CFP Committee 5 Criteria - time for Danny to do what Danny does

#76
#76
VolFreakJosh said:
[QUOTE="spacificislander, post: 22146305, member: 62524"]We beat them cause their kicker missed a FG and ours didn’t. Our heisman-trophy candidate QB can’t play anymore. It’s easy to see why people would rank bama over us.
I think it’s not super clear cut cause their best win is at #21 Texas.
Click to expand...

Lol. Are we really going to play this game?

Bama could have won with a field goal.

Bama could have won had they stopped us on that drive after we fumbled the ball away for a Bama TD.

Wins matter regardless how the game was won.

It’s such an out dated argument.[/QUOTE]
Read the article. It says they can make a decision on who they think the best teams are.
So they pick the best 6 and rank them 1-6. Then look at all the points and whoever has the least is 1, 2,3. Then they would take 4-9 and do it again to pick 4, 5, 6. I think it would have been cool to see those votes here. OSU, USC, bama, VOLS, PSU, Clemson. How far were we off from being 6.
They should just let me pick though. Now it would be UM vs TCU. Winner gets UGA.
 
#78
#78
spacificislander said:
Yeah Bama not having any really good wins is making me think that it’s more of a wash. But I think without hooker we couldn’t win against the top caliber of teams (which is really just UGA and Michigan)
Click to expand...

Just UGA now. Michigan will be with Corrum which should drop them out of the playoffs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spacificislander
#79
#79
mpfvol said:
Why is a 3 loss LSU going to the SECCG when the both have 2 SEC losses because they lost the head to head with LSU .
Click to expand...
This is a different game. The SEC champ game has rules it isnt decided by a committee. It’s record vs SEC. Then head to head. Then coaches vote. But the coaches have agreed to vote on polls. Like when Us, UF, UGA all beat each other. I think we werent selected that year.
They will probably have a mix of this when it expands with P5 conference champs getting a bid.
 
#80
#80
leeroyphi136 said:
We got our brains beat in by South Carolina.

We don't deserve to be ahead of Bama. Stop making excuses and own it. The team had a chance to make it in and screwed up. Period.
Click to expand...
What?????????
You can't be this illogical.
 
#82
#82
Boone&Crockett said:
It is actually on the website under the Principles tab, it clearly states that losing a key player can be a factor in the decision making process, Im not saying they got it right but it is listed as a deciding factor.
Click to expand...

Well if we split the other 5 then they could employ the extra factor. We were 4-0-1 and they were 0-4-1.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheVolsFrog
#84
#84
Tman44 said:
  • Strength of schedule. According to SI, Tennessee #24 - Alabama #53
  • Head-to-head game results. Tennessee 52 Alabama 49
  • Results vs. teams in Top 25 rankings. Alabama 3-2 Tennessee 5-1
  • Results vs. common opponents. LSU -Bama loss/ Tennessee rout Vandy -Bama @home 55-3 UT road win 56-0
  • Conference championships. Neither team will play
After looking at things this way, this isn't even close. Why state the criteria if they are to be thrown out the window? Danny White did a great job with P/R at UCF. I think its high time he get on Dan Patrick, Colin Cowherd, SVP, any and everyone that will give him an interview and demand the CFP Committee follow it's own rules. I get the fact Hooker is hurt; however, if it were that important personnel matters would be listed as a criterion. The more I explore this, the more sickened I become. I also think banging the drum loudly about this will exert even more pressure to squash the whining from (We don't play anyone) OSU about the Rose Bowl.

Go Vols!
Click to expand...
Agree. Well said
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tman44
#85
#85
Tman44 said:
  • Strength of schedule. According to SI, Tennessee #24 - Alabama #53
  • Head-to-head game results. Tennessee 52 Alabama 49
  • Results vs. teams in Top 25 rankings. Alabama 3-2 Tennessee 5-1
  • Results vs. common opponents. LSU -Bama loss/ Tennessee rout Vandy -Bama @home 55-3 UT road win 56-0
  • Conference championships. Neither team will play
After looking at things this way, this isn't even close. Why state the criteria if they are to be thrown out the window? Danny White did a great job with P/R at UCF. I think its high time he get on Dan Patrick, Colin Cowherd, SVP, any and everyone that will give him an interview and demand the CFP Committee follow it's own rules. I get the fact Hooker is hurt; however, if it were that important personnel matters would be listed as a criterion. The more I explore this, the more sickened I become. I also think banging the drum loudly about this will exert even more pressure to squash the whining from (We don't play anyone) OSU about the Rose Bowl.

