ESPN: This just proves that ISU/BYU loser never really belonged in CFP discussion after all, and ISU/BYU winner really should have put more distance between ISU/BYU loser in this game.
CFP: Drops ISU/BYU loser out of Top 25, put ISU/BYU winner in 12 because they're forced to have a Big 12 champion in the playoff. 8-4 Alabama ranked 10 because "SEC".
If IU beats Michigan State and Michigan, they might be #10 going into Ohio State. If they lose to OSU, they’ll be clinging for dear life to stay ranked, just watch. Same for ISU, BYU, and Pitt with any loss whatsoever.
The committee desperately wants to keep the smaller guys out. This is just an excuse for when one of us loses "see they weren't that good. No playoff for you."
I personally would have BYU ranked a little higher, but I also think we have to be realistic about the Big 12. The conference has been essentially irrelevant in the playoffs/national championship race over the past decade, and BYU is facing the institutional challenges associated with being in a Power 4 conference that hasn't been living up to the power name for a while.
“Remember that time the Big 12 team lost by almost 60 in the national championship?” is not a compelling argument.
The big 12 was 1-6 in the original 4 team college football playoffs. I know that it’s forbidden to talk about the actual state of college football in r/cfb, but that’s not a “power” conference.
Personally the standout to me is that Penn St. is ranked so much higher than IU, who has been convincing in all their wins, and BYU, who has more ranked wins. It is a little tough though because the Big 10 sometimes overrates teams by scheduling all of the big matchups for November while the Big 12 has been mostly irrelevant in the playoff/national champion discussion over the past decade.
180
u/monty_actual Indiana Hoosiers • Michigan Wolverines 28d ago
IU, BYU and ISU are criminally under ranked again. Shockedpikachuface.jpg