Update: Alabama is in over Ohio State for the fourth semifinal slot. This slightly affects projections in the following ways:
- Ohio State vs. USC in the Fiesta Bowl.
- Wisconsin vs. Miami in the Orange Bowl. This also creates a ripple effect:
- Because the Big Ten is now in the Orange Bowl, the SEC (and not the Big Ten) gets the Citrus Bowl. This puts one of the Michigan teams (likely Michigan State) in the Holiday Bowl instead of the Citrus Bowl.
- Again, since the Big Ten now loses the Citrus Bowl, it will now have one of its lesser teams available for the Foster Farms Bowl: I’m going with 6-6 Purdue.
All other projections remain as listed below.
We’re a mere eight hours away from the CFP’s final rankings and selections, but while we’re waiting, why not have a little bit of fun trying to project how everything plays out? Last year, I somehow managed to predict 100% of the Pac-12’s bowl destinations, and even correctly predicted all but two opponents. (Don’t ask me how I pulled that one off because—honestly—I still don’t know. Nonetheless, here I am again to push my luck, this time in one of the least predictable bowl seasons in recent memory!)
Before I hop into the Pac-12 projections, let me give two of my BIG assumptions on the front-end. If either of my big assumptions proves wrong, it will quickly unravel all of the below projections:
- Ohio State (not Alabama) will be in the semifinals. Three of the four semifinal slots are very straight-forward: ACC Champion Clemson, Big 12 Champion Oklahoma, and SEC Champion Georgia. The fourth slot, however, is clear as mud. Does it go to two-loss Big Ten Champion, Ohio State, or a one-loss Alabama team that couldn’t even win its division (let alone its conference)? My instinct is to lean toward Ohio State, but there’s no clear answer, and if Ohio State fails to make the semifinals, it will completely alter the opponent projections below.
- Washington will crack the top 11 and earn a New Year’s Six Bowl. Coming into this week, Washington was ranked #13 and on the outside looking in for a New Year’s Six Bowl; however, both TCU and Stanford lost their conference championships. My assumption is that Washington will leapfrog both of these teams, and earn a second New Year’s Six Bowl for the Pac-12. If this assumption proves wrong, all of my Pac-12 predictions below will quickly unravel.
Long story short: there’s more uncertainty for the Pac-12 in bowl projections this year than in recent years. But those are my assumptions, and here is what those assumptions yielded:
New Year’s Six Bowls
Fiesta Bowl: USC vs. Wisconsin Ohio State (see update above)
This one is pretty straight-forward. With the Rose Bowl serving as semifinals this year, the otherwise Rose Bowl match-up will just be moved to the geographically-closest Fiesta Bowl. Since my assumption is that Ohio State is off to the semifinals, that leaves the door open for one-loss Wisconsin to seize the Fiesta Bowl.
Cotton Bowl: Washington vs. Penn State
Another Pac-12 vs. Big Ten match-up! It’s like two Rose Bowls for the price of one! As to why I see these two teams in the Cotton Bowl, admittedly, it was more process of elimination than anything else. The Orange Bowl is contractually obligated to take an ACC team (Miami) and the best available SEC/Big Ten/Notre Dame team (Alabama Wisconsin). That leaves only the Peach and Cotton Bowls for Washington/Penn State/Auburn/UCF. The Peach Bowl makes good geographic sense for Auburn/UCF, so that leaves Washington/Penn State in the Cotton Bowl.
Pac-12 Bowls
Alamo Bowl: Stanford vs. TCU
Alamo will get the “what might have been?” bowl, hosting both of the runner-ups to the Pac-12 and Big 12 Championships. With Oklahoma in the semifinals, TCU is both the team with the best remaining record, and is also in the same state as the Alamo Bowl. On the Pac-12 side, Stanford is the best remaining record once USC and Washington are in the New Year’s Six. If Stanford is selected, it will be Stanford’s first appearance in the Alamo Bowl.
