2024 College Football Playoffs

[Huntr]

The committee’s stance on not punishing teams for losing a CCG does answer your question

Prob best not to get too caught up in whatever bullshit they put out while trying to fill up a wholly unnecessary show and pay more attention to what they actually do.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

Prob best not to get too caught up in whatever bullshit they put out while trying to fill up a wholly unnecessary show and pay more attention to what they actually do.

Supposed to be a four hour show.

 

[InKellyWeTrust]

Yeah, 6 seed would be good with me.

 

[wizards8507]

The committee’s stance on not punishing teams for losing a CCG does answer your question

THEY NEVER SAID THAT

 

[arrowryan]

Prob best not to get too caught up in whatever bullshit they put out while trying to fill up a wholly unnecessary show and pay more attention to what they actually do.

I hedged my happiness and took Alabama +240 to make the CFP. They shouldn’t make it, but it is so painfully obvious that the committee is biased towards them.

 

[wizards8507]

Committee says they won’t penalize teams for that.

No. They didn't.

 

[IrishLax]

I actually think this is correct simply to not have two Big Ten teams play in the first round. I think if Indiana wasn’t in the 10th spot they would have Notre Dame ahead of Penn State for certain and likely Texas.

 

[KMac151993]

Texas/SMU, PSU/ASU, ND/IU, O$U/Tennessee

Oregon, Georgia, Boise State, Clemson

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

Yeah, 6 seed would be good with me.

We’d have to be ranked 2-3 to get the 5 spot but I doubt that happens. We probably stay where we are and one of the CCG losers (Texas, PSU or both lol) somehow gets seeded above us at 5

 

[Huntr]

Supposed to be a four hour show.

Can't just have the committee set a playoff field after the CCG's. Nope, the 4 letter wants it to be a months-long THING.

It's wizards' fault.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

Yeah, 6 seed would be good with me.

We’d have to be ranked 2-3 to get the 5 spot but I doubt that happens. We probably stay where we are and one of the CCG losers somehow gets seeded above us at 5

 

[notredomer23]

I actually think this is correct simply to not have two Big Ten teams play in the first round. I think if Indiana wasn’t in the 10th spot they would have Notre Dame ahead of Penn State for certain and likely Texas.

On the other hand it wouldn’t be a conference rematch unlike if OSU was in that slot or when they had UGA-Tennessee playing earlier in the rankings as 8-9. As long as it’s not a rematch, the first round conference affiliation shouldn’t matter with the expanded leagues

 

[LifelongFan]

One thing I was thinking last night with Texas is that dropping them to 6 or 7 isn't really punishing them for an extra game. Being ranked 2 and first in the SEC is saying that we expect you to win the SEC championship, and for now we are ranking teams as if you beat Georgia. Last night we saw that they didn't go out and do that. I get not dropping them below Bama or Ole Miss obviously, but that 2 spot showed the expectations and they came up short again.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

I actually think this is correct simply to not have two Big Ten teams play in the first round. I think if Indiana wasn’t in the 10th spot they would have Notre Dame ahead of Penn State for certain and likely Texas.

Yeah at this point rankings go out the window on how teams are seeded outside of First round byes. They need to make eyeballs, ad revenue and ticket sales matter. It’s entirely possible highly ranked teams may not be seeded according to their “rankings”

 

[wizards8507]

Yeah at this point rankings go out the window on how teams are seeded outside of First round byes. They need to make eyeballs, ad revenue and ticket sales matter. It’s entirely possible highly ranked teams may not be seeded according to their “rankings”

No it isn't. They might fudge the rankings to manipulate matchups but they can't seed differently than the rankings would dictate.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

No it isn't. They might fudge the rankings to manipulate matchups but they can't seed differently than the rankings would dictate.

Outside of the conference winners they can rank teams however they want. I see no rules listed on their websites about what criteria they use for the 5-12 slots except that one spot goes to the lowest ranked conference champion. Seeding follows the ranking but their rankings for 5-12 are likely very malleable with financial pressures associated with them.

