CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: medinabuckeye1 on November 10, 2021, 12:45:48 PM
-
- 9-0 Georgia
- 8-1 Bama, lost to #11 aTm
- 8-1 Oregon, lost to 3-6 Stanford
- 8-1 Ohio State, lost to #3 Oregon
- 9-0 Cincy, LoL
- 8-1 Michigan, lost to #7 MSU
- 8-1 Michigan State, lost to #19 PU
- 9-0 Oklahoma
- 8-1 Notre Dame, lost to #5 Cincy
- 8-1 Oklahoma State, lost to 6-3 ISU
- 7-2 Texas A&M
- 8-1 Wake Forest, lost to 5-4 UNC in a non-league game
- 7-2 Baylor
- 8-2 BYU
- 7-2 Ole Miss
- 7-2 NCST
- 6-3 Auburn
- 6-3 Wisconsin
- 6-3 Purdue
- 7-2 Iowa
- 7-2 Pitt
- 8-1 SDSU, lost to 7-3 FresnoSt
- 9-0 UTSA
- 6-3 Utah
- 6-3 Arkansas
-
If Georgia and Bama win out, they both get in no matter who wins the SECCG.
-
Bama with 2 losses drops out if Oregon, Ohio St, and Oklahomo win out
-
As I see it the following teams control their own destiny:
- #1 Georgia: If the Dawgs win out and finish 13-0 they are obviously in. They would also definitely be in as 12-1 SEC Champions and probably also as 12-1 non-Champions.
- #2 Bama: 12-1 SEC Champs gets them in.
- #7 Michigan State: 12-1 B1G Champs gets them in because they'd leap-frog M, Cincy, tOSU, and Oregon while possibly getting passed by Oklahoma.
- #8 Oklahoma: The sooners are all the way down at #8 because they've had multiple unimpressive wins but their next three games are @#13 Baylor, vs 6-3 ISU, @#10 OkSU and after that they'd get another highly ranked opponent in the B12CG. If they get to 13-0, they are in.
What the others need:
- #3 Oregon: They need to win out and hope that either tOSU or a team with at least two losses wins the B1G. Oregon has two major weaknesses relative to the other contenders. One is that their loss is BAD. The other is that they are REALLY light on quality wins. They can't afford for their signature win to take many hits. Also, a 12-1 P12 Champion Oregon would almost certainly be behind any 12-1 B1G Champion not named Ohio State (M or MSU) but they might get in ahead of a 12-1 B1G Champion Ohio State on the strength of the H2H win. Even there it is no guarantee because tOSU's loss is obviously VASTLY better and while Oregon's signature win would obviously be better than anything Ohio State could point to, a 12-1 Ohio State would have a LOT more volume of quality wins.
- #4 Ohio State: The Buckeyes need a loss by either Oklahoma or Oregon. Barring that they could find themselves left out behind Georgia, Bama (if both finish 12-1), Oregon, and Oklahoma. It would be a close and controversial decision between Oregon and Ohio State for the #4 spot. The usual argument between the "H2H uber alles" faction and the "13 games are 13 data-points" factions. If you look at H2H as irrebuttable then obviously Oregon goes. If you look at the seasons as a whole, a 12-1 tOSU is plainly better than a 12-1 Oregon.
- #5 Cincy: Chaos. The Bearcats schedule is complete crap and to make it worse they haven't even consistently dominated their weak opponents. In the last three weeks they have one-score wins over sub .500 Navy and Tulsa and they only led a terrible (1-8) Tulane team by two points at halftime. This clearly does not look like the resume of a legitimate contender. Obviously finishing strong would help but it will not be enough. They'll also need a slew of losses because they obviously will not be taken ahead of any undefeated or 1-loss P5 Champs (maybe Wake, I doubt it) and they might not even get in over some potential 2-loss P5 Champs.
- #6 Michigan: IMHO, the Wolverines control their own destiny IF MSU loses a game. They would be VERY unlikely to get in as an 11-1 non-Champion but they'd be a lock as a 12-1 B1G Champion because that resume would be better than Oregon's so worst case scenario they'd be #4 behind the two SEC teams and Oklahoma.
- #9 Notre Dame: The Cincinnati loss hurts them every which way. As long as Cincy remains undefeated it is unlikely that the Irish could get in ahead of them so they REALLY need Cincy to lose and maybe twice. At the same time, Cincy can't lose to a quality opponent so any additional losses by Cincy would make Notre Dame's loss to them look bad in comparison to other contenders such as Bama, tOSU, M. They also lack a "signature" win so it would REALLY help them if Wisconsin, Purdue, and UNC all finish strong.
- #10 OkSU: The Cowboys aren't THAT far out. Winning out would probably require beating #8 Oklahoma twice. That would get them ahead of ND, Oklahoma, and two of the three B1G teams in front of them but they still could end up arguing with Oregon over who should be #4 behind the two SEC teams and the B1G Champion.
- #11 aTm: The Aggies have no plausible shot as a 2-loss non-Champion so they need to win out and they need Bama to lose to either Arkansas or Auburn, then they need to take down #1 Georgia in the SECCG. If all of that happened they'd be an 11-2 SEC Champion owning two of the best wins of the season (Bama, UGA). The only problem is that they'd still be carrying those two losses to middling SEC teams (6-3 Arkansas and 5-4 MsSt). They'd end up with better wins and worse losses than their contenders and who knows how that would turn out. My hunch is that they'd get in but they'd definitely be sweating out the selection.
- #12 Wake: Chaos. They are in a similar situation to Cincy.
IMHO nobody outside the current top-12 has a plausible shot. In theory it could happen but it would require a slew of unlikely upsets.
-
If Georgia and Bama win out, they both get in no matter who wins the SECCG.
Depends who else is there.
The secret to these weekly rankings: they mean nary a thing.
-
Bama with 2 losses drops out if Oregon, Ohio St, and Oklahomo win out
Nah, they drop down to 4.
The messaging is obvious.
-
If Georgia and Bama win out, they both get in no matter who wins the SECCG.
I agree with @FearlessF (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=10) :
Bama with 2 losses drops out if Oregon, Ohio St, and Oklahomo win out
They both make it if Georgia hits the SECCG undefeated and Bama wins the SECCG to finish as 12-1 SEC Champs. In that case:
- 12-1 SEC Champion Bama is obviously in because the only potential team that would even have an argument to be ahead of them would be a 13-0 Oklahoma.
- 12-1 non-Champion Georgia would almost certainly be behind a 13-0 Oklahoma and they *MIGHT* be behind 12-1 Ohio State, Michigan, or Michigan State but obviously only one of those could happen and that would still get them #4.
-
Nah, they drop down to 4.
The messaging is obvious.
Yeah, you gotta read between the lines. The Illuminati and like such as.
-
Nah, they drop down to 4.
The messaging is obvious.
oh the powers that be would LOVE to keep Bama at #4, but leaving out a one loss Ohio St. Big Ten champ or a one loss PAC champ or an undefeated Big 12 champ would cause too much trouble
now if Michigan state is the one loss Big champ, all bets are off
-
Only time will tell, I suppose.
But let's not behave as though it would be far fetched to only drop Bama to 4 if they win out and then lose a close SECCG.
-
Bama with 2 losses drops out if Oregon, Ohio St, and Oklahoma win out
Gonna be a tough call if BAMA wins the CCG between the last 3
-
Might only drop down to 3, in order to avoid a semifinal rematch.
-
Bama and the committee don't need to worry yet.
Having Ohio St, Oklahoma, and Oregon win out is unlikely
-
For better or worse the precedent set by the committee is that the #1 criteria is "number of losses". The only exceptions have been cases in which SoS was an EXTREME outlier.
Bama's SoS simply wouldn't be an extreme outlier if it would even be #1.
Take the example implied by @FearlessF (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=10) :
- Georgia wins out, finishes 13-0 and SEC Champs.
- Bama wins their other games, finishes 11-2 SECCG loser.
- Ohio State wins out, finishes 12-1 and B1G Champs.
- Oklahoma wins out, finishes 13-0 and B12 Champs.
- Oregon wins out, finishes 12-1 and P12 Champs.
- For the sake of this discussion assume that Wake does NOT win out such that the ACC produces a Champion with at least two losses and no serious argument.
I think the first two are obvious. Georgia is the #1 and Oklahoma is the #2. They would both be undefeated P5 Champions. Oklahoma is down in the rankings right now but that is because they've struggled a bit against weaker opponents and because their schedule is seriously back-loaded with their last three regular season games being against the other three B12 contenders. If they get through that AND the B12CG without a loss, they'll easily be in at 13-0.
That leaves:
- 12-1 B1G Champion Ohio State: Best wins are #6 Michigan, #7 Michigan State, #19 Purdue, and (probably) #18 Wisconsin. The loss is a respectable one-score loss to #3 Oregon.
- 12-1 Pac Champion Oregon: Best win is #4 Ohio State followed by #24 Utah (probably twice). Everybody's victims would be expected to drop for losing to them but Oregon is the only one playing theirs twice and thus degrading their own second-best win dramatically. After Utah there isn't much and the loss is to a terrible Stanford team (currently 3-6).
- 11-2 non-Champion Bama: Best wins are #15 Ole Miss, #25 Arkansas, and #17 Auburn. Losses are a close loss to #11 aTm and (per Fearless' example), a close loss to #1 Georgia.
Both Ohio State and Oregon have a better win than Bama's best (#6 Michigan and #7 MSU for tOSU, #4 tOSU for Oregon). Ohio State's loss is also better than Bama's loss to aTm (#3>#11). Additionally, Ohio State has four wins over ranked teams to Bama's three and Ohio State is a P5 Champ where Bama isn't. This really isn't a close call.
Oregon's H2H win over Ohio State is the big monkey-wrench. If you ignored the names (and consequently the H2H) Ohio State would be the obvious choice for #3 and then it would be between Bama and Oregon for #4. That simply comes down to the rather typical dispute between Championships vs losses vs SoS. Oregon has less losses and a Championship but they played a weaker schedule.
It would make no sense to put Bama behind Oregon and ahead of Ohio State so if you feel that Oregon HAS to go ahead of Ohio State due to H2H you are left with two choices:
Either:
- #3 Oregon, plays Oklahoma in a CFP semi-final
- #4 Ohio State, plays Georgia in a CFP semi-final
- #5 Bama, out.
Or:
- #3 Bama, plays Oklahoma in a CFP semi-final
- #4 Oregon, plays Georgia in a CFP semi-final
- #5 Ohio State, out.
The easiest thing to do is to exclude Bama on the basis that they have two losses and aren't a P5 Champion. I do think that in this case the committee would put Ohio State ahead of Oregon simply because they'd want UGA and tOSU on opposite sides of the bracket for a host of reasons.
-
I think they should seed the teams correctly and let the rematches begin
if Georgia beats Bama. and has the most impressive resume by quite a bit, why shouldn't the Dawgs get the perceived 4th seed?
Cincy wants an invite to the big boy table, give 'em a shot at the Dawgs
-
Taken from another message board I frequent, current top 8 in the CFP rankings:
(https://i.imgur.com/bfBk0Wo.png)
-
Sooners win out they'd have to be in
-
sooners sched will get a bump this week playing at 7-2 Baylor, they finish at 8-1 Okie St.
have the birds from Ames at 6-3 in between those games
then of course, a rematch with one of the 3 in the con champ game
-
Sooners win out they'd have to be in
For sure. An undefeated Sooner team is always going to be in.
-
sooners sched will get a bump this week playing at 7-2 Baylor, they finish at 8-1 Okie St.
have the birds from Ames at 6-3 in between those games
then of course, a rematch with one of the 3 in the con champ game
No way they beat OSU2 two weeks in a row.
-
They always beat Oklahoma State. They'd be in more danger if it's one of the other teams.
-
the Cyclones are dangerous to Sooners
-
It is very difficult to beat the same team in back to back weeks.
-
It is very difficult to beat the same team in back to back weeks.
But how much of that is such a situation only occurring between pretty evenly-matched teams? An Ohio State-type team never plays an Eastern Michigan two weeks in a row.
Simple statistics would tell us evenly-matched teams playing twice in a row would most often yield a win for each.
-
Simple statistics would tell us evenly-matched teams playing twice in a row would most often yield a win for each.
A single toss of a coin is an event (also called a trial) that is not connected to or influenced by other events. When a coin is tossed twice, the coin has no memory of whether it came up heads or tails the first time, so the second toss of the coin is independent (http://equiseq.com/learn_probability.php#). The probability of heads on the first toss is 50%, just as it is on all subsequent tosses of the coin.
The two outcomes of the toss of a coin are heads or tails. For any individual toss of the coin, the outcome will be either heads or tails. The two outcomes (heads or tails) are therefore mututally exclusive (http://equiseq.com/learn_probability.php#); if the coin comes up heads on a single toss, it cannot come up tails on the same toss.
There are two useful rules for calculating the probability of events more complicated than a single coin toss.
The first is the Product Rule (http://equiseq.com/learn_probability.php#). This states that the probability of the occurrence of two independent events is the product of their individual probabilities. The probability of getting two heads on two coin tosses is 0.5 x 0.5 or 0.25.
The probability in the second match would also be 50-50 in theory, unaffected by the initial outcome. This isn't true in reality of course. But in theory, there are four possible outcomes, W/W for either team half the time and W/L or L/W half the time. So, half the time one team wins both games. Half is a split.
-
I can't even tell if you're agreeing with me or not. But I'll quote this part:
But in theory, there are four possible outcomes, W/W for either team half the time and W/L or L/W half the time. So, half the time one team wins both games. Half is a split.
You've got it 2-0 for a team and 1 win for each as 50/50 chance here.
Except that when we play a game, it's ideally designed for the better team to win much of the time. So while the old adage "it's hard to beat the same team twice" is probably not bourn out by the facts, it's also undercut that as long as the better team wins more than half the time (given a well-designed game), "a team" should win both games because its better.
Anyway, football games obviously aren't coin flips and despite what 847 insists, peripheral ship matters and comes into play. So with 2 equal teams, I'd expect each to win half the time, whether it's 100 games or 2 (as in adjustments the losing team can make > the winning team guessing what adjustments the losing team will do).
And now I can't tell if I've supported your post or resisted it.
-
Is it odd that OU is penalized for close games vs a weak schedule and Cincinnati maybe isn't? Or is the win over ND the difference there?
-
sooners have their 3 toughest games head of them
just let the season play out
only the final ranking matters
they should probably wait 2 or 3 weeks longer before releasing their rankings
-
Is it odd that OU is penalized for close games vs a weak schedule and Cincinnati maybe isn't? Or is the win over ND the difference there?
It is ridiculous.
Cincinnati is effectively getting the best of both worlds.
Normally when a G5 team barely beats a mediocre P5 like Indiana we basically pat them on the head and say "good job" but if a NC contender like OU struggles with a mediocre P5 we say "What's wrong with that team?"
Cincinnati is getting the best of both worlds in that when they struggle against bad teams it isn't held against them but then for some reason we are still pretending that they are a legitimate contender.
-
Is it odd that OU is penalized for close games vs a weak schedule and Cincinnati maybe isn't? Or is the win over ND the difference there?
