CFP FINAL FOUR

[HLB]

I expect today's CFP FINAL FOUR teams to be:

1. Michigan, 2. Washington, 3. Texas, 4. FSU

The placement of these teams is based on overall win-loss record, which is regarded as "most deserving".  When considering "most deserving" there should be consideration given to wins over current ranked teams, with the strongest strength of schedule.

If consideration is given to "wins over current ranked teams", with the strongest strength of schedule, the rankings "should be":

1.  Michigan 3 wins (over ranked Ohio State, Penn State and Iowa), 2.  Texas 2 wins (over ranked Alabama {and SEC Champion who defeated #1 Georgia} and OK State)

3.  FSU 3 wins (over ranked LSU, Louisville and Clemson), 4.  Alabama 4 wins (over #1 Georgia, Ole Miss, LSU and Tennessee)

The committee is choosing to place value on quantity and not quality.  When analyzing Alabama, the committee is placing emphasis on one loss, over a team with the most quality wins of all other teams where consideration is given.  Alabama has the strongest SOS, the best win, and are conference champions in the strongest conference.

> In the past, Ohio State - who lost head-to-head against B1G Champion PSU, was placed in the CFP, while PSU was relegated to the Rose Bowl.

> In the past, Ohio State lost to a 6-win Virginia Tech team yet won the B1G, made the CFP and won the NC.

> In the past, Clemon lost to an unranked Pittsburgh in the month of November yet made the CFP and won the NC.

If Alabama makes the CFP, I believe they will win the NC in a repeat game with Texas.

If this committee is truly seeking to put the "best" teams in the CFP, then the four "best" teams are:

1.  Michigan

2.  Texas

3.  Alabama

4.  Georgia

To that end, I expect the Final Four to be as I listed above - which is okay.  And I expect Texas (a future SEC team) to dominate and win the CFP Championship, where the games will be mildly competitive, and not closely contested contest.

And for what it's worth, I follow Auburn, and I'm not an Alabama supporter.  But I do admire Saban and what Alabama has accomplished.

[Buff_Fan]

On 12/3/2023 at 6:41 AM, HLB said:

I expect today's CFP FINAL FOUR teams to be:

1. Michigan, 2. Washington, 3. Texas, 4. FSU

The placement of these teams is based on overall win-loss record, which is regarded as "most deserving".  When considering "most deserving" there should be consideration given to wins over current ranked teams, with the strongest strength of schedule.

If consideration is given to "wins over current ranked teams", with the strongest strength of schedule, the rankings "should be":

1.  Michigan 3 wins (over ranked Ohio State, Penn State and Iowa), 2.  Texas 2 wins (over ranked Alabama {and SEC Champion who defeated #1 Georgia} and OK State)

3.  FSU 3 wins (over ranked LSU, Louisville and Clemson), 4.  Alabama 4 wins (over #1 Georgia, Ole Miss, LSU and Tennessee)

The committee is choosing to place value on quantity and not quality.  When analyzing Alabama, the committee is placing emphasis on one loss, over a team with the most quality wins of all other teams where consideration is given.  Alabama has the strongest SOS, the best win, and are conference champions in the strongest conference.

> In the past, Ohio State - who lost head-to-head against B1G Champion PSU, was placed in the CFP, while PSU was relegated to the Rose Bowl.

> In the past, Ohio State lost to a 6-win Virginia Tech team yet won the B1G, made the CFP and won the NC.

> In the past, Clemon lost to an unranked Pittsburgh in the month of November yet made the CFP and won the NC.

If Alabama makes the CFP, I believe they will win the NC in a repeat game with Texas.

If this committee is truly seeking to put the "best" teams in the CFP, then the four "best" teams are:

1.  Michigan

2.  Texas

3.  Alabama

4.  Georgia

To that end, I expect the Final Four to be as I listed above - which is okay.  And I expect Texas (a future SEC team) to dominate and win the CFP Championship, where the games will be mildly competitive, and not closely contested contest.

And for what it's worth, I follow Auburn, and I'm not an Alabama supporter.  But I do admire Saban and what Alabama has accomplished.

Absolute nonsense.  The pac was the best conference this year, especially compared to the big 10 and 12.  Washington doesn’t get left out.  Your logic gives a lot of credit, for instance, to Michigan beating Iowa.  They were a deeply flawed team in an awful division.  
 

I get the sec homerism, but the flaws wasn’t as good, too to bottom, as the pac.

