Alright, alright, alright (McConaughey voice) Tennessee is building a stout future defense, with the youngsters we have in the program now, and these #'s continuing to come in with this class. And all you have to do is look at Tennessee's D-line improvement over the last year and a half to know that Pruitt and this staff can really develop defensive players. Future looking bright in Knoxville!
Jones is a fine coach for a mid-tier/group of 5 team. Just not good enough to succeed in the SEC, which is true of a lot of coaches around the country.
All the SEC teams have flaws. I feel like this is not going to be a 7/8 sec teams in the ncaa tourney type of year...maybe 5 or 6.
Neither total yards or points are the best judges of an offense, imo, because yards can depend on how many plays you're running, and points allowed is also tied to offense and special teams. So I feel like Yards per play is the best single stat. Notre Dame is at 6.2 yards, which ties for 21st in the country. They also played a harder than average schedule, so I would call them top 20. They actually have better offensive efficiency than Florida.
The problem with purely talking about the "best teams" is that that is entirely subjective. Let's be honest, there's people in the SEC who think the 4 "best teams" all play in the SEC. Alabama fans tend to think theyre automatically one of the 4 best teams no matter what. In spite of what the committee says, I think it's more about resume, data, and the 4 most deserving teams. And that's the way it should be. Nobody can agree on the "best" teams. We all have bias.
Notre Dame has a top 20 offense, too. Outside of that, you're right. Nobody has seen UGA v an "elite" offense.
I'm really not the only person defending the rankings. A lot of people absolutely agree with them. What's confusing is when people say things are jokes or clown shows, and then they can't give one legitimate reason to support that. The purpose of using computer rankings is based on the constant complaint of "bias" by the committee. Computers have no bias, and they have many of the same conclusions, such as Wisconsin and Penn St. in the top 10, Ohio St. #1. It's hard to argue Ohio St. is only #1 because of committee "bias", when the most non-biased determinants out there have Ohio St. #1, too. In fact, it doesnt make sense. A lot of claims here of what's dumb or biased, but almost zero logic or evidence to actually back those claims up. Just a lot of assumption and preconceptions.
"It matters not that they were conference opponents," Completely disagree. The guy is arguing against the Big ten because he says Ohio St dominates and no one is anywhere close. If 2 middle tier Big 10 teams beat Ohio St. in the last 3 years, that logically weakens that whole argument. There's honestly no way that the Big 10 will ever get actual respect from some SEC fans, because there's always some excuse no matter what. First, its the Big 10 sucks because no one can beat Ohio St. But then when its pointed out teams do beat Ohio St., it becomes "oh those teams are bad, it doesnt matter". There is literally no way to convince some people. It's like modern politics.
"Those shouldn’t be too 10 teams. The committee put them there to fool people just like you." The committee put them there because they are actually looking at the data. I'm a data and list nerd,and I make my own poll before the committee puts anything out. I have Penn St. and Wisconsin both in the top 10, just like the computers do, based on results and data. All your arguments are opinion, with little to no supporting data or evidence at all.
"These aren’t the same committee members. This group is a clown show." Clown show? Based on what?
"Idk how you can say the Big 10 is top heavy without saying the same about the SEC. Past the top 5 SEC teams this year the SEC is garbage." You're right on again. They say it because they can't be objective.
Ohio St. would have been in the playoffs the last 2 years if they had not played the extra 9th game. Those were the games they actually lost.
"It’s just a media poll voted on by biased members of the media who value brand names over on-feld performance." Exactly. Bias comes from people voting in polls, not computers. I also have no idea what the AP/Coaches rankings are right now, because you're 100% right. Theyre meaningless.
"They care. They definitely care" No, the computers absolutely do not care. And again, Over 90% of them have Ohio St. #1. All they care about our data. The computers, again they don't care, claim Ohio St. had the #7 toughest schedule in the country. And if you put your anti-big10 bias away and actually looked at the schedule, you could see why. Your argument is purely based on opinion and perception.
Because Yeldon went out of bounds with one second. No timeout necessary. In the final 2 minutes, when a player goes out of bounds, the clock stops and doesnt restart until the ball is snapped. When a player gets a first down in bounds (like Auburn), the clock only stops til the ball is reset. Not the same situation. False equivalency.
" I trust a computer more than these bozos on the “committee”." What is it that you're calling the committee bozos for? If it's because you think Ohio St. shouldnt be #1, you should realize that out of the over 100 computer rankings compiled on Massey's site, over 90% of them have Ohio St. #1.
You're right. And they won't put the #1 team in a situation where the opponent is closer geographically. Utah n Oklahoma are both much closer to AZ than Ohio St. If Ohio St. gets the #1, they will definitely be in Atlanta, imo.
I think the writer's done a pretty good job here. I'm also of the opinion that Oregon will beat Utah, and have already laid my $ down on the Ducks +7 I feel like a Utah loss would drop them farther than the writer says, tho. If they have 2 losses and zero top 25 wins, I think they fall back behind Auburn and Alabama, and possibly Wisconsin if they play Ohio St. somewhat tough. I think there's a good chance, then, that the SEC will get that 4th team in the big 6, and likely Auburn in the Cotton v Memphis. That would be great, because as a Tennessee fan, I would love to be back in the Outback against a tough opponent.
I heard another writer say that that won't happen because Texas AM is deadset against it. I honestly dont know if that's true or not, but that would suck. Because you're right, it lines up perfectly for that matchup to happen, and it should.
I wouldnt mind seeing Utah there...but they dont have a top 25 win, still. Will have just 1 after Friday if they win. I think the Oklahoma/Baylor winner deserves it more, unless Utah just really crushes Oregon and the Big 12 title game is real tight.
1. This is the 2019 College football playoff. Previous years are completely irrelevant. 2. Saying teams have more "talent" and "depth" are comments affected by perception. I'm an SEC person, myself, but the majority of SEC people do not give the Big 10 the credit it deserves, at all. 3. Since the CFP started, the Big 10 has had just as many different teams as the SEC...2. 4. Ohio St. has been kept out of the last 2 because they were beaten by lower Big 10 teams...handily. As in, they were kept out by their own conference. 5. Michigan has been the #7 team according to ESPN's SP+ in the CFP era. Take away Ohio St. and they would likely have been in at least 2 playoffs. 6. Michigan, Ohio St., Michigan St., Penn St., Wisconsin have all finished within the top 10 in the last 5 years. If you're finishing in the top 10, to me, that certainly seems like competing at a high level.
Ha, now youre clearly just trolling. But i'll bite.. "Ohio state has been more complete against who? Non ranked teams?" I guess you're unaware that Ohio St. has wins over 4 ranked opponents (2 in the top 10) by an average of 27.5 points.
Not nonsense at all. They don't care about any of that. Ohio St. is #1 because they think they are the best team, period. They do have a tougher schedule and better wins than almost any SEC fan is willing to admit on here, and theyve been incredibly dominant all the way. Computer rankings arent perfect, of course...but they have zero bias or concern for any of these things many of you talk about. On Massey they have rankings from over 100 computers. ALL BUT 9 OF THEM have Ohio St. #1. They don't care about team names, they don't care about conferences, or any of that crap. It's just data. Like I said, computer rankings arent perfect, but it should prove these explanations regarding motives and bias that people have are ludicrous. Again, computers are unaware of any of that crap, they just have data.
You all really gotta quit with the conspiracy crap. There is absolutely nothing to show in the first 5 years that this committee has any bias against the SEC whatsoever. Ohio St. above LSU is the right call. There's a reason pretty much every computer has Ohio St. has #1. Computers don't have bias and don't care who is who. Why is there "no reason" Wisconsin or PSU is ahead of UF, Auburn, or Bama?? Personally, I have both PSU and Wisconsin ahead of both Bama and Auburn purely based on data and resume. That's what counts, not the pre-conceived perceptions of conference homers.
garbage. Their schedule strengths are pretty close, if youre not basing things on preconceived perception, and Ohio St. has been more dominant and complete. There's a reason Ohio St. is #1 in like every computer poll. When you say blanket stuff like Penn St., Michigan, Wisconsin are nothing "close" to Alabama, Auburn, or Georgia, you have zero to back that up, other than your own perception and bias. Thankfully, the committee doesnt operate based on extreme SEC fan bias.
Actually, I'm pretty sure that has all changed in the last few years. I believe it's still true for only the Rose, and even the Rose has stated they will tend to go with the higher ranked.
Don't see Georgia falling behind Florida, especially since UGA won on a neutral field. But, Florida should be in the Orange Bowl, and that's pretty darn good.
Bowl games are in warmer sites because they need to draw fans. People will travel to Florida in January, Minnesota not so much. As far as an advantage, I dont really think its much of one. The weather is no factor, it's not like its hot in January. And when it comes specifically to like Florida bowls, SEC fans generally get there the same way other fans do...by plane.
Just for kicks...lets do the same with the SEC. Yes, I believe the list will look a bit better for the SEC, but it may not be as big a difference as one might think. This only counts what has already happened.. a) LSU - at Texas, GA Southern, Utah St., NW Louisiana b) Georgia - Notre Dame*, Murray st, arkansas st c) Alabama - Duke, W. Carolina, Southern Miss, N Mex St. d) Florida - Miami, Towson, Tn-Martin e) Auburn - Oregon*, Tulane, Samford, Kent f) Texas AM - at Clemson (L), Texas St., Lamar, UT-San Antonio g) Tennessee - Ga St. (L!), BYU (L), UAB, Chattanooga h) Kentucky - E. Michigan, TN Martin, Toledo Not much better than what you listed, if at all, frankly. Big 10 actually has more wins over current top 25 teams.
It must depend what rankings. I'm not sure what the playoff uses, but I tend to look at the Massey computer aggregates, and they have San Diego St. lower. Looking at the Aztec results, I will say their defense does seem pretty good, even relative to the schedule. So i can buy them having a quality defense, but yeah, 6 would seem high.