Only fell two spots...
- Thread starter CardVille
- Start date
At this point, the only relevant ranking for us was FSU being ranked 1 space ahead of us, and therefore will receive the Orange Bowl bid. And I really can't argue the ranking. We controlled our own destiny and we literally and figuratively fumbled it away.
You can argue but after the Houston debacle, no one wants to relive that against Michigan.
Louisville more than deserves it going 7-1 in conference to FSU'S 5-3.
Nevertheless the last 3 games were vomit. No need to think the OB would be any different.
Louisville more than deserves it going 7-1 in conference to FSU'S 5-3.
Nevertheless the last 3 games were vomit. No need to think the OB would be any different.
I thought there was still a chance that if Florida gets embarrassed by the Tide would make the loss to FSU less meaningful and then maybe they do consider the H2H. Since we are so close now it might come down to that.
Looks like some in the media are questioning why FSU is above UofL.
A Bama blowout might flip them since their is only one spot separating them.
A Bama blowout might flip them since their is only one spot separating them.
Yes we are headed to Orlando...Citrus Bowl most likely or in case somehow Virginia Tech beats Clemson the Russell Athletic Bowl
I for one, do have a problem with it. Forgetting all of the "we probably don't want to play in the Orange bowl because we might get beat" stuff, there is literally no metric where Florida State should be ranked ahead of UofL.
7-1 vs 5-3 in the (same side of the) conference.
H2H matchup where UofL put a good old fashioned Housing Authority beat down on them.
Same amount of 'quality wins' except UofL's is better beating a higher ranked team in FSU than FSU did on UF.
Better intangibles including the probable Heisman trophy winner.
FSU has the name and and a campus that's closer - that's it.
I'm sure UofL won't get the invite but it's not because FSU is more deserving.
7-1 vs 5-3 in the (same side of the) conference.
H2H matchup where UofL put a good old fashioned Housing Authority beat down on them.
Same amount of 'quality wins' except UofL's is better beating a higher ranked team in FSU than FSU did on UF.
Better intangibles including the probable Heisman trophy winner.
FSU has the name and and a campus that's closer - that's it.
I'm sure UofL won't get the invite but it's not because FSU is more deserving.
Its all about TV people trying to get the sexxy matchup of FSU v Mich.
If this was between 9-3 (7-1) Louisville and
9-3 (5-3) NC state, would this be a question.
Kerry,
Part of what you are saying is right but you also have to consider that we lost our last two games badly, one to a rival in which we had 10 days to prepare and fell on our butts. FSU, on other hand, took care of business against their rival and top 20 team. When you put it in those perspectives, our game against FSU seems like last year.
And yet...
It wasn't last year. It was 2 months ago - and it wasn't close.
63 - 20.
You don't think that FSU prepared for UofL? How did that work out for them? H2H is supposed to matter - at least that's what they told UofL when they kept them below Clemson - despite EVERYONE (not named Joey Galloway or Booger) saying that UofL was flat out better and, playing better, than Clemson.
UofL crapped the bed the past two weeks - of that there is no doubt. If you want to make the case that they are not deserving of the OB bid, you certainly could but, they are not being judged individually. They are being judged against FSU and based upon the records (H2H and otherwise) if UofL isn't worthy, FSU sure as hell isn't either and is in fact - less worthy.
The CFP is to blame.
How do you lose to an unranked crap team and only drop 2 spots?
It should go to UofL unless the CFP is trolling the Cards.
Brett Mcmurphy has UofL vs Michigan in the Orange bowl.
Wouldn't FSU rather play LSU anyways?
I dont care either way. Just be consistent.
How do you lose to an unranked crap team and only drop 2 spots?
It should go to UofL unless the CFP is trolling the Cards.
Brett Mcmurphy has UofL vs Michigan in the Orange bowl.
Wouldn't FSU rather play LSU anyways?
I dont care either way. Just be consistent.
And if Houston was eligible for the ACC's spot in the OB - your comment might have been worth making. As it stands, they aren't and you might want to work on your reading comprehension.
Other factors are also in play. FSU has beaten 3 teams with a winning record (meaning bowl eligible teams) and the Cards have only beaten one (earlier in the season).
My reading comprehension is fine. My point is, a couple of people are acting like the committee is out to get Louisville, and that's asinine. The point can be debated, but there isn't some grand conspiracy.
Here's another one for you. Stanford and USC are both 9-3. Stanford beat USC head to head, but USC is ranked ahead of Stanford. Point being, the committee doesn't have it out for Louisville. This kind of thing happens in multiple cases.
