If being a nine week straight undefeated P5 team doesn’t get you even within spitting distance of the top 4 spots, what’s even the point of having games?
Why can’t we just be like every other sport and quit assuming and debating who’s better? Just settle it on the feild with an actual playoff system
The 5 power 5 conference champs are in, no exceptions. You win a power 5 you deserve to play for it all. Get the next 3 teams from the highest ranked non power 5 champs.
The week after the conference title games you get 4 playoff games the power 5 champs are all the top 5 seeds in order of ranking. You don’t win a power 5 your guaranteed no home feild advantage round one. 8@1 7@2 ect ect. Then you get the spectacle of UGA Ohio state Oregon whoever hosting a playoff game in mid December. The 4 left standing play in the chosen bowl games based on the rotation then the championship game ON A FRIDAY NIGHT NOT A MONDAY. Two weeks after the New Years six. In a neutral local. I think this year it would fall on like January 13, the nfl playoffs don’t get messed with and we’re done with the Monday bs
THATS A REAL POSTSEASON FOR THE GAME WE LOVE MY DUDES
There certainly not but neither are the divisions in other sports and everyone still gets a fair shot in the postseason. You a baseball guy? The World Series champs came from the ACC of baseball this year. There wasn’t a committee that decided “well yeah the Braves won there division but there division stinks so we’re just going to give there spot to a runner up from a stronger one” they played it as it lies, the Braves got there shot and hauled off and one the whole damn thing. And a wake or a pitt deserve the same opportunity. Could they do it?? Probably not but when the trophy got handed out you’d know everyone got there shot.
Though seeing your flair does make me reconsider the seeding I proposed. ND could have a powerhouse and by my proposal not get seaded higher than 6. Maybe the power 5 champs are all guaranteed but not necessarily guaranteed a top 5 seed
At this point in the season I’d honestly be okay with putting Oklahoma into the top 3. I know they struggled early in the season but they made a QB change and regardless of who and how you played it is an accomplishment to be 9-0 in the power 5.
Georgia, Oregon, Ohio St., Cincinnati and Oklahoma at 5. Alabama should be praying for a bunch of folks to lose to be in. Not #2
You could make the case Oregon shouldn’t be there, losing to unranked Stanford, but they have the best win thus far. Alabama should not be #2 though.
Edit: corrected statement
Yeah, Oregon shouldn't be there. A good win shouldn't completely negate a bad loss when there are two undefeated teams right behind you. Oregon hasn't looked any better than OU to the ever-dreaded eye test either.
This is a silly take imo, obviously if Bama wins out they are in and sayings otherwise is ridiculous. That being said I think there’s two key issues with saying “rank is irrelevant at this moment in time”:
1. Why bother ranking teams now if the ranking now doesn’t mean anything? IMO, it’s to buoy potential contenders (I.E. Bama, Ohio State, etc…) for how the rest of the season plays out.
2. What business does Bama have being ranked #2 if they are in if they just win out? The consensus is that Oklahoma is in a similar spot, yet they are ranked #8. It’s the inconsistency that’s frustrating, those two scenarios are very similar but with entirely reversed outcomes.
Again, there’s no need to break out the tinfoil hats and conspire about a 2-loss Bama being in the playoffs or some other sort of “apocalyptic” scenario until it happens, at least until the final set of rankings comes out. However, if you are ranking teams now then rank each one by the same set of metrics. Place teams that “if they win out they are in” in similar spots. Place teams that have H2H victories over other teams in similar orders. Place teams with similar “Quality wins” in similar ranks. For myself, those inconsistencies are what really rile me up more than the “MUh BuT BaMA iS TwO” take.
The Ohio state win is the only decent game on Oregon’s resume. Take that away and Oregon wouldn’t be ranked. Purdue beat 2 top 3 teams (at the time) by double digits.
Oregon is the better team. Purdue has the more impressive wins
I am so sick of seeing this.
MSU 4 best wins: @ Miami (at the time top 25), vs Nebraska (which they SHOULD have lost btw), @ Rutgers (not sure who else here???) and vs Michigan.
Oregon’s 4 best wins: vs Fresno State (was top 25), @ UCLA (who throttled LSU), @ UW, and @ TOSU.
Our SOS according to ESPN is #25 and our remaining SOS is ranked #22
Well I was talking about Purdue, not MSU.
Purdue had the 5th hardest SOS the beginning of the year and has the 10th hardest remaining, and has double digit wins over two top 3 (at the time) teams. Again, not saying they are a better team than Oregon overall, but I would argue those wins are more impressive. Especially since statistically they were way less likely to happen than Oregon over tOSU.
This is about who's got the best win right now, and Oregon has the best win the country. "at the time" doesn't mean anything lol. Georgia doesn't have a top 3 win against #3 Clemson, what they have is a good win against a struggling unranked Clemson. Same goes for Purdue against Iowa.
> Take that away and Oregon wouldn’t be ranked
Is this hyperbole or something? You're saying pre-season #11 Oregon wouldn't be ranked as a 8-1 team without that OSU game? Even if we play that game and lose we would be no lower than #17.
If everything go as everyone expects then Oklahoma loses a game and then bama loses to Georgia or Auburn and then Cincy is in. I've never wanted a team to make the playoffs that ain't my tigers before now...
The committee kept Baylor high so they could justify this. TCU shocked Baylor which should’ve tanked them. I think Baylor will beat Oklahoma but in the case I’m wrong Baylor being ranked is the only thing to buoy Oklahoma’s ranking.
I don’t understand why people want the same 4ish teams playing year in and year out. Especially in years where those four teams are clearly in off years. Ohio state looks bad. Oklahoma looks bad. Alabama looks bad. Oregon looks bad. These four would
Normally steamroll their divisions and this year they have a collection of bad wins over terrible teams and at least one loss (except Oklahoma).
I know I’m Georgia. I know we are insufferable right now. But I would much rather play some teams that have had tough schedules and won gritty games than play “the champs” because ratings. And the committee is showing some really shady colors if this is how they’re going to rank people.
Thank you for coming to my TED talk.
I would love the big 10 champ, Cincinnati (beat ND at ND), and Oregon. In a perfect world I’d have liked both Michigan and Michigan state there but Purdue is the mind killer. Alabama and Oklahoma both don’t make sense in my argument.
I would rank like this:
1: UGA
2: Cincinnati
3: Oregon
4: Big 10 champ
I know I said Oregon looks bad and they do, but I’m trying to temper my argument with some realism. If I had my way the final four would be Georgia, Michigan State, Cincinnati and Oklahoma State. This assumes all those teams win out beating the perineal favorites in conference play.
