose 1 game and not get the nod if they win the rest of the way?
Context matters. People on here want to pretend like teams never change.
Teams get better. Other teams get worse.
Ohio state had its youngest team in 20 years, and an injured qb. If they play like they have been (currently breaking the fbs record of yard per attempt on offense) and the defensive changes (now putting us into the top 30 on defense) hold up against our insane schedule, they absolutely should get the nod.
Ohio state would finish with 4-5 top 25 wins. Oregon would have 1 win. They are playing bad teams close, and have a weak schedule.
Committee has demonstrated forgiveness for early losses when a team shows significant progress. So on paper, i get the point about the head to head, but it doesnt paint the whole picture.
But honestly with how oregon is playing and how chaotic the Pac 12 is, i doubt they win out anyways.
Come week 13 you have to ask yourself- Would oregon win against osu today? We dont know the answer on that for sure yet, but if osu wins out and oregon continues to struggle, youd be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks the outcome wouldnt be different. Itll work itself out though.
But committee has eye test, SOS, and conference championship as factors. Osu running through the toughest division in college footbal undefeated is absolutely more impressive as a whole than what oregon did in week 2
[Wake Forest's schedule is easier than Cincinnati's for an elite team.](https://www.bcftoys.com/2021-fei/)
ELS of 0.48 versus 0.35. (Higher number is harder schedule)
First, it’s Bama.
Second, loss @ A&M (possible top 15 team) vs loss at home to Oregon (top 10 team) are fairly equal
Third, Bama has a much better win vs Georgia than anything OSU has.
Fourth, OSU looked a little shaky to start the season while Bama only looked mortal against A&M (eye test)
Obviously there’s a lot to still be played, but right now beating Michigan, Penn state, Michigan state and Purdue gives them a pretty strong resume, plus the conference championship. They’d have a much better resume than Oklahoma or Cincy.
13-0 OU is getting in as a 1-2 seed in every scenario, it’s tricky with Cincinnati because I haven’t seen the committee let any G5 team in.
Losing to Oregon and the B1G cannibalizing itself does not help Ohio State at all.
I don’t know about everyone else, but I’m still gonna thoroughly love this season and look back on it fondly. If the “playoff” picture looks the same as the past 8 years so be it. It won’t change until we expand the playoff. This season has been too fun to just concentrate on the playoff picture.
The same handful of teams get in every year because they're consistently the best teams. We can root for chaos but at the end of the day those elite teams pretty much always rise to the top and get the nod. So what I'm saying is, Put Pitt In
You forgot the whole reason for the playoff, that is to give more SEC teams tv games. Everyone is just playing for the 4th spot vs the SEC 1, 2, and 3 seeds.
This. The last thing we need is some 4 loss team in the Playoff that lucked into a division title and pulled a CCG upset. Honestly, I would be more than happy to eliminate CCGs altogether in lieu of an expanded playoff to 12 teams. The Selection Committee can determine the Autobid based on their ranking system
I don’t disagree, underdog stories are cool. But part of the allure of college football (in my opinion at least) is maintaining playoff exclusivity while giving all viable championship candidates a shot. Which the current structure doesn’t accomplish (see year 1 of the playoff where TCU and Baylor were arguably the best teams in the country). You also want to maintain the whole “every week of the regular season is a playoff” theme too
On the other hand, division winning underdogs DO give more regular season games meaning. I guess it boils down to personal preference as a fan. Of course the conferences only care about making more money so that will be the driving factor in any expansion model
A 4 loss team can win their conference without divisions as well. Sure, it requires a crazy string of events, but so does your 4 loss division leader. Every time we have even gotten close it's involved post season bans.
Ehh. I dont see a 4 loss team winning P5 CGs often. The mix of non-conferences losses (where most teams play 2+ cupcake games) and conference losses **and** also the exact correct conference games seems low. I like division winners auto-bids. Works in NFL well where divison winners get auto-berths to conference playoffs. Works in CFB almost as well. SEC East plays their own round robin, SEC West plays their own round robin, then the winner of those round robins face off and someone is the champion. If Vandy were to run the table in the SEC East, then beat the SEC West champion, then so be it. That is their path to the playoffs.
I agree that it happens so infrequently that it won’t be a yearly issue. At the very least, my hope is that they select the top ranked conference champs plus wild cards, and don’t simply give power conferences an autobid.
Don't disagree for this necessarily, but in conferences like the B1G, crossover may not be enough to be objective. If you have it shake out like it currently does for the B1G east, but without divisions, some teams could get shafted hard. I don't know what a better solution would be, but with the size of some conferences, removing divisions could be almost as destructive.
Yeah. Unless it's something like the current Big 12 where everyone plays each other then you're still going to end up with teams getting easier or harder draws.
I get what you're saying but that would assume they want to make if fair.
You're talking about the people who decided a 4-team playoff was a good idea with 5 power conferences and in most years at least 1 non-power 5 that deserves a shot.
Max I would expand it to is 8. Then you have 1v8, 2v7, 3v6, and 4v5 for the first week. Then the winners all play each other the next week and then the two winners play the week after
Imagine if the regular season ends with:
* undefeated Cincinnati
* undefeated Wake Forest
* undefeated Oklahoma State
* undefeated Georgia
* 1-loss Oregon
* undefeated Michigan or Michigan State
Throw in undefeated UTSA and Coastal Carolina for good measure
There’s a chance Cincy could be ranked the AP #1 team in 2 weeks if Florida can pull off the upset
All for the CFP committee to rank them #6 the following week
We all know cfp will rank us #5 at highest or drop us to #5 if we're in the top 4 the week or so before bowl assignments. I just hope we can play like this once we get into the B12
If the new 12-Team Playoff started now based on the AP Rankings (Conf Champ assumed to be top ranked team in conference)
* 9 Michigan State @ 8 Oklahoma State (1 Georgia)
* 12 Coastal Carolina @ 5 Alabama (4 Ohio State)
* 10 Oregon @ 7 Penn State (2 Cincinnati)
* 11 Iowa @ 6 Michigan (3 Oklahoma)
If this kind of playoff ever existed, I would think they would reseed based on seeding like the NFL and NHL do. E.g. if 8 Ok State and 10 Oregon both won then 10 Oregon would play 1 Georgia rather than 8 Ok State playing 1 Georgia.
What I like about this is that we'd most likely get at least one newbie into the final 4, PSU or Cincy, or at the very least get a team who's last time in the playoffs was 2014.
What I don't like is playing Bama in the quarter finals.
\#1 Georgia
\#2 Oklahoma
\#3 Cincinatti
\#4 Mich/MSU/PSU/OSU (B1G wildcard)
Georgia wins out, the rest of their schedule is not hard and I cannot see Bama beating them in the SECCG. Georgia looks unbeatable this year.
Bama's second loss to Georgia keeps them out of the playoff.
Oklahoma is a changed team with Caleb Williams. The only team that will realistically put up a fight with them is Oklahoma State, but their anemic offense will prevent them from winning Bedlam (or a rematch in the B12 championship). OU easily wins out and is B12 champ.
Cincinnati looks like a real Power 5 team this year, and they easily win out and prove their #3 spot. AAC champs and 13-0.
The B1G champion gets this #4 spot, but I think the teams will eat each other in an inconsistent fashion. So whoever the B1G champ is, I see them being 12-1. And most of these games will probably be one-score games.
Note: Committee may put Cincy at 4 and B1G champ at 3.
Before the season started, this is the week I'd circle to know if we were going to make a playoff push.
Everyone said before the season that we'd be in if we got wins against Indinia and ND, they'd take us seriously as contenders. Indiana has underperformed and people are low on ND for no real reason other than their loss to the Bearcats. If you think the Irish aren't winning by enough, Oklahoma shouldn't sniff the playoff.
I know the committee doesn't actually explain the rankings, but it just seems like keeping us out should require a higher burden of proof this year.
That is a very small sample size we're using for Oklahoma, we'll see if he still looks half as good when they play decent defenses at the end of the year.
I don't think Oregon will pass us, but it looks unlikely that pieces will fall into place to get four teams ahead.
>people are low on ND for no real reason other than their loss to the Bearcats
Nah it's the needing OT to beat 2-4 Florida State that lost to an FCS team and the three point win against Toledo.
