College Football Playoff Rankings 2015 (ND #8...)

Irish YJ

Southsida
Messages
25,888
Reaction score
1,444
JIM SMALL'S NOTRE DAME GO IRISH BLOG -- www.NDGOIRISH.com -- A NOTRE DAME BLOG: Take the Test -- Rank the TEAMS in the Playoff

Think this is both simple and well illustrates what garbage it is that the Big Ten teams are where they are.

It's what they said last year before OSU went on a roll and beat the crap out of everyone.. I agree with what you are saying, but I personally think any one of the top 8 teams (except Iowa) could go on a roll.

I had it D, C, A, B. That would put it as:

3. ND
4. MSU
5. OK
6. Iowa

Iowa's collective schedule is such a joke.

Very true, but regardless, they are undefeated. Won't be for long...

What frustrates me is all we likely had to do was grab 20+ points out of all those turnovers and we're at worst in 4th.

You can't turn the ball over like that and let BC come storming back this late in the season when you know this committee has the memory of a bunch of goldfish.

We can't control the committee but we should have controlled the turnovers.

Yup... we're outside looking in due to our own less than stellar performances. We've had several this year.


BEAT Stanford

no, crush Stanford.
 

IrishinSyria

In truth lies victory
Messages
6,046
Reaction score
1,924
What frustrates me is all we likely had to do was grab 20+ points out of all those turnovers and we're at worst in 4th.

You can't turn the ball over like that and let BC come storming back this late in the season when you know this committee has the memory of a bunch of goldfish.

We can't control the committee but we should have controlled the turnovers.

I don't know, I feel like this is less about what ND didn't do and more about what Oklahoma did. The B1G teams don't bother me as much because they both control their own destiny anyway.
 

phork

Raining On Your Parade
Messages
9,863
Reaction score
1,019
So when Nebraska beats Iowa, then Iowa beats MSU in the BIGCG that eliminates the BIG and the PAC12 is already out. OSU beats OU. ND beats Stanford.

Then we have a date with Alabama.
 

Wild Bill

Well-known member
Messages
5,518
Reaction score
3,263
So when Nebraska beats Iowa, then Iowa beats MSU in the BIGCG that eliminates the BIG and the PAC12 is already out. OSU beats OU. ND beats Stanford.

Then we have a date with Alabama.

I'll take it.
 

Sherm Sticky

The Prophet
Messages
19,321
Reaction score
1,638
So when Nebraska beats Iowa, then Iowa beats MSU in the BIGCG that eliminates the BIG and the PAC12 is already out. OSU beats OU. ND beats Stanford.

Then we have a date with Alabama.


I want a rematch date with Clemson. I know if we play them again we will win!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

johnnycando

Frosted Tips
Messages
3,744
Reaction score
490
We're the ONLY team that has slowed the Navy offense.

Navy by 17 is my fearless prediction.
 

NDWorld247

New member
Messages
2,474
Reaction score
302
Yup. I think the QB gets invited to NYC for the Heisman after today's performance.

He wouldn't make it in time. Navy plays Army at 3pm in Philly. Show starts at 8pm. He could maybe get there for the last 15-30 minutes with a police escort, but, doubtful.
 

Luckylucci

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
27,769
Reaction score
10,146
Certainly doesn't help that Pitt is in the process of throwing up on themselves. F'ing Narduzzi. At home against Miami and on Senior Day is when his guys lay he egg, smh
 

IrishLion

I am Beyonce, always.
Staff member
Messages
19,127
Reaction score
11,077
Houston is using an interesting I-formation defense with their LB's stacked to defend the triple option. It's fun to watch.

Navy did a nice job of countering it with play action on their last scoring drive. They need to keep using the PA triple/counter options or even just roll Reynolds out more in the second half to keep up. Ward is killing them on scrambles.
 

NDinL.A.

New member
Messages
8,121
Reaction score
1,734
Yup. I think the QB gets invited to NYC for the Heisman after today's performance.