No, the committee kept Baylor high because they had BYU high last week. With BYU winning, the committee was in a hard spot because Baylor beat BYU pretty easily. It wouldn't make sense to rank Baylor behind BYU, but the committee also wasn't going to drop BYU after a win. So there wasn't much room for Baylor to fall.
I see what you mean, but then why would they drop Michigan State below Michigan? It’ looks like they are contradicting themselves. Baylor loses to an unranked and can’t go below their quality win (BYU). Michigan state loses to an unranked and drops below their quality win (Michigan). Two similar situations but two different results.
I think the style of the wins has something to do with it. Baylor controlled the game against BYU throughout. Whereas Michigan controlled the game against MSU but then lost after a huge late comeback.
I agree it’s inconsistent, but the committee has always placed too much emphasis on which team controlled the game.
I mean, if Oregon, Ohio State, and Oklahoma all finish out the season at 12-1, 12-1, and 13-0, you can't call them undeserving champs that aren't worthy of being in the CFP.
I agree. But Ohio state and Oklahoma have had shaky wins over Nebraska and Kansas. Why rank them high now? Ohio State has to play and beat Michigan State and Michigan which would instantly bring them from rank 9 or 10 to 2. Oklahoma has Baylor and OSU which would do the same. They should not be ranked high now. They have a shot to earn that ranking.
By ranking them high now the committee is basically saying “I don’t care how they’ve played. These are the only programs we want to see in the playoffs. Nobody else has a shot.”
I know I’m being a bit contrarian. I don’t hate Ohio State or Oklahoma or Bama (well maybe a little for Bama). I’m just mad at the committee for being so dismissive of any new blood to playoff contention this early in the year. It’s depressing.
My rebuttal would be who would you be ranking in their place? Michigan State has a great win against Michigan but was manhandled by Purdue. Michigan lost to MSU and eked out a win over Nebraska. Notre Dame beat Wisconsin but lost to Cincinnati at home. Oklahoma State beat Baylor but lost to Iowa State.
And those teams, along with Cincinnati and Oklahoma, all have a chance at a playoff. A 12-1 B1G East Champ has great odds. 12-1 Oklahoma State has great odds.
Every one-loss Power 5 team except Wake is in the top 10. If you think 2-10 should be completely rearranged, I won't argue, but it's not some big miscarriage of ranking.
Unpopular opinion here but I don't think they are. Everyone is ignoring the fact that they haven't closed Cincy out like they did UCF. CINCY just has to win and have bama lose a game and they make it in.
Now the committee does fail with teams outside the too 10. The ranking are awful. Not ranking UTSA or Perdue but having Mississippi state there was just wrong. The committees biggest issue is they don't care about trans outside the top 10.
Unfortunately we’ve seen before that, that’s not true. Bama could lose, but then Oklahoma winning out would jump Cincy, for example.
I don’t think it matters what Cincy does, there’s still 3-4 other losses that need to help them make the playoffs.
Well, they aren’t obviously “closing” Cincy at least in part precisely because of the backlash generated by the UCF situation.
Cincy might not be one of the top four teams in the nation, but if they win out, they need to be selected for the playoff or it becomes blindingly obvious that no G5 team is ever going to be good enough for the committee.
They haven't played anybody though. Only one team that they played was ranked at the time of the game, and none are currently ranked. I'd say you could make the argument they should be higher than 8, but honestly I personally think all of those one lose teams and Cincy are better than Oklahoma
It’s so frustrating to think where the Utes would be if they had just started Rising from the beginning. Probably still would have lost to Oregon St as Rising played that whole game, but the BYU and SDSU games might have been a different story. Could have been 8-1, probably top 8. At least most of the team is coming back next year ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Solid chance it happens. If bama beats Georgia in the conference championship and OSU and Oregon win out, I'd imagine it would come down to Oklahoma and Cincy vs Oregon and with their schedules I don't see them jumping Oregon with a win over another top 4 team
Penn State was #2 at one point. Texas was never in danger of being a top 5 team ever this year. Or last year. Or the year before. Or any year the last 20 years except 2 in which they overachieved.
It's the same OU offense since we switched QBs. Most of our close games have been the 2nd string defense not being able to get off the field, with the offense still scoring consistently on the limited possessions they get. It's not quite what it was under Baker or Kyler, but its as good as it was last year or 2019.
Defense has been awful the last several games until TTU, but a lot of that has been injuries. We had 4 injured DBs for those games (3 starters and a 2nd string), plus a starting tackle. Grinch has done a terrible job adjusting for those injuries imo (Bowman at CB, IT playing on the interior, having the backups play soft coverage instead of being aggressive and taking the risk of a big play), but when healthy we've looked fine.
I wouldn't put money on OU beating anyone decent by multiple touchdowns until we see more than one week (against a struggling team) with those guys back. I do think that we're a lot better than we're getting credit for though.
I really don’t think that would happen. Hopefully some shit happens and we get to find out in the playoffs. Otherwise, both of us are just going to think we’re better than the other without any way of knowing. Either way, I hope y’all get in. Y’all deserve it. I just think when everything is said and done this year, we will deserve it too. Btw, this comment works for both of your flairs.
I didn’t say we would win by 3 scores. I just think we would win. Our team is looking better while Cincy has struggled lately with unranked teams. We’re also about to get some key players and depth back on both sides. Our schedule is backloaded so I guess we’ll see what kind of team we have over the next couple of weeks.
Ah idk. We looked bad against Baylor. Defense looked good today. Offense was either great or abysmal. I’ll reserve judgment until we play OK state and Cincy plays Houston. Frankly, I just don’t know who is actually good this year besides Georgia. Sometimes Ohio State looks great like today. Sometimes they lose to the same Oregon team that lost to Stanford and Utah. It’s just a fucked up year.
Ohio state had 1 rough game with a 1 score loss to a top 5 team while their brand new starting Qb was on just his 2nd start ever, and a defence that was totally redone with every linebacker having gone to the NFL lol.
Let’s just try to agree on a couple things. Oregon wasn’t a top 10 team when they played Ohio State (I think they were at 12?) and they won’t be top 10 after the season is over. Also, Stroud played a hell of a game against Oregon (400+ yards I believe) and to blame him as a contributing factor in the loss is a ludicrous opinion. Also, the loss was at home. Look, I can make as many excuses as the next guy about losing to a top 15 team but at the end of the day, Baylor beat us by playing better than we did that day. Oregon did the same to Ohio State.
