We might be #4 now but everybody needs to keep rooting for Alabama cause the Bowl Committee proved last night they REALLY want two SEC teams in the final four

Submitted by mGrowOld on November 7th, 2018 at 10:23 AM

The number one takeaway from last night's ranking reveal was that the bowl committee REALLY wants to see two SEC in the final four and is manipulating the hell out of the rankings to give themselves every chance make that happen.  By placing Georgia at #5 they now have a clear path to the final four IF they beat Alabama in the SEC title game.   And if anybody thinks a one-loss Alabama team is getting left out of the dance this year they are nuts, especially when the talking heads are currently describing them as one of the best teams in college football history and after what we saw them do last night.

When the committee only dropped Kentucky two slots after losing badly to Georgia and even more unbelievably kept a two loss LSU at #7 ahead of West Virginia, Washington State and OSU, they are setting the stage for only moving Alabama down a couple of slots should they lose to Georgia in the title game.  If that happens and both Clemson & Notre Dame win out the final four will look like this IMO (remember they only dropped Kentucky two slots after getting beat by 17 at home last week and only dropped LSU four spots after getting shut out at home)

1. Clemson

2. Georgia

3. Alabama

4. Notre Dame

We need Alabama to win out or either Clemson or Notre Dame to lose for us to be assured of getting in.  Those that say if we just win out we'll be fine are missing the elephant in the room IMO - that when a one loss Kentucky team ranked 9th lost to Georgia team ranked 6th they only dropped two slots cause it was such a "good loss".  Does anybody here really believe that if #1 ranked Alabama somehow loses to a Georgia team ranked 5th they'll drop Alabama MORE than they dropped Kentucky losing to Georgia?

Last night one of our fellow posters PapabearBlue had a perfect post IMO on what's going on and is worth a read if you missed it:

If you look at the SEC's wins/losses what is happening is a giant pile of bullshit.

The SEC has no good wins, in fact they have zero non-con wins against ranked opponents. They've all beaten each other. It's a giant circle jerk of SEC love and transitive bullshit. I'm not gonna pull up the long diatribe I typed the other day but essentially every SEC team being propped up because they beat a team who beat a team who beat them. Every one of those teams is getting good credit for their own losses.

 beats 2 who beats 3 who beats 1. Well, obviously 1 must be pretty good because they beat 2 and 2 beat 3 and 3 was good enough to beat 1.

It makes no fucking sense, it's an SEC slob job. AND it's the exact reason why preseason rankings are fucking cancer.

If Georgia isn't ranked #3 preseason then NONE of this matters.

But NO, after Georgia loses to LSU everyone just assumes LSU should be number 3, after they had just lost to a 6-3 Florida who has just now lost to 4-4 Florida. Why not do the sensible thing and assume that Georgia was over-ranked as fuck like what happens to every other conference?

Oh, yeah. SEC slob jobs.

It's fucking corrupt.

ChuckieWoodson

November 7th, 2018 at 1:57 PM ^

A hypothetical situation is one that's filled with conjecture, it allows people to think of some "possible" outcomes.  One, "possible" outcome is that we get into the CFP and get housed by Bama.  I said, about 3-4 times in my post, possible, hypothetical...  This is a pretend scenario.  So, now that we have that out of the way.. would you rather...

A: Lose to Bama 35-3. Or,

B: Win the Rose Bowl

I, in this hypothetical scenario, would prefer to win the Rose Bowl.

Perkis-Size Me

November 7th, 2018 at 10:58 AM ^

Fuck the Rose Bowl. Unless you’re playing there as part of a playoff semi-final, you should have bigger goals than that. Brady Hoke ain’t coaching this team anymore. 

The Rose Bowl is nothing more than a consolation prize at this stage in the game. It means we lost to OSU (which would be another awful end to the season), or won out but still got left out because Bama lost somewhere and still got in. 

I’d rather make the playoff with a chance to play for it all, even if we lose to Bama, then accept going to the Rose Bowl and playing in a game that ultimately doesn’t matter, against what is very likely going to be a vastly overmatched Wazzu team.

Even if we lose in the playoff, that tells recruits we’re putting it all together. That Harbaugh CAN win big at Michigan. That OSU shouldn’t be the only Big Ten option for elite recruits to consider. That’s more important for this program’s long Term success. 

LeCheezus

November 7th, 2018 at 11:06 AM ^

None of this is new - the SEC and other big time programs have been subtly shifting their schedules as well to better position themselves for high rankings. 

