Who's In?

Who's In?

  • Total voters
    122
  • Poll closed .
Honestly Michigan PSU and OSU all in there with Alabama would be hilarious.
 
Here's my thinking:
Penn State excluded => good, they're sorry and they deserve it
Ohio State excluded => good, they're sorry and they deserve it
Washington excluded => funny because of how biased a move it would be
 
ThisIsAtlanta said:
Honestly Michigan PSU and OSU all in there with Alabama would be hilarious.
Click to expand...

What if it were Alabama, LSU, Florida, and Ohio State? Would that be hilarious also? I mean isn't the whole reason we have this playoff because of what happened in 2011?
 
ronricks said:
What if it were Alabama, LSU, Florida, and Ohio State? Would that be hilarious also? I mean isn't the whole reason we have this playoff because of what happened in 2011?
Click to expand...

That'd be beyond hilarious. You are talking to a man who really does want to watch the system burn. The playoff committee is the single worst way I can imagine to select playoff teams.

I'm talking like horse races, outright bidding, rolling dice, literal warfare, I prefer any of them to what we have today.
 
I don't think it's as clear cut as some make it out to be. Penn State didn't just lose to Pitt. They got smoked by Michigan as well. Being conference champions isn't an official requirement for the committee.

And Ohio State wouldn't be "leaping" over anyone since they're currently at #2. That said, I'd have no problem with leaving them out with the rationale that conference champion + head-to-head with a couple sketchy losses > non-division winner with 3 top 10 wins and one fewer loss

With regard to only allowing conference champs in, I think it sounds great in theory, but if that became actual criteria, it would lead to some truly ööööty playoff games in years where you have multiple upsets in conference championship games.
 
ThisIsAtlanta said:
That'd be beyond hilarious. You are talking to a man who really does want to watch the system burn. The playoff committee is the single worst way I can imagine to select playoff teams.

I'm talking like horse races, outright bidding, rolling dice, literal warfare, I prefer any of them to what we have today.
Click to expand...

Well we both agree that this 'system' is a farce. I also think any conference getting two teams in is laughable and can't be done without bias and outright corruption.
 
We need an 8 team playoff - include all conference champs, top 2 at-large teams, and top group of 5 team that gets to to be the sacrificial lamb to the #1 team.
 
Perfect storm here in my opinion.

Bama stays at 1 (obviously)
Clemson and Washington both jump OSU for being idle, landing at 2 and 3 respectively as top 1 loss teams...Ohio State at 4 temporarily.
Penn State jumps Wisconsin (just beat them h2h)
Penn State jumps Michigan (fellow 2 loss team that was idle, one less win)
Question is: Does Penn State jump the now 4 spot OSU with one more loss vs winning head to head and conf championship?

I say yes.

So

1. Bama
2. Clemson
3. Washington
4. Penn State

OSU first one out
 
gtfan088 said:
We need an 8 team playoff - include all conference champs, top 2 at-large teams, and top group of 5 team that gets to to be the sacrificial lamb to the #1 team.
Click to expand...

We already have a 12 week playoff plus a championship week playoff. There is no need to go to 8 teams. The games you watched tonight were a playoff. The BCS was better than this system.
 
ronricks said:
We already have a 12 week playoff plus a championship week playoff. There is no need to go to 8 teams. The games you watched tonight were a playoff. The BCS was better than this system.
Click to expand...

Eh, we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't feel like Florida or Virginia Tech were playing for a chance to get in. I agree the system is flawed, especially since you have 5 power conferences and only 4 slots, which is why I think an 8 team playoff makes sense. Let the best teams from all the major conferences have at it.
 
What team has washington beaten that is the caliber of Ohio State and Wisconsin?

Southern Cal beat a Washington and got pasted by Bama.

Why do we think the PAC XII is deserving a spot again?

Wazzou lost to an FCS team and was one of the best teams in the North (and lost to Boise state)

Colorado lost @Michigan by double digits and was runner up.

One of the conferences big OOC wins was cal over Texas. It also boasts wins over UVA, Rutgers, Texas Tech, Norte Dame and BYU twice. Waaaaaow!

Chris Petersen is basically still coaching Boise State.
 
Last edited:
GTCrew4b said:
What team has washington beaten that is the caliber of Ohio State and Wisconsin?

Southern Cal beat a Washington and got pasted by Bama.

Why do we think the PAC XII is deserving a spot again?

Wazzou lost to an FCS team and was one of the best teams in the North (and lost to Boise state)

Colorado lost @Michigan by double digits and was runner up.

One of the conferences big OOC wins was cal over Texas. It also boasts wins over UVA, Rutgers, Texas Tech, Norte Dame and BYU twice. Waaaaaow!

Chris Petersen is basically still coaching Boise State.
Click to expand...
Penn State also lost at Michigan by double digits.... in fact they lost by 39
 
fatmike91 said:
Washington is at risk. Here's why:

You can't justify OSU >> Penn St, but OSU >> Washington is more subjective.

So in order to take OSU you need to also take Penn St.

Bama+Clemson+OSU+Penn st

/
Click to expand...
Why can't you justify OSU > PSU? They've consistently been ranked ahead and they haven't lost to an unranked team like PSU.

People complaining about them playing 1 less game, well, even if OSU played the conference championship and we assumed the worst case scenario of them losing, their record would still be better than PSU's with 2 losses but against highly ranked teams, as opposed to PSU with 1 of their 2 losses being against an unranked team.

To be honest I am amazed anyone can look at PSU and OSU's results and say that PSU had better results. The only reason for PSU being in ahead of OSU is if an overwhelming criteria is being champion of your conference based on the fairly arbitrary rules chosen by different conferences.

But since most conference championships do not factor in out of conference results at all, overvaluing conference championships to the extent some here want to simply means teams will stop scheduling interesting non conference games, focus on winning their conference, and crossing their fingers that their conference isn't the 1/5 to be left out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top