So how is it that the Deacons are the #10 in the CFP ranking yet the underdog for the game? It looks like the Vegas got it right. So maybe we should let Vegas do the CFP rankings.

While I get where you're coming from, body of work throughout the season matters in college. If you come out of the gate 0-3 then rattle off 9 straight wins including a couple of top 10 teams, that resume isn't CFP worthy. If you want to watch a sport where half the league makes the playoffs and the wild card wins the championship, follow the NFL instead

But Clemson did not rattle off 9 straight wins. Clemson is 7-3 and not ranking in the CFP rankings top 25 at all. So when the #10 in college football, that's 9-1, plays a non ranked team, that has looked terrible all year and barely escapes with a win in almost every win they have, they should at least be favored to win. I'm just saying the ranking are BS.

Batty said:

---

But Clemson did not rattle off 9 straight wins. Clemson is 7-3 and not ranking in the CFP rankings top 25 at all. So when the #10 in college football, that's 9-1, plays a non ranked team, that has looked terrible all year and barely escapes with a win in almost every win they have, they should at least be favored to win. I'm just saying the ranking are BS.

---

The problem with your logic is that you are assuming every team is exactly the same each week. Clemson has been getting better recently on offensive, just like the Aggies have slowly improved on offense. So, the Clemson that lost to NC State by 6 is not the same Clemson playing today.

But, at the end of the day, if Clemson had the #1 toughest schedule in the nation and went 8-4, and Wake had the #80 toughest schedule in the nation and goes 11-1.... Wake will be ranked ahead of Clemson every time... because at the end of the day, Wins and losses are all the committee is going to see unless the gap is only a game (10-2 v. 9-3 for example)