(11-08-2016 07:06 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-08-2016 06:46 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  Is the UW Pac-12 CCG win a rematch against USC? Because, if so, I think they get in.

Problem for them there is there's no guarantee that it would be USC in the title game. If Colorado wins out, they're division champs. If Utah beats Colorado, then USC has to have Colorado beat Washington St to create the 3 way tie to have a chance. But there- it would go down to that Sports Analytics poll I believe, and that would likely go Utah I think. So Utah would need to lose to either Arizona St or Oregon for USC to get it....

That's not how it works.
If, as expected, CU beats AZ, Utah beats ASU, and USC loses to UW this week then USC is out because the best USC can achieve is a 3 way tie.

A three way tie looks at head-head-head record. If Utah beats CU, a 3 way tie would put UU (2-0) over USC (1-1) and CU (0-2). If it's a 3 way tie after head-head-head then they look at South Division record which currently stands at UU 3-0, USC 3-1, CU 3-1.

USC needs Utah to lose to ASU this week because a CU loss to Utah would otherwise likely result in a 3-way tie which Utah would win.

(11-09-2016 08:45 AM)jrj84105 Wrote:  

(11-08-2016 07:06 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-08-2016 06:46 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  Is the UW Pac-12 CCG win a rematch against USC? Because, if so, I think they get in.

Problem for them there is there's no guarantee that it would be USC in the title game. If Colorado wins out, they're division champs. If Utah beats Colorado, then USC has to have Colorado beat Washington St to create the 3 way tie to have a chance. But there- it would go down to that Sports Analytics poll I believe, and that would likely go Utah I think. So Utah would need to lose to either Arizona St or Oregon for USC to get it....

That's not how it works.
If, as expected, CU beats AZ, Utah beats ASU, and USC loses to UW this week then USC is out because the best USC can achieve is a 3 way tie.

I expect a resurgent USC to upset the applecart with a victory over Washington.

And I also expect that to be Washington's last challenge. If they do manage to beat USC, they run the table and all talk of two teams from any conference ends.

(11-09-2016 12:39 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 08:45 AM)jrj84105 Wrote:  

(11-08-2016 07:06 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-08-2016 06:46 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  Is the UW Pac-12 CCG win a rematch against USC? Because, if so, I think they get in.

Problem for them there is there's no guarantee that it would be USC in the title game. If Colorado wins out, they're division champs. If Utah beats Colorado, then USC has to have Colorado beat Washington St to create the 3 way tie to have a chance. But there- it would go down to that Sports Analytics poll I believe, and that would likely go Utah I think. So Utah would need to lose to either Arizona St or Oregon for USC to get it....

That's not how it works.
If, as expected, CU beats AZ, Utah beats ASU, and USC loses to UW this week then USC is out because the best USC can achieve is a 3 way tie.

I expect a resurgent USC to upset the applecart with a victory over Washington.

And I also expect that to be Washington's last challenge. If they do manage to beat USC, they run the table and all talk of two teams from any conference ends.

WSU is playing darn well right now, and that's for all the marbles in the division.

(11-09-2016 12:42 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 12:39 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 08:45 AM)jrj84105 Wrote:  

(11-08-2016 07:06 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-08-2016 06:46 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  Is the UW Pac-12 CCG win a rematch against USC? Because, if so, I think they get in.

Problem for them there is there's no guarantee that it would be USC in the title game. If Colorado wins out, they're division champs. If Utah beats Colorado, then USC has to have Colorado beat Washington St to create the 3 way tie to have a chance. But there- it would go down to that Sports Analytics poll I believe, and that would likely go Utah I think. So Utah would need to lose to either Arizona St or Oregon for USC to get it....

That's not how it works.
If, as expected, CU beats AZ, Utah beats ASU, and USC loses to UW this week then USC is out because the best USC can achieve is a 3 way tie.

I expect a resurgent USC to upset the applecart with a victory over Washington.

And I also expect that to be Washington's last challenge. If they do manage to beat USC, they run the table and all talk of two teams from any conference ends.

WSU is playing darn well right now, and that's for all the marbles in the division.

Yes they are, but ...

I just look forward to the day when objective criteria, not subjective committees, determine who makes the playoffs.