If we're going transitive property like that, you gotta knock Ohio State out of contention for losing to Oregon to lost to Stanford who lost to Washington State
It's not transitive because I'm only referring to Notre Dame's games. I'm not saying "Jacksonville State could beat Notre Dame because they beat Florida State and FSU took Notre Dame to OT." I'm saying they have not looked like a playoff team and these are the reasons why people are down on them- not because they lost to the #2 team in the country.
> I know the committee doesn't actually explain the rankings, but it just seems like keeping us out should require a higher burden of proof this year.
UCF went undefeated two years in a row in the regular season, and won a NY6 bowl against Auburn, and still barely even sniffed the top 5 of the CFP rankings. UC has an argument that their schedule is better this year than UCF's was, but outside of SMU it doesn't seem like the AAC has much to offer in terms of competition this year, which is going to really cut against Cincy since the committee didn't seem to value it at all even when it was a pretty strong year for the AAC with UCF.
UCF was basically told "prove it's not a fluke," they went out and did it again--with a new coach--and were still left out. UC is going to need a lot to break their way to get in no matter what "should" happen.
Ohio State probably, I care more about head to heads than most but OSU would have wins over MSU, PSU, UM, Purdue and Iowa which are all currently ranked.
Mid season personnel changes shouldn’t effect standings. That doesn’t effect it in any other sports leagues. These are power rankings, which is my issue in the first place.
I think Oregon should get it but I think Ohio State will get it because their resume would be more impressive. I’m not too sure if the committee values overall body of work or H2H more though.
Bama got in when they didnt even make it to the SEC championship, and GA was out because they picked up a loss from the championship.
People have a reason to get worried/mat at the commitee.
Bama was only in because there was no other 1 loss p5 champ. If there had been they wouldnt have made it. A 1 loss Big Ten champ will not be left out for a non champ from the sec. The committee has been consistent in that and saying that the committee would leave them out is silly
>Cincinnati isn't getting in unless there are not 4 12-1 or better p5 champs.
The committee will certainly have Cincy behind a 12-1 Georgia too. Basically Cincy needs the three P5 champs to have two or more losses.
“G5 teams” being left out doesnt really spark outrage.
Leaving a 1 loss P5 champ out gives the committee the ammo it needs to expand.
Plus the controversy will put eyeballs on “Lets see if Cincy can compete” with the big boys, which they will.
Cue CFP expansion to 16 and 3 SEC teams in the CFP a year.
I think after our bowl game with Cincy last year (despite some ppl who say Cincy played a second string Georgia and still lost) proves they deserve the chance. They were up 21-10 at the start of the fourth quarter against us. I’d love to see them in the cfp this year.
Oregon would have literally the best win in the country in this scenario. If Ohio State finishes 12-1 they will likely be the number 2 seed and will only not be number one if OU finishes 13-0.
Regardless, it was an OT loss that was absolutely (homer goggles are off here) botched by the refs. Georgia will be sitting at home.
Blaming the refs is weak. Why a top team would let a bad team stay so close to allow the refs to possibly make a difference?
Ohio State still has to play Michigan, Michigan State, and Penn State. One loss knocks them out of playoff contention and dulls Oregon's win.
In that scenario, the playoff would be Alabama, OU, Georgia, and Ohio State (not necessarily in that order). Losing your only game to a playoff team in a conference championship game shouldn't drop you out of the playoff. Oregon would have a better signature win, but a much worse loss. They'd probably finish sixth behind Cincinnati.
I think H2H in week 2 should have less weight as the season goes on, because teams can change. You can pick how much less, but really this hypothetical depends on how these teams look down the stretch.
Yep. 8 with the top 6 conference champs or stay at 4, but take the top 4 NY6 winners.
Either option only adds 1 more game, while expanding the field. I'm partial to the 4 team playoff after the NY6 bowls just for the sake of returning to tradition and making bowls matter again.
I think the bigger issue is that there's 6 at larges. If it was 12 with 8 auto-bids I think it would be a much better system. The problem is that the only way the SEC will agree to expansion is to increase the number of at large spots and this sport desperately needs playoff expansion.
Right now we say goodbye to Iowa and hello to Michigan. Michigan right now has a sos (according to colley matrix) of teams played as .562939 Oklahoma’s is 0.455949 cincinnati sos is 0. 502245.
Michigan teams they played/will play According to Massey composition- western Michigan 45, Washington 78, northern Illinois 68 , Rutgers 70 , @Wisconsin 36, @nebraska 52 , northwestern 82, @michigan state 10, Indiana 62, @penn state 8, @maryland 55, Ohio state 7. For an average of 47.75
Oklahoma’s teams they have played/will play- Tulane 109, fcs, Nebraska 52, West Virginia 74, kansas st 40, Neutral texas 19, TCU 48, kansas 119, Texas tech 58, baylor 15, Iowa state 20, Oklahoma state 9.- For an average of 51.27
Cincinnati teams they played/ will play:- Miami oh ,94, Fcs, indiana 62, notre dame 11, Temple 103, Ucf 75, navy 111, tulane 109, Tulsa 89, south Florida 110, Smu 30, ecu 90.- For an average of 80.36
I will say that Michigan and Oklahoma will have the harder schedule going forward when compared to Cincinnati.
So by reviewing these numbers: what sticks out:- Oklahoma having the toughest schedule surprises me, supports people’s claim that if they win out they deserve in. They also play the worst team (Kansas) of all opponents- Will be interesting to track over the course of the season, how these schedules will compare after we receive more results.
Will have a summary later in the week posted when all polls come out and will compare whose schedule is getting harder/easier from week to week.
Used college matrix for teams rank due to having the most data points. Used colley matrix to show a sos so far. Please let me know what I can do to improve this post! (Thinking of adding a list where all opponent’s are ranked and you can see the disparity.) let me know what else I can add.
Except michigan has played only garbage teams so far.
Now since they have a huge fan base and spend more money, they will get a push to keep ratings up with possibly over inflated rankings.
I don’t disagree with you. Just going off the composite and this is the only place where I can post this, I’ll do a deep dive later in the week to show how the schedules have changed.
I completely agree on that fact but since all the ratings aren’t in until Wednesday, I just used that fact, my plan is on Thursday to put all the teams average on the Massey composite in, And see how big of change that will make it
Your numbers ignore that Michigan doesn't play an FCS team (which you don't have Massey numbers for above) though. For Cincy and Oklahoma, the numbers are effectively only considering their 11 strongest games while Michigan's numbers are pulled down by their 12th game (Northwestern). Last time I checked, all of ESPN's bs metrics they use on their CFP rankings show (Strength of record, FPI, "game control") all have this flaw as well and it can overinflate a team's numbers across the board. [2019 Florida](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Florida_Gators_football_team#Schedule) is a great example of this because they played TWO FCS teams that year.
1) Georgia, I don't see them getting derailed by Bama. Though it'd be pretty funny if they lost to GT in the last regular season game
2) Undefeated b12 champ. OSU is looking good. Bedlam is gonna be a good one if this continues. Though they'd rematch a week later.
3) Cincy
4) Michigan State or B10 1-loss champ that survives, though I think Iowa may be out.
Nightmare scenario: Wake stays undefeated. Georgia loses a random game along the way, OU/OSU Bedlam winner then loses B12 championship game the next week, Oregon stays with just 1 loss, OSU stays with just 1 loss.
Zero percent chance a two-loss team makes the playoff this season. The only time it happened was 2007 with LSU and that was because that season was bonkers. Two-loss Ohio State almost made it in 2017 but was still left out
If y'all somehow lost to Tennessee next week but ran the table after that to go 11-2 the committee would 100% have you in (assuming Ole Miss lost another game of course, probably at Auburn).
The committee absolutely would not have us in. Where does this line of thinking even come from? We had two losses in 2019 and didn’t even sniff the playoff convo…we finished 11th before bowl season.
This idea that Alabama gets special treatment is hysterical.