- Playing marquee in conference matchups early in the year:  Gives the impression they are playing tough out of conference schedule because most teams are not playing conference games

- Slip in bottom G5 teams in the schedule in November when they should be playing all conference teams, essentially almost getting a second bye week

- Scheduling conference games early on gives more control on when to schedule bye weeks (usually later in the season, again when they should be playing conference game after conference game)

- Scheduling less tough non conference opponents in general to take advantage of other teams losing and having high rankings for 3-0 teams that haven't played anyone going into week 4, which leads into the whole "circle jerk" of the SEC teams keeping high rankings by losing to each other.  I'm not sure there is much that can be done about it, it is the very embodiment of "perception is reality."

ChuckieWoodson

November 7th, 2018 at 1:57 PM ^

A hypothetical situation is one that's filled with conjecture, it allows people to think of some "possible" outcomes.  One, "possible" outcome is that we get into the CFP and get housed by Bama.  I said, about 3-4 times in my post, possible, hypothetical...  This is a pretend scenario.  So, now that we have that out of the way.. would you rather...

A: Lose to Bama 35-3. Or,

B: Win the Rose Bowl

I, in this hypothetical scenario, would prefer to win the Rose Bowl.

ChuckieWoodson

November 7th, 2018 at 1:58 PM ^

A hypothetical situation is one that's filled with conjecture, it allows people to think of some "possible" outcomes.  One, "possible" outcome is that we get into the CFP and get housed by Bama.  I said, about 3-4 times in my post, possible, hypothetical...  This is a pretend scenario.  So, now that we have that out of the way.. would you rather...

A: Lose to Bama 35-3. Or,

B: Win the Rose Bowl

I, in this hypothetical scenario, would prefer to win the Rose Bowl.

Kevin14

November 7th, 2018 at 1:17 PM ^

This is a piping hot take.  The kind I come to message boards for!  Bravo. 

You'd rather win a NY6 bowl game than have to play Bama in the playoffs?  That is ABSURD!  All bowl games that aren't part of the CFP are consolation prizes.  A way for players to practice/play one more game and fans to see their team one more time. 

That'd be like saying you'd rather Michigan lose in the Elite 8 last year because if they made the final four they'd have to play Villanova.  

ChuckieWoodson

November 7th, 2018 at 1:55 PM ^

A hypothetical situation is one that's filled with conjecture, it allows people to think of some "possible" outcomes.  One, "possible" outcome is that we get into the CFP and get housed by Bama.  I said, about 3-4 times in my post, possible, hypothetical...  This is a pretend scenario.  So, now that we have that out of the way.. would you rather...

A: Lose to Bama 35-3. Or,

B: Win the Rose Bowl

I, in this hypothetical scenario, would prefer to win the Rose Bowl.

Kevin14

November 7th, 2018 at 4:15 PM ^

Okay, that could spark more of a discussion.  Your original post wasn't clear that was the point you were intending to make. 

"Still a few weeks to go but, hypothetically - would we prefer to make the CFP, potentially get housed by Bama, or go to the Rose Bowl or some other high level NY6 bowl game and winI"

"Potentially get housed by Bama" is where the confusion came from.

UMAmaizinBlue

November 7th, 2018 at 10:31 AM ^

Win out and things will take care of themselves. The argument could be made that the committee is overvaluing OSU given history and preseason rankings, even though we know they fail the eye test on both sides of the ball.

They could easily jettison OSU to outside the top 15 after Purdue, but they didn't. This gives the B10 a shot regardless of the SEC, b/c Michigan/OSU will be a top 10 match-up. If OSU or Michigan wins out, they're in. Mark my words.

ijohnb

November 7th, 2018 at 10:45 AM ^

It looks to me that you are not paying attention to the reality of the situation because you think it would be abstractly unfathomable for a one-loss BIG team to be left out.  In theory, I agree with you, such an occurrence would be a distinct anomaly.  However, two factors are converging that is making it considerably more likely. 

The loss to ND in the same year that they appear to be running the table, and the complete dissolution of the BIG West as a viable/formidable division are two very influential factors.  If only one of them was happening, I would even agree then that any such talk of Michigan being left out at 12-1 would be non-sense.  But the fact that both are happening at the same time is leaving us really vulnerable.  If we play and win the BIG title game, it is not going to boost our resume at all.  As far as the committee is concerned, the game will essentially not even count.  I know it is far from ideal but it is the reality.

The committee thinks the BIG is garbage, and it is reflected in their rankings.  They like Michigan, that is clear, but it is also clear that they do not believe that Michigan being left out would be some travesty of justice.  As long as the loss was 1) close and 2) to a ranked team, I have 0% doubt that they would put a 1 loss Alabama team in over Michigan.  I think that if that situation occurs, there will be a lot of people around here who are super pissed and in disbelief because they did not read the very large-bolded font writing on the walls weeks ahead of time. 

As a fan, right now I am focused on the next three weeks and hoping this team wins the BIG.  The next month is going to be fun and I hope this team is as good as I think they are.  In the back of my mind, however, I am more than aware that Michigan is vulnerable to a major hose-job this year as far as the Playoff goes.

1VaBlue1

November 7th, 2018 at 11:03 AM ^

You're completely disregarding the Michigan-OSU game, here.  In three weeks, when both teams are 11-1, either OK or WVU will have lost (to each other) and I wouldn't be surprised if WSU also loses (very likely - they're fool's gold).  That makes Michigan #4 and OSU #8, or higher.  When UM wins that game - on the road, GameDay, HUGE viewership, HYPE-galore, they may well jump ND for #3.  Especially if ND looks like they have all year against Syracuse and USC - even if they win.

No way in hell a non-conference champ gets in over Michigan in that case.  No way.

ijohnb

November 7th, 2018 at 11:11 AM ^

I may have been a little over the top with my "0% doubt" statement, but I don't know how you can say "no way."

I concede that I did overlook the possibility of a winner take all OSU matchup.  (Although the way OSU has looked, I am not so sure I really see that happening).

However, I think you are overlooking the slob-job that the SEC title game would get a week later if Bama and Georgia both win out.  And then we roll out and play....... Northwestern?  Again? Not the best look.

UMAmaizinBlue

November 7th, 2018 at 11:52 AM ^

You, being a little over the top? Don't sell yourself short. =)

I get your point, but it's still insane for any committee to leave out an 11-1 B10 Champion, especially if one of those teams is already in the top 4. If we win out and get ousted, it would be some major fuckery going on, and we all know it. 

m_go_T

November 7th, 2018 at 11:19 AM ^

I know it's not an exact science, but 538 gives us a 40% chance to make the CFP as it stands today and an 82% chance of making the CFP if we win out.  Lose one game and our chances go down significantly (down 11% if we drop a game).  For purposes of discussion, it is assumed we need to win out to have a shot, and all models assume that happens for the sake of argument (and not assuming we are a given to run the table).  The link to their model is:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2018-college-football-predictions/?ex_cid=rrpromo

Tinkering around with their model is where it gets interesting.  If both of Michigan and Georgia win out, our chances sit at 78% and Alabama goes down to 32% from 75%.  Their statistical model does not believe that a 1 loss Alabama team goes to the playoff over Michigan.  If you adjust the model and assume Clemson, ND, Georgia, Michigan, and Oklahoma all win out, then Alabama's chances go down to 16%, but our chances in that scenario go down to 39% and Oklahoma going up to 67%.   

Tldr: Based on Silver's predictions, his models don't believe that Alabama and Georgia are likely to both make the CFP (unless chaos ensues).  His models don't love Michigan that much either, and prefer Oklahoma. 

 

Using their models as the only indicator our rooting interests are:

Alabama to win out, though its not that important (83% if we both win out, 78% if both Michigan and Georgia win out).

Oklahoma must lose (if win out and Oklahoma loses, then our chances go up to 88% and up to 95% if that happens and Alabama wins out, but down to 83% if Georgia and Michigan win out but Oklahoma trips up).

Clemson losing to BC would see us go up to 90%, assuming we win out.  

Notre Dame losing to FSU would see us go up to 94%, again assuming we win out.  

Any combo of losses from the group above and a win out by Michigan puts us at around 98%.

  

 

 

The Maizer

November 7th, 2018 at 10:47 AM ^

I think the committee's method values conferences that are top-heavy and that play 8 conference games instead of 9. I don't think it's an intentional shady SEC bias. You're probably right that we should be worried because the consequences of high-ranked SEC teams is the same, but I don't think there is nefarious intent.

