THE COMMITTEE HATES US!!!!

[Jaromir Jagr]

He mad

You can always tell who the loser is in any argument when their argument reduces to the idea that the other person is mad/triggered. I have very much enjoyed clubbing you over the head repeatedly, and the fact that you're so stupid that you still don't understand it, brings me further joy.

What brought me joy was posting all of your previous quotes, none of which were acknowledged by you.

Tell us again how the B12 leader will not drop behind us. That was a doozy.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

Loose Cannon: "Jagr wants to argue that we said a 12-0 Miami wouldn't get in the CFP, when what was actually said was that there remained a slim chance that a 12-0 Miami could get left out."

Yeah, we're really on thin ice here.

 

[Loose Cannon]

He mad

You can always tell who the loser is in any argument when their argument reduces to the idea that the other person is mad/triggered. I have very much enjoyed clubbing you over the head repeatedly, and the fact that you're so stupid that you still don't understand it, brings me further joy.

What brought me joy was posting all of your previous quotes, none of which were acknowledged by you.

Tell us again how the B12 leader will not drop behind us. That was a doozy.

I never said that they would not. I never said that we wouldn't be exactly where we are. I simply said that things outside of our control needed to happen and that if us winning is all it took, then why were we 10th. Just winning was obviously not enough when we were 10th even though we were 1 of 3 teams who had only won. That was it. I was right then, and I am still right now. You missed it. You argued then, and you continue to argue today the absurd opinion that us being 10th and behind 6 teams who had not been "just winning" was not a direct slap from the committee based on things that were likely to happen in the future. My argument was never that we wouldn't pass teams and get into the top 4. My argument was that we should have been top 4 from the start of the CFP rankings.

 

[Loose Cannon]

Loose Cannon: "Jagr wants to argue that we said a 12-0 Miami wouldn't get in the CFP, when what was actually said was that there remained a slim chance that a 12-0 Miami could get left out."

Yeah, we're really on thin ice here.

Again, being 10th even though we were undefeated was the proof of that statement. I did not need any further proof.

 

[monkey1371]

The original argument, when the first CFP poll came out was that just us winning would not be enough. We would need things to happen, beyond our control. the fact that we were undefeated and ranked 10th was the proof. That's what the idiots are not getting. Nobody, NOBODY, ever said that Miami would not rise or not make it to the top 4. We said that just us winning, all by itself, would not be enough. And the proof to that was that the committee ranked us 10th, behind six 1 loss teams even though all we had done all season was win our games. Now you're acting like us being ranked 2nd is some kind of vindication, when in fact it is just more proof that the committee ****ed up the first rankings and had us WAY undervalued at 10.

We didn't pass Ohio State and Penn State because they played each other. We passed Ohio State because they got the **** beat out of them by unranked Iowa. That was **** beyond our control. We passed Penn State when they **** the bed against #24 , 2 loss, Michigan State. **** beyond our control. USC didn't put the Pac12 out of the playoff hunt, 3 loss Stanford did that when they guaranteed a 2 loss Pac12 champion by upsetting Washington. More **** beyond our control. We didn't pass UGA or Alabama because they played each other, as you suggested would be the case. We passed UGA when Auburn beat the dog **** out of them.

My argument, from the very beginning, has been that we needed things to happen like those laid out above. Miami winning games had absolutely zero to do with those things. Us winning can only possibly account for us passing Wisconsin and Oklahoma. It's very hard to argue that us passing Clemson had anything to do with us escaping Virginia after trailing 28-14 in the 3rd, while Clemson won their game 61-3.

Your argument was that it was inevitable and that we controlled our own destiny. We controlled zero ****ing percent of the results listed above. I never argued that it couldn't or wouldn't. I simply argued that it was out of our hands. Clemson passed us in the AP poll during their bye week when we beat the team that had just beaten them the week before. They should never been ranked ahead of us. Oklahoma lost to an unranked team. They should have never been ahead of us. TCU failed to score a TD against that same team. They should have never been ranked ahead of us. Wisconsin's marquee win was against a team that Duke, the 13th best team in the ACC blew out. They should have never been ranked ahead of us. Ohio State got blew out at home. They should have never been ranked ahead of us. Penn State lost to Ohio State and had zero quality wins. They should have never been ranked ahead of us.