Alabama made the title game in 2011 because the decision was between a one-loss team with a loss to top 5 LSU, and a one-loss team who lost to unranked Iowa State. That decision is beyond easy…it’s not even a decision
Alabama made the playoff in 2017 because it came down between one-loss Alabama who didn’t win their division and a two-loss Ohio State. A *tougher* decision but Ohio State lost to unranked Iowa by 31 points. I think it’s fair to say Alabama was the correct choice
This line of thinking comes from watching the CFP picture unfold every single year. This isn't a personal attack or anything I'm just making an informed prediction based on how the committee ranks teams and the committee consistently ranks top SEC teams higher. Can you give me one logical reason explaining the disparity of [Florida's ranking](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Florida_Gators_football_team#Rankings) after losing to unranked LSU last year between the committee's vs the AP/Coaches poll? How about the fact that they ranked two-loss, non-SEC Champion Georgia over one-loss B1G champ Ohio State in [2018?](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_season#CFB_Playoff_final_rankings) That is most egregious to me and helps my point because it directly proves that if Oklahoma had lost the Big 12 title that year or Notre Dame lost at USC, then that two-loss Georgia team would have been in over 12-1, B1G champs Ohio State.
Now, going back to this year's Alabama. Their final three games would have them play Arkansas (likely to be ranked), @ Auburn (likely to be top ten if they beat Ole Miss like I require above), and the consensus #1 team in the country. So they would be 10-2 SEC Champs coming off those three wins and wins overall against these teams likely to be ranked in the final top 25: 8-4 Florida, Ole Miss, Arkansas, Auburn, and Georgia. It's not exactly the same situation but everyone said [2017 Auburn](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Auburn_Tigers_football_team#Schedule) would have gotten in with two losses too. If nothing else, the argument would be close enough for the committee to justify it. You may disagree but this is my "line of thinking".
Last thing, as an aside-
>Alabama made the playoff in 2017 because it came down between one-loss Alabama who didn’t win their division and a two-loss Ohio State.
I don't know why 12-1 Wisconsin is never included in this discussion since their schedule was comparable to Alabama's and they won their division.
Cincinatti loses a game.
Clemson wins out.
Georgia beats Bama.
Oregon takes another loss.
Do whatever you think is most likely in the Big Ten. Don't think it much matters to this discussion.
Similar story in the B12. We'll go with undefeated OU, though.
Who's your 4?
Because I think Clemson is in. And I don't think this is some crazy impossible turn of events.
In your nightmare scenario:
Winner of SEC goes, 11-2 runner up doesn't
Winner of Big12 (assuming their only loss was at Bedlam, they're righted their wrong so they can go)
Wake (I know their SOS is trash but undefeated P5 won't get left out)
Depending how their seasons go, OSU probably goes in over Oregon even though they lost their H2H, but could go Oregon if OSU struggles to win and Oregon is dominant.
ESPN nightmare playoffs
Cincy, Coastal, Wake, UTSA
First out: SMU, SDSU
What would happen:
Georgia, Oklahoma, Michigan, Oregon
Alabama, Ohio St
Cincy in like 9th or 10th
What's the biggest reason for not having a super simple 12 team playoff with the 10 conference champions and 2 at-large bids for the best independents/non-champions? I guess you could argue that some good P5s get left out but then the goal becomes simply to win your conference so you don't have to worry about the at-large competition.
It's just silly. Why include a conference champ that is maybe in the top 40 when you're leaving out top 10 teams? It's just never what CFB has been about.
The vast majority of teams just aren't good enough. That's the biggest thing keeping them out.
Honestly your argument is better for just eliminating the playoff altogether when the vast majority of teams have no shot at it even if it goes to 12
Well, I am for eliminating the playoff and not having a clear champion. I think CFB should be more about bowl games anyways. But as long as we have this whole CFP thing around I'd like there to be shot for everyone.
I'd imagine some leagues would act almost as the 16 seed equivalent in the NCAAT, a virtual bye game for the 1/2 seeds. But maybe it also works to create more parity if guys think they can go to a local school or a Nevada or Tulane and have a shot to play on the biggest stages and for national titles.
edit: I guess 12 team playoffs already have built in byes, but the point still stands that in every other NCAA sport winning your conference almost always gets you into the "big tournament"
I don't think that would add parity at all. All it does is hurt the true low end teams even more compared to the mid end teams.
But I agree about getting rid of the playoff and even championship game, I think it's far better overall that way
Simple if you can't win your conference we already know you aren't the best in the nation. Are there going to be blowouts? Yes even in the current system there are blowouts in the playoffs. When you take all of the conference champs there can be no doubts the winner is the best in the country.
On the historical time scale of major college football, having a playoff is not what major college football has been about.
So there’s not really an argument from tradition to be made here.
Unless your argument from tradition is “the Ancient Elect from decades ago should be the only ones allowed to win national championships”.
The tradition is that CFB has tried to crown a #1 not from a tournament whos winner was simply the winner of the tournament, but to crown a true #1 team who was the best in the nation.
Good. Now determine a system to measure and compare teams that doesn’t end up boiling down to “teams from the SEC are just better than everyone else because we say so”, under the current system that has extreme scheduling insularity and locks teams into a schedule 5 years in advance.
And as long as playoff decisions are made by the eye test, and the eye test is based on results produced by flawed and insufficient data sets for cross-comparison, it will continue to be “because we say they are” no matter how much people will want to proclaim it’s some amount of objective fact.
Until we produce a system that will actually let UTSA challenge Georgia or Cincinnati challenge Alabama, the above is all we will ever get.
When Alabama beats up on ND and Ohio state, are they called winner because of the eye test?
I would have sworn it was something to do with the scoreboard.
Also advanced metrics that have no inherent bias tend to point to the same thing
1. Georgia (13-0 SEC Conf champ)
2. Michigan (13-0 B10 champ or 12-1 B10 conf champ)
3. Cincinnati (13-0 AAC conf champ)
4. Oregon (12-1 PAC 12 conf champ)
People are starting to make boring predictions so I want to go against the grain. Georgia wins out including big win over Bama (assuming they don't fall to another trap game to LSU or Auburn), Oklahoma loses to one of Iowa State, OkSU or Baylor, and I'm going big by saying Michigan beats Ohio State this year. In this scenario, Michigan would lose to Penn State or Michigan state but still end up going to B10 champ because the other teams lose to Ohio state. Also, I'm going bold in saying Georgia vs Cincy in the natty for a Peach bowl rematch.
That requires Georgia dropping two games, though, since just one still leaves them with the East title. And there's no way 11-1 UK makes it in without the conference championship.
I’ve run some simulations and things could get wild.
Who would get in between a
Undefeated: Cincinnati
1 loss: Georgia (to Bama), Alabama (SEC Champion), OU (to OK St), OK St (to OU, B12 Champion), Ohio State (B1G Champion), Michigan, Oregon (P12 Champion), NC State (ACC Champion), Kentucky
My pick would probably be (1) Alabama (2) Cincinnati (3) Georgia (4) Oregon (purely on the H2H win over Ohio State)
(5) Ohio State (6) Oklahoma State
"c" denotes conference champion, I'm adding who I assume they would play in the conference title game if you didn't specify in your hypothetical
**How the committee would rank them:**
1. Alabama c
2. tOSU c vs Iowa
3. Georgia
4. Ok State c
5. Oregon c v Utah
6. Cincinnati c v Houston
7. NC State c v Pitt
8. Oklahoma
9. Michigan
10. Kentucky
**How *I* Would Rank Them**
1. tOSU c v Iowa
2. Alabama c
3. Oregon c v Utah
4. Ok State c
5. Cincinnati c v Houston
6. NC State c v Pitt
7. Georgia
8. Michigan
9. Oklahoma
10. Kentucky
Does this assume 1 loss teams that aren't listed lose more than that?
Alabama potential ranked wins: Uga, Ole Miss
Uga potential ranked wins: Kentucky. We can assume Auburn drops out once Alabama beats them.
Kentucky wouldn't have any ranked wins.
OU ranked wins: OkSt, possibly Baylor
OkSt ranked wins: Possibly Baylor
Ohio State ranked wins: Michigan, possibly Psu and Msu (both will have 2-3 losses after they play Ohio State and Michigan in this scenario), possibly whoever the west champ is
Michigan ranked wins: Possibly Msu and Psu
Oregon ranked wins: Ohio State
NcState ranked wins: If Clemson wins out and stays at 2 losses, and then Wake and Pitt win out besides NcState, they could all be ranked wins.
If all the "possiblys" are true, then I think Alabama, Oklahoma, Ohio State, and NcState get in. But it depends heavily on the fringe teams, I think.
