That has nothing to do with the criteria. When u lose is not a factor.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Colorado #8 in new rankings...
- Thread starter PhillyBuff
- Start date
That's it. I quit the internet. lol
If that does happen, they better hope OSU and Michigan put on great performances, or their credibility will be shot.
What I would say about Wisconsin - their 2 losses were to Michigan and Ohio State...which are better than our 2 losses. And their wins are probably on par, if not a little better than ours - both of their Top 25 wins are still IN the Top 25 (and were higher ranked at the time of the win). ...Sadly.
BUffsNation
Newest Tool
What I took away from the head of the CFP is if we beat Wash, Michigan is in. Our only chance is to have a statement big win over Washington, Clemson and Oklahoma lose as well. And even still then it is a small chance. Utah getting beat by Oregon destroyed our chances.
CVilleBuff
Well-Known Member
We needed some breaks last weekend and we didn't get them (no ****). There's still a chance for the playoff, but it's extremely slim. I think we were worthy of at least 7th and of course that extra spot would have been a huge deal. Obviously every spot matters immensely when you're top 10 and at the point some teams have one game left and some are done. The bright side is we've got it directly in our hands to get an extremely high quality win and knock that team below us. VT could potentially hang with Clemson, although I'm just not sure it's a great matchup. However, Clemson has certainly sputtered their fair share of times. It's going to take a Foster masterpiece. Personally, I think this CU team at 10-2 with our resume is worthy of more than an Alamo should we not have a 70-3 occur against UW (and it won't). Alamo is a solid bowl, but it's not the "consolation bowl" quality that you find in some other leagues, at least in my eyes. Obviously bowls shift a bit over time and vary by season, but this year's group is a notch above the 2002 CU side that entered the Alamo at 9-4. Let's beat these UW ****ers and leave no doubt to as the Rose. Should we lose, I do fear the Rose breaking their word of taking the highest ranked and being unable to resist the USC route. The USC jerk-off by media shows no signs of slowing down despite our higher ranking and great chance of maintaining it. Still not completely impossible to be playing for a national title, but last weekend was likely a dagger by no fault of our own. Let's get this damn Pac12 title!
I like this guy!
To me Colorado's path to the Playoff is simple. It comes down to two games.
Colorado beats Washington
Virginia Tech beats Clemson
In that scenario, Colorado will jump:
Washington - Same record, just lost head to head, no conference championship,
Michigan - Beat head to head, but has a worse overall record and no division or conference championship
Loser of PSU - Wisconsin - Worse overall record, no conference championship
Clemson - Same overall record, no conference championship.
The committee has stated over and over that it values a conference championship, especially with the extra game played, as the biggest factor.
Colorado beats Washington
Virginia Tech beats Clemson
In that scenario, Colorado will jump:
Washington - Same record, just lost head to head, no conference championship,
Michigan - Beat head to head, but has a worse overall record and no division or conference championship
Loser of PSU - Wisconsin - Worse overall record, no conference championship
Clemson - Same overall record, no conference championship.
The committee has stated over and over that it values a conference championship, especially with the extra game played, as the biggest factor.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
Who is their other top 25 win? Iowa?
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
We go to the Rose if the committee ranks us higher than USC. They pick the NY6 as well as the CFP-not the bowls involved. What would be more likely would be them sending Michigan to the Orange Bowl to avoid a rematch with CU......and giving us one of the B1G championship game participants.
its not quite as simple as that.... the best article I have seen is a cbssportsline article.... if I knew how to post links and pictures I would.... but I would go to CBs Sports and click on the College Football playoff link....
http://www.cbssports.com/college-fo...ngs-clarify-scenarios-for-cfp-big-bowl-games/
I tried....
8 of the top 10 teams in the current rankings are playing for a conference title this weekend...Ohio State and Michigan are sitting home. It's a really bad time to be idle especially with the committee placing such value on conference championships.
Michigan may get in if CU wins if only because we'd take out Washington in the process, but Michigan is not getting in over the Big10 champ.
somebody
Well-Known Member
This year will certainly clarify the value of a conference championship.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
Head to head matters in cases. To me, you can't take PSU ahead of Michigan if Michigan beat them by 40. I think we're different because of the QB injury, but I think we're in if we win and VA Tech wins.....
