Ducks remain #6 in 2nd CFP Poll

[pezsez1]

It's not the committee's fault that Texas hasn't looked dominant late in the season. TCU by 3? Houston by 1 TD?

This.

The weakest argument in football right now is Texas Fan bringing up our results vs Texas Tech. We played them week 2, on the road, with them at full strength. It was our first real game, as PSU was like a glorified scrimmage. Teams are always trying to figure s*** out that early in the year. A great example is our win against Ohio State -- I love that we won, but I'll go to my grave believing the only reason we won was because it took Ohio State there quarters to realize we weren't throwing the ball more than 10 yards down the field.

(Another great example: Texas beating Alabama in Week 2 when 'Bama was still floundering around on offense. The following week, Bama hung a whopping (checks notes) 17 POINTS on unranked South Florida.)

Texas played TT at home, with TT's QB gone (and Texas having a much better stable of backups), in week 12. I mean by week 12, I certainly hope you're blowing out unranked teams at home. Great job, Texas, for actually being dominant once.

So, yeah -- Oregon is properly ranked. Texas has struggled all year and was incredibly fortunate to play Alabama in Week 2 and not Week 5 or 6. They also lost to a two-loss team. They almost lost to a team that COLORADO beat! I mean if you want to talk about common opponents why not bring that up?

This would have been so much easier had the CFP properly ranked Utah. Oregon should have two ranked wins right now.

[Duck07]

Rankings criteria
College Football Playoff selectors create Top 25 rankings based on their evaluation of teams’ performance on the field. The committee employs several metrics to select the best teams.

Strength of schedule
Head-to-head game results
Results vs. teams in Top 25 rankings
Results vs. common opponents
Conference championships
Selectors are allowed to use a variety of advanced analytics to gauge teams' performance, but those numbers don't play a formal role in determining Top 25 rankings, which is a decision made by selectors' own judgement.

I can definitely see why Texas fans will be upset if they beat OSU and get left out.

Embedded Tweet

[Duck07]

It's not the committee's fault that Texas hasn't looked dominant late in the season. TCU by 3? Houston by 1 TD?

This.

The weakest argument in football right now is Texas Fan bringing up our results vs Texas Tech. We played them week 2, on the road, with them at full strength. It was our first real game, as PSU was like a glorified scrimmage. Teams are always trying to figure s*** out that early in the year. A great example is our win against Ohio State -- I love that we won, but I'll go to my grave believing the only reason we won was because it took Ohio State there quarters to realize we weren't throwing the ball more than 10 yards down the field.

(Another great example: Texas beating Alabama in Week 2 when 'Bama was still floundering around on offense. The following week, Bama hung a whopping (checks notes) 17 POINTS on unranked South Florida.)

Texas played TT at home, with TT's QB gone (and Texas having a much better stable of backups), in week 12. I mean by week 12, I certainly hope you're blowing out unranked teams at home. Great job, Texas, for actually being dominant once.

So, yeah -- Oregon is properly ranked. Texas has struggled all year and was incredibly fortunate to play Alabama in Week 2 and not Week 5 or 6. They also lost to a two-loss team. They almost lost to a team that COLORADO beat! I mean if you want to talk about common opponents why not bring that up?

This would have been so much easier had the CFP properly ranked Utah. Oregon should have two ranked wins right now.

Ranking Tennessee so high is obviously an easy bias issue but with Texas its pretty simple, they were tied with Wyoming going into the 4th Quarter of a HOME GAME. The following week, Wyoming had a 7 point lead going into the 4th Quarter at home against a Portland State team that we lead by 60 points in the same situation.

Texas isn't ranked high because the Longhorns have played half their season looking like a mediocre football team, while at no point this season, has Oregon looked anything except a Top 5 team. They can scoff the eye-ball test (that's is backed up with a ton of metrics) but they can't argue that beating TCU by 3 points means they're a great team. TCU lost by 3 to the worst team in the Pac 12 this year.

[73duck]

"Results vs. teams in Top 25 rankings"

The biggest error commentators make is to read this to mean number of top 25 wins (something already captured in SOS). It clearly means how a team played against top 25 teams. If Oregon mauls UW, which I fully expect, it will show that both times they played top 25 teams, they dominated the other team, basically MOV. Texas can't argue that "results of" means number of wins, but argue that the same phrase means MOV when looking at common opponents. People play up that Tennessee and Clemson are top 25 wins, but close wins over people at the bottom of the rankings are really net negatives. That explains why Oregon is doing well with the Committee; they are clobbering good teams.

Still, a close win against UW and an Alabama win on saturday will make me nervous. The way I see it, though, if UO isn't good enough to lay the wood on an overrated UW, they aren't ready to play in the CFP.