Not really. OU has no wins over ranked teams. Cincy has a win over ND. Oregon can be thrown in the same boat - their win over OSU doing a lot of work that covers up the rest of their resume. The other issue is who do you put over Cincy? Oklahoma has no convincing case, at least not yet. Michigan just beat a corpse version of indiana in a performance that wasn't much more impressive than Cincy's. And they are sixth.
-
Bama also edged LSU in a bit of a shocker. Only one team is blowing everyone out, so far, since week one. That could change Saturday.
-
Cincinnati can have whatever they want or the committee wants to give them for a couple more weeks.
Then reality is gonna sit on them hard
-
Cincinnati can have whatever they want or the committee wants to give them for a couple more weeks.
Then reality is gonna sit on them hard
I mean...maybe. For one, Cincy needs to continue to win, which is no easy task despite what people want to say. But if that happens, because of how weak the rest of college football is, there are some very clear paths for Cincy. Oklahoma could win out and get in. They also might not win another game. Iowa State might be the best team in the B12, and they are 6-3. Ohio State may win out and get in, or may limp to a rough finish, and no matter what happens in the East, Wisconsin suddenly looks like a real threat to win the B1G. Oregon could win out and get in, but does anyone want to put up money betting that Oregon is going to win out?
-
oh, Cincy could get in, but they obviously need help from two or three conferences
not only with a few teams dropping, but Cincy could get passed by Okie St., Wake, either of the Michigan schools or even Notre Dame
-
oh, Cincy could get in, but they obviously need help from two or three conferences
not only with a few teams dropping, but Cincy could get passed by Okie St., Wake, either of the Michigan schools or even Notre Dame
A one loss ND team getting in over undefeated Cincy would be hilarious. I would almost want it to happen just to hear the committee try to justify it
-
A one loss ND team getting in over undefeated Cincy would be hilarious. I would almost want it to happen just to hear the committee try to justify it
Not sure how many listen to Andy Staples' podcast, it's very good, but I like his take the most.
Ari Wasserman literally wants the 4 best to the point that he basically argues for just looking at recruiting rankings, and putting the 4 most talented in. Staples is not on the "put the 4 best undefeated in, and if there aren't 4, start filling in with 1 loss teams," but acknowledges you play the games for a reason, and at some point winning games has to matter more than how badly you club overmatched teams when looking at the resume.
Strength of Record would always be my default.
-
I'm pretty sure it would happen
that Golden Dome is pretty shiny
-
recruiting rankings are not scientifically proven
example: Clemson
-
recruiting rankings are not scientifically proven
example: Clemson
I mean, they’re useful tools. They’ll always have variance. Some teams will hit the peaks and valleys. Not to mention records will do the same.
I think they’re good tools, especially in projecting quality. That said, you need some kind of accomplishment. How much credit you want to give in terms of what can be controlled is up to the one giving credit. And the beauty is that for as much as we might argue about a Cincinnati or Oregon, chances are, there won’t be THAT hard of a decision at the end.
(bonus points if someone can name what should’ve been the biggest 4/5 argument of the CFP era, but wasn’t for some reason)
-
good tool for projecting quality, not for assigning the top 4 most quality teams in any given season
-
What I see with the champion teams is an elite QB who makes plays, Joe Burrow being the best example I think.
-
I mean...maybe. For one, Cincy needs to continue to win, which is no easy task despite what people want to say.
This depends. If they are "just a G5 school" then no, their remaining schedule isn't easy. They still have to play SMU and ECU which are two pretty good (for G5 teams) teams then USF which is terrible even by G5 standards.
There are, however, a multitude of problems. For one thing, SMU lost their last two games. A couple weeks ago they were undefeated and ranked #19 but now they are 3-2/7-2 with losses to Houston (not too bad) and Memphis (BAD). Thus, beating SMU isn't going to win them many style points for the simple reason that SMU isn't very good.
Lets look at SMU:
The Mustangs' only game against P5 competition was at TCU. It was a back-and-forth game in which the Mustangs only led by more than one score for about seven minutes in the third quarter and another eight minutes in the fourth. The Mustangs won by one score, 42-34. Ok, so the Mustangs are a bit better than TCU. How good is TCU? Well, they suck. They fired their coach. They are 2-4 in the B12 and 4-5 overall. When TCU played the Sooners who are much maligned for their closer-than-expected wins, the Sooners never trailed and took a two-score lead for good shortly before halftime.
That is the best game left on Cincy's schedule, then there is ECU, lets look at ECU:
The Pirate's only foray against P5 opposition was a home game against USCe. ECU took an early 14-0 lead then got outscored 20-3 the rest of the way and lost 20-17. That is close but how good is USCe? They suck too. They are 2-4/5-4. The two SEC wins were over hapless Vanderbilt and a cratering Florida team.
Cincy's other scheduled game is against USF, lets look at USF:
The Bulls are horrible even by G5 standards. They are currently 1-4/2-7 and the two wins came against an equally bad Temple team (1-4/3-6) and FCS FAMU. The Bulls played two P5 opponents and got drilled both times. They lost 45-0 to NCST and trailed Florida 35-3 at halftime before outscoring UF 17-7 in a meaningless second half to make it look like a respectable loss at 42-20 but it wasn't. As I stated, the Gators led 35-3 at the half.
I used CBS's 1-130 rankings to rank all teams (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/rankings/cbs-sports-ranking/). The three remaining scheduled games for Cincy, tOSU, and Bama are:
- Best remaining opponent: #7 MSU for Ohio State, #17 Auburn for Bama, #31 SMU for Cincy.
- Middle remaining opponent: #8 Michigan for Ohio State, #26 Arkansas for Bama, #77 ECU for Cincy.
- Worst remaining opponent: #28 Purdue for Ohio State, #111 USF for Cincy, #127 NMST for Bama.
Cincy's schedule so far isn't all that much worse than the average P5 but every P5 contender is going to play a VASTLY more difficult slate between now and selection than Cincy. I only listed scheduled games above but the P5's will also have much better opposition in their CG's. You might point to Houston (Cincy's likely CG opponent) and point out that they are ranked ahead of a number of potential and even likely P5 CG participants but the plain fact is that Houston is wildly overrated based on their numerous wins over cupcakes. When they stepped onto the field against a P5 opponent they got drilled 38-21 by Texas Tech. Sure, it was a close game most of the way but Texas Tech is a complete non-factor in the B12 at 2-4/5-4 with a 35 point loss to Texas, a 31 point loss to OU, and a 21 point loss to TCU.
Look, you can't have it both ways. Cincy is one of two things. They are either:
- A legitimate NC contender, or
- A G5 team that is good for the G5 but absolute crap compared to legitimate contenders.
If they are #1 then don't try to tell us that winning on their schedule is "no easy task". If they are a legit NC contender then the ONLY team on their entire schedule all year long that should challenge them AT ALL is Notre Dame.
The fact is that they are not a legitimate NC Contender. They are a G5 team that is pretty good by G5 standards but they aren't even dominating at that level.
These are tOSU's, Bama's, and Cincy's schedules using the aforementioned CBS 1-130 rankings:
(https://i.imgur.com/TCznMzZ.png)
One of these things is not like the others. Can you tell which one?
I'll add one final thing. Cincy's win over ND is a nice win but IMHO, it is a lot easier to pull off a win like that when last weeks' opponent didn't beat you up too badly and you don't realistically have to worry about next weeks' opponent. Cincy's game against ND came after a bye-week and before a god-awful Temple team. Their upcoming game against SMU is sandwiched between a god-awful USF and ECU. Ohio State has an upcoming three-game stretch of #28 PU, #7 MSU, #8 M. Bama had a three-game stretch earlier this year against #40 MsSt, #11 aTm, and #12 Ole Miss. Do you think it just might be a little easier when you can spend an extra week or two game-planning for a game because you don't have to worry about the team before them?
-
recruiting rankings are not scientifically proven
example: Clemson
Can we stop pretending that one exception negates an entire point?!? Aren't we all better than that?
good tool for projecting quality, not for assigning the top 4 most quality teams in any given season
No one is suggesting this, besides Ali Wasserman or whoever. It's stupid. There are thousands of inputs into any given season, so not any one single input is going to magically be the answer/key.
You know what, I want Cincinnati to get in. People keep bitching about it, let's just let them in and watch like the ancient Romans did. The carnage a big-boy program with the NC up for grabs will put on the Bearcats can shut everyone up about it. Their high school schedule, lack of depth, and 2nd-tier everything does, in fact, make them a 2nd-class program. A G5 program.
I'm tired of their putting up a good fight vs motive-less teams in consolation bowls. Put them in front of the train and see if they can stop it.
-
Do you think it just might be a little easier when you can spend an extra week or two game-planning for a game because you don't have to worry about the team before them?
Well, to my point - if it was easy to go undefeated against a G5 schedule, we should see a lot of teams do it. It's not that easy. But the biggest point is that to some degree you are right - P5 teams win all ties because they have a tougher schedule. But at some point we have to acknowledge the reality - playing a tough schedule, by itself, doesn't mean you are a better team, that you deserve more, or whatever else. You have to actually go out and perform and win. OSU has a great chance to get in the playoffs if they win out. If they don't win out...just throw them in anyway because they are Ohio State and played a tougher schedule?
-
The carnage a big-boy program with the NC up for grabs will put on the Bearcats can shut everyone up about it.
LOL.
-
I'd be totally fine with an undefeated Cincinnati getting hammered. Happier than having an SEC runner up win an NC honestly
-
Can we stop pretending that one exception negates an entire point?!? Aren't we all better than that?
I can easily provide many more examples - see the Texas Longhorns
No one is suggesting this, besides Ali Wasserman or whoever. It's stupid. There are thousands of inputs into any given season, so not any one single input is going to magically be the answer/key.
You know what, I want Cincinnati to get in. People keep bitching about it, let's just let them in and watch like the ancient Romans did. The carnage a big-boy program with the NC up for grabs will put on the Bearcats can shut everyone up about it. Their high school schedule, lack of depth, and 2nd-tier everything does, in fact, make them a 2nd-class program. A G5 program.
I'm tired of their putting up a good fight vs motive-less teams in consolation bowls. Put them in front of the train and see if they can stop it.
Thanks for making the same point. It's stupid for suggesting this. I want Cincy to get in as well. They can play Georgia.
-
Well, to my point - if it was easy to go undefeated against a G5 schedule, we should see a lot of teams do it. It's not that easy. But the biggest point is that to some degree you are right - P5 teams win all ties because they have a tougher schedule. But at some point we have to acknowledge the reality - playing a tough schedule, by itself, doesn't mean you are a better team, that you deserve more, or whatever else. You have to actually go out and perform and win. OSU has a great chance to get in the playoffs if they win out. If they don't win out...just throw them in anyway because they are Ohio State and played a tougher schedule?
It's not about ease of going undefeated - that's actually an argument against Cinci. It's only hard to go undefeated against their schedule because they're on the same plane as the programs on their schedule.
Have Ohio St play their schedule. For every simulation the Buckeyes beat ND, they basically automatically go undefeated. Cincinnati can't say that.
-
Yes, a motivated Georgia with no players sitting out for the draft.
For Cincinnati, be careful what you wish for.
-
It's not about ease of going undefeated - that's actually an argument against Cinci. It's only hard to go undefeated against their schedule because they're on the same plane as the programs on their schedule.
Have Ohio St play their schedule. For every simulation the Buckeyes beat ND, they basically automatically go undefeated. Cincinnati can't say that.
Yes, but see, your argument is about a simulation, not the actual results of the games that are actually played. So for you to have an argument, you need to admit that the games don't matter.
-
Yes, a motivated Georgia with no players sitting out for the draft.
For Cincinnati, be careful what you wish for.
Oh no they might get run over like every single other team Georgia has played. Perhaps they should have cancelled the SEC this season, as well.
-
Yes, but see, your argument is about a simulation, not the actual results of the games that are actually played. So for you to have an argument, you need to admit that the games don't matter.
Why do I need to pick either/or??? Of course it's not JUST talent vs game results, it's both. It's coaching, depth, play-calling, injuries, etc. Looking at the schedule rankings on previous posts, the 9th-toughest opponents for P5 teams align with around the 3rd-4th-toughest for Cinci. It's a joke schedule.
So yes, 11-1 or 10-2 vs a vastly deeper schedule is better than undefeated against that schedule. No one likes to hear that, but it's true. That's why computer rankings systems have an 8-4 team over an 11-1 team. It's not that the games don't matter, but the opponent matters, too. What is 4 wins vs teams ranked in the 100s???? It's a layup. It's playing backups in the 3rd quarter. It's meaningless........again, not something anyone wants to acknowledge, but if you want to label it "the games don't matter," then for those, specifically, no, they do not matter.
So if 2 of OSU's games don't matter and 5 of Cincinnati's don't, where are we? Cincinnati hasn't played nearly as many losable games. And if you disagree with that sentence, then you're acknowledging they are a lesser program.
-
Oh no they might get run over like every single other team Georgia has played. Perhaps they should have cancelled the SEC this season, as well.
I'm dying for Cincinnati to get in. Why are you chomping at me?
-
So if 2 of OSU's games don't matter and 5 of Cincinnati's don't, where are we? Cincinnati hasn't played nearly as many losable games. And if you disagree with that sentence, then you're acknowledging they are a lesser program.
But that brings up the great question - do you actually hold, you know, the results of the games as something that matters. I know it is unpopular to actually look at the results of the game, as opposed to what we think should have happened, but at some point there is no point to sports if we continue to not care about the results of the games. This stuff against Cincinnati is based in simulation - Cincinnati shouldn't compete with the Georgia's and Notre Dame's of the world, and if they do, it is due to some sort of other mystical reason. At some point, we have to expose that idea as the complete joke that it is. They play the games, the results matter, and anything else is just noise.
-
Yes, a motivated Georgia with no players sitting out for the draft.
For Cincinnati, be careful what you wish for.
well, motivation and having players available is Georgia's problem
no excuses
-
I'm dying for Cincinnati to get in. Why are you chomping at me?
Because people arguing against Cincinnati being in, are setting up the straw man argument that they are going to get blasted once they get in. I simultaneously would prefer an undefeated Cincinnati getting in over a conference runner up, while acknowledging that they would probably get absolutely blasted. Probably by more than an SEC runner up
-
I'm on record preferring an undefeated Cincy over a 2 loss non SEC champ Bama
Cincy might get blasted, but they've done more to earn the blasting than a 2 loss Bama, imo
-
But that brings up the great question - do you actually hold, you know, the results of the games as something that matters. I know it is unpopular to actually look at the results of the game, as opposed to what we think should have happened, but at some point there is no point to sports if we continue to not care about the results of the games. This stuff against Cincinnati is based in simulation - Cincinnati shouldn't compete with the Georgia's and Notre Dame's of the world, and if they do, it is due to some sort of other mystical reason. At some point, we have to expose that idea as the complete joke that it is. They play the games, the results matter, and anything else is just noise.
This is neither my nor @OrangeAfroMan (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=58) 's argument.
Our argument is this:
It's not that the games don't matter, but the opponent matters, too.
