(11-24-2015 11:08 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-23-2015 02:24 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(11-23-2015 01:45 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-23-2015 01:38 PM)Greenroom Wrote:  

(11-23-2015 12:40 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I never said "common opponent" is the only factor. When comparing OK and Notre Dame, it should be decisive, because the other big factor, SOS, will be very similar.

In contrast, UNC's schedule is so much weaker than Notre Dame's that it can't be decisive. Especially since ND lost by two on the road, which is within the margin of home field advantage. Heck, UNC also lost to a team that just got beat by the Citadel.

No hypocrisy, just not apples to apples.

Here is the biggest problem for ND, and to me it would trump the "common opponent". Is that OU would be a Conference Champion, which ND cannot be. Plus add in quality of W's far better than ND. Yes OU had the lose vs Texas in a rivalry game, where ND played Texas at home and I am sorry rivalry games are harder to win. But name a Win for ND that is better than OU's Baylor, TCU and if they beat OK State? Stanford is not better than Baylor or Ok State.

I think Stanford is better than all of those, especially since OK played TCU and Baylor when they didn't have their star QBs.

If Notre Dame beats Stanford, Stanford will have 3 losses...

how the hell will that be better than Baylor, Oklahoma State, and TCU??

From what we have seen over the past couple of weeks, this CFP committee just seems to like Stanford. They didn't dock Stanford anywhere nearly as bad for their loss to Oregon as the pollsters did. It wouldn't shock me one bit if Stanford is ahead of Oklahoma State when the new rankings come out tonight, which means that an ND win over Stanford would be looked at by the CFP committee as a "better" win than an OU win over Oklahoma State. Remember how high Navy is ranked and USC could end up being the Pac-12 champ, too. There's certainly an argument for OU to get in over ND, but the OU/Big 12 supporters seem to overstate how tough OU's schedule is compared to ND's schedule. They're basically equal SOS, ND's only loss is to the #1 team in the country, and the one OU loss was to a team that ND completely destroyed. I understand the politicking right now, but I have no dog in this fight and I'd pick ND over OU on that basis. That OU loss to Texas was simply the worst possible one on the schedule for OU to have lost because it was the one game that allows for a direct comparison to ND. OU/Big 12 supporters want everyone to forget that game happened, but I don't think that's going to be the case.

Compelling post. Hard to deny its powerful internal logic.

OU needs Notre Dame to lose to Stanford - bottom line here.

(11-24-2015 11:44 AM)TerryD Wrote:  An article on ND's injuries and ability to overcome them so far this season.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/notre-dame-...39531.html

The depth of recruiting has really shown. But, the loss of that CB is a real problem. Offensive players are much more plug-and-play than defensive players, particularly LBs and DBs. Their job involves a lot of coordination with other players, being in the right position. That comes from being on the field and gelling with the other guys.

If whoever ND fills that gap with has a good game vs. Stanford, I will admit Kelly is a kind of genius.

(11-24-2015 12:31 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-24-2015 11:44 AM)TerryD Wrote:  An article on ND's injuries and ability to overcome them so far this season.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/notre-dame-...39531.html

The depth of recruiting has really shown. But, the loss of that CB is a real problem. Offensive players are much more plug-and-play than defensive players, particularly LBs and DBs. Their job involves a lot of coordination with other players, being in the right position. That comes from being on the field and gelling with the other guys.

If whoever ND fills that gap with has a good game vs. Stanford, I will admit Kelly is a kind of genius.

This was the basis for my "tipping point" post about the injuries to Prosise (explosive runner) and Russell (ND's alleged best cover corner).

I am not optimistic that ND can continue to just shake off injuries to starting players to win on the road at Stanford.

(11-23-2015 10:51 AM)nj alum Wrote:  No Michigan State. 10-1.

No Michigan. 9-2.

If the Irish beat Stanford, and don't get in, ... just sayin.

Basically, ND traded out Michigan, Michigan St., Purdue, Pitt and BC for a rotating five game schedule with the ACC (which this year happened to include Pitt and BC). In place of the 3 B1G schools, ND played 4 ACC schools this year, Clemson, GT, Wake and Virginia. As others have pointed out, Clemson is No. 1 and GT was expected to be good, but wasn't. UVA and Wake are having rough years, but no worse than Purdue's. Really, you trade out Michigan for GT, but preseason, you would have guessed GT would have been better.