He deserves it.

There are a couple of problems with that:

1. It's not a career award, and IMO shouldn't be. His game to game #'s this year aren't eye-popping. They're very good, and he's having a fantastic year, but others have better numbers, against better competition.

2. A lot of people don't know, but writers only get to put 3 names on their ballets. Think about how hard that makes it for them. They'd have to leave a couple of these guys off their lists:

Derrick Henry
Christian McCaffrey
DeShawn Watson
Dalvin Cook
Baker Mayfield
Leonard Fornette

You can make a case for the top 5 in this list above to be on the ballot over Reynolds, at this time. So it's going to be extremely hard for him to get on enough ballets to get there, even though I'd love to see him there and I agree in that he deserves to be there.
 

greyhammer90

the drunk piano player
Messages
16,825
Reaction score
16,090
There are a couple of problems with that:

1. It's not a career award, and IMO shouldn't be. His game to game #'s this year aren't eye-popping. They're very good, and he's having a fantastic year, but others have better numbers, against better competition.

2. A lot of people don't know, but writers only get to put 3 names on their ballets. Think about how hard that makes it for them. They'd have to leave a couple of these guys off their lists:

Derrick Henry
Christian McCaffrey
DeShawn Watson
Dalvin Cook
Baker Mayfield
Leonard Fornette

You can make a case for the top 5 in this list above to be on the ballot over Reynolds, at this time. So it's going to be extremely hard for him to get on enough ballets to get there, even though I'd love to see him there and I agree in that he deserves to be there.

I think there's a problem with attempting to look at a triple option QB's stats as being the same as a more contemporary offense. He's their entire offense. Almost every yard earned in that offense is because the QB made the right read, played the space the correct way, and set up a running lane because the defense is having to play off him. He's responsible for almost every rushing yard they have because his play sets up where the defense will be.

I don't know if he deserves to win the Heisman or anything, but I don't like looking at his stats in the same way we do "normal" QBs.
 

NDWorld247

New member
Messages
2,474
Reaction score
302
You can make a case for the top 5 in this list above to be on the ballot over Reynolds, at this time. So it's going to be extremely hard for him to get on enough ballets to get there, even though I'd love to see him there and I agree in that he deserves to be there.

Another thing that people may not realize is the guy in charge of deciding who is invited to New York doesn't get to pick from a list of names. He's given the point totals of the top 10 vote getters and makes the decision based on where there is a clear cut off. After he makes the decision on the number of guys, he's given an alphabetical list and invites them. That's why the number of invitees varies from year to year.
 

IrishHokie22

New member
Messages
306
Reaction score
23
Yeah it would have been nice to see Navy (and Pitt) come out and win, but it honestly doesn't really matter. ND needs OU to lose tomorrow night. If they lose and we win, we're in. If OU loses we're done. It's been that way all along. These scenarios where we get in over the B1G are nothing more than wishful thinking.

Root for OK ST tomorrow night. That's our only prayer.
 

FWIrish4

Well-known member
Messages
1,408
Reaction score
2,833
So why does the ESPN bottom ticker say Oklahoma is 4-0 against AP Ranked teams this year when only TCU and Baylor are the only currently AP ranked teams they've played?

No way they are stretching it to the fact 'at the time ranked' card are they? I think it's bad enough they're saying AP ranked teams when the only ranking that matters is the Playoff Committee's.
 

T Town Tommy

Alabama Bag Man
Messages
6,278
Reaction score
2,768
So why does the ESPN bottom ticker say Oklahoma is 4-0 against AP Ranked teams this year when only TCU and Baylor are the only currently AP ranked teams they've played?

No way they are stretching it to the fact 'at the time ranked' card are they? I think it's bad enough they're saying AP ranked teams when the only ranking that matters is the Playoff Committee's.

Is that what it says? Because if so, it isn't accurate at all. There are more teams that have played at least that many AP ranked teams "when they played."
 
Top