(01-02-2017 10:54 AM)PrideinthePack2 Wrote:  "SHOULD HAVE" lost to Northwestern and Michigan...but they didn't.

"PROBABLY WOULD HAVE" lost to Wisconsin...but they didn't.

Making hypotheticals is fun but it's not a practical way to pick teams. Penn St would have made the Final 4 if they didn't lay an egg against Pitt.

YOU MADE MY CASE ... Including OSU was based almost exclusively on hypotheticals ... PSU loss was a fluke ... NW-Mich near misses were no big deal ... Wisc at the end never would have happened ...

Grape or Strawberry???

(01-02-2017 11:27 AM)PrideinthePack2 Wrote:  They're 124 voters in the AP/Coaches Poll combined, and both polls had Ohio St at #2. So let's not pretend this was some kind of huge snubbing.

There definitely was chatter after the season about Penn St's case, much of it outlined in this thread, but it would have been a far bigger snub and newsworthy story if Ohio St didn't make it.

ESPN had a "Who should be in college football playoff?" question at the conclusion of the season and 74% had Ohio St in the Final Four and 42% had Penn St. People pretty clearly favored Ohio St.

And this isn't even a Ohio St or Penn St argument. Technically Ohio St was #3 in the CFP poll so it should be a Washington or Penn St argument.

This is the kind of discussion to have after the season ends. Not after semifinal games are played. I guarantee this thread wouldn't have been made if Ohio St won.

Check that poll ... there's a big difference between ...WHO DO YOU WANT TO SEE.... vs. .. WHO DESERVED TO BE THERE ...

So since Ohio State lost by 31, that means they didn't belong, right? The score was just proof that they didn't belong. Said no P5 fan ever. It only applies to G5 teams.

USC was definitely one of the top 4 teams in the country at the end of the regular season, and they will show why today vs PSU.

(01-02-2017 12:10 PM)cleveland Wrote:  YOU MADE MY CASE ... Including OSU was based almost exclusively on hypotheticals ... PSU loss was a fluke ... NW-Mich near misses were no big deal ... Wisc at the end never would have happened ...

Grape or Strawberry???

I don't think either position is unreasonable (PSU vs OSU) but...what? Ohio State won at Oklahoma by 21, won at Wisconsin, beat Michigan, and was 11-1. None of that was hypothetical.

(01-02-2017 11:16 AM)Big_Man Wrote:  Link

Interesting article about the 2014 TCU team that was left out of the playoffs because the Big 12 doesn't have a title game. That TCU team went from a 3 ranking to a 6 ranking in a week span after beating Iowa State 55-3.

From the article:

On the College Football Playoff website, under the heading "How to select the four best teams," it reads "the following criteria must be considered" - listed in this order:
-- Championships won;
-- Strength of schedule;
-- Head-to-head competition;
-- Comparative outcomes of common opponents.

Ohio state is college football royalty and TCU is not therefore OSU gets the benefit of the doubt. I think an even better argument is to have excluded Washington since the PAC12 was awful this year overall. I would have liked to see Penn St vs Alabama and keep OSU v Clemson. Putting Washington in keeps the west coast viewers interested and I think ratings are factored into the choices.

(01-02-2017 01:50 PM)Dtownboys Wrote:  

(01-02-2017 11:16 AM)Big_Man Wrote:  Link

Interesting article about the 2014 TCU team that was left out of the playoffs because the Big 12 doesn't have a title game. That TCU team went from a 3 ranking to a 6 ranking in a week span after beating Iowa State 55-3.

From the article:

On the College Football Playoff website, under the heading "How to select the four best teams," it reads "the following criteria must be considered" - listed in this order:
-- Championships won;
-- Strength of schedule;
-- Head-to-head competition;
-- Comparative outcomes of common opponents.

Ohio state is college football royalty and TCU is not therefore OSU gets the benefit of the doubt. I think an even better argument is to have excluded Washington since the PAC12 was awful this year overall. I would have liked to see Penn St vs Alabama and keep OSU v Clemson. Putting Washington in keeps the west coast viewers interested and I think ratings are factored into the choices.

Exactly what is wrong with college football.

It will always be incredibly difficult for a 2 loss team to get into a 4 team playoff.

(01-02-2017 09:01 AM)epasnoopy Wrote:  What a joke of a playoff system, 31-0 and 24-7. Two uncompetitive games. If WMU loses to Wisconsin we'll have to hear about how they didn't belong on this board and national media but no one talks about the two garbage games that were just played.

So because they lost big they didn't belong. Who did then? Who had the next best 2 resumes? Michigan ans PSU? Colorado? Just forget teams lost 43 games and let them in? Should it have just been 16 teams (which 14 would come from P5)and then the best "hot" team wins it all, like pro sports, some of which let 40...50% of their league in the playoffs?

(01-02-2017 12:10 PM)cleveland Wrote:  

(01-02-2017 10:54 AM)PrideinthePack2 Wrote:  "SHOULD HAVE" lost to Northwestern and Michigan...but they didn't.

"PROBABLY WOULD HAVE" lost to Wisconsin...but they didn't.

Making hypotheticals is fun but it's not a practical way to pick teams. Penn St would have made the Final 4 if they didn't lay an egg against Pitt.

YOU MADE MY CASE ... Including OSU was based almost exclusively on hypotheticals ... PSU loss was a fluke ... NW-Mich near misses were no big deal ... Wisc at the end never would have happened ...