Conference champion was stated as having priority when this whole thing started. This because it is a cross section of reps from all leagues and to avoid another LSU/Alabama situation. All I have to say.

(11-09-2016 02:56 PM)Tigeer Wrote:  Conference champion was stated as having priority when this whole thing started. This because it is a cross section of reps from all leagues and to avoid another LSU/Alabama situation. All I have to say.

Yup - and until proven otherwise, I think the committee will do everything they can to avoid two teams from the same conference.

For example, if Ohio State beats Michigan, and wins the B1G CCG (or Auburn beats Alabama, wins SEC CCG), Michigan or Alabama have a pretty high hurdle to be in the CFP. They would have been coming off a loss to a team already in the CFP in their last game.

but if Big 12 champ is Oklahoma with 2 losses and Pac 12 champ is Washington St with 2 losses, that's the type of year where it would happen. Conference Champions is just one of 4 things that matters. that, strength of schedule, head to head competition, and comparative outcomes of common opponents.

The conference champion thing is just a preference, and not an absolute determinant. Some folks here want to make it seem that it is an absolute, and that is just not the case at all whatsoever.

(11-09-2016 08:45 AM)jrj84105 Wrote:  

(11-08-2016 07:06 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-08-2016 06:46 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  Is the UW Pac-12 CCG win a rematch against USC? Because, if so, I think they get in.

Problem for them there is there's no guarantee that it would be USC in the title game. If Colorado wins out, they're division champs. If Utah beats Colorado, then USC has to have Colorado beat Washington St to create the 3 way tie to have a chance. But there- it would go down to that Sports Analytics poll I believe, and that would likely go Utah I think. So Utah would need to lose to either Arizona St or Oregon for USC to get it....

That's not how it works.
If, as expected, CU beats AZ, Utah beats ASU, and USC loses to UW this week then USC is out because the best USC can achieve is a 3 way tie.

A three way tie looks at head-head-head record. If Utah beats CU, a 3 way tie would put UU (2-0) over USC (1-1) and CU (0-2). If it's a 3 way tie after head-head-head then they look at South Division record which currently stands at UU 3-0, USC 3-1, CU 3-1.

USC needs Utah to lose to ASU this week because a CU loss to Utah would otherwise likely result in a 3-way tie which Utah would win.

Gosh, how sad is it that we are the underdogs to Washington? But anyway, I actually would not mind if we did not win the Pac-12. My hope is that we can beat Washington then become an at large pick for a major bowl game.

P5 champ easily gets in over a non-champ with the same #losses (i.e. 12-1 vs 11-1). Not as certain 11-2 beats 11-1 though, especially if there's a big difference in SOS.

Sent from my HTC Desire 626 using CSNbbs mobile app

(11-09-2016 04:11 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 08:45 AM)jrj84105 Wrote:  

(11-08-2016 07:06 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-08-2016 06:46 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  Is the UW Pac-12 CCG win a rematch against USC? Because, if so, I think they get in.

Problem for them there is there's no guarantee that it would be USC in the title game. If Colorado wins out, they're division champs. If Utah beats Colorado, then USC has to have Colorado beat Washington St to create the 3 way tie to have a chance. But there- it would go down to that Sports Analytics poll I believe, and that would likely go Utah I think. So Utah would need to lose to either Arizona St or Oregon for USC to get it....

That's not how it works.
If, as expected, CU beats AZ, Utah beats ASU, and USC loses to UW this week then USC is out because the best USC can achieve is a 3 way tie.

A three way tie looks at head-head-head record. If Utah beats CU, a 3 way tie would put UU (2-0) over USC (1-1) and CU (0-2). If it's a 3 way tie after head-head-head then they look at South Division record which currently stands at UU 3-0, USC 3-1, CU 3-1.

USC needs Utah to lose to ASU this week because a CU loss to Utah would otherwise likely result in a 3-way tie which Utah would win.

Gosh, how sad is it that we are the underdogs to Washington? But anyway, I actually would not mind if we did not win the Pac-12. My hope is that we can beat Washington then become an at large pick for a major bowl game.

That's going to be really difficult. Colorado/Utah winner if they win out until the P12 CCG will be ahead of USC guaranteed- even with loss in the P12 CCG. And USC isn't going to finish ahead of enough teams to get in the access bowl slot.

(11-09-2016 04:15 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  P5 champ easily gets in over a non-champ with the same #losses (i.e. 12-1 vs 11-1). Not as certain 11-2 beats 11-1 though, especially if there's a big difference in SOS.

Sent from my HTC Desire 626 using CSNbbs mobile app

if it's 12-1 Washington with loss to USC, vs 11-1 Alabama, with 40 point win vs USC- going to be tough for Washington to get in over Alabama....

(11-09-2016 04:22 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 04:11 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 08:45 AM)jrj84105 Wrote:  

(11-08-2016 07:06 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-08-2016 06:46 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  Is the UW Pac-12 CCG win a rematch against USC? Because, if so, I think they get in.

Problem for them there is there's no guarantee that it would be USC in the title game. If Colorado wins out, they're division champs. If Utah beats Colorado, then USC has to have Colorado beat Washington St to create the 3 way tie to have a chance. But there- it would go down to that Sports Analytics poll I believe, and that would likely go Utah I think. So Utah would need to lose to either Arizona St or Oregon for USC to get it....

That's not how it works.
If, as expected, CU beats AZ, Utah beats ASU, and USC loses to UW this week then USC is out because the best USC can achieve is a 3 way tie.

A three way tie looks at head-head-head record. If Utah beats CU, a 3 way tie would put UU (2-0) over USC (1-1) and CU (0-2). If it's a 3 way tie after head-head-head then they look at South Division record which currently stands at UU 3-0, USC 3-1, CU 3-1.

USC needs Utah to lose to ASU this week because a CU loss to Utah would otherwise likely result in a 3-way tie which Utah would win.

Gosh, how sad is it that we are the underdogs to Washington? But anyway, I actually would not mind if we did not win the Pac-12. My hope is that we can beat Washington then become an at large pick for a major bowl game.

That's going to be really difficult. Colorado/Utah winner if they win out until the P12 CCG will be ahead of USC guaranteed- even with loss in the P12 CCG. And USC isn't going to finish ahead of enough teams to get in the access bowl slot.

I'm not sure I agree. If and it's a big if we beat Washington we have the potential to jump very high. Keep in mind we also have a win over Colorado who ranked #12.

I would not be shocked to see us jump as high as #11 if we win Saturday.

(11-09-2016 04:23 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 04:15 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  P5 champ easily gets in over a non-champ with the same #losses (i.e. 12-1 vs 11-1). Not as certain 11-2 beats 11-1 though, especially if there's a big difference in SOS.

Sent from my HTC Desire 626 using CSNbbs mobile app

if it's 12-1 Washington with loss to USC, vs 11-1 Alabama, with 40 point win vs USC- going to be tough for Washington to get in over Alabama....

That's what people were saying about USC being ranked in the top 25 this week above Arkansas who scored 30 on Alabama and beat a top 15 Florida team.

The committee ranks teams based on where they should be ranked right now. Not where they may be after x game or what happened at the start of the season. Right now USC could hang with just about every team in the country.

Vegas line has been moving further in UW's favor. All things equal, UW is just the better team- better QB play, better scheme, better talent on defense. UW has a great secondary, and as good as Datnold will be, he's still a very mistake prone freshman.

But all things aren't equal. USC isn't used to being in this position, but the PAC NEEDS you to lose. You're going to get jobbed by the officials. Trust me, it sucks to have the PAC's favored team hold your DEs on each of 70 passing attempts without ever drawing a flag, but you'll find out what that's like soon enough.

(11-08-2016 07:30 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  No, the CFP is to select the 4 best teams. Criteria does not mandate a conference champ should be selected. I think a Louisville or Michigan would be valid over a two loss Pac 12 champ.

Since it is never possible to know which the "4 best teams" are, the selection committee is free to pick whomever they want, using whatever rationale they want.

There are no objective ways to select the participants, so we will continue to use the tried and true "beauty contest" method.

There are no wrong answers here - just different opinions. The unique nature of college football in all of sports means it will always be so. Embrace the chaos.

If we are talking about 1-loss teams: The committee is clearly giving teams credit for respectable losses to good teams, even though they've said in the past they don't do that.