Quit ignoring the fact that Cincy's opponents suck. They don't suck just because Fro and I say they suck or just because their recruiting sucks but because the teams suck. You can quibble with the exact rankings here but the general concept holds, this is from the CBS 1-130 rankings:
(https://i.imgur.com/F3r6KSo.png)
Ohio State's and Bama's 9th toughest opponents (RU and UF) are ranked #74 and #69 respectively. That is about equivalent to Cincinnati's fourth toughest opponent, ECU ranked #77.
My view, for a legitimate NC contender is that the teams break down into "tiers" roughly as follows:
- Roughly the top 15-20: These are teams that you better bring your "A Game" against because otherwise they'll probably beat you. Even if you DO bring your "A Game", these are likely to be dogfights with a decent possibility of losing. For Ohio State this is Oregon, Michigan State, Michigan, and maybe Penn State. For Bama this is aTm, Ole Miss, and maybe Auburn. For Cincinnati this is Notre Dame . . . and that is it. If they were a legitimate NC contender their only serious challenge all year would be Notre Dame.
- Roughly the next 15-20 (so about 15 or 20 through 30 or 40): These are teams where if you bring your "A Game", you will win but if you have an off night they could jump up and get you. For Ohio State this is Purdue. For Bama this is Arkansas and maybe Tennessee and Mississippi State. For Cincy this is maybe SMU and that is it.
- Roughly the next 15-20 (so about 30 or 40 through 45 or 60): These are teams that an actual NC contender is a WHOLE LOT better than but they are good enough that if the stars align and they have a REALLY great game and your team plays their worst game of the year it ends up being a close game and then anything can happen at the end. For Ohio State this is Minnesota. For Bama this is Miami,FL and LSU. For Cincy this is UCF.
- Roughly the next 15-20 (so about 45 or 60 through 60 or 80): These teams would need miracles but upsets in this range do happen every few decades or so. For Ohio State this is Maryland, Nebraska, and Rutgers. For Bama this is Florida. For Cincy this is ECU.
- All teams below about 60 to 80: Barring some insane mitigating circumstance (like half your team being out for some reason) if you lose to one of these teams you aren't a legitimate NC contender. For Ohio State this is IU, Tulsa, and Akron. For Bama this is USM, NMST, and Mercer. For Cincy this is most of their schedule: Indiana, MiamiOH, Tulsa, Navy, Tulane, USF, Temple, and MurraySt.
On the whole:
- tOSU plays 4, Bama plays 3, and Cincy plays one seriously challenging game.
- tOSU plays one, Bama plays three, and Cincy plays one marginally challenging game.
- tOSU plays one, Bama plays two, and Cincy plays one possibly challenging game.
- tOSU plays three, Bama plays one, and Cincy plays one implausibly challenging game.
- tOSU plays three, Bama plays three, and Cincy plays SEVEN body-bags.
Nobody is arguing that tOSU or Bama or anybody else should automatically get in based on recruiting rankings and a tough schedule but you can't compare Cincy to a P5 team without acknowledging the massive difference in schedule.
If Ohio State, Bama, or anybody else in the top-20 played Cincy's schedule they'd have maybe a 50/50 chance of losing to ND, maybe a 20% chance of losing to SMU, maybe a 10% chance of losing to UCF, maybe a 5% chance of losing to ECU or IU and <1% chance of losing any of the other seven games. The entire schedule boils down to Notre Dame.
I'm NEVER comfortable judging a team based on one game because it is WAY too easy to cherry pick the game. Lets try:
Want to prove Ohio State is #1, look at the Maryland game. Ohio State crushed them FAR worse than any other opponent of theirs.
Want to prove Ohio State doesn't belong, look at the Oregon game.
Want to prove Bama is #1, look at the MsSt game. Bama crushed them by 40 and they beat aTm.
Want to prove Bama doesn't belong, look at the aTm game.
Want to prove Cincy is #1, look at the Notre Dame game. Cincy beat them, nobody else has.
Want to prove Cincy doesn't belong, look at their last three games. Legitimate NC contenders don't struggle with #101 Navy, #107 Tulane, and #100 Tulsa.
That brings me to my final point:
Just looking at W's and L's is ridiculous because Cincy's SoS is so vastly weaker than the other contenders. Thus we are compelled to look at what the committee has called "game control". This is more than just final score because final scores can be misleading due to late "garbage time" scores that can make a blowout look close or make a close game look like a blowout. I like the committee's "game control" concept. Basically I look at this as asking yourself "If you were watching this game hoping for an upset, when would you have given up and changed the channel to something else?" Indiana and Tulsa make a great example here because they a common opponents of the Buckeyes and Bearcats:
Indiana:
Cincinnati trailed in the fourth quarter and didn't take a two score lead until just 2:37 remained so if you were watching this you'd have been in until almost the last second.
Ohio State led 44-7 at halftime.
Tulsa:
Cincinnati had a 14-0 lead early but that evaporated into a 14-12 game at halftime then Cincy pulled out to a 16 point lead in the third quarter but Tulsa got back in the game with a TD and 2PT conversion to make it a one score game then Cincy needed not one but TWO goal-line stands in the final minutes to preserve their victory.
Ohio State wasn't as dominant as they should have been against Tulsa either but the game effectively ended when Ohio State scored an offensive TD with about three minutes remaining to obtain a 14 point lead and rather than fighting off a goal-line attempt in the final seconds, the Buckeyes got a pick-6 to make it a 21 point win.
The Tulsa game doesn't look good for Ohio State. Their performance was only marginally better than Cincinnati's. The difference is that we KNOW that the Tulsa game was an outlier for Ohio State because they they haven't struggled against any other teams even close to as bad as Tulsa. The Buckeyes throttled #125 Akron, #82 Indiana, #79 Rutgers, and #61 Maryland and even their "only" nine point win over #67 Nebraska is the only two score win over the Cornhuskers so far this year. We can't say the same thing about Cincinnati because they also struggled with #82 Indiana, #101 Navy, and #107 Tulane.
If a G5 team like Cincinnati wants to be considered they have to make up for their rinky-dink schedule by beating the living daylights out of their pip-squeak opponents and Cincinnati simply hasn't done it. They have four close wins over teams ranked 80+ (#82 IU, #100 Tulsa, #101 Navy, #107 Tulane). That simply isn't the resume of a legitimate contender.
If they were consistently beating the tar out of their weak opponents then I'd be ok with putting an undefeated G5 Champion in over a non-Champion or maybe a 2-loss P5 Champ but they aren't. In light of how ridiculously weak their SoS is, they haven't done enough to even be in the discussion.
-
I understand all of that. The problem with your argument is that both of you constantly compare Cincy to OSU, Georgia, and Alabama. This isn't good enough. You have four spots, so you need four teams. So while I agree Georgia definitely deserves a spot over Cincy, and Bammer probably does and OSU probably does as well, at least right now, you still need to explain why, say, Oregon, who not only struggled but lost to a bad team deserves a spot over Cincinnati.
-
It depends on how things end up obviously. Cincy might struggle more than they have, or win impressively, or lose. Usually there are only a couple undefeated teams at the end. I think it also depends on whether one chooses teams based on "power" or optics. I'm not going to get too worried at this point about the rankings.
-
well, motivation and having players available is Georgia's problem
no excuses
You can't really believe this.
A team's best 5 players sit out for non-injury reasons - a newfangled side-effect of the 4-team playoff and you want to pretend like it doesn't alter the outcome?
Go away.
-
Yes, but see, your argument is about a simulation, not the actual results of the games that are actually played. So for you to have an argument, you need to admit that the games don't matter.
The games matter and WHO THE OPPONENTS ARE MATTERS. Why do you keep omitting this?
-
The games matter and WHO THE OPPONENTS ARE MATTERS. Why do you keep omitting this?
I have addressed it many times.
-
The games matter and WHO THE OPPONENTS ARE MATTERS. Why do you keep omitting this?
At a point, I kind of shrug at this. The sport is what it is. Half of it is disqualified because there are not enough good opponents to go around. There's not much of a fix for that.
The desire to blame the teams for it always seems strange. But, some folks wanna do stuff I consider strange. I've reached a point where the in-season minutiae of it seems sort of silly. If we get to the end of the season and they actually have a perfect record, we'll look at the rest. And if there enough other one-loss teams to crowd them out, is what it is. And if the field is thin, perhaps they sneak in. But they probably won't. And it might not be all that controversial.
-
Well, Bama has almost clinched the SEC W. A&M is a weird team. I guess Purdue is as well.
-
I think Oregon is Cincy's barrier, if both win out. Ohio State is in if they win out.
And Cincy needs to hope for a UGA win over Bama too. UGA is basically in the playoff barring a shocker with Tech.
-
I think Oregon is Cincy's barrier, if both win out. Ohio State is in if they win out.
And Cincy needs to hope for a UGA win over Bama too. UGA is basically in the playoff barring a shocker with Tech.
OkSU could also be a thing, I think. Right now we're at nine 1- or 0-loss P5s. At least four are assured another loss, and we think another will take one (Wake). Plus one of those nine is likely in with a loss.
Would be funny if it just rounds out to another mundane finish.
-
Our argument is this:Quit ignoring the fact that Cincy's opponents suck. They don't suck just because Fro and I say they suck or just because their recruiting sucks but because the teams suck. You can quibble with the exact rankings here but the general concept holds, this is from the CBS 1-130 rankings:
Nobody is arguing that tOSU or Bama or anybody else should automatically get in based on recruiting rankings and a tough schedule but you can't compare Cincy to a P5 team without acknowledging the massive difference in schedule.
Want to prove Ohio State doesn't belong, look at the Oregon game.
Want to prove Bama is #1, look at the MsSt game. Bama crushed them by 40 and they beat aTm.
Want to prove Bama doesn't belong, look at the aTm game.
Want to prove Cincy is #1, look at the Notre Dame game. Cincy beat them, nobody else has.
Want to prove Cincy doesn't belong, look at their last three games. Legitimate NC contenders don't struggle with #101 Navy, #107 Tulane, and #100 Tulsa.
Great rebuttal's per usual,the Bearcats IMO are getting votes because of a last second loss 46 weeks ago to the currently entrenched number 1 ranked Pole Setter
-
I was just looking at Oklahoma State's season, it's pretty solid. One can argue they should be top five, or so. They did beat Texas. (!)
-
I was just looking at Oklahoma State's season, it's pretty solid.
Damn right it is beat Kansas 55-3,only loss on the road by 3 to Cyclones.Might be the best year to watch Bedlam,Sooners slipping and the Pokes getting traction.Going to change the batteries on the remote
-
Well, Bama has almost clinched the SEC W. A&M is a weird team. I guess Purdue is as well.
I don't think A&M's a weird team. I just think there's a ton of parity in the SEC West. Most of those teams are decent but not great. Even Alabama is not as good as they have been in many recent years.
This is definitely the Year of the Dawg in the SEC, your team looks so solid and well-coached.
-
Mebbe so, mebbe everyone is so close to everyone else a team looks good and then bad in successive weeks. I'd note UGA has not played a top 20 team this year. Their schedule has been rather light, in reality.
-
Mebbe so, mebbe everyone is so close to everyone else a team looks good and then bad in successive weeks. I'd note UGA has not played a top 20 team this year. Their schedule has been rather light, in reality.
Alabama in the SECCG will be a worthy opponent, even if they're not quite as good as usual. That should be a pretty solid UGA win, I think.
Is Ole Miss still mathematically alive? I assume the ags are officially out, now. But I haven't really looked into it that closely.
-
Bama leads Ole Miss by 1.5 games with 2 to play, so Ole Miss is still technically in the race. And yes, beating Bama any year would be a great win, but thus far, the Dawgs have not really played a formidable opponent. Their best wins are Clemson, Arkansas, and Auburn, none of which are top 20 ranked.
-
You can't really believe this.
A team's best 5 players sit out for non-injury reasons - a newfangled side-effect of the 4-team playoff and you want to pretend like it doesn't alter the outcome?
Go away.
I believe if Georgia's 5 best players sit out, it's Georgia's problem, not Cincy's
did I type something else?
-
UGA apparently was hit with the flu yesterday, fairly bad. Some players tried to go and couldn't. Some didn't make the trip. But no one super crucial, they have one LB suspended on rape charges. I was a bit surprised he was charged if the media reportage was correct (ha).
-
(https://scontent.ffod1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/p526x296/257759147_4625629350807771_8962942981360335045_n.jpg?_nc_cat=106&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=6nKFECS3LFIAX9Oi_Oy&_nc_ht=scontent.ffod1-1.fna&oh=30a11a531a4ff04996486990d9a90620&oe=61964B5B)
-
I believe if Georgia's 5 best players sit out, it's Georgia's problem, not Cincy's
did I type something else?
HOT TAKE!
-
Oklahoma will split their two game series with OSU2, and Oregon will split their two game series with the Utes.
Bearcats sneak in.
-
I don't think A&M's a weird team. I just think there's a ton of parity in the SEC West. Most of those teams are decent but not great. Even Alabama is not as good as they have been in many recent years.
This is definitely the Year of the Dawg in the SEC, your team looks so solid and well-coached.
They're kinda weird. They rolled up 41 points on Bama, 19 on Ole Miss. Per SP+, they lost to 17, 31, 34, but beat No. 2. They have top-flight lines and a great secondary. They have two very good, not Great, backs, one very good receiver and a great tight end, but can't tie it all together. Their offense my be too complicated. And they have the most expensive coach with a pair of somewhat opposed past two seasons in a certain light.
Interesting, if nothing else.
-
They also lost their starting QB early in Game 2.
I know, I know, we shouldn't care about that.
Context is the enemy!!!
-
My CFP Rankings:
1. Georgia
2. Ohio State
3. Oregon
4. Alabama
I don't think the committee will want two rematches in a semifinal game, but this is not the last week of the season. So this is how I believe the committee should rank the Top 4.
If Georgia defeats Alabama in the SEC championship game, Alabama will be out with at least two losses. (Ala. plays Arkansas and Auburn to close out the regular season, likely wins, but no gimmes).
Ohio State plays two one-loss teams, MSU and Michigan, to close out the season; absolutely no gimmes for Ohio State.
-
I'd like to see Georgia, Oregon, Alabama, and Michigan or MSU in it. Interesting matchups.
I meant to say Cincinnati, so they get their shot at public embarrassment.
-
Worst case scenario for the Big Ten is for Michigan St to beat Ohio State but then lose to Penn St while OSU beats Michigan. Then everyone has 2 losses going into the CCG.
All of that is quite possible too.
-
I'd like to see Georgia, Oregon, Alabama, and Michigan or MSU in it. Interesting matchups.
I meant to say Cincinnati, so they get their shot at public embarrassment.
It is difficult to say what would happen if Ohio State loses to MSU or Michigan. It seems unlikely, but back-to-back games against Top 10 teams could take a toll on Ohio State and it is entirely possible. If Michigan or MSU wins-out, I suspect the team that does win-out gets into the CFB playoff. There would be no reason to put Cincy or ND, in if MSU and Mich. win out, and the only other possibility is Okie St, or Ok. And, I don't think any of these are deserving.
