Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Yeah, UGA will likely start 2024 ranked #1, and almost certainly will make the 12 team scheme.  The four teams selected were conference champions, UGA and OSU weren't.  FSU has a better technical beef.  

UGA has some tough road games next year though they are favored in each so far, Texas, Bama, Ole Miss.  I'd guess they lose at least one of those, two is very possible as well.  They start with Clemson in ATL.  That said, UGA has a lot coming back of note, which of course doesn't mean they are likely to win an NC.

There is no perfect system, and I find it far easier to criticize rankings or whatever than propose my own.

Yeah, UGA will likely start 2024 ranked #1, and almost certainly will make the 12 team scheme.  The four teams selected were conference champions, UGA and OSU weren't.  FSU has a better technical beef. 

UGA has some tough road games next year though they are favored in each so far, Texas, Bama, Ole Miss.  I'd guess they lose at least one of those, two is very possible as well.  They start with Clemson in ATL.  That said, UGA has a lot coming back of note, which of course doesn't mean they are likely to win an NC.

There is no perfect system, and I find it far easier to criticize rankings or whatever than propose my own.

BEFORE THE SEASON BEGINS, Georgia knows for a fact that it can lose twice and still comfortably make the playoff.
That's a problem.

It's the 7 year-old method of ranking teams.  And no, it's not about eye test, it's about resume beyond the L column.

If say Penn State had a better resume than Liberty (they did), then the 1-loss season is not automatically better than the 2-loss season.  

The Big XII was pretty shitty in 2022.  Not taken into account.  TCU had 5 close calls.  Not taken into account.  Didn't even drop behind OSU.  There is no sound argument for that.  


Just have a 2nd-grade class do it.  The committee is embarrassing, and not for leaving out FSU.

I'm sure there were some on the committee arguing for X over Y.  The point is, the argument clearly isn't compelling, and there are arguments for Y over X, every time.

Maybe a group of 10 of us here would have made different choices, OK fine, that doesn't mean we'd be "right" (whatever that means).

It's like a SCOTUS decision, I might have preferred another option, but my opinion doesn't matter in the real world.  And just saying the committee concept is wrong doesn't really add anything without suggesting another alternative.

The problem is Alabama lost twice in the regular season, compared to zero for TCU, and they had a game in common where TCU outperformed them. Their biggest argument was their schedule was marginally more difficult, but it wasn't much of an argument. They weren't particularly impressive in their other games, either. Bama was easily the best other team available, and they weren't particularly good  for "Alabama'. So the the arguments against TCU were pretty weak, which was why they made the field.

Alabama not being particularly good is utter nonsense.  4 points away from 12-0.  Bryce Young.  Will Anderson.  You love you some force-fed narrative, don't you?

But why treat the final ranking differently than one in October?  No team who loses to another team far below them in the polls simply stays put at their same ranking at any other time of the season.  TCU would have obviously dropped, probably 5-6 spots, if they had lost to KSU in their first meeting.

It's about inconsistency and special pleading.  It's a joke.  If they're incapable of nuance and slaves to the loss column, honestly, let kids do it.

Again, sure, but in October there were a million teams that could have jumped them. Not so by the end of the season. There is no magic rule where losing a game means you must drop below every other team no matter what their records and common sense would tell you.

I'm personally not really bothered by the committee's decisions.  Maybe I'd have chosen differently, so what?  It's not at all clear to me that they were wrong, ever.  It's arguable, sure, but to what end?

And we still have them with the 12 gamer.  And we'll still have controversy and disagreement with their choices and seedings.  If you just took the teams ranked 1-12 in the AP, you'd have the same issues (plus others).