Recruiting Forum Football Talk V
- Thread starter StoVol
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2012
- Messages
- 37,523
- Likes
- 182,126
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2017
- Messages
- 3,534
- Likes
- 13,127
Nobody in the pac12 has a good ooc win.
Utah lost at UF. Oregon was pounded by UGA. Colorado was curb stomped by Minnesota and TCU. Oklahoma State beat ASU by 17. Miss State blew out Arizona who nearly beat USC.
It's hard to judge a conference when they couldn't pull out any significant wins against the rest of the country. 0 chance any of them make the CFP, imo. USC winning out was their only hope, but losing to Utah ended it - especially with mediocre Notre Dame being their only p5 ooc game.
Utah lost at UF. Oregon was pounded by UGA. Colorado was curb stomped by Minnesota and TCU. Oklahoma State beat ASU by 17. Miss State blew out Arizona who nearly beat USC.
It's hard to judge a conference when they couldn't pull out any significant wins against the rest of the country. 0 chance any of them make the CFP, imo. USC winning out was their only hope, but losing to Utah ended it - especially with mediocre Notre Dame being their only p5 ooc game.
3 being in the top 10 right now. USC and UCLA still have to play one another. Oregon beat UCLA already and would only face USC in championship game, but they still have Utah to play.
USC will for sure also get attention if they emerge as the 1 loss champion since they have the 1 point loss to Utah as their only blemish. But ideally at least 2 of them end up with a 2nd loss...there's a chance all 3 could end up with a 2nd loss.
USC will for sure also get attention if they emerge as the 1 loss champion since they have the 1 point loss to Utah as their only blemish. But ideally at least 2 of them end up with a 2nd loss...there's a chance all 3 could end up with a 2nd loss.
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2011
- Messages
- 5,823
- Likes
- 23,480
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2005
- Messages
- 68,670
- Likes
- 113,028
we add Hobbs...flip Keith and Ramil....we're top 8 class this season. 24 class is off to a top 3-5 start, and has serious momentum. do some damage in the portal this winter/spring....
i really like what this looks like for the next 3-5 years for sure. next year, we'll see, i think we'll still be good, but i'd expect a step back from what we're doing this year lol. but the future looks soooo good right now.....
i really like what this looks like for the next 3-5 years for sure. next year, we'll see, i think we'll still be good, but i'd expect a step back from what we're doing this year lol. but the future looks soooo good right now.....
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2016
- Messages
- 14,737
- Likes
- 47,560
Agreed. My ranking wouldn’t have any of them in the CFP, but I’m not on the committee and they will look at it differently. Personally, I just hope they all beat each other and then we will see where the chips fall.
All in all though, I just don’t trust the CFP Committee to make the right decisions with the eye test. Regardless of what we think about the PAC12 it would still be a toss up to see if a 1 loss SEC non champion gets in over a 1 loss PAC12 champion. It’s not as cut and dry as some people make it out to be. Also have to remember the committee, as much as every member will say they don’t, they do have biases. Whether it’s cognitive or not.
All in all though, I just don’t trust the CFP Committee to make the right decisions with the eye test. Regardless of what we think about the PAC12 it would still be a toss up to see if a 1 loss SEC non champion gets in over a 1 loss PAC12 champion. It’s not as cut and dry as some people make it out to be. Also have to remember the committee, as much as every member will say they don’t, they do have biases. Whether it’s cognitive or not.
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2016
- Messages
- 14,737
- Likes
- 47,560
Was curious who was sitting on the CFP Committee this year so I just looked it up. These are the conferences that each member has the most experience or connection to:
SEC - 1 Member
ACC - 2 Member
PAC12 - 3 Members
Big10 - 1 Member
Big12 - 3 Members
Non Power 5 - 4 Members
Should also be noted that the 1 SEC member is the AD from UK. Also, one of the ACC members is actually Notre Dame, so could have put that one into an unaffiliated slot but figured they do a good bit of their athletics within ACC now so I’d put it there.
All of these members have said they will be unbiased.. but we know that won’t be exactly 100% true. We just have to give the committee a resume that can’t be ignored by going undefeated.
Edit: should also be noted that some of these members don’t necessarily have a football playing or coaching background. One of the PAC12 members is a professor, doesn’t say what she teaches. And only 5 of the 13 said former head coach or athlete. The other 7 besides the professor and former athlete/coaches are all ADs so they should have a good background of football. I just only point this out to say that I would hate to try and rely on them putting through a 1 loss non SEC champion over a 1 loss PAC12 champion by way of the eye test. Because on paper, it won’t be as much of a difference as we think.
SEC - 1 Member
ACC - 2 Member
PAC12 - 3 Members
Big10 - 1 Member
Big12 - 3 Members
Non Power 5 - 4 Members
Should also be noted that the 1 SEC member is the AD from UK. Also, one of the ACC members is actually Notre Dame, so could have put that one into an unaffiliated slot but figured they do a good bit of their athletics within ACC now so I’d put it there.
All of these members have said they will be unbiased.. but we know that won’t be exactly 100% true. We just have to give the committee a resume that can’t be ignored by going undefeated.
Edit: should also be noted that some of these members don’t necessarily have a football playing or coaching background. One of the PAC12 members is a professor, doesn’t say what she teaches. And only 5 of the 13 said former head coach or athlete. The other 7 besides the professor and former athlete/coaches are all ADs so they should have a good background of football. I just only point this out to say that I would hate to try and rely on them putting through a 1 loss non SEC champion over a 1 loss PAC12 champion by way of the eye test. Because on paper, it won’t be as much of a difference as we think.
Last edited:
I get that they don't want it to look like the SEC and Big10 have a lot of bias from the committee, but why not just do 2 from each and 4-5 from G5?. Make sure there's no argument. That demographic looks like a near foregone conclusion that say, a TCU or Kansas St would get in over a 1-loss SEC team. And how many of the 4 G5 members are affiliated with schools that are soon to join the Big12?
- Status
VN Store