Your proposition that the committee having us at 10, behind 6 teams that had already lost was not a direct slap in the face is as absurd today as it was then. We should have never been ranked lower than 4th in the CFP rankings. We were one of only three undefeated P5 teams, and the only 1 loss team that didn't have a "bad loss" was Notre Dame. Miami didn't prove that they belonged ahead of these teams by winning games. Those teams proved they didn't belong by losing games that they weren't supposed to. And we only had control in one of those games. That does not vindicate you. It vindicates me.

Jesus Christ..... Take the L.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

No. Not because you say so without anything to support your opinion, and certainly not because everything that I said would have to happen in order for us to move up did happen, us winning AND teams ahead of us losing. We did not pass UGA, Ohio State, and Penn State because we won. We passed them because they lost. They lost games they were favored in and expected to win.

Here is why you were 100% wrong.

Your entire premise is based upon the initial committee rankings having Miami #10 . Your arguments revolve around that this was some incredibly, egregious, PERMANENT, "slap in the face" that we could not correct without circumstances beyond our control.

And that is 100% flawed. Your claim just because we were undefeated we should have been #4 with an absolute certainty displays nothing but blind homerism and a naivete towards the history of the game.

At that point in time....the only win we had against a team even receiving votes in a poll was Toledo.....We were life and death with 4 straight teams including a 1-9 UNC the game before that were note even capable of receiving vote in any poll....not 1 vote from even the home town paper guy......Even UCF had a victory over a ranked team in Memphis and a Navy team getting votes and they had won every game by 27+ except Navy they won by 10(Should they be ranked 3 then as their resume was much more impressive..Why not based upon your argument?).

So you keep digging your heels in on a completely flawed premise that we were severely under-ranked in that first poll.

There was not 1 scenario out there where an undefeated ACC Champ Miami with wins over Clemson, Notre Dame and VT at that point would have been left out.

To prove you were right.....tell me the scenario that with 100% certainty an undefeated Miami would have been left out.....I am all ears.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

To prove you were right.....tell me the scenario that with 100% certainty an undefeated Miami would have been left out.....I am all ears.

This ought to be good.

His buddy - [MENTION=1846]TheOriginalCane[/MENTION] - claimed that it was possible for 12-0 Miami to finish #7 .

 

[Big Sky Cane]

The original argument, when the first CFP poll came out was that just us winning would not be enough. We would need things to happen, beyond our control. the fact that we were undefeated and ranked 10th was the proof. That's what the idiots are not getting. Nobody, NOBODY, ever said that Miami would not rise or not make it to the top 4. We said that just us winning, all by itself, would not be enough. And the proof to that was that the committee ranked us 10th, behind six 1 loss teams even though all we had done all season was win our games. Now you're acting like us being ranked 2nd is some kind of vindication, when in fact it is just more proof that the committee ****ed up the first rankings and had us WAY undervalued at 10.

We didn't pass Ohio State and Penn State because they played each other. We passed Ohio State because they got the **** beat out of them by unranked Iowa. That was **** beyond our control. We passed Penn State when they **** the bed against #24 , 2 loss, Michigan State. **** beyond our control. USC didn't put the Pac12 out of the playoff hunt, 3 loss Stanford did that when they guaranteed a 2 loss Pac12 champion by upsetting Washington. More **** beyond our control. We didn't pass UGA or Alabama because they played each other, as you suggested would be the case. We passed UGA when Auburn beat the dog **** out of them.

My argument, from the very beginning, has been that we needed things to happen like those laid out above. Miami winning games had absolutely zero to do with those things. Us winning can only possibly account for us passing Wisconsin and Oklahoma. It's very hard to argue that us passing Clemson had anything to do with us escaping Virginia after trailing 28-14 in the 3rd, while Clemson won their game 61-3.

Your argument was that it was inevitable and that we controlled our own destiny. We controlled zero ****ing percent of the results listed above. I never argued that it couldn't or wouldn't. I simply argued that it was out of our hands. Clemson passed us in the AP poll during their bye week when we beat the team that had just beaten them the week before. They should never been ranked ahead of us. Oklahoma lost to an unranked team. They should have never been ahead of us. TCU failed to score a TD against that same team. They should have never been ranked ahead of us. Wisconsin's marquee win was against a team that Duke, the 13th best team in the ACC blew out. They should have never been ranked ahead of us. Ohio State got blew out at home. They should have never been ranked ahead of us. Penn State lost to Ohio State and had zero quality wins. They should have never been ranked ahead of us.

Your proposition that the committee having us at 10, behind 6 teams that had already lost was not a direct slap in the face is as absurd today as it was then. We should have never been ranked lower than 4th in the CFP rankings. We were one of only three undefeated P5 teams, and the only 1 loss team that didn't have a "bad loss" was Notre Dame. Miami didn't prove that they belonged ahead of these teams by winning games. Those teams proved they didn't belong by losing games that they weren't supposed to. And we only had control in one of those games. That does not vindicate you. It vindicates me.

Jesus Christ..... Take the L.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

No. Not because you say so without anything to support your opinion, and certainly not because everything that I said would have to happen in order for us to move up did happen, us winning AND teams ahead of us losing. We did not pass UGA, Ohio State, and Penn State because we won. We passed them because they lost. They lost games they were favored in and expected to win.

Yeah.. we passed OU (that beat OSU head to head & OSU beat PSU). OU was staying ahead of a 1 loss OSU/PSU......period. We pass OU but would have stayed behind a 1 loss PSU/OSU? You are digging in and you look ridiculous.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[monkey1371]

They must have missed Virginia Tech losing to Georgia tech, then.

But that affected both of us.......as we both played them. So what is your point?

Simply that Virginia Tech went from a quality win against a Top 15 team to just a win over a very average team who is now unranked. The Ga Tech win was always just a win over a very average team who will likely end the season with a losing record. Ga Tech must beat UGA to get to .500 and become bowl eligible. That might actually make our win over Ga Tech look pretty decent, but not their win over Virginia Tech.

OK...but in strictly heads up rankings between Miami & Clemson it is irrelevant since both Miami and Clemson played both VT and GT this year.

Syracuse

OK....Peppermint Gum......I guess we are at the point of just shouting out random words.

I'm curious what you are even arguing at this point.

Discussion was factors that lead to Miami jumping Clemson this week. Syracuse losing again was a factor, Miami in a let down game, down 14 twice rolled off 30-0 run, NC State losing to Wake diminishing a big Clemson win another factor......

So other than arguing just to argue on this topic.....what point are you trying to make?

 

[Loose Cannon]

The original argument, when the first CFP poll came out was that just us winning would not be enough. We would need things to happen, beyond our control. the fact that we were undefeated and ranked 10th was the proof. That's what the idiots are not getting. Nobody, NOBODY, ever said that Miami would not rise or not make it to the top 4. We said that just us winning, all by itself, would not be enough. And the proof to that was that the committee ranked us 10th, behind six 1 loss teams even though all we had done all season was win our games. Now you're acting like us being ranked 2nd is some kind of vindication, when in fact it is just more proof that the committee ****ed up the first rankings and had us WAY undervalued at 10.

We didn't pass Ohio State and Penn State because they played each other. We passed Ohio State because they got the **** beat out of them by unranked Iowa. That was **** beyond our control. We passed Penn State when they **** the bed against #24 , 2 loss, Michigan State. **** beyond our control. USC didn't put the Pac12 out of the playoff hunt, 3 loss Stanford did that when they guaranteed a 2 loss Pac12 champion by upsetting Washington. More **** beyond our control. We didn't pass UGA or Alabama because they played each other, as you suggested would be the case. We passed UGA when Auburn beat the dog **** out of them.

My argument, from the very beginning, has been that we needed things to happen like those laid out above. Miami winning games had absolutely zero to do with those things. Us winning can only possibly account for us passing Wisconsin and Oklahoma. It's very hard to argue that us passing Clemson had anything to do with us escaping Virginia after trailing 28-14 in the 3rd, while Clemson won their game 61-3.

Your argument was that it was inevitable and that we controlled our own destiny. We controlled zero ****ing percent of the results listed above. I never argued that it couldn't or wouldn't. I simply argued that it was out of our hands. Clemson passed us in the AP poll during their bye week when we beat the team that had just beaten them the week before. They should never been ranked ahead of us. Oklahoma lost to an unranked team. They should have never been ahead of us. TCU failed to score a TD against that same team. They should have never been ranked ahead of us. Wisconsin's marquee win was against a team that Duke, the 13th best team in the ACC blew out. They should have never been ranked ahead of us. Ohio State got blew out at home. They should have never been ranked ahead of us. Penn State lost to Ohio State and had zero quality wins. They should have never been ranked ahead of us.

Your proposition that the committee having us at 10, behind 6 teams that had already lost was not a direct slap in the face is as absurd today as it was then. We should have never been ranked lower than 4th in the CFP rankings. We were one of only three undefeated P5 teams, and the only 1 loss team that didn't have a "bad loss" was Notre Dame. Miami didn't prove that they belonged ahead of these teams by winning games. Those teams proved they didn't belong by losing games that they weren't supposed to. And we only had control in one of those games. That does not vindicate you. It vindicates me.

