CFP ranking show. Mich still not ranked.

Submitted by Helloheisman on
While we had a close loss to Michigan State and a blowout loss to Penn state. I don't see the difference in resumes with how high Ohio State is ranked and we're not in comparison of losses. Fuel for the fire I guess.
MGoBoard
Football
CFP ranking show

UMoutwest

November 7th, 2017 at 7:16 PM ^

1 Georgia

2 Alabama

3 Notre Dame

4 Clemson

5 Oklahoma

6 TCU

7 Miami

8 Wisconsin

9 Washington

10 Auburn

12 Michigan State

13  Ohio State

14 Penn State

20 Iowa

25 Northwestern

 

Joined: 01/02/2016

MGoPoints: 244

Mongo

November 7th, 2017 at 9:03 PM ^

I don’t get not counting bad losses. Like Clemson’s defense being exposed by Syracuse and losing that game because it’s defense sucked against an unranked team. If Clemson was a true # 4 they would have won ugly, instead they couldn’t stop a mid-tier program like Syracuse. That is like Michigan losing to Indiana, Minnesota or Purdue.

Joined: 06/25/2016

MGoPoints: 9585

Mongo

November 7th, 2017 at 9:19 PM ^

NCS had Clemson with 340 yards passing and 175 yards passing. Clemson is way over-rated. Miami will expose that b.s. soon enough. And WTF is Clemson playing Citadel this late in the season? Clemson has a dog shit schedule as well. This is no #4 team in the nation. Miami should be ranked higher based on comps and league play.

Joined: 06/25/2016

MGoPoints: 9585

Maynard

November 8th, 2017 at 10:19 AM ^

No. The highest Michigan could even hope to end up at going into the bowls is #9 and that isn't likely. It's wishful thinking. Beating Maryland isn't going to do much for us and the movement in rankings would really only happen after the other two games. You're not jumping what is basically 17 spots to get there even off of two of those wins.  

Joined: 02/19/2016

MGoPoints: 9887

LBSS

November 8th, 2017 at 8:13 AM ^

I think you mean a log, rather than a crack. The chip isn't like a chip in a plate, it actually refers to scrap wood from shipyards in England that builders were allowed for centuries to take home as firewood. When the powers that be tried to take the right away, the builders got pissed and basically said, "Oh yeah? Try to take them off." 

/themoreyouknow

Joined: 11/21/2009

MGoPoints: 9641

TrueBlue2003

November 7th, 2017 at 8:40 PM ^

that the committee isn't very good at evaluating losses, unless the teams are close otherwise and they can simply order them by head to head. 

Northwestern lost by 24 to Duke (!!!).  The committee barely dinged them for that, it appears.

Granted, they're not that out of place at 25th.  And I guess I'd rather the committee encourages teams to play more difficult schedules rather than run up the score against bad teams.  So if they're going to lean in some direction, I guess it's preferred the focus primarily on quality wins.

Crazy thing is, NW is probably going to win out.

I'm just glad Florida, AFA, etc. decided to be terrible in a rebuilding year that isn't going to matter for us anyway.

Joined: 01/05/2010

MGoPoints: 38075

I Like Burgers

November 7th, 2017 at 7:43 PM ^

Who you've beaten matters more than almost anything.  If you've beaten some good teams, losses to good teams (and even bad ones) get mitigated a bit because you've at least proved you can beat a good team.

The way the committee ranks teams is they do a blind resume approach and group teams with comparable blind resumes.  So they take the teams that have 1 or 2 wins over a power 5 team with a winning record, lump them together, and then compare resumes and rank them.

The reason Michigan keeps getting left out, is that they don't have any wins over P5 teams with a winning record. So they aren't even getting to grouping stage of being ranked.  Even with a win over 4-5 Maryland, I'm still not sure they'll be ranked next week.  Yes, they would have 8 wins, but none of them could be described as quality.  There would still be a good handful of 7-3 and 6-4 teams ranked ahead of them.

Joined: 10/06/2012

MGoPoints: 30574

I Like Burgers

November 8th, 2017 at 12:46 AM ^

Exactly. There’s at least five 6-3 teams that we know of ranked above Michigan and seven 7-2 teams. Plus two 8-2 teams. Some of those teams will lose, they will still have better wins than Michigan and will still likely be ranked higher. A win over Maryland, arguably the worst power 5 team they will play, isn’t going to change anything.

Joined: 10/06/2012

MGoPoints: 30574

TrueBlue2003

November 8th, 2017 at 1:23 AM ^

ranked next week for us.  That isn't mutually exclusive to the fact that it's also possible that we're behind teams that are 6-4.

If Iowa loses a close game to Wisconsin, they should stay relatively unchanged in the rankings.  If NW loses to Purdue at home, we should be ahead of NW.  There are several other teams that play games that if they lose, they'll be out of the rankings.

That might not be enough to get us in the rankings, depending on other teams that may be ahead of us (WVU and Arizona, probably), but point is, there's a path for us to the top 25 and still a decent chance 6-4 teams will be ahead of us.

Joined: 01/05/2010

MGoPoints: 38075

ColeIsCorky

November 8th, 2017 at 1:04 AM ^

This is why I don't agree with the argument for not playing strong out of conference opponents. That is only good if you go undefeated or lose to one really good team, but even then teams like TCU, Baylor, and Oklahoma were left out of the CFP's despite only 1 loss because of their weak OOC. Washinton, in my opinion, was the outlier and only happened because every other good team in the playoff race had 2 losses. If Florida was a top 15 team this season, Michigan would still be in the top 20 with a shot of getting a major bowl bid. Instead, even if we beat Ohio St. and Wisonsin, it will likely rather be deemed that both those teams are just no good and Michigan still barely makes the top 15-20 (which is absolutely ridiculous either way in my opinion if Michigan does in fact win out).

Strong out of conference wins don't just bolster the one team's resume but also the resume of the conference. The Big 10 has no major OOC wins this year, so the conference looks bad and is therefore reflected as such in the rankings. 

In summary, this is all Ohio's fault.

Joined: 11/15/2016

MGoPoints: 4627

TrueBlue2003

November 8th, 2017 at 1:35 AM ^

has never been left out with only 1 loss.  TCU and Baylor weren't even left out because they played a poor non-conference schedule.  They were left out because they didn't have a conference title game and didn't have the chance to get one more quality win (most important criteria for the committee), compared to the four that did make it.  Had they played a conference title game, the winner probably would have been in over OSU.

If Michigan beats Wisconsin and OSU (and those two teams don't lose to anyone else) Michigan will be right around 10th, which is more than fair.  They'll have gone .500 against the teams on their schedule that end up 10-20ish which means they'd be fortunate to be near the front of that group.

Joined: 01/05/2010

MGoPoints: 38075

RickyPowers

November 7th, 2017 at 7:38 PM ^

Do games in rain count less than games in good weather?  We play in the fucking Big Ten - shitty weather is to be expected.  I'm so sick and tired of this LOSE DOG attitude trying to diminish Sparty's wins because they were in the rain.  How about we win some fucking games that matter for a change instead of disparaging our rivals, all of whom are doing better than us.

Enough with the cliche'd Bo quotes and bullshit.  Bo would not be down with discounting wins because they happened in the fucking rain.  Get real.

Joined: 11/19/2008

MGoPoints: 445