NCAA Playoff Committee Rankings 2014 (Unranked)

[UmphreakDomer]

this is not a transparent process, correct? it'll be like hoops selection?

 

[Cackalacky]

Because your last several posts in multiple threads are oozing hyperbole, I will make an effort to bring my stance out a little better. I have never once said that ND wont make the playoffs. I have ONLY said that as of the date of the first committee poll release, ND will most likely be ranked around 7 as our schedule, to date, is weak. Additionally, we are just getting to the meat of our schedule and it appears the over half of the remaining teams are not very good. Notice I have yet to label anyone as garbage, or terrible or shitty...so add to this that there may actually be a two loss conference champion or god forbid Georgia wins the east and beats a one loss Alabama or Auburn. The scenarios are too difficult to run and hash out so yes I am concerned with right now more than five weeks from now and I think the possibility of ND with one loss very well could be left out, especially since we only play 12 games. This first poll will tell alot about where everyone stands, the decision making process and who looks to be in the catbird seats.

If you want to discuss it then knock off the verbal disentery and have a decent discussion. The "who cares" and "so whats" do jack squat for me.

 

[nd_fan]

4 loss USC & 4 loss Stanford are better than most 2 loss and 3 loss teams.

Better than which 2 loss and 3 loss teams?


A 2 loss Auburn or Bama or TCU team is no way worse than a 4 loss USC team.

 

[Martibhoy]

Maybe being over the pond, I'm missing out on the day to day craziness of the Playoffs, but there has already been loads of upsets this year and that will continue.

We winning out is my sole focus. We do that and I genuinely believe we are in, easily.

 

[Irish Insanity]

I think we're #6 or #7. I think Miss State, FSU, Bama, Auburn, Oregon are guaranteed to be ahead of us. Ole Miss will be 50/50. I think we're ahead of any other 1-loss team.

Im right with you. I don't like Oregon in front of us, but I can see it happening.

Listening to Mike and Mike this morning they said, statistically, there is a 33% chance all SEC teams finish with 2+ losses. And the 2 one loss teams with the highest probability to run the table is Oregon and TCU.

 

[phork]

Does it really matter how many losses USC and whoever else have? MissSt is still riding their 3 top "10" wins vs LSU, A&M and SCarolina.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

100% w/ Cack and GK on this. ND does not currently have a quality win against a currently ranked team....currently, in case I wasn't clear.

ND's schedule gets tougher with ASU, USC, and UL...but those teams have to continue to win. USC's loss was brutal for ND's SOS. The ASU game is extremely important not only because they'll probably be ND's marquee win, but they'll almost certainly be a common opponent with Oregon (common opponents are on the list of criteria for the committee).

 

[Grahambo]

...and this is why that blown call is such a big deal.

As the year goes on, the worse the SOS gets.

 

[Bugzly21]

Does it really matter how many losses USC and whoever else have? MissSt is still riding their 3 top "10" wins vs LSU, A&M and SCarolina.

Edit: it was Auburn not SCar

 

[kmoose]

100% w/ Cack and GK on this. ND does not currently have a quality win against a currently ranked team....currently, in case I wasn't clear.

That is true, but I would argue that a quality win doesn't have to come against a ranked team. If you play a Michigan, lets say.......... even in a really bad year for them, blasting them in almost every phase of the game could still be considered a quality win. Is it a win over a quality team? Probably not. But you could make an argument for it being a quality win.

 

[Grahambo]

I may be in the minority on this but I see the playoffs getting expanded to either 6 or 8 teams eventually. There are too many quality teams that deserve a chance.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

That is true, but I would argue that a quality win doesn't have to come against a ranked team. If you play a Michigan, lets say.......... even in a really bad year for them, blasting them in almost every phase of the game could still be considered a quality win. Is it a win over a quality team? Probably not. But you could make an argument for it being a quality win.

This is true. And it helps that regardless of how bad UM, Purdue, etc are, they're still D1 teams from Power 5 conferences. I will add that common opponents come into play here with MSU as they're battling for a spot in the final four as well.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I may be in the minority on this but I see the playoffs getting expanded to either 6 or 8 teams eventually. There are too many quality teams that deserve a chance.

And too much money to be made. Six was my initial thought from the very beginning w/ the top two seeds getting a bye. Seeds 3-6 are essentially play-in games to sort out who deserves the be in the final four.

 

[Grahambo]

FWIW, Bruce Feldman has the Irish at #4 in his ranking of the Top 10.