[UOducksTK1]

"Results vs. teams in Top 25 rankings"

The biggest error commentators make is to read this to mean number of top 25 wins (something already captured in SOS). It clearly means how a team played against top 25 teams. If Oregon mauls UW, which I fully expect, it will show that both times they played top 25 teams, they dominated the other team, basically MOV. Texas can't argue that "results of" means number of wins, but argue that the same phrase means MOV when looking at common opponents. People play up that Tennessee and Clemson are top 25 wins, but close wins over people at the bottom of the rankings are really net negatives. That explains why Oregon is doing well with the Committee; they are clobbering good teams.

Still, a close win against UW and an Alabama win on saturday will make me nervous. The way I see it, though, if UO isn't good enough to lay the wood on an overrated UW, they aren't ready to play in the CFP.

According to this... If Bama and all favorites win, these are their odds of how things will end up:
TEAM % PLAYOFF CHANCES
1 Michigan >99%
2 Florida State 98%
3 Oregon 94%
4 Texas 57%
5 Alabama 43%

[duckpoint]

"Results vs. teams in Top 25 rankings"

The biggest error commentators make is to read this to mean number of top 25 wins (something already captured in SOS). It clearly means how a team played against top 25 teams. If Oregon mauls UW, which I fully expect, it will show that both times they played top 25 teams, they dominated the other team, basically MOV. Texas can't argue that "results of" means number of wins, but argue that the same phrase means MOV when looking at common opponents. People play up that Tennessee and Clemson are top 25 wins, but close wins over people at the bottom of the rankings are really net negatives. That explains why Oregon is doing well with the Committee; they are clobbering good teams.

Still, a close win against UW and an Alabama win on saturday will make me nervous. The way I see it, though, if UO isn't good enough to lay the wood on an overrated UW, they aren't ready to play in the CFP.

I get what you are saying and agree.

Strength of schedule and rankings are arbitrary and often manipulated to justify putting the "right" teams in the big game(s). Remember Mack Brown lobbying to get the votes his team need to change the rankings and get in the BCS?

Funny how they keep "improving" the system and always discover that voting in most years result in some degree of controversy. Now they are already complaining that the 12 team playoff sets the bar too low to get a seat at the table. Why? because they still want to vote those twelve teams in!

Build the system that is 100% reliant on conference W/L records to advance to the playoffs (like the NFL) and it's that easy. Every conference gets a spot guaranteed.

As it goes right now, Liberty for example should have just as much of a chance to get in as everyone else, or they are just in the wrong division! Would they get in next year with 12 teams in? Or, do they make the argument for that 4th SEC team?

[73duck]

> According to this... If Bama and all favorites win, these are their odds of how things will end up:
TEAM % PLAYOFF CHANCES
1 Michigan >99%
2 Florida State 98%
3 Oregon 94%
4 Texas 57%
5 Alabama 43%

This was last updated Monday, but if anything the odds got better for Oregon on Tuesday. But ...

Do you really believe the Committee leaves the SEC out? A computer might do it, but not humans. So Alabama would be in if they beat Georgia. And if they put Alabama in, how can they exclude Texas? That's Oregon's vulnerability.

I am rooting hard for chalk with one upset (Louisville). That would result in Georgia/Michigan/Oregon/Texas with Oregon playing Michigan in the Rose Bowl. A dream field for football fans.

[pezsez1]

According to this... If Bama and all favorites win, these are their odds of how things will end up:
TEAM % PLAYOFF CHANCES
1 Michigan >99%
2 Florida State 98%
3 Oregon 94%
4 Texas 57%
5 Alabama 43%

Agree 100%. I know it seems crazy to think of the playoffs without an SEC team, but if Alabama could beat Georgia and jump in then it would be ranked in front of Texas. There is no way in the multiverse that Oregon beats #3 and then gets kicked out of the playoff in favor of #8. It's just not happening. The committee could have left that door opened, but they closed it pretty firmly.

We recently talked in another thread about how, during times of controversy, good PR folks aim to shorten the news cycle. I think these rankings are the committee's way of not necessarily ranking the best teams as they stand right now, but showing us how the pieces will fall based on who wins this weekend. For example, they could have ranked Ohio State 5th and us sixth, but then we'd jump them after (presumably) beating Washington and there'd be all kinds of uproar over it. Better to just rank us 5th now so that everyone knows where the Buckeyes stand.

Same goes for Alabama and Georgia. Georgia can't lose to Alabama and still be ranked above teams that have significantly better wins under their belts. Michigan, Oregon, Texas, Alabama, and maybe even Florida State would all have stronger resumes at that point AND conference championships. And, like I said, Alabama isn't jumping from eighth to fourth in such a loaded field.

Oregon just has to beat UW. Win and we're in.