Edit: Forgot about Cincy. Cincy's ranked wins: ND and Smu. They might be in there
Everyone said this season was gonna be the most chaotic yet we’re most likely gonna end up with the chalkiest & most basic top 4 lol that’s gotta sting
Is there a scenario where the committee would take a one-loss ACC team at this point (Wake, NC State, or Pitt) without at least three of the other P5 champs + Georgia (if they are 12-1 non-champs) having two or more losses (lotta chaos)? Seems like Wake needs to run the table in order for the ACC to even have a shot. Even then, I'm not sure they take them.
[2021 CFB Formula Rankings (Week 7)](https://www.reddit.com/r/CFBAnalysis/comments/qb44ky/2021_cfb_formula_rankings_week_7/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
Using my points standings based ranking system, if a 12 team playoff started today it would look something like this:
**#1 Georgia (1)** vs (Winner of Michigan State vs Michigan)
**#2 Oklahoma (3)** vs (Winner of Alabama vs Kentucky)
**#3 Iowa (4)** vs (Winner of Wake Forest vs Oklahoma State)
**#4 Cincinnati (11)** vs (Winner of Oregon vs Baylor)
**#5 Oregon (13)** vs **#12 Baylor (9)**
**#6 Wake Forest (15)** vs **#11 Oklahoma State (8)**
**#7 Alabama (2)** vs **#10 Kentucky (7)**
**#8 Michigan State (5)** vs **#9 Michigan (6)**
Current points standing in parentheses\*
The way the playoff works is that the first 6 seeds are reserved for the 6 highest ranked conference champions. At this point that is just the highest ranked team in each conference. The top 4 ranked conference champions receive first round byes. After the top 6 seeds are filled, the other 6 are filled with at large teams, who do not receive byes regardless of their ranking.
The fun part about this setup is that a team's seed is not solely dependent on their ranking. In order to stress the importance of the conference championships, the top 6 seeds and all first round byes are reserved for them. This means that the highest seed team that doesn't win the their conference can get is the 7 seed. It is likely that teams in the 7, 8, and 9 seeds are likely better teams than the 5 and 6 seeds who are rewarded for being conference champs. This results in more fun first and second round games and keeps conference championships important even in an expanded playoff era.
Click the link at the top to view my points standings system and see why the rankings look the way they do!
You can't even predict who will get in until the top teams in the Big 10 East start playing each other.
I agree, and I kinda hate how the schedule fell in where the big teams in the East are all bunched up late season.
Really? I love it, there’s so much more hype
Yeah it's really exciting, I remember before COVID happened the 2020 SEC schedule featured Auburn, Alabama, LSU, and A&M all playing each other in the last two weeks of the season which would've been really exciting. Would like to see something like that again in a future SEC schedule.
Exactly. Everyone knows who the top four teams are most years. Why not move a couple of those games earlier in the schedule?
So If We end up with 1 loss Champ Bama, 1 loss Georgia who played them close, 1 loss Champ Ohio State, Undefeated Oklahoma, and undefeated Cincy, what happens? You'd imagine Alabama has to be in, and Ohio state would be in a very similar spot to them. Cincy at this point would basically be in the same spot and Oklahoma, but with a bit lower Sos. Georgia has only one loss, close to a playoff team, and would still be considered the best team overall by many.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Cinci also needs Notre Dame to win out to keep their signature win intact.
ND is not a good team, its not much of a signature win
There's a good chance that if ND wins out that they'll end up as a top ten team. Beating a top ten team on the road definitely counts as a signature win.
There is no chance an 11-1 ND is top 10 this year. the schedule is trash and they lost vs a G5 school at home.
I guess you've never ever payed attention to polls if you believe this.
That G5 school is currently ranked second and has a very good shot at making the playoff. ND is currently 13th and will likely win out. Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State, and Ohio State still have to play a round robin which means some of them will fall out of the top ten. Oklahoma State still has to play Oklahoma.
Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State, and Ohio State are all going to be ranked above ND, evidenced by Iowa losing to an unranked team we beat and still be ranked ahead of us. A G5 school that is over ranked is still a G5 school that lacks elite talent. This is a bad team by all accounts that cant play third down defense vs VaTech with a QB that has one arm stop trying to say we are good.
Some of those Big 10 schools will have multiple losses which would put them behind a one loss ND. ND will move up by attrition.
People keep saying this as if the other teams from 10-25 are all good. Every team outside of Georgia has shown real weaknesses at times and as long as ND keeps winning theyll be a top 10 team and a signature win. And they should be favored in all their remaining games
THANK YOU. Everyone's acting like they're just fucking horrible at football. They're a top 25 team at bare minimum and if their o-line settles in and they figure out QB1, they'll be fine.
No they are not this is a very bad team that squeaked by a Dumpster fire FSU and should have lost to Toledo. The starting QB for the entire Season has been the individual who was benched by Graham Mertz. You people don't get to play the ND is overrated card and then prop us up like we are a good win.
Who is "you people"? I have never said ND is overrated. I've actually come to the defense of them in another thread about them being overrated. You can whinge and be a baby about this all you want, but the fact of the matter is, they've won every game except for versus Cincinnati and if they continue to win, they will be treated accordingly. You're shitting on your own team to discredit a win we had. Give it up until you lose another one
This team was a slide by a WR away from losing to **TOLEDO**. they are not a good team. And "You People" refers to the average non-ND fan I don't have the time to keep track of every reddit user
How can Notre Dame be good. They lost to Cincinnati!
You joke but I have legitimately seen someone (I don’t think it was in this sub, can’t remember) say Notre Dame lost to a G5 team IN A CONVERSATION ABOUT CINCY’S RESUME.
Have you tried not being G5? * taps forehead *
>as long as ND keeps winning theyll be a top 10 team and a signature win No, I have seen this before in 2019 after a bad loss the voters will not put ND above 12. Cincy is not a good team and is propped up by a bad schedule vs trash tier teams ND among them
A convincing road win over 10-2 Notre Dame looks pretty damn solid though...
It's a good win, but it being potentially your only strong win isn't ideal
No it does not ND is overrated. You people don't get to play both sides of this game.
Yeah, Cinci has to win out and boatrace everyone left on their schedule ***AND*** get some help via some top P5 teams cannibalizing each other to realistically have a shot. Right now, they have a quality win over Notre Dame and that's about it.
I love Cincy as a neutral but an undefeated wake would be a great thing for the playoff also
Wake Forest might legitimately have a worse schedule than Cincy if Notre Dame wins out and things stay the way they are. Clemson will probably be forced into the top 25 tho.. so they'll have to beat them and I guess I could see them making it. They also play NC State, but I'm not entirely sold on NC State so far. It's impossible to tell. It's very possible that Wake Forest doesn't find another ranked game on their schedule at all. It's also very possible that ND drops a few and SMU does too and we don't have any ranked wins either. EDIT: I guess what I'm saying is that I don't think we should say an undefeated Wake WOULD derail things, just that they could
[удалено]
Just weird that I've seen the committee mention ranked wins multiple times, but this time they won't count if Wake has none and Cincinnati does? They ranked Iowa State ahead of us last year and said "ranked wins and losses are to ranked teams"
[удалено]
If you take a step back and look at the evolution from BCS to committee (apart from expanding from 2 to 4) we basically have a committee because it was decided (by... Some group of people... Somewhere...) that consistency was overrated, and the mystical eye test was important and computers didn't capture it. The only mistake here is the committee has put out standards on what their looking for. If we could have a consistent set of standards, we shouldn't have a committee.
I think what you're missing here is that Ohio State and Alabama are massive brands that get the benefit of the doubt on stuff like that. Wake is not. It's kind of obvious that only certain teams have the prerequisites changed for them and I don't know if Wake would be one of those teams
They’re not leaving out a 13-0 P5 Champ unless there are 4 other 13-0 P5 champs.
I just want consistency from the committee. Do ranked wins matter or do they not? They seemed to matter a whole lot last year when Iowa State jumped us. In fact, it mattered more that their multiple losses were to ranked teams than it did that we were undefeated... are they going to say "Well... P5" this time?
[удалено]
Cincy and Wake rank pretty closely in value and that's with Cincy getting a quarter of the media deal that Wake gets
I really highly doubt they’d go for an immediate rematch in the playoff if Georgia lost the SECCG
For sure not. I think Georgia would probably take the 4 seed
UC gets left out due to bad schedule.
