College Football Playoff Predictions!

am1 · Nov 16, 2014

Clemson Fan said:
Do you really think the commitee is going look at the highest ranking any team had throughout the season when evaluating those quality wins? I don't think they will. I think they're going to look at where those teams ended up (with 4 or 5 losses and not ranked in some cases) when making the final determination on how "quality" those wins actually were.

BTW, MSU will only get to face Missouri or Georgia IF Auburn beats Alabama. Otherwise they'll be on the outside looking in on the SEC championship game. That's why I stated above that I think they're going to need a lot of help to get back into the 4 teams for the playoff.

I started talking about the Razorbacks. They are not a good team but did beat NIU and Texas Tech OOC. Came very close to winning some of their other games against the ranked opponents (at the time) that I talked about.

As far as MSU goes they are behind FSU, Alabama, Oregon for sure if all 4 win out. Then there is Baylor, TCU, and Ohio State and a 1 loss FSU team to think about where they will end up. 7 teams left. Baylor and TCU will not both make it.

There has to be some combination of where teams end the season and where they were when the matchup happened. Is it due to injury, teams being exposed, weak early schedules, young players getting better etc. Every time a team losses their ranking goes down. Its possible the 4th best team loses to the top 3 teams in the country but they would not be ranked 4th.

I am all for stopping 1AA wins counting towards getting to a bowl. There are enough 1A teams that have moved up in recent years to be chicken feed. I also feel for the 1AA gys who work just as hard who are sold out by their school for a payday. Although a team going for a national championship year in and year out is not worried about becoming bowl eligible.

TUGBrian · Nov 16, 2014

looks like mariotta also got paid....

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odk...iota+signed.TRS0&_nkw=mariota+signed&_sacat=0

dak prescott too!

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odk...signed.TRS0&_nkw=dak+prescott+signed&_sacat=0

uh oh..amari cooper in trouble with a signed stitched jersey!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/AMARI-COOPE...36176142?pt=US_Autographs&hash=item58b786a30e

how weird you can just type in the name of a popular leading college athlete on a top 10 team and find autographed and certified memorabilia! but hey, im sure its just winston that got paid...the other autographs on the same medium (stitched jerseys, mini helmets, footballs) are all legit.

Elan · Nov 16, 2014

Clemson Fan said:
Do you really think the commitee is going look at the highest ranking any team had throughout the season when evaluating those quality wins? I don't think they will. I think they're going to look at where those teams ended up (with 4 or 5 losses and not ranked in some cases) when making the final determination on how "quality" those wins actually were.
.

Yep. In not sure why someone would cling to rankings at all, much less weeks old rankings that have since been proven to be laughably inaccurate. Rankings are subjective and useless. Go back and look at how far off preseason and early season rankings typically are compared to end of season results if anyone wants to prove it to themselves.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

TUGBrian · Nov 17, 2014

someone else posted an amusing comment on another thread...talking about how auburn, lsu, scar and TAM....who all at one point were ranked in the top 10 (and some in the top 5)....and who all now have a combined 15 losses now?

ampaholic · Nov 17, 2014

Elan said:
Yep. In not sure why someone would cling to rankings at all, much less weeks old rankings that have since been proven to be laughably inaccurate. Rankings are subjective and useless. Go back and look at how far off preseason and early season rankings typically are compared to end of season results if anyone wants to prove it to themselves.

Such a shame that they actually have to play the games - isn't it?

TUGBrian said:
someone else posted an amusing comment on another thread...talking about how auburn, lsu, scar and TAM....who all at one point were ranked in the top 10 (and some in the top 5)....and who all now have a combined 15 losses now?

Yea, if I had known for sure about Oregon knocking off FSU in the 1st playoff round and the Alabama in the championship game -- think of the money I could have made placing that bet at the start of the season. :bawl:

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

Oh and Bama destroyed TCU in their semi

Sent from January 30th 2015

ampaholic · Nov 18, 2014

Heather Dinich SLAMS FSU - puts them at #4!!!

