CFP rankings

smokey_wasp

smokey_wasp

Dodd-Like
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
11,036
It's that time of year again, even though it doesn't feel like it.



Joke list.
 
How in the crap is Georgia 9th? More like 19th. Miami and OU also too high, and BYU, USC and Oregon are too low. No real quibbles with the top 8 though. You could flip Northwestern and Cinci maybe . . . but otherwise I think they nailed the top eight in order..
 
Not enough SEC teams in the Top 10.
 
Yeah I don’t get the love for uga. The lost their only 2 games against decent teams and have been relatively unconvincing against a weak schedule outside of that. Almost lost at home to a terrible MSU team that only had 50 scholly players available for the game (didn’t even have to play under SEC rules).
 
gtrower said:
Yeah I don’t get the love for uga. The lost their only 2 games against decent teams and have been relatively unconvincing against a weak schedule outside of that. Almost lost at home to a terrible MSU team that only had 50 scholly players available for the game (didn’t even have to play under SEC rules).
Click to expand...
it's always this way for uga. if they are a two loss team you can be damn sure they will be the highest ranked 2 loss team.
 
BYU way too low. Liberty has one loss by a point to a P5 team with wins over P5 teams and they don’t crack the top 25. The system makes it impossible for teams outside the cartel of the P5 to have a chance. The love affair with Georgia sadly continues. Why expand the playoffs? They would leave out an undefeated Cincinnati or BYU and include three more SEC teams with two losses.
 
How is the pac 12 up there with so few games played.

Texas A&M above Florida??

I would switch Clemson and Ohio State. Ohio State is getting screwed because the big ten is so weak this year.
 
ScionOfSouthland said:
How is the pac 12 up there with so few games played.

Texas A&M above Florida??

I would switch Clemson and Ohio State. Ohio State is getting screwed because the big ten is so weak this year.
Click to expand...
1) How do they rank teams in the pre-season beforw anyone has even played a game? And I woould not call 15 and 18 "up there."

2) Texas A&M beat Florida when they played heads-up. Outpassed them, outran them, outgained them. And won.

3) OSU beat winless PSU by just 13. Gave up 27 to Rutgers and 35 to Indiana. Their offense is top 3 worthy. Their defense isn't even close. Anyway, I would hardly call being in the top 4 at this point "getting screwed."
 
00Burdell said:
Indiana would -- had to check the URL where I am -- beat the dwags like a child that the father knows isn't his but can't understand why the kid looks so much like his sister.

Dwags as a top-10 team - scoff.
Click to expand...

You're blowing my mind here
 
Georgia wouldn't have beaten Mississippi State if it weren't for Mississippi State being depleted and unable to cover jump ball passes to WR's. UGAg also got a TD pass to an uncovered WR on a 3rd and 15 or so.

UGAg running backs got nowhere all day against MSU. UGAg is not a top 10 team
 
gtrower said:
Yeah I don’t get the love for uga. The lost their only 2 games against decent teams and have been relatively unconvincing against a weak schedule outside of that. Almost lost at home to a terrible MSU team that only had 50 scholly players available for the game (didn’t even have to play under SEC rules).
Click to expand...
People look at recruit rankings and think they should be better than they are.

Despite the fact that uga has the lowest conversion rate of 4* and 5* players to the NFL, no media company wants to run the story asking why players at uga fail to live up to their potential.
 
1606316210895.gif
 
gtphd said:
People look at recruit rankings and think they should be better than they are.

Despite the fact that uga has the lowest conversion rate of 4* and 5* players to the NFL, no media company wants to run the story asking why players at uga fail to live up to their potential.
Click to expand...
But we all know from a recent post here that recruit rankings are poorly correlated with an actual ability to play football, or something like that. UGAG just manages to land all the dog (pun: noted) 4* and 5* players.
 
1982Jacket said:
But we all know from a recent post here that recruit rankings are poorly correlated with an actual ability to play football, or something like that. UGAG just manages to land all the dog (pun: noted) 4* and 5* players.
Click to expand...
My hypothesis is that they bring in quality players, then cater to their ego instead of creating a development program, and as a result the players come out worse than they went in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top