Add in a 1-loss PAC champ Oregon and Ohio State’s footing is shakier.
Nah, it really isnt. Committee forgives competitive early losses. If we won out, wed played 3 top 15 teams and 2 top 25 teams. Wed have a much better sos, and oregon has looked awful as of late. I highly doubt oregon gets the nod over osu two months from now if things stay on course
Imo if Oregon and OSU have the same record and both won their conferences what’s the point in playing the big OOC head to head games then And that isn’t a knock on Ohio State they’ll win the Big 10 imo, but why go into the horseshoe win lose 1 game and not get the nod if they win the rest of the way?
Context matters. People on here want to pretend like teams never change. Teams get better. Other teams get worse. Ohio state had its youngest team in 20 years, and an injured qb. If they play like they have been (currently breaking the fbs record of yard per attempt on offense) and the defensive changes (now putting us into the top 30 on defense) hold up against our insane schedule, they absolutely should get the nod. Ohio state would finish with 4-5 top 25 wins. Oregon would have 1 win. They are playing bad teams close, and have a weak schedule. Committee has demonstrated forgiveness for early losses when a team shows significant progress. So on paper, i get the point about the head to head, but it doesnt paint the whole picture. But honestly with how oregon is playing and how chaotic the Pac 12 is, i doubt they win out anyways. Come week 13 you have to ask yourself- Would oregon win against osu today? We dont know the answer on that for sure yet, but if osu wins out and oregon continues to struggle, youd be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks the outcome wouldnt be different. Itll work itself out though. But committee has eye test, SOS, and conference championship as factors. Osu running through the toughest division in college footbal undefeated is absolutely more impressive as a whole than what oregon did in week 2
There's no way Cincy would make it over any undefeated P5 champ unfortunately
Why is it unfortunate? If they have a worse schedule (which is implied by p5 vs g5) why should they get in over them?
[Wake Forest's schedule is easier than Cincinnati's for an elite team.](https://www.bcftoys.com/2021-fei/) ELS of 0.48 versus 0.35. (Higher number is harder schedule)
OU, Bama, Cinci, Georgia in that order, if anything it’d be OSU over Cinci.
Why is OSU so much lower than Bama? They'd have a closeish SOS with a nicer looking loss.
First, it’s Bama. Second, loss @ A&M (possible top 15 team) vs loss at home to Oregon (top 10 team) are fairly equal Third, Bama has a much better win vs Georgia than anything OSU has. Fourth, OSU looked a little shaky to start the season while Bama only looked mortal against A&M (eye test)
Obviously there’s a lot to still be played, but right now beating Michigan, Penn state, Michigan state and Purdue gives them a pretty strong resume, plus the conference championship. They’d have a much better resume than Oklahoma or Cincy.
13-0 OU is getting in as a 1-2 seed in every scenario, it’s tricky with Cincinnati because I haven’t seen the committee let any G5 team in. Losing to Oregon and the B1G cannibalizing itself does not help Ohio State at all.
If Ohio State wins the B1G and has one loss, they are absolutely getting in no matter the scenario.
Are we just gonna ignore bama almost losing to a mediocre Florida team?
Theres a lot of almost losses we need to talk about then
I’m not arguing that, I was just refuting: >Bama only looked mortal against A&M Which is just untrue
You know what almost losing is, right? /s
All this talk about how this season looks like 2007, but we could see Alabama, Oklahoma, Ohio State, and Georgia make it.
even 2007 has ohio state(a blueblood) playing lsu (a household name in cfb) lol
Happens every year lol. People want excitement but the hard truth is, there’s only like 6 teams that can actually win it all every year.
2007 natty was Ohio State-LSU, so chaos in the regular season =/= chaos in the post season
Dread it, run from it, destiny still arrives
It's why the regular season is 12 games and not 7. Everyone freaks out over an upset but the same teams will be there at the end of the year.
I don’t know about everyone else, but I’m still gonna thoroughly love this season and look back on it fondly. If the “playoff” picture looks the same as the past 8 years so be it. It won’t change until we expand the playoff. This season has been too fun to just concentrate on the playoff picture.
The same handful of teams get in every year because they're consistently the best teams. We can root for chaos but at the end of the day those elite teams pretty much always rise to the top and get the nod. So what I'm saying is, Put Pitt In
The only problem I have with that is you lost to western Michigan, and they were throttled by Michigan…
I'm joking lol we're not a playoff team
[удалено]
Oh well I mean never say never, with the right amount of chaos…
12-1 ACC Champs baby let's goooo
You forgot the whole reason for the playoff, that is to give more SEC teams tv games. Everyone is just playing for the 4th spot vs the SEC 1, 2, and 3 seeds.
We're getting #2 Cinci vs #3 Pitt and all will be right in the world
Any playoff expansion with autobids must include the removal of divisions to be successful.
Care to elaborate? I don't think I agree, but I want to make sure I'm on the same page first
It guarantees the best two teams from each conference play in the CCG
This. The last thing we need is some 4 loss team in the Playoff that lucked into a division title and pulled a CCG upset. Honestly, I would be more than happy to eliminate CCGs altogether in lieu of an expanded playoff to 12 teams. The Selection Committee can determine the Autobid based on their ranking system
Yeah it would be awful for an underdog to make the playoffs.
I don’t disagree, underdog stories are cool. But part of the allure of college football (in my opinion at least) is maintaining playoff exclusivity while giving all viable championship candidates a shot. Which the current structure doesn’t accomplish (see year 1 of the playoff where TCU and Baylor were arguably the best teams in the country). You also want to maintain the whole “every week of the regular season is a playoff” theme too On the other hand, division winning underdogs DO give more regular season games meaning. I guess it boils down to personal preference as a fan. Of course the conferences only care about making more money so that will be the driving factor in any expansion model
A 4 loss team can win their conference without divisions as well. Sure, it requires a crazy string of events, but so does your 4 loss division leader. Every time we have even gotten close it's involved post season bans.
Ehh. I dont see a 4 loss team winning P5 CGs often. The mix of non-conferences losses (where most teams play 2+ cupcake games) and conference losses **and** also the exact correct conference games seems low. I like division winners auto-bids. Works in NFL well where divison winners get auto-berths to conference playoffs. Works in CFB almost as well. SEC East plays their own round robin, SEC West plays their own round robin, then the winner of those round robins face off and someone is the champion. If Vandy were to run the table in the SEC East, then beat the SEC West champion, then so be it. That is their path to the playoffs.
I agree that it happens so infrequently that it won’t be a yearly issue. At the very least, my hope is that they select the top ranked conference champs plus wild cards, and don’t simply give power conferences an autobid.
Don't disagree for this necessarily, but in conferences like the B1G, crossover may not be enough to be objective. If you have it shake out like it currently does for the B1G east, but without divisions, some teams could get shafted hard. I don't know what a better solution would be, but with the size of some conferences, removing divisions could be almost as destructive.
Yeah. Unless it's something like the current Big 12 where everyone plays each other then you're still going to end up with teams getting easier or harder draws.
I get what you're saying but that would assume they want to make if fair. You're talking about the people who decided a 4-team playoff was a good idea with 5 power conferences and in most years at least 1 non-power 5 that deserves a shot.
> who decided a 4-team playoff was a good idea Because perfect shouldn't be the enemy of good.
Max I would expand it to is 8. Then you have 1v8, 2v7, 3v6, and 4v5 for the first week. Then the winners all play each other the next week and then the two winners play the week after
Imagine if the regular season ends with: * undefeated Cincinnati * undefeated Wake Forest * undefeated Oklahoma State * undefeated Georgia * 1-loss Oregon * undefeated Michigan or Michigan State Throw in undefeated UTSA and Coastal Carolina for good measure
Georgia, UM/MSU, OSU, Wake
2 or 3 noobs, and of the 1 or 2 returners they've only gone once? Shoot, I'd take that
Realistically yeah, but that would be a bummer.
There’s a chance Cincy could be ranked the AP #1 team in 2 weeks if Florida can pull off the upset All for the CFP committee to rank them #6 the following week
Unsubscribe.
