I understand this. I’m saying a bad loss AT HOME is equally as bad a blowout loss on the road. Ohio State was ranked 10th last year after the loss. 2 years ago the committee liked us and had us at 5th despite 2 losses. How does that happen? OSU is just the most obvious case of where the committee has been inconsistent both for and against. I just want some damn transparency. I don’t see how anyone in their right mind can see that Georgia lost at home to a team destined to not make a bowl and have them at 4. Nothing the committee has done in the past has shown that to be a normal practice. I was shocked that Bama wasn’t at 4. I would have put Oregon there but, I have no issues with Bama at 4 now. Georgia is going to lose to Auburn this week anyways, but it’s still just another case in a long line of inconsistency with the criteria the committee uses year to year.

 

No a lost at home is not equally as bad as a blowout lost on the road to a team that barely ends up .500 and bowl eligible. A lost at home to a bad team isn't good at all. A blowout lost to a .500 team has been unheard in college football history for teams that are suppose to be the best.

 

Which me and you have already went down that route. However, you asked how it could be that different, and just pointing out in the case of OSU that is why.

I don't understand how Georgia is #4. I think Oregon, Alabama and Oklahoma are all better.

That said, it doesn't matter. Georgia is going to lose to LSU and maybe even Auburn this weekend.

Sad but expected.

No a lost at home is not equally as bad as a blowout lost on the road to a team that barely ends up .500 and bowl eligible. A lost at home to a bad team isn't good at all. A blowout lost to a .500 team has been unheard in college football history for teams that are suppose to be the best.

 

Which me and you have already went down that route. However, you asked how it could be that different, and just pointing out in the case of OSU that is why.

We’re just going to have to agree to disagree. The 2 losses Ohio State to Purdue and Georgia to South Carolina signal the exact same message. Nobody believes that Purdue was better than Ohio State and nobody believes South Carolina is better than Georgia. All it showed is that each team had deficiencies that they weren’t able to overcome for one game against a bad team they had no business losing to. The blowout loss on the road vs a bad team vs a close home loss to a bad team are equally as bad as long as we’ve established that the losing team was still the better team despite losing that game. All those games did was showcase the deficiencies of the two teams. How you lost is irrelevant to the conversation. We can both agree that despite the 1 loss to Purdue, Ohio State was a pretty damn good football team. We can also agree that despite the 1 loss to South Carolina, Georgia is still a damn good football team. But when you have teams like Alabama, Oregon, Utah, and Minnesota who haven’t shown a level of deficiency on either side of the ball to the level Georgia has on offense numerous times this season I don’t see how Georgia could possibly be at 4. Then when you look at Penn State and Oklahoma both struggle on one side of the ball at times and it caused them to drop a game. But the games they dropped were way better than Georgia’s loss to SC. It’s the same exact situation as Ohio State last year when they entered the rankings at 10. Ohio State was a really inconsistent team. Georgia this year has been really inconsistent. Georgia is getting the benefit of the doubt over other 1 loss teams and undefeated who haven’t been inconsistent. I just need to know why.

We’re just going to have to agree to disagree. The 2 losses Ohio State to Purdue and Georgia to South Carolina signal the exact same message. Nobody believes that Purdue was better than Ohio State and nobody believes South Carolina is better than Georgia. All it showed is that each team had deficiencies that they weren’t able to overcome for one game against a bad team they had no business losing to. The blowout loss on the road vs a bad team vs a close home loss to a bad team are equally as bad as long as we’ve established that the losing team was still the better team despite losing that game. All those games did was showcase the deficiencies of the two teams. How you lost is irrelevant to the conversation. We can both agree that despite the 1 loss to Purdue, Ohio State was a pretty damn good football team. We can also agree that despite the 1 loss to South Carolina, Georgia is still a damn good football team. But when you have teams like Alabama, Oregon, Utah, and Minnesota who haven’t shown a level of deficiency on either side of the ball to the level Georgia has on offense numerous times this season I don’t see how Georgia could possibly be at 4. Then when you look at Penn State and Oklahoma both struggle on one side of the ball at times and it caused them to drop a game. But the games they dropped were way better than Georgia’s loss to SC. It’s the same exact situation as Ohio State last year when they entered the rankings at 10. Ohio State was a really inconsistent team. Georgia this year has been really inconsistent. Georgia is getting the benefit of the doubt over other 1 loss teams and undefeated who haven’t been inconsistent. I just need to know why.