Grape or Strawberry???

They didn't hypothetically beat the Big 12 champ and the team that crushed Penn St by 39 points.

(01-02-2017 12:12 PM)cleveland Wrote:  

(01-02-2017 11:27 AM)PrideinthePack2 Wrote:  They're 124 voters in the AP/Coaches Poll combined, and both polls had Ohio St at #2. So let's not pretend this was some kind of huge snubbing.

There definitely was chatter after the season about Penn St's case, much of it outlined in this thread, but it would have been a far bigger snub and newsworthy story if Ohio St didn't make it.

ESPN had a "Who should be in college football playoff?" question at the conclusion of the season and 74% had Ohio St in the Final Four and 42% had Penn St. People pretty clearly favored Ohio St.

And this isn't even a Ohio St or Penn St argument. Technically Ohio St was #3 in the CFP poll so it should be a Washington or Penn St argument.

This is the kind of discussion to have after the season ends. Not after semifinal games are played. I guarantee this thread wouldn't have been made if Ohio St won.

Check that poll ... there's a big difference between ...WHO DO YOU WANT TO SEE.... vs. .. WHO DESERVED TO BE THERE ...

Ohio St ranks above Penn St in both.

(01-02-2017 09:20 AM)PrideinthePack2 Wrote:  Ohio St was the right choice and it wasn't even close.

Ohio St lost by 3 (only loss) at Penn St and there was a huge passing interference non-call on the Buckeyes final drive.

Penn St got smoked by 39(!!!) against Michigan and lost at a solid but not great Pitt team.

In the non-conference department, Ohio St smacked around an (currently #7) Oklahoma team by 21 in Norman.

It doesn't matter if Penn St wins by 100 against USC, Ohio St was the correct choice.

Hey PIP2,

I understand your position, however I have a fundamental problem of putting a team in the playoffs that did NOT win their conference over the team that did.

For me, before you have the opportunity to be the best team in the nation, you first need to be the best team in your conference. Penn State was, Ohio State was not.

Now, one could certainly make a fair argument that Ohio State was the most impressive team in the Big Ten, but they were not the best. They did not win the conference.

A contrarian opinion would be; what if Florida managed to upset Alabama in the SEC title game? Does Florida belong in the playoff over Alabama?

Of course not, but now I become hypocritical if I still want Alabama in the playoffs. College football is tough - you can't have off weeks.

It has to expand to eight teams. The five major conference winners, the G5 representative, and two wild card teams. With this, it makes those conference championship games very relevant because you are playing for your entrance into the tourney, and the wild card protects against a big upset such as if Florida would have beat Alabama by still allowing Alabama into the tourney.

I get the reason why.

As you know a couple years ago Alabama made (and won) the national championship without winning their division, let alone conference. It was a very similar situation. I understand LSU also made it to the title game that year but there were two other P5 champs also had 1 loss. Bama deserved it.

You're right in the sense that you can't have off-weeks. The difference between them was off-weeks. An off-week for Ohio St was a 3 point loss on the road on a late game questionable call.

Penn St had multiple off-weeks. One where they lost by 39 points. And one where they lost to an unranked team.

That was enough to do it.

(01-02-2017 10:46 PM)PrideinthePack2 Wrote:  I get the reason why.

As you know a couple years ago Alabama made (and won) the national championship without winning their division, let alone conference. It was a very similar situation. I understand LSU also made it to the title game that year but there were two other P5 champs also had 1 loss. Bama deserved it.

You're right in the sense that you can't have off-weeks. The difference between them was off-weeks. An off-week for Ohio St was a 3 point loss on the road on a late game questionable call.

Penn St had multiple off-weeks. One where they lost by 39 points. And one where they lost to an unranked team.

That was enough to do it.

I completely agree with you that Ohio State has the more impressive resume. My question to you would be - do you feel winning a conference should matter?

Maybe you don't, and you are certainly entitled to that opinion. I don't share that, however, I think that winning your conference should be paramount.

It doesn't always work out perfectly, and sometimes the best teams do not advance and lesser teams do. There was an NFL season very recently that had a 7-9 Seahawks team winning a weak NFC west division and going to the playoffs ahead of teams with much better records and resumes.

I think it matters but I think having 2 losses compared to 1 loss and also the margin of those losses/opponent of those losses matters more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDXniEa430Y

Nuff said. #GoBlue

I should add...

- Michigan lost a 3 games by a total of 5 points. FIVE. FLIPPIN'. POINTS.
- We blew out the Pac-12 South Champs 45-28 and the B1G Champs 49-10
(Granted, Penn State was a different team back in September, but it was still a blowout)
- As per tradition, officiating crew screws us over (against OSU, nonetheless)
- Meanwhile, Ohio St. barely gets past Northwestern, lost to Penn St, and was nearly upset by 3-9 MSU

I will admit, we played like **** against Florida State. By the time the woke up, it was too little too late. Speight played terrible, we couldn't establish the run game, and Peppers/Butt being out/injured didn't help us. As much as Harbaugh talked about the players being pumped to play in the Orange Bowl, some of the players (and much of the fanbase) saw it as a consolation prize. Harbaugh's team definitely improved during his 2nd year, but ending the season with a bowl loss and the same record as 2015 feels like a step back.