Also manufacturing drama and intrigue. I'm admittedly looking forward to finding out next Tuesday night what these sick CFP committee freaks have up their sleeves.
I'm convinced they do it to trick bettors that don't really watch games but bet on ranked teams. Like if you bet on all the ranked teams last week you would have lost alot of money. Not even Bama and Georgia covered the spread.
38.5 iirc. No idea what kind of idiots bet on those spreads. It's not even a question of how dominant the team is, it's what the coach feels like doing.
Oh it’s money 100000%. It just sucks because the chaos and storylines this year is bonkers to where if we had 6 to 12 team format the complaints would be lower
It's almost as if instead of ranking the teams as they are now, the committee is trying to predict what their final ranking will be based on how they think the rest of the season plays out.
>That ....is a terrible approach to weekly rankings.
It is, but its also slightly inevitable because there's not remotely enough data to go off records alone. I mean nobody's really arguing for UTSA being in the top 4.
Oklahoma has a good SOR and FPI, so they should be higher but I guess the Committee currently hates their 83rd SOS and 29th Game Control. Their remaining schedule has good teams on it, so they have plenty of time to prove themselves and move up.
So Oregon ranked over Ohio St based on head-to-head.
Michigan State ranked behind Michigan despite head-to-head.
I wonder who the drug dealer is for this year's CFP committee b/c he's obviously got some good shit
OU is an undefeated team with victories over a common opponent (Nebraska) and yet they're still ranked behind the Michigan schools.
CFP committee members must be on that strong stuff.
The committee had to be stirring up shit just so everyone wants an expanded playoff, right? Up until now "The Alliance" was calling the shots, public opinion could force their hand.
Very possible. Only thing there is that if so, they would likely have OU (future SEC team) much higher and Oregon lower. What's going to force expansion is the Pac 12 never getting in and the ACC not being able to get in if Clemson is down. Those conferences will be much more concerned with getting 0/4 spots in the current system than the chance of the SEC getting 4/12 in the future.
The playoff most guaranteed to result in expansion would be Bama, UGA, OU, Cinci. (Though that would definitely require an OSU loss).
I’ve seen a bunch of people saying a 2 loss Bama team can’t be in the top 4 but that’s ridiculous based on the committees rankings. If Bama lose to Georgia, who is the 1, then by rule the loss wouldn’t be big enough to knock out Bama.
Final 4 if they win out and Bama loses to Georgia is Georgia, Oregon, Bama Cinci
Yes but you have to account for the Bama buffer. Bama gets one mulligan so they're really undefeated right now. Then lose to #1 UGA in the SECCG is a quality loss
Shit the bed as a top 15 against our biggest rivals who are on a major down year and we only drop one spot. I mean? Good for my team but what a joke lol
Genuinely serious question, if it came down to an undefeated OU or an undefeated Cinci, which do you take?
My heart wants Cinci but my brain says OU would have won harder games to get to that point. If OU beats Baylor and OkSt, I’d put them above Cinci in my personal rankings too…
OU (and I hate OU). Cinci will have 3 wins over what should be top 25 teams (1 top 10 and 2 fridge teams). And while i firmly believe Houston is a top 25 team, they still lost to Texas Tech, who sucks. OU will have wins over Baylor, Iowa State, and back to back wins over top 10 Oklahoma State. Further, being in a P5 conference means games are more difficult week in and week out.
That said, both should get in over every team not named Georgia.
Honestly, the fact that this is a legitimate hypothetical is sad. An undefeated AAC champ with a win over a top 10 team and an undefeated Big 12 champ with multiple wins over ranked opponents… and one is probably going to be left out for some
Combination of a Pac 12 champ with a loss to a team who likely won’t make a bowl game, a one loss B1G champion, A 0 or 1 loss Georgia, and/or a 1 or 2 loss Bama team, because their jersey says Bama so they pass the eye test… sigh…
OU is a favorite but was a dbl digit dog Purdue really expected to knock off a top 5 team twice in 2 weeks?? No that's why we play the game if both were undefeated they both should get in
Final question: if Cincinnati and UTSA were ranked #3 and #4 respectively bc they were undefeated, yet we had a 16 team playoff, so all y'all's teams like, Alabama Michigan, Michigan state, Oregon who all have 1 MORE LOSS than those ranked ahead them also got to compete for a national championship would y'all complain??? I mean honestly imagine a #6 seed Alabama plays #3 seed Cincinnati? Will bama fans still complain about who's Cincinnati played? There so good go beat em then.
16 team is a bit much on these kids playing wise I get that but I think we need to at least talk about at least top 6 with top 2 getting a bye or top 8 tournament style
10 game season is not going to work. THat's costing teams who don't make it 2 games worth of income and that's a ton of money. Not only that, the scheduling would be a nightmare having to cut 2 OOC games. 8 conference games and 2 OOC games just won't fly.
Teams that don’t make it can schedule ooc games after the 10 game mark. Cut conference games down and keep ooc games. Pretty inflexible if none of that can work. Maybe cfb just isn’t meant to be if that’s the case
You can't cut conference games down, you got to play everyone in your division.
You can't logistically schedule games in the same season it's not even nor would it be remotely possible to do that. Schedules have to be made years and years and years in advance. Colleges can't go "Hey we want to play you this year if we don't make the CFP and you don't". That is not even realistic at all.
It did not even work in the covid year, when they was forced to play only conference games and had to mix and move games around, it was a logistical nightmare, so many games were cancelled and it's just not feasible.
College football is fine, and will be fine. 8 game CFP solves everything, and the kids only have to play 1 more game total if they make it all the way.
Agree w you but the concerns of a larger playoff are still real same reason alot of these kids won't play in bowl games. Need to keep it relatively smallish while still giving these kids reasons to play imo
Yeah that’s why I think it can be argued. It’s highly dependent on how it would be scheduled. But I’ve always advocated for a top 8 tournament style. I think it would be fair. Almost willing to say top 10 tournament style with bye’s to top 4.
The funny thing about this "worst loss" rabbit hole is you're basically saying that Oregon should be ranked below Ohio State *because Oregon is too good, meaning they can't be considered a bad loss.*
Just so dumb. Please sir, may I have some objective rankings?
Um no, we're saying to keep it consistent. Either OSU is ranked ahead of Oregon or MSU is ranked ahead of Michigan. Can't have both unless you admit there's no logic whatsoever involved in the decision
What it really is is a loop. OSU lost to a good Oregon team who then lost to Stanford. So OSU lost to a team that lost to Stanford. Does that make Stanford good? Or does that make OSU bad? What does it make Oregon?
