CFP Rankings: OSU 1, WI 8, PSU 10, Mich 14, Iowa 16, Minnesota 18

Donate To GopherHole

Livingat45north said:
Which gives us one more quality win that many of the teams ranked ahead of us.
Click to expand...
It isn’t ALL about quality wins. That is only part of it. Alabama doesn’t have a quality win either, but you can look at them with the eye test and tell they are a great team. The Gophers are probably getting dinged on the eye test because we left that as an avenue for the committee to go down by struggling to beat poor non-con foes. So we lost to Wisconsin. The Badgers are a good team. No shame in that loss. Had we beat Iowa like we should have, we wouldn’t have fallen the 10 spots with the Wisconsin loss. We would have been held in a little higher regard.
I’m mad about all this too, but it’s our own fault.
 


Something Fleck talked about earlier in the season was how the respect from last year vs Purdue didn't carry over this year. It doesn't happen from just one year.

Need to establish the culture of winning and the culture of being an 8-12 win team every year not a 5-7 win team every year.

If you want to get the benefit of the doubt, you need to provide a couple years of results to change people's minds.

Hopefully this was year 1 in doing that and next year will be year 2 with a second year of 8-12 wins.
(And a floor of 9 would be better than 8).
 



The committee is a joke because they change their criteria for what’s important based on what they want to sell.

minnesota has a weak strength of schedule. Only one quality win. Two losses.

Well Bama has the same thing except no quality wins and is 12.

which is fine but stupid.

The whole criteria is subjective.

If you ever wanted a true champion you’d have all conference champions in (10) plus a couple at largest 2-6. The rankings would be picked by objective criteria not strange things like “eye test”

I think college hockey might do it the best
 

Face The Facts said:
True. But there is something curious about being at #18 instead of #15 or #16.

#18 is like a big FU from the committee to Minnesota for some reason.
Click to expand...
Because they thought we were a paper tiger from the start and, in their eyes, we proved them right.
 

Nax5 said:
It wasn't just a loss. It was a loss while the most amount of local and national attention has ever been on the Gophers. The magnifying glass was out. So the loss was amplified. Especially with how we lost.
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting the committee didn’t watch the gophers until this week?
Are you suggesting the committee is a fraud?
 

howeda7 said:
If Michigan and Iowa are ahead of us (which is a joke) we're looking at what, the Pinstripe Bowl? We can't go to the Holiday Bowl most likely.
Click to expand...
Fortunately the committee only picks the NY6 bowls.

would be awesome if we played in Detroit again though.
We could beat up on Florida State
 




cncmin said:
Yeah, great take. The Gophers lost one game big on the scoreboard. They vastly outgained a currently higher-ranked opponent in an away game during their other loss. They destroyed every other B1G team that was on their schedule, and lost non of their non-conference games. Sounds like they "deserve" such treatment, simply because of a f'd up system where getting absolutely destroyed by the #1 team in the nation raises your ranking while absolutely destroying the #40 team in the nation lowers your ranking. Losing to the #8 team drops you 10 spots. Beating the #18 teams raises you 6 spots. Nonsense.
Click to expand...
You know it is crazy.
The college football world has turned into college basketball.

Losses to good teams became more important than winning games about 15 years ago in college basketball. It did about 5 years ago in football.

What is better? To be unbeaten or have a loss?
What if the loss is the the team I speculate is the 10th best team but the best team you beat is the team who I think is the 20th best team (even though the two teams have never played each other)?

It’s all subjective. Meaning they can makeup whatever they want
 

Some guy said:
Are you suggesting the committee didn’t watch the gophers until this week?
Are you suggesting the committee is a fraud?
Click to expand...
You know what I meant. Don't come back with a disingenuous argument.
 

Other than the Bateman touchdown there wasn’t much for the committee to point to.
Our offense struggled and Wisconsin toyed with our defense. How can anybody watch that and go ya but or if only? We were dominated at home playing for the Axe and the West title.
We thought we’d be 15 through maroon glasses. They saw us as #18.
Win the bowl game, finish Top 25. 11 wins! Awesome season!
 



Nax5 said:
You know what I meant. Don't come back with a disingenuous argument.
Click to expand...
Your whole argument is off.
3 point game at halftime.
Inside the 10 with a chance to score to cut it to one score in the 4th.

When Alabama does that against LSU they call it a “close game”
 

60's Guy said:
Other than the Bateman touchdown there wasn’t much for the committee to point to.
Our offense struggled and Wisconsin toyed with our defense. How can anybody watch that and go ya but or if only? We were dominated at home playing for the Axe and the West title.
We thought we’d be 15 through maroon glasses. They saw us as #18.
Win the bowl game, finish Top 25. 11 wins! Awesome season!
Click to expand...
Well Wisconsin dominated Michigan even more than they dominated Minnesota.
And Minnesota and Michigan both split Iowa-Penn State.

But I guess it is fine to put the teams far apart.


I honestly have no issue with the ranking. They can make up whatever stuff they want. They’ve been doing it for 6 years.
 

Some guy said:
Your whole argument is off.
3 point game at halftime.
Inside the 10 with a chance to score to cut it to one score in the 4th.

