1) Bama
2) Texas
T3) Georgia
T3) Michigan
Michigan had played 3 teams that were good enough to be in the next to last rankings and was undefeated. (Not going by what an opponent was ranked when Michigan played them, but how they ranked in the end.) Georgia also played 3 of those teams with just 1 loss: by 3 points to Bama. Texas played 4 of those teams with just 1 loss. Bama played a whopping 5 of those teams with just 1 loss.
Want to know why Washington and FSU were undefeated (before FSU's thunderfumping by Georgia)? Because they each played only 2 of the teams ranked in the end (Washington playing Oregon twice, though, so 3 games against final ranked teams). Call me unimpressed.
From a pure put up or shut up perspective against a tough strength of schedule, Bama and Texas stand out.
Nice try , but Washington played every one on their schedule and beat them. At the time of the games, several of those teams were ranked in the top 25 and they gave the Dawgs a run for their money.
Yeah it sucks the CFP left off an undefeated Florida State supposedly because of their QB situation, but they were undefeated. That basically caused the majority of starter to opt out of the game. Georgia would have most likely still one but not by 58 points.
The difference in the SEC title game was a missed UGA field goal and a fumble that resulted in a bama FG.
UGA lost by three.
Michigan is -2 1/2 vs Alabama=it can’t be #4 vs #1.
If Texas wins they will be an underdog to both Michigan and Alabama=they can’t be #2.
Ohio St -4 vs Texas would’ve been the line before Ohio St lost to Missouri.
The lines are the forward looking objective indicator.
Ofc they are frequently wrong and have some bias-Michigan has the largest/wealthiest alumni base-
they’re better than the supposition/academic models.