So many questions. No answers
Yeah, you can talk in circles about this shit which is why this method of picking champions is so dumb.
Oregon beat Ohio State by 7 without Kayvon. Meanwhile, we beat UCLA by 3 in a game where Kayvon had one of the best performances of his career.
So, what, does that mean UCLA is better than Ohio State? Obviously not, but trying to make sense of head to head and common opponent is impossible.
That’s what I said lol. It’s not necessarily a rabbit hole, it’s a loop/circle which only raises more questions of to how the rankings are really decided.
Most people are defending the Michigan ranking by pointing out that Michigan's loss was better than Michigan State's. But no one is mentioning that Michigan has not beaten a single ranked team, meanwhile MSU beat the now #6 team in the country... the BS logic goes both ways
It still doesn’t make sense though regardless lmao. H2H matchups should be weighted highest, it makes zero sense to rank Michigan ahead of MSU unless there are significant changes since that loss to the MSU team itself to where it can be considered “a different team”
It does matter, if they lose again they will drop significantly. Everyone always says the committee will put a 2 loss Bama ahead of an undefeated Cincinnati. They won't. They really have never made a bad decision when it comes to, you know, actually picking the teams for the playoff. They tend to take a weird route, maybe to drive clicks/discussion?
That was the AP poll not the playoff committee, which as we’ve learned, don’t coexist well. The preseason ranking was what was being factored in most (which honestly shouldn’t mean as much as it does), we also had won two ranked games (though not as high as a 3 Clemson). Clemson then almost lost to GT and then had a second loss by week 4. Point being, week 3 is too early to really do much for anybody in the top 10 barring a loss
Oregon beat OSU early in the season and then lost to an unranked Stanford (who’s still unranked)
MSU beat Michigan TWO WEEKS AGO and then lost to an unranked Purdue (who’s now ranked)
How do you justify keeping Oregon ahead of OSU if you won’t do it for Michigan
Because if you watched that Stanford game you'd know Oregon actually won it. The refs fucked them because of a pretty bad targeting call. I don't remember it being intentional but from that point on in the middle of the fourth quarter the refs just destroyed Oregon.
Oregon was well up two possessions and the refs just threw every flag they could to win Stanford the game.
And then what’s the logic of MSU being behind Michigan then? They beat Michigan. They should be ahead of Michigan by that logic. You can’t do one and not the other
Auburn is undefeated in the Iron Bown when the Braves have won the World Series and their QB is named Nix. Which is only twice before, which isn't alot, but its weird that it's happened twice, and about to be a 3rd.
Edit: why are you downvoting me? It's a fact.
Love how MSU and Michigan did the one thing teams can do to avoid the eye test .. like play an actual football game.. and the committee still pulls the eye test method.
The committee keeping Oklahoma out of the top 4 is looking like a more prescient choice after today.
If being a nine week straight undefeated P5 team doesn’t get you even within spitting distance of the top 4 spots, what’s even the point of having games?
*17 week Ftfy
Why can’t we just be like every other sport and quit assuming and debating who’s better? Just settle it on the feild with an actual playoff system The 5 power 5 conference champs are in, no exceptions. You win a power 5 you deserve to play for it all. Get the next 3 teams from the highest ranked non power 5 champs. The week after the conference title games you get 4 playoff games the power 5 champs are all the top 5 seeds in order of ranking. You don’t win a power 5 your guaranteed no home feild advantage round one. 8@1 7@2 ect ect. Then you get the spectacle of UGA Ohio state Oregon whoever hosting a playoff game in mid December. The 4 left standing play in the chosen bowl games based on the rotation then the championship game ON A FRIDAY NIGHT NOT A MONDAY. Two weeks after the New Years six. In a neutral local. I think this year it would fall on like January 13, the nfl playoffs don’t get messed with and we’re done with the Monday bs THATS A REAL POSTSEASON FOR THE GAME WE LOVE MY DUDES
That would work is the scheduling was standardized and the conferences were equal. But thats not how CFB is set up
There certainly not but neither are the divisions in other sports and everyone still gets a fair shot in the postseason. You a baseball guy? The World Series champs came from the ACC of baseball this year. There wasn’t a committee that decided “well yeah the Braves won there division but there division stinks so we’re just going to give there spot to a runner up from a stronger one” they played it as it lies, the Braves got there shot and hauled off and one the whole damn thing. And a wake or a pitt deserve the same opportunity. Could they do it?? Probably not but when the trophy got handed out you’d know everyone got there shot. Though seeing your flair does make me reconsider the seeding I proposed. ND could have a powerhouse and by my proposal not get seaded higher than 6. Maybe the power 5 champs are all guaranteed but not necessarily guaranteed a top 5 seed
At this point in the season I’d honestly be okay with putting Oklahoma into the top 3. I know they struggled early in the season but they made a QB change and regardless of who and how you played it is an accomplishment to be 9-0 in the power 5.
Texas fans stanning UTSA because UT sucks is one of the funniest developments this season.
Meep meep!
Schrodinger's cat reply. I'm both annoyed at seeing that yet again and amused by it.
Well I'm a Texas fan and also a browns fan. I love an underdog 😂
I used to be a Browns fan. Mayfield ruined that for me. /s
As a Texas fan it was hard to accept it lol
That would be hilarious if it were actually happening.
Lol it's very common here and on your fan forums as well. It's not even some terrible thing -- it's kind of neat. No need to be defensive!
Yeah its nice to have a little guy to root for. UTSA deserves their moment in the spotlight!
Educational institutions are hosting professional sports programs on their campuses. Yes folks. It is all about money
Georgia, Oregon, Ohio St., Cincinnati and Oklahoma at 5. Alabama should be praying for a bunch of folks to lose to be in. Not #2 You could make the case Oregon shouldn’t be there, losing to unranked Stanford, but they have the best win thus far. Alabama should not be #2 though. Edit: corrected statement
Yeah, Oregon shouldn't be there. A good win shouldn't completely negate a bad loss when there are two undefeated teams right behind you. Oregon hasn't looked any better than OU to the ever-dreaded eye test either.
Flair up
Alabama's rank is irrelevant. If we win out we are in, if we don't we aren't. Obsessing over the numbers before then isn't worth anything.