(11-24-2015 12:52 PM)TerryD Wrote:  This was the basis for my "tipping point" post about the injuries to Prosise (explosive runner) and Russell (ND's alleged best cover corner).

I am not optimistic that ND can continue to just shake off injuries to starting players to win on the road at Stanford.

Stop McCaffrey and you win.

Assuming ND wins and finishes 11-1 ...

As long as the Big 12 has a one loss team, they are in ... no way two years in a row they don't make the playoffs.

Clemson and Bama are in.

Pac 12 is out.

ND is competing against the Big Ten for the last spot ... would've been nice for ND to have those traditional Big Ten rivals and wins over those Big Ten rivals on the resume.

Instead, the resume is 5-1 against the ACC, 2-0 against the Pac, 1-0 against the Big 12, 0-0 against the SEC, 0-0 against the Big Ten, and 3-0 against G5 schools.

Quote:And, the Clemson game is one of ND's best arguments in the committee room. ND's only loss is a 2-point loss on the road to the #1 team, whereas their potential "competitors" for a playoff spot have losses that don't look so good.

But beating MSU and UM would be better than losing to Clemson. And beating MSU and UM would eliminate a B1G champ from trumping ND into it, which is more the key.

ND's gone virtually ACC now.

(11-24-2015 03:36 PM)nj alum Wrote:  Assuming ND wins and finishes 11-1 ...

As long as the Big 12 has a one loss team, they are in ... no way two years in a row they don't make the playoffs.

Clemson and Bama are in.

Pac 12 is out.

ND is competing against the Big Ten for the last spot ... would've been nice for ND to have those traditional Big Ten rivals and wins over those Big Ten rivals on the resume.

Instead, the resume is 5-1 against the ACC, 2-0 against the Pac, 1-0 against the Big 12, 0-0 against the SEC, 0-0 against the Big Ten, and 3-0 against G5 schools.

Alot of assumption in that statement. Fact of the matter is the Big 12 will always be at a disadvantage with the ACC, B1G, PAC-12 and SEC because they don't have a conference championship game. Because of that, they will always have an uphill battle to win due to that disadvantage. If the Big 12 has an undefeated champion in a given year, then yes - the decision is relatively easy as to place them in the CFP. However, with the conference possibly looking at the second consecutive year with two one-loss teams at the top of the league, and another year at being shut out of the CFP, the it's not a shocking development in the least to see them on the outside looking in again.

Oklahoma's biggest problem with Notre Dame is that they lost to Texas, who ND destroyed. The committee knows that, so unless ND loses and Oklahoma wins, the Big 12 will be shut out again.

(11-24-2015 03:36 PM)nj alum Wrote:  Assuming ND wins and finishes 11-1 ...

As long as the Big 12 has a one loss team, they are in ... no way two years in a row they don't make the playoffs.

Clemson and Bama are in.

Pac 12 is out.

ND is competing against the Big Ten for the last spot ... would've been nice for ND to have those traditional Big Ten rivals and wins over those Big Ten rivals on the resume.

Instead, the resume is 5-1 against the ACC, 2-0 against the Pac, 1-0 against the Big 12, 0-0 against the SEC, 0-0 against the Big Ten, and 3-0 against G5 schools.

????

I really don't think that the CFP committee gives a crap about whether the Big 12 is left out 2 years in a row (and if they *do* give a crap, then they shouldn't be on the CPF committee in the first place). Frankly, the CFP rankings up to this point have shown a heavy skepticism toward the Big 12 teams compared to the SEC and Big Ten (and also ND and Clemson as individual teams).

The only way that ND (or Big 12 champ) is competing with the Big Ten for the last spot is if (a) Michigan State loses to PSU, (b) Michigan beats Ohio State and © Michigan then beats Iowa in the Big Ten championship game. That's really the only scenario where I see the Big Ten getting left out... and even then, the CFP committee seems to have given Michigan (and the Big Ten overall) a lot of the benefit of the doubt over the past few weeks. This isn't the Big Ten of the last part of the BCS era - they're getting a lot of credit for conference wins right now.

If Michigan State, Ohio State or Iowa win the Big Ten, then they're in. Outside of the Michigan Big Ten champ scenario, it's going to be the Big 12 champ and Notre Dame that are going to be sweating it out (assuming that ND beats Stanford).

ND dropped to #6, which is not unexpected when you turn the ball over five times.

(11-24-2015 07:43 PM)TerryD Wrote:  ND dropped to #6, which is not unexpected when you turn the ball over five times.

OU up to #3.
The Irish had better play great and hope for an OSU win.

(11-24-2015 07:52 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-24-2015 07:43 PM)TerryD Wrote:  ND dropped to #6, which is not unexpected when you turn the ball over five times.

OU up to #3.
The Irish had better play great and hope for an OSU win.

Astoundingly poor decision by the CFP.

OU/Bama makes for a way better Cotton Bowl than Iowa/MSU versus Bama and a rematch in the Orange. OU beat Bama in the Sugar couple years back. I think it's an awesome prime time match up.

(11-24-2015 08:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-24-2015 07:52 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-24-2015 07:43 PM)TerryD Wrote:  ND dropped to #6, which is not unexpected when you turn the ball over five times.

OU up to #3.
The Irish had better play great and hope for an OSU win.

Astoundingly poor decision by the CFP.

I have no problem with it. ND should have beat Clemson and not left anything to chance.

Not pounding BC didn't help ND's cause.

Oh well, win 'em all next year.

Boston College and Virginia Tech games really killed them. Texas is better than both of those programs.

(11-24-2015 09:00 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(11-24-2015 08:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-24-2015 07:52 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-24-2015 07:43 PM)TerryD Wrote:  ND dropped to #6, which is not unexpected when you turn the ball over five times.

OU up to #3.
The Irish had better play great and hope for an OSU win.

Astoundingly poor decision by the CFP.

I have no problem with it. ND should have beat Clemson and not left anything to chance.

Notre Dame isn't eliminated by any means - lots of football still left to be played.

But objectively, the committee's moves make no sense. Notre Dame and OU have the same record, and same SOS. There's just no basis for having OU at #3 and ND at #6.

(11-24-2015 09:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-24-2015 09:00 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(11-24-2015 08:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-24-2015 07:52 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-24-2015 07:43 PM)TerryD Wrote:  ND dropped to #6, which is not unexpected when you turn the ball over five times.

OU up to #3.
The Irish had better play great and hope for an OSU win.

Astoundingly poor decision by the CFP.

I have no problem with it. ND should have beat Clemson and not left anything to chance.

Notre Dame isn't eliminated by any means - lots of football still left to be played.

But objectively, the committee's moves make no sense. Notre Dame and OU have the same record, and same SOS. There's just no basis for having OU at #3 and ND at #6.

This definitely was surprising, particularly in a week where OU didn't look like the dominant "eye test" team that they had been over the past several weeks (which seemed to be the biggest argument that OU had over ND).

As I noted earlier today, though, the CFP committee just seems to really respect Stanford and that held true again with them being ranked ahead of Oklahoma State. So, ND beating Stanford could very well flip everything again.

I think the committee is doing the same thing they did to TCU the week before. It isn't only that they looked sluggish against an inferior team. It is that they did that along with significant injuries.

Of course OU also looked sluggish with injuries, but perhaps since it was against a ranked team they were given the benefit of the doubt. Plus mayfield prob isn't out.

(11-24-2015 10:39 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  I think the committee is doing the same thing they did to TCU the week before. It isn't only that they looked sluggish against an inferior team. It is that they did that along with significant injuries.

Of course OU also looked sluggish with injuries, but perhaps since it was against a ranked team they were given the benefit of the doubt. Plus mayfield prob isn't out.

The committee Chair did say yesterday that they gave weight to the fact that Oklahoma was dominating TCU before Mayfield went out. What makes me scratch my head about that is ... so what? Did it not occur to the committee that TCU played the whole game without their star QB and best WR? Would Oklahoma have been beating them 30-13 if TCU had those guys?

Or that Oklahoma beat Baylor the week before without Baylor's star QB playing? Or that Notre Dame has been pummeled by injuries all year and yet is still 10-1 against a schedule as good as Oklahoma's?

Seems like the committee only took sympathy on OU for their injury, said "well, IF Mayfield wasn't hurt they win by 30" and disregarded everyone else's. Weird.

The committee sucks and there's no logic behind it...

How the hell did Oklahoma jump MICHIGAN STATE? Wins over Michigan, Ohio State, and Oregon aren't impressive?

Ridiculous