CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: Cincydawg on August 09, 2018, 09:04:39 AM
-
I'm going with USC (the real one).
They remind me of Richt-coached UGA teams a bit now, high on talent and prone to losing twice inexplicably. Maybe they get it done this year. They could be 12-1 and very likely make the final four (FF, if they win the CG of course).
Maybe this thread won't get lost in turmoil this year?
-
Considering I have them starting 1-2 in my projections, I will not be going with the Trojans.
-
Of teams outside the Top 10, I think Sparty and Stanford have the best chances.
-
A bit of history on this:
In four years of the CFP we have had four teams from outside the preseason AP top-10 make the playoff for an average of one per year but it hasn't been consistently one each year:
- One in 2017: #15 UGA
- One in 2016: #14 Washington
- Two in 2015: #12 Clemson and #19 Oklahoma
- None in 2014
History of preseason AP rank getting to the playoff:
- #1 has made it three out of four years
- #2 has made it two out of four years
- #3 has made it two out of four years
- #4 has never made it
- #5 has made it three out of four years
- #6 has made it once
- #7 has made it once
- #8 has never made it
- #9 has never made it
- #10 has never made it
- #11 has never made it
- #12 has made it once
- #13 has never made it
- #14 has made it once
- #15 has made it once
- #16 has never made it
- #17 has never made it
- #18 has never made it
- #19 has made it once
- #20 and all teams ranked #21 and below have never made it
Percentage of teams making the CFP based on preseason AP rank:
- #1: 75%, 3 of 4
- top-2: 62.5%, 5 of 8
- top-3: 58.3%, 7 of 12
- top-4: 43.8%, 7 of 16
- top-5: 50%, 10 of 20
- top-6: 45.8%, 11 of 24
- top-7: 42.9%, 12 of 28
- top-8: 37.5%, 12 of 32
- top-9: 33.3%, 12 of 36
- top-10: 30%, 12 of 40
- top-11: 27.3%, 12 of 44
- top-12: 27.1%, 13 of 48
- top-13: 25%, 13 of 52
- top-14: 25%, 14 of 56
- top-15: 25%, 15 of 60
- top-16: 23.4%, 15 of 64
- top-17: 22.1%, 15 of 68
- top-18: 20.8%, 15 of 72
- top-19: 21.1%, 16 of 76
Medina's theoretical predictive percentage chance of a given team making the CFP based on preseason AP rank:
| 1 | 65.0% |
| 2 | 50.0% |
| 3 | 50.0% |
| 4 | 41.5% |
| 5 | 34.4% |
| 6 | 28.6% |
| 7 | 23.7% |
| 8 | 19.7% |
| 9 | 16.3% |
| 10 | 13.6% |
| 11 | 11.3% |
| 12 | 9.3% |
| 13 | 7.8% |
| 14 | 6.4% |
| 15 | 5.3% |
| 16+ total | 17.0% |
-
It won't be the Wolverines.
-
Of teams outside the Top 10, I think Sparty and Stanford have the best chances.
No idea how they calculate it, but ESPN's playoff odds say MSU-OSU is the most important swing game for determining playoff participation.
-
A bit of history on this:
In four years of the CFP we have had four teams from outside the preseason AP top-10 make the playoff for an average of one per year but it hasn't been consistently one each year:
- One in 2017: #15 UGA
- One in 2016: #14 Washington
- Two in 2015: #12 Clemson and #19 Oklahoma
- None in 2014
History of preseason AP rank getting to the playoff:
- Alabama has made it four out of four years
- #1 has made it three out of four years
- #2 has made it two out of four years
- #3 has made it two out of four years
- #4 has never made it
- #5 has made it three out of four years
- #6 has made it once
- #7 has made it once
- #8 has never made it
- #9 has never made it
- #10 has never made it
- #11 has never made it
- #12 has made it once
- #13 has never made it
- #14 has made it once
- #15 has made it once
- #16 has never made it
- #17 has never made it
- #18 has never made it
- #19 has made it once
- #20 and all teams ranked #21 and below have never made it
Percentage of teams making the CFP based on preseason AP rank:
- #1: 75%, 3 of 4
- top-2: 62.5%, 5 of 8
- top-3: 58.3%, 7 of 12
- top-4: 43.8%, 7 of 16
- top-5: 50%, 10 of 20
- top-6: 45.8%, 11 of 24
- top-7: 42.9%, 12 of 28
- top-8: 37.5%, 12 of 32
- top-9: 33.3%, 12 of 36
- top-10: 30%, 12 of 40
- top-11: 27.3%, 12 of 44
- top-12: 27.1%, 13 of 48
- top-13: 25%, 13 of 52
- top-14: 25%, 14 of 56
- top-15: 25%, 15 of 60
- top-16: 23.4%, 15 of 64
- top-17: 22.1%, 15 of 68
- top-18: 20.8%, 15 of 72
- top-19: 21.1%, 16 of 76
Medina's theoretical predictive percentage chance of a given team making the CFP based on preseason AP rank:
| 1 | 65.0% |
| 2 | 50.0% |
| 3 | 50.0% |
| 4 | 41.5% |
| 5 | 34.4% |
| 6 | 28.6% |
| 7 | 23.7% |
| 8 | 19.7% |
| 9 | 16.3% |
| 10 | 13.6% |
| 11 | 11.3% |
| 12 | 9.3% |
| 13 | 7.8% |
| 14 | 6.4% |
| 15 | 5.3% |
| 16+ total | 17.0% |
just thought i'd fix that real quick ;)
-
No idea how they calculate it, but ESPN's playoff odds say MSU-OSU is the most important swing game for determining playoff participation.