Jesus Christ..... Take the L.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

No. Not because you say so without anything to support your opinion, and certainly not because everything that I said would have to happen in order for us to move up did happen, us winning AND teams ahead of us losing. We did not pass UGA, Ohio State, and Penn State because we won. We passed them because they lost. They lost games they were favored in and expected to win.

Here is why you were 100% wrong.

Your entire premise is based upon the initial committee rankings having Miami #10 . Your arguments revolve around that this was some incredibly, egregious, PERMANENT, "slap in the face" that we could not correct without circumstances beyond our control.

And that is 100% flawed. Your claim just because we were undefeated we should have been #4 with an absolute certainty displays nothing but blind homerism and a naivete towards the history of the game.

At that point in time....the only win we had against a team even receiving votes in a poll was Toledo.....We were life and death with 4 straight teams including a 1-9 UNC the game before that were note even capable of receiving vote in any poll....not 1 vote from even the home town paper guy......Even UCF had a victory over a ranked team in Memphis and a Navy team getting votes and they had won every game by 27+ except Navy they won by 10(Should they be ranked 3 then as their resume was much more impressive..Why not based upon your argument?).

So you keep digging your heels in on a completely flawed premise that we were severely under-ranked in that first poll.

There was not 1 scenario out there where an undefeated ACC Champ Miami with wins over Clemson, Notre Dame and VT at that point would have been left out.

To prove you were right.....tell me the scenario that with 100% certainty an undefeated Miami would have been left out.....I am all ears.

We had not lost! I don't care who we beat or how. The post was counter to the stupid idea that ALL we needed to do was win, when it was abundantly clear that just winning WAS NOT enough to get us ahead of teams. Some of those 1 loss teams would have to become two loss teams. I was 100% correct then, and the results have proven that. We could very well still be behind Ohio State, Penn State, Oklahoma, and Clemson. Ohio State and Penn State both lost games that they weren't supposed to. Iowa's blowout win over Ohio State devalued OU's one and only quality win to that point. We didn't pass those teams for any other reason than one loss teams became two loss teams. We had absolutely nothing to do with that, and nobody can explain why we passed Clemson with any rationale outside of their loss to Syracuse that should have been enough to keep them behind us from the start.

This insistence that my argument was wrong is the same as insisting that we had some sort of control over the Iowa/Ohio State game or the Penn State/Michigan State game. I called it a slim chance then because the entire scenario hinged on teams like Ohio State and Penn State winning out. I detailed all of this, and now hockey guy wants to cherry pick quotes out of context and present them as if I claimed these were things that would happen rather than things that could happen.

 

[rok]

I also think NC State losing to Wake diminished what was another quality win for Clemson.....Committee does seem like they are paying some attention.

They must have missed Virginia Tech losing to Georgia tech, then.

VT snuck into this week's top 25. So that's convincing wins for us over # 8 and # 25.

Clemson also has wins over two top 25 teams but that Cuse loss probably looks bad enough at this juncture considering they haven't won since.

 

[monkey1371]

The original argument, when the first CFP poll came out was that just us winning would not be enough. We would need things to happen, beyond our control. the fact that we were undefeated and ranked 10th was the proof. That's what the idiots are not getting. Nobody, NOBODY, ever said that Miami would not rise or not make it to the top 4. We said that just us winning, all by itself, would not be enough. And the proof to that was that the committee ranked us 10th, behind six 1 loss teams even though all we had done all season was win our games. Now you're acting like us being ranked 2nd is some kind of vindication, when in fact it is just more proof that the committee ****ed up the first rankings and had us WAY undervalued at 10.

We didn't pass Ohio State and Penn State because they played each other. We passed Ohio State because they got the **** beat out of them by unranked Iowa. That was **** beyond our control. We passed Penn State when they **** the bed against #24 , 2 loss, Michigan State. **** beyond our control. USC didn't put the Pac12 out of the playoff hunt, 3 loss Stanford did that when they guaranteed a 2 loss Pac12 champion by upsetting Washington. More **** beyond our control. We didn't pass UGA or Alabama because they played each other, as you suggested would be the case. We passed UGA when Auburn beat the dog **** out of them.

