forums

CFP rankings at 9 tonight

Advertisement
I'll be surprised if we're higher than 4. Not that we shouldn't be, but that bias is still there.
 
Sabetta said:
mackjones said:
Sabetta said:
Clemson is incredibly overrated.
Click to expand...

Yes! Take away Clemson rushing attack, and their just like mighty ND. The only difference is Clemson has a STRONGER defense. hUh.
Click to expand...

Their starting front 4 is awesome but they lack depth. They don't have backups like Trent, Garvin and Moten. Their LBs are really good, especially O'Daniel and Lamar but the secondary is suspect specifically at safety.
We matchup nicely against them but their defense is 100 times better than ND.
Click to expand...

Good short synopsis and all that!
 
Advertisement
The committee is chaired by Kirby Hocutt, who left Miami on bad terms.

Other members are Frank Beamer, who hates Miami...

Gene Smith - the Ohio State AD who said we should get the death penalty

Clemson's AD is on the committee as well.

These are the people making this decision. So you can't leave any room for doubt.
 
If season ended last Saturday,

1. Miami
2. Alabama
3. Wisconsin
4. Oklahoma
5. Clemson

Will IMHO Be
1. Alabama
2. Miami
3. Oklahoma
4. Wisconsin
5. Clemson
 
Tad Footeball said:
I have a dream that my four little (unacknowledged) children will one day live in a nation where their college football teams will not be judged by the biases of some dopes in a conference room in Dallas but by the content of the number in their loss column.......non Power 5 teams excluded.
Click to expand...

The committee won't penalize you for playing tough OOC opponents and losing.

Auburn's loss to Clemson and Ohio State's loss against Oklahoma are basically being pardoned.

In the committee's eyes there's three undefeated teams: Bama, Miami, Wisky

1 loss teams: UGA, Auburn, Clemson, Ohio State, Oklahoma
 
Last edited:
Mad we only get 30 mins of the CFB playoff show to enjoy our top 4 ranking lol ******* basketball......
 
Advertisement
rokulika said:
Tad Footeball said:
I have a dream that my four little (unacknowledged) children will one day live in a nation where their college football teams will not be judged by the biases of some dopes in a conference room in Dallas but by the content of the number in their loss column.......non Power 5 teams excluded.
Click to expand...

The committee won't penalize you for playing tough OOC opponents and losing.

Auburn's loss to Clemson and Ohio State's loss against Oklahoma are basically being pardoned.

In the committee's eyes there's three undefeated teams: Bama, Miami, Wisky

1 loss teams: UGA, Auburn, Clemson, Ohio State, Oklahoma
Click to expand...

I was kinda just joking there along with my desire just to go to a freakin' 8 team Playoff (5 conf winners/3 at-large). My main issue now though is the committee (and media) tending to ONLY focus on "quality" wins and what they conveniently call "overall resume" as a vehicle to minimize losses by teams they have a conscious or even unconscious bias toward. Their "standard" is too easily manipulated and flexible based on buzzword criteria.
 
Advertisement
USNAVYCANE said:
I reallllly hope we get matched up with wisky in the playoffs
Click to expand...

Yes! Wisconsin is just another version of mighty ND. Albeit Wisconsin's defense is better than ND's. Nevertheless, Wisconsin won't be tested until the Big Ten title game- maybe Michigan can expose some slight flaws in Wisconsin.
 
CaneZ4eveR said:
1. Bama
2. Oklahoma
3. Miami
4. Clemson
5. Wisconsin
6. Auburn
7. Georgia
8. Notre Dame
9. USC
10. Ohio State
11. Penn State
12. TCU
13. Oklahoma State
14. UCF
15. Washington
Click to expand...


This seems to be the one most prognosticators are putting forth. Just win baby.
 
The more I think about it, I think I’m coming around to Vilma’s side: Miami’s opponent last Saturday probably should never have been ranked #3 and UGA probably shouldn’t have been #1 (though they deserved to be top 4 with an undefeated record, had they played Auburn’s schedule I don’t think they would’ve been).

