NCAA Playoff Committee Rankings 2014 (Unranked)

[Bishop2b5]

Some of you guys seem to be obsessed with resumes and quality of wins, and seem to think that's the only thing that matters. It's not that it's not important, but it's far from being the only thing that counts or the only thing the committee or voters take into account. They also look at quality of play against all opponents. Most voters would (and probably rightly so) put a team higher in the polls if they'd played a slightly weaker schedule or had fewer marquee wins, but looked dominant, than another team with a better resume, but who had barely squeaked by some of those teams or looked sloppy. In the end, the voters and committee are trying to decide who is actually the better team, and resume is just one factor.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Some of you guys seem to be obsessed with resumes and quality of wins, and seem to think that's the only thing that matters. It's not that it's not important, but it's far from being the only thing that counts or the only thing the committee or voters take into account. They also look at quality of play against all opponents. Most voters would (and probably rightly so) put a team higher in the polls if they'd played a slightly weaker schedule or had fewer marquee wins, but looked dominant, than another team with a better resume, but who had barely squeaked by some of those teams or looked sloppy. In the end, the voters and committee are trying to decide who is actually the better team, and resume is just one factor.

Agree but that's called being a "fan." While I think we are better than Auburn, right now I have no issue with them being third and Bama sixth. In the end Bama, much like the rest, just needs to worry about themselves. Win out and it will work itself out. Notre Dame is in the same boat. Win out and be 11-1 and it will be hard to keep them out.

 

[stlnd01]

On MSU: Nebraska's ONLY loss right now is to MSU. Considering MSU beat a power-five team with only one loss and we can't say we have beat a power-five team with less than 3 losses, I don't see why there is such an uproar about them being ranked ahead of us.

On OSU: We need to root for them to beat MSU in a sloppy game.

On Louisville: I want them to beat FSU considering the emphasis the committee seems to have placed on beating quality teams. Louisville would probably jump to the top 15-20 if they won out before we played them.

On Stanford: Stanford/Oregon may be the most important game on the national schedule.

On Ole Miss: This is the one team I was shocked to see so high. That's where the SEC bias showed, if at all.

On Alabama: They actually have a very similar resume to us but have beat teams much more impressively. Going to need them to lose to Auburn.

On MSU: True, but do you actually think Nebraska's better than Stanford? Yeah they've lost three, but I'd take Stanford head-to-head. Beyond that I think Sparty's still getting residuals for the Rose Bowl.

On OSU: Ideally for us they beat MSU, then lose to Michigan. Stranger things have happened. Go Blue.

On Louisville: Torn here. I don't really think that FSU game is going to win us more points as the season wears on. But if we beat them, I have a hard time seeing Louisville finishing ranked, so it'll just be another win over a middling team for us.

On Stanford. Absolutely. Go Tree. Also, go Sun Devils.

On Ole Miss. Yeah. But they lost close to LSU in Baton Rouge on a Saturday. They also beat Alabama. And I think they're better than Miss. State. I'd put 'em high. Auburn's the team that surprised me. Guess that'll sort itself out on Saturday.

On 'Bama. I think they make the playoff, maybe wind up winning the SEC. They're getting better, and they've been there before. Always bet on Alabama.

 

[stlnd01]

Some of you guys seem to be obsessed with resumes and quality of wins, and seem to think that's the only thing that matters. It's not that it's not important, but it's far from being the only thing that counts or the only thing the committee or voters take into account. They also look at quality of play against all opponents. Most voters would (and probably rightly so) put a team higher in the polls if they'd played a slightly weaker schedule or had fewer marquee wins, but looked dominant, than another team with a better resume, but who had barely squeaked by some of those teams or looked sloppy. In the end, the voters and committee are trying to decide who is actually the better team, and resume is just one factor.

Yup. The eyeball test matters. I think the North Carolina game, in particular, hurt us quite a bit. We win that by 21, we're 8th.

 

[IrishinSyria]

14 of the 16 teams with 1 loss will play each other...


Let that sink in

Means 7 of them will have a great resume :jawdrop:

 

[MNIrishman]

On MSU: True, but do you actually think Nebraska's better than Stanford? Yeah they've lost three, but I'd take Stanford head-to-head. Beyond that I think Sparty's still getting residuals for the Rose Bowl.