Holiday Bowl: Washington State vs. Northwestern Michigan State (see update above)
The Holiday Bowl will have a selection of Washington State or either Arizona school. Washington State seems the most attractive. As for the opponent, this is the third bowl in line for a Big Ten team, and my hunch is that the two Michigan schools will go to the more prestigious bowls (Citrus and Outback). With the two Michigan schools gone, 9-3 Northwestern has the best record of any remaining Big Ten school (next is 7-5 Iowa).
Foster Farms Bowl: Arizona State vs. San Diego State Purdue (see update above)
Foster Farms will be faced with a decision between the two Arizona schools. My hunch is that they select an Arizona State team that defeated Arizona during the regular season. The opponent is trickier. Foster Farms is usually another Pac-12 vs. Big Ten match-up, but the Big Ten won’t have enough bowl eligible teams to fill Foster Farms this year. Foster Farms will likely select a school within California but outside of the Pac-12; since San Jose State isn’t bowl eligible, that leaves only San Diego State and Fresno State. I’m taking San Diego State and its better record, even though Fresno State beat them earlier this season. (By the way, the Big Ten’s lack of available teams will come into play in a later bowl projection as well...)
Sun Bowl: Arizona vs. Louisville
The Pac-12 team here is easy: whichever Arizona team isn’t selected by Foster Farms is Sun Bowl-bound. The opponent, however, is trickier because, rather than the bowls picking one by one, the ACC assigns four different bowls (including Sun) with equal status. The Sun Bowl located in Texas, however, is the farthest west of the four equal ACC bowls, and Louisville is also the westernmost ACC team available. It makes sense to me that Louisville will end up here.
Las Vegas Bowl: Oregon vs. Boise State
Unlike the last couple of bowls, the Las Vegas Bowl is very straight forward. Boise State is in by virtue of winning the Mountain West Championship. On the Pac-12 side, Las Vegas will only have a choice of Oregon or UCLA. Oregon seems the more lucrative program.
Cactus Bowl: UCLA vs. Kansas State
Whichever Pac-12 team the Las Vegas Bowl passes on (Oregon or UCLA) will be in the Cactus Bowl. Once again, though, the opponent is a bit trickier, and it really could be any of the 7-5 Big 12 teams (Iowa State, Kansas State, West Virginia). I’m going with Kansas State, though, because I think that Iowa State will be taken in the bowl before this one (Liberty Bowl), and that Kansas State is more alluring than West Virginia.
Heart of Dallas Bowl: Utah vs. West Virginia
This is the trickiest projection of all of them because the Cactus Bowl (above) was the last bowl that’s contracted with the Pac-12. Because there are no more bowls contracted with the Pac-12, that means that bowl-eligible Utah can end up anywhere (or, possibly, nowhere). That said, remember earlier when we discussed the lack of bowl eligible teams in the Big Ten? The Heart of Dallas Bowl is one of the other Big Ten contracted bowls, so it will be looking for a replacement pick, and the Heart of Dallas Bowl even used the Pac-12 for a replacement pick just two years ago (Washington). If the Heart of Dallas Bowl takes Utah, then the Big 12 opponent is whichever the Liberty and Cactus Bowls left behind; I’m going with West Virginia.
Comments
Hmm
It will be interesting to see what they do with UW and TCU. If UW advances to the NY6, then the above projections are probably right, as far as the Pac schools go. And that would result in a terrible match-up for Stanford against TCU, ugh. I’d prefer Northwestern in the Holiday, to be honest, so I’m hoping that UW doesn’t leapfrog TCU (based on strength of schedule, quality of losses).