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:11897158

(sorry about the 30 seconds of dead air while it loads - be patient)

Wonder if she is reading the tea leaves correctly?

pedro47 · Nov 18, 2014

There is another undefeated football team in the nation called Marshall University. I hope they get a chance to go and play in a bowl game .
Prediction both Alabama and Oregon will lose one more game before the season is over this year.

Elan · Nov 18, 2014

What irks me is that there's an obvious disconnect in the whole "selection by committee" approach. What really matters? Record, perceived strength of schedule, quality of wins, quality of losses, "eye test", etc? This committee process is likely to be as big of farce as the BCS was, it just get's twice the wiggle room in that the playoff is 4 teams, and the BCS MNC selection was 2 teams.

Either put objective, measurable criteria on the process, or expand the playoff field to a point where it's reasonable to assume that the last team chosen has little to no likelihood of winning it all. Until either of those two things happens, the process is every bit as susceptible to fraud as the BCS system was.

am1 · Nov 18, 2014

Elan said:
What irks me is that there's an obvious disconnect in the whole "selection by committee" approach. What really matters? Record, perceived strength of schedule, quality of wins, quality of losses, "eye test", etc? This committee process is likely to be as big of farce as the BCS was, it just get's twice the wiggle room in that the playoff is 4 teams, and the BCS MNC selection was 2 teams.

Either put objective, measurable criteria on the process, or expand the playoff field to a point where it's reasonable to assume that the last team chosen has little to no likelihood of winning it all. Until either of those two things happens, the process is every bit as susceptible to fraud as the BCS system was.

I am in favour of that more criteria.

All Power 5 undefeated teams get in.
Conference champs get a boost.
Losing conference championship game hurts more then losing early.
No more than two teams from one conference.
No more than 3 losses.
Power 5 1 loss team gets in over a 3 loss non conference championship team,

These are very simple ones. I am sure better ones can be brainstormed.

Marshall had no chance before the season started.

ampaholic · Nov 18, 2014

Elan said:
What irks me is that there's an obvious disconnect in the whole "selection by committee" approach. What really matters? Record, perceived strength of schedule, quality of wins, quality of losses, "eye test", etc? This committee process is likely to be as big of farce as the BCS was, it just get's twice the wiggle room in that the playoff is 4 teams, and the BCS MNC selection was 2 teams.

Either put objective, measurable criteria on the process, or expand the playoff field to a point where it's reasonable to assume that the last team chosen has little to no likelihood of winning it all. Until either of those two things happens, the process is every bit as susceptible to fraud as the BCS system was.

Your mistake is thinking Football should be like golf - in golf you can have a "shotgun" start where each golfer starts (and ends) the game at about the same time, so you can have 18 or more scores at the end of the day - in football the entire season is like playing 10 or 11 holes (games) - but no 2 teams play the SAME 10 or 11 holes er, teams.

In football competing teams play against EACH OTHER - not the "course". It is therefore viable to gnash about hypothetical match ups and how does team A's body of work compare to team B's.

The "body of work" helps determine the rankings - review the link I supplied above it will help you understand the "committee thinking" as explained by Heather.

Elan · Nov 18, 2014

am1 said:
I am in favour of that more criteria.

All Power 5 undefeated teams get in.
Conference champs get a boost.
Losing conference championship game hurts more then losing early.
No more than two teams from one conference.
No more than 3 losses.
Power 5 1 loss team gets in over a 3 loss non conference championship team,

These are very simple ones. I am sure better ones can be brainstormed.

Marshall had no chance before the season started.

That's a start, but what does "boost" mean? All of this stuff needs to be quantified, or it's useless. Any wiggle room allows for bias to creep in, and that was the problem with the BCS.

The best approach is my second suggestion. Expand the field. While it's difficult to argue Marshall's case, there's little doubt they should make an 8 or perhaps 12 team field (assuming they remain undefeated). People can talk all they want about relative conference strength, but as has been shown, perception and reality are vastly different when that's the topic. Furthermore, as an example, if we applied strength of conference to baseball, the Giants would have 0 World Series wins instead of 3, because they come from what's generally perceived as one of the one of the weakest divisions in baseball. A weak conference isn't indicative of a weak conference champion, nor is the converse true.