Go Vols!
Click to expand...
Well said
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tman44
#88
#88
Assuming the SEC was a 1-14 league instead of the stupid divisions, where would Bama have finished? They are 4th at best in the SEC and somehow ranked almost that highly in the country and are ranked ahead of two teams that finished better than them in the SEC standings and that beat them head to head.
 
#89
#89
If TCU loses where will we be ranked? And if USC loses, and if both TCU and USC loses?
 
#90
#90
So, hypothetically, if we had forfeited the game to SC without playing it and lost 1-0, that would have propelled us ahead of Alabama? That’s a smaller margin of loss.

Should we have left Columbia at halftime to reduce the margin of loss?

Don’t teams play these head-to-head games to determine the better team?

In most sports the first postseason seeding tiebreaker is head-to-head result.
 
#91
#91
Tman44 said:
  • Strength of schedule. According to SI, Tennessee #24 - Alabama #53
  • Head-to-head game results. Tennessee 52 Alabama 49
  • Results vs. teams in Top 25 rankings. Alabama 3-2 Tennessee 5-1
  • Results vs. common opponents. LSU -Bama loss/ Tennessee rout Vandy -Bama @home 55-3 UT road win 56-0
  • Conference championships. Neither team will play
After looking at things this way, this isn't even close. Why state the criteria if they are to be thrown out the window? Danny White did a great job with P/R at UCF. I think its high time he get on Dan Patrick, Colin Cowherd, SVP, any and everyone that will give him an interview and demand the CFP Committee follow it's own rules. I get the fact Hooker is hurt; however, if it were that important personnel matters would be listed as a criterion. The more I explore this, the more sickened I become. I also think banging the drum loudly about this will exert even more pressure to squash the whining from (We don't play anyone) OSU about the Rose Bowl.

Go Vols!
Click to expand...
Excellent analysis.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tman44
#92
#92
LWSVOL said:
I wonder how many in the thread have read the entire CFP site? Its more than a small set of criteria and its very obvious committee members have latitude when applying ALL considerations mentioned on the site. Not just the 4 pieces of data that many continue to list.

This debate happens every spring with the college basketball tournament selection process. As long as there are human elements, there will be debate about rankings and/or selections..
Click to expand...

There will be less disagreement when the football field expands, which needs to happen. It’d be much better IMO if they did 8 or 16 teams and left the bye out of it.

A big difference in arguing over the 68th team versus the 4th.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Woodlawn VOL
#93
#93
LWSVOL said:
If thoughts were irrelevant, they would not need a committee. They would just feed the data into a computer and come up with the rankings. South Carolina beat Tennessee and Clemson. Should they have been ranked with them?
Click to expand...
why would u need a committee when you have a CRITERIA? unless you're trying to showcase some kind of favoritism as seen with bama over TN
 
#94
#94
Boone&Crockett said:
It is actually on the website under the Principles tab, it clearly states that losing a key player can be a factor in the decision making process, Im not saying they got it right but it is listed as a deciding factor.
Click to expand...
This should never be part of the process. It just gives them more latitude in manipulating who they want in. There are many cases of backups coming in and teams keep winning because the rallied up together. The worst rule ever is for them to take injuries and much less coaching changes into account for a team receiving a invite they earned. Yes they dared to put coaching changes in as a way to keep a team from something a team has earned. They must think the public is stupid or they don’t give a darn what people think. No team in college football should have a potential playoff berth or bowl taken from them in a injury or coaching change. Teams do rally and players and coaches do step up. Sure they may fall flat but they earned that right for the chance as a team. For subjective committee members to get in the way of on field performance is hijacking the system. I hope the universities will look at this and in the future let the record of the team reflect where they are going not on guessing what a injury or good grief a coach missing is going to do to the game. Heck folks drop out if games now, what’s next go by how many on each team drop out???? The Field is where the game is played let them results be the decider of where a team plays!!!! GBO
 
#95
#95
Boone&Crockett said:
It is actually on the website under the Principles tab, it clearly states that losing a key player can be a factor in the decision making process, Im not saying they got it right but it is listed as a deciding factor.
Click to expand...
So by the committee's definition in pursuit of ranking accuracy, the absence of 1 key player leaves 10 common players on the field. The committee is subjectively saying 10 common players are less important than the 1 key player. I thought football was a team sport played by 11 individuals. Guess we should have put HH out there by himself against AL. Committee is a corrupt joke.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Woodlawn VOL
#96
#96
lexkyvol said:
boy, we got some butthurt fake fans that will never let the sc loss die. the criteria is the criteria. i guess u were fine with lsu being ahead of us too huh? wtf
Click to expand...
This.I sometimes question whether some of these supporters of Bama being ahead of the Vols are actually Vols fans.Forget the SC loss Tennessee beat Bama on the field and they have identical records.The tie breaker should go to the team that won the head to head imo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lexkyvol and TheVolsFrog
#97
#97
This is just a thought ... we may want to be thankful to land in the Cotton w inferior opponent, win the game, then ride off into the sunset of an utterly shocking and overachieving season headed strong into recruiting season with a tinge of "we got screwed by ranking".

