NCAA Football CFP Thread: My Rankings, and Scenarios

[WinterBorn]

SEC is still an elite conference; they just weren't as good at the top as they have been in the past. Lots of departing talent the last few years in the UGA and Bama programs.

Michigan v Washington is going to be an interesting contrast of styles, with Michigan's grind-it-out football against Washington's elite passing game. I'd have to give the edge to Michigan but Washington is certainly capable.

I tend to agree. Michigan's defense is solid.

But Washington can score quickly and often, if allowed. Michigan will have trouble if they leave the door open for them.

 

[multivita-man]

I tend to agree. Michigan's defense is solid.

But Washington can score quickly and often, if allowed. Michigan will have trouble if they leave the door open for them.

I picked Texas because I thought their defense had improved and I thought Washington's defense wouldn't be able to stop Texas. Was kinda right about their defense but I over-estimated Texas' defense. There's no over-estimating Michigan's defense. It's good, and Washington's probably not going to score over 30 this time. They might score over 20 though, and how far over 20 they go and how their defense can stand up to Michigan's power offense will tell the tale. I've got Michigan as a slight favorite, maybe 27-24.

 

[sealybobo]

The AP Top 25 Came Out, and it looked something like this
1. Georgia
2. Michigan
3. Washington
4. FSU
5. Oregon
6. Ohio St.
7. Texas
8. Alabama

As for me, I have my own method of ranking that looks at all rankings of all teams you've played (ranked 1-133), looks at Big ranked wins but also at top 40 wins. It has the team, the average rank of opponent, and a list of key wins as to why:

1. Georgia (12-0) 61.4 (avg rank of opponent)
Beat #9 Missouri, Beat down #10 Ole Miss, #25 Tennesee, and #40 Kentucky
2. Washington (12-0) 56.6
Barely beat #5 Oregon, Beat #15 Arizona, Barely beat #20 Oregon St, Beat #27 Utah and #35 USC
3. Michigan (12-0) 66.9
Beat #6 Ohio St, Beat #11 Penn St, Beat down #42 UNLV, Beat #48 Maryland
4. Texas (11-1) 52.2
L to #12 OK, Beat #8 Bama, Barely beat #28 KS St., Beat down #29 Kansas, Beat #41 Iowa St.
5. Florida St (12-0) 67.0
Beat down #13 LSU, Beat #31 Clemson, #33 Miami, and #36 Duke.
6. Alabama (11-1) 56.8
L to #7 Texas, Beat #10 Ole Miss, #13 LSU, #25 Tennessee, #38 Tx A&M, and beat down #40 KY
7. Ohio State (11-1) 63.0
L to #2 Michigan, Beat #11 Penn St, barely beat #17 Notre Dame, Beat down #48 Maryland.
8. Oregon (11-1) 62.9
L to #3 Washington, Beat down #20 Oregon St and #27 Utah, Beat #35 USC.

If you agree with the AP, or you agree with me... there are some interesting ways this could all go given the championship games this week, which include (via AP polling)...
SEC Championship: #1 Georgia vs. #8 Alabama
Big 10 Championship: #2 Michigan vs. #19 Iowa
PAC12 Championship: #3 Washington vs. #5 Oregon
ACC Championship: #4 Florida St. vs. #14 Louisville
Big 12 Championship: #7 Texas vs. #16 Oklahoma St.

So what happens if X? Let's do it.

I think the game that could brutally F this whole thing up is if Alabama beat Georgia. If that happened:

• Michigan is pretty much a slam dunk and will likely win, moving to 1.
• A Washington win, keeping them undefeated, puts them clearly at 2 (An Oregon win causes ABSOLUTE chaos as you have 2 one loss PAC teams that have beaten each other)
• Georgia's loss historically SHOULDN'T drop them all the way out of the playoffs from #1, especially losing to Bama.
• Alabama would have a claim to get in having only 1 loss to Texas and just having beaten #1 Georgia for the SEC championship.

So let's back up for second. If that happened, You'd have Michigan, Washington, Georgia, Bama.

Okay, but WTF about Texas if they win the Big 12, and WTF about FSU if they beat Louisville?

The Results that will completely cause chaos are if Bama beats Georgia, and if Oregon beats Washington. Holy crap. Could you imagine if:

• Michigan 13-0
• Georgia 12-1 (L to Bama)
• Bama 12-1 (L to Texas, SEC champ)
• Texas 12-1 (L to #12 OK, Big 12 Champ, toughest schedule)
• Oregon 12-1 (L to Washington, PAC12 Champ)
• Washington 12-1 (L to Oregon)
• FSU 12-1 or 13-0 (easiest schedule, injured QB)
• Ohio St 11-1 (L to #1 Michigan)

Talk about Mayhem.

2 things that happened since this post that stand out in my mind. Michigan beat Bama AND I heard Florida got whipped. So that ends the controversy about if they should have been in the top 4.

 

[multivita-man]

2 things that happened since this post that stand out in my mind. Michigan beat Bama AND I heard Florida got whipped. So that ends the controversy about if they should have been in the top 4.

I don't think you can judge FSU's in-season performance based on a game when so many of their starters opted out and some of their bench hit the portal. Obviously UGA had players who were out as well but even Kirby Smart acknowledged that FSU was at a disadvantage. Do I think FSU would have been at a disadvantage w/o Jordan Travis? Sure, but they had earned the right to prove people wrong, even if they had ended up getting blown out.

Alabama had not earned that - not after losing to Texas at home and not with some of their inconsistency and shakiness since then, including nearly losing to an Auburn team that now sports a losing record - in the very last game of the regular season. And it's not just the Auburn game. They were behind either at halftime or in the 3rd quarter against Tennessee and LSU and they struggled against Ole Miss early.

I get those are good teams but it's not like Alabama was dominating everyone and had an off game. In 2011, when they lost to LSU in overtime, Alabama was dominating everyone and had an off game. In 2012, when they lost to A&M, pretty much the same thing except for maybe the LSU game the week before.

The system rewarded Alabama based on their reputation over the past 15 years and because they beat Georgia in the SEC title game - I get that, but the so-called experts on the committee should have seen that this was not the same Georgia team as the year or two before.

FSU did everything that anyone could ask them to do. They took on all comers and they left the field with more points than the other team every time. It wasn't always pretty but they did it.

 

[sealybobo]

I don't think you can judge FSU's in-season performance based on a game when so many of their starters opted out and some of their bench hit the portal. Obviously UGA had players who were out as well but even Kirby Smart acknowledged that FSU was at a disadvantage. Do I think FSU would have been at a disadvantage w/o Jordan Travis? Sure, but they had earned the right to prove people wrong, even if they had ended up getting blown out.

Alabama had not earned that - not after losing to Texas at home and not with some of their inconsistency and shakiness since then, including nearly losing to an Auburn team that now sports a losing record - in the very last game of the regular season. And it's not just the Auburn game. They were behind either at halftime or in the 3rd quarter against Tennessee and LSU and they struggled against Ole Miss early.

I get those are good teams but it's not like Alabama was dominating everyone and had an off game. In 2011, when they lost to LSU in overtime, Alabama was dominating everyone and had an off game. In 2012, when they lost to A&M, pretty much the same thing except for maybe the LSU game the week before.

The system rewarded Alabama based on their reputation over the past 15 years and because they beat Georgia in the SEC title game - I get that, but the so-called experts on the committee should have seen that this was not the same Georgia team as the year or two before.

FSU did everything that anyone could ask them to do. They took on all comers and they left the field with more points than the other team every time. It wasn't always pretty but they did it.

1. I didn't know a lot of top FSU players didn't play. I see why. Did you see last night a couple guys got hurt in the last minutes of the game? I don't blame FSU stars for sitting it out.

2. Maybe this is why we need to make the playoffs more than only 4 teams. It'll make the stars of the other 8 top teams want to play. Because it'll be for a National Championship.

You have convinced me I'm wrong.

 

[multivita-man]

1. I didn't know a lot of top FSU players didn't play. I see why. Did you see last night a couple guys got hurt in the last minutes of the game? I don't blame FSU stars for sitting it out.

2. Maybe this is why we need to make the playoffs more than only 4 teams. It'll make the stars of the other 8 top teams want to play. Because it'll be for a National Championship.

You have convinced me I'm wrong.

They're going to 12 next year. The bottom 8 will play each other first and the top 4 get a bye and wait for the winners of the first round. I think 12 is enough. They should move bowl games to week 0 the following year and make that a more meaningful game.

 

[Blaster]

Michigan, Washington advance to 2024 College Football Playoff National Championship Game

Michigan and Washington were victorious in national semifinal games on Monday, punching their tickets to the College Football Playoff National Championship Game. Eric Edholm previews the matchup with three NFL draft-focused takeaways.

www.nfl.com

 

[AMart]

This will be the 2nd non Southern team in the last 20 years to win a natty. (if you count USC as Southern).

 

[Blaster]

I'm looking forward to a 12 team playoff system.

 

[sealybobo]

They're going to 12 next year. The bottom 8 will play each other first and the top 4 get a bye and wait for the winners of the first round. I think 12 is enough. They should move bowl games to week 0 the following year and make that a more meaningful game.

Is that how it's going to work? I think I would prefer them just do 8. 1 plays 8, 2 plays 7, 3 plays 6 and 4 plays 5

Then assuming the top teams all win, 1 plays 4, 2 plays 3.

So you're saying to win it all a bottom 8 team has to win 4 games? My way with 8 teams in it it's only 3 games for everyone. I wonder why they got cute with the bi and having 12 teams in it. That's too much. IMO

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Is that how it's going to work? I think I would prefer them just do 8. 1 plays 8, 2 plays 7, 3 plays 6 and 4 plays 5

Then assuming the top teams all win, 1 plays 4, 2 plays 3.

So you're saying to win it all a bottom 8 team has to win 4 games? My way with 8 teams in it it's only 3 games for everyone. I wonder why they got cute with the bi and having 12 teams in it. That's too much. IMO

Yes it’s 12 next year, which sucks. It should be 6 or 8.

 

[Blaster]

Yes it’s 12 next year, which sucks. It should be 6 or 8.

I prefer the 12 team format.

 

[sealybobo]

I prefer the 12 team format.

Why more games to watch?

 

[22lcidw]

I prefer the 12 team format.

Hopefully teams that are ranked on the bubble at the end of 12 teams do not gripe like we see with the 4 teams now.

 

[AMart]

Hopefully teams that are ranked on the bubble at the end of 12 teams do not gripe like we see with the 4 teams now.

They will of course.

 

[WinterBorn]

This will be the 2nd non Southern team in the last 20 years to win a natty. (if you count USC as Southern).

USC? Southern? I don't count them as Southern.

 

[Couchpotato]

USC? Southern? I don't count them as Southern.

its warm.

 

[AMart]

USC? Southern? I don't count them as Southern.

The so cut off point is Texas to the West. Anything West of there is considered Western? Is Washington Western or Northern?

 

[WinterBorn]

The so cut off point is Texas to the West. Anything West of there is considered Western? Is Washington Western or Northern?

They would be Southwestern.

For most people, when you refer to a place being Southern, it means Southeastern.

 

[AMart]

They would be Southwestern.

For most people, when you refer to a place being Southern, it means Southeastern.

Texas is South central. It's in the Central Time Zone, but still South. I think 3 classifications would work, North, South, and West (anything in the Mountain or Pacific Time Zones).