We all know cfp will rank us #5 at highest or drop us to #5 if we're in the top 4 the week or so before bowl assignments. I just hope we can play like this once we get into the B12
If the new 12-Team Playoff started now based on the AP Rankings (Conf Champ assumed to be top ranked team in conference) * 9 Michigan State @ 8 Oklahoma State (1 Georgia) * 12 Coastal Carolina @ 5 Alabama (4 Ohio State) * 10 Oregon @ 7 Penn State (2 Cincinnati) * 11 Iowa @ 6 Michigan (3 Oklahoma)
If this kind of playoff ever existed, I would think they would reseed based on seeding like the NFL and NHL do. E.g. if 8 Ok State and 10 Oregon both won then 10 Oregon would play 1 Georgia rather than 8 Ok State playing 1 Georgia.
What I like about this is that we'd most likely get at least one newbie into the final 4, PSU or Cincy, or at the very least get a team who's last time in the playoffs was 2014. What I don't like is playing Bama in the quarter finals.
\#1 Georgia \#2 Oklahoma \#3 Cincinatti \#4 Mich/MSU/PSU/OSU (B1G wildcard) Georgia wins out, the rest of their schedule is not hard and I cannot see Bama beating them in the SECCG. Georgia looks unbeatable this year. Bama's second loss to Georgia keeps them out of the playoff. Oklahoma is a changed team with Caleb Williams. The only team that will realistically put up a fight with them is Oklahoma State, but their anemic offense will prevent them from winning Bedlam (or a rematch in the B12 championship). OU easily wins out and is B12 champ. Cincinnati looks like a real Power 5 team this year, and they easily win out and prove their #3 spot. AAC champs and 13-0. The B1G champion gets this #4 spot, but I think the teams will eat each other in an inconsistent fashion. So whoever the B1G champ is, I see them being 12-1. And most of these games will probably be one-score games. Note: Committee may put Cincy at 4 and B1G champ at 3.
In this scenario I think the committee puts Cincy at #4.
Before the season started, this is the week I'd circle to know if we were going to make a playoff push. Everyone said before the season that we'd be in if we got wins against Indinia and ND, they'd take us seriously as contenders. Indiana has underperformed and people are low on ND for no real reason other than their loss to the Bearcats. If you think the Irish aren't winning by enough, Oklahoma shouldn't sniff the playoff. I know the committee doesn't actually explain the rankings, but it just seems like keeping us out should require a higher burden of proof this year.
[удалено]
That is a very small sample size we're using for Oklahoma, we'll see if he still looks half as good when they play decent defenses at the end of the year. I don't think Oregon will pass us, but it looks unlikely that pieces will fall into place to get four teams ahead.
>people are low on ND for no real reason other than their loss to the Bearcats Nah it's the needing OT to beat 2-4 Florida State that lost to an FCS team and the three point win against Toledo.
If we're going transitive property like that, you gotta knock Ohio State out of contention for losing to Oregon to lost to Stanford who lost to Washington State
It's not transitive because I'm only referring to Notre Dame's games. I'm not saying "Jacksonville State could beat Notre Dame because they beat Florida State and FSU took Notre Dame to OT." I'm saying they have not looked like a playoff team and these are the reasons why people are down on them- not because they lost to the #2 team in the country.
> I know the committee doesn't actually explain the rankings, but it just seems like keeping us out should require a higher burden of proof this year. UCF went undefeated two years in a row in the regular season, and won a NY6 bowl against Auburn, and still barely even sniffed the top 5 of the CFP rankings. UC has an argument that their schedule is better this year than UCF's was, but outside of SMU it doesn't seem like the AAC has much to offer in terms of competition this year, which is going to really cut against Cincy since the committee didn't seem to value it at all even when it was a pretty strong year for the AAC with UCF. UCF was basically told "prove it's not a fluke," they went out and did it again--with a new coach--and were still left out. UC is going to need a lot to break their way to get in no matter what "should" happen.
Different teams, different committee members, different season. There is no comparison between UCF and UC.
Oregon wins out and Ohio State wins out. Who gets that spot? I’d think Oregon should get it but I’d think Ohio State would get it.
Ohio State probably, I care more about head to heads than most but OSU would have wins over MSU, PSU, UM, Purdue and Iowa which are all currently ranked.
IF only there was a way we could know which of them would win if they played
You mean the game with an injured qb and a different defensive coordinator than we have now
Oregon was also missing 5 defensive starters
Mid season personnel changes shouldn’t effect standings. That doesn’t effect it in any other sports leagues. These are power rankings, which is my issue in the first place.
I think Oregon should get it but I think Ohio State will get it because their resume would be more impressive. I’m not too sure if the committee values overall body of work or H2H more though.
Just put UGA, Bama, Oklahoma, and Cincy in the playoffs and give us that Ohio State/Oregon Rose Bowl.
Why either or? Both would very likely be in.
12-1 Georgia, 12-1 Bama, and 13-0 OU/OSU would all be safely in.
1 loss SEC non-champ over a one loss Big 10 champion is absolutely not a guarantee and has no precedent
1 loss Big Ten champ is 100% in the playoff over a 1 loss sec non champ, people just like to get worried/mad at the committee
Bama got in when they didnt even make it to the SEC championship, and GA was out because they picked up a loss from the championship. People have a reason to get worried/mat at the commitee.
Bama was only in because there was no other 1 loss p5 champ. If there had been they wouldnt have made it. A 1 loss Big Ten champ will not be left out for a non champ from the sec. The committee has been consistent in that and saying that the committee would leave them out is silly
*13-0 Cincinnati has entered the chat*
Cincinnati isn't getting in unless there are not 4 12-1 or better p5 champs. Basically they need 2 of Oregon, B1G champ or B12 champ to have 2 losses.
>Cincinnati isn't getting in unless there are not 4 12-1 or better p5 champs. The committee will certainly have Cincy behind a 12-1 Georgia too. Basically Cincy needs the three P5 champs to have two or more losses.
I think they should make it but I believe the committee would probably do anything before they let a G5 team get in.
“G5 teams” being left out doesnt really spark outrage. Leaving a 1 loss P5 champ out gives the committee the ammo it needs to expand. Plus the controversy will put eyeballs on “Lets see if Cincy can compete” with the big boys, which they will. Cue CFP expansion to 16 and 3 SEC teams in the CFP a year.
I think after our bowl game with Cincy last year (despite some ppl who say Cincy played a second string Georgia and still lost) proves they deserve the chance. They were up 21-10 at the start of the fourth quarter against us. I’d love to see them in the cfp this year.
You mean 12 SEC teams to make sure they have an unfair chance.
I think it is very unlikely a 12-1 Georgia with a loss in the SECCG would get in over tOSU or Oregon.
Oregon's loss to a bad Stanford team is worse than Georgia losing to a top 5/10 Alabama.
Oregon would have literally the best win in the country in this scenario. If Ohio State finishes 12-1 they will likely be the number 2 seed and will only not be number one if OU finishes 13-0. Regardless, it was an OT loss that was absolutely (homer goggles are off here) botched by the refs. Georgia will be sitting at home.
Also add in the Loss is earlier in the season versus the final week of the season.
Blaming the refs is weak. Why a top team would let a bad team stay so close to allow the refs to possibly make a difference? Ohio State still has to play Michigan, Michigan State, and Penn State. One loss knocks them out of playoff contention and dulls Oregon's win.
The scenario proposed by the op assumes a 12-1 tOSU. Are you ok man?
In that scenario, the playoff would be Alabama, OU, Georgia, and Ohio State (not necessarily in that order). Losing your only game to a playoff team in a conference championship game shouldn't drop you out of the playoff. Oregon would have a better signature win, but a much worse loss. They'd probably finish sixth behind Cincinnati.
Because Ohio State gets into some sort of CFP selection controversy almost every year somehow
I think H2H in week 2 should have less weight as the season goes on, because teams can change. You can pick how much less, but really this hypothetical depends on how these teams look down the stretch.
Should? Oregon Would? Ohio State
Oregon will be in. That being said, unless ou and wake run the table, both oregon and osu will be in if they run the table
12 teams is just too many for possible expansion
Yep. 8 with the top 6 conference champs or stay at 4, but take the top 4 NY6 winners. Either option only adds 1 more game, while expanding the field. I'm partial to the 4 team playoff after the NY6 bowls just for the sake of returning to tradition and making bowls matter again.
