College Football Playoff Rankings TOP 6

[The Oldtimer]

But Washington's losses are non existent at this point.

Ohio State has beat a very good Wisconsin team on the road and went to Norman and completely boat raced Oklahoma.

Louisville's loss is better than A&M's IMO in the fact that they were on the road at Clemson and lost a very close game that they had a chance to win as opposed to getting their shit pushed in the second half like A&M did against Bama.

IMO, this is the best comment of this thread.

 

[The Oldtimer]

If you don't think playing at Northwestern and at Illinois is more difficult than playing at home to Rutgers and Idaho, the joke is on you my friend.

Then I guess the joke is on me.

 

[TheDayMan]

Then the hoop needs to get out more. I just skip past his post but he has a habit of quoting mine on just about every thread I post on here.

I've responded to you in like 3 threads... maybe try to do more than bitch about the SEC and spam worthless blogs and you'll get some better responses.

 

[AlaskaGuy]

I've responded to you in like 3 threads... maybe try to do more than bitch about the SEC and spam worthless blogs and you'll get some better responses.

And there you go again.

 

[wazzu31]

The Husky fans (fan) are upset that A&M is ahead has more of a gripe that A&M isn't rated higher over Michigan. Michigan has nothing on their resume either, their notable wins are (losing to Colorado until their QB got hurt) and to Wisconsin who is inferior to Utah. If Wisconsin had anything resembling a QB, they'd be leading the B1G, At least A&M has a signature win, Michigan does not

 

[AlaskaGuy]

Why do you think that the Aggies win over Auburn is better than the Huskies win over Utah? Tennessee is no better than Stanford and Arky is not a very good team this year. I can respect your opinion, but at this time of the year, it's just your opinion against my opinion.

 

[fordman84]

Not that I'm bothered that TAMU is #4 and UW is #5 right now (I'm not), but just to address this particular point, both UW and TAMU scheduled three very easy OOC opponents. TAMU's fourth OOC opponent happened to be one of the lesser PAC schools. Teams in the PAC play an extra conference game as compared to the SEC. Therefore, you have both teams with three easy OOC opponents, and both teams playing an extra PAC team to fill out it's schedule. It just worked out that way this year regarding TAMU & UW.

Having said that, the opponents that TAMU has played this year so far have a distinctly better W/L record than the opponents that UW has played so far. Plus, TAMU's only loss was against a team that seems in a class by itself this year in college football-- I'm not sure that TAMU deserves to be punished much if at all for that loss.

I think that one of the issues here is that several teams can make a reasonable argument for the current #4 slot (UW, TAMU, tOSU, Lousville). In my mind, none of these four resumes stand out as truly separating one team from the others. Fortunately, there's 4-5 more football games left for each team to play. Personally I believe that UW's weak OOC schedule means that they must run the table in order to to earn that 'stand out' resume. And maybe they will, and maybe they won't.

Gonna stop you right there at the bold. That last cupcake hasn't been played yet, so it can't have "happened". A&M hasn't had our SOS dinged yet for that school. As soon as we play them, and UW plays USC the rankings will flip. If not sooner. You can't ding our SOS for cupcakes yet to be played. But it will happen.

 

[fordman84]

But Washington's losses are non existent at this point.

Ohio State has beat a very good Wisconsin team on the road and went to Norman and completely boat raced Oklahoma.

Louisville's loss is better than A&M's IMO in the fact that they were on the road at Clemson and lost a very close game that they had a chance to win as opposed to getting their shit pushed in the second half like A&M did against Bama.

Well, if you are going to change your argument and add UW in, then that is different. You were talking about the teams with 1 loss: A&M, Louisville, and tOSU. That is what I quoted and what I addressed. Now you want to talk about UW. A&M's loss was on the road to a better team than Clemson.

Pick an argument and stick with it, sir.

 

[Chewbaccer]

Well, if you are going to change your argument and add UW in, then that is different. You were talking about the teams with 1 loss: A&M, Louisville, and tOSU. That is what I quoted and what I addressed. Now you want to talk about UW. A&M's loss was on the road to a better team than Clemson.

Pick an argument and stick with it, sir.

Go back and read my original post. I plainly said that since there's 4 undefeated P5 teams at the moment, the top 4 teams should be cut and dry.

I went on to add that if I were going to take a one loss team, I'd take Louisville and Ohio State over A&M.

 

[Hard2Bluff]

JOKE...

 

[Hard2Bluff]

Go back and read my original post. I plainly said that since there's 4 undefeated P5 teams at the moment, the top 4 teams should be cut and dry.

I went on to add that if I were going to take a one loss team, I'd take Louisville and Ohio State over A&M.

This

 

[AlaskaGuy]

"The Washington Huskies need to worry about their little Apple Cup or whatever they call it and leave the College Football Playoffs to the experts." -Paul Finebaum

 

[nathans8823]

"The Washington Huskies need to worry about their little Apple Cup or whatever they call it and leave the College Football Playoffs to the experts." -Paul Finebaum

I wouldn't listen to what he says... His forehead knows more than what he does.

 

[WizardHawk]

So how many more does UCLA have to lose before that credit for SoS in their OOC goes away? 3-6 now. Just saying.

 

[TheDayMan]

So how many more does UCLA have to lose before that credit for SoS in their OOC goes away? 3-6 now. Just saying.

But they were like, 8-4 last year...

Spoiler

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

Okay you hoop geniuses. Clarify something for me.

Hocutt referenced "wins over teams with >.500 records" several times last night as one of the reasons for rankings. Do they consider who those "teams with >.500 records" actually played?

Example: Prarie View A&M is one of the opponents that A&M got credit for as having a >.500 record at 5-3. Here is how they got there:

Texas Southern W 29-25
Texas A&M L- 0-67
Alabama A&M W 41-20
Miss Valley State W 56-21
Grambling State L 16-36
Alabama State W 24-17
Rice L 44-65
Jackson State W 28-14

I'm sure there are other teams similar to this on some of the other ranked teams schedules. I have no problem with A&M's ranking, but don't insult our intelligence by citing credit for beat a Prarie View A&M team that has a 5-3 record against that schedule. As bad as Oregon is this year, the schedule to got them to less than .500 is a hell of a lot better than the one that got Prarie View to 5-3.

That is supposed to be a room full of intelligent people. This type thing doesn't make them look good.

Underrated post tbh

 

[The Crimson King]

It has been obvious the first two years. The committee hasn't really had to make a difficult decision...yet.

OSU wasn't obvious until they beat bama

 

[jon2tanman]

Texas A&M went into OT at home to beat a shitty UCLA team and then got ass reamed by Bama and they're #4? GTFO

The sec bias is alive and well. UW would smash A&M.

 

[jon2tanman]

LOL, come on 4down20 have you took a good look at the Aggies SOS? Who has Texas A&M beat to this point of the season? I'm thinking Auburn is the only real good team they have beaten so far.

^ this ^

 

[jon2tanman]

Ohio st. and Louisville would beat A&M. Also that video of The Herd is spot on.