2017/2018 CFB Playoff Rankings | Page 10 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

2017/2018 CFB Playoff Rankings

If we beat Clemson we would have beaten #3 and #1 (when we played them)

None of this matters if we lose that game.
 
Clemson is going to beat the breath outta the stiffbreezes. Most of you already know it even though you would never post it here.

Anyway, I'd be curious to see what you guys top 10 would look like. No matter what the committee or AP or any other polls looks like, all I hear is Bama homers and SEC bias. So what would your top 10 look like...
 
Clemson is going to beat the breath outta the stiffbreezes. Most of you already know it even though you would never post it here.

Anyway, I'd be curious to see what you guys top 10 would look like. No matter what the committee or AP or any other polls looks like, all I hear is Bama homers and SEC bias. So what would your top 10 look like...
Good. Canes suck. Alabama rocks. All is clear.

I have no top 10. I don't worry about 3-loss teams some 2-loss teams.

1) Clemson
2) Oklahoma
3) Wisconsin
4) Auburn
5) Georgia
6) Alabama
7) Miami
8) Ohio State

The final top 4 should be: winner of Clemson/Miami; winner of Wisconsin/Ohio State; winner of Georgia/Auburn and Oklahoma (assuming they beat TCU). Should TCU upset Oklahoma that leaves the door open for the loser of Clemson/Miami; loser of Georgia/Auburn; and maybe Wisconsin if they lost to Ohio State.
 
Last edited:
Good. Canes suck. Alabama rocks. All is clear.

I have no top 10. I don't worry about 3-loss teams some 2-loss teams.

1) Clemson
2) Oklahoma
3) Wisconsin
4) Auburn
5) Georgia
6) Alabama
7) Miami
8) Ohio State

The final top 4 should be: winner of Clemson/Miami; winner of Wisconsin/Ohio State; winner of Georgia/Auburn and Oklahoma (assuming they beat TCU). Should TCU upset Oklahoma that leaves the door open for the loser of Clemson/Miami; loser of Georgia/Auburn; and maybe Wisconsin if they lost to Ohio State.

Well we're going to disagree on a few things, get to that later.

But first, how do you figure Georgia's loss at Auburn is better than Alabama's loss at Auburn when Georgia lost by twice the difference? Secondly, how much weight do you put on losses?
 
Well we're going to disagree on a few things, get to that later.

But first, how do you figure Georgia's loss at Auburn is better than Alabama's loss at Auburn when Georgia lost by twice the difference? Secondly, how much weight do you put on losses?
No we don't. You asked for an opinion and that's mine.

As I told you before I weight the participation in a Championship game high. Alabama had the chance and they screwed the pooch. It sucks but that is reality.
Usually 1 loss early in the season can be compensated for but at a late stage like that? It has always been that way.
Miami's luck is that they play in a Championship game and have a chance to somewhat make up for that loss.
 
No we don't. You asked for an opinion and that's mine.

As I told you before I weight the participation in a Championship game high. Alabama had the chance and they screwed the pooch. It sucks but that is reality.
Usually 1 loss early in the season can be compensated for but at a late stage like that? It has always been that way.
Miami's luck is that they play in a Championship game and have a chance to somewhat make up for that loss.


The purpose was to determine how some of you view the entirety of the process, and why you constantly yell out bias and fail to understand what the job of the committee is in the first place.

Basically you just want a system where all conference champions get in the playoff. Hell, you don't need a committee for that.

All you want is a system that states conference champions get in the playoff. Which runs directly opposed to what the committee's job is. The job of the committee is to get the 4 best teams in college football into a 4 team playoff.

You're placing way too much emphasis on "participation" in a conference championship game. Georgia has done nothing to EARN a spot in a conference championship game over Alabama other than being in the weaker division. They'd still be representing the East with 3 losses for ****'s sake. Furthermore in common opponents Alabama was the better team anyway.

The committee's job is certainly to weigh conference championships properly, but not at the expense of common sense. The human element must be a factor, otherwise you can just use computers like the BCS. Nobody liked that remember? It said LSU and Alabama were the 2 best teams in the country and we got a rematch in 2011.

The reason some people see bias where there is no bias is because they're focusing on the wrong things, and not focusing enough on what they should be focusing on.

The committee has already set the precedent for a 1 loss non conference champion to get in the playoff last year when they put Ohio St. in over 2 loss Penn St....who was conference champion and beat Ohio St. head to head. And the last two teams they let in the playoff from the BIG-10 both got shutout. They didn't even score. Neither of em.

All I'm saying is the committee isn't necessarily going to view it like you view it. Nor should they. They're most likely going to have Alabama at #5.