My argument, from the very beginning, has been that we needed things to happen like those laid out above. Miami winning games had absolutely zero to do with those things. Us winning can only possibly account for us passing Wisconsin and Oklahoma. It's very hard to argue that us passing Clemson had anything to do with us escaping Virginia after trailing 28-14 in the 3rd, while Clemson won their game 61-3.

Your argument was that it was inevitable and that we controlled our own destiny. We controlled zero ****ing percent of the results listed above. I never argued that it couldn't or wouldn't. I simply argued that it was out of our hands. Clemson passed us in the AP poll during their bye week when we beat the team that had just beaten them the week before. They should never been ranked ahead of us. Oklahoma lost to an unranked team. They should have never been ahead of us. TCU failed to score a TD against that same team. They should have never been ranked ahead of us. Wisconsin's marquee win was against a team that Duke, the 13th best team in the ACC blew out. They should have never been ranked ahead of us. Ohio State got blew out at home. They should have never been ranked ahead of us. Penn State lost to Ohio State and had zero quality wins. They should have never been ranked ahead of us.

Your proposition that the committee having us at 10, behind 6 teams that had already lost was not a direct slap in the face is as absurd today as it was then. We should have never been ranked lower than 4th in the CFP rankings. We were one of only three undefeated P5 teams, and the only 1 loss team that didn't have a "bad loss" was Notre Dame. Miami didn't prove that they belonged ahead of these teams by winning games. Those teams proved they didn't belong by losing games that they weren't supposed to. And we only had control in one of those games. That does not vindicate you. It vindicates me.

Jesus Christ..... Take the L.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

No. Not because you say so without anything to support your opinion, and certainly not because everything that I said would have to happen in order for us to move up did happen, us winning AND teams ahead of us losing. We did not pass UGA, Ohio State, and Penn State because we won. We passed them because they lost. They lost games they were favored in and expected to win.

Here is why you were 100% wrong.

Your entire premise is based upon the initial committee rankings having Miami #10 . Your arguments revolve around that this was some incredibly, egregious, PERMANENT, "slap in the face" that we could not correct without circumstances beyond our control.

And that is 100% flawed. Your claim just because we were undefeated we should have been #4 with an absolute certainty displays nothing but blind homerism and a naivete towards the history of the game.

At that point in time....the only win we had against a team even receiving votes in a poll was Toledo.....We were life and death with 4 straight teams including a 1-9 UNC the game before that were note even capable of receiving vote in any poll....not 1 vote from even the home town paper guy......Even UCF had a victory over a ranked team in Memphis and a Navy team getting votes and they had won every game by 27+ except Navy they won by 10(Should they be ranked 3 then as their resume was much more impressive..Why not based upon your argument?).

So you keep digging your heels in on a completely flawed premise that we were severely under-ranked in that first poll.

There was not 1 scenario out there where an undefeated ACC Champ Miami with wins over Clemson, Notre Dame and VT at that point would have been left out.

To prove you were right.....tell me the scenario that with 100% certainty an undefeated Miami would have been left out.....I am all ears.

We had not lost! I don't care who we beat or how. The post was counter to the stupid idea that ALL we needed to do was win, when it was abundantly clear that just winning WAS NOT enough to get us ahead of teams. Some of those 1 loss teams would have to become two loss teams. I was 100% correct then, and the results have proven that. We could very well still be behind Ohio State, Penn State, Oklahoma, and Clemson. Ohio State and Penn State both lost games that they weren't supposed to. Iowa's blowout win over Ohio State devalued OU's one and only quality win to that point. We didn't pass those teams for any other reason than one loss teams became two loss teams. We had absolutely nothing to do with that, and nobody can explain why we passed Clemson with any rationale outside of their loss to Syracuse that should have been enough to keep them behind us from the start.

This insistence that my argument was wrong is the same as insisting that we had some sort of control over the Iowa/Ohio State game or the Penn State/Michigan State game. I called it a slim chance then because the entire scenario hinged on teams like Ohio State and Penn State winning out. I detailed all of this, and now hockey guy wants to cherry pick quotes out of context and present them as if I claimed these were things that would happen rather than things that could happen.

How would we still be behind Clemson and Oklahoma if we are not now?

Also....Please tell me where UCF should be ranked according to your logic?

Also....

"We had not lost! I don't care who we beat or how. The post was counter to the stupid idea that ALL we needed to do was win, when it was abundantly clear that just winning WAS NOT enough to get us ahead of teams."

False premise again.....It was not "abundantly clear"....that is a 100% opinion.

