forums

MEGA There’s Still Hope for the ACCCG/CFB Playoffs Mega Merge Thread

Advertisement
Angry Ibis said:
We’ll need to see it long term…

“Only invested in Mario” and hiring JD says otherwise. And of course Radtirement.
Click to expand...


Again, "University President" is higher on the org chart than "Athletic Director".

Review the hiring timelines, and you will arrive at the correct answer.
 
cway313 said:
How many games did Miami win in 2024? They knew the margin for error coming into the season. You can hate it all you want.
Click to expand...


Everyone is fully aware of our record in 2024.

That still doesn't mean that the system for ranking teams should be abused by Utah Athletic Directors and 100-year-old definitions of "bluebloods".

Two things can be true at the same time. Miami put itself at risk AND the system is being abused at Miami's expense.
 
YLCANE said:
Their football history doesn’t start w Pete Carroll and Reggie bush

We are talking John McKay and classic games w ND……Miami is an annoying pimple that most college historians coaches and media DISLIKE

Whereas USC is revered!!!!

There is a HUGE difference between the two
Click to expand...
Who gives a **** what usc did in the 1960s?

They are new to the conference and haven’t been relevant in 20 years.

If I’m worried we are gonna get screwed, im worried about bama/SEC, not usc.
 
scrantoncane said:
Who gives a **** what usc did in the 1960s?

They are new to the conference and haven’t been relevant in 20 years.

If I’m worried we are gonna get screwed, im worried about bama/SEC, not usc.
Click to expand...
you can say that all you want
It isn’t going to change a **** thing
Blue bloods are blue bloods and USC is one

As for not being relevant for 20 years
That statement is true for Miami for even longer

You can worry about bama too
They aren’t going anwhere

Committee put them there to create wider disparity between Miami and ND

Know the game
 
TheOriginalCane said:
Proof positive that they are valuing LOSSES more than WINS. Who has Utah beaten? Ooooh, #25 Arizona State. Not quite as comparable as beating #9 Notre Dame, BUT **** ALL THE QUALITY WINS, they just want to fixate on quality LOSSES.

Bull****...

The Utah AD fix is in.
Click to expand...
they had to pivot to losses since wins didn't support their agenda
 
Strangely enough, our chances according to the playoff predictor have gone up to 35% today from 11% yesterday if we win out and don't make the ACCCG. It also has us at #9 ahead of ND at 10.

1000018740.png


www.espn.com

Who will make the 12-team College Football Playoff?

Select your favorite contender, make your picks for how its season will play out and see what the Allstate Playoff Predictor foretells.
www.espn.com
 
Advertisement
YLCANE said:
you can say that all you want
It isn’t going to change a **** thing
Blue bloods are blue bloods and USC is one

As for not being relevant for 20 years
That statement is true for Miami for even longer

You can worry about bama too
They aren’t going anwhere

Committee put them there to create wider disparity between Miami and ND

Know the game
Click to expand...


Here's the thing you may not be taking into account.

USC's "blueblood" status is a historical thing. But USC's place in the firmament of the Big 10 is something very new. In fact, it is easy to argue that USC actually diminished its star by joining the Big 10.

Whereas, Alabama has "always been" Alabama. They have won titles IN THE SAME LEAGUE over decades of play.

The Big 10 is not trumpeting USC as its "golden boy" in the same way that the ACC is currently championing Miami. The Big 10 is touting other teams, and one can even argue that INDI-*******-ANA is getting more shine this year than USC.

I'm not saying that USC will definitively "jump" Miami or "not jump" Miami. I think it depends on how close and/or dominating the game will turn out to be. Who knows what will happen.

Which is why I am not worried about USC right now. If USC absolutely blows out Oregon, then the chances of USC "jumping" Miami and Oregon "falling below" Miami are roughly equal.

Otherwise, I am MUCH MORE worried about Oklahoma and Alabama and BYU and Wake Forest. Period. End of story.

Go Mizzou! War Eagle! And if I knew more about the ****** teams in the Big 12, I'd use their fight slogans too.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
All good.