TUGBrian · Nov 18, 2014

Ive always thought it silly that one play can determine who "should" or "shouldnt" be ranked in a particular spot.

for instance, lets say miami scores on that last drive and beats FSU...now due to one play...the entire voting community would rank FSU way down the line (perhaps not even in the top 10 for some). however, without that play...they are apparently the best team in the nation merely because they remain unbeaten.

just as with auburn last year, they were 3 or 4 "single plays" away from being a 4 loss team and not ranked by anyone.

that said, I am not sure there is any non-subjective way to rank separate teams who never play each other on a neutral field...for the purposes of comparing how they would perform on a neutral field against each other.

is virginia tech better than ohio state? not a chance...but they beat them at home earlier this year.

is florida a better team than georgia? not in any measurable category...but yet they blew their doors off a few weeks back.

I dont see any real solution to this short of expanding the playoffs to include the top 12 or more teams....thus shortening the regular season.

TUGBrian · Nov 18, 2014

and now a story from today on ESPN....all those winston autographs are likely fakes

https://espn.go.com/college-footbal...-jameis-winston-items-due-legitimacy-concerns

am1 · Nov 18, 2014

Elan said:
That's a start, but what does "boost" mean? All of this stuff needs to be quantified, or it's useless. Any wiggle room allows for bias to creep in, and that was the problem with the BCS.

The best approach is my second suggestion. Expand the field. While it's difficult to argue Marshall's case, there's little doubt they should make an 8 or perhaps 12 team field (assuming they remain undefeated). People can talk all they want about relative conference strength, but as has been shown, perception and reality are vastly different when that's the topic. Furthermore, as an example, if we applied strength of conference to baseball, the Giants would have 0 World Series wins instead of 3, because they come from what's generally perceived as one of the one of the weakest divisions in baseball. A weak conference isn't indicative of a weak conference champion, nor is the converse true.

Right it is not easy which all the more reason to have established criteria. I would add out of the 4 two are to be conference champions. The other 3 conference champs would still get some kind of boost when compared to the others. Maybe even 3 conferences need to be represented but not all 3 have to be conference champs. Some of these criteria's may keep better teams out but it ensures that more conferences are represented and less room for error from the rankings.

It would be hard now but maybe 4 super conferences is the answer to this.

I am not in favor of an 8 team playoff but it seems that the other equal but non-playoff bowls are not being talked about at all.

Elan · Nov 18, 2014

am1 said:
It would be hard now but maybe 4 super conferences is the answer to this.

I am not in favor of an 8 team playoff but it seems that the other equal but non-playoff bowls are not being talked about at all.

If 4 super conferences are the answer, then someone sure as hell needs to make sure that the BSU's and BYU's are in and the Vandy's, Wake Forests and Indiana's, etc are out. That isn't going to happen, so playoff expansion is the solution. It works in FCS (although they've made their playoff field too large, IMO), so it can easily work in FBS.

TUGBrian · Nov 18, 2014

cant think of any major sporting "title" that ISNT judged by a playoff system....except college football.

ace2000 · Nov 18, 2014

TUGBrian said:
cant think of any major sporting "title" that ISNT judged by a playoff system....except college football.

Not anymore though (I know I'm stating the obvious here). Whatever number of teams are chosen there will always be some "deserving" team(s) left out. At least we're heading in the right direction. I'm a lot happier about this format than what we had previously. I can't complain.

I'm a lot more interested this year than the past.

Elan · Nov 18, 2014

ace2000 said:
Not anymore though (I know I'm stating the obvious here). Whatever number of teams are chosen there will always be some "deserving" team(s) left out. At least we're heading in the right direction. I'm a lot happier about this format than what we had previously. I can't complain.

I'm a lot more interested this year than the past.

There will always be a few teams that will complain about being left out of the field. But I'd rather have 8 conference champions and a committee tell me who 9-12 are (in a 12 team playoff), than have the committee tell me who 1-4 are in a 4 team playoff. Win your conference, you're in - like most other sports.

ace2000 · Nov 18, 2014

Elan said:
There will always be a few teams that will complain about being left out of the field. But I'd rather have 8 conference champions and a committee tell me who 9-12 are (in a 12 team playoff), than have the committee tell me who 1-4 are in a 4 team playoff. Win your conference, you're in - like most other sports.