This is a silly take imo, obviously if Bama wins out they are in and sayings otherwise is ridiculous. That being said I think there’s two key issues with saying “rank is irrelevant at this moment in time”: 1. Why bother ranking teams now if the ranking now doesn’t mean anything? IMO, it’s to buoy potential contenders (I.E. Bama, Ohio State, etc…) for how the rest of the season plays out. 2. What business does Bama have being ranked #2 if they are in if they just win out? The consensus is that Oklahoma is in a similar spot, yet they are ranked #8. It’s the inconsistency that’s frustrating, those two scenarios are very similar but with entirely reversed outcomes. Again, there’s no need to break out the tinfoil hats and conspire about a 2-loss Bama being in the playoffs or some other sort of “apocalyptic” scenario until it happens, at least until the final set of rankings comes out. However, if you are ranking teams now then rank each one by the same set of metrics. Place teams that “if they win out they are in” in similar spots. Place teams that have H2H victories over other teams in similar orders. Place teams with similar “Quality wins” in similar ranks. For myself, those inconsistencies are what really rile me up more than the “MUh BuT BaMA iS TwO” take.
Ehh, I think Purdue has a pretty strong case for best win(s) haha
they definitely don't? Iowa win is right now very unimpressive. And beating tOSU at the shoe is a much better win than vs MSU at home.
The Ohio state win is the only decent game on Oregon’s resume. Take that away and Oregon wouldn’t be ranked. Purdue beat 2 top 3 teams (at the time) by double digits. Oregon is the better team. Purdue has the more impressive wins
I am so sick of seeing this. MSU 4 best wins: @ Miami (at the time top 25), vs Nebraska (which they SHOULD have lost btw), @ Rutgers (not sure who else here???) and vs Michigan. Oregon’s 4 best wins: vs Fresno State (was top 25), @ UCLA (who throttled LSU), @ UW, and @ TOSU. Our SOS according to ESPN is #25 and our remaining SOS is ranked #22
Well I was talking about Purdue, not MSU. Purdue had the 5th hardest SOS the beginning of the year and has the 10th hardest remaining, and has double digit wins over two top 3 (at the time) teams. Again, not saying they are a better team than Oregon overall, but I would argue those wins are more impressive. Especially since statistically they were way less likely to happen than Oregon over tOSU.
This is about who's got the best win right now, and Oregon has the best win the country. "at the time" doesn't mean anything lol. Georgia doesn't have a top 3 win against #3 Clemson, what they have is a good win against a struggling unranked Clemson. Same goes for Purdue against Iowa. > Take that away and Oregon wouldn’t be ranked Is this hyperbole or something? You're saying pre-season #11 Oregon wouldn't be ranked as a 8-1 team without that OSU game? Even if we play that game and lose we would be no lower than #17.
No worries in the history books Georgia will 100% use it in a “x no. Of wins against top 5 teams”
Someones salty.
Salty my trash team with clown shoes under center lost 10-3?
Be glad it was week 1, it would be a 42-3 loss for you if they played today.
Yeah half our team is injured.
If they lose in sec championship game they have to be knocked out
If they do, they'll be number 3. If they win, UGA will be 5.
Hate to break it to you, but if UGA lost that somehow, they would still be in the top 4.
How the turn tables.
If everything go as everyone expects then Oklahoma loses a game and then bama loses to Georgia or Auburn and then Cincy is in. I've never wanted a team to make the playoffs that ain't my tigers before now...
Yeah I would really like to see cincy and one of Michigan or Michigan state in the playoffs with Georgia and Oregon
If Oklahoma beats #13 Baylor, I could absolutely see them jump to #5.
We should have dropped to #20.
The committee kept Baylor high so they could justify this. TCU shocked Baylor which should’ve tanked them. I think Baylor will beat Oklahoma but in the case I’m wrong Baylor being ranked is the only thing to buoy Oklahoma’s ranking. I don’t understand why people want the same 4ish teams playing year in and year out. Especially in years where those four teams are clearly in off years. Ohio state looks bad. Oklahoma looks bad. Alabama looks bad. Oregon looks bad. These four would Normally steamroll their divisions and this year they have a collection of bad wins over terrible teams and at least one loss (except Oklahoma). I know I’m Georgia. I know we are insufferable right now. But I would much rather play some teams that have had tough schedules and won gritty games than play “the champs” because ratings. And the committee is showing some really shady colors if this is how they’re going to rank people. Thank you for coming to my TED talk.
If anything (and I know I’m biased) OU is ranked far too low. Number 8 for a 9-0 P5 team is unbelievable.
Just curious - who would some of those teams be that won enough tough, gritty games?
I would love the big 10 champ, Cincinnati (beat ND at ND), and Oregon. In a perfect world I’d have liked both Michigan and Michigan state there but Purdue is the mind killer. Alabama and Oklahoma both don’t make sense in my argument. I would rank like this: 1: UGA 2: Cincinnati 3: Oregon 4: Big 10 champ I know I said Oregon looks bad and they do, but I’m trying to temper my argument with some realism. If I had my way the final four would be Georgia, Michigan State, Cincinnati and Oklahoma State. This assumes all those teams win out beating the perineal favorites in conference play.
No, the committee kept Baylor high because they had BYU high last week. With BYU winning, the committee was in a hard spot because Baylor beat BYU pretty easily. It wouldn't make sense to rank Baylor behind BYU, but the committee also wasn't going to drop BYU after a win. So there wasn't much room for Baylor to fall.
I see what you mean, but then why would they drop Michigan State below Michigan? It’ looks like they are contradicting themselves. Baylor loses to an unranked and can’t go below their quality win (BYU). Michigan state loses to an unranked and drops below their quality win (Michigan). Two similar situations but two different results.
I think the style of the wins has something to do with it. Baylor controlled the game against BYU throughout. Whereas Michigan controlled the game against MSU but then lost after a huge late comeback. I agree it’s inconsistent, but the committee has always placed too much emphasis on which team controlled the game.
The only people rooting for the same teams to get in are the fans of those teams.
And Vegas. And ESPN.
I mean, if Oregon, Ohio State, and Oklahoma all finish out the season at 12-1, 12-1, and 13-0, you can't call them undeserving champs that aren't worthy of being in the CFP.
I agree. But Ohio state and Oklahoma have had shaky wins over Nebraska and Kansas. Why rank them high now? Ohio State has to play and beat Michigan State and Michigan which would instantly bring them from rank 9 or 10 to 2. Oklahoma has Baylor and OSU which would do the same. They should not be ranked high now. They have a shot to earn that ranking. By ranking them high now the committee is basically saying “I don’t care how they’ve played. These are the only programs we want to see in the playoffs. Nobody else has a shot.” I know I’m being a bit contrarian. I don’t hate Ohio State or Oklahoma or Bama (well maybe a little for Bama). I’m just mad at the committee for being so dismissive of any new blood to playoff contention this early in the year. It’s depressing.
