CFP rankings at 7

[Jaromir Jagr]

But we escaped. We found a way to win when Clemson, Oklahoma, and TCU couldn't.

You don't even think that's slightly ****ing ridiculous, that Clemson or OU could walk in with losses to unranked teams, but if we lose to ND, we can kiss our chances goodbye? What the **** is wrong with you? What do you not understand about this game? I we had gotten our asses handed to us by a 3-3 team nobody in their right mind would be talking about us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They have wins against good teams. Our big win is against Toledo.

So what? Do wins agains good teams erase losses to unranked teams? If so, you're going to have to explain to me why Iowa State isn't [URL=https://www.canesinsight.com/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=1]#1 [/URL] .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're asking why 6-2 Iowa State isn't #1 ? You're seeing a whole team of psychiatrists, aren't you.

Don't dodge the question. If Clemson's win over at the time #17 Virginia Tech is enough to erase their loss to 3-3 Syracuse, why isn't Iowa State's win over #5 Oklahoma enough to erase their loss to Iowa? Why isn't their win over #3 TCU enough to erase their loss to Texas?

I'm simply asking that you apply the same standard, that a team with a loss to an unranked team can be ranked ahead of undefeated teams by having a quality win, across the board. And the reason it sounds insane when applied to Iowa State is because it is insane. You've just contorted your mind to accept it in the case of Clemson, Oklahoma, and TCU.

When a team loses to an unranked team that is still struggling to get into a bowl game, their wins alone are not supposed to be enough to propel them ahead of P5 teams who have not yet lost. These rankings by the committee clearly indicate that we, nor Wisconsin, are being judged based on what we have done, but by what they expect to happen in the future. They expect Clemson and Ohio state to run the table while us and Wisconsin drop a few games.

That's the sham you are falling for. We're not being treated as an undefeated P5 team because the committee expects us to lose in the future, and there are plenty of porsters on this board who share that opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Who said anything about "erasing" losses? All of the teams ahead of us have looked better than us. Every objective person agrees with that.

The big question, though, is who the *&% cares? If we are 9-0 in 2.5 weeks, we will control our destiny. If we are 7-2 or 8-1, then the poll was correct. None of this matters.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

jagr go back to baseball board. you are their bleak vison of vern.

Thanks for the contribution to the topic.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

Playing like we've been playing, no, we will not get in with one loss.

But this Anti-Miami whining is absurd. When we've shown we deserve to be at the top, they have always put us at the top.

BS. There's three teams ranked ahead of us who have losses to un-ranked teams, and another has a home blowout loss to one of those. I don't think Miami is guilty of any excess chest thumping by saying that TCU, Oklahoma, and Clemson do not deserve to be ranked ahead of us. I don't care if all we've beat is cupcakes. We beat our cupcakes. The **** is ridiculous and there is nothing wrong with saying so.

Quit being a drama queen. We've had to escape literally four straight weeks against unranked teams and don't have a single impressive win.

But we escaped. We found a way to win when Clemson, Oklahoma, and TCU couldn't.

You don't even think that's slightly ****ing ridiculous, that Clemson or OU could walk in with losses to unranked teams, but if we lose to ND, we can kiss our chances goodbye? What the **** is wrong with you? What do you not understand about this game? I we had gotten our asses handed to us by a 3-3 team nobody in their right mind would be talking about us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Winning doesn’t matter. Losing to perceived good teams matters more.

And beating the ever-loving sht out of bad teams means even more.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

Your break down is terrible as usual... We broke FSUs spirit they quit after that game just like we usually do after losing to them. But it fits your narrative to act like you were born yesterday when it comes to talking cfb. You think they were a 2 win team before the season started? Do projected 2 win teams get national championship hype before the season??

We broke their spirit? We were their third loss.

A win like that could've turned their season around.... a potentual 10 win season would've still been a possibility I they beat us. The media would've got back on their nuts if they beat us.

Right. 2-5 FSU could have been right back in the mix if not fo' da U.

 

[Dingaan1828]

There are a lot of great points being made in this thread - on BOTH sides of the argument.

If we win the next two games none of this will matter. But, I also agree that whatever the criteria the committee is using, it’s flawed/bogus as ****. As one poster said “they are expecting us to lose”. I think that’s a great point. Any way you look at it, these rankings are just another beauty contest.

 

[canes1977]

Meaningless

not meaningless at all. The committee has pretty much just confirmed that a 1 loss ACC champion in Miami who will have wins over VT and Clemson (and whose only loss is to a top 3 ND team) will get surpassed by a 1 loss PSU team who will not even play in the BIG10 championship and whose top win will be a Michigan team that will not be ranked by the end of the season.

 

[nystateofmind]

Meaningless

not meaningless at all. The committee has pretty much just confirmed that a 1 loss ACC champion in Miami who will have wins over VT and Clemson (and whose only loss is to a top 3 ND team) will get surpassed by a 1 loss PSU team who will not even play in the BIG10 championship and whose top win will be a Michigan team that will not be ranked by the end of the season.

