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

Donate To GopherHole
The Massey Composite has Iowa 17 and Minnesota 18.

College Football Ranking Composite

www.masseyratings.com

Iowa beat 7-5 ISU on the road. ISU was ranked in every CFP until this week.

Iowa went to Madison and lost by 2. Minnesota lost by 21 at home when everything was on the line.
 

This is why I miss the BCS.

The BCS was an impartial computer program.

Humans can sit in a room and make up whatever they want and justify it however they want.

CFP is all about money... and the big-time programs are what bring in the big-time money.
 

SickAndTiredOfLosingToWI said:
This is why I miss the BCS.

The BCS was an impartial computer program.

Humans can sit in a room and make up whatever they want and justify it however they want.

CFP is all about money... and the big-time programs are what bring in the big-time money.
Click to expand...
Except that, the BCS is *exactly* why we have the committee now!

Don't you remember when the BCS gave us the Alabama-LSU national championship game?? That was the end of that.
 

No matter what system you rig up -- computers, polls, committees -- there will always be a flaw. The teams left out will cry foul.
 

SickAndTiredOfLosingToWI said:
This is why I miss the BCS.

The BCS was an impartial computer program.

Humans can sit in a room and make up whatever they want and justify it however they want.

CFP is all about money... and the big-time programs are what bring in the big-time money.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that I saw the BCS model currently has MN at 21...
 


theTurning said:
We had everything laid out in front of us and pissed it down our leg. Can’t blame the committee for that.
Click to expand...
I agree. We had two large meaningful games to clinch the West and didn't play like we belonged. This team played differently after halftime of the PSU game. Defense started to be leaky and OL started to falter. This was against our best competition.

There were 6 good teams in the B1G this year and it's hard to argue we are better than any of the other 5. All loses by these 6, tOSU (3-0), WI (3-1), PSU (2-2), MN (1-2), MI (1-3), IA (1-3) are within the group except WI to ILL. MN has the worst strength of schedule and only looked good in 6 games all year. This can all be argued.

I watched the games and think we are better than IA and would love to have that game back.
 

Some guy said:
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.
Click to expand...
Where would you have us ranked? I'm disappointed in 18, but outside of G5 schools, it's hard to make a great argument we should be ranked much different. After top three teams, 4 and beyond is impossible to rank.
 
Last edited:

ICHawk24 said:
The Massey Composite has Iowa 17 and Minnesota 18.

College Football Ranking Composite

www.masseyratings.com

Iowa beat 7-5 ISU on the road. ISU was ranked in every CFP until this week.

Iowa went to Madison and lost by 2. Minnesota lost by 21 at home when everything was on the line.
Click to expand...
Iowa lost at home to Penn St. Minnesota beat Penn St at home.

Iowa beat Nebraska and Illinois by a combined 12 points. MN beat them by a combined 50 points.

Iowa's best win is against the current #18 team. MN's is against the #10 team.

Iowa went 1-3 against current top 25 teams. MN went 1-2.

You can kinda spin things however you want.
 

Meh. Still in line for the Outback Bowl. I'm fine with that.
 



I just don't care as long as we get the Outback or better bowl.
If we somewhow drop to Holiday or Gator then I'm upset.

Once you're out of the NY6 discussion, the CFP rankings just don't matter. Go win your bowl, finish the season ranked, and have some credibility going into the next season so 10-2 keeps you ahead of the G5 teams and other 3 loss teams.
 

JWG said:
I just don't care as long as we get the Outback or better bowl.
If we somewhow drop to Holiday or Gator then I'm upset.

Once you're out of the NY6 discussion, the CFP rankings just don't matter. Go win your bowl, finish the season ranked, and have some credibility going into the next season so 10-2 keeps you ahead of the G5 teams and other 3 loss teams.
Click to expand...
This is mostly correct, but I will disagree in that the Gator could easily be just as good as the Outback, perhaps even preferable. They both “pay out” the same, though that money goes to the conf. Both would be against an SEC team.
 


GophersInIowa said:
Iowa lost at home to Penn St. Minnesota beat Penn St at home.

Iowa beat Nebraska and Illinois by a combined 12 points. MN beat them by a combined 50 points.

Iowa's best win is against the current #18 team. MN's is against the #10 team.

Iowa went 1-3 against current top 25 teams. MN went 1-2.

You can kinda spin things however you want.
Click to expand...

And that is why Iowa being ranked ahead of us is a joke, IMO.
 



ICHawk24 said:
Totally agree. My point is that the CFP rankings don't seem outlandish.

