|
Replies: 18
| visibility 1
|
All-In [26500]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 20637
Joined: 9/2/02
|
Why not Houston (over Bama) ...
Nov 19, 2015, 8:50 AM
|
|
They have walked the dog on every team except:
Louisville (6-4)
Memphis (8-2)
Cincinnati (6-4)
To me, those are 3 pretty good close wins.
Didn't we play Louisville tight?
|
|
|
|
 |
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Why not Houston (over Bama) ...
Nov 19, 2015, 8:52 AM
|
|
I still think Bama should have to play-in (and win) against Houston or Ok St to be in the playoff 4 teams. If Ok St and Houston are undefeated at the end of the year, teams like ND and Bama should be excluded. Do we just count losses for non-SEC teams? That sucks and makes the playoff total BS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Team Captain [496]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 748
Joined: 10/11/12
|
Re: Why not Houston (over Bama) ...
Nov 19, 2015, 10:53 AM
|
|
Indeed ... until every perfect record team is included in the playoffs, the playoffs are BS.
At This Moment the top four PLAYOFF TEAMS should be Clemson, Houston, Oklahoma State and the better of the BigTen teams. Of course I expect that to change (Navy over Houston) but until that happens (Navy over Houston) Alabama should be planning for the Sugar Bowl.
PERIOD!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1186]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1298
Joined: 1/4/04
|
Re: Why not Houston (over Bama) ...
Nov 19, 2015, 11:37 AM
|
|
The only problem with that logic (every undefeated team must be included in a "legit" playoff") is that it incentivizes filling all non-conf games with cupcakes. As it stands now, such behavior is DISincentivized as a result of strength of schedule and strength of record being factors in the greater picture of playoff selection. Which leads to better product on TV for the consumer each week of the season? The answer is easy. For example, I'd much rather watch a random LSU-Michigan game some random Saturday than an LSU-Charleston Southern! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [64575]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 88988
Joined: 3/27/01
|
Speaking entirely for myself....
Nov 19, 2015, 8:54 AM
|
|
I would not rank any undefeated team from a non-Power 5 conference over a one loss team from a Power-5 conference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
What if Houston had scheduled, and beaten, say...
Nov 19, 2015, 8:56 AM
|
|
Oklahoma in the non-conference? (Or any very good Power 5 team)
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [64575]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 88988
Joined: 3/27/01
|
I think a game of that nature would elevate them some....
Nov 19, 2015, 9:06 AM
|
|
but I would still probably have them behind most of the one loss Power 5 teams.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Just didn't know if it was a hard and fast rule...
Nov 19, 2015, 9:07 AM
|
|
Just because of what conference they are in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [64575]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 88988
Joined: 3/27/01
|
A win over a good Power 5 team would enhance their resume
Nov 19, 2015, 9:11 AM
|
|
When it comes to ranking teams, there aren't too many hard and fast rules. It's all pretty subjective. Unless, of course you're ESPN and you're pimping one particular conference or team pretty much over everyone else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1186]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1298
Joined: 1/4/04
|
Re: Why not Houston (over Bama) ...
Nov 19, 2015, 9:01 AM
|
|
Why is there so much anti-Bama-in-the-CFP sentiment around here? Have you watched them since the Ole Miss game? They're playing at a pretty darn high level right now. I get that they have 1 loss whereas, say, OKST doesn't, but right now on a neutral field I'd lay my money on Bama in that matchup. And that's kind of the thinking that the CFP Committee has - who would make for the best 3 games right now, no questions asked.
Now, as for our Tigers, I've said all year I love the way we match up with the Tide, so I say bring 'em on! The only team I really want no part of in having to face if we make the playoff is ND. Tough to beat a balanced team like that twice in one season!!
GO TIGERS!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6320]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5112
Joined: 7/19/13
|
Re: Why not Houston (over Bama) ...