Slow down.

 

[canes1977]

Meaningless

not meaningless at all. The committee has pretty much just confirmed that a 1 loss ACC champion in Miami who will have wins over VT and Clemson (and whose only loss is to a top 3 ND team) will get surpassed by a 1 loss PSU team who will not even play in the BIG10 championship and whose top win will be a Michigan team that will not be ranked by the end of the season.

Slow down.

ha. I get ahead of myself, but that's how i see our season playing out. Beat VT, Lose to ND and play Clemson for the conference title. If Miami is able to beat Clemson, it's going to **** me off to see a PSU team without any good wins all season long get into the top 4 over us. By putting a team who has won 12 straight games at the #10 spot, the committee is basically telling us to f*ck off.

 

[gabednconfused]

Meaningless

not meaningless at all. The committee has pretty much just confirmed that a 1 loss ACC champion in Miami who will have wins over VT and Clemson (and whose only loss is to a top 3 ND team) will get surpassed by a 1 loss PSU team who will not even play in the BIG10 championship and whose top win will be a Michigan team that will not be ranked by the end of the season.

Does not mean this at all. Watch. We beat VT we will jump. Win and you are in thats it.

I have no problem with putting us in this position. Top 10, win and you are in. Thats that.

 

[canes1977]

Meaningless

not meaningless at all. The committee has pretty much just confirmed that a 1 loss ACC champion in Miami who will have wins over VT and Clemson (and whose only loss is to a top 3 ND team) will get surpassed by a 1 loss PSU team who will not even play in the BIG10 championship and whose top win will be a Michigan team that will not be ranked by the end of the season.

Does not mean this at all. Watch. We beat VT we will jump. Win and you are in thats it.

I have no problem with putting us in this position. Top 10, win and you are in. Thats that.

How high do you think we jump with a VT win? I see us jumping Wisky only (maybe TCU as well). if we drop the following game to ND, we will be out of the top 10 effectively ending any shot for a playoff spot.

 

[ShadowSpring]

I hope all the players see very clearly the rest of the county think they suck. Lowest rated undefeated power 5 team with 6 teams with a loss ahead of them. They think Miami is a fraud and sucks. It's disrespect.

This will be the focus and abuse we unleash on Lunchmeat Tech.

We will roll.

 

[JefeGringo]

There's a month of football plus the championship games. Things get crazy last couple of weeks in November, our season is within the next 10 days.

 

[section9]

They have wins against good teams. Our big win is against Toledo.

So what? Do wins agains good teams erase losses to unranked teams? If so, you're going to have to explain to me why Iowa State isn't [URL=https://www.canesinsight.com/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=1]#1 [/URL] .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're asking why 6-2 Iowa State isn't #1 ? You're seeing a whole team of psychiatrists, aren't you.

Don't dodge the question. If Clemson's win over at the time #17 Virginia Tech is enough to erase their loss to 3-3 Syracuse, why isn't Iowa State's win over #5 Oklahoma enough to erase their loss to Iowa? Why isn't their win over [URL=https://www.canesinsight.com/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=3]#3 [/URL] TCU enough to erase their loss to Texas?

I'm simply asking that you apply the same standard, that a team with a loss to an unranked team can be ranked ahead of undefeated teams by having a quality win, across the board. And the reason it sounds insane when applied to Iowa State is because it is insane. You've just contorted your mind to accept it in the case of Clemson, Oklahoma, and TCU.

When a team loses to an unranked team that is still struggling to get into a bowl game, their wins alone are not supposed to be enough to propel them ahead of P5 teams who have not yet lost. These rankings by the committee clearly indicate that we, nor Wisconsin, are being judged based on what we have done, but by what they expect to happen in the future. They expect Clemson and Ohio state to run the table while us and Wisconsin drop a few games.

That's the sham you are falling for. We're not being treated as an undefeated P5 team because the committee expects us to lose in the future, and there are plenty of porsters on this board who share that opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Who said anything about "erasing" losses? All of the teams ahead of us have looked better than us. Every objective person agrees with that.

The big question, though, is who the *&% cares? If we are 9-0 in 2.5 weeks, we will control our destiny. If we are 7-2 or 8-1, then the poll was correct. None of this matters.

Jagr is absolutely spot-on here.

It doesn’t matter what WE think, nor what our record is. Had the optics on our wins over Syracuse and UNC looked more convincing to the Committee (say, a scoreline in the low forties for each game), we’d be ranked higher.

ND is ranked third because they trashed USC and they convincingly beat NCState.

People on the Committee respect Mark Richt but they don’t respect the Team or the talent yet.

Beat VATech and our reputation gets added luster. We move higher. But to get to the Playoffs, WE MUST BEAT NOTRE DAME!