 

[Big Sky Cane]

Jesus Christ..... Take the L.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

No. Not because you say so without anything to support your opinion, and certainly not because everything that I said would have to happen in order for us to move up did happen, us winning AND teams ahead of us losing. We did not pass UGA, Ohio State, and Penn State because we won. We passed them because they lost. They lost games they were favored in and expected to win.

Here is why you were 100% wrong.

Your entire premise is based upon the initial committee rankings having Miami #10 . Your arguments revolve around that this was some incredibly, egregious, PERMANENT, "slap in the face" that we could not correct without circumstances beyond our control.

And that is 100% flawed. Your claim just because we were undefeated we should have been #4 with an absolute certainty displays nothing but blind homerism and a naivete towards the history of the game.

At that point in time....the only win we had against a team even receiving votes in a poll was Toledo.....We were life and death with 4 straight teams including a 1-9 UNC the game before that were note even capable of receiving vote in any poll....not 1 vote from even the home town paper guy......Even UCF had a victory over a ranked team in Memphis and a Navy team getting votes and they had won every game by 27+ except Navy they won by 10(Should they be ranked 3 then as their resume was much more impressive..Why not based upon your argument?).

So you keep digging your heels in on a completely flawed premise that we were severely under-ranked in that first poll.

There was not 1 scenario out there where an undefeated ACC Champ Miami with wins over Clemson, Notre Dame and VT at that point would have been left out.

To prove you were right.....tell me the scenario that with 100% certainty an undefeated Miami would have been left out.....I am all ears.

We had not lost! I don't care who we beat or how. The post was counter to the stupid idea that ALL we needed to do was win, when it was abundantly clear that just winning WAS NOT enough to get us ahead of teams. Some of those 1 loss teams would have to become two loss teams. I was 100% correct then, and the results have proven that. We could very well still be behind Ohio State, Penn State, Oklahoma, and Clemson. Ohio State and Penn State both lost games that they weren't supposed to. Iowa's blowout win over Ohio State devalued OU's one and only quality win to that point. We didn't pass those teams for any other reason than one loss teams became two loss teams. We had absolutely nothing to do with that, and nobody can explain why we passed Clemson with any rationale outside of their loss to Syracuse that should have been enough to keep them behind us from the start.

This insistence that my argument was wrong is the same as insisting that we had some sort of control over the Iowa/Ohio State game or the Penn State/Michigan State game. I called it a slim chance then because the entire scenario hinged on teams like Ohio State and Penn State winning out. I detailed all of this, and now hockey guy wants to cherry pick quotes out of context and present them as if I claimed these were things that would happen rather than things that could happen.

How would we still be behind Clemson and Oklahoma if we are not now?

Also....Please tell me where UCF should be ranked according to your logic?

The same way we'd be behind a one loss Ohio St/Penn St. In his dream world.

It was ALWAYS going to be Oklahoma>Ohio St.>Penn St. of the 1 loss teams...... But this genius is saying that somehow we weren't going to jump OSU/PSU but somehow managed to jump an OU team, that was always going to be ranked ahead of the other two. Can't make this **** up. Mental gymnastics 101.

 

[DTP]

Three weeks ago, there was an opinion being stated here that since an undefeated Miami was ranked below several one loss teams that the committee would keep them behind any one loss team regardless of whether or not Miami beat VT and ND. As if quality wins against both those teams would't sway the committee's opinion.

 

[Loose Cannon]

Unranked Iowa's blowout of Ohio State made Oklahoma's one quality win seem like nothing special after all. If Ohio State was still humming top 5 with only 1 loss, OU would still have a very impressive win. Can't explain Clemson, but I'm pretty sure you can exclude a week 8 game finally having an effect on rankings in week 13. Clemson was dominant in their game this weekend. There is no reason to justify us jumping them other than the committee finally coming to grips with the fact that we should have been ahead of them from the start.

But while I'm explaining things, you asked for the scenario that would have POSSIBLY kept an undefeated Miami team out of the top 4. Keep in mind that this was presented during the initial CFP rankings in opposition to hockey guy's suggestion that rankings don't matter, and all we needed to do was win.