Link to ELA's note (http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/24310810/introducing-college-football-playoff-predictor-which-likes-clemson-better-alabama).
There are six games among the top-4 in the B1G-E. Of those six, the three involving the Buckeyes are ranked #1 (tOSU@MSU), #2 (tOSU@PSU), and #6 (M@tOSU) in ESPN's ranking of "Highest Impact Games for CFP Race, Per Playoff Predictor".
Interestingly, per ESPN, the other three of the top-6 most important swing games for determining playoff participation all involve Auburn (@Bama, vsWashington, @UGA).
Of the six, I would think that Auburn at Georgia would have the least impact because it is a cross-divisional game and therefore less likely to determine CG representation. The other non-divisional game is an OOC game between Auburn and Washington but I see that as highly likely to have an impact on the CFP race because Washington's performance there could have a huge impact on whether or not the Pac Champion gets in and/or whether or not the SEC gets two teams.
-
just thought i'd fix that real quick ;)
LoL, it wasn't about teams, it was about rankings but go ahead and take the opportunity to brag!
-
based on coaches poll, i'll take nd on a flier. if they can beat mich at home in first game, they'll be set up nicely, with only stanford (home) and usc (away) as the major tests, imo. maybe va tech and fsu, but i don't think either are ready to compete like irish might be, though they could play upset.
stanford will be tough, but it's at home, and i don't buy usc being great this year.
and really, even if they lose to mich in g1, they have the schedule and name to make up for it.
i don't think it'll happen, but they'd be my pick.
-
LoL, it wasn't about teams, it was about rankings but go ahead and take the opportunity to brag!
hey, it's not called the alabama invitational for nothing. it's not called the alabama invitational, but it maybe should be.
-
Because I like symmetry, we need OSU to make the playoff this year and for Clemson and Alabama to miss it. That would give OSU 3, Clemson 3 and the antichrist 4 appearances.
-
West Virginia
-
Whose Top Ten?
-
Because I like symmetry, we need OSU to make the playoff this year and for Clemson and Alabama to miss it. That would give OSU 3, Clemson 3 and the antichrist 4 appearances.
On that subject:
| Team | Appear | CFP Gm | W | L | % | Champ |
| Bama | 4 | 7 | 5 | 2 | 0.714 | 2 |
| Clemson | 3 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 0.600 | 1 |
| tOSU | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0.667 | 1 |
| Oklahoma | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0.000 | 0 |
| Georgia | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0.500 | 0 |
| Oregon | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0.500 | 0 |
| FSU | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.000 | 0 |
| MSU | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.000 | 0 |
| Washington | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.000 | 0 |
In 2014 obviously all four teams were new to the playoff because the playoff itself was new. Since then:
First time CFP participants in 2015:
- #1 Clemson
- #3 Michigan State
- #4 Oklahoma
First time CFP participants in 2016:
First time CFP participants in 2017:
My guess is that it will not be long before we have a year and then multiple years with no new CFP participants.
-
Interesting about new teams getting in versus the "usual". Does that start to diminish interest? What if, in ten years, only ten programs have ever made the CFP? We're at 9 now, so maybe that should be 12 or 14.
Same ol' same ol'. Do programs like "Wisconsin" end up playing for a NY6 bowl with the apparent notion they have no shot? (I know they have a shot would not consent otherwise.)
USC has never made it, nor has ND.
Who are the new teams most likely to make it? USC, ND, Auburn, LSU, VaTech?, Wisconsin, PSU, UM, Texas, Stanford(?), ...
-
Interesting about new teams getting in versus the "usual". Does that start to diminish interest? What if, in ten years, only ten programs have ever made the CFP? We're at 9 now, so maybe that should be 12 or 14.
Same ol' same ol'. Do programs like "Wisconsin" end up playing for a NY6 bowl with the apparent notion they have no shot? (I know they have a shot would not consent otherwise.)
USC has never made it, nor has ND.
Who are the new teams most likely to make it? USC, ND, Auburn, LSU, VaTech?, Wisconsin, PSU, UM, Texas, Stanford(?), ...