On OSU: Ideally for us they beat MSU, then lose to Michigan. Stranger things have happened. Go Blue.

On Louisville: Torn here. I don't really think that FSU game is going to win us more points as the season wears on. But if we beat them, I have a hard time seeing Louisville finishing ranked, so it'll just be another win over a middling team for us.

On Stanford. Absolutely. Go Tree. Also, go Sun Devils.

On Ole Miss. Yeah. But they lost close to LSU in Baton Rouge on a Saturday. They also beat Alabama. And I think they're better than Miss. State. I'd put 'em high. Auburn's the team that surprised me. Guess that'll sort itself out on Saturday.

On 'Bama. I think they make the playoff, maybe wind up winning the SEC. They're getting better, and they've been there before. Always bet on Alabama.

You make me sick.

 

[NOLAIrish]

Some of you guys seem to be obsessed with resumes and quality of wins, and seem to think that's the only thing that matters. It's not that it's not important, but it's far from being the only thing that counts or the only thing the committee or voters take into account. They also look at quality of play against all opponents. Most voters would (and probably rightly so) put a team higher in the polls if they'd played a slightly weaker schedule or had fewer marquee wins, but looked dominant, than another team with a better resume, but who had barely squeaked by some of those teams or looked sloppy. In the end, the voters and committee are trying to decide who is actually the better team, and resume is just one factor.

I agree with the sentiment here. It looks like they emphasized a) quality of opponents beaten, b) quality of play over all opponents, and c) quality of losses in that order. Through that lens, I think the Ole Miss ranking makes a lot more sense.

Bama actually winds up being the oddball. They really haven't beaten anyone and have two pretty unimpressive wins over middling opponents (Arkansas and Tennessee). I think their resume puts them closer to 9. K-State's a little shaky, too, but the argument's there.

If that's the right understanding of the framework, thing's'll get interesting over the next two weeks. Arizona, ASU and Utah have an opportunity to pick up quality wins this week that could muddy the waters a bit. They're also going to have to figure out what to do with the loser of Auburn-Ole Miss. The week after that, we play ASU, MSU plays OSU, TCU plays KSU, and Oregon plays Utah (I'm intentionally leaving off Alabama-LSU on the basis of LSU being generally a mess this year; plus Bama gets Miss. St. and Auburn at home later in Novemer, so the LSU game isn't going to matter).

 

[irishfan]

So, here's what we should be rooting for IMO in order if importance. All pretty obvious things:

1) Finish 11-1. Apart from ASU, we can't afford to win any game by less than a TD. Need some style points. Sorry, Navy.
2) Only 1 SEC team to end the year with 1-loss. I think this is pretty likely. Lot of carnage left in the SEC West.
3) Oregon to lose. That would leave AZ and Utah as the only 1-loss teams. Neither one is finishing the year 12-1. This also helps negate MSU's "good" loss.
4) TCU to lose. They still have WVU and KSU and Texas. They're the only threat from the Big-12. K-State has a brutal tough schedule left, and Baylor is too far behind.
5) Michigan State to lose. Or minimum win ugly against OSU and B1G Championship game. I think its impossible for OSU or Nebraska to jump us right now. There's a chance we could jump MSU even if they keep winning, but we need some help.
6) Everyone on our schedule to finish the year strong. We need the PAC-12 guys to bring it in November. We need Cuse, UNC, NW, Navy to finish .500 or better. We need to be able to say we played 10 bowl teams. Purdue/Michigan the likely ones who wont make it to .500.
7) I have no clue if we need FSU to win out or not. Part of me thinks we could jump them if they go 12-1 with their weak schedule. Part of me thinks that's crazy and there's no way they will rank us ahead of a team who beat us. The committee was very inconsistent when it came to measuring head-to-head so who knows? If I had to pick, I'd say we should root for them to win out. I think the defending champ is gonna be in the Top 4 whether they go 13-0 or 12-1, so might as well have them go 13-0 and finish #1 for our SOS.

 

[WaveDomer]

I remember when ND made the NCG against 'Bama, we were all going over the same scenarios halfway through the season. And that was only with the top 2 making it. It's early right now. There is always chaos in the last 3 weeks of the season. Just take care of business and it will work itself out.

 

[GATTACA!]

