Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KSyrup
It's not conjecture, it's logic.
|
No it isn't. You're assuming, without evidence, why things were done because of aspects of it that you don't agree with. Regarding Texas, it really isn't that complicated. Jumping four spots from 7 to 3 is not in a vacuum.
- They won the conference. Championships are supposed to matter, per the committee guidelines. That, at least arguably, moves them ahead of Ohio State.
- Oregon lost. That's two spots down.
- Georgia lost and wasn't a conference champion. Texas also did better against the common opponent of Alabama. That's three spots down. By the listed criteria of the committee, none of these are not justified. I think Georgia's better than Texas, but again that's besides the point.
- Alabama was ranked below Texas already. That didn't change. So the only question left is, how does FSU compare to Alabama.
Nobody can prove you right or wrong when you assume the committee is lying and assume you know what they would have done in various other hypothetical scenarios. It's conspiracy-theory level stuff, immune to any proof one way or the other. What we can say though is that it's not as if Texas was leapfrogged ahead of Alabama for no reason. They were ahead of them in every.single.ranking the CFP committee put out this year. Unless they are illuminati-style masters of the universe and fully able to predict - heck, why stop there, actively control by fixing the games - the last month-plus of college football happenings, this didn't happen for the purpose of putting the SEC in the playoff. I think they overvalued a first-week win by Texas, but even if so they did it consistently on that issue.