CFP Rankings Week 12

[Chewbaccer]

SOS only matters when the talking heads use it to disqualify G5 teams fron playoff talk.

Theres zero reason right now for a P5 to schedule anyone OOC. The one certainty the committee has shown us so far is you cant lose more than 1 game. So the risk of playing a great OOC game and losing FAR outweighs what you get for winning.

I always go back to 2017 where OSU lost to OU OOC. If they had played a G5 or middling P5 instead and nothing else changed OSU wouldve absolutely been chosen over Bama ( even with a blowout loss to Iowa )

Until you reward teams more for being willing to play big games than you penakize them for losing big games youll continue to see bad ooc. ( like if Bama goes ahead of a 12-1 Oregon this year )

On the flip side, had OSU not lost by 30 to Iowa they would have been in with that loss to OU. Even if they still lost to Iowa, but it was a flukey, last second FG loss instead of getting blown the fuck out.

Beating OU in Norman is also what got them in the 2016 playoffs, despite not winning their division.

 

[Chewbaccer]

At the top certainly!!!! But the PAC doesn’t have an Arkansas or Vanderbilt. Didn’t Cal win on the road at Ole Miss. Conferences as a whole are very close.

Oregon is the best team in the Pac. They would be significant dogs to LSU, Bama, Georgia and Florida, and they already lost to Auburn.

 

[TheLonestarDUCK]

Oregon is the best team in the Pac. They would be significant dogs to LSU, Bama, Georgia and Florida, and they already lost to Auburn.

Like I said at the top!!!! But middle and bottom not so much. Think Oregon beats Auburn with their WRs healthy. Would love to play them now.

 

[rmilia1]

On the flip side, had OSU not lost by 30 to Iowa they would have been in with that loss to OU. Even if they still lost to Iowa, but it was a flukey, last second FG loss instead of getting blown the fuck out.

Beating OU in Norman is also what got them in the 2016 playoffs, despite not winning their division.

I disagree with the first part. No 2 loss team has made it yet so i see no reason a 2 loss OSU wouldve. If a 2 loss PSU who beat a 1 loss OSU didnt ger in i dont think a 2 loss OSU does.

As to 2016 thats a common claim but its impossible to say really. You may be right OR it could just have been because OSU only had 1 loss while the teams behind them had 2.

As i said earlier until a 2 loss team gets in over a 1 loss team im going to continue to believe the number of losses are more important than anything else and at the end the only aspect of a teams schedule they control is their OOC. If Bama gets in over a 12-1 Oregon this year itll be just another example of how scheduling harder games isnt worth it

 

[Gatorchip]

Like I said at the top!!!! But middle and bottom not so much. Think Oregon beats Auburn with their WRs healthy. Would love to play them now.

With Auburn being the 5th (possibly 6th) best team in the SEC, I don't see why you are selling them as being at the top of the SEC. They are an above average team, and the Gumps are about to beat them right out of the top 25.

 

[Gatorchip]

the only aspect of a teams schedule they control is their OOC.

Teams control their entire schedule. Not just OOC.

 

[rmilia1]

Teams control their entire schedule. Not just OOC.

Not in who they schedule. How they perform yes but not who and where they play

 

[Gatorchip]

Not in who they schedule. How they perform yes but not who and where they play

Iowa is not required to play teams in the Big 10. They chose to be part of the conference.

 

[Rolltide94]

Like I said at the top!!!! But middle and bottom not so much. Think Oregon beats Auburn with their WRs healthy. Would love to play them now.

Does Auburn get to have a QB with 8 games of experience....or should they play one in his first game again?

 

[Across The Field]

At the top certainly!!!! But the PAC doesn’t have an Arkansas or Vanderbilt. Didn’t Cal win on the road at Ole Miss. Conferences as a whole are very close.

This conversation has nothing to do with bottom-feeders. It's comparing the teams that will be going to significant bowls.