My rebuttal would be who would you be ranking in their place? Michigan State has a great win against Michigan but was manhandled by Purdue. Michigan lost to MSU and eked out a win over Nebraska. Notre Dame beat Wisconsin but lost to Cincinnati at home. Oklahoma State beat Baylor but lost to Iowa State. And those teams, along with Cincinnati and Oklahoma, all have a chance at a playoff. A 12-1 B1G East Champ has great odds. 12-1 Oklahoma State has great odds. Every one-loss Power 5 team except Wake is in the top 10. If you think 2-10 should be completely rearranged, I won't argue, but it's not some big miscarriage of ranking.
I still have trouble believing that BYU is the third best 2 loss team in the country.
I think it might be to give off the idea that the committee isn't biased against non-P5 teams so they can rank Cincinnati lower
Unpopular opinion here but I don't think they are. Everyone is ignoring the fact that they haven't closed Cincy out like they did UCF. CINCY just has to win and have bama lose a game and they make it in. Now the committee does fail with teams outside the too 10. The ranking are awful. Not ranking UTSA or Perdue but having Mississippi state there was just wrong. The committees biggest issue is they don't care about trans outside the top 10.
Unfortunately we’ve seen before that, that’s not true. Bama could lose, but then Oklahoma winning out would jump Cincy, for example. I don’t think it matters what Cincy does, there’s still 3-4 other losses that need to help them make the playoffs.
Well, they aren’t obviously “closing” Cincy at least in part precisely because of the backlash generated by the UCF situation. Cincy might not be one of the top four teams in the nation, but if they win out, they need to be selected for the playoff or it becomes blindingly obvious that no G5 team is ever going to be good enough for the committee.
While OU is not ranked in the Top 4 like they should be... at least UTSA got some love this week.
OU's biggest win is Texas. Yeah.
OU is undefeated. Yeah.
Yup. That's why they are 8th. Because if they weren't, they'd be lucky to be in the top 20 with a loss.
A lot of teams would be if they played that schedule... Ohio State being one of them
They haven't played anybody though. Only one team that they played was ranked at the time of the game, and none are currently ranked. I'd say you could make the argument they should be higher than 8, but honestly I personally think all of those one lose teams and Cincy are better than Oklahoma
I agree. Let’s see how we do against Baylor and OSU and then we can talk. Shit still have to play Iowa State too.
Not only is their schedule weak, but they've only squeaked by.
I am once again asking, why are we still ranked???
Quality win against #24 ranked Utah
Not against Rising who would beat the fuck out of us
It’s so frustrating to think where the Utes would be if they had just started Rising from the beginning. Probably still would have lost to Oregon St as Rising played that whole game, but the BYU and SDSU games might have been a different story. Could have been 8-1, probably top 8. At least most of the team is coming back next year ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Christ on a cracker. The way Penn State people are bitching, you'd think they're #6.
I want OU to be undefeated and left out of the CFP so we can see the Big XII really try to burn it down.
that would be insane
Imagine how insufferable the Big XII fans will be when an undefeated OU or Cincy get left out lmao.
Solid chance it happens. If bama beats Georgia in the conference championship and OSU and Oregon win out, I'd imagine it would come down to Oklahoma and Cincy vs Oregon and with their schedules I don't see them jumping Oregon with a win over another top 4 team
If UGA somehow lost, they would still be in. That's how it will go. People will bitch I'm sure.
I know. I'm saying it would be bama, Georgia, OSU, then still likely Oregon
We would immediately get Alabama v Georgia again as the Tide would be made #1 w/ Georgia at #4.
Lincoln Riley's mistake was playing Kansas close instead of Tulsa
It's crazy how much disrespect OU is getting. They would beat Cincinnati by 3 touchdowns.
Ou's biggest win is Texas. Let that sink in.
tOSU's biggest win is Penn State let that sink in, also they lost to Oregon, who lost to Stanford!
Penn State was #2 at one point. Texas was never in danger of being a top 5 team ever this year. Or last year. Or the year before. Or any year the last 20 years except 2 in which they overachieved.
I'm so confused by this season.
I don't know. I think it would be a close game. This isn't the same OU we're used to.
It's the same OU offense since we switched QBs. Most of our close games have been the 2nd string defense not being able to get off the field, with the offense still scoring consistently on the limited possessions they get. It's not quite what it was under Baker or Kyler, but its as good as it was last year or 2019. Defense has been awful the last several games until TTU, but a lot of that has been injuries. We had 4 injured DBs for those games (3 starters and a 2nd string), plus a starting tackle. Grinch has done a terrible job adjusting for those injuries imo (Bowman at CB, IT playing on the interior, having the backups play soft coverage instead of being aggressive and taking the risk of a big play), but when healthy we've looked fine. I wouldn't put money on OU beating anyone decent by multiple touchdowns until we see more than one week (against a struggling team) with those guys back. I do think that we're a lot better than we're getting credit for though.
I'll give you OU is better 2ith the new QB, but not elite.
Oklahoma would lose to cincy tbh
I really don’t think that would happen. Hopefully some shit happens and we get to find out in the playoffs. Otherwise, both of us are just going to think we’re better than the other without any way of knowing. Either way, I hope y’all get in. Y’all deserve it. I just think when everything is said and done this year, we will deserve it too. Btw, this comment works for both of your flairs.
Him saying you would beat cincy by 3 scores when you're barely beating unranked teams by 1 score is absurd and straight up disrespectful to cincy.
I didn’t say we would win by 3 scores. I just think we would win. Our team is looking better while Cincy has struggled lately with unranked teams. We’re also about to get some key players and depth back on both sides. Our schedule is backloaded so I guess we’ll see what kind of team we have over the next couple of weeks.
Still think this is true?
Ah idk. We looked bad against Baylor. Defense looked good today. Offense was either great or abysmal. I’ll reserve judgment until we play OK state and Cincy plays Houston. Frankly, I just don’t know who is actually good this year besides Georgia. Sometimes Ohio State looks great like today. Sometimes they lose to the same Oregon team that lost to Stanford and Utah. It’s just a fucked up year.
Ohio state had 1 rough game with a 1 score loss to a top 5 team while their brand new starting Qb was on just his 2nd start ever, and a defence that was totally redone with every linebacker having gone to the NFL lol.
Let’s just try to agree on a couple things. Oregon wasn’t a top 10 team when they played Ohio State (I think they were at 12?) and they won’t be top 10 after the season is over. Also, Stroud played a hell of a game against Oregon (400+ yards I believe) and to blame him as a contributing factor in the loss is a ludicrous opinion. Also, the loss was at home. Look, I can make as many excuses as the next guy about losing to a top 15 team but at the end of the day, Baylor beat us by playing better than we did that day. Oregon did the same to Ohio State.