I hate the concept of "quality losses", but this year's committee likes it. The committee views Wisconsin's losses as less than 2 full losses because they lost competitive games to Ohio St and Michigan. Ohio St is credited with less than a full loss because they lost a close game to Penn State (as long as Penn State keeps winning), same with Louisville's loss to Clemson. TAMU is somehow #8 in the eyes of the committee because it's almost as if the committee doesn't count their loss to Alabama as a loss at all.

So, going forward, a close Alabama loss to Auburn would hurt them far less than a loss to Mississippi State - but that has to be balanced by the fact that late losses always hurt a team more than early losses. Washington would have to be concerned about any late loss; losing to USC or Wazzu would be "better" than losing to Miss St but "worse" than losing to Auburn. For Clemson, any loss at this point would be a bad loss if Michigan or Alabama with only one "good loss" is lurking.

The discussion is moot if Bama and Michigan win out.

(11-09-2016 05:23 PM)Wedge Wrote:  If we are talking about 1-loss teams: The committee is clearly giving teams credit for respectable losses to good teams, even though they've said in the past they don't do that.

I hate the concept of "quality losses", but this year's committee likes it. The committee views Wisconsin's losses as less than 2 full losses because they lost competitive games to Ohio St and Michigan. Ohio St is credited with less than a full loss because they lost a close game to Penn State (as long as Penn State keeps winning), same with Louisville's loss to Clemson. TAMU is somehow #8 in the eyes of the committee because it's almost as if the committee doesn't count their loss to Alabama as a loss at all.

So, going forward, a close Alabama loss to Auburn would hurt them far less than a loss to Mississippi State - but that has to be balanced by the fact that late losses always hurt a team more than early losses. Washington would have to be concerned about any late loss; losing to USC or Wazzu would be "better" than losing to Miss St but "worse" than losing to Auburn. For Clemson, any loss at this point would be a bad loss if Michigan or Alabama with only one "good loss" is lurking.

The discussion is moot if Bama and Michigan win out.

A Washington loss to Wash St would be fatal- as that would knock them out of the division race, and they can't make the playoff as a non champ.

(11-09-2016 05:26 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 05:23 PM)Wedge Wrote:  If we are talking about 1-loss teams: The committee is clearly giving teams credit for respectable losses to good teams, even though they've said in the past they don't do that.

I hate the concept of "quality losses", but this year's committee likes it. The committee views Wisconsin's losses as less than 2 full losses because they lost competitive games to Ohio St and Michigan. Ohio St is credited with less than a full loss because they lost a close game to Penn State (as long as Penn State keeps winning), same with Louisville's loss to Clemson. TAMU is somehow #8 in the eyes of the committee because it's almost as if the committee doesn't count their loss to Alabama as a loss at all.

So, going forward, a close Alabama loss to Auburn would hurt them far less than a loss to Mississippi State - but that has to be balanced by the fact that late losses always hurt a team more than early losses. Washington would have to be concerned about any late loss; losing to USC or Wazzu would be "better" than losing to Miss St but "worse" than losing to Auburn. For Clemson, any loss at this point would be a bad loss if Michigan or Alabama with only one "good loss" is lurking.

The discussion is moot if Bama and Michigan win out.

A Washington loss to Wash St would be fatal- as that would knock them out of the division race, and they can't make the playoff as a non champ.

Wait is this an actual rule or an opinion? I know this is true for the G5 getting the access bowl slot. But I have not heard of this being required for the playoff.

(11-09-2016 04:49 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  Vegas line has been moving further in UW's favor. All things equal, UW is just the better team- better QB play, better scheme, better talent on defense. UW has a great secondary, and as good as Datnold will be, he's still a very mistake prone freshman.

But all things aren't equal. USC isn't used to being in this position, but the PAC NEEDS you to lose. You're going to get jobbed by the officials. Trust me, it sucks to have the PAC's favored team hold your DEs on each of 70 passing attempts without ever drawing a flag, but you'll find out what that's like soon enough.

Oh, believe me I know Washington has a great squad. But this is not the same team that Utah beat. And Utah was the first real test Washington has had all year and you guys played them pretty well.

Not to be arrogant because we lost to Utah fair and square. But I'm not convinced that Washington is that much better than Utah or Colorado.