-
I prefer Alabama to be out (duh) of the conversation. Oklahoma State would be interesting, Oregon somewhat interesting, and a B1G rep whoever it is to be. Cincy is OK with me too. ND has had a nice season save one game.
-
They also lost their starting QB early in Game 2.
I know, I know, we shouldn't care about that.
Context is the enemy!!!
That starting QB's lone performance included three picks against a bottom-10 scoring defense. The backup led them to an upset of Alabama.
And despite recruiting like gangbusters, they managed only one blue chip QB in Year 4. These things are not helping them be less weird.
-
I prefer Alabama to be out (duh) of the conversation. Oklahoma State would be interesting, Oregon somewhat interesting, and a B1G rep whoever it is to be. Cincy is OK with me too. ND has had a nice season save one game.
Good Post The other OSU is a possibility if they win out.I would think Oregon is too,tOSU also if Gawja wins out
-
UGA is virtually in already, with two pastries on the slate and then even a loss in the CG would probably keep them in. You can pencil them in, rightly or wrongly.
Incidentally, a team can beat UGA the old fashioned way, stop the run, which is doable, they have been significantly slowed by teams like Missouri this year until the second half. Make Stetson beat you with his arm. If they got George Pickens back at WR it would help, a lot, but I don't expect that. Just stop the run first, and get them into second and third in 6-8 yards, and shadow the QB so he doesn't run.
-
Oklahoma State
Oregon
Ohio State - MSU - UM
UGA
Bama
Cincy
ND
Probably a couple other long shots like Wake.
-
You can't really believe this.
A team's best 5 players sit out for non-injury reasons - a newfangled side-effect of the 4-team playoff and you want to pretend like it doesn't alter the outcome?
Go away.
OH really vs Alabama,Ohio State had 2 Starters on their defensive line out and their place kicker also under Covid protocol and Try Sermon went down on the 1st series of the game.Perhaps you need a time out
-
I think we all could agree that critical injuries, while part of the game, often are influential.
How to adjust for that is another question.
-
Go Away 😎
-
They're kinda weird. They rolled up 41 points on Bama, 19 on Ole Miss. Per SP+, they lost to 17, 31, 34, but beat No. 2. They have top-flight lines and a great secondary. They have two very good, not Great, backs, one very good receiver and a great tight end, but can't tie it all together. Their offense my be too complicated. And they have the most expensive coach with a pair of somewhat opposed past two seasons in a certain light.
Interesting, if nothing else.
Texas A&M publicly admitted they spent all Summer preparing for Alabama. In looking at their first five weeks schedule in the link below, there is a great indication that they spent most, if not all, of that time in prepping for Bama. They most certainly didn't prepare for Colorado, a 10-7 win in which they scored the winning TD with 2:41 left in the game, shown in the second link. Click Scoring Plays.
https://fbschedules.com/texas-am-football-schedule/
https://www.espn.com/college-football/playbyplay/_/gameId/401282067
-
UGA is virtually in already, with two pastries on the slate and then even a loss in the CG would probably keep them in. You can pencil them in, rightly or wrongly.
Incidentally, a team can beat UGA the old fashioned way, stop the run, which is doable, they have been significantly slowed by teams like Missouri this year until the second half. Make Stetson beat you with his arm. If they got George Pickens back at WR it would help, a lot, but I don't expect that. Just stop the run first, and get them into second and third in 6-8 yards, and shadow the QB so he doesn't run.
You have to be the only non-delusional Georgia fan on the face of the Earth. I live in Georgia and I have never met one.
-
UGA fans are understandably desparate for the missing ring. But fan is short for ...
-
The poindextering of the sport in one tweet.
https://twitter.com/slmandel/status/1460767667351031808?s=20
-
The poindextering of the sport in one tweet.
https://twitter.com/slmandel/status/1460767667351031808?s=20
this is what happens when you have a playoff where the committee ranks teams off the eye test...regular season head-to-head doesn't matter as much anymore....
eye test homer in me- Michigan is a better team than Sparty. Michigan should've been up 23 (B1G admitted ref made mistake over-turning Hutchison TD) yet were still up 16 with 18-19 mins left in the game and Harbaugh absolutely beefed a W they had in the bag on the road in a rivalry game- it happens- especially to guy like Harbs. Michigan wins that on a neutral field imo. And they'd be favored if the game was on a neutral field right now imo.
MSU has the scoreboard- no question about it- but MSU has literally the worst pass defense in the country- they are dead last at 130 in passing yards allowed. Michigan seems been ascending since that game and Michigan State has been descending with that pretty bad loss vs Purdue.
-
I think we all could agree that critical injuries, while part of the game, often are influential.
How to adjust for that is another question.
I have no idea how injuries crept into the discussion. He changed it up.
-
The poindextering of the sport in one tweet.
https://twitter.com/slmandel/status/1460767667351031808?s=20
UM lost to a better team than MSU did.
So for those who consider h2h when all other things are equal, in this case, quality of loss isn't equal. It's not complicated.
-
UM lost to a better team than MSU did.
So for those who consider h2h when all other things are equal, in this case, quality of loss isn't equal. It's not complicated.
Why would it be complicated. It can be based on whatever you want. When you don't have any actual standards, it's just whatever you want it to be.
-
honestly not sure that ranking even matters right now. IF MSU wins out- they'll be in. They have the head to head tie-breaker with Michigan for the B1G CCG- and if they win out that means they'll have W's over OSU & PSU and they'll have the B1G CCG title with another W probably over Wisconsin. They automatically get in under this scenario.
It's all a moot point though- Ohio State's offense cannot be stopped. They will win out and go to the playoff, imo.
-
Michigan is a better team than Sparty.
Put that thing out,you'll burn your fingers
-
Why would it be complicated. It can be based on whatever you want. When you don't have any actual standards, it's just whatever you want it to be.
You don't acknowledge that two 1-loss teams might be ranked in order of the quality of the opponents they lost to? That's just willy-nilly?
-
I'm sure "they" go into a lot of detail about who lost to who and when in the meetings for the upper level teams. It all matters, but the weightings would differ from person to person. If you get blown out once and barely beat other opponents, that matters as well, even if you defeated one good team nicely.
Head to head may not matter critically IF the game was decided on a fluke or unlikely event and was very close late.
-
You don't acknowledge that two 1-loss teams might be ranked in order of the quality of the opponents they lost to? That's just willy-nilly?
They can be ranked by quality of their opponents. Or their recruiting rankings. Or the alphabet. It can be whatever justification you like. This is our system.
-
One could of course use computers and a specific algorithm, but with humans it's inherently subjective. They have a number of people "voting" in an attempt to level out any weirdness. I don't know how else one can do it.
-
One could of course use computers and a specific algorithm, but with humans it's inherently subjective. They have a number of people "voting" in an attempt to level out any weirdness. I don't know how else one can do it.
Not a dang thing.
The point is to be weird and uneven enough that people freak out analyzing or complaining about it. And honestly, even the "perfect" rankings would have both. I still sometimes chuckle at a pretty prominent sports author absolutely losing it because a team he liked (Army) was not rated highly after a good season. Army then went 5-8, though it had some bad luck ended up eight spots better than its preseason rating.
-
Who'd he write for,The Farmers Almanac ?
-
Not a dang thing.
The point is to be weird and uneven enough that people freak out analyzing or complaining about it. And honestly, even the "perfect" rankings would have both. I still sometimes chuckle at a pretty prominent sports author absolutely losing it because a team he liked (Army) was not rated highly after a good season. Army then went 5-8, though it had some bad luck ended up eight spots better than its preseason rating.
Well, one thing - make it objective by say, winning your conference or what not. Hard to say the games matter the most in college football and then say you can't focus too much on the games.
-
Well, one thing - make it objective by say, winning your conference or what not. Hard to say the games matter the most in college football and then say you can't focus too much on the games.
Because of course all conferences are equal and beating out Georgia, Bama, Ole Miss, aTm, Arkansas, and Mississippi State (all ranked) to win the SEC is exactly the same accomplishment as beating out Cincy and Houston to win the AAC.
-
Because of course all conferences are equal and beating out Georgia, Bama, Ole Miss, aTm, Arkansas, and Mississippi State (all ranked) to win the SEC is exactly the same accomplishment as beating out Cincy and Houston to win the AAC.
Of course they're not equal. That's why the idea is a 5+1+2 or a 6+2 model.
In 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2020 a P5 non-champ was selected over P5 champs. There are arguments for why that is the case, in that it was Notre Dame (who gets undeserved treatment because of that shiny gold helmet) twice, but for the most part it was simple "count the number of losses" accounting.
Of all those seasons, the worst P5 champ, by record, was 10-3 Washington. All three of their losses were road games (technically Auburn was neutral, but Washington traveled from Seattle to Atlanta, and Auburn traveled from... Auburn to Atlanta), and two of those were to ranked teams at the time. All three losses were one-score games, by a combined 10 points, with one being a loss in OT. The worst by ranking was 2020 Oregon at 25th (4-2 record), so if you had a 6+2 system they'd have been replaced in the playoff by #12 undefeated Coastal Carolina.
Would it be THAT bad to give every P5 champ an auto-bid?
Then you've got the G5 champ... In 4 of those years, the top G5 champ was undefeated. In two others, the top G5 champ was a 1-loss team in the top 20, and the worst (by record) was a 2-loss Boise State team ranked 20th.
Would it be THAT bad to give the top G5 champ an auto-bid?
Finally, there's an argument that you'd be leaving deserving teams out by allowing undeserving conference champs in. Well, in 7 years of the CFP, we've never had more than one team that was a P5 non-champ selected to the top 4. Now I'm giving you 2 slots for at-large. You can't make the argument at ALL that deserving teams will be left out at a higher rate than the current system.
It satisfies everyone. Conference championships are meaningful. The G5 gets one seat at the table. The "best teams" are not left out because you have two at-large spots.
But I'm just CRAZY for suggesting this, huh? Because the entire idea of a college football championship is a farce if we let Cincy in this year.
-
no ranking matters except the final ranking
-
Of course they're not equal. That's why the idea is a 5+1+2 or a 6+2 model.
In 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2020 a P5 non-champ was selected over P5 champs. There are arguments for why that is the case, in that it was Notre Dame (who gets undeserved treatment because of that shiny gold helmet) twice, but for the most part it was simple "count the number of losses" accounting.
Of all those seasons, the worst P5 champ, by record, was 10-3 Washington. All three of their losses were road games (technically Auburn was neutral, but Washington traveled from Seattle to Atlanta, and Auburn traveled from... Auburn to Atlanta), and two of those were to ranked teams at the time. All three losses were one-score games, by a combined 10 points, with one being a loss in OT. The worst by ranking was 2020 Oregon at 25th (4-2 record), so if you had a 6+2 system they'd have been replaced in the playoff by #12 undefeated Coastal Carolina.
Would it be THAT bad to give every P5 champ an auto-bid?
Then you've got the G5 champ... In 4 of those years, the top G5 champ was undefeated. In two others, the top G5 champ was a 1-loss team in the top 20, and the worst (by record) was a 2-loss Boise State team ranked 20th.
Would it be THAT bad to give the top G5 champ an auto-bid?
Finally, there's an argument that you'd be leaving deserving teams out by allowing undeserving conference champs in. Well, in 7 years of the CFP, we've never had more than one team that was a P5 non-champ selected to the top 4. Now I'm giving you 2 slots for at-large. You can't make the argument at ALL that deserving teams will be left out at a higher rate than the current system.
It satisfies everyone. Conference championships are meaningful. The G5 gets one seat at the table. The "best teams" are not left out because you have two at-large spots.
But I'm just CRAZY for suggesting this, huh? Because the entire idea of a college football championship is a farce if we let Cincy in this year.
As you know, I've been a proponent of 5+1+2 (five P5 Champs, top G5 Champ, two at-large) for a long time. I'd actually prefer to stay at four but I just assume that expansion is inevitable and I've long believed that if we expand beyond four the best possible alternative is that.
I don't want all the tallest midgets because frankly some of them are REALLY short. I've listed the example of 2019 MAC Champion Miami, OH several times in these discussions. They went 6-2 in the MAC with multiple close wins and two losses by 14 and 24 points. The MAC was terrible that year as evidenced by Miami's OOC run which included:
- a 22 point loss to Cincy (which was runner-up in the AAC)
- a 24 point loss to Iowa (finished third in the B1G-W)
- a 71 point loss to Ohio State (won the B1G)
Miami then beat MAC-W Champion Directional Michigan in the MAC CG. It would be lubricous to deprive legitimately good teams of a playoff spot in order to gift that spot to a terrible team like 2019 Miami, OH. We do it in CBB and I don't like it there either but at least there we are taking 68 teams so the vastly superior teams deprived of a spot to make room for tallest midgets are themselves not all that good. Also, the best teams left out of the NCAA Tournament have no realistic prayer of winning it anyway. With a four, eight, or even 12 team CFP the teams deprived would be legitimately good teams that might plausibly win the NC.
OTOH, I'm ok with including the best G5 Champion. Realistically this is simply going to be the tallest of the tallest midgets but it is only one spot and the tallest of the tallest midgets isn't likely to ever be as bad as 2019 Miami.
Two at-large spots is enough that when a team ties for their division Championship but loses the H2H tiebreaker due to a close loss frequently on the road, the team that barely misses their CG still has a path.
This would also generate a lot of cross-regional interest because various fanbases would have differing rooting interests in different games. Examples:
- Suppose that the B1G-E Champion is an 11-1 team (likely) and that the B1G-W team is a 9-3 team (also likely). If your non-B1G team was in line for a possible top seed you would be rooting for the B1G-W Champion in order to clear the B1G-E Champion out of the contention for the top seeds. Conversely, if your team was in line for a possible at-large bid you would be rooting for the B1G-E Champion because in the event that they lost they might simply drop down to your teams' at-large spot.
- The G5 race could get REALLY interesting. This year, for example, the top G5's are #5 Cincy from the AAC, #19 SDSU from the MWC, #22 UTSA from CUSA, and #24 Houston from the AAC. So Cincy fans would simply root for their team. SDSU fans would root for their team against UtahSt and for Houston to knock off Cincy. UTSA fans would root for their team against WKY, Houston to knock off Cincy, and UtahSt to knock off SDSU. Houston fans would root for their team against Cincy, UtahSt to knock off SDSU, and WKY to knock off UTSA.
Two additional caveats to my 5+1+2 proposal:
- The four highest ranked Conference Champions would host the first round. This is mostly to keep CG's between teams like Bama and Georgia meaningful. As it is, Bama is likely to make it as an 11-2 non-Champion with a four-team field and they'd be an obvious lock with an eight-team field so the SECCG between them and Georgia would feel like an exhibition game. I'd avoid that by making the SECCG loser travel to their first-round opponent while the SECCG winner got to sit home and feast on the tallest of the tallest midgets.
- Second-round pairings would be based on rankings with the highest remaining seed getting location preference. Ie, the highest ranked remaining team would get the lowest ranked remaining team and the two middle remaining teams would play each other. This is to avoid a situation where otherwise you could have a second round game between #1 Bama and #2 Georgia. That makes no sense. If Bama beats Georgia in the SECCG and gets the #1 seed then they get the weakest available team in the second round as well. If #2 Georgia survives their road-trip to the #4 Conference Champion, they get the second-lowest remaining team in round #2.