This will be a playoff game for us against VaTech, and if we win that game (which I think we will), then to go anywhere significant in the Postseason, we have to throw the Irish out of their #3 perch.

The Irish will know this.

We are where we deserve to be. Where we end up is entirely up to us.

 

[Buck Teeth]

We earned that #10 ranking with poor offensive play. Therefore, I have no problem with it. If we play a somewhat complete game and beat VT, we will move up. We will know based on the first 2 plays MR dials up. If we see 2 inside/outside runs into a stacked box, prepare for UNC Part 2!

 

[section9]

We earned that #10 ranking with poor offensive play. Therefore, I have no problem with it. If we play a somewhat complete game and beat VT, we will move up. We will know based on the first 2 plays MR dials up. If we see 2 inside/outside runs into a stacked box, prepare for UNC Part 2!

If we get UNC Part 2, the Canes will be playing in the effing Sun Bowl again. Richt needs more crossing routes.

But he knows this.

 

[Loose Cannon]

And couple that with the fact that the committee is instructed to ignore margin of victory...

LOL, instructed by who?

Instructed by CFP chairman Kirby Hocutt said that margin of victory is not considered.

Lat year when the first rankings came out Bobby Patrino was ****ed that Louisville was placed several spots below their AP and Coaches Poll rankings. He said that if he had known it was going to be like this, he'd have left the starters in and hung 80 on FSU.

Hocutt came out and said that it wouldn't have helped Louisville one bit as the committee considers neither the polls or margin of victory.

 

[QuattroCane]

As much as I'd like to be mad, I can't be. Even if we had covered vs UNC we likely wouldn't be in this situation, we just need to win now, plain and simple.

 

[Loose Cannon]

But we escaped. We found a way to win when Clemson, Oklahoma, and TCU couldn't.

You don't even think that's slightly ****ing ridiculous, that Clemson or OU could walk in with losses to unranked teams, but if we lose to ND, we can kiss our chances goodbye? What the **** is wrong with you? What do you not understand about this game? I we had gotten our asses handed to us by a 3-3 team nobody in their right mind would be talking about us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They have wins against good teams. Our big win is against Toledo.

They have a loss to a 4-4 team that also lost to Middle Tennessee State. When you have a loss to an unranked team like Syracuse, there should be not a **** thing that you can do by yourself to get back into the national conversation as long as there are unbeaten P5 teams on the board. You need them to lose before we start comparing strength of schedule. Nobody gives a flying **** about your strength of schedule if you've lost to the worst teams on it.

 

[canes1977]

We earned that #10 ranking with poor offensive play. Therefore, I have no problem with it. If we play a somewhat complete game and beat VT, we will move up. We will know based on the first 2 plays MR dials up. If we see 2 inside/outside runs into a stacked box, prepare for UNC Part 2!

If we get UNC Part 2, the Canes will be playing in the effing Sun Bowl again. Richt needs more crossing routes.

But he knows this.

He needs to roll Rozier out once in a while and buy his playmakers some time to do their thing. If he plays his BS vanilla offense, we will get whooped. I suspect VT will load the box and force Rozier to beat us.

 

[Loose Cannon]

Almost all of the people who are okay with this first CFP ranking were on here at the beginning of the season saying 10 and 2 would be our high water mark, and now they can't even wait for us to lose a **** game before trying to find a way to say they were right. They were the people who gave us no chance vs. FSU and knew **** well we'd drop at least one more along the way, probably ND.

I got no time for this bull****, so I'll just call it what it is: Cowardice. Nobody in their right ****ing mind should be okay with us going into week 10 ranked #10 despite being only 1 of 4 P5 teams left undefeated. These are Al Golden cucks who have become accustomed to the media narrative that says some teams can get into the playoffs with a loss or two while others must run the table.

CLEMSON DOESN'T EVEN LEAD THEIR DIVISION!!!

They need help to even reach the ACCCG. If NC State wins out, Clemson's season ends in November. How the **** can anybody think it's okay that they asses is in the CFP top 4 while we're 10?

You made this post way too early. If we win the next two games, it is not necessary because we will rise. If we don't, well, it didn't matter anyway now did it. Reading through this thread there seems to be people that need to move closer to the middle of the reaction spectrum from both sides. We have beat all of our opponents, yes. We have not looked good doing it. There is still something to prove, and wouldn't you know it, there is still time to do just that.

Everyone relax. If we are 9-0 and behind 6 one loss teams go nuts all you **** well please. If we lose the next two games, there are going to be so many i-told-you-so posts it will be nauseating.

I didn't make the post too early. If the rankings, in your words, are to reflect what will happen in a few weeks, they made the ******* rankings too early.

How ******* hard is this to understand? The Rankings aren't meant to reflect what you think will happen. It's supposed to reflect what has happened, and two weeks ago Clemson and Oklahoma were reeling from embarrassing losses to unranked teams.