|
Replies: 7
| visibility 1252
|
Walk-On [147]
TigerPulse: 100%
11
|
CFP and final rankings
Jan 12, 2017, 9:08 AM
|
|
I realize that the CFP has only been around 3 years but... in my opinion, the Playoff system is designed to allow the top 4 teams, at the end of the season, to battle it out on the field. With this system, you will have 4 teams, two of which will lose the only game they play, no matter what the matchups are, one team advances and the other does not. Since a committee choses the matchups and the rankings, it could have easily been Clemson versus Alabama in the semi-final games. I think we all agree that those were the best two teams in the league this season. Also, in the end, 3 of the 4 teams will end the season with a loss. (9unlike lesser bowl matchups where one must win and the other lose a "one-and-done" bowl game)
So.... what are your thoughts on final rankings? I feel like 1-4 should remain in the top 4 regardless of winning or losing. Some team, on the outside looking in should not be ranked in the final rankings above any of the final 4. Did USC play and beat a top-4 team? no. Does Oklahoma deserve to be ranked ahead of tOSU just because they were beat by the eventual National Champion?
Again, I know that the final rankings don't mean much but IMO, you chose the final 4 and they battle it out for 1,2,3 and 4 spots. Everyone else is on the outside, looking in!
|
|
|
|
 |
Orange Blooded [2332]
TigerPulse: 100%
32
|
Re: CFP and final rankings
Jan 12, 2017, 9:11 AM
|
|
Interesting points.
Go Tigers!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3573]
TigerPulse: 100%
34
|
i think the pollsters do take matchups into account
Jan 12, 2017, 9:31 AM
|
|
Ohio State only fell 3 spots for getting steamrolled. The only way they only fall from 3 to 6 is to take into account they lost to the eventual #1.
USC got a bump because of beating a top 10 Penn St.
Oklahoma is confusing because they won big, but they didn't really beat a top quality opponent. Solid win but not enough to jump a team that whooped them earlier in the year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [310]
TigerPulse: 97%
15
|
I disagree. Ohio State didn't look like they belong.
Jan 12, 2017, 9:34 AM
|
|
I think if the first round games had been switched and we played Alabama first and Ohio State beats Washington but then the Natty comes out the same as the Fiesta bowl did I wouldn't think you would say Ohio State was #2 in that case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Phenom [14959]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 24052
Joined: 2004
|
How do you know somebody else would've looked they belonged
Jan 12, 2017, 9:35 AM
|
|
on the field against us? We might've beaten some other teams by 30 that night too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Phenom [14959]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 24052
Joined: 2004
|
IMO 1-4 should stay 1-4. OSU dropping behind Oklahoma
Jan 12, 2017, 9:35 AM
|
|
in one of the final polls was completely ridiculous. OSU lost to the national champs, Oklahoma beat an 8-4 team in the Sugar Bowl. Lets not forget OSU beat OU 42-21 on their own field..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [147]
TigerPulse: 100%
11
|
Re: IMO 1-4 should stay 1-4. OSU dropping behind Oklahoma
Jan 12, 2017, 3:13 PM
|
|
That's my point exactly. You can't say that because the #2 team beat the #3 team, but #7 beat #5, #7 is better because they won their game.
I just think 1-4 should stay 1-4 and the games define the final order. All I know is CLEMSON is in the #1 spot!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4506]
TigerPulse: 100%
36
|
Agree 100%.***
Jan 12, 2017, 9:38 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 7
| visibility 1252
|
|
|
50