Using this year as an example, assume the following:
- Georgia wins their last two games then loses the SECCG and finishes #2.
- Bama wins out and finishes #1.
- Oregon wins out and finishes #3.
- Ohio State wins out and finishes #4.
- Cincinnati wins out and finishes #5.
- Notre Dame wins out and finishes #6.
- Oklahoma State wins out and finishes #7.
- Wake Forest wins out and finishes #8.
The first round games would be:
- #8 Wake at #1 Bama
- #7 OkSU at #3 Oregon
- #6 ND at #4 Ohio State
- #2 UGA at #5 Cincinnati
Those are some great games in some phenomenal atmospheres!
The two semi-final locations this year are the Cotton Bowl in Dallas and the Orange Bowl in Miami. The highest ranked remaining team after the first round games would get preferential location and play the lowest ranked remaining team while the other two teams played in the other location.
All of that said, THIS YEAR is a completely different animal. Cincinnati simply isn't very good. They haven't even managed to consistently dominate their crappy G5 opponents. They shouldn't be gifted a spot a the expense of a legitimately great 2-loss SEC or B1G team.
-
They shouldn't be gifted a spot a the expense of a legitimately great 2-loss SEC or B1G team.
Who on earth would be "legitimately great" as a two loss SEC or B1G team this year? This is a pretty mediocre group, relative to the rest of the field.
-
If Alabama loses to UGA, I personally would not have them anywhere near the top four, even if it's close. There would be viable alternatives. They have had too many close wins for one thing. The 12-1 teams I'd choose over Bama include OSU/MSU/UM, Oregon, Ok State, and maybe OU. I'm dubious about including UGA frankly if they lose to Bama, depending. I tend to view CGs as part of the playoff, in effect.
-
I'm really REALLY looking forward to a team whose 2nd-best win is against Fuck-All State getting into the playoff.
-
I'm really REALLY looking forward to a team whose 2nd-best win is against Fuck-All State getting into the playoff.
Clemson a couple years ago?
-
UGA's second best win doesn't look all that great currently.
The only thing relevant about these CFPs is trying to understand their weighting factors and how that could play out for the final.
-
This suggestion (purposeful or not) that a non-ranked P5 team = garbage 100th-ranked G5 team needs to stop, please.
-
I don't see such a suggestion, or even inference, so I don't think anything needs to stop, at all.
We all understand that a 35th "ranked" team is better than a 100th ranked team. it's not some radical assertion, and no one suggested otherwise.
-
This suggestion (purposeful or not) that a non-ranked P5 team = garbage 100th-ranked G5 team needs to stop, please.
This idea that a P5 team is better than a G5 team no matter what the results on the field say needs to stop, please.
-
We talk about the top 25 in the rankings, for whatever reason, but the AP and coaches basically have a top 28 or so, or top 30.
I find it a bit odd they get lumped into ORV instead of just given a number, not that it matters.
Others receiving votes: Arkansas 67, Clemson 56, Mississippi State 42, Penn State 22, Appalachian State 20, Purdue 10, Air Force 9, Coastal Carolina 9, Oregon State 2
-
I'm a bit surprised it hasn't expanded into a top 50
in reality, anything out of the top 10 doesn't matter
-
Who on earth would be "legitimately great" as a two loss SEC or B1G team this year? This is a pretty mediocre group, relative to the rest of the field.
I can't think of anything that would devalue the regular season more than letting in a 2 loss Alabama or Ohio State. Would they hold up better than Cincinnati? Almost assuredly. But I don't want to reward the "best" teams who lost 2 of the 3(?) losable games on their schedule, and pounded the bad teams by more than other teams pounded bad teams.
-
I can't think of anything that would devalue the regular season more than letting in a 2 loss Alabama or Ohio State. Would they hold up better than Cincinnati? Almost assuredly. But I don't want to reward the "best" teams who lost 2 of the 3(?) losable games on their schedule, and pounded the bad teams by more than other teams pounded bad teams.
But look at that shiny red helmet, PAAAWWWWLLL!
-
Who on earth would be "legitimately great" as a two loss SEC or B1G team this year?
Well Michigan will after this Saturday,just ask MGO Board 😎
-
I can't think of anything that would devalue the regular season more than letting in a 2 loss Alabama or Ohio State. Would they hold up better than Cincinnati? Almost assuredly. But I don't want to reward the "best" teams who lost 2 of the 3(?) losable games on their schedule, and pounded the bad teams by more than other teams pounded bad teams.
the REAL question is::: would a 2 loss Ohio State bring more fans to the stadium with tickets and turn on more TV sets? You know, more money, more money!
-
I'm a bit surprised it hasn't expanded into a top 50
in reality, anything out of the top 10 doesn't matter
Stop trolling Bug Eater/HORN Fans
-
But look at that shiny red helmet, PAAAWWWWLLL!
Take that back - it's just low
-
Stop trolling Bug Eater Fans
Did you just ask the world famous pot stirrer to stop trolling?
-
See the EDIT ;D
-
This idea that a P5 team is better than a G5 team no matter what the results on the field say needs to stop, please.
I call BS on this.
I have listed RESULTS ON THE FIELD that STRONGLY indicate that Cincinnati is NOWHERE near the top P5 teams repeatedly and you have steadfastly refused to engage in that conversation. Stop pretending that 12-0 = 12-0. It doesn't. My local High School was 12-0 at one point this season. That doesn't mean they were as good as Georgia or for that matter Cincinnati. They weren't.
This Cincinnati team would be LUCKY to be mid-pack in the B1G. They beat Indiana by 14 in a back-and-forth game in which they trailed in the fourth quarter and did not permanently acquire a two-score lead until less than three minutes remained. Ie, it could have gone either way. That same Indiana team lost 34-6 to Iowa in a game that wasn't even that close. They also lost 24-0 to Penn State, 54-7 to Ohio State, 29-7 to Michigan, 38-3 to Rutgers, and 35-14 to Minnesota. Yeah, I know Penix got hurt but note that the Iowa game was before that as was the PSU game in which IU got shut out.
Cincinnati has a second common opponent with Ohio State in the form of Tulsa. Ohio State's performance against Tulsa was embarrassingly bad and yet the Buckeyes still beat them by 21 points. When Cincinnati played Tulsa they needed a goal-line stand as time was running out to avoid potentially going to OT.
Cincinnati also struggled with absolutely terrible Navy and Tulane teams and now their blowout over SMU is hilariously being heralded as proof of their greatness. Beating the crap out of SMU would be something of an accomplishment if not for the fact that Cincinnati is being treated like a legitimate NC contender. No other NC contender would get credit for beating the crap out of SMU, it would just be expected. Cincinnati gets credit for it because their schedule is so ridiculously bad that SMU is actually one of their toughest games. That tells you everything you need to know.
This was before last weekend's games but upthread I posted this table of tOSU's, Bama's, and Cincy's opponents by CBS' 1-130 rankings:
(https://i.imgur.com/QhHIQwn.png)
SMU is the second toughest opponent on Cincy's rinky-dink schedule. They would be sixth on tOSU's schedule or fifth on Bama's schedule.
-
This idea that a P5 team is better than a G5 team no matter what the results on the field say needs to stop, please.
You're literally backwards on this. You've gone against the results on the field.
Honest to god, this is madness.
Name a G5 program with a winning record vs the P5.
Do you want the all-time numbers? They're grotesque.
Not to mention most of the time a strong G5 team fails to go undefeated, they've lost to a fellow G5 team.
This topic has turned comedic.
-
Not to mention most of the time a G5 team fails to go undefeated, they've lost to a fellow G5 team.
(https://c.tenor.com/vbm3-UDMojEAAAAC/no-shit.gif)
-
Folks are allowed to express different opinions. I get slightly amused when opinions are distorted with intent to make them look idiotic.
Could Cincinnati stay with Ole Miss? I think so. Could they stay with Ohio State? I think not.
-
You're literally backwards on this. You've gone against the results on the field.
Honest to god, this is madness.
Name a G5 program with a winning record vs the P5.
Do you want the all-time numbers? They're grotesque.
Not to mention most of the time a strong G5 team fails to go undefeated, they've lost to a fellow G5 team.
This topic has turned comedic.
Math, how does it work? Come to the reality side, my friend.
-
How does a strong G5 team go undefeated with a loss to another G5 team?
-
and many times, if the G5 team has only a single loss, it's to a P5 team
-
(https://c.tenor.com/vbm3-UDMojEAAAAC/no-shit.gif)
The point is that when is a P5's lone loss vs a G5 team?
Nearly never.
-
How does a strong G5 team go undefeated with a loss to another G5 team?
I think you have dementia.
-
The point is that when is a P5's lone loss vs a G5 team?
Nearly never.
Notre Dame, 2021.
Oregon, every time they've lost to Boise.
-
Oregon, every time they've lost to Boise.
I don't think you know what 'lone' means.
-
Wow, most teams that get off to an undefeated start eventually drop a game to a team in their own Conference.
Ground breaking.
-
You're too busy being an asshole to actually contribute.
But yes, and what your snarky summary means is that while an OSU or Alabama randomly loses to an average-to-good P5 team, your Cincinnati or UCF is busy dropping a game to a Tulsa or a Memphis.
You G5 groupies acknowledge only the peaks of their existence and ignore the other 99.7%.
-
I'm contributing to the pointing and laughing at the board clown in clown shoes, a clown nose and a bright orange clown wig.
-
A 1-loss Oregon has never lost to Boise State. Is this how you always react when you're immediately shown to be wrong? Who's the clown?
-
You G5 groupies acknowledge only the peaks of their existence and ignore the other 99.7%.
Yeah, so except for the years they win the lottery, they're broke.
That means their lottery years are worthless, right?
Purdue won the Big Ten in 2000 (via tiebreaker) and went to the Rose Bowl. But I guess because they'd sucked for much of the prior 30 years, we should have given that bowl slot to Michigan or Ohio State, who OF COURSE were better, despite Purdue owning H2H over both of them that year.
After all, if you look at Purdue's existence, that year was clearly a peak and the other 99.7% is much worse.
-
I have listed RESULTS ON THE FIELD that STRONGLY indicate that Cincinnati is NOWHERE near the top P5 teams repeatedly and you have steadfastly refused to engage in that conversation.
??? I have engaed this many times. Here again.
Right now, Cincy is:
- 7th on SP+
- 8th on FEI
- 6th on F+
- 6th on Massey composite
- 8th on ESPN FPI
The idea that they are far and away from these other teams isn't just wrong, it is delusional. Simply put, I don't see that you have any argument here. I am taking your logic (let's look at how all these teams do against each other) and extending it to the entire season, instead of a handful of games. They are a good team who has won all their games. You keep wanting to give passes to similar teams when they lose a game, but if you keep giving passes to teams every time they lose games, what is the point of playing in the first place? No one seems interesting in answering that, probably because there is no answer.
-
I note that ND and UGA both have had fairly unimpressive slates. Cincy won on the road at ND of course which is a better win than ND or UGA has, by a good measure.
UGA and ND have beaten more teams that are decent but unranked.
-
Yeah, so except for the years they win the lottery, they're broke.
That means their lottery years are worthless, right?
Purdue won the Big Ten in 2000 (via tiebreaker) and went to the Rose Bowl. But I guess because they'd sucked for much of the prior 30 years, we should have given that bowl slot to Michigan or Ohio State, who OF COURSE were better, despite Purdue owning H2H over both of them that year.
After all, if you look at Purdue's existence, that year was clearly a peak and the other 99.7% is much worse.
Is today "make a poor retort" day??
The argument is G5 should get a shot.
The data says they are not on the same plane as the P5.
So to pull Purdue's 2000 season out from the ether, okay.....the argument would be Purdue should get a shot? But they already do because they're in the same conference as teams they're not on the same plane on (OSU, UM, etc). The data (as you note) backs that up.
Not sure how there's a parallel here. It's not about success being worthless.
I swear to god, I haven't the slightest how some of you make these leaps from my posts. It's truly bizarre.
Purdue earned their way to the RB that season. I don't understand how a team like Cincinnati can earn their way into the playoff with 9 G5 opponents + an FCS team.
Their 2-game season became 1, with IU falling off a cliff.
They won their 1-game season.
Get 'em a plastic trophy.
-
I swear to god, I haven't the slightest how some of you make these leaps from my posts. It's truly bizarre.
The main issue is the lack of facts are your side.
-
You're too busy being an asshole to actually contribute.
Evidently everyone is full of shit or conspiring against you.There is a song just for you,Enjoy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3t8SUCCTwg
-
The main issue is the lack of facts are your side.
What facts are against me exactly?
-
Cincinnati under Fickell:
9 games vs P5 and have a 6-3 record. Great job!
The 6 wins vs teams with a .431 average win% (5-7 record in 12 games).
The 3 losses vs teams with a .784 average win% (9-3 record)
Game. Set. Match. Right?
But that ignores 11 losses vs fellow G5 teams.
11 losses in 5 years.....jeez, that's an average of 2 per season. Are there any .500+ P5 teams losing twice a season vs G5 teams?
I just find the argument stupid. Cincinnati beat ND and hasn't slipped up vs their remaining high school schedule, so let's let them in the playoff.
All of the big-boy programs should turn independent immediately and schedule light. Go 12-0 every year. Screw it.
-
Is today "make a poor retort" day??
The argument is G5 should get a shot.
The data says they are not on the same plane as the P5.
So to pull Purdue's 2000 season out from the ether, okay.....the argument would be Purdue should get a shot? But they already do because they're in the same conference as teams they're not on the same plane on (OSU, UM, etc). The data (as you note) backs that up.
Not sure how there's a parallel here. It's not about success being worthless.
I swear to god, I haven't the slightest how some of you make these leaps from my posts. It's truly bizarre.
Purdue earned their way to the RB that season. I don't understand how a team like Cincinnati can earn their way into the playoff with 9 G5 opponents + an FCS team.
Their 2-game season became 1, with IU falling off a cliff.
They won their 1-game season.
Get 'em a plastic trophy.
Okay, let me square the circle for you.
The Rose Bowl tiebreakers are mechanical. The Rose Bowl is not a selection committee that can choose which team they invite. In this case, it was Purdue, Michigan, and Northwestern (apologies; I misspoke in the earlier post and thought OSU was part of that tie). All three teams finished 8-3, 6-2 in conference.
Purdue went to the Rose Bowl based on their H2H2H record, as they had beaten both Michigan and Northwestern head to head. Because it was a mechanical tiebreaker, that was the "earn" option.
For the CFP, we don't have any way that a team "earns" their way in. None. It's a beauty pageant. If the Rose Bowl selection in 2000 were the same, they'd look at resume. Purdue had a close loss to a ranked ND, a close loss to an unranked PSU, and a 20-point loss to an unranked MSU. Michigan also had three losses, but they were by a combined 7 points to a ranked UCLA team, ranked Northwestern team, and (unranked at the time but finished the regular season ranked) Purdue team. Their loss to Purdue was by 1 point.
In a "selection committee" scenario, how likely is it that a committee will look at Purdue and Michigan, with completely different program histories (one sucks, the other has a shiny blue and yellow helmet), with completely different recruiting rankings, and uses your logic... "Well, Purdue usually sucks, and while they're having a good year, FOR THEM, they're clearly not on the same level as Michigan, so we should have Michigan in the Rose Bowl."
That's where your logic leads.
What I honestly advocate for is the 5+1+2 or 6+2 system. That way, teams can actually "earn" their way in. Win your P5 conference or be the top rankes G5 conference champ, or simply win your conference (any league) and be one of the top 6 ranked conference champs.
Your system doesn't allow a team to have a playbook before the season comes to "earn" their way in. Cincinnati is trending towards 13-0. They beat a pretty good [ugh!] Notre Dame team, that has not lost to anyone except Cincinnati. They scheduled and beat another P5 team, one that everyone thought preseason was supposed to be good. It's not their fault IU Sucks. And it looks like they're going to TCOB with the rest of their schedule.
What Sam is pointing out is that based on the various football analytic metrics, they grade out as a top-10 team. Regardless of the actual teams they played, those analytics suggest they don't suck.
But that'll never be enough. Because they're G5. You won't let them earn it.
-
College Football Playoff, bowl predictions: Paths the eight remaining contenders must follow in 2021 - CBSSports.com (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/college-football-playoff-bowl-predictions-paths-the-eight-remaining-contenders-must-follow-in-2021/)
Pretty good synopsis I think.
UGA at even 12-1 is likely in the CFP. I'm liking OkSU.
-
All of the big-boy programs should turn independent immediately and schedule light. Go 12-0 every year. Screw it.
And just to make sure you're not just talking out your ass here...
Are you saying that if Cincinnati gets into the playoff, you will become an advocate for Florida to leave the SEC and go independent?
-
I gave up trying to follow his zigs and sags. It's amusing at times I find.
Nobody here is claiming Cincy played a tough schedule, it's a straw man.
-
What facts are against me exactly?
Well, all of them. Fancystats like Cincinnati. The football results like Cincinnati. The retort is that we should let inferior teams in because while they haven't been as good on the field, they just deserve it by being in a tougher conference. Doesn't make sense.
-
??? I have engaed this many times. Here again.
Right now, Cincy is:
- 7th on SP+
- 8th on FEI
- 6th on F+
- 6th on Massey composite
- 8th on ESPN FPI
The idea that they are far and away from these other teams isn't just wrong, it is delusional. Simply put, I don't see that you have any argument here. I am taking your logic (let's look at how all these teams do against each other) and extending it to the entire season, instead of a handful of games. They are a good team who has won all their games. You keep wanting to give passes to similar teams when they lose a game, but if you keep giving passes to teams every time they lose games, what is the point of playing in the first place? No one seems interesting in answering that, probably because there is no answer.
Note that none of those are in the top-4 nor do they have any realistic shot to finish in the top-4 of any of those. So even taking your argument at face value they are a pretty good team that isn't good enough for the CFP.
-
Note that none of those are in the top-4 nor do they have any realistic shot to finish in the top-4 of any of those. So even taking your argument at face value they are a pretty good team that isn't good enough for the CFP.
But, then, you are saying the results of the games don't actually matter. Win/lose/ who cares? If you reward inferior teams, what is the point of playing the games at all?
-
Note that none of those are in the top-4 nor do they have any realistic shot to finish in the top-4 of any of those. So even taking your argument at face value they are a pretty good team that isn't good enough for the CFP.
- Ahead on SP+: UGA/OSU/Bama/UM/A&M/Wis - Wisconsin won't make CFP; neither will A&M. One of OSU/UM won't make CFP.
- Ahead on FEI: UGA/OSU/Bama/UM/ND/OkSU/Wis - Wisconsin won't make CFP, and one of OSU/UM won't make CFP. They have H2H over ND so if they are 13-0 conf champ and have H2H, they would likely be a more deserving CFP selection. And there's a chance they could sneak into top 4 with two more wins and with losses from those ahead of them.
- Ahead on F+: UGA/OSU/Bama/UM/Wis - Wisconsin won't make CFP, and one of OSU/UM won't make CFP. So they could finish top-4.
- Ahead in FPI: UGA/OSU/Bama/UM/OU/ND/OkSU - at least one of OSU/UM won't make the CFP and at least one of OU/OkSU won't make the CFP. Have H2H over ND so would be a more deserving CFP pick at 13-0 conf champ than ND. So pulling out three of those teams only gets them to #5 behind an OU/OkSU winner (if finishing 12-1 and conf champ), but if those teams split a two-game series they'd likely jump.
Not going to address Massey Composite because it's a poll [or an aggregation of polls], whereas SP+, FEI, and F+ are statistical analysis tools as far as I can tell. I don't know the FPI methodology, so I did include it.
Not mentioned above of course is the possibility that Bama loses again, which as an 11-2 team probably pushes them out of the CFP. So that's one more potential spot opening for Cinci.
If any of these metrics factor in record, it's entirely possible that at 13-0 and with losses to the teams ahead of them, the absolutely could climb into the top 4 in these metrics after the conference championship games.
-
My GUESS is Cincy gets in and gets waxed in round one. They did hang with UGA last year of course, I don't think they are an awful team. UGA was a bit depleted last year.
-
Well, all of them. Fancystats like Cincinnati. The football results like Cincinnati. The retort is that we should let inferior teams in because while they haven't been as good on the field, they just deserve it by being in a tougher conference. Doesn't make sense.
I love how you just insert this word in. Like it's anything but your opinion.
-
My GUESS is Cincy gets in and gets waxed in round one. They did hang with UGA last year of course, I don't think they are an awful team. UGA was a bit depleted last year.
You're not allowed to think this. It's just bullshit excuses from the wrong side of the argument. Don't you know that?!?
-
And just to make sure you're not just talking out your ass here...
Are you saying that if Cincinnati gets into the playoff, you will become an advocate for Florida to leave the SEC and go independent?
Yes.
If SOS doesn't matter in the slightest, then there is no incentive to play anyone difficult.
-
I love how you just insert this word in. Like it's anything but your opinion.
The whole system is based on opinion. It's a beauty pageant.
-
You're not allowed to think this. It's just bullshit excuses from the wrong side of the argument. Don't you know that?!?
You can think whatever you want. For example, you can think Oklahoma should get in over Cincinnati, because of Oklahoma's sterling record in the playoffs.
-
Okay, let me square the circle for you.
The Rose Bowl tiebreakers are mechanical. The Rose Bowl is not a selection committee that can choose which team they invite. In this case, it was Purdue, Michigan, and Northwestern (apologies; I misspoke in the earlier post and thought OSU was part of that tie). All three teams finished 8-3, 6-2 in conference.
Purdue went to the Rose Bowl based on their H2H2H record, as they had beaten both Michigan and Northwestern head to head. Because it was a mechanical tiebreaker, that was the "earn" option.
For the CFP, we don't have any way that a team "earns" their way in. None. It's a beauty pageant. If the Rose Bowl selection in 2000 were the same, they'd look at resume. Purdue had a close loss to a ranked ND, a close loss to an unranked PSU, and a 20-point loss to an unranked MSU. Michigan also had three losses, but they were by a combined 7 points to a ranked UCLA team, ranked Northwestern team, and (unranked at the time but finished the regular season ranked) Purdue team. Their loss to Purdue was by 1 point.
In a "selection committee" scenario, how likely is it that a committee will look at Purdue and Michigan, with completely different program histories (one sucks, the other has a shiny blue and yellow helmet), with completely different recruiting rankings, and uses your logic... "Well, Purdue usually sucks, and while they're having a good year, FOR THEM, they're clearly not on the same level as Michigan, so we should have Michigan in the Rose Bowl."
That's where your logic leads.
What I honestly advocate for is the 5+1+2 or 6+2 system. That way, teams can actually "earn" their way in. Win your P5 conference or be the top rankes G5 conference champ, or simply win your conference (any league) and be one of the top 6 ranked conference champs.
Your system doesn't allow a team to have a playbook before the season comes to "earn" their way in. Cincinnati is trending towards 13-0. They beat a pretty good [ugh!] Notre Dame team, that has not lost to anyone except Cincinnati. They scheduled and beat another P5 team, one that everyone thought preseason was supposed to be good. It's not their fault IU Sucks. And it looks like they're going to TCOB with the rest of their schedule.
What Sam is pointing out is that based on the various football analytic metrics, they grade out as a top-10 team. Regardless of the actual teams they played, those analytics suggest they don't suck.
But that'll never be enough. Because they're G5. You won't let them earn it.
Your B1G Purdue example is so far removed from Cincinnati's situation - it's just a broken analogy.
It's not about fault or fairness. And somehow, in your advocating for their inclusion into the playoff, you cite them as a top-10 team. When did the playoff expand to 10 teams?
Cincinnati is hardly the first team in this situation where they win, they're good, but due to a shit schedule, we don't know how good they are.
You're saying they should be given the benefit of the doubt and I'm asking WHY!?!
One might say that it's not fair to this year's team/players, but again - where is it written that it's going to be fair?!? Why should this Cincinnati team get into the playoff and not last year's Coastal Carolina? Or 2008 Utah? Or 1998 Tulane?
All of the players on all of these teams knew when they signed that they were forfeiting any chance to play for a NC. They knew an undefeated season wouldn't garner anything but a shitty (now upgraded) bowl and a shiny, pretty record.
And the reason it's not fair isn't because they were valued as 2nd-tier players or their teams are 2nd-tier programs, but because their schedules would not produce a good-enough resume.
So here, in 2021, some of you want to accept a still-not-good-enough resume and hire the team for the playoff.
I simply don't understand what changed. This seems A LOT like the "give everyone a trophy" mindset so many here are against.
-
You can think whatever you want. For example, you can think Oklahoma should get in over Cincinnati, because of Oklahoma's sterling record in the playoffs.
You should get an award for the least-effective succession of posts in one day. You've supported your position literally 0%.
-
The whole system is based on opinion. It's a beauty pageant.
Right, and Cincinnati has a great, big fucking wart on their forehead!
-
Was that wart from losing to Georgia in the last 2 seconds in January?But WTF it was stinking Georgia they haven't won anything in 40 yrs
-
You should get an award for the least-effective succession of posts in one day. You've supported your position literally 0%.
Lol, you are completely unable to explain why Cincinnati shouldn't get in, and concede that "we don't know how good they are," yet you persist. I admire the dedication to the bit, even if at this point your arguments have failed.
-
Our opinions can differ, it's OK, the committee's opinion has UC in the top four, which means something, duh.
-
It's not about fault or fairness. And somehow, in your advocating for their inclusion into the playoff, you cite them as a top-10 team. When did the playoff expand to 10 teams?
The point about their metrics was to show that on a measurement of football that isn't just "count the losses", they don't suck. And as I pointed out in the other thread, they're anywhere between 6th and 8th on those metrics. One of the team consistently ahead of them is Wisconsin, who isn't going to the CFP. Another pair ahead of them is OSU and Michigan, one of whom is going to basically be eliminated from CFP contention on Saturday. With two more wins, they could conceivably climb into the top 4 in those metrics.
Cincinnati is hardly the first team in this situation where they win, they're good, but due to a shit schedule, we don't know how good they are.
You're saying they should be given the benefit of the doubt and I'm asking WHY!?!
You say we don't know how good they are, but everyone is absolutely incensed by the very suggestion that we find out.
I'm not saying that we should give them the benefit of the doubt, but I find it a bit strange that we have a sport where half of the entire field is eliminated from championship contention before a single snap is played in a season.
We've had people saying they'd rather see a 2-loss B1G or SEC team over Cincinnati, who also argue that the regular season should matter. I say Cincinnati deserves a spot over any 2-loss P5 team. They've forfeited their chance by losing two games.
One might say that it's not fair to this year's team/players, but again - where is it written that it's going to be fair?!? Why should this Cincinnati team get into the playoff and not last year's Coastal Carolina? Or 2008 Utah? Or 1998 Tulane?
All of the players on all of these teams knew when they signed that they were forfeiting any chance to play for a NC. They knew an undefeated season wouldn't garner anything but a shitty (now upgraded) bowl and a shiny, pretty record.
And the reason it's not fair isn't because they were valued as 2nd-tier players or their teams are 2nd-tier programs, but because their schedules would not produce a good-enough resume.
They didn't sign with the intent of forfeiting a chance at a championship. They signed because these were the best offers they had.
Now, it's true they were valued as 2nd-tier players and they're playing for teams viewed as 2nd-tier programs. Of course, the reason you keep them in the 2nd tier is that by your own words, "we don't know how good they are", but you refuse to actually give them a shot and find out.
In this case they scheduled a high-P5 program in Notre Dame and a low-P5 program in Indiana, and won both. They won their FCS OOC matchup (news flash, the SEC SEC SEC schedules annual FCS games too) and have a chance to go 9-0 in conference including the CCG. But in the end, it doesn't matter what they out of conference. Unless they're somehow able to schedule Alabama, OSU, Clemson and Oklahoma OOC and win all 4, people say it's not enough and "we don't know how good they are".
So here, in 2021, some of you want to accept a still-not-good-enough resume and hire the team for the playoff.
I simply don't understand what changed. This seems A LOT like the "give everyone a trophy" mindset so many here are against.
Nothing has changed. The system was fundamentally a beauty pageant in the poll-driven days. The BCS and now the CFP are striving to give the national championship real legitimacy. We're just pointing out that it's still a hypocritical beauty pageant system and has no level of objectivity involved.
Cincinnati is just the latest example. The most glaring example previously was 2009, when both TCU and Boise State finished the season and were included in the BCS bowl system--playing against each other. Literally we could have seen "how good they are" by pairing them up against two P5 teams, but I think the powers that be REALLY didn't want to see both of them knock off P5 teams, lest it give these teams any legitimacy.
We have a system where the argument used against them is "we don't know how good they are" and it's a system where it will be impossible to ever find out "how good they are".
6+2 fixes that problem.
-
Can't we all just get along? It's Thanksgiving for goodness' sake.
-
Can't we all just get along? It's Thanksgiving for goodness' sake.
It's not Thanksgiving with a good blow-up family argument...
...and this website sometimes seems like a family, if perhaps a tremendously dysfunctional one.
-
It's not Thanksgiving with a good blow-up family argument...
...and this website sometimes seems like a family, if perhaps a tremendously dysfunctional one.
So, like any other family, then? :)
-
Heck, this place is way more functional than many families.
-
Heck, this place is way more functional than many families.
-
Note that none of those are in the top-4 nor do they have any realistic shot to finish in the top-4 of any of those. So even taking your argument at face value they are a pretty good team that isn't good enough for the CFP.
This reminds me of a point I like to come back to.
They don't put 11-0 teams in the playoff. Just a lot of, we'll see when we get there. Playoff teams have had statistical ranking far worse than that going in. It's the way of CFB with it's rather blocky resumes.
And the other part of the idea of "good enough for the CFP" is that every field is different. At the moment, it's very possible a field coalesces where the No. 4 team simply has a better case. Also a decent chance it fall that we have a dearth of No. 4 options, and then they'll likely slot in Cincinnati. It'll have the problem that it didn't have access to certain resources, but if the bottom of the field is frayed enough, it'll happen.
And then it likely loses to the top seed, same as power teams with Heisman winners and NFL players do with regularity.
-
Can't we all just get along? It's Thanksgiving for goodness' sake.
I've not eaten yet, but I did exercise, so argument is heart of things until them. (Not at my house. The only argument will be "We all basically agree politically, but can we just not talk about it? The first hour was fine, but I don't care tat this point")
-
Rank these teams:
2021 Cincinnati
2020 Cincinnati
2020 Coastal Carolina
2018 UCF
2017 UCF
2016 Western Michigan
2010 TCU
2009 TCU
2009 Cincinnati
2009 Boise St
.
-
Samford nearly knocked off the Gators.
-
Miss Lippy's car is green.
-
But, then, you are saying the results of the games don't actually matter. Win/lose/ who cares? If you reward inferior teams, what is the point of playing the games at all?
I never said this. Results do matter and Cincy's results aren't that good. They have exactly one quality win. They have a chance for a win over Houston which would be a decent win. Then they have a win over SMU which is nice but certainly nothing to write home about.
Assuming they win out and using the aforementioned CBS 1-130 rankings, Cincy will have wins over:
- #6 ND
- #19 Houston
- #30 SMU
- 10 teams ranked #59 and below.
Against teams in the top-58 they are 3-0. By way of comparison:
- OkSU is 4-1 with two more to play
- OU is 3-1 with one or two more to play
- ND is 4-1
- tOSU is 4-1 with one or two more to play
- Bama is 5-1 with two more to play
The problem for Cincy is that the above (and other P5 teams in the running for their CG's) can't all lose.
- Cincy should probably be ahead of the Bedlam loser but the Bedlam winner will move to either 5-1 (OkSU) or 4-1 (OU) with yet another high-end opponent in the B12CG the following week.
- There is an argument that Cincy should be ahead of the Ohio State/Michigan loser but the winner will move to 5-1 (tOSU) or probably about the same for Michigan and then get yet another high-end opponent in the B1GCG the following week.
Then you have Cincy struggling with some REALLY bad teams:
- #117 USF: Cincy was w/in 10 points in the 4th quarter and scored a very late TD to make it look decent as a 17 point win but USF is a HORRIBLE team. They are 2-9 and when they played P5 teams they got slaughtered 45-0 by NCST and 42-20 by Florida (after trailing 35-3 and outscoring UF's reserves 17-7)
- #108 Tulane: Cincy only led 14-12 at the half and scored 10 points in the final seven minutes to turn a pathetic nine point win into a merely unimpressive 19 point win but Tulane is also a HORRIBLE team. They are 2-9and when they played Ole Miss they got slaughtered 61-21. They did "only" lose to Oklahoma by five but note that unlike the Cincy/Tulane game where Cincy scored the late points, in the Tulane/OU game the Sooners had a pretty comfortable 40-22 lead heading into the fourth quarter and Tulane scored 13 points late to make it look closer than it was.
- #102 Indiana: Cincy struggled mightily with Indiana. They trailed as late as the fourth quarter and scored 15 points in the fourth to make it look better. Even ignoring the fact that the game was MUCH closer than the final score indicates, Indiana has bigger losses to Iowa, PSU, tOSU, Mich, Rutgers, and MN. SIX B1G teams have better results against IU than the Bearcats.
- #99 Navy: Cincy only won by a TD though to be fair Navy scored 10 fourth quarter points to make this look a bit closer than it was. Still, Navy is a HORRIBLE team They are 2-8 with bigger losses to Marshall, Air Force, Houston, Memphis, and Notre Dame.
- #90 Tulsa: Cincy won this by eight points but with about a minute to go Tulsa had a first-and-goal at the Cincy 3 yard line and got as close as second-and-goal at the Cincy 1 yard line. The Bearcats were one yard from potentially going to OT against a HORRIBLE Tulsa team.
Every team has off weeks, that is understood. One or two games like this could be attributed to having an off week or perhaps early season growing pains but I listed five games above in which Cincy looked nothing like a NC contender. That is half of the FBS games they've played so far. This simply isn't a CFP resume.
What boggles my mind is the free pass given by a lot of you to Cincy for being G5. What I mean is that if you look at the five results above and imagine that a legitimate NC Contender such as Georgia, Ohio State, Bama, or Michigan had any of the results listed above. They would be mocked and criticized far and wide for such a result. Answer me this: Why doesn't the same apply to Cincinnati?
-
I don't think anyone here has given UC a "free pass", they just note they have not lost and have one very good win. Free pass? I haven't seen it. I suspect everyone here expects they get trampled if they are a four seed, or nearly so. I think they'd be a 10 point dog.
At least. But they are undefeated. If they stay that way, they knock ND out I think. Oklahoma State has a good shot. Who else gets in ahead of UC if they win out?
-
- Ahead on SP+: UGA/OSU/Bama/UM/A&M/Wis - Wisconsin won't make CFP; neither will A&M. One of OSU/UM won't make CFP.
- Ahead on FEI: UGA/OSU/Bama/UM/ND/OkSU/Wis - Wisconsin won't make CFP, and one of OSU/UM won't make CFP. They have H2H over ND so if they are 13-0 conf champ and have H2H, they would likely be a more deserving CFP selection. And there's a chance they could sneak into top 4 with two more wins and with losses from those ahead of them.
- Ahead on F+: UGA/OSU/Bama/UM/Wis - Wisconsin won't make CFP, and one of OSU/UM won't make CFP. So they could finish top-4.
- Ahead in FPI: UGA/OSU/Bama/UM/OU/ND/OkSU - at least one of OSU/UM won't make the CFP and at least one of OU/OkSU won't make the CFP. Have H2H over ND so would be a more deserving CFP pick at 13-0 conf champ than ND. So pulling out three of those teams only gets them to #5 behind an OU/OkSU winner (if finishing 12-1 and conf champ), but if those teams split a two-game series they'd likely jump.
Not going to address Massey Composite because it's a poll [or an aggregation of polls], whereas SP+, FEI, and F+ are statistical analysis tools as far as I can tell. I don't know the FPI methodology, so I did include it.
Not mentioned above of course is the possibility that Bama loses again, which as an 11-2 team probably pushes them out of the CFP. So that's one more potential spot opening for Cinci.
If any of these metrics factor in record, it's entirely possible that at 13-0 and with losses to the teams ahead of them, the absolutely could climb into the top 4 in these metrics after the conference championship games.
I don't have access to SP+ but the fact that they are already behind Wisconsin tells me everything I need to know. I wouldn't put Cincy in ahead of the B1G Champion no matter who wins the B1G. To win the B1G the Badgers would almost certainly have to beat a decent Minnesota team and then knock of a top-3 tOSU/M winner. Meanwhile Cincy will be playing #64 ECU and #19 Houston. As a 10-3 B1G Champion Wisconsin's overall resume would be better than Cincy's resume at 13-0. Cincy's resume would also be inferior to the tOSU/M winner (eitehr 12-1 or 11-2) and also the tOSU/M loser (10-2) so I'd have at least two B1G teams ahead of the Bearcats. They'd also obviously be behind at least one SEC team. Then there is the B12. The possible B12 Champions are:
- 12-1 OkSU: OkSU wins Bedlam then beats Baylor or OU in the B12CG
- 12-1 OU: OU sweeps OkSU
- 11-2 OkSU: OkSU loses Bedlam then beats OU in the B12CG
- 11-2 OU: OU loses Bedlam, Baylor loses to TxTech, OU beats OkSU in the B12CG
- 11-2 Baylor: Baylor beats TxTech and OkSU
Any of those are better overall resumes than Cincy's.
Same for FEI.
Same for F+
Same for FPI.
They simply aren't a top-4 team and while you are right that either Bama or UGA and either tOSU or M and either OU or OkSU will lose, one of each will also win.
-
The free pass for Cincinnati can be seen in the CFP's first rankings, specifically with OU.
Helmet program.
Undefeated.
But penalized, for lackluster wins vs lackluster opponents. OU was ranked behind 4 one-loss teams. Why were they penalized like that? Because they weren't meeting everyone's expectations of them. Its relative.
Therein lies the free pass - Cincinnati doesn't have the same expectations to live up to. So their lackluster wins vs lackluster opponents aren't penalized as much or at all.
-
We've had people saying they'd rather see a 2-loss B1G or SEC team over Cincinnati, who also argue that the regular season should matter. I say Cincinnati deserves a spot over any 2-loss P5 team. They've forfeited their chance by losing two games.
I hate this because it rewards crap schedules.
Consider the Buckeyes right now. If they had played Directional Nebraska Teacher's College instead of Oregon back in week 2, right now they'd be 11-0 and safely in under the formulation you listed because their worst-case would be 11-1 with a loss to a team better than any that Cincy played.
Punishing teams for playing tough schedules will only result in more "KSU style" schedules where everybody takes Bill Snyder's advice to never schedule a loss.
-
And the other part of the idea of "good enough for the CFP" is that every field is different.
This is a REALLY good and really important point. Ohio State has been 12-1 and not gotten in and they've been 12-1 and gotten in. It wasn't so much because those 12-1 tOSU teams were significantly different from one another, it was because what they were up against was different.
Go 12-1 and win a P5 Conference you are almost always going to be in but there is at least a theoretical possibility that the other four P5 Conferences will each produce a 13-0 Champion.
-
The free pass for Cincinnati can be seen in the CFP's first rankings, specifically with OU.
Helmet program.
Undefeated.
But penalized, for lackluster wins vs lackluster opponents. OU was ranked behind 4 one-loss teams. Why were they penalized like that? Because they weren't meeting everyone's expectations of them. Its relative.
Therein lies the free pass - Cincinnati doesn't have the same expectations to live up to. So their lackluster wins vs lackluster opponents aren't penalized as much or at all.
Exactly. Oklahoma got knocked for lackluster wins but Cincy didn't. That is the free pass that Cincy is getting.
-
Cincy beat ND on the road, OU didn't. Who else would you put ahead of Cincy aside from the OSU-UM winner? ND? Oklahoma State? Sure, if they win out. But right now, who would you have there instead? If you put UM in you just delay a day.
-
Exactly. Oklahoma got knocked for lackluster wins but Cincy didn't. That is the free pass that Cincy is getting.
They got knocked for looking bad more often. And having one fewer good win.
It is what it is. Half the sport is eliminated by dint of the season starting. And when there might be the smallest chance of a crack in that, folks want to jump and explain, no, there's much moral rectitude in that. (And much of the rectitude is in a "strong schedule" which is in many ways not that controllable and subject to some basic economic whims of the sport).
Is what it is, I suppose.
-
They got knocked for looking bad more often. And having one fewer good win.
It is what it is. Half the sport is eliminated by dint of the season starting. And when there might be the smallest chance of a crack in that, folks want to jump and explain, no, there's much moral rectitude in that. (And much of the rectitude is in a "strong schedule" which is in many ways not that controllable and subject to some basic economic whims of the sport).
Is what it is, I suppose.
This is pretty much it.
I actually don't give a crap what happens to Cincinnati. What bothers me is a system that purports to say that half of FBS is in the same sport and division as P5 teams, but which eliminates them from contention every damn year before the season's opening kickoff.
If that is the case, don't even rank them in the CFP rankings. If you'd put 10-3 Wisconsin in over 13-0 Cincinnati, why lie and even rank them at all.
You can either break the P5 away and actually be truthful about who has a chance in this sport, or you should give them an actual chance (i.e. 6+2).
-
This is pretty much it.
I actually don't give a crap what happens to Cincinnati. What bothers me is a system that purports to say that half of FBS is in the same sport and division as P5 teams, but which eliminates them from contention every damn year before the season's opening kickoff.
If that is the case, don't even rank them in the CFP rankings. If you'd put 10-3 Wisconsin in over 13-0 Cincinnati, why lie and even rank them at all.
You can either break the P5 away and actually be truthful about who has a chance in this sport, or you should give them an actual chance (i.e. 6+2).
The real dream is promotion an relegation, but alas, the sport isn't flexible like that.
-
You need a centralized authority to make that happen, and if anything, the NCAA is surrendering power.
-
This is pretty much it.
I actually don't give a crap what happens to Cincinnati. What bothers me is a system that purports to say that half of FBS is in the same sport and division as P5 teams, but which eliminates them from contention every damn year before the season's opening kickoff.
If that is the case, don't even rank them in the CFP rankings. If you'd put 10-3 Wisconsin in over 13-0 Cincinnati, why lie and even rank them at all.
You can either break the P5 away and actually be truthful about who has a chance in this sport, or you should give them an actual chance (i.e. 6+2).
I agree.
I've always said the G5 is in purgatory.
They can achieve out of it (TCU, Utah), but that's hard and takes luck and timing, along with success. What I don't understand is that these FCS teams who CAN compete for national championships keep flocking up for the $$$ while forfeiting any chance at a NC. That's plainly what they're doing. Boise, GA Southern, and others, and now James Madison are putting a 'success ceiling' on their own players and programs to chase some additional dollars.
Cincinnati is going to discover the ceiling in a big way this year, whether they're in the playoff or not. Not getting in = ceiling. Getting in and being curb-stomped with the nation watching = ceiling.
And again, fairness isn't a thing.
-
Getting in and being curb-stomped with the nation watching = ceiling.
They could be Oklahoma!
-
And again, fairness isn't a thing.
If fairness isn't a thing, sports isn't a thing.
-
I don't have access to SP+ but the fact that they are already behind Wisconsin tells me everything I need to know.
SP+ isn't much more than a refined version of what you usually use. You generally look at the margin of victory of like teams, which is fine. SP+ looks at efficiency per play against like teams, with various things filtered in and out. It's a good tempo free stat, and Cincy does just fine in ti and is ahead of several teams who supposedly "deserve" to be ahead of them. You are arguing that such things shouldn't count, and by extension are arguing the results on the field shouldn't count. We should instead reward teams with supposedly tougher schedules who aren't as good.
-
Cincinnati is going to discover the ceiling in a big way this year, whether they're in the playoff or not. Not getting in = ceiling. Getting in and being curb-stomped with the nation watching = ceiling.
Pretty sure every team that has been in the playoffs has gotten curb stomped outside of Georgia and LSU.
-
I don't have access to SP+ but the fact that they are already behind Wisconsin tells me everything I need to know.
About what, exactly?
-
Pretty sure every team that has been in the playoffs has gotten curb stomped outside of Georgia and LSU.
And again, a straw man argument. I fully expect Cincinnati to get blasted. Doesn't change my opinion. otherwise just use the 247 composite recruiting rankings, and put the top 4 in.
-
And again, a straw man argument. I fully expect Cincinnati to get blasted. Doesn't change my opinion. otherwise just use the 247 composite recruiting rankings, and put the top 4 in.
For the life of me I don't understand why anyone would expect, say, Oklahoma State to do any better than Cincy.
-
For the life of me I don't understand why anyone would expect, say, Oklahoma State to do any better than Cincy.
The only realistic way for OkSU to get in is for them to win back-to-back games against Oklahoma then either Baylor or Oklahoma again. IF they do that, I will say that they are a better team than Cincy no matter what Cincy does against ECU and Houston and I'm assuming that SP+ and the like will agree with me and yes, I'll absolutely expect them to do better than Cincy because they'll be a pretty obviously better team.
The same is true for Oklahoma just substitute back-to-back games against OkSU.
The same is true for Baylor just substitute TxTech and OkSU.
Any which way the winner of the B12 will be a better team.
-
Any which way the winner of the B12 will be a better team.
This makes no sense!
-
This is pretty much it.
I actually don't give a crap what happens to Cincinnati. What bothers me is a system that purports to say that half of FBS is in the same sport and division as P5 teams, but which eliminates them from contention every damn year before the season's opening kickoff.
If that is the case, don't even rank them in the CFP rankings. If you'd put 10-3 Wisconsin in over 13-0 Cincinnati, why lie and even rank them at all.
You can either break the P5 away and actually be truthful about who has a chance in this sport, or you should give them an actual chance (i.e. 6+2).
I'm not saying no way ever, I'm saying Cincy hasn't done enough. Their schedule isn't very good. Obviously a BIG part of that is playing in the AAC but they CHOSE to play Miami, OH and an FCS team OOC. Then one of their other two OOC games was IU which frankly is probably about what they expected when they scheduled them however many years ago and the only good one is ND which I frankly think is overrated although they may actually be pretty good now.
If Cincy was closing in on 13-0 with IU replaced by say aTm (#18 in the CBS 1-130) and FCS replaced by say Purdue (#33 in the CBS 1-130) then I'd look at it differently. Their best opponents would be:
- #6 ND
- #18 aTm
- #19 Houston
- #30 SMU
- #33 Purdue
That is not altogether terrible compared to a hypothetical B1G Champion tOSU:
- #5 M - roughly even 5v6
- #11 MSU - roughly even 11v18
- #13 Ore - roughly even 13v19
- #15 UW - tOSU much better 15v30
- #29 PSU - roughly even 29v33
I'm just using tOSU as a fill-in here for basically any P5 team because the story is the same with nearly all of them. As it is now Cincy has a comparable #1 opponent but after that they are WAY behind nearly any P5 at each step.
Look at this chart:
(https://i.imgur.com/MIrKoaI.png)
Other than #1 opponent and the last few, Cincy is generally about 2-3 steps behind the Oklahoma's, tOSU, or Bama:
- Their #2 is comparable to OkSU's #3/4, OU's #3/4, ND's #2, tOSU's #4, Bama's #3
- Their #3 is comparable to OkSU's #4, OU's #4, ND's #3, tOSU's #5/6, Bama's #5
- Their #4 is comparable to OkSU's #7, OU's #6, ND's #6, tOSU's #8, Bama's #9
- Their #5 is comparable to OkSU's #8, OU's #7, ND's #6, tOSU's #8, Bama's #9
- Their #6 is comparable to OkSU's #10, OU's #10, ND's #9, tOSU's #10, Bama's #10
- Their #7 is comparable to OkSU's #11(exact), OU's #10/11, ND's #10, tOSU's #12(exact), Bama's #10/11
- Their #8 is comparable to OkSU's #12, OU's #11, ND's #12(exact), tOSU's #12/13, Bama's #10/11
- Their #9 is comparable to
I just realized I didn't reorganize for IU's drop but you get the point. Every week Cincy's opponent was easier than OkSU's, OU's, ND's, tOSU's, and Bama's by a not insignificant margin. They need two more good to great opponents to rectify that and they chose Murray State instead. That is on them.
-
This makes no sense!
What are you missing?
The B12 Champion will either be:
- A 12-1 Oklahoma that sweeps OkSU, or
- A 12-1 OkSU that beats OU then either OU or Baylor
- An 11-2 Oklahoma that splits the OkSU series, or
- An 11-2 OkSU that splits the OU series, or
- An 11-2 Baylor that finishes with wins over TxTech and OkSU
The first two are pretty obvious. Maybe you disagree with the last three because they have two losses but they played a MUCH harder schedule so they also have a group of quality wins where a 13-0 Cincy has one. One game just isn't enough for me.
Any of those are better than a 13-0 Cincy whose last two games are complete trash and somewhat less trash.
-
What are you missing?
I mean, right now, you can make a very healthy case that Cincinnati is better than any Big 12 team, just based on results on the field. You are saying that if the Big 12 teams all play each other and one emerges champion, that makes them a better team. I can see how you would rather reward the Big 12 team by playing the tougher schedule, but playing a tougher schedule doesn't mean any of them are magically better teams.
-
Who should be in ahead of Cincy and why?
-
I mean, right now, you can make a very healthy case that Cincinnati is better than any Big 12 team, just based on results on the field. You are saying that if the Big 12 teams all play each other and one emerges champion, that makes them a better team. I can see how you would rather reward the Big 12 team by playing the tougher schedule, but playing a tougher schedule doesn't mean any of them are magically better teams.
No, not magically.....they all just have more evidence. You know, that's kind of a big deal when we can't TRULY know, we have to go by the existing evidence.
Cincinnati's existing evidence is a 1-game season.
-
If fairness isn't a thing, sports isn't a thing.
Is this a joke?
Is it fair that the Yankees' payroll is triple that of their opponent?
Is it fair that Georgia has to play Alabama for their conference title and Cincinnati only plays Houston?
Is it fair that one basketball team signs 3 HOFers?
Are injuries fair?
Is your HC leaving for a better job fair?
You've absolutely abandoned strength of schedule being a thing and now you post this? Are you okay? I'm genuinely asking.
-
And again, a straw man argument. I fully expect Cincinnati to get blasted. Doesn't change my opinion. otherwise just use the 247 composite recruiting rankings, and put the top 4 in.
Talk about straw man.
I feel like I'm in the twilight zone. Suddenly everyone is just taking strength of schedule and throwing it in the trash can. WTF?!?
-
No, not magically.....they all just have more evidence. You know, that's kind of a big deal when we can't TRULY know, we have to go by the existing evidence.
Cincinnati's existing evidence is a 1-game season.
No it isn't. You are simply ignoring evidence on the field because to look at it kills your argument.
-
Is this a joke?
No. The fact that some schools have a ton of advantaged over other schools is a fact, and it isn't fair. Your argument, as far as I can tell, is that the disadvantaged schools shouldn't be allowed to even compete, even when they have better teams than the advantaged schools.
-
Talk about straw man.
I feel like I'm in the twilight zone. Suddenly everyone is just taking strength of schedule and throwing it in the trash can. WTF?!?
I have yet to see anyone here claim that an undefeated Cincy should be in over an undefeated P5 team. Yet in response I'm am getting some absolute nonsense that 2 loss Baylor deserves a shot in the playoffs over Cincinnati because of the greatness of the Big 12.
-
You keep using the phrase "on the field," but you're ignoring the teams on the field.
Take an average playoff-level team.
Give them Cincinnati's schedule.
Tell me how many losable games they play.
The 85 Bears can wax a bunch of high school teams and according to you, they "earned it on the field." Great. Thanks for playing!
But you're ignoring that the winless Lions could do the same with the same schedule.
-
No. The fact that some schools have a ton of advantaged over other schools is a fact, and it isn't fair. Your argument, as far as I can tell, is that the disadvantaged schools shouldn't be allowed to even compete, even when they have better teams than the advantaged schools.
Do you want the stats on "disadvantaged" vs P5 teams? Are you sure about that?
-
I have yet to see anyone here claim that an undefeated Cincy should be in over an undefeated P5 team. Yet in response I'm am getting some absolute nonsense that 2 loss Baylor deserves a shot in the playoffs over Cincinnati because of the greatness of the Big 12.
Let's pretend Baylor and Cincinnati are exactly the same quality of team. Humor me.
This argument isn't about who's actually better, because we dont know and can't know. So what is it about? It's about resume and eye test. The same 2 things it's always been about in this era of college football.
Resume is not just record. It's about record and who that record is against. You know this. You're either bored enough to troll like a fiend or you've lost all credibility.
Why weren't you advocating for Wake Forest before they lost? Why not let in UT-San Antonio in over Cincinnati? Let's get an FCS team and throw them in the playoff. I'm sure one of them is undefeated and feels unfairly treated.
-
Do you want the stats on "disadvantaged" vs P5 teams? Are you sure about that?
I'm not interested in stats on P5 v. G5. That is wholly irrelevant. I want the stats on the best teams. This year, that includes Cincinnati. I don't know why people would be up in arms that Cincinnati us better than Oklahoma this year. Most people would be relieved.
-
Let's pretend Baylor and Cincinnati are exactly the same quality of team. Humor me.
This argument isn't about who's actually better, because we dont know and can't know. So what is it about? It's about resume and eye test. The same 2 things it's always been about in this era of college football.
Resume is not just record. It's about record and who that record is against. You know this. You're either bored enough to troll like a fiend or you've lost all credibility.
Why weren't you advocating for Wake Forest before they lost? Why not let in UT-San Antonio in over Cincinnati? Let's get an FCS team and throw them in the playoff. I'm sure one of them is undefeated and feels unfairly treated.
How about look at the games??? As I have advocated this entire thread.
-
I'm not interested in stats on P5 v. G5. That is wholly irrelevant. I want the stats on the best teams. This year, that includes Cincinnati. I don't know why people would be up in arms that Cincinnati us better than Oklahoma this year. Most people would be relieved.
You could even throw all the games before now out the window. Set up all the contenders in a row and look at their routes to the playoff.
Georgia, you have to beat GT and then #3 Alabama.
OSU, you have to beat #5Michigan and then #14 Wisconsin
Alabama, you have to beat Auburn and then #1 Georgia
Cincinnati, you have to beat East Carolina and then Houston
Michigan, you have to beat #2 OSU and then #14 Wisconsin
Notre Dame, you have to beat Stanford and then masturbate onto your NBC contract
Oklahoma St/Baylor/OU, you have to beat each other twice (more or less) (all ranked 7-10)
.
Obviously, the easiest route is ND's. But no one here is advocating for them.
The next-easiest route is Cincinnati's.
Then which one would you choose for yourself? A couple of top 10 teams or a top 5 team and someone else?
EVEN IN A 2-GAME SCHEDULE, CINCINNATI'S IS WEAK, LOL.
-
How about look at the games??? As I have advocated this entire thread.
How about look at how the games are against??? Don't be a child.
-
How about look at how the games are against??? Don't be a child.
So use the many tools available which compare games against dissimilar schedules
-
I think most of us concur that Cincinnati has a solid team, very good, but probably not on a par with the top five or so. Maybe all of us think that.
Maybe they get blown out in a CFP game, but if we believe they are on a par with say Ole Miss, they would have a chance albeit not a great chance of beating a "UGA/OSU".
And I don't know currently who "deserves" the spot more. OSU/UM will resolve, Oklahoma State will win out of not, I can't put ND ahead of them unless they lose. If Bama edges UGA it gets complicated of course, but if not you have 2 slots left (presume OSU/UM gets one). I don't see another likely candidate.
This assumes much of course, like UC has to beat Houston. It's better for them if OkSU loses of course. The ACC is out, the Pac is out, so ....
-
1 Georgia vs 4 Wake Forest
2 Cincinnati vs 3 St. Augustine School for the Deaf & Blind
-
I mean, right now, you can make a very healthy case that Cincinnati is better than any Big 12 team, just based on results on the field. You are saying that if the Big 12 teams all play each other and one emerges champion, that makes them a better team. I can see how you would rather reward the Big 12 team by playing the tougher schedule, but playing a tougher schedule doesn't mean any of them are magically better teams.
Dogshit schedules are rewarded with dogshit bowl games. Cincy can thank their AD if they are rightfully left out.
-
Dogshit schedules are rewarded with dogshit bowl games. Cincy can thank their AD if they are rightfully left out.
He scheduled a one off at Notre Dame.
-
Right, they had 1 losable game this year.
-
Right, they had 1 losable game this year.
Well, OSU had two and guess what their record is.
-
The team you're neglecting for some reason, UTSA, is down 18 at the half.
According to you, though, if they were to go undefeated, they'd deserve a playoff spot over Ohio State or some other evil, entitled 10-2 team with an actual schedule.
-
M should probably slide up to #2 after this win.
-
The team you're neglecting for some reason, UTSA, is down 18 at the half.
According to you, though, if they were to go undefeated, they'd deserve a playoff spot over Ohio State or some other evil, entitled 10-2 team with an actual schedule.
I'm not ignoring them at all. Fun team. By the fancystats (F+), they are 43rd in the country. Cincinnati is 6th.
-
If Michigan manages to win the Big Ten next weekend then I will change my philosophy and fully agree that Cincy deserves a playoff spot and hope that they meet in the semifinals. If it doesn't play out exactly like this then I will maintain my current position that Cincy has no business in the playoffs.
-
So, who should be in instead of Cincy? I can see Oklahoma State IFF they win out.
We could have mayhem if Michigam loses next week.
-
So, who should be in instead of Cincy? I can see Oklahoma State IFF they win out.
We could have mayhem if Michigam loses next week.
Anyone to be honest. I don't think their schedule or narrow wins against several lackluster opponents warrants consideration. Maybe they're one of the four best, but it was their responsibility to play a schedule that allowed them to show they belong. A single game against Notre Dame doesn't do that for me.
-
Anyone to be honest. I don't think their schedule or narrow wins against several lackluster opponents warrants consideration. Maybe they're one of the four best, but it was their responsibility to play a schedule that allowed them to show they belong. A single game against Notre Dame doesn't do that for me.
Anyone? Indiana? Vandy?
-
Anyone? Indiana? Vandy?
Cincy beat Indiana so how about anyone who had the testicular fortitude to schedule a portfolio of opponents that would allow a committee to review your resume and see that there is no doubt you are one of the four best teams and have rightfully earned a playoff spot.
-
So, not just anyone?
-
So, not just anyone?
I'd be fine with anyone who made the effort, but if you'd like to win the argument on a technicality this one is all yours my friend.
-
I'd be fine with anyone who made the effort, but if you'd like to win the argument on a technicality this one is all yours my friend.
Notre Dame?
-
I'd be fine with anyone who made the effort, but if you'd like to win the argument on a technicality this one is all yours my friend.
Name a team.
-
Name a team.
Off the top of my head, Georgia, Alabama, UM, OSU, OK St, Baylor, Ole Miss, Oklahoma. I'm sure there's others wouldn't mind seeing how the rest of the season shakes out first. Notre Dame sneaking by FSU in overtime and Toledo in the final seconds doesn't really help Cincy's argument. Cincy's schedule disqualifies them from the get go for me.
It's like they were invited to a frat party and brought a tray of cupcakes when everyone else brought titties or beer and now they can't figure out why they aren't the life of the party.
-
Ole Miss. Funny.
-
Ole Miss. Funny.
I don't have a beef with Cincy specifically, it's undefeated teams with suspect schedules. To be fair to Cincy, Clemson has had some pretty weak OCC schedules in the past and the ACC is complete garbage.
I'm just not a fan of leaving good teams home that faced some adversity throughout the season in favor of a team that played nobody.
-
Ole Miss. Funny.
I doubt Vegas would laugh.