If someone made the argument that the SEC East, at least this year, was marginally better -if better at all- than the B1G West, I wouldn’t put up much of a fight. UGA won their first game and beat an inconsistent MSSt along with the worst coached teams in college football, the SEC East. Is it time to argue that they’re not who we thought they were? Especially, when you consider the drubbing Miami just gave their “signature” win.

Iowa not only stomped the Buckeyes, they also beat the Hawkeyes -who saw their way to victories over OK and TCU. Is it time to call OK’s loss exactly what it is? A loss. And, WI beat Iowa. Bad.

AL
WI/U
U/WI
Clemson*
OK
Auburn**

*Clemson > OK on neutral field
**Consistency keeps UGA ahead of Auburn if I’m just counting wins and losses, but at this point of the season there is no way a “#1 ” team should be beaten that badly even if it’s on the road. Fromm ain’t who some thought he was.
 
Advertisement
Tetragrammaton Cane said:
The more I think about it, I think I’m coming around to Vilma’s side: Miami’s opponent last Saturday probably should never have been ranked #3 and UGA probably shouldn’t have been #1 (though they deserved to be top 4 with an undefeated record, had they played Auburn’s schedule I don’t think they would’ve been).

If someone made the argument that the SEC East, at least this year, was marginally better -if better at all- than the B1G West, I wouldn’t put up much of a fight. UGA won their first game and beat an inconsistent MSSt along with the worst coached teams in college football, the SEC East. Is it time to argue that they’re not who we thought they were? Especially, when you consider the drubbing Miami just gave their “signature” win.

Iowa not only stomped the Buckeyes, they also beat the Hawkeyes -who saw their way to victories over OK and TCU. Is it time to call OK’s loss exactly what it is? A loss. And, WI beat Iowa. Bad.

AL
WI/U
U/WI
Clemson*
OK
Auburn**

*Clemson > OK on neutral field
**Consistency keeps UGA ahead of Auburn if I’m just counting wins and losses, but at this point of the season there is no way a “#1 ” team should be beaten that badly even if it’s on the road. Fromm ain’t who some thought he was.
Click to expand...

I'd pay for video of Vilma sitting in with the committee.
 
Going by their ratings last week Canes have the most dominating quality win going. Would be totally hypocritical to discount that win now after they raved over ND last week. As for quality losses they are equal to a so called moral victory. Both just equal a loss in my humble opinion
 
swampcougar1 said:
Going by their ratings last week Canes have the most dominating quality win going. Would be totally hypocritical to discount that win now after they raved over ND last week. As for quality losses they are equal to a so called moral victory. Both just equal a loss in my humble opinion
Click to expand...
I agree that it would be hypocritical to discount, but did UGA look like the number 1 team? Of course not. (Did Miami’s opponent look like the #3 team?). Which says their 1-point win to start the season MAY not have been weighed as heavily, and the loss by their opponent should not have been discounted as much - and that’s recognizing that the opponent has played a tougher schedule with wins over MSU and USC.
 
CaneZ4eveR said:
Wisconsin has played nobody and on top of that do not pass the eye test.
Click to expand...

Fuggg that eye test bull$hit. You gotta be kidding repeating that stupid propaganda. That is just the committee's and ESPN's way of putting in whoever the **** they want. Ohio State was certainly passing the phantom "eye test" until they weren't. Clemson passed the "eye test" till they lost to Cuse...who we beat. Georgia had their eye's wide open...till they sucked. That's all bulls#%t.

Win your motherf@#king games...

Bama
Canes
WI
OK/Clemson (giving Clemson the edge)

That's what it should be...but it won't b/c of that dumb *** eye test crap.

Edit: Fu@# that...we should be #1 . Our boys know it...we will ride that all the way thru to the ACC title and playoffs.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
Back
Top