naptownskinsfan Posted November 22, 2020 Share Posted November 22, 2020 1. Alabama (7-0) 2. Notre Dame (8-0) 3. Clemson (7-1) 4. Ohio State (4-0) 5. Texas A&M (5-1) 6. Florida (6-1) 7. Cincinnati (8-0) 8. Northwestern (5-0) 9. Georgia (5-2) 10. Miami (7-1) 11. Oklahoma (6-2) 12. Indiana (4-1) 13. Iowa State (6-2) 14. BYU (9-0) 15. Oregon (3-0) 16. Wisconsin (2-1) 17. Texas (5-2) 18. USC (3-0) 19. UNC (6-2) 20. Coastal Carolina (8-0) 21. Marshall (7-0) 22. Auburn (5-2) 23. Oklahoma State (5-2) 24. Iowa (3-2) 25. Tulsa (5-1) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candyman93 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 Clemson at 3 ahead of OSU lol okay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oregon Ducks Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 Iowa St., Oklahoma, Georgia lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pf9 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 What the non-playoff NY6 would look like now: Orange: Texas A&M VS. Miami Cotton: Florida VS. Oklahoma Peach: Georgia VS. Cincinnati (no way the committee passes up an opportunity to have UGA play in Atlanta) Fiesta: Northwestern VS. Oregon While Oregon is ranked #15, three spots below Indiana, the Pac-12 has a guaranteed bid to a New Year's Six game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buno67 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 11 hours ago, candyman93 said: Clemson at 3 ahead of OSU lol okay the committee is a joke this year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candyman93 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 It just irritates me how people just unanimously praises the playoff system more than the BCS. The committee has shown year after year they have no consistent standard or criteria. If you wanted a playoff format, that makes sense. However, the way it’s decided, doesn’t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naptownskinsfan Posted November 25, 2020 Author Share Posted November 25, 2020 Even with Covid........these are some pretty bad rankings at first glance. Nice to see Auburn still hanging in there to help strength of schedule though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWil23 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 Friendly reminder that ESPN and the committee have millions of reasons to release controversial rankings that vary from week to week. Tune in next Tuesday night and stick around for the post-show talking heads! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pf9 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 Here's how the CFP and NY6 would look now with my 8-team Mason-Dixon bracket: Bowden Semifinals: Florida at Alabama, Texas A&M at Clemson Osborne Semifinals: Northwestern at Notre Dame, Cincinnati at Ohio State Orange: Miami VS. Georgia Cotton: Wisconsin VS. Oklahoma Peach: Indiana VS. Iowa State Fiesta: BYU VS. Oregon Every team is in the top 16 of the CFP rankings. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mse326 Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 On 11/24/2020 at 7:35 PM, candyman93 said: Clemson at 3 ahead of OSU lol okay Ehh. I don't agree with it but I get it. OSU's defense has been poor. Clemson's only loss is to the #2 team without their star starting QB. And they've looked really good with Lawrence back there including throttling the committee's #10 team. Ultimately it will work itself out with Clemson-ND meeting again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NateDawg Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 10 minutes ago, mse326 said: Ehh. I don't agree with it but I get it. OSU's defense has been poor. Clemson's only loss is to the #2 team without their star starting QB. And they've looked really good with Lawrence back there including throttling the committee's #10 team. Ultimately it will work itself out with Clemson-ND meeting again. Yeah I think it would’ve probably been different if there weren’t chinks in the armor with as bad as the Ohio State defense has played. At the same time, I did think it was interesting considering Clemson has had a relatively close contest against a Boston college and has a loss on the resume along with pretty meh defense on the year. All in all I didn’t necessarily agree with it considering the loss but didn’t think it was egregious either. Committee does what they want for the final rankings anyhow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candyman93 Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 13 minutes ago, mse326 said: Ultimately it will work itself out with Clemson-ND meeting again. I agree with you on this. However, they’re rewarding Notre Dame for beating a Clemson team without Lawrence, but not really punishing Clemson for losing because they didn’t have Lawrence. It’s trying to have your cake and eat it too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWil23 Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 1 minute ago, candyman93 said: However, they’re rewarding Notre Dame for beating a Clemson team without Lawrence, but not really punishing Clemson for losing because they didn’t have Lawrence. It’s trying to have your cake and eat it too. It’s the year to year criteria difference that’s hilarious and inconsistent that bothers me. 2015 OSU is clearly one of the best four teams (Their criteria) but left out because they don’t have the best resume/didn’t win their conference, but finished behind a 2 loss Stanford PAC conference winner, because “conference winning matters”. Meanwhile a year later, a 2 loss conference winner in OSU finishes behind a 1 loss Bama that didn’t win their own conference, because 2 losses are worse. It is absolutely the inconsistency that bothers me when “the best team” and “the eye test” argument is used. TBH, I don’t take an issue with Clemson being over OSU right now, but I do take issue with the selective rationale that’s used each year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buno67 Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 39 minutes ago, MWil23 said: It’s the year to year criteria difference that’s hilarious and inconsistent that bothers me. 2015 OSU is clearly one of the best four teams (Their criteria) but left out because they don’t have the best resume/didn’t win their conference, but finished behind a 2 loss Stanford PAC conference winner, because “conference winning matters”. Meanwhile a year later, a 2 loss conference winner in OSU finishes behind a 1 loss Bama that didn’t win their own conference, because 2 losses are worse. It is absolutely the inconsistency that bothers me when “the best team” and “the eye test” argument is used. TBH, I don’t take an issue with Clemson being over OSU right now, but I do take issue with the selective rationale that’s used each year. Totally agree. This is the biggest issue, that they make up the rules to get in every year. There should be a set requirement in place. Like it should have been the first thing they did when they announced they were going to a playoff committee. Hell they could have kept the BCS point system and just used their top 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrILL! Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 🐀☠️ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.