FBS Committee Rankings

Rick Burlesons Yam Bag

Internet Cowboy, Turbo Accelerator, tOSU Denier
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
If anything, the "established" teams already get a nod -- they are in more powerful conference, it's easier to schedule marquee games, etc. And in off years, those teams are going to get the tiebreak in lesser bowls: if you're faced with the practical challenge of keeping the Car Wash Bowl solvent, of course you're going to pick 6-6 tOSU or Bama over, say, the runner-up in the MAC. But going beyond that and giving them the further advantage of getting championship berths they arguably don't deserve would be unconscionable -- if anything, ties should be broken in the opposite direction (and yes, that would hurt my team as much as yours) -- the stadium will be full for the national semifinals (or even the other NY6 bowls) no matter who is playing.
You are misrepresenting what I am saying and you are also continuing to do this "I have figured out how the playoffs should be defined" stuff, which is silly.

At no point have I said that an undeserving better traveling team should be in the playoffs. But in as many years as not, there are legitimate coin flips. As I say, I have no problem if one of the primary factors is "which team travels better." I see no benefit nor higher moral standing for choosing the lesser followed fan base.

And Bama does not travel anywhere near as well as tOSU friend. Give it 3-4 years after the Sabah leaves, you guys will be back to normal.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
And Bama does not travel anywhere near as well as tOSU friend. Give it 3-4 years after the Sabah leaves, you guys will be back to normal.
Oh, I don't doubt that tOSU travels better (by virtue of sheer size of nothing else). I was just pointing out that my team, like yours, benefits from a system where the better-traveling team gets the benefit of the doubt (because I think we agree this is at least the case for the minor bowls, and probably is indirectly the case for more consequential berths because of the ease of scheduling marquee non-conference games, etc.).
 

Ale Xander

Hamilton
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
72,203
So Michigan's hopes now rest with the Hokies.
It's over sorry to say. The Iowa loss is as bad as the Pitt loss by Psu loss as their Clemson win validated them. It's pretty clear cut of Wisconsin win as their M game was close and they beat a top half sec team and have no losses outside m and osu.
If Psu wins it should be closer but their osu win should prevail.

While they don't travel as good as M, both travel well enough to be chosen with the league championship and the extra win.

Unfortunately for you fans Michigan faded down the stretch
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
36,921
Hingham, MA
It's over sorry to say. The Iowa loss is as bad as the Pitt loss by Psu loss as their Clemson win validated them. It's pretty clear cut of Wisconsin win as their M game was close and they beat a top half sec team and have no losses outside m and osu.
If Psu wins it should be closer but their osu win should prevail.

While they don't travel as good as M, both travel well enough to be chosen with the league championship and the extra win.

Unfortunately for you fans Michigan faded down the stretch
Eh if Clemson loses - which I highly doubt will happen, they should roll - and if PSU ekes out a win against Wisconsin, I think the committee sends Michigan, for three reasons. First, the Iowa loss was with a backup QB. Second, the OSU loss was, more or less, a tie. A double overtime loss on the road to the #2 team in the country. Their two losses were both on the road by a combined 4 points. And third, Michigan absolutely slaughtered PSU earlier this year.

I don't know whether or not Michigan "deserves" to be there over Penn State, since PSU would be the B1G champ. But there are some very logical reasons that the committee could favor Michigan.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,647
The logical reasons being Michigan abused Penn State, UM and PSU have equal records, and the committee absolutely thinks the Wolverines are the better team. I also don't really think Michigan "faded," unless Ale Xander means definitionally since they lost two of their last three. Iowa played a great game and won at the end. Ohio State is a great team and won by six inches.

I'm not sure the Iowa loss was a killer. It might have kept them from beating out Washington, since the margin between Washington and Michigan in this week's rankings was supposedly very slim, but Washington may very well have passed them after this week anyway. If Clemson loses and Penn State wins the committee is left with picking the conference champion or the team they think is better: well that's where they would have been whether or not Michigan lost to Iowa.