 

[ND NYC]

My biggest concern is that the committee is made up of:

5 AD's, one from each of the Power 5 conferences

Osborne who is strongly affiliated with a B-Ten school, and has history in the Big 12

Condi Rice has ties to the Pac 12 with her current position

I just worry that those above will ardent supporters of conference winners; maybe not Condi so much.


Then we have:

Tranghese who is probably still pissed that ND never joined the Big East for football (and blames ND for that conference losing teams like BC and Miami)

Ty for obvious reasons


Figure Lt General Gould will stick up for Independents and non-power 5 conference teams. No idea on Wieberg and Jernstedt.

were f^cked...

 

[Guest]

I agree with the statements on expanding teams in the playoff. Parity is here in college football and there will be plenty of 'good' 1 and even 2 loss teams. I wouldn't favor a 65-team tournament like college BB, but 8 teams sounds about right. I would even be in favor of dropping a 'regular season' game on the schedule (which for most teams involves dropping one of an assortment of cupcakes) to support a slight expansion of the playoffs.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I wouldn't be upset if conference alignment involved 6 Mega conferences and those schools played each other and only each other. No cupcake, fluff teams. The winner of each division would play each other in a conference championship and that champion would rep the conference in a 6 team playoff. A committee would select the rankings, with the top two seeds getting a first-round bye. Just my short-sighted thoughts on this matter.

 

[Irish YJ]

I agree with the statements on expanding teams in the playoff. Parity is here in college football and there will be plenty of 'good' 1 and even 2 loss teams. I wouldn't favor a 65-team tournament like college BB, but 8 teams sounds about right. I would even be in favor of dropping a 'regular season' game on the schedule (which for most teams involves dropping one of an assortment of cupcakes) to support a slight expansion of the playoffs.

No need to drop a regular season game for an 8 team playoff. Plenty of weeks in Dec and Jan to accomplish the 3 rounds.

It would be nice to have five automatic berths from the conference champions and 3 at large bids.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

No need to drop a regular season game for an 8 team playoff. Plenty of weeks in Dec and Jan to accomplish the 3 rounds.

It would be nice to have five automatic berths from the conference champions and 3 at large bids.

This is probably the most practical route.

 

[NCND]

Anyone else notice whenever a analysis makes a pro ND prediction (top 4 or game) that the reaction is "ooh, ahh" like ND is some Mid-Major. Lol I find it funny.

 

[GoIrish41]

Not aimed at anyone in particular, but a lot of posters seem to be making assertions about if this happens than that, of if that happens than this. My understanding is that the committee will come up with its own criteria to pick to the top teams. Polls, strength of schedule, quality wins/losses. These could all mean nothing, or they could mean everything. I'll wait to see the first couple of releases from the committee before I believe one way or another how they are going to come to their conclusions. I just hope they consistently apply their criteria.

 

[Old Man Mike]

Seahorn just said that Notre Dame would be his #4 team as of this stage of the season. The SEC/Bama apologist that he works with immediately deflected this into "look how Alabama will replace them". Seahorn replied that Sure Alabama winning out gets them in, but they have to do it first.

Interesting exchange.

 

[Guest]

I think limiting the teams in also promotes scheduling easier out-of-conference games. You have to have at least 8 teams to give those who play tougher schedules a shot. And there is no way to plan SOS ahead of time without scheduling cupcakes, as the top 25 tends to change a lot from year to year. The problem with 4 teams and a selection committee is too much chance for bias to screw a legitimate team from a chance at the title over one that has less losses due to a lot of cupcakes or committee bias.

 

[Cackalacky]

Not aimed at anyone in particular, but a lot of posters seem to be making assertions about if this happens than that, of if that happens than this. My understanding is that the committee will come up with its own criteria to pick to the top teams. Polls, strength of schedule, quality wins/losses. These could all mean nothing, or they could mean everything. I'll wait to see the first couple of releases from the committee before I believe one way or another how they are going to come to their conclusions. I just hope they consistently apply their criteria.

Right. We don't know how they are going to pick the teams or their justification. So projecting this unknown into the future is irrelevant at this time. For all we know, the committee could have ND out of the top 10 or #2.

 

[NDWorld247]

I found this explanation on the voting process very helpful: Your guide to how the College Football Playoff committee votes

OK, so how does it work?
The voting process has five steps, but some of those steps will need to be repeated several times before the committee arrives at its top 25.

To start, the 12 committee members -- remember, Archie Manning, committee member No. 13 will not be replaced this season -- will independently rank the top 25 teams, as they see it. To make it to the next step of the process, teams need votes from three or more of the 12 committee members. This will almost certainly leave them with more than 25 teams to consider during the next step.