I don’t think anyone really knows what’s going to happen with Ohio State and Alabama, arguments can be made either way I think. Ohio State has a stronger schedule than Bama, but they got their bells well and truly rung in Iowa City not so long ago, which is by far a worse loss than Bama’s, and they also got their clocks cleaned at home by Oklahoma in September. At the same time, they have a stronger schedule than Bama. It will be interesting to see what happens there. SC matches up well against either of those in the Fiesta, but if there is no B1G team in the CFP, then I guess Michigan drops to the Holiday, which I think would also be a fine matchup for us.
By Brendan Ross on 12.03.17 2:51am
One data point among many for amusement this morning ....
ESPN’s team is 24-11 in favor of Bama over Ohio State: http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/page/fourforfour120317/college-football-playoff-espn-expert-picks
By Brendan Ross on 12.03.17 2:55am
Not surprisingly
ESPN is shamelessly SEC-biased.
By Jeff Tarnungus on 12.03.17 5:18am
What scares you about TCU?
Their defense doesn’t look very good; and we could probably run it down their throats with great TOP play. That would keep their high-octane offense off the field.
By Jeff Tarnungus on 12.03.17 5:27am
Their offense scares me quite a bit
We would need to execute like our old teams did against the old Oregon teams, and I don’t think we execute like that now, really. That’s the best offense, by a significant margin, we will have faced all year. Yes, we could beat them if we execute the possession style offense well … if we don’t, we’d be screwed, because our defense won’t stop them.
By Brendan Ross on 12.03.17 5:29am
Oklahoma held them to 17 points yesterday
And the Sooners are not known for prodigious D (#52 scoring defense). We are at #29, despite our obvious weaknesses. Yes, maybe the Sooners have faced more potent offenses than we have; but they do not have a stingy defense and still managed to corral the Horned Frogs yesterday. I like the match-up, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. TCU will get a NY6 bid (probably against Penn State), and the UW will land in the Alamo Bowl against Oklahoma State. We drop to the Holiday Bowl and face off against Northwestern or Michigan. We might even get a rematch with Michigan State.
By Jeff Tarnungus on 12.03.17 6:47am
Maybe
I just feel very nervous going against an offense like that with our defense, statistics aside. I think we match up better against a Big Ten team with a more modest offense — of course the downside there is that they are more phsyical in general (certainly Michigan and Michigan State are this year). I wouldn’t mind playing any of the three Big Ten teams that seem to be on tap for us.
By Brendan Ross on 12.03.17 6:57am
You should be much more concerned by TCU’s defense than offense. Kenny Hill is inconsistent, and if we don’t get running back Darius Anderson back for the bowl game (he has missed the last month), we struggle to move the ball consistently. The defense is legit though. TCU dominates against the run, which makes the matchup with Love fascinating. The pass defense is good when healthy, Oklahoma is just a machine. Playing in a conference like the Big 12, that is loaded with outstanding QBs, you’re going to give up some yards and points. But this is a ball-hawking, speedy group that is really strong in the trenches and boasts the most underrated linebacker in the country in Travin Howard. I think this is a pretty even matchup on paper, and likely comes down to special teams and turnovers.
By Melissa B. Triebwasser on 12.03.17 7:25pm
Good point
I was unaware that TCU’s run defense was so strong. I hope Shaw doesn’t try to run it up the gut all game.
By Jeff Tarnungus on 12.04.17 12:13am
I don't think Washington jumps TCU for one simple reason
The Playoff committee has been favorably predisposed to conferences that have championship games. This has worked against the Big-12 in the past, so the Big-12 finally introduced a championship game. If the result of the first Big-12 championship game is to punish TCU for an additional loss, then the CFP committee has some explaining to do. Assume there had been no Big-12 championship game: Oklahoma probably still would have been selected for the CFP; and TCU would have remained with two losses and ahead of UW. Also, there is the rule that when a conference sends a representative to the CFP, its runner up is a kind of substitute champion and gets the traditional bowl tie-in (something USC and Penn State took advantage of last year when Washington and Ohio State were in the CFP: both took the Rose Bowl tie-ins for the Pac-12 and Big Ten because the Rose Bowl was not a playoff venue). In other words, I don’t think the Pac-12 will get a 2nd NY6 bowl; and that will push everything down a notch. Washington goes to the Alamo Bowl, and we should get a Big-10 foe in the Holiday Bowl.