Here's the other problem - the Pac 12 probably does have teams on the Vandy/Arkansas level, but someone has to win the games in that conference. When you look at the fact that they only beat the horrible teams OOC and none of the good ones, it lends to the idea that Colorado, Arizona, UCLA, Oregon St. etc would have worse records if they were playing in better conferences.

Any way you cut it, there's no way the Pac12 stands up to the SEC, or really the B1G or Big 12.

 

[757Hokie83]

 

[dtgold88]

There were, quite literally , more big OOC games the first 3 nights of the CBB season than there was the entire CFB OOC. Thats what happens when the gain from playing the game is more than the loss for losing. People will say " thats what makes CFB great! You have to win!!" but the reality is id rather see great OOC games and reward teams who schedule them as opposed to rewarding a team for going 11-1 while playing nobody

Another benefit of an 8 team playoff with CCG winners getting automatic inclusion. They know they can schedule tough OOC and even if they lose, win their conference and they are in.

 

[Rolltide94]

If Bama gets in over a 12-1 Oregon this year itll be just another example of how scheduling harder games isnt worth it

I emphatically disagree with that statement. I wish that we had played a ranked team this year and not Duke...then this might not even be a discussion. Oregon would also not be part of this discussion if they beat Auburn, had they beat Auburn convincingly, we would be talking about could they lose to Utah and still get in. Win the games and you're in...anything else and it's a debate.

 

[dtgold88]

On the flip side, had OSU not lost by 30 to Iowa they would have been in with that loss to OU. Even if they still lost to Iowa, but it was a flukey, last second FG loss instead of getting blown the fuck out.

Beating OU in Norman is also what got them in the 2016 playoffs, despite not winning their division.

Helped get them in but not the only factor.

 

[rmilia1]

I emphatically disagree with that statement. I wish that we had played a ranked team this year and not Duke...then this might not even be a discussion. Oregon would also not be part of this discussion if they beat Auburn, had they beat Auburn convincingly, we would be talking about could they lose to Utah and still get in. Win the games and you're in...anything else and it's a debate.

If they hadnt played Aubutn at all theyd be top 4 right now

 

[Across The Field]

I emphatically disagree with that statement. I wish that we had played a ranked team this year and not Duke...then this might not even be a discussion. Oregon would also not be part of this discussion if they beat Auburn, had they beat Auburn convincingly, we would be talking about could they lose to Utah and still get in. Win the games and you're in...anything else and it's a debate.

So does Utah not get into the CFP in this scenario? Obviously the Pac12 isn't getting two teams in any time soon.

 

[Rolltide94]

If they hadnt played Aubutn at all theyd be top 4 right now

Would they though...or are they Baylor two weeks ago?

 

[Rolltide94]

So does Utah not get into the CFP in this scenario? Obviously the Pac12 isn't getting two teams in any time soon.

I don't know if Oregon gets in in that scenario...but it's a debate at that point.

 

[Across The Field]

I don't know if Oregon gets in in that scenario...but it's a debate at that point.

Is it? Beating a likely 4-5 loss team in OOC and then losing the only other game you have against a decent opponent puts you in position to be in the CFP?

 

[ericd7633]

I disagree with the first part. No 2 loss team has made it yet so i see no reason a 2 loss OSU wouldve. If a 2 loss PSU who beat a 1 loss OSU didnt ger in i dont think a 2 loss OSU does.

As to 2016 thats a common claim but its impossible to say really. You may be right OR it could just have been because OSU only had 1 loss while the teams behind them had 2.

As i said earlier until a 2 loss team gets in over a 1 loss team im going to continue to believe the number of losses are more important than anything else and at the end the only aspect of a teams schedule they control is their OOC. If Bama gets in over a 12-1 Oregon this year itll be just another example of how scheduling harder games isnt worth it

Auburn was a 2 loss team in 2017 that was ahead of a 0 loss Wisconsin team before they lost to UGA in the SECCG, and ahead of a bunch of 1 loss teams.