The only thing I'm sure of is that ultimately this is all an annoying cock-tease.
 

Fred in Lynn

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 3, 2013
4,900
Not Lynn (or Ocean Side)
I think it would be fairer to declare that they didn't get it wrong, because the criteria the committee use are so nebulous that it's not clear to me what is "right." It seems as though it's up to individual committee members to decide what is important, which (again) is too bad. The goal of drafting a system should be to minimize to the highest degree possible input from outside influence, i.e., maximize the chances for the teams to decide by creating a hierarchy for the criteria or algorithm while minimizing gut feelings.

Again, I rail against this because they're judging a competitive team sport, not figure skating or art. (Humorously, the opening sentence of the 9-page selection guidelines is "Ranking football teams is an art, not a science." Its self-important bullshit.
 

lars10

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
11,564
I know I'm a psu fan but who cares about winning the big ten if it means you still finish behind a team that didn't?
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
I know I'm a psu fan but who cares about winning the big ten if it means you still finish behind a team that didn't?
If they beat Oklahoma instead of losing to Temple, PSU would be in the Final Four. Is the Committee supposed to ignore non-conference games, the way the B1G standings do?
 

Ale Xander

Hamilton
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
72,203
I know I'm a psu fan but who cares about winning the big ten if it means you still finish behind a team that didn't?
Yes

PSU lost twice
Once to Pitt (as did Clemson in fairness)
And to someone else by 39 points.
 

Ale Xander

Hamilton
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
72,203
If they beat Oklahoma instead of losing to Temple, PSU would be in the Final Four. Is the Committee supposed to ignore non-conference games, the way the B1G standings do?
They beat temple. It was their 3rd or 4th best win the entire year though.
 

lars10

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
11,564
Yes

PSU lost twice
Once to Pitt (as did Clemson in fairness)
And to someone else by 39 points.
Any chance you think psu loses to Michigan by anywhere close to that margin right now?

Edit: I know that doesn't really matter at this point but that Michigan loss was a complete outlier of the rest of the season.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
Since no one has posted them, the official rankings are out.

1. Alabama
2. Clemson
3. tOSU
4. Washington
5. Penn State
6. Michigan

I could probably argue for any order among the 2-3-4 teams. As a Bama fan, UW is the matchup I like least, so I'm a little disappointed UW didn't move up.
 

Rick Burlesons Yam Bag

Internet Cowboy, Turbo Accelerator, tOSU Denier
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Alabama is a 14.5 point favorite (or was a few days ago when I got the lines from the guy I used to bet through). That seems about right to me, even though I think that Washington has a moderate chance of beating them. That Washington Defense is sick.

tOSU is a 3 point favorite over Clemson, which is interesting to me......I would have thought this one was a pick 'em. We'll see.

Regardless, I think both games will be fantastic.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,595
Pittsburgh, PA
Really? I watched every minute of Washington-Colorado and was very unimpressed by Washington, as far as their execution, the creativity of their play calling, and Browning at QB. I think Alabama would have a much harder time with a fully healthy PSU or Oklahoma, nevermind Clemson or tOSU.
 

Rick Burlesons Yam Bag

Internet Cowboy, Turbo Accelerator, tOSU Denier
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Really? I watched every minute of Washington-Colorado and was very unimpressed by Washington, as far as their execution, the creativity of their play calling, and Browning at QB. I think Alabama would have a much harder time with a fully healthy PSU or Oklahoma, nevermind Clemson or tOSU.
Browning was terrible in that game. Like....beyond hideous. But he has "being a good QB" in him and was pretty darned good in the first half of the season. I would still argue that the Washington D could, possibly, create problems for Alabama and their relatively young QB. They are fast and violent. And the Washington O-line is very, very good, which could give Washington a decent chance.

Let's see, I don't see them beating Alabama, but just like a few years ago, the CFP can create some surprises, and Washington has steamrollered a couple of pretty darned good teams.