[glduck]

[Mano]

On 12/3/2023 at 6:41 AM, HLB said:

I expect today's CFP FINAL FOUR teams to be:

1. Michigan, 2. Washington, 3. Texas, 4. FSU

The placement of these teams is based on overall win-loss record, which is regarded as "most deserving".  When considering "most deserving" there should be consideration given to wins over current ranked teams, with the strongest strength of schedule.

If consideration is given to "wins over current ranked teams", with the strongest strength of schedule, the rankings "should be":

1.  Michigan 3 wins (over ranked Ohio State, Penn State and Iowa), 2.  Texas 2 wins (over ranked Alabama {and SEC Champion who defeated #1 Georgia} and OK State)

3.  FSU 3 wins (over ranked LSU, Louisville and Clemson), 4.  Alabama 4 wins (over #1 Georgia, Ole Miss, LSU and Tennessee)

The committee is choosing to place value on quantity and not quality.  When analyzing Alabama, the committee is placing emphasis on one loss, over a team with the most quality wins of all other teams where consideration is given.  Alabama has the strongest SOS, the best win, and are conference champions in the strongest conference.

> In the past, Ohio State - who lost head-to-head against B1G Champion PSU, was placed in the CFP, while PSU was relegated to the Rose Bowl.

> In the past, Ohio State lost to a 6-win Virginia Tech team yet won the B1G, made the CFP and won the NC.

> In the past, Clemon lost to an unranked Pittsburgh in the month of November yet made the CFP and won the NC.

If Alabama makes the CFP, I believe they will win the NC in a repeat game with Texas.

If this committee is truly seeking to put the "best" teams in the CFP, then the four "best" teams are:

1.  Michigan

2.  Texas

3.  Alabama

4.  Georgia

To that end, I expect the Final Four to be as I listed above - which is okay.  And I expect Texas (a future SEC team) to dominate and win the CFP Championship, where the games will be mildly competitive, and not closely contested contest.

And for what it's worth, I follow Auburn, and I'm not an Alabama supporter.  But I do admire Saban and what Alabama has accomplished.

What a twat.

[row Z]

I fully expected them to put UW number 2, and put us in the Sugar v. Texas. So, not shocked at all. However, the fact that number 2 gets you a road game v. Texas indicates flaws in this entire process. To me, number 2 should be given the option to play 3 at the designated site, or drop to 4 and play 1 at the other site (Rose). If i am the UW AD, i would choose the Rose v. Michigan. 

What do you guys think about the UW AD reaching out to Bama and Michigan AD to explore a swap? If all programs consent, they could approach the CFP to make the Rose UW v. Michigan. Is that insane? Seems like it would be mutually beneficial all the way around. Who objects? Would need to get DeBoer's agreement internally first, of course. 

[win2bfree]

On 12/3/2023 at 10:35 AM, row Z said:

What do you guys think about the UW AD reaching out to Bama and Michigan AD to explore a swap? If all programs consent, they could approach the CFP to make the Rose UW v. Michigan. Is that insane? Seems like it would be mutually beneficial all the way around. Who objects? Would need to get DeBoer's agreement internally first, of course. 

Nah.  As much as I wanted a traditional Rose Bowl too, it is what it is.  I wanna respect the system as is, even though it is heavily flawed.  They could have avoid this all along by not putting #'s in front of the final 4, just pitting match-ups based on many factors including history and geography along with competitive balance.  Year 1 in 2014 should have been OSU/Oregon in the Rose and Bama/FSU, but by putting artificial numbers we didn't get it.

Besides from UW's point it is better to play Texas now vs if they both win (and I think both games are tossups) and then UW would have to play Texas in Houston.

[azgreg]

 

[Orange]

 Not having a 13-0 P5 conference champ in your playoff is INSANE.  
 

And fuck the SEC, they sucked this year.  
 

1. Washington

2. Michigan

3. Texas

4. FSU

 

the only real answer.  

[KUGRDON]

Oregon vs Liberty?  Lol

[row Z]

On 12/3/2023 at 12:13 PM, KUGRDON said:

Oregon vs Liberty?  Lol

It doesn't get much worse than that for a top 10 team that had very real CFP aspirations just one game and 3 points ago. Terrible draw for the ducks and for the Pac12. Really would have preferred seeing them face off against one of the other top 8 (Ohio State in particular). 

[HLB]

On 12/3/2023 at 10:16 AM, Buff_Fan said:

I get the sec homerism, but the flaws wasn’t as good, too to bottom, as the pac.

There are more ranked teams in the SEC, in the CFP than there are in the PAC12.

Don't confuse competitive, with "best".  The PAC had a lot of balance within their conference, which made for a competitive conference.  But they weren't the best.

You will find this out during the bowls.

Expect Texas to defeat Washington, 56-10.

