I agree IF Oregon stayed up around #3 to #5 in the CFP poll. I just don't think they will.
No one is going to use the H2H tie breaker if OSU is fighting for the 3rd or 4th spot and Oregon has slipped down to 10 or whatever.
Upvote
0
-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter BB73
- Start date
I agree IF Oregon stayed up around #3 to #5 in the CFP poll. I just don't think they will.
No one is going to use the H2H tie breaker if OSU is fighting for the 3rd or 4th spot and Oregon has slipped down to 10 or whatever.
ORD_Buckeye
Wrong glass, Sir.
If they win out, they should slide back into that 3-6 range.
Given the B12's championship game format, there is no way mercifully that Okie and Tejas could both end up with one loss. Talk about an espn wet dream of pushing a Bama, UGA, Okie, Tejas playoff.
Right now, the inside track seems to be Bama, UGA and the Okie-Tejas winner and the B1G winner. Wild cards are Oregon and the juggalos. Flip Oregon and the B1G winner if the latter is Ohio State.
Upvote
0
Well that's the whole thing isn't it? The media seems to have zero respect for (or financial interest in) the PAC if it isn't USC led. I could just as easily see undefeated teams that get their first loss stay ahead of Oregon as it begins to happen.
In that case, they won't be up around that 3-6 range to even make the argument.
All in all, a second loss is better but I don't think they are an insurmountable obstacle with 1 loss. No one knows for sure.
Upvote
0
The problem with the committee is their "criteria" seems to shift with the wind. They basically mold it to fit what they want to happen. There's nothing really set. So you never know what really is going to happen until it does. It would definitely be better for Oregon to lose again, sure. But I don't think a decision would be based entirely on a head to head game in week 2 of the season.
Upvote
0
I'd LOVE to see them really get exposed and be forced to choose from a 1 loss Bama that loses the SEC title game to Georgia and like a undefeated Wake Forest ACC Champion. You know there's no way they are putting Wake Forest in over Bama in that scenario. But the mental gymnastics and excuses they'd make explaining how its "not a beauty contest" would be pretty hilarious. .
Upvote
0
Beano Cook
Hangin' with Rockne
Cross Notre Dame off the list after Kelly shit the bed versus Cincinnati. Someone should send his ass up in a scissor lift for that one. Knute's still pissed off.
Upvote
0
Zurp
I have misplaced my pants.
Unfortunately, I agree with you. It's tough when the whole world says, "Why can't they settle this on the field?" and in this case, they already did settle it on the field. "But that was before Ohio State found a defense" seems like something that Ohio State fans will say and make people laugh at Ohio State fans.
I think that if Oregon, Ohio State, Bama, and Georgia all win out, except for the SEC CG, the real argument should be between Ohio State and the SEC CG loser (and Cincinnati, if they win out, too). But that won't be the argument.
Upvote
0
I think they would maybe actually leave Georgia out. Call me crazy. They don't carry the same pull as Bama though. Especially if it came down to them and a Ohio State team that just beat a pretty highly ranked (hopefully) Iowa team in the B1G title game.
Upvote
0
CincyInterloper
Hall of Fame
If Alabama and Georgia both go undefeated, the only thing the SEC CG decides is who gets seeded 1 and who gets seeded 2/3 in the CFP.
Upvote
0
ScriptOhio
Everybody is somebody else's weirdo.
An inside look at how the College Football Playoff Selection Committee process has changed since 2014
A mock CFP Selection Committee meeting provided an interesting look into how the rankings are decided
The College Football Playoff held its latest mock selection meeting this week, and in attending for the second time -- my first since 2014, the initial year of the CFP -- the process has certainly changed.
That first meeting was held before the actual CFP Selection Committee had ever met live for its first set of rankings. It was interesting to see the process, but there was not much data available to analyze the teams. Notably absent was a strength of schedule measurement. That was highly subjective.
This time around, there's a lot of data available for committee members. Not only is there strength of schedule, but there are numerous offensive and defensive statistics provided to help measure team performance not only in raw numbers but in relation to the strength of their opponents.
Strength of schedule is also measured in aggregate with each team given a raw rating and ranking from 1-130. Also, each opponent on a team's schedule is listed with a relative strength ranking that is color-coded with green being stronger and red weaker. It is easy to spot right away a schedule with a lot of red or green as weak or strong.
An opponent's place in the most recent CFP Rankings is also listed, if applicable. Each team's record against the top 25 is based on that CFP ranking.
Entire article: https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...ion-committee-process-has-changed-since-2014/
A mock CFP Selection Committee meeting provided an interesting look into how the rankings are decided
The College Football Playoff held its latest mock selection meeting this week, and in attending for the second time -- my first since 2014, the initial year of the CFP -- the process has certainly changed.
That first meeting was held before the actual CFP Selection Committee had ever met live for its first set of rankings. It was interesting to see the process, but there was not much data available to analyze the teams. Notably absent was a strength of schedule measurement. That was highly subjective.
This time around, there's a lot of data available for committee members. Not only is there strength of schedule, but there are numerous offensive and defensive statistics provided to help measure team performance not only in raw numbers but in relation to the strength of their opponents.
Strength of schedule is also measured in aggregate with each team given a raw rating and ranking from 1-130. Also, each opponent on a team's schedule is listed with a relative strength ranking that is color-coded with green being stronger and red weaker. It is easy to spot right away a schedule with a lot of red or green as weak or strong.
An opponent's place in the most recent CFP Rankings is also listed, if applicable. Each team's record against the top 25 is based on that CFP ranking.
Entire article: https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...ion-committee-process-has-changed-since-2014/
Upvote
0
And who decides which teams are "red" and which are "green". This "information" that the committee is given should be like everything else. It should be questioned. They should look to determine how the information was compiled, and by whom.
But they won't. Easier to just accept what you’re given as being true. Makes your job easier.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Brave of you to assume politicians, 4star generals, CEOs, and a few Athletic Directors actually watch these games.
Upvote
0
I really don't want to see Ohio State in a national championship game this year. Next year is an exciting prospect.
Upvote
0