Which would be more of a factor when comparing teams that did not play H2H. As it stands UofL's best win was better than FSU's, their 'best' loss was to the same team as FSU and, their 'worst' loss was only (arguably) slightly worse than FSU's. Then there is that pesky fact that UofL finished TWO games ahead of FSU in the ACC.
And again, those items should (would?) have more weight if it was a close result in the H2H matchup.
It wasn't.
Is it "fine" - really?
You responded to my post and I haven't alleged any sort of "grand conspiracy". Nor did I say that the committee "had it out for Louisville". What I did say, was that the committee appears to be talking out of both sides of their collective faces when it comes to the criteria used to either elevate or drop certain teams.
Having said all that, I don't give a great pixelated f**k about either USC or Stanford. If you do, perhaps you should troll their boards.
I'm not advocating for FSU to be in the Orange Bowl. In fact I think it would be cool to play Michigan. I think it would be big for our program as oppose to going to a Citrus or Taxslayer Bowl. You make some great arguments and I personally think H2H is important. However I think the edict reads next highest ranked ACC team. Based on the latest polls unfortunately that is FSU.
It unfortunately does read like that - and I'm ok with that. It's the ever changing fine print to get there that bugs me.
If we were still in the AAC, we would have dropped out of the polls completely. We've come a long way in 3 short years as far as respect from the media and the committee is concerned.
I think that my main point was that you lack reading comprehension. Your last post confirms that assertion.
My other point was that (wait for it) "the committee appears to be talking out of both sides of their collective faces when it comes to the criteria used to either elevate or drop certain teams". That would naturally be applicable to the Stanford / USC rankings though, less critical as I don't believe that there is the same component of which of those two schools is more deserving to go to a NY6 bowl game. If I am mistaken about that - you can again chalk it up to me not caring about either of those teams in the slightest.
I just hope that Clemson's frankly unbelievable luck continues to hold, and you all don't screw it up for everyone on Saturday.
Again, no problems with reading comprehension. If there is any comprehension problem, it is with you, regarding the committee. The committee simply doesn't put as much emphasis on head to head as you do. Whether that's right or wrong, they don't. So, you keep arguing that the committee is talking out of both sides of its mouth, but that's because you are applying your standard to the committee, rather than the standard they actually use themselves.
For the record, you are mistaken about the Stanford/USC thing. If Washington makes the playoffs (which is a distinct possibility) then Stanford, USC, and Colorado are all in the running for the Rose Bowl.
That's the point really - where the committee is concerned there is no real comprehension outside of that room - only speculation. Mine, yours - everyone's.
When the committee decided to keep clemson in the 4 in week 11 despite an identical record to UofL's and UofL playing better, the stated reason was the H2H result. Now that FSU has played better than UofL, despite an identical record of 9-3, suddenly the H2H gets seemingly dropped in importance. My question is why?
Again, don't care about usc, stanford, et al.
It was actually Week 12, not Week 11. To answer your question, Clemson also had a better SOS than Louisville, plus the head to head. Louisville doesn't have SOS over Florida St.
It doesn't matter if you don't care about Stanford/USC. It still exists, whether you care about it or not, and it still contradicts your point.
It was actually week 11 - November 15th when both Louisville and clemson were 9-1.
At the end of the day, I'm not comparing clemson and UofL - I'm comparing UofL and FSU. And in either the metrics I put out or the ones you put out, UofL is more deserving than FSU.
Lastly, like most of your comparisons / rationales, comparing the usc/stanford situation to the UofL/FSU one is flawed, as usc's overall record is better.
If UofL is going to get f@cked over anyway, I now hope that VT wrecks dumbo and the boys specifically due to idiots like you.
No, sorry, it's Week 12. The CFP rankings go Week 15, which is this week. Week 14 was last week, (Clemson/SC), Week 13 was 2 weeks ago (Clemson/Wake Forest), and Week 12 was 3 weeks ago (Clemson/Pitt).
You brought up Clemson, not me.
USC's overall record isn't better. They are 9-3, same as Stanford.
It would help if you would look up stuff before you post. You can go to ESPN's website, and if you pick the week where Clemson lost to Pitt, you have to pick "Week 12." If you also go look at the standings, you will see that USC and Stanford both have 9-3 overall records.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
LOUISVILLE AT GTECH GAME THREAD- 3:45PM THE CW
- Latest: Thecycle27
-