The winner of Auburn/Georgia is in. The loser is out.

The winner of Clemson/Miami is in. The loser is left out even over a 1 loss Alabama, because whichever one it ends up being is going to have 2 losses with one of them being a bad loss.

Wisconsin is in if they beat Ohio St. If Ohio St. wins, both are out. They're not putting a 2 loss Ohio St. in over a 1 loss Alabama.

Here's why...Ohio St. got clobbered by 31 against Iowa, and clobbered at home by Oklahoma. No team that loses by 31 points to anybody anywhere deserves to be in a playoff. Period. Certainly not from a conference that's been shutout in the playoff 2 years in a row. Take your conference championship to the Rose Bowl. Bye.

Oklahoma is in if they beat TCU. If TCU wins, both are out. Just like the BIG-10.

The PAC-12 has been out. Take your 2 loss conference champion USC or 3 loss conference champion Stanford and take it to the Rose Bowl. We told you bye a month ago.

Bottom line is, if Oklahoma or Wisconsin lose, Alabama is sitting there at #5 with 1 loss and the best resume left, and they're probably in the playoff at #4.

Two SEC teams would get in. Not because of bias, but because their job is to get the 4 best and most deserving teams in the playoff.
 
Last edited:
The purpose was to determine how some of you view the entirety of the process, and why you constantly yell out bias and fail to understand what the job of the committee is in the first place.

Basically you just want a system where all conference champions get in the playoff. Hell, you don't need a committee for that.

All you want is a system that states conference champions get in the playoff. Which runs directly opposed to what the committee's job is. The job of the committee is to get the 4 best teams in college football into a 4 team playoff.

You're placing way too much emphasis on "participation" in a conference championship game. Georgia has done nothing to EARN a spot in a conference championship game over Alabama other than being in the weaker division. They'd still be representing the East with 3 losses for ****'s sake. Furthermore in common opponents Alabama was the better team anyway.

The committee's job is certainly to weigh conference championships properly, but not at the expense of common sense. The human element must be a factor, otherwise you can just use computers like the BCS. Nobody liked that remember? It said LSU and Alabama were the 2 best teams in the country and we got a rematch in 2011.

The reason some people see bias where there is no bias is because they're focusing on the wrong things, and not focusing enough on what they should be focusing on.

The committee has already set the precedent for a 1 loss non conference champion to get in the playoff last year when they put Ohio St. in over 2 loss Penn St....who was conference champion and beat Ohio St. head to head. And the last two teams they let in the playoff from the BIG-10 both got shutout. They didn't even score. Neither of em.

All I'm saying is the committee isn't necessarily going to view it like you view it. Nor should they. They're most likely going to have Alabama at #5.

The winner of Auburn/Georgia is in. The loser is out.

The winner of Clemson/Miami is in. The loser is left out even over a 1 loss Alabama, because whichever one it ends up being is going to have 2 losses with one of them being a bad loss.

Wisconsin is in if they beat Ohio St. If Ohio St. wins, both are out. They're not putting a 2 loss Ohio St. in over a 1 loss Alabama.

Here's why...Ohio St. got clobbered by 31 against Iowa, and clobbered at home by Oklahoma. No team that loses by 31 points to anybody anywhere deserves to be in a playoff. Period. Certainly not from a conference that's been shutout in the playoff 2 years in a row. Take your conference championship to the Rose Bowl. Bye.

Oklahoma is in if they beat TCU. If TCU wins, both are out. Just like the BIG-10.

The PAC-12 has been out. Take your 2 loss conference champion USC or 3 loss conference champion Stanford and take it to the Rose Bowl. We told you bye a month ago.

Bottom line is, if Oklahoma or Wisconsin lose, Alabama is sitting there at #5 with 1 loss and the best resume left, and they're probably in the playoff at #4.

Two SEC teams would get in. Not because of bias, but because their job is to get the 4 best and most deserving teams in the playoff.

Let's not have that discussion again and especially not here. You are the old fashion guy who loves the tradition of polls by humans. I realize that college football has developed into major business with millions of dollars at stake. You cannot make important football decisions by some humans with so much on the line. With all these cup cakes on teams schedules how can you tell that teams are really the best?
Just when we started the conversation with the first playoff poll coming out and I was saying that ND has no business being in the top 4. What was I told (paraphrased)? They are the experts and watch every game and they have it right. Guess not, ND is nowhere to be found and come Tuesday only one team will be left from the original 4. And Clemson is only left because outside NC State every team they played since Nov 1 is crap.

