More idle ACCCG speculations

18in32

18in32

Petard Hoister
Joined
May 23, 2010
Messages
27,889
Here's CPJ's presser today... where he said that if we win out, and if Miami loses to VT and one other, we'll all three be 6-2 and we'd win the tiebreaker.

Is that because Miami would have two Coastal losses (whereas VT and we would have one apiece)? I haven't looked at the tiebreaker rules in a couple of hours and forget them.

Oddly enough, that would mean that losing to Clemson had zero effect on our (admittedly already slim) chances of making the ACCCG.

 
Yes to answer your question. Still a lot to play for. I want to play Clemson again. Or NC State.
 
It’s intriguing. We could in theory knock the dawgs out of the playoffs, then knock them back in the next week...
 
It requires Miami losing to Virginia or Pitt, though, so pretty unlikely. Yes, they could've lost to North Carolina, but I can't see something like that happening again.
 
gtfan1147 said:
It requires Miami losing to Virginia or Pitt, though, so pretty unlikely. Yes, they could've lost to North Carolina, but I can't see something like that happening again.
Click to expand...
I can. To me, Miami is not that great and Pitt is not that bad. Don't know about Virginia because I haven't watched.
 
gtfan1147 said:
It requires Miami losing to Virginia or Pitt, though, so pretty unlikely. Yes, they could've lost to North Carolina, but I can't see something like that happening again.
Click to expand...

I could see it happening if they were to have a demoralizing loss to Virginia Tech...which is definitely within the realm of possibility.
 
18in32 said:
Here's CPJ's presser today... where he said that if we win out, and if Miami loses to VT and one other, we'll all three be 6-2 and we'd win the tiebreaker.

Is that because Miami would have two Coastal losses (whereas VT and we would have one apiece)? I haven't looked at the tiebreaker rules in a couple of hours and forget them.
Click to expand...

I can't find the rules on the ACC website. Here are the first two 3+ team tiebreaker rules from 2015, per SBNation:
  1. Combined head-to-head winning percentage among the tied teams.
  2. Winning percentage of the tied teams within the division.
If GT, Miami, and VT all have two losses and for #1 are 1-1 against each other (50% winning), it goes to #2. Miami would then be eliminated because their two losses would be against division teams, whereas both VT and GT would have lost to Clemson. Once Miami is eliminated, you rerun the tiebreaker rules for head to head. We beat VT head-to-head => division champs.

Note that this scenario also requires VT to beat both Pitt and UVA.
 
If Miami beats VT Saturday, we're eliminated.

If that happens AND we beat UVA, Miami clinches the division.
 
I wouldn't say losing to Clemson had zero effect. Had we won, we would still have controlled our destiny should VT beat Miami, right?
 
tenor.gif
 
gtgtgt1 said:
I wouldn't say losing to Clemson had zero effect. Had we won, we would still have controlled our destiny should VT beat Miami, right?
Click to expand...
Both Miami and GT would have had only one loss in that scenario (VT would have two after we beat them the following week), and Miami would win the tie-breaker since they'd have the head-to-head advantage.
 
gtfan1147 said:
It requires Miami losing to Virginia or Pitt, though, so pretty unlikely. Yes, they could've lost to North Carolina, but I can't see something like that happening again.
Click to expand...

Pitt/UVA and VT are better teams than UNC and Miami is capable of dropping 2 in the next 3 acc matchups. 9-3 Richt will strike again.
 
gespacho_the_slender said:
It’s intriguing. We could in theory knock the dawgs out of the playoffs, then knock them back in the next week...
Click to expand...
I'm not sure about. Assuming Dawgs lose to Alabama, would an 11-2 UGA that's not a conf champ get into the CFP, displacing a team with fewer losses or a conf champ? Not likely, especially if ND wins out (already displacing a conf champ). While there's a lot of football left to be played, currently there are 13 zero- or one-loss P5 teams. Each of them controls their own destiny right now. If we beat UGA, VT, and Clemson, and assume Miami loses to VT and Pitt/UVA, that means the 4 of them have two losses and no conf champ... but still leaves 9 other teams vying for the 4 spots.

It is fun to dream about this stuff. "Three cheers for the CFP"
 
18in32 said:
I'm not sure about. Assuming Dawgs lose to Alabama, would an 11-2 UGA that's not a conf champ get into the CFP, displacing a team with fewer losses or a conf champ? Not likely, especially if ND wins out (already displacing a conf champ). While there's a lot of football left to be played, currently there are 13 zero- or one-loss P5 teams. Each of them controls their own destiny right now. If we beat UGA, VT, and Clemson, and assume Miami loses to VT and Pitt/UVA, that means the 4 of them have two losses and no conf champ... but still leaves 9 other teams vying for the 4 spots.

It is fun to dream about this stuff. "Three cheers for the CFP"
Click to expand...

The whole cfb world is built on dreams and upsets.
 
18in32 said:
Here's CPJ's presser today... where he said that if we win out, and if Miami loses to VT and one other, we'll all three be 6-2 and we'd win the tiebreaker.

Is that because Miami would have two Coastal losses (whereas VT and we would have one apiece)? I haven't looked at the tiebreaker rules in a couple of hours and forget them.

Oddly enough, that would mean that losing to Clemson had zero effect on our (admittedly already slim) chances of making the ACCCG.

Click to expand...

I hadn't thought about that. Is it too soon to start creating ACCCG scenarios?
 
I hate the part of the season (every season) where we have to start playing this game. The second conference loss always takes your wind out.
 
Duh, that makes sense now. Forgot about Clemson beating VT.

A better question would be just how far does Mark Richt have the rabbits foot stuck up his ass?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top