So, here's what we should be rooting for IMO in order if importance. All pretty obvious things:

1) Finish 11-1. Apart from ASU, we can't afford to win any game by less than a TD. Need some style points. Sorry, Navy.
2) Only 1 SEC team to end the year with 1-loss. I think this is pretty likely. Lot of carnage left in the SEC West.
3) Oregon to lose. That would leave AZ and Utah as the only 1-loss teams. Neither one is finishing the year 12-1. This also helps negate MSU's "good" loss.
4) TCU to lose. They still have WVU and KSU and Texas. They're the only threat from the Big-12. K-State has a brutal tough schedule left, and Baylor is too far behind.
5) Michigan State to lose. Or minimum win ugly against OSU and B1G Championship game. I think its impossible for OSU or Nebraska to jump us right now. There's a chance we could jump MSU even if they keep winning, but we need some help.
6) Everyone on our schedule to finish the year strong. We need the PAC-12 guys to bring it in November. We need Cuse, UNC, NW, Navy to finish .500 or better. We need to be able to say we played 10 bowl teams. Purdue/Michigan the likely ones who wont make it to .500.
7) I have no clue if we need FSU to win out or not. Part of me thinks we could jump them if they go 12-1 with their weak schedule. Part of me thinks that's crazy and there's no way they will rank us ahead of a team who beat us. The committee was very inconsistent when it came to measuring head-to-head so who knows? If I had to pick, I'd say we should root for them to win out. I think the defending champ is gonna be in the Top 4 whether they go 13-0 or 12-1, so might as well have them go 13-0 and finish #1 for our SOS.

I think the likelihood of us jumping a 12-1 FSU outweighs the benefit of having a "good loss". We all saw what that good loss did for us today, almost nothing. The benefit of opening up another spot for a 1 loss could be critical. IMO a 12-0 FSU and the SEC champ are locks, if FSU goes down now there are 3 spots to fill.

 

[GATTACA!]

How about you go fuck yourself Pat Forde.

 

[Senoj13]

I took a look a the committee members again and I think it would be interesting to see what financial benefit/bonuses some of these members would get from their employers once bowl season is over. Do AD's have incentives in their contracts for bowl appearances like coaches do? When conference schools share bowl revenue, does that all go back into the athletic program and when it does, are bonuses funded for the AD's of those schools? If so, there is a big conflict of interest with about half the members.

 

[irish4ever]

I think the likelihood of us jumping a 12-1 FSU outweighs the benefit of having a "good loss". We all saw what that good loss did for us today, almost nothing. The benefit of opening up another spot for a 1 loss could be critical. IMO a 12-0 FSU and the SEC champ are locks, if FSU goes down now there are 3 spots to fill.

Ditto! If Louisville beats F$U and then ND beats down Louisville later this yr. (in addition to ASU), that's (2) quality wins in the second half of the season. ND needs to win out, and have Louisville and ASU to lose only to ND between now and conference champioships! The "good loss" to F$U did virtually nothing for ND's ranking.

 

[Huntr]

2 undefeated teams on top, 1 loss teams ranked based on quality of their wins, then quality losses.

Seems pretty straight-forward

 

[Guest]

1. I checked the thread to see how the meltdown was going. You guys didn't disappoint, thanks!

2. Check the Stanford gameday thread. I predicted that they weren't worth a damn and that beating them would be useless.

3. Remember when EVERYONE said how freaking awesome the committee would be? I didn't.

4. EVERYONE is on the nuts of the SEC West, not just ESPN. In fact, the SEC is significantly lower overall in the ESPN power rankings than the committee rankings.

5. Yes, this is an "I told you so" post. I don't care. I've been ridiculed all season for being a hater and every other thing. We haven't beaten ANYBODY this year and the rankings reflect that.

Congrats for being right. I also said yesterday that committees tend to be very biased versus polls at large. Having a small group of people determine the fate of all of college football is a ridiculous design. Committees in other fields, especially government, are wrought with problems (bias, corruption, payoffs, etc) because it allows corrupting a very small segment to affect the entire population, which invites increased corruption to occur.

I also said that having 8 teams in a playoff is better due to the inevitable yearly 'screw job' in which several good 1 loss teams (and maybe some pretty good 2 loss teams) feel like they got jobbed. ND looks to be one of those teams this year, which is why I said the night of the FSU loss that ND will always have beat teams convincingly to get any respect.