[HLB]

On 12/3/2023 at 12:27 PM, Mano said:

What a twat.

Not sure what I said that prompted that response.

[HLB]

On 12/3/2023 at 1:56 PM, azgreg said:

 

BAMA, Georgia, Missouri, LSU, Ole Miss and TN, representing the SEC.

And those first five teams are in the top 13 of the rankings.

[HLB]

On 12/3/2023 at 5:47 PM, row Z said:

It doesn't get much worse than that for a top 10 team that had very real CFP aspirations just one game and 3 points ago. Terrible draw for the ducks and for the Pac12. Really would have preferred seeing them face off against one of the other top 8 (Ohio State in particular). 

Be glad that they aren't playing Ohio State, or Georgia, or Ole Miss, or Missouri, or Penn State, or FSU ....

Liberty is a team they can beat (maybe).  Those other teams I just mentioned are teams they can't beat.

[HLB]

On 12/3/2023 at 2:12 PM, Orange said:

 Not having a 13-0 P5 conference champ in your playoff is INSANE.  
 

And fuck the SEC, they sucked this year.  
 

1. Washington

2. Michigan

3. Texas

4. FSU

 

the only real answer.  

That's why you'll never be on any such committee.

It's about having the best teams.  And FSU's resume doesn't add up.  Liberty was an undefeated conference champion - should they be in the playoffs?  No.  Because they faced inferior competition, just like FSU did.

Alabama's SOS was #5.  FSU's SOS was #55.

BAMA had more wins over teams that are ranked in the CFP, than FSU.

FSU cannot be Alabama - plain and simple - because Alabama is the better team.

[HLB]

On 12/3/2023 at 1:02 PM, win2bfree said:

Besides from UW's point it is better to play Texas now vs if they both win (and I think both games are tossups) and then UW would have to play Texas in Houston.

Wow .... An example of how delusional PAC fans are about the PAC.

Texas "easily" beats UW - 56-10.  The only way the score would be less is if Texas throttles back in the 2nd half.  This meeting between UW and Texas will be over by halftime.

And if UW played Michigan, the beat down wouldn't be as bad, but Michigan would win by 3 scores.

[HLB]

On 12/3/2023 at 12:35 PM, row Z said:

I fully expected them to put UW number 2, and put us in the Sugar v. Texas. So, not shocked at all. However, the fact that number 2 gets you a road game v. Texas indicates flaws in this entire process. To me, number 2 should be given the option to play 3 at the designated site, or drop to 4 and play 1 at the other site (Rose). If i am the UW AD, i would choose the Rose v. Michigan. 

What do you guys think about the UW AD reaching out to Bama and Michigan AD to explore a swap? If all programs consent, they could approach the CFP to make the Rose UW v. Michigan. Is that insane? Seems like it would be mutually beneficial all the way around. Who objects? Would need to get DeBoer's agreement internally first, of course. 

That's stupid.

Playoff teams play where the committee seeds them, in every sport.  You don't get to move games around and play who you want, where you want.

That being said, UW will lose handily to Michigan or Texas.

[HLB]

On 12/3/2023 at 10:50 AM, glduck said:

I don't know how PAC12 fans can be more delusional or "dumber".  But reality is, UDubb is going to experience a beat down, with Texas.  And ultimately, BAMA and Texas (an SEC school beginning in 2024) will have a rematch in the NCG, where BAMA will prevail.

[HLB]

On 12/3/2023 at 10:16 AM, Buff_Fan said:

Absolute nonsense.  The pac was the best conference this year, especially compared to the big 10 and 12.  Washington doesn’t get left out.  Your logic gives a lot of credit, for instance, to Michigan beating Iowa.  They were a deeply flawed team in an awful division.  
 

I get the sec homerism, but the flaws wasn’t as good, too to bottom, as the pac.

I said that I expected the FINAL FOUR to be 1. Michigan, 2. Washington, 3. Texas and 4. FSU.

And top-to-bottom, SEC was significantly better, as proven by the final CFP rankings.    The SEC has 6 teams in the final CFP poll, with 5 listed in the Top 13.

[glduck]

On 12/3/2023 at 3:47 PM, row Z said:

It doesn't get much worse than that for a top 10 team that had very real CFP aspirations just one game and 3 points ago. Terrible draw for the ducks and for the Pac12. Really would have preferred seeing them face off against one of the other top 8 (Ohio State in particular). 

Yeah, Ohio State would have been my preferred choice, too. Would have been nice to cap this season with a resounding win over a high profile school. The cache with Liberty just isn’t there. 

Still, Tulane beat SC last year, so hopefully the team is more mature than I and takes it seriously.