#1 UGA wins out. Big blow out at Auburn, mud stomp SCar, Kentucky, and Ga Tech. Beat Bama on in the SECCG by <3 points.
#2 Bama wins out. More impressive domination of Auburn, humiliate Miss St., and loose a nail-biter to UGA in the SECCG.
#3 Notre Dame loses a close one to us but also loses to Navy and gets embarrassed by Stanford.
#4 Clemson loses to NC State and SCar. Does not make ACCCG
#5 OU wins out, dominating #1 1 OSU, and #6 TCU along the way, beating TCU once again in boring Big12 CG
#6 Ohio State wins out and blows out Wiscy in B1GCG
#7 PSU wins out. Misses B1GCG at 11-1.
#8 TCU only loses twice to Oklahoma
#9 Wiscy wins out in dominant fashion, but loses big in the B1GCG
#1 0 Miami continues it's streak of nail-biting victories against VaTech who loses out, ND who loses out, Virginia, and Pitt. Then play a 9-3 NC State, coming fresh off a loss to UNC, in the ACCCG, and yes, barely squeaking by.

With that scenario Miami would have zero big wins and could have easily been ranked 6-7 remaining behind UGA, OU, Bama, Ohio State, Penn State, and maybe getting passed Pac12 champ Washington should they win out with dominant victories over Stanford and USC and finish 11-1.

Nobody ever said that scenario was going to happen or that it was likely to happen. Only that it could happen, and that ever so slim possibility was why being ranked 10th mattered.

 

[Nixed]

It's pretty nuts considering we're like, 3 insanely clutch plays away from having like three losses instead of zero... lol

Negged nixed.

I don't get why I was so heavily negged, I'm not trying to take anything away from the season, it's just an observation. Langham with two huge catches in crunch time against FSU and GT, the defense with some major clutch stops in the second half against syracuse, UNC, etc.
It's been a magic season, and good teams find ways to win, and that's why we're where we are now. But I can't deny we were seconds away from losing to GTech, on 4th and 10, on a bobbled and then caught pass. In hindsight, it's crazy!

my point was we've had to clutch it out this season, more than once! Just a few plays or a few INCHES difference and it's a different season with a few close losses. surely you guys acknowledge that, right?

And I'm proud of this team for it. The 2009-2015 teams never would have shown the collective heart that this team does.

I think we can beat Clemson.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

Unranked Iowa's blowout of Ohio State made Oklahoma's one quality win seem like nothing special after all. If Ohio State was still humming top 5 with only 1 loss, OU would still have a very impressive win. Can't explain Clemson, but I'm pretty sure you can exclude a week 8 game finally having an effect on rankings in week 13. Clemson was dominant in their game this weekend. There is no reason to justify us jumping them other than the committee finally coming to grips with the fact that we should have been ahead of them from the start.

But while I'm explaining things, you asked for the scenario that would have POSSIBLY kept an undefeated Miami team out of the top 4. Keep in mind that this was presented during the initial CFP rankings in opposition to hockey guy's suggestion that rankings don't matter, and all we needed to do was win.

#1 UGA wins out. Big blow out at Auburn, mud stomp SCar, Kentucky, and Ga Tech. Beat Bama on in the SECCG by <3 points.
#2 Bama wins out. More impressive domination of Auburn, humiliate Miss St., and loose a nail-biter to UGA in the SECCG.
#3 Notre Dame loses a close one to us but also loses to Navy and gets embarrassed by Stanford.
#4 Clemson loses to NC State and SCar. Does not make ACCCG
#5 OU wins out, dominating #1 1 OSU, and #6 TCU along the way, beating TCU once again in boring Big12 CG
#6 Ohio State wins out and blows out Wiscy in B1GCG
#7 PSU wins out. Misses B1GCG at 11-1.
#8 TCU only loses twice to Oklahoma
#9 Wiscy wins out in dominant fashion, but loses big in the B1GCG
#1 0 Miami continues it's streak of nail-biting victories against VaTech who loses out, ND who loses out, Virginia, and Pitt. Then play a 9-3 NC State, coming fresh off a loss to UNC, in the ACCCG, and yes, barely squeaking by.

With that scenario Miami would have zero big wins and could have easily been ranked 6-7 remaining behind UGA, OU, Bama, Ohio State, Penn State, and maybe getting passed Pac12 champ Washington should they win out with dominant victories over Stanford and USC and finish 11-1.

Nobody ever said that scenario was going to happen or that it was likely to happen. Only that it could happen, and that ever so slim possibility was why being ranked 10th mattered.

Being ranked 10th didn't matter. We told you then, and we're telling you now. I could see if we were trying to pull some kind of hindsight, but we TOLD YOU.

 

[Loose Cannon]

"We had not lost! I don't care who we beat or how. The post was counter to the stupid idea that ALL we needed to do was win, when it was abundantly clear that just winning WAS NOT enough to get us ahead of teams."