The whole thing is so weird. A 2-team tie is pretty straightforward. But a multi-team tie gets confusing as to who gets the upper hand. It's almost like there is a sweetspot, because it becomes really hard to find common opponents if you have 5 or 6 teams tied.

Although there is an evil part of me that hopes we get down to the Commissioner having to pick teams...
Click to expand...

Appreciate you - Hopefully, it does come down to the commissioner picking
 
aelmiami said:
BYU basically has to win their conference to make it imo. Even total utter chaos happens a loss would kill them vs TT.

The Bama thing is what I keep going back to. Does the committee punish Bama if they lose the SECCG? Say to UGA and it happens convincingly. Does the committee punish UGA if they make it and lose to GT and whoever they play?

This is where ND and their schedule becomes problematic. Losses to two CFP level teams. One win vs a CFP level team. We share an insane amount of opponents with them. If the results are similar and we have the H2H, how can you justify them in over us?

But the bigger issue and why I think the SEC might go nuclear on ND. Why should Bama be punished in favor of us or ND? If say things shake out to where we are #11. Bama is #10 and ND is #9. Bama loses to someone in the SECCG. Does Bama drop below us? The committee would essentially be rewarding us and ND for not playing in a conference title game. If they don’t, they have to make a decision, does H2H weigh more than who you lost to. The SEC would have to stake a case for either who you did beat matter or who beat you for Bama. I’d imagine they’d pick who you beat. Which benefits us. They’d tout Bama beating UGA, Vandy, Mizzou, Tennessee over losses because then it opens up the FSU conversation. The minute Bama touts wins it benefits us. Indirectly.

But idk. I’m so far down this CFP rabbit hole rn I’m confusing myself.
Click to expand...

Hahaha I am in the same boat. So many permutations and combinations. Say what you will about conference tiebreakers but those are an organized method of determining rank unlike the crystal ball and curtains process going on here.

Last year the committee had it easy because both of the XII teams had two losses going into the game. None of them were even ranked in the top 15 before ASU’s victory. This year they face the challenge of possibly having two one loss teams in there. They didn’t knock out 11-2 SMU so I am reluctant to state that a 11-2 TT gets knocked out.

I believe a 11-2 TT would get in over a 10-3 Bama team; BYU winning the XII. If TT wins the XII, Bama goes 10-3 with a close loss to A&M; Bama still gets in, imo.

I feel like they are trying to prepare for that scenario by avoiding the repeat of last year; which is why Bama is above BYU whose “good loss,” not only is better than Bama’s; but they additionally have no bad losses!

I cannot tell if they are going to ***** us over two years in a row. I don’t see them putting Bama above Notre Dame after losing to A&M or the week after they beat Auburn.

I think they want the Big12 to hold off Miami because we are directly comparable to alabama’s superior as well as indirectly to Bama since we beat FSU. Because if Utah and BYU holds off Miami, they buy time before say BYU and Bama both lose in conference championship games; they get to keep their list as static as can be. Why bump Miami for not playing in a CCG will be their propaganda line. Swapping out UVA/SMU/GT as the ACC conference champion in place of Miami.

It’s a super small thing; but we will be helped if North Texas wins out & beats Tulane. Their only loss is to USF. Now, the committee would be staring at a scenario wherein the last three teams in — have lost to Miami or lost to a team Miami beat. That’s ugly and damning after last year’s fiasco.

History tells us **** near impossible for the dozen teams ahead of us to go 24-0 these next two weeks. But who knows. If it does happen; it would have been three weeks straight of the chair guy pestered about Miami.

Im not sure the committee/larger media/NCAA-CFB world could accept such a blantant rigging where head to head and common opponents dissipate. It’s bad for the sport, and it would be used as an example consistently in ways that the Travis/FSU/Bama and Clemson/Miami/Bama scenarios could not be used.

It seems like for all intents and purposes, they’re expecting Bama to be this year’s UGA and beat A&M to be Texas; then only put us in if BYU loses; but if BYU wins, we’re out and Tech would still get in. This is where ASU being ranked at 25 while SMU and Louisville are unranked means something.