I was thinking that might be the thing that drives the push to 8 more than anything. Alabama, Clemson, OSU, and soon Georgia (maybe Oklahoma) fatigue. I watched the Rose Bowl last year, and went to bed partway through the Sugar Bowl. My interest in watching more Alabama-Clemson is gone.
-
Interesting thoughts. Those nine teams that have made the CFP are ranked (Coaches, preseason):
- #1 Bama
- #2 Clemson
- #3 Ohio State
- #4 Georgia
- #5 Oklahoma
- #6 Washington
- #12 Michigan State
- #19 Florida State
- n/r (3rd among "others receiving votes) Oregon
It wouldn't be completely shocking if this year's four CFP participants all come from among those nine and I'd suggest that it is more likely than not that at least three of the four will.
I do not know if people get tired of that or if they want to watch BamavClemson IV.
-
so in the theme of the thread I'd be wise to select #12 Michigan State or #19 Florida State?
I'll take Stanford
my other choices would be Michigan or USC
-
Hard pass on USC being playoff-worthy this year. They will sorely miss Darnold and their D is good but far from elite.
-
I think we may have this backwards. In 4-5 year stretches, hasn't the top 4 always been populated by the same few teams? If there's fatigue now, why any more than in the past? If we went to 8 teams - guess what? We'd have a larger handful of the same teams making the playoffs even more often. The random, "down" year by Bama (10-2) would yield a playoff spot with 8 teams. The larger the playoff, the more familiar faces there will be.
Regular season end, Top 4 rankings
4-year stretches, with 2-year overlap:
2012-15
ND, Bama, Florida, Oregon
FSU, Auburn, Bama, MSU
Bama, Oregon, FSU, OSU
Clemson, Bama, MSU, OU.............Bama 4, Oregon 2, MSU 2, FSU 2
2010-2013
Auburn, Oregon, TCU, Stanford
LSU, Bama, OK St, Stanford
ND, Bama, Florida, Oregon
FSU, Auburn, Bama, MSU...............Bama 3, Stanford 2, Oregon 2
2008-2012
OU, Florida, Texas, Bama
Bama, Texas, Cinci, TCU
Auburn, Oregon, TCU, Stanford
LSU, Bama, OK St, Stanford............Bama 3, Texas 2, Stanford 2, TCU 2
2006-2009
OSU, Florida, Michigan, LSU
OSU, LSU, Va Tech, OU
OU, Florida, Texas, Bama
Bama, Texas, Cinci, TCU............OSU 2, Bama 2, LSU 2, Florida 2, Texas 2, OU 2
2004-2007
USC, OU, Auburn, Texas
USC, Texas, Penn St, OSU
OSU, Florida, Michigan, LSU
OSU, LSU, Va Tech, OU..............OSU 3, OU 2, LSU 2, Texas 2
Pretty consistent, no? The teams cycle through a bit, but there's always a handful who peak in these stretches....
-
It won't be the Wolverines.
wouldn't be so sure. Michigan is loaded on defense. That defense alone will keep them in every game. They have the best RB duo the school has had in ages in Higdon and Evans. Those guys have big strides to make in pass pro- but as pure runners- it's the best duo they've had in ages and both of them can also catch the ball really well. They have really talented WR's in DPJ and Black- that's as talented a duo as there is in the country. Grant Perry will be rock solid in the slot and they have an embarrassment of riches at TE. Not to mention they've got a kicker who hit 80% of his kicks with a long of 56 yards as a frosh. Nordin could wind up being the best kicker in the B1G this year. Probably has the biggest leg at the very least.
Ed Warriner and Shea Patterson were huge additions. If Warriner can turn that OL around- which he has great track record of developing OL units I'd say- Michigan will be dangerous. They don't need a high flying offense to be a playoff caliber team. They just need a functional offense that limits turnovers and sustains drives to help out that defense.
-
I'm going with USC (the real one).
This year we see that the last two years of stellar SC teams were due to Darnold’s arm, not Clay Helton’s coaching.
Unless it’s Washington, don’t count on the PAC 12 for much this season.
-
This year we see that the last two years of stellar SC teams were due to Darnold’s arm, not Clay Helton’s coaching.
Unless it’s Washington, don’t count on the PAC 12 for much this season.
I'm with you there.
Darnold carried USC. They were cratering with Max Browne, didn't turn that ship around til Darnold got the start. He covered a lot of warts at USC.
Helton is a shit coach.
-
So, Notre Dame is looking like a pretty good choice at the moment. We'll see. Duh.
-
Ed Warriner and Shea Patterson were huge additions. If Warriner can turn that OL around- which he has great track record of developing OL units I'd say- Michigan will be dangerous. They don't need a high flying offense to be a playoff caliber team. They just need a functional offense that limits turnovers and sustains drives to help out that defense.
This was a good take. Especially about Warriner. So far so good on that front. Improving fast.