Agreed, and I hope they can figure it out.

I saw something the last weekend that mentioned a couple of scenarios that would push for expanded playoffs. An undefeated Fl St team getting shut out and two SEC teams.

TUGBrian · Nov 18, 2014

called it!

Playoff comissioner tonight when asked about alabama in the 1 spot:

They had a decisive win over the number 1 ranked team in the country, we felt they should be number 1

same guy when asked why MSU only dropped to 4, literally 15 seconds later:

They played a great game against the now number 1 team and only lost by 5 points, we never felt like they were out of the game.

*sigh

Clemson Fan · Nov 18, 2014

TUGBrian said:
looks like mariotta also got paid....

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odk...iota+signed.TRS0&_nkw=mariota+signed&_sacat=0

dak prescott too!

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odk...signed.TRS0&_nkw=dak+prescott+signed&_sacat=0

uh oh..amari cooper in trouble with a signed stitched jersey!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/AMARI-COOPE...36176142?pt=US_Autographs&hash=item58b786a30e

how weird you can just type in the name of a popular leading college athlete on a top 10 team and find autographed and certified memorabilia! but hey, im sure its just winston that got paid...the other autographs on the same medium (stitched jerseys, mini helmets, footballs) are all legit.

They probably did get paid and you know what, I'm not against them getting paid. I never was. I think they, including Winston, should get paid for their autograph if they can. Why should all the money go to some sleazy autograph dealer?

My beef isn't with Winston getting paid. It's with how Jimbo defended it all. It made Jimbo look like a fool and at FSU it looks like Jimbo exerts very little disciplinary control over his program.

Elan · Nov 18, 2014

TUGBrian said:
called it!

Playoff comissioner tonight when asked about alabama in the 1 spot:

same guy when asked why MSU only dropped to 4, literally 15 seconds later:

*sigh

Yep, Long would be better off to keep his mouth shut than to try to justify the unjustifiable. I love that in the very first year the committee is making a mockery of the process. Particularly impressed that Marshall and Colorado State can't crack the top 25, yet 7-3 Minnesota makes it. What a joke!

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Clemson Fan · Nov 18, 2014

I have to admit that I'm a little surprised that MSU is at 4. Now instead of beating 3 Top 10 teams in a row they only have a single win against a Top 25 team.

I still think that if TCU, Baylor or OSU win out that one of them will eventually jump MSU to the 4th position assuming MSU wins the Egg Bowl. My best guess is that OSU will make it in mainly because the Big 10 has a championship game and the Big 12 does not. I think having won the regular season conference championship AND the conference championship game will hold a lot of weight with the committee and will brake a tie when they compare them to MSU. I don't think TCU nor Baylor have enough left in their schedule which lacks a championship game to be able to jump a MSU team that wins the Egg bowl.

Here's my updated playoff prediction (not like anybody cares :hysterical

:

Alabama
Oregon
FSU
OSU

Clemson Fan · Nov 18, 2014

ace2000 said:
Agreed, and I hope they can figure it out.

I saw something the last weekend that mentioned a couple of scenarios that would push for expanded playoffs. An undefeated Fl St team getting shut out and two SEC teams.

I'm rooting hard for chaos!

am1 · Nov 18, 2014

Elan said:
If 4 super conferences are the answer, then someone sure as hell needs to make sure that the BSU's and BYU's are in and the Vandy's, Wake Forests and Indiana's, etc are out. That isn't going to happen, so playoff expansion is the solution. It works in FCS (although they've made their playoff field too large, IMO), so it can easily work in FBS.

Yes that is why it would not being easy. The lines are drawn in stone. If there were 4 12 team conferences, year in year out the best teams could come from there. I appreciate the history (whats left) and hope it does not go that way.

Expanding the tournament would take away from the regular season. I think the season is long enough as it is. But hopefully it is all a work in progress.

College Football Playoff Predictions!

TUG Review Crew: Expert