Re: Guaranteed CFP rankings tomorrow...

Makes sense though....

Committee does not give incentive for Margin of Victory.

So...technically.
Clemson:
1) 3 top 25 wins (potentially 4 if Troy sneaks into the playoff committee top 25 like they didin the AP)
2) Won the head-to head vs Louisville
3) Has a stronger strength of schedule than Louisville AND Michigan in both versions (ESPN and teamrankings.com).
5) Lost to a team that Louisville doesn't play, so no way to compare outcome...just becomes a matching 1 loss in the records.

Michigan:
1) SOS is comparable to Louisville (they sit directly under Louisville on teamrankings.com, but above Louisville on ESPN's)
2) A worse loss than Louisville's and no head-to head.
BUT
3) 3 top 15 wins (Colorado, Wisconsin, and Penn State)

vs

Louisville:
1) A worse SOS than Clemson...SOS compared to Michigan depends which version is being used by the committee.
2) Only loss is to a top ranked team, only hurts them in the head-to head vs Clemson.
3) Only quality win though is vs #18 FSU.

SOS:
https://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/ranking/schedule-strength-by-other
http://www.espn.com/college-football/playoffPicture

Tigerman1978

110%er [5280]

TigerPulse: 100%

Posts: 6926

Joined: 11/5/12

Nov 14, 2016, 11:50 AM

I'd possibly swap #4 and #5...#4 Michigan...#5 Louisville.

Let's look at the protocol in detail:

When circumstances at the margins indicate that teams are comparable, then the following criteria must
be considered:

- Championships won
- Strength of schedule
- Head-to-head competition (if it occurred)
- Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory)

Some of the guidelines and protocols expected to be established to guide the committee would include,
but not be limited to, the following:
- While it is understood that committee members will take into consideration all kinds of data including polls, committee members will be required to discredit polls wherein initial rankings are established before competition has occurred;
- Any polls that are taken into consideration by the selection committee must be completely open
and transparent to the public;
- Strength of schedule, head-to-head competition and championships won must be specifically applied as tie-breakers between teams that look similar;
- Committee members associated with any team under consideration during the selection process
will be required to recuse themselves from any deliberations associated with that team;

So from that, we can conclude the following when comparing 7-1 Clemson, 7-1 Louisville, and 7-1 Michigan.

1) Clemson's head to head win vs Louisville as well as their higher SOS should put Clemson above Louisville automatically. There is no comparative outcome vs Pitt with Louisville, so that loss should just equally be applied as only a loss on the record, regardless the opponent. If it isn't, then again, the head-to head gets applied and still places Clemson ahead.

2) So now we are looking at Louisville and Michigan. Louisville's SOS varies which you look at (teamrankings.com has Louisville one spot above Michigan, the one on ESPN has Michigan's SOS better than Louisville's)...so depends which they use, if not both. Michigan has 3 top 15 wins, where Louisville only has 1 top 20 win. Louisville's loss is better when comparing losses, but Michigan's wins are better by 2 teams worth when comparing wins. So depends which they view as more important. I bank on the wins being more important than the 1 point loss. Apply ESPN's version of the SOS and Michigan should go above Louisville....thus:

1) Alabama
2) OH State
3) Clemson
4) Michigan
5) Louisville

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

Guaranteed CFP rankings tomorrow...