 

We can agree to disagree. However, I think what the committee has done with OSU and what they have done with Georgia. Also shows they believe getting blown out by teams who barely were .500 is much worst than barely losing at home to a team that will finish one game below .500. In fact the only person I have heard try to argue that fact is you lol. The committee obviously disagrees with your thinking of those losses being the same. Which is because as I said you simply don't ever see teams who are trying to be considered one of the best teams in the country get blown out by teams like that.

We can agree to disagree. However, I think what the committee has done with OSU and what they have done with Georgia. Also shows they believe getting blown out by teams who barely were .500 is much worst than barely losing at home to a team that will finish one game below .500. In fact the only person I have heard try to argue that fact is you lol. The committee obviously disagrees with your thinking of those losses being the same. Which is because as I said you simply don't ever see teams who are trying to be considered one of the best teams in the country get blown out by teams like that.

You didn’t respond to any part of my post.

But when you have teams like Alabama, Oregon, Utah, and Minnesota who haven’t shown a level of deficiency on either side of the ball to the level Georgia has on offense numerous times this season I don’t see how Georgia could possibly be at 4. Then when you look at Penn State and Oklahoma both struggle on one side of the ball at times and it caused them to drop a game. But the games they dropped were way better than Georgia’s loss to SC. It’s the same exact situation as Ohio State last year when they entered the rankings at 10. Ohio State was a really inconsistent team. Georgia this year has been really inconsistent. Georgia is getting the benefit of the doubt over other 1 loss teams and undefeated who haven’t been inconsistent. I just need to know why.

 

I agree with most of this. An explanation would be nice. I'm not sure I'd put Oregon, Utah, or Minnesota above Georgia at this point, but I wouldn't argue with someone who did.

I avoid the college football Reddit usually, but I was bored and just pulled it up at work. The top voted comments were from Georgia fans wondering how they were at 4. “Do people even watch our games?” Was another reply from a Georgia fan. When the fans don’t even think they belong, that’s when you know you screwed up.

When Georgia and Minnesota lose this weekend, things will be fun all over again.

Clemson is holding at #3 based off 2018 stats right? Could they be leaped?

You didn’t respond to any part of my post.

 

My post was in reference to you bringing up how OSU got ranked 10th with there one lost before, and Georgia 4th. I'm just pointing out the answer to that, even if you disagree with it.

 

In reference to the rest we will see if the committee got it right on Georgia soon. I think Georgia is better than Oregon, Penn State, Minnesota, Utah so I think they got that right. I will say this, I think Oklahoma is the one getting the shaft here a little bit. So I will agree with you on that.

Clemson is holding at #3 based off 2018 stats right? Could they be leaped?

 

If they fo undefeated they will be in. However, I do think they could possibly be leaped and fall back to 4th come playoff time though.

When Georgia and Minnesota lose this weekend, things will be fun all over again.

 

Which I think Minnesota will lose. I think Georgia will play one of it's better games this year and win by a decent margin.

Could they be leaped?

 

No chance a one-loss team leap-frogs an undefeated Clemson. Zero.

My post was in reference to you bringing up how OSU got ranked 10th with there one lost before, and Georgia 4th. I'm just pointing out the answer to that, even if you disagree with it.

 

In reference to the rest we will see if the committee got it right on Georgia soon. I think Georgia is better than Oregon, Penn State, Minnesota, Utah so I think they got that right. I will say this, I think Oklahoma is the one getting the shaft here a little bit. So I will agree with you on that.

I’m simply pointing out that despite their logic putting Georgia at 4, it’s completely incongruent with what they’ve done in the past specifically with Ohio State. I keep bringing up Ohio State because it’s an easy example. Something unique has happened to them every year of the playoff rankings whether it be positive or negative. But you say you believe Georgia is better than Oregon, Utah, Minnesota, and Penn State but wouldn’t Ohio State have been favored over Kentucky, Washington State, and Michigan who were all ahead of OSU in the initial rankings?