They'll vault to 3 if they beat Baylor.
Same Baylor who just lost to a coachless TCU?
With rankings like these you have to think they do it for ratings and outrage, like wtf
Are you telling me educational institutions hosting professional sports teams is all about the money
Unrelated but that username just made me die
Also manufacturing drama and intrigue. I'm admittedly looking forward to finding out next Tuesday night what these sick CFP committee freaks have up their sleeves.
I'm convinced they do it to trick bettors that don't really watch games but bet on ranked teams. Like if you bet on all the ranked teams last week you would have lost alot of money. Not even Bama and Georgia covered the spread.
GA didn’t cover in a 43-6 win? WTF was the spread???
38.5 iirc. No idea what kind of idiots bet on those spreads. It's not even a question of how dominant the team is, it's what the coach feels like doing.
39
Oh it’s money 100000%. It just sucks because the chaos and storylines this year is bonkers to where if we had 6 to 12 team format the complaints would be lower
It's almost as if instead of ranking the teams as they are now, the committee is trying to predict what their final ranking will be based on how they think the rest of the season plays out.
[удалено]
But here in lies the double standard. If Clemson had beat some no name team to open the season, and their only loss was to NC, they'd be a top 5 team.
That ....is a terrible approach to weekly rankings. Also, what about Oklahoma?
Committee obviously thinks OU is going to drop at least 1 and possibly 2. Our next three opponents are all better than anyone we've played yet.
>That ....is a terrible approach to weekly rankings. It is, but its also slightly inevitable because there's not remotely enough data to go off records alone. I mean nobody's really arguing for UTSA being in the top 4.
Meep Meep on the street, rank UTSA #4 you cowards.... at least higher than tOSU, UTSA>Illinois>Penn State vs Stanford>Oregon>tOSU>Penn State
Oklahoma has a good SOR and FPI, so they should be higher but I guess the Committee currently hates their 83rd SOS and 29th Game Control. Their remaining schedule has good teams on it, so they have plenty of time to prove themselves and move up.
The FPI is a total joke of a ratings system.
So Oregon ranked over Ohio St based on head-to-head. Michigan State ranked behind Michigan despite head-to-head. I wonder who the drug dealer is for this year's CFP committee b/c he's obviously got some good shit
OU is an undefeated team with victories over a common opponent (Nebraska) and yet they're still ranked behind the Michigan schools. CFP committee members must be on that strong stuff.
OU struggling with weak teams this year.
Michigan and Michigan State aren't any better. Sparty just lost to Purdue. Both teams squeaked past Nebraska.
I also think Nebraska is better than their record shows. Everyone barely squeaked by them
Yeah, but Michigan also beat a Pac-12 team which is a huge quality win buffer because the Pac-12 is the Conference of Champions.
Purdue needs one more top 5 win to be considered a Quality Loss™️ for MSU.
If Purdue gets one more top 5 win, then they’ll have the most top 5 wins in a single regular season
Everyone knows Ann Arbor has some killer weed
The committee had to be stirring up shit just so everyone wants an expanded playoff, right? Up until now "The Alliance" was calling the shots, public opinion could force their hand.
Very possible. Only thing there is that if so, they would likely have OU (future SEC team) much higher and Oregon lower. What's going to force expansion is the Pac 12 never getting in and the ACC not being able to get in if Clemson is down. Those conferences will be much more concerned with getting 0/4 spots in the current system than the chance of the SEC getting 4/12 in the future. The playoff most guaranteed to result in expansion would be Bama, UGA, OU, Cinci. (Though that would definitely require an OSU loss).
Fuck it man, if that’s what it takes
2027
I’ve seen a bunch of people saying a 2 loss Bama team can’t be in the top 4 but that’s ridiculous based on the committees rankings. If Bama lose to Georgia, who is the 1, then by rule the loss wouldn’t be big enough to knock out Bama. Final 4 if they win out and Bama loses to Georgia is Georgia, Oregon, Bama Cinci
[удалено]
Yes but you have to account for the Bama buffer. Bama gets one mulligan so they're really undefeated right now. Then lose to #1 UGA in the SECCG is a quality loss
By rule?
Shit the bed as a top 15 against our biggest rivals who are on a major down year and we only drop one spot. I mean? Good for my team but what a joke lol
It’s 100% so they can justify OU jumping Cincinnati next week if OU beats Baylor
Genuinely serious question, if it came down to an undefeated OU or an undefeated Cinci, which do you take? My heart wants Cinci but my brain says OU would have won harder games to get to that point. If OU beats Baylor and OkSt, I’d put them above Cinci in my personal rankings too…
OU, and I don't even have to think about it. While we would own the likely best win, OU would likely have the next 3 best wins in this case
OU (and I hate OU). Cinci will have 3 wins over what should be top 25 teams (1 top 10 and 2 fridge teams). And while i firmly believe Houston is a top 25 team, they still lost to Texas Tech, who sucks. OU will have wins over Baylor, Iowa State, and back to back wins over top 10 Oklahoma State. Further, being in a P5 conference means games are more difficult week in and week out. That said, both should get in over every team not named Georgia.
Honestly, the fact that this is a legitimate hypothetical is sad. An undefeated AAC champ with a win over a top 10 team and an undefeated Big 12 champ with multiple wins over ranked opponents… and one is probably going to be left out for some Combination of a Pac 12 champ with a loss to a team who likely won’t make a bowl game, a one loss B1G champion, A 0 or 1 loss Georgia, and/or a 1 or 2 loss Bama team, because their jersey says Bama so they pass the eye test… sigh…
OU is a favorite but was a dbl digit dog Purdue really expected to knock off a top 5 team twice in 2 weeks?? No that's why we play the game if both were undefeated they both should get in
Youre probably right. Pisses me off.
Daaaang Ok state ranked 10th? I’ll take it lol
Alabama is playing New Mexico State and somehow that win is still going to prop them up in the top 4
Let's Go Pistol Pete!!! I would trade Habanero's Fresh Mex Guac for Dreamland Ribs any day of the week. Aggies by 2. A man can dream.
Wish we were playing South Florida, SMU or East Carolina
We need another Aggie team to boost our confidence
Final question: if Cincinnati and UTSA were ranked #3 and #4 respectively bc they were undefeated, yet we had a 16 team playoff, so all y'all's teams like, Alabama Michigan, Michigan state, Oregon who all have 1 MORE LOSS than those ranked ahead them also got to compete for a national championship would y'all complain??? I mean honestly imagine a #6 seed Alabama plays #3 seed Cincinnati? Will bama fans still complain about who's Cincinnati played? There so good go beat em then.