• The 12 participating teams will be the five conference champions ranked highest by the CFP selection committee, plus the next seven highest-ranked teams.
• The ranking of the teams will continue to be done by a selection committee.
• The four highest-ranked conference champions will be seeded one through four and will receive a first-round bye. The fifth conference champion will be seeded where it was ranked or at No. 12 if it is outside the top 12 rankings. Non-conference champions ranked in the top four will be seeded beginning at No. 5. Because of this, the seeding, 1 through 12, could look different than the final rankings.
• The eight teams seeded No. 5-12 will play in a first round with the higher seeds hosting the lower seeds either on campus or at other sites designated by the higher-seeded institution (No. 12 at No. 5, No. 11 at No. 6, No. 10 at No. 7 and No. 9 at No. 8.).
• The selection committee will assign the four highest-ranked conference champions to Playoff Quarterfinals hosted by bowls. This will be done in consideration of historic bowl relationships, then in consideration of rankings. For example, if the Sugar Bowl hosts a Playoff Quarterfinal and the SEC champion is ranked No. 1 and the Big 12 champion is ranked No. 3, the SEC champion would be assigned to the Sugar Bowl and the Big 12 champion would be assigned elsewhere.
• With the four highest-ranked conference champions assigned to bowls, their four Playoff Quarterfinal opponents will be dictated by the bracket (i.e., No. 1 vs. No. 8/9 winner, No. 4 vs. No. 5/12 winner, No. 2 vs. 7/10 winner; No. 3 vs. 6/11 winner.)
• The College Football Playoff bracket will follow the selection committee’s rankings, with no modifications made to avoid rematches between teams that may have played during the regular season or are from the same conference.
• The bracket will remain in effect throughout the playoff (i.e., no re-seeding).
• The highest seed will receive preferential placement for the Playoff Semifinal bowl assignment.
• All 11 games will be under the CFP umbrella with the administrative policies determined by the CFP.

 

[irish4ever]

I actually think this is correct simply to not have two Big Ten teams play in the first round. I think if Indiana wasn’t in the 10th spot they would have Notre Dame ahead of Penn State for certain and likely Texas.

I didn't think of that, as I thought that IU would drop to 11th and Clemson the ACC Champ would move up to 10th (with SMU @ 12th).

 

[Huntr]

Seeding follows the ranking but their rankings for 5-12 are likely very malleable with financial pressures associated with them.

That part is sort of true, but they do have a formula. People have figured it out with a high degree of accuracy and precision.

 

[thekid33]

The dumb show today is the definition of "could have been an email."

Just let me know who and when we play.

Fuck them all.

Go Irish ☘️

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

That part is sort of true, but they do have a formula. People have figured it out with a high degree of accuracy and precision.

Obviously we will see but I’d love to know what this formula is. For example it’s unlikely ND will be dropped too far but they won’t be seeded higher than 5. But they absolutely have the freedom to see ND whenever they want in the remaining six spots.

 

[wizards8507]

That part is sort of true, but they do have a formula. People have figured it out with a high degree of accuracy and precision.

What is the formula that would keep SMU in but leave Army out?

I just don't get the SMU logic. The resume argument favors Army. The eye test argument favors Alabama. SMU doesn't win either.

 

[Huntr]

Obviously we will see but I’d love to know what this formula is.

Here you go: https://www.patreon.com/cfb_professor

Not joking, that guy and his partner have it basically down.

*Playoff Committee Top 25 Projections (My model has accurately predicted committee behavior better than any other source out there. The past 4 years it has been off less than 1 ranking per team for the entire Top 25.)

 

[NDFAN2008]

Give me Indiana they haven’t beaten anyone all year

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

Here you go: https://www.patreon.com/cfb_professor

Not joking, that guy and his partner have it basically down.

Thanks! I did not know this.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

What is the formula that would keep SMU in but leave Army out?

I just don't get the SMU logic. The resume argument favors Army. The eye test argument favors Alabama. SMU doesn't win either.

What part of the formula let’s ND in and Army out. Army won it’s conference and has identical record to ND.

 

[BleedingGold]

New system, same problems. I have seen college football go from rank based - strict tie in bowl games prior to this continuing series of attempts to improve the system. While the money grows the issues never get solved and in many ways get worse.

The unwritten rule is people want in who they want in and will justify it and the matchups they want using what ever logic suits those purposes, usually heavily laced with the financial results in mind.

 

[stlnd01]

What part of the formula let’s ND in and Army out. Army won it’s conference and has identical record to ND.

The part where we played each other and blew them off the field?

 

[NDFAN2008]

They need to go away with the automatic byes next year

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

No. They didn't.

I agree. I don’t recall. The committee saying this and it’s not in their rules they provide. CCG losers will not get first round byes and they will either fall out or fall into the 5-12 spots where they have to play a first round game. That is punishment. lol. 😂

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

The part where we played each other and blew them off the field?

Yeah that part. You are correct sir.