One thing that could be disastrous is having our AD trotting around to everywhere including Jerry Springer to rouse up support for our criteria of being ahead of Bammer, getting the nod, playing in a big time Bowl matchup, then getting stomped again because we have no way to complete a deep ball. This would lead to massive public humiliation and make us a laughing stock. We're not making the playoffs no matter, so the reward is not worth the risk.

Sometimes the juice (orange) ain't worth the squeeze.
 
#98
#98
Tman44 said:
  • Strength of schedule. According to SI, Tennessee #24 - Alabama #53
  • Head-to-head game results. Tennessee 52 Alabama 49
  • Results vs. teams in Top 25 rankings. Alabama 3-2 Tennessee 5-1
  • Results vs. common opponents. LSU -Bama loss/ Tennessee rout Vandy -Bama @home 55-3 UT road win 56-0
  • Conference championships. Neither team will play
After looking at things this way, this isn't even close. Why state the criteria if they are to be thrown out the window? Danny White did a great job with P/R at UCF. I think its high time he get on Dan Patrick, Colin Cowherd, SVP, any and everyone that will give him an interview and demand the CFP Committee follow it's own rules. I get the fact Hooker is hurt; however, if it were that important personnel matters would be listed as a criterion. The more I explore this, the more sickened I become. I also think banging the drum loudly about this will exert even more pressure to squash the whining from (We don't play anyone) OSU about the Rose Bowl.

Go Vols!
Click to expand...


Please everyone get off this topic! Going to the Orange bowl is far better for US than making the playoffs by some miracle or complaining.

We do not have the horses to beat UGA yet, especially with our injuries. Lets go to the orange bowl and pound Clemson. Half of the teams in front of us have to get beat since they all play each other. We finish the year top 5 and can sell the " you are the last piece" to recruits.

Getting pounded in the semi finals does us zero good. I know most will say "line up and play anyone" but some of us accept the reality of the situation. We simply do not have the roster yet to beat UGA or probably OSU or Michigan.

We will get there, but not this year. Be happy with top 5 and tons of momentum heading into next year.
 
#99
#99
EZE said:
There will be less disagreement when the football field expands, which needs to happen. It’d be much better IMO if they did 8 or 16 teams and left the bye out of it.

A big difference in arguing over the 68th team versus the 4th.
Click to expand...

Haha. Wishful thinking my friend. NCAAB has 68, and it's become a national pastime to rant and rail @ the selection. We have to be accosted with WhosIn Who's out bubble talk for months before March. Trust me on this one ... It will not improve, only involve teams #17-27 who got "screwed" by the corrupt committee.
 
#100
#100
Woodlawn VOL said:
This should never be part of the process. It just gives them more latitude in manipulating who they want in. There are many cases of backups coming in and teams keep winning because the rallied up together. The worst rule ever is for them to take injuries and much less coaching changes into account for a team receiving a invite they earned. Yes they dared to put coaching changes in as a way to keep a team from something a team has earned. They must think the public is stupid or they don’t give a darn what people think. No team in college football should have a potential playoff berth or bowl taken from them in a injury or coaching change. Teams do rally and players and coaches do step up. Sure they may fall flat but they earned that right for the chance as a team. For subjective committee members to get in the way of on field performance is hijacking the system. I hope the universities will look at this and in the future let the record of the team reflect where they are going not on guessing what a injury or good grief a coach missing is going to do to the game. Heck folks drop out if games now, what’s next go by how many on each team drop out???? The Field is where the game is played let them results be the decider of where a team plays!!!! GBO
Click to expand...
I wasnt replying as to the right or wrong of it, a partial list of the criteria has been floating around with multiple " They're not even following their own guidelines!" kinda posts, I was just pointing out it is actually part of the criteria and is posted on the website, whether its fair or not is all in the eye of the beholder but it is listed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Woodlawn VOL
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top