It's also still not clear how much the committee really values a conference championship as there is no precedent to compare one-loss champion to one-loss non-champions yet. This could be what saves us in the doomsday scenario, but you're right that I'd rather not rely on that hope.

njvictor

November 7th, 2018 at 11:24 AM ^

I definitely think there is nefarious intent. On what planet should LSU and Florida be ranked where they are after losing in the manner they did this past week? When quality B1G teams beat each other, they drop like ~8 spots, but when an SEC team beats another, they only drop 2? That makes no sense

The Maizer

November 7th, 2018 at 11:39 AM ^

Look at strength of record metrics, or if you'd rather, peek at THIS. These are things that do not include human decisions other than the arbitrary formulas set up ahead of time and they align with the committee's "controversial" decisions. I'm not saying the system is good, I'm just questioning the thought that there is a conspiracy.

raleighwood

November 7th, 2018 at 11:01 AM ^

Still not sure that I follow the conspiracy theory.  The committee is made up of representatives from every conference.....as well as multiple "at large" members.  Most of them don't have a vested interest in tipping the balance toward the SEC.  

Herb Deromodi would most likely support Michigan's case.  PAC 12 guys like Ronnie Lott and Rob Mullens are possibly more aligned with the B1G over the SEC.  You could certainly make an argument that Bobby Johnson (former Clemson player) and Ken Hatfield (former Clemson head coach) would love to find a reasonable opportunity for Clemson to avoid Alabama in the playoffs.  I'll admit I'm concerned that Gene Smith is the B1G rep because, well, Ohio State. 

I just think that the committee is too diverse for "the fix to be in".  There's no reason for people from other conferences overly support the SEC.  A final four of Clemson (ACC), Notre Dame (essentially ACC), Georgia (SEC) and Alabama (SEC) would be disastrous for the committee.  The whole process breaks down if three of the P5 conferences are excluded.

Let's see how this plays out.....

 

goblue12

November 7th, 2018 at 10:33 AM ^

I don't care if this Alabama team is the best team in the history of college/professional football. Is they lose to Georgia and we win out there is no way in hell that we get left out. The committee has said in past years that they value conference championships a great deal as well as overall trend (meaning a loss at the tail end of the season << a loss in week 1 on the road against a top 3 team). If this scenario does play out and Michigan gets left out of the CFP then burn the system to the ground. 

Reggie Dunlop

November 7th, 2018 at 11:05 AM ^

Okay, hang on. Who do you want to rank ahead of 7-2 Kentucky? And when you come up with that school, let's compare resumes.

There are the undefeated and 1-loss teams...

Then UK, LSU and the three ACC squads with 2-losses.

Everybody else has 3 losses with one of those losses being a complete abomination. There's no conspiracy. Kentucky is about where they should be. If you can come up with a better option, I'm all ears.

If you want to argue Florida and Miss St. are getting an 'SEC bump' over MSU and Penn State, that would make more sense. But then we're talking about slotting 3-loss teams and honestly, who cares?

http://www.espn.com/college-football/rankings

 

 

Reggie Dunlop

November 7th, 2018 at 11:23 AM ^

They've played a tougher schedule than anybody in the country (per S&P+), they have wins over #5, #16 & #24. They're losses are to #15 & #1.

Again, who do you want to put in front of them? Once you come up with that team, let's compare resumes. Still waiting...

ijohnb

November 7th, 2018 at 11:37 AM ^

I don't need to give you a team. 

You think that a two-loss team who just got outgained 579-196 at home in a game that was over at halftime should hovering right around Playoff consideration.  And  you don't see this as strange.  You have drank the entire gallon of Kool-Aid.  I can't help you now.

Reggie Dunlop

November 7th, 2018 at 11:40 AM ^

Yes. You do.

If you don't think LSU should be #7, I'm asking you which team behind them deserves to take their spot. This is not hard. If this is such an outrage, you should be able to confidently give me at least one single team who should be ranked ahead of them.

This is the fourth time I'm asking. I'll even post the hyperlink a 2nd time for your easy review of the current rankings.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/rankings

If you can't come up with a better option, then you are proving that LSU is probably ranked appropriately. So yes, you do need to give me a team or you're killing your own argument.

ijohnb

November 7th, 2018 at 11:43 AM ^

No, I don't.  I don't care how many times you ask.  To get into the specifics would be to validate your argument as reasonable and I am not going to do that because it isn't.  Full stop.

Your opinion is wrong.  You can say it as many times as you want but it is still going to be wrong.

Reggie Dunlop

November 7th, 2018 at 11:47 AM ^

Aaaaaaand... *buzzer*, time's up. (crowd groans)

Unfortunately, ijohnb couldn't come up with a single better option.

Nobody behind LSU has a better resume, nor are they more deserving of the #7 spot than the Tigers. LSU is ranked appropriately.

That's today's show. Be sure to tune in tomorrow where ijohnb will once again be pulling his hair out over mid-year football rankings.