By Jeff Tarnungus on 12.03.17 5:26am
It would indeed be hard to justify
I think given that TCU’s loss is in its 13th game, and two of their losses are to Oklahoma, its conference champion and a CFP team, while UW had two losses and didn’t even play the Pac-12 champion.
By Brendan Ross on 12.03.17 6:59am
It can go either way, but...
…I really don’t think it’s farfetched at all to think TCU might drop just one rank after its decisive loss to Oklahoma. Last year, Colorado dropped TWO ranks and fell out of the Rose Bowl after losing to Washington in the Pac-12 Championship, so there is precedent for an adverse ranking (with substantial stakes!) following a conference championship loss.
But I definitely see your point and don’t view this as a "slam dunk" decision either way for the committee. No matter the case, all will be done very soon here!
By Matt Vassar on 12.03.17 8:50am
But the Pac-12 still got its tie in with the Rose Bowl
And the committee probably just did the Rose Bowl a favor by putting USC above Colorado, since USC was clearly the better draw in LA. It’s all about the bucks at the end of the day.
By Jeff Tarnungus on 12.03.17 9:21am
Well...
I ended up going one for two on my assumptions. Nailed the UW in top 11, but screwed the pooch on Ohio State over Bama. Retrospectively, my assumptions seem logically inconsistent. If the CFP is willing to extend the benefit to UW when it sat the conference championship, it probably should’ve (and did!) extend the same benefit to Bama when it too sat the conference championship.
Regardless, projections were updated above following the announcement of Bama in the semifinals; now that UW is confirmed for a NY6 bowl, I’m going to consider these projections final:
https://www.ruleoftree.com/2017/12/3/16729714/pac-12-bowl-projections-where-will-stanford-and-the-pac-12-play
By Matt Vassar on 12.03.17 11:12am
Nice call
I didn’t think they would do that.
By Jeff Tarnungus on 12.03.17 11:44am
The logic of the committee is consistent I suppose
which is a bit surprising, but I agree, good call on UW.
By Brendan Ross on 12.03.17 11:51am
The only thing I like about the Bama over Ohio State selection is that this should accelerate the move to an eight team playoff
The Big Ten will be livid; and since they certainly have a lot of weight in the CFP power structure, they will not want to have their conference excluded in the future. The first CFP was in 2014. In the first four years, the Big 12 has been excluded twice, the Pac-12 twice and the Big 10 now for the first time. The SEC has been in the play-off every time (Bama 3 times, Auburn once and Georgia once); and this year, they take two slots. The ACC has also made it every time (Clemson 3 times and FSU once). I hope this sets something in motion to stop this east coast bias. The worst scenario: Alabama and Georgia meet in the final. For what it’s worth, I am an Oklahoma Sooners and Clemson Tigers fan for the rest of this season. I hope Bama and Georgia get pasted in the semifinals, just to help dampen this SEC bias.
By Jeff Tarnungus on 12.03.17 12:06pm
I think Clemson will beat Bama again
in a good game. I think they’re better than Bama this year, but only slightly. I think Oklahoma will have a hard time beating Georgia because of Georgia’s defense, but it’s hard to say … Georgia has a great defense but hasn’t played an offense that is close to Oklahoma’s (while Oklahoma hasn’t played a defense like Georgia’s) … so that’s a good matchup, too, but I would go with the better defensive team.
By Brendan Ross on 12.03.17 12:18pm
I just don't want to see two SEC teams in the final. That would just reinforce all the bias that is currently prevailing.