Minnesota appears to be a lock for the Outback, so you guys are looking good.
Click to expand...
I just think the committee continues to be so inconsistent.
 

We can agree and disagree on a lot, but if anyone here believes the committee is sitting in that room reviewing games play by play, your nuts.

With that many people in a committee room, half are silent hoping to just get paid and get out.
Two or three are vocal. Another 5 might have a specific team they are trying to defend up or down. The majority of them are rolling their eyes wondering how something as easy as ranking teams can be such a crapfest.

If anyone has worked in a business setting, you know a committee like this in a conference room is going to be unproductive at best and a horrible waste of time.

Hey Merle, I'm telling you Minnesota is better than Memphis! Get that PSU game up on the screens and let me show you that one handed catch again. Memphis doesn't have a WR like that. That alone is reason to move them up!

college-football-playoff-2.jpg


At best they have a couple games running on the TV's with no sound while they decide what to order for lunch and discussing when they all fly back out.
 

Face The Facts said:
We can agree and disagree on a lot, but if anyone here believes the committee is sitting in that room reviewing games play by play, your nuts.

With that many people in a committee room, half are silent hoping to just get paid and get out.
Two or three are vocal. Another 5 might have a specific team they are trying to defend up or down. The majority of them are rolling their eyes wondering how something as easy as ranking teams can be such a crapfest.

If anyone has worked in a business setting, you know a committee like this in a conference room is going to be unproductive at best and a horrible waste of time.

Hey Merle, I'm telling you Minnesota is better than Memphis! Get that PSU game up on the screens and let me show you that one handed catch again. Memphis doesn't have a WR like that. That alone is reason to move them up!

college-football-playoff-2.jpg


At best they have a couple games running on the TV's with no sound while they decide what to order for lunch and discussing when they all fly back out.
Click to expand...

Never was a fan of U-Shaped conference tables.
 

OK, it's a conspiracy. Someone in a smoke-filled room told the committee to scr*w the Gophers - rank them lower than you think they should be. Maybe it was the Deep State. Maybe it was the Ukrainians. Maybe someone on the committee had their heart broken by a girl from MN and this is their way of getting even.

Or maybe they ranked the Gophers where they felt they should be ranked. It seems pretty clear that the committee puts a lot of importance on strength of schedule.

As someone noted, this is not being done by computer. It's being done by people - human beings - with different biases, opinions and viewpoints. And they didn't do what you wanted them to do. It's not fair.
 

Our effort last Saturday was pathetic and you pay for that with the committee. We had two chances to win the west. One game we beat ourselves after sleeping for a half and then got throttled by a team that is better than us and clearly wanted the win. What do people expect? Don't know what bowl we go to at this point but we will have a chance at redemption because we will play on Jan 1 and cannot afford to be non-competitive. We are right where we should be. We had a great season at 10-2 regardless of who you play but just once in two "make it" games you have to SHOW UP.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
Or maybe they ranked the Gophers where they felt they should be ranked. It seems pretty clear that the committee puts a lot of importance on strength of schedule.
Click to expand...

They do for some teams. For others it appears it doesn't matter. Memphis, for example has a strength of schedule of 63 while MN is at 27. Yet Memphis is ranked higher than MN. What's important for one team is not important for another. Inconsistent.

They seriously said part of the reason WI moved up to #8 is because they had a close loss to Illinois.
 

Face The Facts said:
We can agree and disagree on a lot, but if anyone here believes the committee is sitting in that room reviewing games play by play, your nuts.

With that many people in a committee room, half are silent hoping to just get paid and get out.
Two or three are vocal. Another 5 might have a specific team they are trying to defend up or down. The majority of them are rolling their eyes wondering how something as easy as ranking teams can be such a crapfest.

If anyone has worked in a business setting, you know a committee like this in a conference room is going to be unproductive at best and a horrible waste of time.

Hey Merle, I'm telling you Minnesota is better than Memphis! Get that PSU game up on the screens and let me show you that one handed catch again. Memphis doesn't have a WR like that. That alone is reason to move them up!

college-football-playoff-2.jpg


At best they have a couple games running on the TV's with no sound while they decide what to order for lunch and discussing when they all fly back out.
Click to expand...
If you’re going that cynical, and I’m not saying you shouldn’t, then let’s peel it back one more layer:

the CFP is paid for by TV money. TV doesn’t grow on trees, it comes from massive ratings. And massive ratings don’t come from “crappy” matchups.