It's tough, but conference championships and common opponents also matter and by those measures Penn St would look favorable to Michigan - remember they beat both teams Michigan lost to. Also losing at Michigan is a "good" loss - Utah actually moved up 2 spots after losing to us this week.
BehindEnemyLines
beware the habu
So the committee is supposed to take into account other influencing factors. I wonder how they considered CU's placement when the starting qb was out with an injury?
Inquiring minds wanna know.
Inquiring minds wanna know.
Conference Championships trump head to head big time. USC beat both UW and CU and yet either of those team will be the conference champion over USC.
That was asked before..... the committee has no such metric called: "Liufaunessless"
Otherwise, we would be ranked AHEAD of Alabama.
I disagree about their wins. Thier best wins are against LSU (who fired that coach) and N*b (who suck balls). Who cares what they were ranked when they played them. MSU was #8 when they played, does that seem accurate? There is no reason they should be ahead of us. The big 10 is getting inflated more then it deserves.
Very concise...but not very likely both happen...but with this season who the **** knows!
Unlikely head to head upsets happen every weekend. Conference championship teams pile up a season full of wins. The head to head needs to be devalued when up against conference championship teams.
Randy.Watson
Well-Known Member
I've now read thru this entire thread and can only say one thing for certain...
You are not handling our success well.
when I was at CU.... I painted my face, drank beer, and farted the CU fight song out of my ass..... now that I am 42... that is inappropriate..... so I do not know how to handle our success..... we haven't had any since 2006.... I am limited to talking smack on AllBuffs.....
somebody
Well-Known Member
I agree with Philly's statement in another thread that absolutes matter more than head-to-head. Using the committee's current evaluations:
5. Michigan
6. Wisconsin
7. PSU
8. Colorado
Rank by (losses):
1. Wisconsin (#2, #5)
2. Colorado (#5, #11)
3. Michigan (#2, unr)
4. PSU (#5, unr)
Rank by (wins) against ranked teams. #s 2 and 3 ranked that way because that's evidently how the committee currently views it.
1. Michigan (#6, #7, #8)
2. PSU (#2)
3. Colorado (#18, #20)
4. Wisconsin (#21)
If you just add these w/o using any qualitative measure:
1. Colorado, Michigan, Wisconsin (5)
4. PSU (6)
Michigan doesn't play and two of their opponents play, so that's pretty much a wash.
With a win, CU stands to improve the most because Washington is higher rated than either Wisconsin or PSU.
Oklahoma slipped by not playing, it seems Michigan would suffer the same fate, especially if Wisconsin wins the B1G (because they are only 1 spot back).
Considering the committee's love for the B1G so far, they may still value PSU's win over OSU better than Colorado beating 3 ranked opponents, even with adding a top ten win over UW to the total above.
5. Michigan
6. Wisconsin
7. PSU
8. Colorado
Rank by (losses):
1. Wisconsin (#2, #5)
2. Colorado (#5, #11)
3. Michigan (#2, unr)
4. PSU (#5, unr)
Rank by (wins) against ranked teams. #s 2 and 3 ranked that way because that's evidently how the committee currently views it.
1. Michigan (#6, #7, #8)
2. PSU (#2)
3. Colorado (#18, #20)
4. Wisconsin (#21)
If you just add these w/o using any qualitative measure:
1. Colorado, Michigan, Wisconsin (5)
4. PSU (6)
Michigan doesn't play and two of their opponents play, so that's pretty much a wash.
With a win, CU stands to improve the most because Washington is higher rated than either Wisconsin or PSU.
Oklahoma slipped by not playing, it seems Michigan would suffer the same fate, especially if Wisconsin wins the B1G (because they are only 1 spot back).
Considering the committee's love for the B1G so far, they may still value PSU's win over OSU better than Colorado beating 3 ranked opponents, even with adding a top ten win over UW to the total above.
FlatironsBuff
Well-Known Member
That's because it's "Liufaulessness"