False premise again.....It was not "abundantly clear"....that is a 100% opinion.

It was not opinion. We were 10th behind 6 teams with a loss. That is abundant clarification that more than "just winning" was being considered.

 

[Big Sky Cane]

"We had not lost! I don't care who we beat or how. The post was counter to the stupid idea that ALL we needed to do was win, when it was abundantly clear that just winning WAS NOT enough to get us ahead of teams."

False premise again.....It was not "abundantly clear"....that is a 100% opinion.

It was not opinion. We were 10th behind 6 teams with a loss. That is abundant clarification that more than "just winning" was being considered.

And we we're telling you with our remaining schedule it didn't matter, which it didn't. It's all irrelevant now though. We should all move on.

 

[Loose Cannon]

Unranked Iowa's blowout of Ohio State made Oklahoma's one quality win seem like nothing special after all. If Ohio State was still humming top 5 with only 1 loss, OU would still have a very impressive win. Can't explain Clemson, but I'm pretty sure you can exclude a week 8 game finally having an effect on rankings in week 13. Clemson was dominant in their game this weekend. There is no reason to justify us jumping them other than the committee finally coming to grips with the fact that we should have been ahead of them from the start.

But while I'm explaining things, you asked for the scenario that would have POSSIBLY kept an undefeated Miami team out of the top 4. Keep in mind that this was presented during the initial CFP rankings in opposition to hockey guy's suggestion that rankings don't matter, and all we needed to do was win.

#1 UGA wins out. Big blow out at Auburn, mud stomp SCar, Kentucky, and Ga Tech. Beat Bama on in the SECCG by <3 points.
#2 Bama wins out. More impressive domination of Auburn, humiliate Miss St., and loose a nail-biter to UGA in the SECCG.
#3 Notre Dame loses a close one to us but also loses to Navy and gets embarrassed by Stanford.
#4 Clemson loses to NC State and SCar. Does not make ACCCG
#5 OU wins out, dominating #1 1 OSU, and #6 TCU along the way, beating TCU once again in boring Big12 CG
#6 Ohio State wins out and blows out Wiscy in B1GCG
#7 PSU wins out. Misses B1GCG at 11-1.
#8 TCU only loses twice to Oklahoma
#9 Wiscy wins out in dominant fashion, but loses big in the B1GCG
#1 0 Miami continues it's streak of nail-biting victories against VaTech who loses out, ND who loses out, Virginia, and Pitt. Then play a 9-3 NC State, coming fresh off a loss to UNC, in the ACCCG, and yes, barely squeaking by.

With that scenario Miami would have zero big wins and could have easily been ranked 6-7 remaining behind UGA, OU, Bama, Ohio State, Penn State, and maybe getting passed Pac12 champ Washington should they win out with dominant victories over Stanford and USC and finish 11-1.

Nobody ever said that scenario was going to happen or that it was likely to happen. Only that it could happen, and that ever so slim possibility was why being ranked 10th mattered.

Being ranked 10th didn't matter. We told you then, and we're telling you now. I could see if we were trying to pull some kind of hindsight, but we TOLD YOU.

You claiming that you were "right" because the above scenario didn't happen, when nobody ever said that it would, is completely ridiculous. That scenario, however unlikely, did exist and it only ever existed because an undefeated P5 team with the second most wins against the FPI top 50 was ranked 10th, behind 6 teams who had already lost. The only reason that scenario ever existed was because of the initial CFP rankings. Rankings matter. You were wrong then, and you are wrong now. The fact that all of these teams have since proven that they do not deserve to be ahead of us proved my point, not yours.

 

[Loose Cannon]

"We had not lost! I don't care who we beat or how. The post was counter to the stupid idea that ALL we needed to do was win, when it was abundantly clear that just winning WAS NOT enough to get us ahead of teams."

False premise again.....It was not "abundantly clear"....that is a 100% opinion.

It was not opinion. We were 10th behind 6 teams with a loss. That is abundant clarification that more than "just winning" was being considered.

And we we're telling you with our remaining schedule it didn't matter, which it didn't. It's all irrelevant now though. We should all move on.

Who is we? It was you, hockey guy, Hairy Goat, and maybe one other person. The initial post in this thread has 29 down votes. There were and are still, obviously, sane people on this board who disagree with your position. Nearly every comment in this thread supporting your position has a negative score. Your opinion is NOT in the majority. You are wrong, and everybody sees it except for you two.