By Jeff Tarnungus on 12.03.17 12:25pm
I would prefer that too
but I’m not sure Bama getting in over Ohio State was due to bias. No 2-loss team has ever made the CFP, and I don’t think a team with the kind of loss that they had to Iowa has made it, either. The Committee could have gone either way, but either way it would have been an Eastern team (although, true, not two teams from the same conference, which is also a first for the CFP era). I’m not surprised that Bama made it in over Ohio State due to 2 losses and the Iowa blowout, but I wouldn’t have been very surprised if the Committee went with Ohio State despite the two losses in order to avoid 2 teams from the same conference.
I guess it really does come down to not having more than 1 loss.
By Brendan Ross on 12.03.17 12:45pm
These are good points and probably steered the committee's thinking
But I still believe that conference dynamics are also very important; and a conference champion (whether USC or Ohio State) should get the right to compete for the national title. Especially in conferences that play nine games, which means only three other games are out-of-conference, there are so many conference-specific issues and factors that affect three-quarters of the season. As we have discovered, playing in Pullman and Seattle is a huge challenge: both teams were perfect at home this year. We were also perfect at home, though I don’t believe it has anything to do with a daunting environment. Then there is parity: if the conference is relatively balanced, then a team like ASU can shock a team like Washington at home; or in our own case, we dropped that game to Utah on the road in 2013. Any team that tops a Power-5 conference should be qualified to compete with the other champions. Now it looks as if USC and Ohio State will face off in the Cotton Bowl. That should be a play-off game for a shot at the title. As it is, one of these teams will get to call itself Cotton Bowl champ. Nice, but sort of like being NIT champion.
By Jeff Tarnungus on 12.03.17 1:06pm
I think
They’re going to have to move to an 8-team format at some point. ESPN loves it this way, I think, because of all the intrigue around the musical chairs aspect of the current setup — it generates a huge amount of churning attention which would be much less the case with all the conf champions in, plus a few at large teams. I do think an 8-team setup would be fairer in terms of selecting the champion, but I suspect it will take a while to get there. Jim Delany was on the selection show and basically said he sees no reason to move beyond a 4-team playoff due to scheduling issues, despite what happened this year for the B1G, so at least so far we are hearing solidarity behind the current setup, at least initially, as the B1G joins the Pac and the B12 as confs that have sat out the musical chairs mini-tournament.
And, of course, it does marginalize the meaning of the other bowls, without question. The rest of the bowls are like the NIT, I agree. It’s just rich for ESPN guys to be noting this when they created the system we have (or at least had a huge influence in its creation).
By Brendan Ross on 12.03.17 1:55pm
I think the real problem with the 8-team play-off is the traditional NY6 bowl schedule
Numerically, six bowls would accommodate 4 quarter final games and 2 semi final games, leaving one final game for the NC. This could also be a rotating sequence. The problem is that the quarter-final and semi-final games need to be played at least one week apart, which would mess up the New Year’s scheduling. The Rose Bowl, for example, does not want to move from its traditional New Year’s spot. If it were a quarter-final venue, it would have to move forward by a week; and that would be hard to sell to the Grand-daddy of them all. The same applies to the Sugar, the Orange, the Peach, etc. In essence, the big bowl venues are steering this whole development; and they will torpedo anything that compromises their status and finances.
By Jeff Tarnungus on 12.03.17 2:05pm
Well
They could have the first round be home field for higher ranked teams, rather than at a bowl, then when it gets to 4 we have the format we have now. I have heard that discussed. The issue is the extra game for the players, over and above the current format, because noone wants to cut the regular season by a game for everyone who doesn’t make the playoffs to keep the total number of games for players on playoff teams the same. Frankly, I don’t see this as a huge issue, but it’s an issue that gets bandied about by people like ADs and media who do not want an expansion to 8 teams.
By Brendan Ross on 12.03.17 2:30pm
One other comment
ASU and SDSU played during the regular season. I don’t think the Foster Farms Bowl would be interested in a rematch. Fresno State would make more sense.
By Jeff Tarnungus on 12.03.17 5:30am