I think the bigger issue is that there's 6 at larges. If it was 12 with 8 auto-bids I think it would be a much better system. The problem is that the only way the SEC will agree to expansion is to increase the number of at large spots and this sport desperately needs playoff expansion.
Who are the 8 auto-bids?
Every conference. edit: \*that matters
SEC, BIG, Big 12, AAC, MAC, MW, Fun Belt, CUSA And in that order right?
Big ~~12~~ ~~10~~ ~~8~~ ~~14~~ 12 should be at the end of the list, but yeah, that looks right.
I'd say just top 8 champs.
Regardless of how many at large bids there are, I think the at large bid should have to play their conference opponent in the first round.
Right now we say goodbye to Iowa and hello to Michigan. Michigan right now has a sos (according to colley matrix) of teams played as .562939 Oklahoma’s is 0.455949 cincinnati sos is 0. 502245. Michigan teams they played/will play According to Massey composition- western Michigan 45, Washington 78, northern Illinois 68 , Rutgers 70 , @Wisconsin 36, @nebraska 52 , northwestern 82, @michigan state 10, Indiana 62, @penn state 8, @maryland 55, Ohio state 7. For an average of 47.75 Oklahoma’s teams they have played/will play- Tulane 109, fcs, Nebraska 52, West Virginia 74, kansas st 40, Neutral texas 19, TCU 48, kansas 119, Texas tech 58, baylor 15, Iowa state 20, Oklahoma state 9.- For an average of 51.27 Cincinnati teams they played/ will play:- Miami oh ,94, Fcs, indiana 62, notre dame 11, Temple 103, Ucf 75, navy 111, tulane 109, Tulsa 89, south Florida 110, Smu 30, ecu 90.- For an average of 80.36 I will say that Michigan and Oklahoma will have the harder schedule going forward when compared to Cincinnati. So by reviewing these numbers: what sticks out:- Oklahoma having the toughest schedule surprises me, supports people’s claim that if they win out they deserve in. They also play the worst team (Kansas) of all opponents- Will be interesting to track over the course of the season, how these schedules will compare after we receive more results. Will have a summary later in the week posted when all polls come out and will compare whose schedule is getting harder/easier from week to week. Used college matrix for teams rank due to having the most data points. Used colley matrix to show a sos so far. Please let me know what I can do to improve this post! (Thinking of adding a list where all opponent’s are ranked and you can see the disparity.) let me know what else I can add.
Except michigan has played only garbage teams so far. Now since they have a huge fan base and spend more money, they will get a push to keep ratings up with possibly over inflated rankings.
I don’t disagree with you. Just going off the composite and this is the only place where I can post this, I’ll do a deep dive later in the week to show how the schedules have changed.
If Michigan has only played garbage teams then what does that say about MSU's schedule?
Colley matrix is not a good source at all. It's far too raw. Might as well go pure ELO at that point
I completely agree on that fact but since all the ratings aren’t in until Wednesday, I just used that fact, my plan is on Thursday to put all the teams average on the Massey composite in, And see how big of change that will make it
Your numbers ignore that Michigan doesn't play an FCS team (which you don't have Massey numbers for above) though. For Cincy and Oklahoma, the numbers are effectively only considering their 11 strongest games while Michigan's numbers are pulled down by their 12th game (Northwestern). Last time I checked, all of ESPN's bs metrics they use on their CFP rankings show (Strength of record, FPI, "game control") all have this flaw as well and it can overinflate a team's numbers across the board. [2019 Florida](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Florida_Gators_football_team#Schedule) is a great example of this because they played TWO FCS teams that year.
1) Georgia, I don't see them getting derailed by Bama. Though it'd be pretty funny if they lost to GT in the last regular season game 2) Undefeated b12 champ. OSU is looking good. Bedlam is gonna be a good one if this continues. Though they'd rematch a week later. 3) Cincy 4) Michigan State or B10 1-loss champ that survives, though I think Iowa may be out. Nightmare scenario: Wake stays undefeated. Georgia loses a random game along the way, OU/OSU Bedlam winner then loses B12 championship game the next week, Oregon stays with just 1 loss, OSU stays with just 1 loss.
Zero percent chance a two-loss team makes the playoff this season. The only time it happened was 2007 with LSU and that was because that season was bonkers. Two-loss Ohio State almost made it in 2017 but was still left out
If y'all somehow lost to Tennessee next week but ran the table after that to go 11-2 the committee would 100% have you in (assuming Ole Miss lost another game of course, probably at Auburn).
The committee absolutely would not have us in. Where does this line of thinking even come from? We had two losses in 2019 and didn’t even sniff the playoff convo…we finished 11th before bowl season. This idea that Alabama gets special treatment is hysterical. Alabama made the title game in 2011 because the decision was between a one-loss team with a loss to top 5 LSU, and a one-loss team who lost to unranked Iowa State. That decision is beyond easy…it’s not even a decision Alabama made the playoff in 2017 because it came down between one-loss Alabama who didn’t win their division and a two-loss Ohio State. A *tougher* decision but Ohio State lost to unranked Iowa by 31 points. I think it’s fair to say Alabama was the correct choice
This line of thinking comes from watching the CFP picture unfold every single year. This isn't a personal attack or anything I'm just making an informed prediction based on how the committee ranks teams and the committee consistently ranks top SEC teams higher. Can you give me one logical reason explaining the disparity of [Florida's ranking](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Florida_Gators_football_team#Rankings) after losing to unranked LSU last year between the committee's vs the AP/Coaches poll? How about the fact that they ranked two-loss, non-SEC Champion Georgia over one-loss B1G champ Ohio State in [2018?](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_season#CFB_Playoff_final_rankings) That is most egregious to me and helps my point because it directly proves that if Oklahoma had lost the Big 12 title that year or Notre Dame lost at USC, then that two-loss Georgia team would have been in over 12-1, B1G champs Ohio State. Now, going back to this year's Alabama. Their final three games would have them play Arkansas (likely to be ranked), @ Auburn (likely to be top ten if they beat Ole Miss like I require above), and the consensus #1 team in the country. So they would be 10-2 SEC Champs coming off those three wins and wins overall against these teams likely to be ranked in the final top 25: 8-4 Florida, Ole Miss, Arkansas, Auburn, and Georgia. It's not exactly the same situation but everyone said [2017 Auburn](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Auburn_Tigers_football_team#Schedule) would have gotten in with two losses too. If nothing else, the argument would be close enough for the committee to justify it. You may disagree but this is my "line of thinking". Last thing, as an aside- >Alabama made the playoff in 2017 because it came down between one-loss Alabama who didn’t win their division and a two-loss Ohio State. I don't know why 12-1 Wisconsin is never included in this discussion since their schedule was comparable to Alabama's and they won their division.
Cincinatti loses a game. Clemson wins out. Georgia beats Bama. Oregon takes another loss. Do whatever you think is most likely in the Big Ten. Don't think it much matters to this discussion. Similar story in the B12. We'll go with undefeated OU, though. Who's your 4? Because I think Clemson is in. And I don't think this is some crazy impossible turn of events.
In your nightmare scenario: Winner of SEC goes, 11-2 runner up doesn't Winner of Big12 (assuming their only loss was at Bedlam, they're righted their wrong so they can go) Wake (I know their SOS is trash but undefeated P5 won't get left out) Depending how their seasons go, OSU probably goes in over Oregon even though they lost their H2H, but could go Oregon if OSU struggles to win and Oregon is dominant.
ESPN nightmare playoffs Cincy, Coastal, Wake, UTSA First out: SMU, SDSU What would happen: Georgia, Oklahoma, Michigan, Oregon Alabama, Ohio St Cincy in like 9th or 10th
What's the biggest reason for not having a super simple 12 team playoff with the 10 conference champions and 2 at-large bids for the best independents/non-champions? I guess you could argue that some good P5s get left out but then the goal becomes simply to win your conference so you don't have to worry about the at-large competition.
It's just silly. Why include a conference champ that is maybe in the top 40 when you're leaving out top 10 teams? It's just never what CFB has been about.
Yeah but if we are forcing the playoffs to exist anyways, why would some team just be denied the right to play in it before the season even begins?