 

[Irish Insanity]

I dont think a 1 loss ND makes it no matter how things above us shake out now. We are down at 10 with 5 spots we need to jump. Our last game is 11/28, every other team we will be fighting for a position with will have a conference championship game later than our last game. They all play a week later and will have another shot to be seen. It's just like not moving up, or even falling back, on a bye week in the polls.
I was wrong when I posted about MSU last night. We don't share just 1 common opponent this year, we share 2. And we beat both by a larger margin. No way thwy should be ahead of us. Just sayin

 

[bkess8]

How about you go fuck yourself Pat Forde.

I was thinking the same thing when I was checking my twitter feed yesterday! Pat Forde is now on my list!

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I had to sleep on the results of the first rankings. This, in a hopefully coherent way, is how I feel about it all.

The committee seems to only care about wins and "quality wins" are completely subjective to them. This is evident when looking no further than where the B1G teams are ranked. Early in the season, the B1G teams were losing left and right to OoC teams, or barely beating them. Everyone said the B1G is down this year and with MSU getting smoked by Oregon, OSU getting beat by VT, and Nebraska squeaking by McNese St no one felt a team from the B1G deserved to get in because once OoC was done, their wins (and "quality" wins) would be against each other, ultimately proving nothing. Yet here we are with MSU at #8, Nebraska at #15, and OSU at #16. I'll ask this, Who have they beat?! Nebraska and OSU have literally beaten no one. NO ONE. Not one quality win on the board. But yet, MSU beating them makes it a quality win? That's the most asinine thing I have ever seen. And it's the complete opposite to what everyone felt should happen (again, B1G teams beating each other proves nothing).

Next, the committee is clearly not concerned with losses, or the "quality" of the loss. This is evident by looking no further than MSU's blowout loss to Oregon versus ND's last second loss (on a questionable call) to FSU. IMO, there is no way a team deserves a high ranking if they get blown out. And when you are comparing numerous one-loss teams, you have to find ways to be picky and sort them out. If it's me, I'm immediately discarding any one-loss team if they've been blown out. Yet here's MSU sitting TWO-SPOTS ahead of ND.

Third, the committee's criteria of common opponents is laughable. Look no further than MSU/ND. Both share UM and Purdue, yet ND beat both teams by more points than MSU did.

Clearly, my main gripe about the initial rankings are the B1G teams, especially MSU. (The nerve of OSU fans bitching about being ranked so low is comical btw). I can make a case for TCU and KSU being where they are for now. (However, OU is quickly becoming a non-quality win if they keep losing...Think the committee will adjust accordingly? I don't.)

Look, I know there is a lot of football to be played. I'm not crazy about the SEC-W bias, but that will work itself out (hopefully). I'm not entirely convinced, however, that the committee will drop a 2-loss SEC-W team very low in the rankings though. But I digress. ND has to win out or this is all moot. But everyone needs to start preparing themselves for a one-loss ND team NOT getting into the Final Four. ND needs some help getting in now.

 

[koonja]

The only two I have a problem with are Ole Miss at 4 and MSU at 8. Win out and we're fine. For anyone saying an 11-1 ND team won't make it, my offer of 1 billion vbucks to your 1 is on the table.

Ole Miss
vs. Auburn
@ Arkansas
vs. MSU

Auburn
@Ole Miss
vs. Texas AM
vs. Georgia
@Bama

Oregon
vs. Stanford
@Utah
@ Oregon St.

Mississippi St.
vs. Arkansas
@Bama
@ Ole Miss

Alabama
@LSU
vs. Mississippi St.
vs. Auburn

Georgia
vs. Florida
vs. Auburn

TCU
@WVU
vs. KSU
A Texas

KSU
@TCU
@WVU
@Baylor

MSU
@OSU

Not worried.

 

[Cackalacky]

Per BGIFs post earlier

Here's their Top 25 with Sagarin's Strength of Schedule following the Won Loss Record.