GT beating UGA then losing in the conference championship game is their true nightmare scenario for them.

Blaming Spider-Man GIF
 
Advertisement
Colin Cowhered is the king of judging everything on feelings, how things look, and whatever line of bull**** he can think of. As he himself said, its more important for him to be interesting than right.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
Here's the thing you may not be taking into account.

USC's "blueblood" status is a historical thing. But USC's place in the firmament of the Big 10 is something very new. In fact, it is easy to argue that USC actually diminished its star by joining the Big 10.

Whereas, Alabama has "always been" Alabama. They have won titles IN THE SAME LEAGUE over decades of play.

The Big 10 is not trumpeting USC as its "golden boy" in the same way that the ACC is currently championing Miami. The Big 10 is touting other teams, and one can even argue that INDI-*******-ANA is getting more shine this year than USC.

I'm not saying that USC will definitively "jump" Miami or "not jump" Miami. I think it depends on how close and/or dominating the game will turn out to be. Who knows what will happen.

Which is why I am not worried about USC right now. If USC absolutely blows out Oregon, then the chances of USC "jumping" Miami and Oregon "falling below" Miami are roughly equal.

Otherwise, I am MUCH MORE worried about Oklahoma and Alabama and BYU and Wake Forest. Period. End of story.

Go Mizzou! War Eagle! And if I knew more about the ****** teams in the Big 12, I'd use their fight slogans too.
Click to expand...
That’s a fair point….pac 10 USC carried more weight!!! I will agree w that

But to think USC won’t move up a fair amount from 15 while beating #7 Oregon on the road is naive imo

We are almost damned if we do damned if we don’t type of a scenario in that game in my opinion

I don’t think the committee will factor in the outcome of ND game for both schools as the litmus test of where they are ranking USC versus Miami I just think if USC beats number seven they’re gonna move up five or six spots!

Meanwhile, Miami is playing lowly Virginia Tech if we don’t win 50 to nothing it’s deemed a failure!

I hope I’m wrong, but I’ve seen this movie before I’ve been around long enough, lol
 
TheOriginalCane said:
Here's the thing you may not be taking into account.

USC's "blueblood" status is a historical thing. But USC's place in the firmament of the Big 10 is something very new. In fact, it is easy to argue that USC actually diminished its star by joining the Big 10.

Whereas, Alabama has "always been" Alabama. They have won titles IN THE SAME LEAGUE over decades of play.

The Big 10 is not trumpeting USC as its "golden boy" in the same way that the ACC is currently championing Miami. The Big 10 is touting other teams, and one can even argue that INDI-*******-ANA is getting more shine this year than USC.

I'm not saying that USC will definitively "jump" Miami or "not jump" Miami. I think it depends on how close and/or dominating the game will turn out to be. Who knows what will happen.

Which is why I am not worried about USC right now. If USC absolutely blows out Oregon, then the chances of USC "jumping" Miami and Oregon "falling below" Miami are roughly equal.

Otherwise, I am MUCH MORE worried about Oklahoma and Alabama and BYU and Wake Forest. Period. End of story.

Go Mizzou! War Eagle! And if I knew more about the ****** teams in the Big 12, I'd use their fight slogans too.
Click to expand...
I also agree with you about Alabama and Oklahoma that Oklahoma win last week really hurt us because it really slotted another SEC team, conveniently!

I do think there’s a possibility for Auburn and Missouri to pull the upsets, but they will have to overcome SEC officiating as well. Cincinnati definitely could beat BYU and I would love to see Kansas State beat Utah if those things happen obviously our chances to make it increase dramatically.

Having settle that are we gonna beat Pittsburgh or is Meathead gonna lay an egg?😂😂😂
 
With regards to the CFP, very few things are a certainty. One of those is that there’s a 0% chance the rest of this season goes chalk. There will be upsets and unexpected results. We just have to hope Miami ends up on the right side of that.
 
Back
Top