College Playoff hypothetical

[CarolinaBuff]

That 3-0 mark for Ohio State is not correct - they are only 2-0 against the current AP top 25

 

[CarolinaBuff]

Although it's unlikely one of the more interesting scenarios would be if Ohio State and OU both lose. Then if UGA loses as expected who would be the 4th team? Bama, Clemson, and ND would be the obvious top 3.

The Big 12, B1G, and P12 champs would all have at least 3 losses and a 3-loss team isn't getting in. That leaves OU, tOSU, UGA, Michigan, and WSU with 2 losses. WSU and Michigan aren't realistic candidates in this scenario, so that leave tOSU, OU, and UGA. Or would this open the door for a UCF bid?

If this scenario played out I think Georgia should be the 4th team, however the committee has stated they try to avoid rematches in the semi's, let alone a rematch in back-to-back weeks.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

Although it's unlikely one of the more interesting scenarios would be if Ohio State and OU both lose. Then if UGA loses as expected who would be the 4th team? Bama, Clemson, and ND would be the obvious top 3.

The Big 12, B1G, and P12 champs would all have at least 3 losses and a 3-loss team isn't getting in. That leaves OU, tOSU, UGA, Michigan, and WSU with 2 losses. WSU and Michigan aren't realistic candidates in this scenario, so that leave tOSU, OU, and UGA. Or would this open the door for a UCF bid?

If this scenario played out I think Georgia should be the 4th team, however the committee has stated they try to avoid rematches in the semi's, let alone a rematch in back-to-back weeks.

That’s about the only scenario in which UCF has a shot and unfortunately, without Milton, there would always be an asterisk next to the beating they would take from Alabama.

 

[Buffnik]

That’s about the only scenario in which UCF has a shot and unfortunately, without Milton, there would always be an asterisk next to the beating they would take from Alabama.

If they got through Memphis, which is about 50/50 this week.

They also lose, we'll be talking about whether UW or UT with 3 losses and a conference championship is more worthy than a 2-loss team that just got beat.

 

[manhattanbuff]

That’s about the only scenario in which UCF has a shot and unfortunately, without Milton, there would always be an asterisk next to the beating they would take from Alabama.

Even if they beat memphis, the committee leaves them out because they’re without Milton.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

Even if they beat memphis, the committee leaves them out because they’re without Milton.

Probably. UCF would be a prime example of deserving vs best.

 

[manhattanbuff]

Probably. UCF would be a prime example of deserving vs best.

I just remember personnel being a factor in how the committee evaluates marginal teams.

 

[Ralfie]

I think they should take into account whether or not teams are strong enough to tie Oregon State as of the end of regulation. Eventually losing is kinda not relevant to committee deliberations.

 

[hawg1]

How do you differentiate between "best" and "most deserving"? Give me a real world scenario.

Conference champions as AQ is a most deserving model. They deserve to be in the playoff, but may not be the best team. There might be three teams in another conference better than them.

Three teams from one conference is a best model (if that’s what the data say).

 

[hawg1]

I think I'd define "best" as the 4 teams that Vegas and other experts would favor over anyone else.

"Most deserving" would be if a team like CU in 2016 had held on to beat Michigan or come back to beat USC and then finished it off by getting the win against Washington. Not a team that anyone thought was the most talented or would favor against any other team in the Top 10 of the rankings but would have been one of the 4 teams that had the season that was most deserving of a playoff berth.

Vegas:

UGA over OU by 6; tOSU by 7

OU over tOSU by 1.

Clemson over ND by 11-13.

 

[hawg1]

That's fair. An undefeated or 1 loss conference champ of a very mediocre conference could be most deserving but not one of the best. I'm trying to think of a specific example as things stand this year that would apply. Assuming chalk in the CCGs, I have a hard time distinguishing between who are the "best" 4 and who are the most "deserving" 4 between OU, ND, Clemson, Bama, and tOSU.

UGA would be favored over three of those teams that you list, even if they lose to Bama.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

UGA would be favored over three of those teams that you list, even if they lose to Bama.

So Vegas’ favorites should be the determining factor?

The problem with this argument of deserving vs best is that teams across conferences don’t play by the same rules.

 

[steph]

Yep. And the biggest benefit of 8 teams is that it's much better if a committee has some controversy and gets #8 or maybe even #7 wrong versus a committee getting #4 and maybe #3 wrong.

In addition, if P5 conference championship winners get an automatic bid, in reality you would have up to 13 teams in the playoff; the 10 P5 teams playing in their conference championship, plus 3 wildcard teams. If some conferences have traditionally weak divisions, maybe they need to think about realigning divisions to achieve more parity so you don’t have three 1 or 2 loss teams in one division and a 4 loss champion of the other division.

 

[hawg1]

So Vegas’ favorites should be the determining factor?

The problem with this argument of deserving vs best is that teams across conferences don’t play by the same rules.

Yes. I would like to see Vegas Power Ratings used by the Committee.