Selecting the top three
From the group of teams identified in the first step of the voting process, each committee member will provide a list of the six best teams, in no particular order. After all 12 sets of nominations are tallied, the six teams with the most votes will advance to the next step. (Here's something that might confuse you: if a team doesn't make this top six, it's impossible for it to be ranked in the top three, but there's still a chance that it could end up ranked No. 4. More on this later.)

The members will then rank that group of six teams from first to sixth. A first place vote is worth one point, a second place vote is worth two points, a third place vote is worth three points, and so on. The three teams with the fewest points will be the first three teams in the playoff.

The last team in
This is where things get a little weird, so keep up. After deciding on the top three, the committee revisits that top-25-or-so group established in step one, less the teams identified as the top six. It's important to note that this excludes the three teams selected for the top six but not picked for the top the top three. I told you it was going to get weird.

From this field (initial pool of top 25 or so teams, minus the top six), each committee member lists his/her six best teams, again in no particular order. The three teams receiving the most nominations will then be added to the the three teams selected for the initial top six but excluded from the top three. From this new group of six, the committee members will decide spots four through six just as they decided spots one through three. A first place vote is worth one point, a second place vote is worth two points, a third place vote is worth three points, and so on. The three teams of the six with the fewest points will be ranked No. 4 through No. 6. And, of course, the team that emerges from this step ranked No. 4 and would be the last team in the College Football Playoff. (See? This is how, in theory, you could miss the initial top six and still end up in the top four.)

The rest of the field
To fill out spots seven through 25, the committee members will repeat theses steps until all 25 teams are ranked. If this all seems just a little more complicated than it probably needs to be, that's because it is.

Not aimed at anyone in particular, but a lot of posters seem to be making assertions about if this happens than that, of if that happens than this. My understanding is that the committee will come up with its own criteria to pick to the top teams. Polls, strength of schedule, quality wins/losses. These could all mean nothing, or they could mean everything. I'll wait to see the first couple of releases from the committee before I believe one way or another how they are going to come to their conclusions. I just hope they consistently apply their criteria.

I remember reading something, maybe the Condi Rice interview last week or the week before, that each member will have their own criteria. This may be what you're saying, but my understanding was it would be 12 different ideas, not one that all committee members must follow.

At the end of the day there is a lot they can look at...wins/losses, SOS, offensive/defensive rankings, injuries/suspensions, etc...but my hope is it comes down to the good ole question "who is the most deserving?" as the BS call that cost ND the FSU game will look very favorable in the committee's mind.

My prediction is we end up in the top 6 (4-6) in the initial release.

 

[TDHeysus]

I think ND will initially be 6th in the playoff poll....and here is my prediction for the final playoff poll at the end of the year.


In no particular order:

FSU
Auburn
ND
Oregon

 

[ickythump1225]

I found this explanation on the voting process very helpful: Your guide to how the College Football Playoff committee votes






I remember reading something, maybe the Condi Rice interview last week or the week before, that each member will have their own criteria. This may be what you're saying, but my understanding was it would be 12 different ideas, not one that all committee members must follow.

At the end of the day there is a lot they can look at...wins/losses, SOS, offensive/defensive rankings, injuries/suspensions, etc...but my hope is it comes down to the good ole question "who is the most deserving?" as the BS call that cost ND the FSU game will look very favorable in the committee's mind.

My prediction is we end up in the top 6 (4-6) in the initial release.

I think this all sounds nebulous and I'm not a big fan of the playoff committee at all. Not at all. I'd rather just keep the BCS rankings and pick top 4 based off those rankings.

 

[IrishLax]

I think you'll see heavy conference bias and we'll end up somewhere around 8.

 

[Old Man Mike]

Actually, I've found that in similar "secret criteria" situations, if there is something like "homer bias", that usually results in an outsider getting more votes [on the theory that it freezes other --- in this case "conferences" --- out; bragging rights and all]. I've seen this in political elections for instance where boards or groups of elected officials are at play. The "different one" tends to get votes as opposed to the obvious rival.

Not saying that this will happen and consequently favor ND, but we ARE the different one and human behaviors are extremely unpredictable in such things.

 

[TheOneWhoKnocks]

I think this all sounds nebulous and I'm not a big fan of the playoff committee at all. Not at all. I'd rather just keep the BCS rankings and pick top 4 based off those rankings.

That's what I thought it was going to be. Not sure why they changed it.