2018 Playoff Rankings

[TyphonInc]

as a fan, I'd like to see and advantage for playing a stronger schedule and an advantage for being a conference champion

the committee doesn't agree

+1

[FearlessF]

i'm not sold that the rankings we see are the same order if ou lost the bigxiiccg. i think there's a better than 50% chance they put osu in over uga for 2 reasons.

I certainly hope you would be right about this.
But, they chose to not send this message even-though it meant nothing.  Were they motivated to appease the SEC base or did they simply want to annoy the Big Ten and fans like me? 

[Kris60]

i'm not sold that the rankings we see are the same order if ou lost the bigxiiccg. i think there's a better than 50% chance they put osu in over uga for 2 reasons.

1 - they'd be under a tremendous amount of pressure to do so (imo it'd be the right call fwiw)
2 - otherwise they have to put a rematch of bama/uga for rd 1. and i don't think they'd do that. it'd have been easier to have bama #2 and uga #4, but they'd have to come up with some excuse to move bama down, and i don't think they had it.

this year, the committee had it easy. had 3 p5 undefeated teams, so that's easy. osu had a massive wart, uga had 2 losses and if in would be in a rematch (not ideal), and ou had just gotten redemption for against the team responsible for their lone loss (which was a 3 point loss where they had -3 turnover ratio), so they technically beat every team on their schedule. it gave them an easy road with minimal controversy.

I totally agree with this.  I don’t think for a second UGA would have gotten the nod over Ohio St if it came down to that.

[rolltidefan]

I certainly hope you would be right about this.
But, they chose to not send this message even-though it meant nothing.  Were they motivated to appease the SEC base or did they simply want to annoy the Big Ten and fans like me?

i think it let them give their honest opinion without much cause for controversy. this will be forgotten in a month and will go down in history as one of the clean, no-issues seasons when picking 4 was relatively easy. 16 and 17 will be talked about for years as examples of conf champs getting snubbed. i think it had 0 motivation to appease sec/annoy the b1g.
and it's not an unfounded opinion that uga is better than osu. it's not necessarily one i buy into, but there's a decent argument to be made. but i also find it difficult to believe they'd have actually gone through with it given the circumstances i listed in this thread before.

[Cincydawg]

I think UGA and OSU and OU are close enough, Michigan as well, that if they played each other 100 times, somebody might win 55 or so.

This is a case, I think where "the best team" is not the same as "the best team for the playoff".  OU in my view is the latter.

[Honestbuckeye]

I totally agree with this.  I don’t think for a second UGA would have gotten the nod over Ohio St if it came down to that.

Totally agree with both of you.  They got it right, and it was not controversial, plus, we will never know for sure but if Oklahoma would have lost Saturday I am 100% confident OSU would have got in.
This is actually the first time a 1 loss Conference Champ that won their CCG was kept out. But we always knew it would happen.  With 5 power conferences and independents (namely ND)- and with Two of your conferences champs, plus ND being undefeated, it leave two conferences out. The PAC didn’t have a legitimate contender, and the Big 12 had a slight,but clearly better case.  

[FearlessF]

so, then another way the Committee tells us one thing and then doesn't something else.

The committee thinks the Dawgs are a better team than the Bucks, but if it was for the 4th spot and not the 5th they would have voted differently?

great, that's my point.  Why not vote the Bucks over the Dawgs if that's the way they would have done it if it really mattered?  Just to mess with us all?

Just to stir the pot?

I just think it was an opportunity to tell the nation & SEC,  that a non-champ with a weak 4-team non con schedule does not get rewarded.

[rolltidefan]

maybe they're telling us not to lose by 30 to .500 teams?

[Cincydawg]

One thing does seem obvious now, had UGA hung on to defeat Bama ......

[Kris60]

so, then another way the Committee tells us one thing and then doesn't something else.

The committee thinks the Dawgs are a better team than the Bucks, but if it was for the 4th spot and not the 5th they would have voted differently?

great, that's my point.  Why not vote the Bucks over the Dawgs if that's the way they would have done it if it really mattered?  Just to mess with us all?

Just to stir the pot?

I just think it was an opportunity to tell the nation & SEC,  that a non-champ with a weak 4-team non con schedule does not get rewarded.

I’m not sure I know the answer to that. This is the second time the committee has put a buffer between two teams I felt posed a tough decision for them.
They did the same thing putting Washington between Ohio St and Penn St. To this day I never believed that was a Washington/Penn St debate. I’ll always believe that was a PSU/OSU debate but they stick UW in the middle there to make it seem like it wasn’t even that hard a decision.
I almost felt like UGA at 5 was the same thing.  I don’t know.  I may be way off base but in both instances in order to make it seem less difficult than it was they put a team in between two teams they were debating to make it seem like, “You guys thought those teams were close?  Hmm, we didn’t. It wasn’t even that hard.”

[medinabuckeye1]

This dis-respect for Big Ten conference champions all started when the Big Ten did not stick up for PSU in 2016.

They should have insisted back then, if our champion does not get in, then nobody from our conference gets in.  Which I know would be tricky in some years when an 8-4 team upsets a 12-0 team in the CCG, but so be it, how often does that happen anyway?

This is flat out ridiculous.  Penn State had a loss to an unranked team and got absolutely drilled by Michigan.  Ohio State had only one loss, on the road, to a very good team.  They were not remotely comparable.  
FWIW, @Anonymous Coward 's comment upthread that PSU was not even the second best B1G team that year is spot on.  Ohio State was the best by a hair over Michigan and Penn State was a fairly distant third.  
HFA is a real thing.  Penn State would not have lost to Michigan by more than five TD's at home.  Then again, they wouldn't have won in Columbus.  

[medinabuckeye1]

I’m not sure I know the answer to that. This is the second time the committee has put a buffer between two teams I felt posed a tough decision for them.
They did the same thing putting Washington between Ohio St and Penn St. To this day I never believed that was a Washington/Penn St debate. I’ll always believe that was a PSU/OSU debate but they stick UW in the middle there to make it seem like it wasn’t even that hard a decision.
I almost felt like UGA at 5 was the same thing.  I don’t know.  I may be way off base but in both instances in order to make it seem less difficult than it was they put a team in between two teams they were debating to make it seem like, “You guys thought those teams were close?  Hmm, we didn’t. It wasn’t even that hard.”

You are not the only one who wondered about that.  That crossed my mind after 2016 and I think they may have done it again this year.  
If they had ranked (2016) tOSU #4 and PSU #5 the wailing and gnashing of teeth would have been even worse.  
This year I think they had a lot less reason to do it.  In this case I think it was pretty clear that OU had the better argument.  Their loss was better and they avenged it.  Ohio State had a better "best" win but overall the wins were close.  As an Ohio State fan, I wish my team had made it but I feel like I have no right to complain when my team lost by nearly 30 points to an unranked team.  I've always pointed out PSU's bad loss to M in 2016 and I'm consistent here.  Ohio State had a similar loss this year (less points but worse opponent).  

[FearlessF]

maybe they're telling us not to lose by 30 to .500 teams?

valid point

[Brutus Buckeye]

Clemson lost to a 4-8 Syracuse team last year, and got in.