No way in hell that TV was going to pay for the system if the BCS algorithm got to determine the matchups. Was never on the table. It was always going to be a committee of humans who, at least (as you describe it), give the outward appearance of fairness.
 

The committee seems to track computer rankings fairly closely. Nearly all the complaints on this thread match up with computer rankings.

Massey Composite:

College Football Ranking Composite

www.masseyratings.com

It has Minnesota 18. Memphis 16. Wisconsin 6. PSU 8. ND 11.
 

An Athletic article said Utah gets credit for their September loss because some player was out injured. Our game completely turned when Faalele went out. There are so many examples, as everyone has cited, on how messed up this ranking is. It's insanity. I've said before, but they looked at our PSU win the same as Illinois' win over WI. Didn't count.
 

There should be no rankings until four or five weeks in any area. Those first rankings are always guessing where teams should be. Then they go back and say. They beat Notre Dame when they were ranked 10th or something like that when Notre Dame never should have been that high in the first place.

IMO I don't think MN should have jumped that many places and it almost seems like they were punished by the committee for making them look bad for having MN so high.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TAW

MplsGopher said:
If you’re going that cynical, and I’m not saying you shouldn’t, then let’s peel it back one more layer:

the CFP is paid for by TV money. TV doesn’t grow on trees, it comes from massive ratings. And massive ratings don’t come from “crappy” matchups.

No way in hell that TV was going to pay for the system if the BCS algorithm got to determine the matchups. Was never on the table. It was always going to be a committee of humans who, at least (as you describe it), give the outward appearance of fairness.
Click to expand...
That's why the BCS formula had such a large component of voting.
If the computers came up with something strange, people could override it by voting down a team they didn't want towards the top.

My argument is from a social dynamic standpoint. Nineteen people in a conference room tasked to come up with a rankings. It's probably 3 people who are probably doing most of the work and everyone else nods their heads or maybe argues one team up or down.
 

Face The Facts said:
That's why the BCS formula had such a large component of voting.
If the computers came up with something strange, people could override it by voting down a team they didn't want towards the top.

My argument is from a social dynamic standpoint. Nineteen people in a conference room tasked to come up with a rankings. It's probably 3 people who are probably doing most of the work and everyone else nods their heads or maybe argues one team up or down.
Click to expand...
The committee might not even work that well.

But anyway, the human polls in the BCS couldn’t counteract the computers in the way you describe, because they didn’t know ahead of time what the computers would do. Again, it all goes back to the various debacles that the BCS produced in its run since the late 90’s through the early 2010’s. The TV execs weren’t going to allow their new shiny system to be ruined by that.
 

how did we make the Citrus Bowl with 8 wins in 2014? Seems like that could never happen again.
 

mnsportsgeek said:
how did we make the Citrus Bowl with 8 wins in 2014? Seems like that could never happen again.
Click to expand...

The Gophers definitely punched above their weight that year. Plus, there was only three teams ahead of them in the standings in conference play. Michigan and Penn State were terrible and Iowa mediocre.
 

Current rankings with old BCS system

1) Ohio St
9) Wisconsin
10) Penn St
16) Michigan
17) Minnesota
19) Iowa

It would actually have Alabama at 11 and Auburn at 12 when they just played. Alabama's best wins are vs Texas A&M and Tennessee.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
I agree. We had two large meaningful games to clinch the West and didn't play like we belonged. This team played differently after halftime of the PSU game. Defense started to be leaky and OL started to falter. This was against our best competition.

There were 6 good teams in the B1G this year and it's hard to argue we are better than any of the other 5. All loses by these 6, tOSU (3-0), WI (3-1), PSU (2-2), MN (1-2), MI (1-3), IA (1-3) are within the group except WI to ILL. MN has the worst strength of schedule and only looked good in 6 games all year. This can all be argued.

I watched the games and think we are better than IA and would love to have that game back.
Click to expand...
MaxyJR1 said:
Where would you have us ranked? I'm disappointed in 18, but outside of G5 schools, it's hard to make a great argument we should be ranked much different. After top three teams, 4 and beyond is impossible to rank.
Click to expand...

The first quote is exactly why the only logical ranking of the 6 big ten teams ranked is:
Ohio State
Penn state
Wisconsin (behind Penn State due to bad loss against Illinois)
Minnesota
Michigan
Iowa (behind Michigan due to loss to Michigan)

You might be able to convince me that Michigan is above Minnesota due to Notre Dame win.
 

The only thing baffling to me is we are below Iowa. I could see us dropping as low as 14 but 18, omg no words.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom