street0123

The NFL only needs to see 1 year of quality play and upside potential from a college QB with solid measurables to make them a top round pick. Fields would have been a better QB if he had waited and learned at UGA, The QB room at UGA is set-up pretty well for the next several years, if those QB's use their time to improve their skills and hone their talents.

Last year was CKS first top 10 offense and UGA won the NC. On average under CKS Georgia has fielded top 10 defense but the offense has only been top 35 and UGA has come up just short of the CFP or NC. I think the offense will need to be top 10 again this year to get back to the CFP and NC.

Under coach Smart UGA has averaged giving up 16 pts/gm which would place them as a top 10 defense every year for the past 6 years. However, averages are just that and CKS has fielded the following defenses ranked by ESPN for pts/gm. 2016 40th 2017 4th 2018 16th 2019 2nd 2020 16th 2021 1st So yeah, I can see the 2022 UGA defense giving up about 16-20 pts/gm but still finishing ranked in the top 15. It's the offense that needs to come around and get to the 40 pts/gm range if UGA wants to get back to the CFP.

Hmm, using the stats published by ESPN CKS defense has averaged giving up 16.1 points per game and that includes his worst defense in 2016 through his best in 2021's D. So, if UGA can simply meet the average then they will be another top 10 scoring defense. Where UGA has underperformed has been as a scoring offense. The UGA average scoring offense under CKS is 33.5 pts/game which, on average, would rank about 31st. The defense is going to be a top 10 D but if UGA wants to win another NC the offense has got to advance inside the top 20.

Smaller running QB's get hurt in the SEC and if Stetson loses his starting job this year it will be because he gets hurt and Beck comes in and does well. Just like SB and JT last year, if Beck is doing a solid job of running the team and winning games CKS will not make a change back to SB when he gets back from injury.

So how does someone get classified as a booster? If you were classified/identified as a booster a couple of years ago, can you do or not do something that removes such designation going forward? I think NIL is going to end up costing universities athletic endowments and contributions which are then split by the university to their various athletic programs. NIL allows a former doner/contributor/booster to target the specific player or athletic performance that they want to reward and spend their money on.

Hmm, UGA may have thin experienced depth at DB but their starting slate looks pretty good if Tykee Smith (an All-American DB) can return from last seasons injury. Tykee paired with Ringo combined with the returning Super Senior Smith, along with the experienced Jackson and Poole, I think UGA starters may be pretty good.

Hilarious, all of these people posting that UGA shouldn't have gotten in the CFP because they lost the SEC Championship. Same people who were upset Alabama got in without even playing in the SEC Championship in 2018. Both years the best team won the title, do these people posting want a the best teams to play for the title or just other teams which aren't as good?

Hilarious, like there are two other teams in the country more deserving or better than UGA and Bama. Please name these other teams if you are going to say UGA shouldn't be in the Title game, then who do you think should be? Do you want to see the best teams play for a championship or just other teams play?

I was on here telling all these UGA fanatics that Alabama was a bad match-up for UGA and I was right. I didn't think it would be because the UGA D couldn't get any effective pressure on Young. However, I did think Bama would hit big plays, UGA would not be able to run and without the play-action pass Bennett would not be able to win this game with his arm. I'm a big UGA fan but I knew this was not going to be the easy win all these other UGA fanatics were spouting off about.

A blow out win by Bama could easily leave UGA out of the CFP, and Bama has the offense to do it and the UGA offense has turned the ball over.

16 team playoff is best, every P5 division winner plus 3 set-aside for G5 champions and independent teams. Let the conferences decide who is their #1 & #2 teams. Each P5 conference hosts a 1st round CFP game instead of their conference championship with that conference #1 vs a #2 from another p5 conference. The CFP Cmte gets to select 3 at-large teams but those teams have to travel for their 1st round game to face the G5 & Independent teams with automatic selections. Win your division and conference and get into the playoffs, no opinion polls required. No reason for conference realignment, no reason for top recruits to only choose from 3 or 4 playoff potential teams. Using the conference championship games as 1st round venues allows a 16 team CFP field to complete with only 4 teams playing 1 additional game and no changes to the existing semifinals and finals.

Cincy has a joke of a schedule, only 2 wins against P5 conference teams, every other top 10 team has at least 7 wins over P5 teams this season. Cincy has earned 7 wins against P5 conference teams in total over the last 6 years, there is no reason to consider them for the CFP. Yes they do have 11 wins this year against FBS teams but those teams have a combined losing record and the only other top 10 team who has accumulated their wins against FBS teams with a combined losing record, yep Notre Dame. Co-dependency anyone?

This is a bad match-up for UGA, very much like the Clemson game only Bama has significant offensive ability. UGA will not be able to run the ball and that will negate the play-action pass, and without play-action Bennett doesn't excel.

The statistical rankings will not matter, UGA will not be able to implement an effective play-action passing scheme because they will not be able to run the ball against Bama. Young's arm talent and mobility will allow the Tide WR's to get over the top of the UGA secondary. Auburn sacked Young like 10 times yet he still connected when he had to and won that game. Without the benefit of play-action and under pressure, Bennett has not been able to do anything like this.

UGA has to limit the deep pass routes and get a solid pass rush into Young's face every play or they will get behind and UGA doesn't have the offense to play from behind in the 2nd half. If Bennett can stay away from turnovers then UGA should play this like they did the Clemson game and just work for field position and kick field goals. Bennett will not get any benefit from the play-action passing scheme because UGA will not have much of a running game to speak of.

Just as Ohio State was a perfect match-up against Michigan State, Alabama matches up perfectly to defeat UGA. Bama is better against the run than the vaunted Georgia D, so UGA is not going to be successful running the ball. That means Bennett needs to be successful passing the ball without the benefit of play-action. Which is something he has not done well over his career. On the other side, Young is a mobile QB with a great arm and quick release, who can buy just enough time for his best-in-league WR's to get over the top on UGA. I'm a big UA fan but these match-ups could be really bad for Georgia.

This is going to be a very difficult game for Bennett, because the play-action passing game is not going to be there for him. Bama is tougher against the run than UGA and will lock down the UGA run game and still be able to drop players into coverage. Bennett is going to be running for his life and will throw some picks before CKS pulls him for Daniels.

UGA is not going to be able to run the ball against Bama, in fact the Bama Defense gives up fewer rushing yards per game than the vaunted UGA defense. No running game for Bennett means the play-action passing game will be useless and Bennett's passing stats drop off horribly when you take out play-action.

How much do you value some groups collective opinions and do you place more value on them today vs last week or two weeks ago? The only real measure is wins against FBS teams and the overall quality of those wins. Once you set that hierarchy you can adjust for head-to-head results, marque wins, and relative strength between conferences. You can't pick and choose between ranking criteria until you have sorted out the potential teams to consider.

UGA is the only team at this point in the season with 10 wins against FBS competition. There are 5 teams with 9 FBS wins, Ohio State, Cincinnati, Michigan, Notre Dame and UTSA. The FBS teams Georgia has beaten have a combined winning percentage (excluding their losses against UGA) of .600, while only Michigan and Notre Dame have 9 wins over teams with combined winning percentages over .500, (.524 & .563 respectively). I think the next best team at this point in the season is Wake Forrest with 8 FBS wins over teams with a combined winning percentage of .563 and don't discount the ACC, the ACC conferences record against the other P5 conferences is much better than the PAC12 (.537 to .300 respectively) and even better than the .500 record of the B12 against the other P5 conferences.

Expected game results based on each teams performance against common opponents is UGA 47-15 over UT. If UT has similar success against UGA offensively and defensively as they have had against these common foes then the final score could be UGA 37-17 and if UGA has similar success against UT offensively & defensively as they have had against these common foes then the final score could be UGA 57-13 over UT.

These are all opinion polls, even the CFP Cmte says they do their rankings based on polling (total votes) by the committee members. While I agree that opinions matter I don't think those opinions should come into play until some basic criteria have been met to achieve consideration. Leave the names of teams off and only include wins against FBS teams and the quality of FBS teams those wins have been compiled against. Then after those have been reviewed and voted on by the committee reveal the names and have the committee re-evaluate.

Actually the The Pac12 has the worse record (.300) against the other P5 Conferences and the Big10 has the best at .571. The SEC is at .545 then the ACC at .530 followed by the B12 at .500. The AAC conference that Cincy plays in has a terrible record of just .267 against the other P5 conferences.

Hmm, UT has earned 4 FBS wins against teams with a .563 combined winning percentage. (excluding results against UT). UGA has earned 9 FBS wins against teams with a .625 combined winning percentage. (excl. results against UGA) So UGA has more than 2x the FBS wins against a group of teams with an 11% better record than the teams UT has beaten. Looking at all games played not just wins, UT has faced teams who have averaged 28.7 pts/gm while UGA has faced teams who average 25.6 pts/gm so UT has faced teams with about a 12% better scoring average than those UGA has faced. But, defensively UT has faced teams who give up on average 26.3 pts/gm while UGA has faced teams who defensively are only giving up 21.7 pts/gm, so the teams UGA has faced have been about 12% lower scoring but approximately 21% better defensively.

All these people using statistics to compare the offenses that UGA has played to the UT offense mistakenly include the stats against UGA in those statistics. When you remove the UGA game stats UT will still be the highest scoring team UGA has faced at 38.2 pts/gm which is about 4% more pts/gm than Arkansas at 36.7 pts/gm. However, in Total Yards. Passing Yards & Rushing Yards per Game UT will only be the 3rd best offense that UGA has faced. On the flip side the UT defense will only be the 7th best defense that UGA has faced, better than Mizz & Vandy but not as good as any of the other teams UGA has played. I do agree that UT has played a good group of teams but the problem is that UT has only beaten 4 FBS teams and while those are good teams with a combined winning percentage of .563 UGA has won 9 FBS wins against teams with a combined winning percentage of .625. Good loses only count when you are comparing teams with similar records compiled against teams of similar quality so maybe the 3rd or 4th level comparison.

Hmm, so by your criteria let's evaluate Texas A&M and Alabama. Texas A&M has 7 wins against FBS teams with a combined winning percentage of .571 while Alabama has 6 wins against FBS teams with a combined winning percentage of .571. Texas A&M has more FBS wins against teams with comparable winning percentage and a Head-To-Head victory against Alabama. So would you rank Texas A&M over Alabama at this point in the CFP Rankings?

Hmm, it all depends on what you decide are your criteria for ranking a team. The most wins, the fewest losses, the quality of the teams hey have beaten, head-to-head results? Or do you rank teams based on who you think would beat the other or which teams have the best chance of winning the rest of their games? Do you value opinion polls and if so do you value those opinions as equally this week today as opposed to prior weeks? I choose to look at which P5 Conferences could have an undefeated champion, because there is no way the CFP Cmte is going to leave an undefeated P5 conference champion out unless there are 5 undefeated champions. This week there are only 4 teams who could become undefeated conference champions 1. UGA 2. Michigan State 3. Oklahoma 4. Wake Forrest.

How am I misinformed?

Ok, then please provide one thing wrong with this CFP format?