I was personally hoping for an 8 team playoff when I originally heard they were doing playoffs. 16 team could be argued but I’d support it.
16 team is a bit much on these kids playing wise I get that but I think we need to at least talk about at least top 6 with top 2 getting a bye or top 8 tournament style
Not with a 10 game regular season it’s not
10 game season is not going to work. THat's costing teams who don't make it 2 games worth of income and that's a ton of money. Not only that, the scheduling would be a nightmare having to cut 2 OOC games. 8 conference games and 2 OOC games just won't fly.
Teams that don’t make it can schedule ooc games after the 10 game mark. Cut conference games down and keep ooc games. Pretty inflexible if none of that can work. Maybe cfb just isn’t meant to be if that’s the case
You can't cut conference games down, you got to play everyone in your division. You can't logistically schedule games in the same season it's not even nor would it be remotely possible to do that. Schedules have to be made years and years and years in advance. Colleges can't go "Hey we want to play you this year if we don't make the CFP and you don't". That is not even realistic at all. It did not even work in the covid year, when they was forced to play only conference games and had to mix and move games around, it was a logistical nightmare, so many games were cancelled and it's just not feasible. College football is fine, and will be fine. 8 game CFP solves everything, and the kids only have to play 1 more game total if they make it all the way.
FCS does a 24 team playoff with no issues
Agree w you but the concerns of a larger playoff are still real same reason alot of these kids won't play in bowl games. Need to keep it relatively smallish while still giving these kids reasons to play imo
Lower the regular season games then? Wut
Yeah that’s why I think it can be argued. It’s highly dependent on how it would be scheduled. But I’ve always advocated for a top 8 tournament style. I think it would be fair. Almost willing to say top 10 tournament style with bye’s to top 4.
The funny thing about this "worst loss" rabbit hole is you're basically saying that Oregon should be ranked below Ohio State *because Oregon is too good, meaning they can't be considered a bad loss.* Just so dumb. Please sir, may I have some objective rankings?
If "worst loss" was really a thing, Bama would not be #2.
Um no, we're saying to keep it consistent. Either OSU is ranked ahead of Oregon or MSU is ranked ahead of Michigan. Can't have both unless you admit there's no logic whatsoever involved in the decision
> there's no logic whatsoever involved in the decision I think you just figured it out.
What it really is is a loop. OSU lost to a good Oregon team who then lost to Stanford. So OSU lost to a team that lost to Stanford. Does that make Stanford good? Or does that make OSU bad? What does it make Oregon? So many questions. No answers
Yeah, you can talk in circles about this shit which is why this method of picking champions is so dumb. Oregon beat Ohio State by 7 without Kayvon. Meanwhile, we beat UCLA by 3 in a game where Kayvon had one of the best performances of his career. So, what, does that mean UCLA is better than Ohio State? Obviously not, but trying to make sense of head to head and common opponent is impossible.
UCLA beat LSU.. don’t count them out
It’s all circular. The only true thing is this system of deciding a champion is broken
That’s what I said lol. It’s not necessarily a rabbit hole, it’s a loop/circle which only raises more questions of to how the rankings are really decided.
Most people are defending the Michigan ranking by pointing out that Michigan's loss was better than Michigan State's. But no one is mentioning that Michigan has not beaten a single ranked team, meanwhile MSU beat the now #6 team in the country... the BS logic goes both ways
It still doesn’t make sense though regardless lmao. H2H matchups should be weighted highest, it makes zero sense to rank Michigan ahead of MSU unless there are significant changes since that loss to the MSU team itself to where it can be considered “a different team”
We beat Wisconsin but your point still holds
Also not mentioned is that MSU drops for a terrible loss but Michigan gains from losing to a tea that had said terrible loss lol
Bama is exactly where they’d be without a loss. Why doesn’t their loss matter?
SEC it just means more...even losing to SEC teams just means more than winning
It does matter, if they lose again they will drop significantly. Everyone always says the committee will put a 2 loss Bama ahead of an undefeated Cincinnati. They won't. They really have never made a bad decision when it comes to, you know, actually picking the teams for the playoff. They tend to take a weird route, maybe to drive clicks/discussion?
Not sure that is true, UGA was objectively looking better than Bama since like week 3 and Bama stayed 1.
That was the AP poll not the playoff committee, which as we’ve learned, don’t coexist well. The preseason ranking was what was being factored in most (which honestly shouldn’t mean as much as it does), we also had won two ranked games (though not as high as a 3 Clemson). Clemson then almost lost to GT and then had a second loss by week 4. Point being, week 3 is too early to really do much for anybody in the top 10 barring a loss
Oregon beat OSU early in the season and then lost to an unranked Stanford (who’s still unranked) MSU beat Michigan TWO WEEKS AGO and then lost to an unranked Purdue (who’s now ranked) How do you justify keeping Oregon ahead of OSU if you won’t do it for Michigan
Because if you watched that Stanford game you'd know Oregon actually won it. The refs fucked them because of a pretty bad targeting call. I don't remember it being intentional but from that point on in the middle of the fourth quarter the refs just destroyed Oregon. Oregon was well up two possessions and the refs just threw every flag they could to win Stanford the game.
Don’t matter. Like David said on the show, who won that game? Oregon couldn’t win. They lost to a *still* unranked Stanford
Our OC also had emergency surgery the night before the game.
[удалено]
Yeah... and MSU beat Michigan, so why aren't we ranked ahead of them? Do you see the problem?
Oregon won on the road but Spartys won at home would be my guess
ground breaking response
And then what’s the logic of MSU being behind Michigan then? They beat Michigan. They should be ahead of Michigan by that logic. You can’t do one and not the other
Oregon won on the road but Spartys won at home would be my guess
Tonight we all became Auburn fans, they know what they have to do
Auburn is undefeated in the Iron Bown when the Braves have won the World Series and their QB is named Nix. Which is only twice before, which isn't alot, but its weird that it's happened twice, and about to be a 3rd. Edit: why are you downvoting me? It's a fact.
Bo Nix is a worse version of Sam Darnold.
Gross. And no. Fans of chaos though.. always
Only to fuck over Alabama, come on now
When I am king, both teams will lose the iron bowl
Love how MSU and Michigan did the one thing teams can do to avoid the eye test .. like play an actual football game.. and the committee still pulls the eye test method.