When Alabama does that against LSU they call it a “close game”
Click to expand...
But we didn't lose by 5 points. We lost by a ton. And considering the Iowa loss, the committee thought we were the #18 team in the country. Perhaps they think our PSU win was a fluke - I don't know. (For the record, I don't think the win was a fluke. We played our best game of the year). And late-season losses always hurt your ranking more than earlier. Probably because they assume every team is at their best (unless there are significant injuries).
 

Committee hates on the Gophers.

I’m guessing their argument is “Minnesota only played three teams this year, and only beat Penn St from those three, and that was by 5 at home”.

It’s a horse crap argument, but it’s what they’re going with.
 

Nax5 said:
But we didn't lose by 1 point. We lost by a ton. And considering the Iowa loss, the committee thought we were the #18 team in the country. Perhaps they think our PSU win was a fluke - I don't know. (For the record, I don't think the win was a fluke. We played our best game of the year).
Click to expand...
forsure
The committee thinks Minnesota is 18 and thinks Wisconsin is 8 and Michigan is 14.

even though Michigan essentially has the same resume.
Michigan beat an okay Michigan team and got destroyed by Ohio state.

I think Minnesota could do the same. The committee doesn’t.
Eye test
 

Some guy said:
Well Wisconsin dominated Michigan even more than they dominated Minnesota.
And Minnesota and Michigan both split Iowa-Penn State.

But I guess it is fine to put the teams far apart.


I honestly have no issue with the ranking. They can make up whatever stuff they want. They’ve been doing it for 6 years.
Click to expand...
Well, my only question would be...if your struggle is Michigan’s ranking...Are you certain if we play Michigan that we win? I’m not sure and obviously the committee doesn’t think so after Saturday.
 

MplsGopher said:
Committee hates on the Gophers.

I’m guessing their argument is “Minnesota only played three teams this year, and only beat Penn St from those three, and that was by 5 at home”.

It’s a horse crap argument, but it’s what they’re going with.
Click to expand...
Iowa's only good win was against "crappy" Minnesota at home by 4. No other ranked wins. They also nearly lost to Nebraska. How's that better?

Memphis's only good win is against #24 Navy and #20 Cincy. How is that better? Notre Dame didn't beat anyone ranked higher than #22.
 

Some guy said:
The committee is a joke because they change their criteria for what’s important based on what they want to sell.
Click to expand...

I do agree wholeheartedly with this statement. I think this committee has by far been the worst of the CFP committees to date. What they value as important seems to change each week and what they kill one team for doesn’t seem to impact another team. Poor leadership at the top I think.
 

howeda7 said:
Iowa's only good win was against "crappy" Minnesota at home by 4. No other ranked wins. They also nearly lost to Nebraska. How's that better?

Memphis's only good win is against #24 Navy and #20 Cincy. How is that better? Notre Dame didn't beat anyone ranked higher than #22.
Click to expand...
Because it’s all eye test.

It’s like we are in college basketball. Results of game don’t matter. What is their FPI?
 


Some guy said:
Because it’s all eye test.

It’s like we are in college basketball. Results of game don’t matter. What is their FPI?
Click to expand...
The eye test says if we played Iowa 10 times on a neutral field, we'd win 6 or 7.
 

I thought we'd be 14 or 15. I can live with being behind Michigan and ND, but Iowa and Memphis being ahead of us is ridiculous.
 


60's Guy said:
Well, my only question would be...if your struggle is Michigan’s ranking...Are you certain if we play Michigan that we win? I’m not sure and obviously the committee doesn’t think so after Saturday.
Click to expand...
No idea what would happen.
Neither does the committee.

Good thing the committee doesn’t have to use objective criteria and can just make stuff up.

Minnesota? Only one quality win and 2 losses? Sounds like 18
Iowa? Only one quality win and 3 losses? Sounds like 16
Michigan? Only 2 quality wins and 3 losses? Sounds like 14
Notre Dame? Virginia and Navy are two best wins and 2 losses? Sounds like 15
Bama? 0 quality wins and 2 losses? Sounds like 12
Oregon? 0 top 25 wins and 2 losses? Sounds like 13


Utah? 0 top 25 wins and 1 loss? 6
Memphis? 2 top 25 wins and 1 loss? 17

It’s all just made up crap
 

howeda7 said:
The eye test says if we played Iowa 10 times on a neutral field, we'd win 6 or 7.
Click to expand...
Not the committees eye test apparently.
They have no accountability and there is no objective criteria.

I’m not a conspiracy theorist I just think they’re idiots who value the wrong things.
Personally I value the results of games more than weighted results of hypothetical games based on SOS metrics.
 

Face The Facts said:
True. But there is something curious about being at #18 instead of #15 or #16.

#18 is like a big FU from the committee to Minnesota for some reason.
Click to expand...
While part of me agrees with you, I try to look at things from all angles. If I take off my maroon colored glasses, and ask myself against how many of the 17 teams ranked ahead of us would we be favored against if played on a neutral field, I’m forced to admit that I could count them all on one hand. And I would have fingers left over on that one hand. Beating Iowa and Wisconsin would have changed that narrative. Unfortunately, we didn’t get it done.

Let’s go to whatever bowl we are given and kick ass! Then, let’s continue to improve and try to win 10 or more next year as well.
 

We are also one iffy pass interference call against Penn State from having our best win be over Georgia Southern.

I don’t understand the complaining. Iowa, Wisconsin, PSU all played 4 or 5 ranked/tough games, we played 3. We did fine in winning 1 but having an extra loss is expected for Iowa and Michigan.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom