***2017 College Football Thread***

[F32Fleet]

Originally Posted by Flying Ace

1. Clemson
2. Georgia
3. Oklahoma
4. Ohio State

#1 Clemson
#2 Oklahoma
#3 Georgia
#4 Alabama OR "A we need to make more money by expanding viewership and it's good for the game and fans so we flipped a coin and chose OSU over USC. "

[mookie45]

It will be interesting to see who fills that fourth spot.

[RickFLM4]

Are 2 losses by OSU, to a playoff team and a really bad one to Iowa, offset by clearly better wins than Alabama? If Auburn had beaten GA, or TCU beaten OK, I think Alabama would have a better case. But as it stands, I'm not sure what rationale would be to include Alabama. Committee has already shown they are willing to include a 2 loss team by ranking Auburn so high in last rankings. If number of losses trump quality of wins, then Central FL should be in but clearly that won't be the case.

[roll_the_dice]

31 point loss to Iowa should trump a 12 point loss to Auburn. IF Alabama had lost by 31 to anyone, we wouldn't be debating nor would I think they should get in. No way USC is even in the debate...they got blown out by ND who got blown out by Miami who lost to a 4 win Pitt team then got blown out by Clemson.

I think Clemson and OU are playing best right now, so it looks like on paper whoever gets in at #4 loses to Clemson ...last year OSU lost by 31 in the semi final to Clemson...do we want to see that again? OF course this would also pit Bama vs Clemson for the 3rd straight year. But I do think Bama would give a better game against Clemson than OSU.

Can anyone say OSU is better than Bama and really believe it? Both OSU and Wisconsin looked inept last night. IMO, Alabama should get in, but I think OSU will get in.

4 Best teams not 4 most deserving.

[RickFLM4]

I think we can agree USC is out. It is OSU or Alabama.

Just seems odd to take first and third best teams from the SEC and leave Big 10 champ out, who beat two top 10 teams. At least if Auburn won, Alabama could claim to be second best team in SEC. Given loss to Auburn not sure how they could claim that now.

Clemson lost to Syracuse and it has no impact and Auburn lost twice before last week's rankings so it seems the committee values big wins more than number or bad losses detract.

To me this is Urban Liar vs. Nick Satan. I despise both pretty equally. So about objective as it gets. I also don't think Alabama has done anything this season that makes me think they could clearly beat OSU. Both lost to Clemson last year but I think last year should be irrelevant to this year's rankings.

[roll_the_dice]

I would agree with your argument of 1st and 3rd best of the SEC if the committee didn't have precedent of taking the 3rd best team from the BIG 10 (14) last year. Seemed odd last year not to take the BIG 10 champion, PSU, but they did especially since PSU beat OSU head to head.

The committee loves OSU, so they get in over a better team...IMO. We will find out soon enough.

[RickFLM4]

I agree with that and personally didn't think OSU made sense getting in last year. However at least in that case they had some good wins against highly rated Wisconsin and Michigan teams and their loss to PSU was in the middle of the season. Alabama has no top 10 team wins and lost their last game of the season. For as long as I can remember, late season losses always hurt the most when it comes to rankings because it makes a bad trend line, right or wrong.

I think whichever one gets in will have trouble with Clemson's defense.

[roll_the_dice]

I agree with the late season loss...it has always been a death knell.

Yes Wisconsin was a top 4 team, but I don't really think they were one of the best 4 teams in the country. When Bama scheduled FSU as the opener, everyone thought FSU would be in the thick of the hunt also...they lost their QB and fell apart...but for 95% of that game they had him and Bama won going away 24-7. So IMO they did have a top 10 win...but no one wants to give credit for that game or the fact Bama has lost 4 starting LB's..but they gave consideration for Clemson's loss to the Cuse because the QB was hurt...makes no sense and is why we talk about it.

[Flying Ace]

Originally Posted by roll_the_dice

I agree with the late season loss...it has always been a death knell.

Yes Wisconsin was a top 4 team, but I don't really think they were one of the best 4 teams in the country. When Bama scheduled FSU as the opener, everyone thought FSU would be in the thick of the hunt also...they lost their QB and fell apart...but for 95% of that game they had him and Bama won going away 24-7. So IMO they did have a top 10 win...but no one wants to give credit for that game or the fact Bama has lost 4 starting LB's..but they gave consideration for Clemson's loss to the Cuse because the QB was hurt...makes no sense and is why we talk about it.

Your logic is so flawed.