Nov 19, 2015, 9:23 AM
|
|
Yes, that last minute win over a 3 win UT team was epic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13038]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22359
Joined: 4/24/04
|
What 3-win UT team are you talking about?
Nov 19, 2015, 9:56 AM
|
|
Texas is 4-6 if we are talking about OK St escaping 30-27.
If UT = Tennessee, they are going to finish 8-4 with losses to Oklahoma (by 7), Bama (by 5), Florida (by 1), and Arkansas (by 4). I think they had leads in all of those games too. They aren't a bad team at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16902]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10768
Joined: 1/25/07
|
Re: What 3-win UT team are you talking about?
Nov 19, 2015, 3:54 PM
|
|
You really are SEC obsessed. You qualify all of UTs losses but fail to mention that they won a squeaker against a miserable South Carolina team, escaped Oklahoma at home in overtime, and only beat a down Georgia by a touchdown in a comeback at home. Their only dominant performance against a Power 5 school was against Kentucky. You seriously need an SEC on ESPN intervention.
Message was edited by: viztiz®
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
Just my take
Nov 19, 2015, 9:29 AM
[ in reply to Re: Why not Houston (over Bama) ... ] |
|
I'd take Bama over Houston, but I hate the idea that Houston evidently plays in a division that, even if they go undefeated, they have zero chance of winning the title. That just seems so very wrong.
Additionally, I think when you only have 13 regular season games, and no way to non-subjectively rank schedules and opponents, a loss HAS to mean something more than "we'll drop them down a spot" when there are other undefeated teams. Lets say Bama is playing the best football in the world now. Lets say they are clearly the best assembled team of all time. Even then, the loss *HAS* to have some weight or why even play games and keep track of W's and L's?
I trust this will, for the most part, shake out in the weeks to come, but I really wish the CFP took the "it'll shake out" approach the other way. 1 Loss Bama should be, right now, behind other undefeated major conference teams (and I don't like our system for even having to parse major and minor conferences). Then, when it "shakes out" they can move up at that point.
But we'll see how it goes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13038]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22359
Joined: 4/24/04
|
There are non-subjective ways to rank schedules, it's just
Nov 19, 2015, 9:58 AM
|
|
that very few people actually like them because they involve computers and statistics - things many football fans aren't comfortable with and don't trust.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
Sure
Nov 19, 2015, 11:42 AM
|
|
But even then, they are subjective in that they are weighted one way or another in their formula. A pure w/l based strength of schedule gives a number, and sure we can straight use that number but it may not consider the strength of opponents' opponents. And say we include those, what about their opponents' opponents' opponents? Its subjective to decide where to stop on that tree.
Just another layer of subjective value to include. And once we have that SOS, it's purely subjective how much to weight that.
These are cool debates to enjoy over a beer, but I keep coming back to us ALREADY having a min-playoff in the regular season which is settled on the field. Conference champs should ten move on and play each other in a playoff which is seeded based on whatever formula/poll/opinion you want. That way every (in my perfect world) FBS has a path to play for the title if they go undefeated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1186]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1298
Joined: 1/4/04
|
Re: Sure
Nov 19, 2015, 11:44 AM
|
|
I don't hate this idea... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [40927]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42943
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Houston has to do it two years in a row
Nov 19, 2015, 10:12 AM
[ in reply to Just my take ] |
|
It's all about where you start in preseason rankings. If they start around 10 or so after going undefeated, then they can move up as other teams lose.
If you are UNC you are the lowest ranked one loss P5 team because of where you started. If you are Houston and not expected to be that good, you have to get 5 or 6 wins before you get ranked.
The CFP poll looks no different than the AP or coaches poll. A few teams swap a couple of spots, but they all feed off of each other. That's why the coaches moved us to first after everybody else did otherwise they would have had us there after the FSU game and not cuse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13038]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22359
Joined: 4/24/04
|
The first CFP rankings were a good bit different than the
Nov 19, 2015, 10:54 AM
|
|
polls. The polls adjusted to them to where they are now much more similar.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 18
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
