Post Your Top 10

[Anonymous Coward]

(...) and Bama (in that order).  Why?  Because I think on a neutral field, Bama would probably beat Michigan (it'd probably be closer than a lot of people think, but the Tide would certainly be favored).

But that's not one of their stated criteria. When teams are that close, they claim to break the tie by looking at four criteria:

• Conference championships won
• Strength of schedule
• Head-to-head result (if it occurred)
• Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incentivizing margin of victory)

And Michigan would beat Bama in the conference championship and SOS comparisons.

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the same reason the ND-M comparison is so hard right now (when they seem equal and must use the tie breakers) but may become easy peasie if ND loses and they no longer require these tie breakers to rank Michigan.

[ELA]

Until proven otherwise, I think they'll simply rank them

• Undefeated
• 1 loss conference champs
• 1 loss non-champs
• 2 loss conference champs

They only analysis goes into distinguishing teams within those tiers.  I also think if there aren't 4 teams that fit into that, things will start to get interesting.  Is that when a Group of 5 team sneaks in?  I still suspect not, considering UCF is still well behind a 2 loss LSU, and only 1 spot ahead of a 2 loss Syracuse, that doesn't really have an outstanding resume.  I think last year UCF was behind 4 two loss non-champs?

[Kris60]

Until proven otherwise, I think they'll simply rank them

• Undefeated
• 1 loss conference champs
• 1 loss non-champs
• 2 loss conference champs

They only analysis goes into distinguishing teams within those tiers.  I also think if there aren't 4 teams that fit into that, things will start to get interesting.  Is that when a Group of 5 team sneaks in?  I still suspect not, considering UCF is still well behind a 2 loss LSU, and only 1 spot ahead of a 2 loss Syracuse, that doesn't really have an outstanding resume.  I think last year UCF was behind 4 two loss non-champs?

If Auburn would have beaten UGA last year you don’t think they would have been ahead of 1 loss non-champ Wisconsin?

[Mdot21]

if Michigan finishes 12-1 and wins the B1G and then Bama loses in the SEC CG- Bama should be out. 

If people are going to say that Michigan lost a playoff game to ND early in the season- then what the hell would Bama have just lost in the SEC CG? A playoff game at the end of the season.

Let me see- losing to an out of conference team in the opening game of the season, on the road, at night vs a playoff team (should ND win out) by 1 score SHOULD trump Bama losing on a neutral field to a conference foe.

I think it's really a moot point anyways, because I'm not 100% sure that Michigan beats OSU and I am almost 100% sure that Alabama is going to destroy Georgia.

[SFBadger96]

I rank Michigan over Notre Dame because I like Michigan and don't like Notre Dame.

Similarly, I'd rank OU at #127.

I like this kind of honesty.

[ELA]

If Auburn would have beaten UGA last year you don’t think they would have been ahead of 1 loss non-champ Wisconsin?

I don't know, that's interesting.  I do think they are going to avoid 2 loss teams if at all possible.  The thing that muddies the water there is a 2 loss Big Ten champ Ohio State, which just beat Wisconsin.  They could use the TCU/Baylor argument to knock them both out and just roll with Auburn, like they did with Ohio State.

[Cincydawg]

Auburn would have been in last year with two losses.  The losses were "acceptable" and they would have had three wins over top ten teams offsetting that.

Wisconsin would have been in the discussion at 12-1, but their 12 wins lacked anything notable.

[rolltidefan]

I think you're right but I'm also a fan, so that's nothing. Instead, I'll say that both of us would be sweating it out. It'd be close.

you'd be sweating it out, but i'd be going in expecting to be left out. i'd be pleasantly and confusingly surprised if it was bama. last year i thought we had a legit argument, this scenario i wouldn't.
having said that, if i can screw over the b1g and mich to get bama in, deserving or not, i would love. 

[Kris60]

I don't know, that's interesting.  I do think they are going to avoid 2 loss teams if at all possible.  The thing that muddies the water there is a 2 loss Big Ten champ Ohio State, which just beat Wisconsin.  They could use the TCU/Baylor argument to knock them both out and just roll with Auburn, like they did with Ohio State.

Going into the CCG last year a two loss Auburn was ranked #2 in the country while an undefeated Wisconsin was #4.  The committee was all in on Auburn.  They weren’t trying to avoid putting them in there.  They would have definitely been in there over a one loss Wisconsin and, if Miami has beaten Pitt, a one loss Miami.

[Kris60]

Through games played on Nov. 17

1. Bama
2. Clemson
3. ND
4. Michigan
5. UGA
6. OU
7. Wazzu
8. Ohio St
9. UCF
10. LSU
11. WVU
12. Texas
13. Penn St
14. Washington
15. Kentucky
16. Utah
17. Florida
18. Mississippi St
19. Texas A&M
20. Duke
21. Northwestern
22. Iowa
23. Boise St
24. Pitt
25. Oregon

[FearlessF]

1. Alabama
2. Clemson
3. Notre Dame
4. Michigan
5. Georgia
6. Washington State
7. Oklahoma
8. LSU
9. UCF
10. Ohio State

[OrangeAfroMan]

I'm sick and tired of the limitations of the poll voters.  No, their polls don't matter, but it's a larger point.
WV loses yesterday, they drop in the polls.  Fine.  They fall right behind Texas in both polls.  Their win over the Horns 2 weeks ago is rendered meaningless.  
WV has one fewer loss than Texas, but the idiotic voters are slaves to WHEN you lose, still.  Why did WV and Texas bother playing their game????  Why have the last-second win?  Why go for two?  Two weeks later it's thrown out the window.  

[FearlessF]

well, at least they weren't lazy and simply put WV ahead of Texas because they have one fewer loss