Michigan 5th in initial CFP poll

Submitted by Bambi on October 30th, 2018 at 7:17 PM

1 Bama

2 Clemson

3 LSU

4 ND

5 Michigan

6 Georgia

7 OU

10 OSU

MgoHillbilly

October 30th, 2018 at 8:58 PM ^

Agree to disagree. By placing a one loss team in front of them already, the committee is suggesting that it isn't a sure thing they can't be jumped. And that's without lsu having a conference championship win. I'd also bet a one loss non conference champ bama stands to get in over them. Georgia could jump them if they win the conference as could michigan or OU.  Notre Dame would have to look good the rest of the season to keep the conference champs at bay. 

footballguy

October 31st, 2018 at 4:13 PM ^

I personally think that was done as preemptive damage control in the case of Bama losing this weekend. They know an undefeated ND is going to get in regardless, so they put LSU in front so that the SEC has an increased chance of getting two into the playoff. 

Bambi

October 30th, 2018 at 7:29 PM ^

LSU, sure. But Kentucky makes sense. They're a P5 team with 1 loss and are the 3rd lowest of those teams. Based on resume, who should go above them? OSU with their PSU win and blowout loss to Purdue? WVU with their win over no one and blowout loss to Iowa State?

Kentucky has a road win at Florida and beat Miss St. Their only loss is OT @ TAMU. 9 is very fair for them.

Jibbroni

October 30th, 2018 at 7:26 PM ^

No one is beating Bama.  Lets get that straight.  I dont understand the consternation about LSU and UGA.  They will both have 2 losses at least.  Clemson and Bama are locks in my book.  If we win out we are in.  Just win!   Everyone worrying about a one loss Bama needs to watch them play.  OSU will lose at least one more too.  OU running the table will be the only wrench in the works but Im sure they have another dud in them.  

footballguy

October 30th, 2018 at 7:37 PM ^

I firmly believe that when the clock hits 00:00 in the 4th quarter of the national title game, we will be having a debate if Bama was the greatest college football team of all time. 

I know that may seem extreme, but I haven't thought we could be witnessing a GOAT status team since the Leinart/Bush USC days

UMFan1780

October 30th, 2018 at 7:28 PM ^

Anybody else worried that if (assuming UM wins out) LSU wins on Saturday, the Committee would leave Michigan out? I mean, would the Committee put a 1 loss, non-division winning Alabama in over a 1 loss, conference winning Michigan, based on some nebulous criteria like the “eye test” and Alabama’s loss was more impressive and conference championships are not important (see Alabama last year)?

M-Dog

October 30th, 2018 at 7:32 PM ^

No. 

Last year they would have put a 2-loss Big Ten champ Ohio State in over non-conference, non-division winning Alabama.  They only reason they did not is because OSU's Iowa loss was so bad.

A 1-loss Big Ten champ Michigan will get in over a 1-loss Alabama that did not even win its division.  If Alabama is so great, how come they didn't even win their division?  They lost when they were actually tested.  That would be the thought process.

 

Cope

October 30th, 2018 at 7:42 PM ^

A 1-loss Michigan team will not get in over a 1-loss Alabama. The eye test and SEC bias will be all over that one. Everyone has predetermined that Alabama is that good. Now a 1-loss Michigan team would probably make it in over someone else in that case after it all plays out. 

ehatch

October 30th, 2018 at 7:28 PM ^

The committee LOVES the ACC -- Syracuse 19, NC State 21, BC 22, Virginia 25. All these teams are in the 30s or lower in the S&P (i.e. roughly equivalent to MSU).

brad

October 30th, 2018 at 9:36 PM ^

If teams are really overrated in the 15-25 range in a group like that, they tend to lose to an average team here and there and drop as a group.  This ACC crop is a week or two behind a similar big ten situation , and that one followed a similar SEC situation.

Synful

October 30th, 2018 at 7:34 PM ^

Pretty much according to script.  Real question is what happens in Baton Rouge on Sat.  Mich does lots of tcb on Sat, then things get really interesting.  

Bama rolls the Tigers, M moves to 4.  LSU wins, chaos ensues.

CompleteLunacy

October 31st, 2018 at 6:53 PM ^

Head to head is not nearly as strong as you make it out to be. This isn't like a Big Ten Championship division rule where ties go to head-to-head winners. That's a round robin tournament, so it makes sense to break the tie that way. But playoff selection is based on a wide variety of factors. I'm sure in some way they will take head-to-head into account, but there are so many other factors (timing/situation of the loss being week 1 on the road at night by just 7 points, strength of schedule, the "eye test", playing and winning an extra game against a decent opponent) that very clearly would favor Michigan.  

mgobill324

October 30th, 2018 at 7:36 PM ^

So I noticed Herbstreit said he had the top six “exactly” like what the committee had. BS! If you look at his helmets behind him he had ND in the third spot. Now they come back from break and he moved ND to the four and LSU to the third on the shelf. Anybody else notice? He’s full of it

azian6er

October 30th, 2018 at 7:37 PM ^

There is a 0% Chance a conference champ Michigan on an 11 game win streak would be dropped from top 4 in favor of a one loss non conference champion Alabama with less ranked wins than UM.

absolutely NO chance.

if Michigan wins out, they will either be the 2 or 3 seed.

M-Dog

October 30th, 2018 at 7:45 PM ^

But why?

Unless it's overtime, Alabama will have failed its only true test when it mattered.  So what if they "looked good" up until then against average teams? 

At what point are you just rewarding them for last year?  You already did that last year.

 

outsidethebox

October 30th, 2018 at 8:25 PM ^

Exactly and this is why the committee has LSU at #3 right now-gives them the wiggle room to only drop Alabama to #4. It is just the way it is...I do not like it but the more objective view likely agrees with the committee. My guess is that the committee is taking this tack because...ah  well...they should drop them to five and put Michigan at #4 but forcing Michigan to win out all the way to retain the position...that would be a fair position to take. But if Michigan wins out in convincing style the committee will have some splainin to do to keep them out. 

Mongo

October 30th, 2018 at 9:24 PM ^

Yes, let's say it is a barn-burner and both teams play great but LSU beats Bama in OT by a FG?  The committee is going to move Clemson to #1, LSU #2, ND #3 and Bama #4.  Sorry, but the committee is in love with Bama and the SEC.  But what if UGA then beats LSU in the SEC title game?  That would be quite the shituation. 

At the end of the day, conference title is just a tie breaker.  So in that case we might sneak ahead of Bama, but only in that case.  Otherwise if LSU beats UGA again in the SEC title game, Bama would be the #4 seed.  ND's schedule is not strong enough to jump a 1-loss UM ahead of a 1-loss Bama.  Again, conference title means virtually nothing to the CFP committee.

All of this argues for the 8-team playoffs if conference title games are just tie-breakers.  So dump the conference title games and replace them with first round of the 8-team playoff in same day / time slots at neutral NFL venues with domes.  

Based on the current CFP ranking the first round of an 8-team playoff would look like:

  • #1 Bama vs. #8 WSU
  • #2 Clemson vs. #7 Oklahoma
  • #3 LSU vs. #6 Georgia
  • #4 ND vs. #5 Michigan

Way better matchups and bigger money than the dorky conference title games.  

M-Dog

October 30th, 2018 at 7:42 PM ^

We actually want ND to keep winning.  The committee has a fetish for a "good" loss.  

The ND loss is a "very good" loss - against an undefeated team, on the road, at night, first game of the season when everybody else was playing cupcakes.

The committee will want to reward that as often as possible.

If we win out and ND is our only loss, and ND is undefeated, no 1-loss team will jump us, not even Alabama.