The only way to determine a true National Championship is on the field. If you are unbeaten and you lose to a 3-loss Conference winner - guess what? You are not good enough. If you have a bunch of cup cakes scheduled to get to unbeaten you don't deserve it just by the merits of being "undefeated" while another team went through a tough conference incl championship game.

Alabama has no resume this year. It is only in the mind of biased observers.

But I am not going into that discussion again. I love you and your draft wisdom but you are too ingrained in tradition and when it comes to polls you show an extreme bias that it makes no sense to discuss this any further. Human polls have outlived its usefulness. But the good news for you is that it will remain that way.
 
I do agree with Slimm that if Wisconsin or Oklahoma fall that means Alabama is in. A 1 Loss Bama beats out a 2 loss ACC loser
 
CFP committee would be violating own policy if it picks Alabama over one-loss UM

http://www.miamiherald.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/barry-jackson/article186580503.html

That's Barry's take although when you have human emotion involved there's no telling what can happen.

I think it's best just to see what happens. We win and it's a conversation. We lose and it's just meaningless banter .

Personally I'd like to see Bama and the Canes both get in and settle it on the field.
 
Let's not have that discussion again and especially not here. You are the old fashion guy who loves the tradition of polls by humans. I realize that college football has developed into major business with millions of dollars at stake. You cannot make important football decisions by some humans with so much on the line. With all these cup cakes on teams schedules how can you tell that teams are really the best?
Just when we started the conversation with the first playoff poll coming out and I was saying that ND has no business being in the top 4. What was I told (paraphrased)? They are the experts and watch every game and they have it right. Guess not, ND is nowhere to be found and come Tuesday only one team will be left from the original 4. And Clemson is only left because outside NC State every team they played since Nov 1 is crap.

The only way to determine a true National Championship is on the field. If you are unbeaten and you lose to a 3-loss Conference winner - guess what? You are not good enough. If you have a bunch of cup cakes scheduled to get to unbeaten you don't deserve it just by the merits of being "undefeated" while another team went through a tough conference incl championship game.

Alabama has no resume this year. It is only in the mind of biased observers.

But I am not going into that discussion again. I love you and your draft wisdom but you are too ingrained in tradition and when it comes to polls you show an extreme bias that it makes no sense to discuss this any further. Human polls have outlived its usefulness. But the good news for you is that it will remain that way.

I'm not in any way married to human polls. As long as we get the 2 best and most deserving teams playing each other for the national title, I don't particularly care how we got there. As long as we don't diminish the regular season and make it meaningless in the process. Where you and I differ is that I know there's no way we can get there using what you propose.

These big regular season matchups ARE playoff games. Furthermore, you and I do agree on the cupcakes, and so does Saban. I don't think any Power 5 teams competing for the big prize should be playing anything other than Power 5 competition.

Keep in mind what Mike Slive proposed many years ago that the BIG-10 commissioner wouldn't sign off on. Then did a complete 180 after the LSU/Bama rematch in 2011.
 
CFP committee would be violating own policy if it picks Alabama over one-loss UM

http://www.miamiherald.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/barry-jackson/article186580503.html

That's Barry's take although when you have human emotion involved there's no telling what can happen.

I think it's best just to see what happens. We win and it's a conversation. We lose and it's just meaningless banter .

Personally I'd like to see Bama and the Canes both get in and settle it on the field.

There's literally a 0% chance that the committee would choose a 1 loss Alabama over a 1 loss Miami team that are conference champions. None whatsoever.

He wasted a lot of time even writing that.
 
There's literally a 0% chance that the committee would choose a 1 loss Alabama over a 1 loss Miami team that are conference champions. None whatsoever.

He wasted a lot of time even writing that.
Glad you feel that way as a Bama fan. These guys are freaking out.
 
Good. Canes suck. Alabama rocks. All is clear.

I have no top 10. I don't worry about 3-loss teams some 2-loss teams.

1) Clemson
2) Oklahoma
3) Wisconsin
4) Auburn
5) Georgia
6) Alabama
7) Miami
8) Ohio State

The final top 4 should be: winner of Clemson/Miami; winner of Wisconsin/Ohio State; winner of Georgia/Auburn and Oklahoma (assuming they beat TCU). Should TCU upset Oklahoma that leaves the door open for the loser of Clemson/Miami; loser of Georgia/Auburn; and maybe Wisconsin if they lost to Ohio State.

I was pretty much right on except, of course, for the screw job setup putting Alabama at 5.

Playoff rankings:
1) Clemson
2) Oklahoma
3) Wisconsin
4) Auburn
5) Alabama
6) Georgia
7) Miami
8) Ohio State
 
Back
Top Bottom