So if Wisconsin won, they are clearly a top 4 team. But since they lost they're not a top 4 team? The fact is, Wisconsin was one game away from being #4. It's very different in week 14 than from a week 1 popularity poll.

Ultimately, who you beat and their strength is measured as of today not the week you played them. Based on your logic, Ohio State shouldn't even have gotten in in 2014 based in a week 2 loss to 6-loss Va Tech nor Clemson last year due to losing to 5-loss Pitt.

The reality is Bama's best wins are 3-loss LSU and 4-loss Miss State, and 3-loss Fresno State.

Ohio State's best wins are 2-loss Penn State, 3-loss Michigan State, and 1-loss Wisconsin.

Surely wins matter just as much if not more than losses right? If not, why isn't UCF in?

Lastly, you cannot honestly believe losing defenders is akin to losing a QB. You just said FSU losing their QB effected the game and season outcome. A QB touches the ball every play and accounts for 50% to 80% of a teams offense is far more impactful.

[Flying Ace]

Originally Posted by RickFLM4

I agree with that and personally didn't think OSU made sense getting in last year. However at least in that case they had some good wins against highly rated Wisconsin and Michigan teams and their loss to PSU was in the middle of the season. Alabama has no top 10 team wins and lost their last game of the season. For as long as I can remember, late season losses always hurt the most when it comes to rankings because it makes a bad trend line, right or wrong.

I think whichever one gets in will have trouble with Clemson's defense.

This. Last year, if anything, the decision for #4 was even easier than this year's. Ohio State had wins against Oklahoma, Wisconsin, and Michigan. Penn State had a fluke win at home off a bye week on a blocked FG that would have been illegal (jumping over the back of snapper) this year and Michigan State and Wisconsin. Penn State also had a loss to a terrible Pitt team. Ohio State's only loss was Penn State.

[scostu]

Ohio state over Alabama for me......strength of schedule plus Conference champs counts for more.

Why else even have a conference title game

the whole UCF ordeal.....well.....if UCF can play higher ranked opponents and go 12-0.....then they get my vote.

[Flying Ace]

Originally Posted by F32Fleet

#1 Clemson
#2 Oklahoma
#3 Georgia
#4 Alabama OR "A we need to make more money by expanding viewership and it's good for the game and fans so we flipped a coin and chose OSU over USC. "

There's no way you can even compare USC to any #4 candidate

[RickFLM4]

Well, we'll find out in 30 minutes.

[kprocivic]

Originally Posted by Flying Ace

There's no way you can even compare USC to any #4 candidate

Stop hating on the Pac 12.

With that said I think USC ends up at 5 which should exceed their expectations.

[hellrotm]

Ohio St losing to Iowa by 31 points, is like Alabama losing to Kentucky by 31 points.

Wisconsin was a fugazi #4, they only had one win over a top 25...#21 Northwestern.

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by scostu

Why else even have a conference title game

There shouldn't be any conference title games. The games are over weighted in decision making, it is just one game in a long season. Let the records determine conference titles.

Eliminate conference title games, instead make all these teams play an out of conference game in a power conference. It would better help pick teams for the playoffs.

[RickFLM4]

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

There shouldn't be any conference title games. The games are over weighted in decision making, it is just one game in a long season. Let the records determine conference titles.

Eliminate conference title games and make all these teams play an out of conference game in a power conference. It would help picking teams for the playoffs.

So with no title game, it would be Clemson, Auburn, Oklahoma and Wisconsin?

[F32Fleet]

Originally Posted by Flying Ace

There's no way you can even compare USC to any #4 candidate

True, but college football has always been about money and preserving the bowl games first. The best team is a distant second. IMO choosing USC or OSU would be the political choice

[RickFLM4]

Man do they drag this shit out.

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by RickFLM4

So with no title game, it would be Clemson, Auburn, Oklahoma and Wisconsin?

No, everyone should play another out of conference game(not powderpuff game), in another power conference. Their win-loss would be different.

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

If Auburn can pull out this win, I see the two SEC teams in playoffs scenario coming. Winner of SEC championship and one loss Bama.

[RickFLM4]

Surprised they took the third best team in SEC over Big 10 champ. They clearly think Wisconsin is good by leaving them at 6 and OSU just beat Wisconsin.

In any event, OSU left the door open by losing to Iowa so it is what it is. If OSU beats Iowa, no question they would be in.

I think Clemson wins back-to-back, but my track record on predictions isn't so great so presumably it will be one of the other 3 that wins.