2016 CFP Rankings #1 Released

B1GTide said:

That is because Alabama is considered to be almost unbeatable. While every other team in the hunt has an easier road to the playoff than Alabama, none of those teams is Alabama.

Click to expand...

That and if Bama is not the SECw champs, then UF has little chance to beat LSU twice, or Awbarn, or Tamoo. Basically, the SECw champ will win the SECCG. West is best, East is least!

selmaborntidefan said:

I won't go so far as to say that the Giants were overall better BUT....

1) In week 16 of the 2007 regular season, the Giants gave the Pats all they could handle and nearly beat them (the final was 38-35 and the Giants led entering the fourth quarter). While I know the records weren't even close, the gap in the NFL is much smaller.

2) You did know the Giants were actually favored in 46, right? (I say this because I used the same argument on my brother, and he face planted me with that - I don't bet so I didn't know).

Click to expand...

1) That was the beginning of the Giants surge - when they became hot. Before that game the Giants were a very average football team and only made the playoffs because of their division. The Pats were undefeated until the Super Bowl. The Giants got hot at the right time while the Pats started to fade (peaked too soon).

2) The Giants being favored reflects the number of betters and the amount of money that those people bet, not the relative ability of the teams. The NY Giants have the most wealthy fan base in the country, and it isn't close. Add the sports wagering culture in the NY metro area and this is what you get. When the Giants are winning - well, lines are based on the money, not the teams on the field.

As long as Bama is #1, the rest doesn't matter.


Sent from my iPhone 7 Plus [emoji336] using Tapatalk

RTR91 said:

No team is going to have 100% chance to win out unless they play a bunch of FCS schools. What B1G is saying, the other teams have lower percentages because they have to face Alabama (or most likely will in Florida's case) while Alabama doesn't play Alabama.

Click to expand...

Yep, I got what he was saying.

The percentages I was showing were each team's chances of making the playoffs if each team won the rest of their games. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

B1GTide said:

1) That was the beginning of the Giants surge - when they became hot. Before that game the Giants were a very average football team and only made the playoffs because of their division. The Pats were undefeated until the Super Bowl. The Giants got hot at the right time while the Pats started to fade (peaked too soon).

2) The Giants being favored reflects the number of betters and the amount of money that those people bet, not the relative ability of the teams. The NY Giants have the most wealthy fan base in the country, and it isn't close. Add the sports wagering culture in the NY metro area and this is what you get. When the Giants are winning - well, lines are based on the money, not the teams on the field.

Click to expand...

The Giants were a 2.5 dog in 2011. They were more picked by fans and analysts than the pats, but they weren't favored by Vegas.

Those numbers seem about right regarding percentages.

The biggest takeaway for me is that Washington probably needs to go undefeated to make it, at least without help and that Bama is probably a lock even if they drop one.

Big XII is also totally done unless Oklahoma wins out impressively and there is LOTS of "chaos" at the top. Committee clearly doesn't have a ton of respect for West Virginia or Baylor.

B1GTide said:

1) That was the beginning of the Giants surge - when they became hot. Before that game the Giants were a very average football team and only made the playoffs because of their division. The Pats were undefeated until the Super Bowl. The Giants got hot at the right time while the Pats started to fade (peaked too soon).

2) The Giants being favored reflects the number of betters and the amount of money that those people bet, not the relative ability of the teams. The NY Giants have the most wealthy fan base in the country, and it isn't close. Add the sports wagering culture in the NY metro area and this is what you get. When the Giants are winning - well, lines are based on the money, not the teams on the field.

Click to expand...

Agreed on all points.

LA4Bama said:

My God, thank you Selma, for removing the scales from my eyes. I have been the naive one who couldn't see through the complex machinations of our NCAA football oligarchs. But now that you've revealed it to me, I see the truth of the corporate masterminds manipulating my ovine simplicity. My God, and look how clever they are! Not only did they create a can't miss match-up by naming Bama #4 (who, after all, would watch a pointless affair between #2 and #5), but to conceal their plot, they actually put each team into the ranking most deserved! Oh what deviant architects of duplicity! They at once realized their evil scheme AND hid all the evidence of their malfeasance! The plot is so deviously evil it's literally undetectable!! What evil geniuses!!! :wink:

Click to expand...

You're welcome.

UntouchableCrew said:

Those numbers seem about right regarding percentages.

The biggest takeaway for me is that Washington probably needs to go undefeated to make it, at least without help and that Bama is probably a lock even if they drop one.

