Utes Stay at #8 in This Week's AP Poll

“Bama’s path involves other teams screwing up, which happens every year.” By that you mean it happened one time?

Like I said… 1 game in 38 years non-conference out of state.

No, I just mean that unexpected losses happen regularly in college football. It’s not crazy to think that Bama gets in because Clemson or OU or Oregon blows it.

Ah. I just think I have been reading too much hyperbole today. I read a Georgia blog today say Tua never steps up in big games. A Georgia blog…

1 Like

I agree, although I’m not sure it would have been true in prior years. I also agree with Rocker’s sentiment that no one wants to see Alabama and LSU play again in the CFP. It’s time for the CFP committee to shake things up and change the narrative.

2 Likes

Yes but there is a very good chance all have two losses. Then what?

To make the CFP workable, more interesteing, default to one-loss conference champions from around the country. No same conference rematches. Sorry. If Alabama wanted to be in the CFP, win at home. Also, Alabama has no better a SOS schedule than Utah or Oregon, LSU notwithstanding.

If Oregon, Utah, and Oklahoma all have two losses, then probably none of them would end up in the top 4 of the CFP rankings. I imagine there will be enough undefeated and one-loss teams to keep out a two-loss conference champion. I don’t like that, but I don’t think we’ve reached the point where a conference championship will carry enough value—at least not yet. However, I do think the narrative needs to shift. In my view, conference champions among the P5 conferences should get heavy consideration.

Yeah, the SOS argument is weird. The rankings have Ohio State having a better one than LSU. Not sure what’s up with the computer. Don’t get me wrong, our schedule is trash. I also don’t advocate we deserve in. Just saying it’s hard to really say “deserve.” Other than LSU & Ohio State I’m not seeing “deserve” anywhere.

I get what you are saying and I should agree. That being said, not all P5 conferences deserve their P5 ranking every year. Top to bottom ACC and Big 12 would struggle with the American.

Agreed. But usually the top teams of the various P5 conferences are pretty good and a step above the non-P5 conferences. So if you take the P5 champions after the conference dust settles, you will generally end up with some of the best teams in the nation. There would, of course, be exceptions, but those teams would be outliers. In those years, the clamor for an eight-team CFP would get pretty loud.

As things are, however, I think it makes sense to take only one team from each conference, even if one conference is perceived to have two or three of the best teams in the nation. There are not enough games between the conferences to truly determine how the various conferences all stack up against each other. Accordingly, instead of seeing conference mates play each other in the CFP (conceivably at times in a rematch), four conferences should each send a champion. The conference championship game will tell us who is the best in a given conference. And if one of the P5 conferences is head and shoulders above the rest, then their champion should be able to beat the other champions.

The College Playoff is not a true playoff. We need to stop thinking this was setup to get the best representation of the USA but the best representation of the top 4 teams. The College Playoff is BCS light. If you want “fair” eliminate all non-conference and demand 10 game season with conference titles (This prevents from expanding the amount of games played). 10 conference champs and 6 at large spots. Slot it as a 16 team tournament. This system keeps the bowls but the first 2 rounds are played at higher seed home field.

That’s if you want “fair.” Fair is when even the Sun Belt and WAC have a shot. Till then, the playoff is about 4 best teams, not 4 best conference championship.

2 Likes

I don’t disagree, and I think you are correct that the CFP was designed to pick the 4 best teams and continue the BCS formula under a different (somewhat misleading) name.

I think a lot of folks don’t like this new incarnation of the BCS, and I have to admit that I’m one of them (though I’m not rabid about it). My hope is that the CFP committee is moving the CFP away from the BCS model, and I think they can do that by giving greater value to conference championships. It might be only a small step, but I think it is a step in the right direction.

1 Like

I agree. I did a bunch of digging into SOS yesterday. Came away more confused than enlightened. LSU and OSU look great.

Maybe they value beating non-P5 Cincinnati more than beating Auburn who is a higher rated P5? Sometimes the computer is screwy

Not sure what rankings you’re looking at. Sagarin has LSU at #13 SOS, toughest of any playoff contender (followed by Penn State, #23).

Post 9 in this thread features a link to the source I used. The fact that there are different sources for SOS is troubling to me, and the reason why I came away so confused after looking into it. The source I used (link above) has LSU at 14.

Duke, NM St., S. Miss., W. Carolina- non-conf. this year. Duke game all the way east to Atlanta; all the rest at home.

Yes, we schedule a Home and Home with Duke recently and this was the third game in that deal which was a neutral. Cutcliffe has done a good job with the Duke program. They average 8 wins over the past six years. Saban took Alabama to Penn State recently for a home and home. Next year we play in Texas vs USC and Miami in Atlanta the following. Then we add home and homes in the next 10 years with Wisconsin, Texas, West Virginia, Florida State and USF. Past that already have home and homes with Va. Tech, Notre Dame and Oklahoma.

Let’s not act like Saban has not called for a mandate we increase to 10 conference games and dropping all non- P5 non-conference games.