1. MissSt (7-0) 17
2. FSU (7-0) 41
3. AUB (6-1) 2
4. Miss (7-1) 7
5. ORE (7-1) 34
6. ALA (7-1) 3
7. TCU (6-1) 48
8. MSU (7-1) 63
9. KSU (6-1) 37
10. ND(6-1) 36
11. UGA (6-1) 22
12. Arizona (6-1) 49
13. Baylor (6-1) 54
14. ASU (6-1) 30
15. NEB (7-1) 58
16. OSU (6-1) 60
17. Utah (6-1) 38
18. OU (5-2) 11
19. LSU (7-2) 9
20. WVU (6-2) 13
21. Clem (6-2) 25
22. UCLA (6-2) 12
23. ECU (6-1) 114
24. Duke (6-1) 116
25. UL (6-2) 66

Here is the reordered top 25 based on Sagarin Strength of Schedule model

AUB (6-1) 2
ALA (7-1) 3
Miss (7-1) 7
LSU (7-2) 9
OU (5-2) 11
UCLA (6-2) 12
WVU (6-2) 13
MissSt (7-0) 17
UGA (6-1) 22
Clem (6-2) 25
ASU (6-1) 30
ORE (7-1) 34
ND(6-1) 36
KSU (6-1) 37
Utah (6-1) 38
FSU (7-0) 41
TCU (6-1) 48
Arizona (6-1) 49
Baylor (6-1) 54
NEB (7-1) 58
OSU (6-1) 60
MSU (7-1) 63
UL (6-2) 66
ECU (6-1) 114
Duke (6-1) 116

My knowledge of how Sagarin's model works is limited but, this is quite interesting if the committee is looking at the body of work as one of the components. There is clear Big10 bias in the committee. It is also clear that while two loss teams are less impressive some of those are against SOS that are better than NDs (relatively speaking). What is also clear is that our schedule was not nearly as daunting as we initially expected.

I am also gonna add that if ND wants to get the street cred we feel it deserves, it needs to beat the big dogs convincingly. No excuses. Win the games that matter.

 

[Irish#1]

Four spots... five conferences and Notre Dame.

It will all be moot in a few years when the playoff goes to eight teams.

This is my wish!!
But does that mean 5 automatic berths for conf champions, plus 3 SEC teams?

It will expand to eight teams just like the NCAA tourney expanded. Really not sure they didn't go with eight to begin with because everyone knows it will happen. Anyway, I think when they go to eight, you may see it change so the conference champions get an automatic bid (like the NCAA tourney) and the other three positions are filled by a committee vote.

 

[Irish YJ]

I dont think a 1 loss ND makes it no matter how things above us shake out now. We are down at 10 with 5 spots we need to jump. Our last game is 11/28, every other team we will be fighting for a position with will have a conference championship game later than our last game. They all play a week later and will have another shot to be seen. It's just like not moving up, or even falling back, on a bye week in the polls.
I was wrong when I posted about MSU last night. We don't share just 1 common opponent this year, we share 2. And we beat both by a larger margin. No way thwy should be ahead of us. Just sayin

Auburn was number 11 last year at this time and made it to the top 2.
We can make it to the top 4 with some luck. It's not too much of a stretch to think most SEC teams ahead of us end up with 2 losses. Stanford could do us a solid beating Oregon, or Utah could beat them in 2 weeks. Or they could fall to the Pac12 south champ... MSU could fall to OSU or PS. KSt has 3 tough games on the road, and TCU plays 2 tough ones as well. Lots of opportunity for us to move up.

If we win out, and don't make it to the top 4, I'm OK with it. We'll be a preseason top 5 team going into next year with almost everyone back. Our schedule is pretty positive with only Clemson and Stanford as tough road games. Perfectly happy with going to a big bowl this year and killing it next year.

Not directed at you, but if everyone would look back at the 2014 predictions thread, most said we go 8-4 or 9-3. I think I said 10-2. We've overachieved this year with all the youngsters. It's likely due to some of the teams on our schedule being weaker than we thought, but nonetheless our young guns have picked up valuable experience and will be better for it in 2015. The kids in year 2 of BVGs system, and year 2 of EG part 2 and BK fast pace part 2 will be crazy good IMO. If we do make it to the top 4, f'ing fantastic, but I won't be a depressed fan if we don't. The future is bright.

 

[Irish YJ]

It will expand to eight teams just like the NCAA tourney expanded. Really not sure they didn't go with eight to begin with because everyone knows it will happen. Anyway, I think when they go to eight, you may see it change so the conference champions get an automatic bid (like the NCAA tourney) and the other three positions are filled by a committee vote.

Like Triple T and I were saying last night. It will be 5 automatic bids plus 3 SEC teams, or 4 automatic bids (Big 10 giving up their seat to the SEC) + 4 SEC teams

 

[BleedBlueGold]

Thanks BGIF and Cack for that post. ND in at 10 based on Sagarin makes me feel better about my personal rankings (ND at #9). And yes, the B1G bias is pretty obvious here and it's part of my rant a few posts up. This only backs that up.

 

[rocket66]

NCAA Playoff Committee Rankings 2014 (ND #10)

NCAA Playoff Committee Rankings 2014 (ND #10)

What sucks the most is that if that final flag isn't thrown at FSU, then ND is sitting at #2 or 3 right now. But because it was thrown and it goes as a loss (on the road!), then ND falls all the way to #10. It just doesn't make sense to me not to consider all of the variables in these games. Crazy how the perception is black and white simply based on Wins and Losses.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

The only two I have a problem with are Ole Miss at 4 and MSU at 8. Win out and we're fine. For anyone saying an 11-1 ND team won't make it, my offer of 1 billion vbucks to your 1 is on the table.

Ole Miss
vs. Auburn
@ Arkansas
vs. MSU

Auburn
@Ole Miss
vs. Texas AM
vs. Georgia
@Bama

Oregon
vs. Stanford
@Utah
@ Oregon St.

Mississippi St.
vs. Arkansas
@Bama
@ Ole Miss

Alabama
@LSU
vs. Mississippi St.
vs. Auburn

Georgia
vs. Florida
vs. Auburn

TCU
@WVU
vs. KSU
A Texas

KSU
@TCU
@WVU
@Baylor

MSU
@OSU

Not worried.

You're assuming a two-loss SEC team won't get in by suggesting all of these tough games...It's been mentioned that there's a 33% chance the SEC champion has two losses. Yes, those teams will beat up on each other. Yes, there will most likely be teams with two losses or more. But just because a team gets that second loss, it doesn't automatically eliminate them. Look no further than Ole Miss recent loss at LSU. The committee clearly didn't care that they literally just lost. They still put them in the Top 4. If Alabama loses to LSU but beats Auburn and Miss St, you think the committee will drop them from contention? Not a chance.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

What sucks the most is that if that final flag isn't thrown at FSU, then ND is sitting at #2 or 3 right now. But because it was thrown and it goes as a loss (on the road!), then ND falls all the way to #10. It just doesn't make sense to me not to consider all of the variables in these games. Crazy how the perception is black and white simply based on Wins and Losses.

Yea, I'm even more upset with the ending of that game because of what you just described. And I'm also upset because the committee took the time to inform everyone about all the criteria they'd consider during ranking meetings, yet it's pretty obvious they looked just at wins and "quality" wins.

 

[koonja]

You're assuming a two-loss SEC team won't get in by suggesting all of these tough games...It's been mentioned that there's a 33% chance the SEC champion has two losses. Yes, those teams will beat up on each other. Yes, there will most likely be teams with two losses or more. But just because a team gets that second loss, it doesn't automatically eliminate them. Look no further than Ole Miss recent loss at LSU. The committee clearly didn't care that they literally just lost. They still put them in the Top 4. If Alabama loses to LSU but beats Auburn and Miss St, you think the committee will drop them from contention? Not a chance.

A 2 loss SEC champ would obviously be in, but a 2 loss non-SEC champion-SEC team would not be in over a 1 loss ND team.

I hear all of this concern, but no one's willing to put their one vbuck on the line .

 

[NDohio]

The part that bothers me the most is the conference bias. The committee made it very clear that the conference teams have an advantage over a ND independent team. I love not being completely a part of a conference, but if this season plays out like it looks like it might, there may not be a choice. I would have never imagined a B1G one loss team>ND 1 loss team, but the committee sees it differently.

A lot of football left to play and there will be some surprises along the way. Just win - and win big.

 

[koonja]

It really sucks that Wisconsin couldn't finish off LSU when they were up 3 scores.

Every big win/loss seems to center around LSU.