Big XII is also totally done unless Oklahoma wins out impressively and there is LOTS of "chaos" at the top. Committee clearly doesn't have a ton of respect for West Virginia or Baylor.

Click to expand...

The problem with writing off Washington if they lose is to whom they lose to. Let's say they lose to WSU who will probably be in the top 15. Washington would then have a makeup game against a top 10 Colorado or Utah the next week to make it up. Again a lot seems to happen outside the top 8 in the weekly CFP rankings, and I guarantee you when LSU, Auburn, and UF start losing in these final 5 weeks they all will make way for the PAC 12 and ACC teams to be used as justification pieces. I would say the rankings favor Washington tremendously more than they favor aTm because the SEC in the top 13 have a lot of losses still on the board compared to the 12-25 PAC 12 teams. And Washington playing on the last week of football against a top 10 team helps them way more than an aTm team sitting at home.

Now if Washington loses in the championship or to asu or cal then that all changes.

81usaf92 said:

The Giants were a 2.5 dog in 2011. They were more picked by fans and analysts than the pats, but they weren't favored by Vegas.

Click to expand...

My bad, not his. I misread it in my old age. NE and NY look a lot alike when you get old. Sorry.

81usaf92 said:

The Giants were a 2.5 dog in 2011. They were more picked by fans and analysts than the pats, but they weren't favored by Vegas.

Click to expand...

That is how much better the Pats were. All of the NYC money was on the Giants, but it still wasn't enough to swing the line in their favor. Still, the Giants won the game - somehow.

I remember the Giants needing a win in week 17 and some help to even make the playoffs both years.

B1GTide said:

Still, the Giants won the game - somehow.

Click to expand...

Two words... Wes Welker.

I would say Gronk being hurt also had something to do with, but Welker always had the habit of going cold in key situations. I tried to tell my Broncos buddy that but he wouldn't listen

81usaf92 said:

Two words... Wes Welker.

I would say Gronk being hurt also had something to do with, but Welker always had the habit of going cold in key situations. I tried to tell my Broncos buddy that but he wouldn't listen

Click to expand...

Also, in both playoff runs Eli played like Peyton.

wow! Y'all are a trip.

B1GTide said:

Also, in both playoff runs Eli played like Peyton.

Click to expand...

Make that "reg season Peyton" . Even in both of his SB wins he played avg or worse and had almost nothing to do with his teams' victory. In 3 of his SB wins Brady led late game winning drives and did so in the first loss to the NYG, Eli just trumped him getting the ball essentially last.

It's ironic how Peyton was great reg season but mediocre at best in the playoffs, while Eli is just good reg season but great in the playoffs and at crunch time. They were both the same way in college.

Btw - further proof of what a total farce these rankings are and DRIVEN BY NAME RECOGNITION:

Oklahoma is ranked 14th and has two losses.

WVA is ranked 20th and has ONE loss.

Sagarin tells us OU has played the #22 ranked schedule this year, WVA the #31 (not exactly a substantial difference).

The teams WVA played (and I didn't even count Youngstown St because they're not FBS) have an overall record of 25-23 (.520)
The teams OU played teams with an overall record of 33-30 (.523)

They've played THREE common opponents at this point:
OU survived Texas Tech by seven and TCU by six - and pulverized K-State
WVA thumped BOTH Tech and TCU (by 24 and 31) and slipped by K-State by one.


So what's the argument? "Oh, but Oklahoma played better teams than WVA."

Yes and they LOST TO THEM BY DOUBLE DIGITS!!!! Indeed, the ENTIRE difference in their schedule is that OU played AND GOT KILLED by Ohio State. It's not like OU lost a triple overtime thriller to the Buckeyes....and the game was in Norman, too.


Over and over again, we have this same farce. I'm NOT saying WVA is better than OU because I doubt that. But that's not the line of bull we're being fed right now. No, we're being told this garbage about how Team X has done more than Team Y.

Can any of you SERIOUSLY look at the two resumes and say OU has done ANY better than WVA at this point in time?

They have more losses.
WVA has beaten two of the three common opponents by substantially larger margins.
The entirety of 'but OU played a tougher schedule' is based on games they lost and were dominated by those teams.


But it's simple: OU is a draw and WVA is not. And that's what this committee was all about.

And btw - if your counter argument is that it doesn't matter now.....then why even have a ranking right now since it doesn't matter?

selmaborntidefan said:

And btw - if your counter argument is that it doesn't matter now.....then why even have a ranking right now since it doesn't matter?

Click to expand...

Why have it now?

$$$$$$$$$$