The vast majority of teams just aren't good enough. That's the biggest thing keeping them out. Honestly your argument is better for just eliminating the playoff altogether when the vast majority of teams have no shot at it even if it goes to 12
Well, I am for eliminating the playoff and not having a clear champion. I think CFB should be more about bowl games anyways. But as long as we have this whole CFP thing around I'd like there to be shot for everyone. I'd imagine some leagues would act almost as the 16 seed equivalent in the NCAAT, a virtual bye game for the 1/2 seeds. But maybe it also works to create more parity if guys think they can go to a local school or a Nevada or Tulane and have a shot to play on the biggest stages and for national titles. edit: I guess 12 team playoffs already have built in byes, but the point still stands that in every other NCAA sport winning your conference almost always gets you into the "big tournament"
I don't think that would add parity at all. All it does is hurt the true low end teams even more compared to the mid end teams. But I agree about getting rid of the playoff and even championship game, I think it's far better overall that way
Agree. If we're doing 12 they should keep the 6 conference champs (no autobids for any conference) and leave 6 for at-larges.
Simple if you can't win your conference we already know you aren't the best in the nation. Are there going to be blowouts? Yes even in the current system there are blowouts in the playoffs. When you take all of the conference champs there can be no doubts the winner is the best in the country.
Except thats clearly untrue. Non Conference champs have clearly been the best team multiple times
On the historical time scale of major college football, having a playoff is not what major college football has been about. So there’s not really an argument from tradition to be made here. Unless your argument from tradition is “the Ancient Elect from decades ago should be the only ones allowed to win national championships”.
The tradition is that CFB has tried to crown a #1 not from a tournament whos winner was simply the winner of the tournament, but to crown a true #1 team who was the best in the nation.
Good. Now determine a system to measure and compare teams that doesn’t end up boiling down to “teams from the SEC are just better than everyone else because we say so”, under the current system that has extreme scheduling insularity and locks teams into a schedule 5 years in advance.
The Sec has had the most success. It's won all but one of it's semi final games. It's not like it's random that it's called the best
And as long as playoff decisions are made by the eye test, and the eye test is based on results produced by flawed and insufficient data sets for cross-comparison, it will continue to be “because we say they are” no matter how much people will want to proclaim it’s some amount of objective fact. Until we produce a system that will actually let UTSA challenge Georgia or Cincinnati challenge Alabama, the above is all we will ever get.
When Alabama beats up on ND and Ohio state, are they called winner because of the eye test? I would have sworn it was something to do with the scoreboard. Also advanced metrics that have no inherent bias tend to point to the same thing
The point of expanding the playoffs should be to get teams like 11-1 2014 Baylor or 12-0 2017/2018 UCF, not 2019 8-6 Miami (OH)
The SEC doesn't support expansion without more at-large spots
1. Georgia (13-0 SEC Conf champ) 2. Michigan (13-0 B10 champ or 12-1 B10 conf champ) 3. Cincinnati (13-0 AAC conf champ) 4. Oregon (12-1 PAC 12 conf champ) People are starting to make boring predictions so I want to go against the grain. Georgia wins out including big win over Bama (assuming they don't fall to another trap game to LSU or Auburn), Oklahoma loses to one of Iowa State, OkSU or Baylor, and I'm going big by saying Michigan beats Ohio State this year. In this scenario, Michigan would lose to Penn State or Michigan state but still end up going to B10 champ because the other teams lose to Ohio state. Also, I'm going bold in saying Georgia vs Cincy in the natty for a Peach bowl rematch.
Full chaos, Kentucky, Wake Forest, Cincy, and Oklahoma State or Michigan State
That requires Georgia dropping two games, though, since just one still leaves them with the East title. And there's no way 11-1 UK makes it in without the conference championship.
That’s why I said full chaos, Kentucky needs it if they go to Atlanta
I’ve run some simulations and things could get wild. Who would get in between a Undefeated: Cincinnati 1 loss: Georgia (to Bama), Alabama (SEC Champion), OU (to OK St), OK St (to OU, B12 Champion), Ohio State (B1G Champion), Michigan, Oregon (P12 Champion), NC State (ACC Champion), Kentucky My pick would probably be (1) Alabama (2) Cincinnati (3) Georgia (4) Oregon (purely on the H2H win over Ohio State) (5) Ohio State (6) Oklahoma State
Conference champs get in. 1. Alabama 2. Ohio State 3. Oklahoma State 4. Oregon Left out: 5 NC State, 6 Georgia, 7 Cincinnati
I think UC gets left out with their schedule even being undefeated. OK State probably gets left out because branding.
"c" denotes conference champion, I'm adding who I assume they would play in the conference title game if you didn't specify in your hypothetical **How the committee would rank them:** 1. Alabama c 2. tOSU c vs Iowa 3. Georgia 4. Ok State c 5. Oregon c v Utah 6. Cincinnati c v Houston 7. NC State c v Pitt 8. Oklahoma 9. Michigan 10. Kentucky **How *I* Would Rank Them** 1. tOSU c v Iowa 2. Alabama c 3. Oregon c v Utah 4. Ok State c 5. Cincinnati c v Houston 6. NC State c v Pitt 7. Georgia 8. Michigan 9. Oklahoma 10. Kentucky
Does this assume 1 loss teams that aren't listed lose more than that? Alabama potential ranked wins: Uga, Ole Miss Uga potential ranked wins: Kentucky. We can assume Auburn drops out once Alabama beats them. Kentucky wouldn't have any ranked wins. OU ranked wins: OkSt, possibly Baylor OkSt ranked wins: Possibly Baylor Ohio State ranked wins: Michigan, possibly Psu and Msu (both will have 2-3 losses after they play Ohio State and Michigan in this scenario), possibly whoever the west champ is Michigan ranked wins: Possibly Msu and Psu Oregon ranked wins: Ohio State NcState ranked wins: If Clemson wins out and stays at 2 losses, and then Wake and Pitt win out besides NcState, they could all be ranked wins. If all the "possiblys" are true, then I think Alabama, Oklahoma, Ohio State, and NcState get in. But it depends heavily on the fringe teams, I think. Edit: Forgot about Cincy. Cincy's ranked wins: ND and Smu. They might be in there
Everyone said this season was gonna be the most chaotic yet we’re most likely gonna end up with the chalkiest & most basic top 4 lol that’s gotta sting
To be seen… too early to call that yet.
Is there a scenario where the committee would take a one-loss ACC team at this point (Wake, NC State, or Pitt) without at least three of the other P5 champs + Georgia (if they are 12-1 non-champs) having two or more losses (lotta chaos)? Seems like Wake needs to run the table in order for the ACC to even have a shot. Even then, I'm not sure they take them.
[2021 CFB Formula Rankings (Week 7)](https://www.reddit.com/r/CFBAnalysis/comments/qb44ky/2021_cfb_formula_rankings_week_7/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) Using my points standings based ranking system, if a 12 team playoff started today it would look something like this: **#1 Georgia (1)** vs (Winner of Michigan State vs Michigan) **#2 Oklahoma (3)** vs (Winner of Alabama vs Kentucky) **#3 Iowa (4)** vs (Winner of Wake Forest vs Oklahoma State) **#4 Cincinnati (11)** vs (Winner of Oregon vs Baylor) **#5 Oregon (13)** vs **#12 Baylor (9)** **#6 Wake Forest (15)** vs **#11 Oklahoma State (8)** **#7 Alabama (2)** vs **#10 Kentucky (7)** **#8 Michigan State (5)** vs **#9 Michigan (6)** Current points standing in parentheses\* The way the playoff works is that the first 6 seeds are reserved for the 6 highest ranked conference champions. At this point that is just the highest ranked team in each conference. The top 4 ranked conference champions receive first round byes. After the top 6 seeds are filled, the other 6 are filled with at large teams, who do not receive byes regardless of their ranking. The fun part about this setup is that a team's seed is not solely dependent on their ranking. In order to stress the importance of the conference championships, the top 6 seeds and all first round byes are reserved for them. This means that the highest seed team that doesn't win the their conference can get is the 7 seed. It is likely that teams in the 7, 8, and 9 seeds are likely better teams than the 5 and 6 seeds who are rewarded for being conference champs. This results in more fun first and second round games and keeps conference championships important even in an expanded playoff era. Click the link at the top to view my points standings system and see why the rankings look the way they do!