Who's In?

Who's In?

  • Total voters
    122
  • Poll closed .
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...

I ööööing hate this line of thinking. The regular season isn't a playoff when we're arguing back and forth between which loss by a team to excuse (or call "quality"), and whether actually lining up and beating a team on the field is a good enough accomplishment to be considered better than them.
 
rghoae said:
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.
Click to expand...

This line of thinking is ööööing full retart too. We literally just saw two teams get left out two years ago because they subscribed to this very notion. Even in a system that prioritizes conference championships, playing meaningful non-conference games helps give you that edge when it comes down to deciding which power 5 conference gets left out (or if ND is in play, which TWO conferences get left out). In a possible eight team playoff, it would be even more paramount, because if you do happen to trip up on the way to winning the conference (like Ohio State), you still have something to fall back on.
 
GTSaxophone said:
This line of thinking is ööööing full retart too. We literally just saw two teams get left out two years ago because they subscribed to this very notion. Even in a system that prioritizes conference championships, playing meaningful non-conference games helps give you that edge when it comes down to deciding which power 5 conference gets left out (or if ND is in play, which TWO conferences get left out). In a possible eight team playoff, it would be even more paramount, because if you do happen to trip up on the way to winning the conference (like Ohio State), you still have something to fall back on.
Click to expand...
An 8 team playoff changes everything, so let's not confuse the matter by bringing that up.

How will the non conference games decides who gets left out when none of the major conferences are playing meaningful non conference games? The SEC perfected this in the BCS era. Doing something like limiting the playoff spots to conference champions, or overvaluing a conference championship is the equivalent of proportionately devaluing non conference games. The way most conferences are setup the difference between a conference championship and your overall record is largely 2 things. (a) The former ignores out of conference results, and (b) it heavily overvalues the conference championship game. Any move towards increasing the weight of conference championships implies increasing the weight of the conference championship game, and decreasing the weight of non conference games.
 
So ACC is gonna keep the Big10 champion out of playoffs:
- by Clemson getting in
- by Pitt beating Penn State

Muhahha
 
rghoae said:
An 8 team playoff changes everything, so let's not confuse the matter by bringing that up.

How will the non conference games decides who gets left out when none of the major conferences are playing meaningful non conference games? The SEC perfected this in the BCS era. Doing something like limiting the playoff spots to conference champions, or overvaluing a conference championship is the equivalent of proportionately devaluing non conference games. The way most conferences are setup the difference between a conference championship and your overall record is largely 2 things. (a) The former ignores out of conference results, and (b) it heavily overvalues the conference championship game. Any move towards increasing the weight of conference championships implies increasing the weight of the conference championship game, and decreasing the weight of non conference games.
Click to expand...

You're the one assuming that no one would play meaningful conference games in such a scenario. I'm arguing that you're incorrect in that assumption, because teams would still have incentive to schedule aggressively due to their attempts to make themselves more attractive to the committee. When all things are equal, and you're looking at five conference champions, or five P5 champs, one G5 champ, and a undefeated/one-loss ND team, how do you decide between them who's more deserving to make the playoff? Why, by examining their overall body of work, which is where having a stronger schedule comes into play, which means more aggressive OOC scheduling. No team can afford to rest on the potential strength of a conference schedule, as that is completely out of their control.

No system should be an absolute "Win your conference, or GTFO", because öööö does happen in those games. However, it isn't outlandish to suggest that a system should favor a conference champion, unless there is another team that far and away shows it's more deserving. Meaning: Hypothetically, if a 3-loss team pulls an upset in a title game, then they still wouldn't get in, even as a conference champ, but if we're talking the difference between a one-loss team that didn't win it's division or conference, and a two-loss team that did, then the conference championship should put the latter over the former.
 
Osu has a better resume... Conf championships matter but it's not enough to overtake osu resume...

And I'm in favor of a 6 team playoff. Let 1&2 have a buy then there is only one more game for a couple teams
 
rghoae said:
Why can't you justify OSU > PSU?
Click to expand...


OSU lost to Penn State heads up.

They played on the field and Penn St won. Curious, when you wrote 4 paragraphs about why OSU was better than Penn State, did you even know this?

/
 
All this PSU vs. OSU conversation makes me want Western Michigan to get in and the Big10 to get left out in the cold.
 
is this really any better than the poll system? at least before, things could be explained by the voters were a bunch of crusty old sports writers, and coaches, but this is a öööö show where they will make up new criteria from year-to-year so they can protect the schools they want in (read: revenue). certainly, the current system is not what was "sold" to the masses.

Just go ahead and expand to 64 teams, or 65 just to give it some suspense as to who the last team in is, and get it over with.
 
After reading this thread, there are some good arguments for leaving UW out. Which, IMO, would be a shame.
 
Changed my vote from Penn State to Ohio State. And I hate Ohio State. Here's why...

I was thinking Penn State had beaten Ohio State on the road. Wrong. The loss occurred on the road, at night for the Buckeyes...and it was only a 3 point decision.

Also, Penn State won a game in overtime at home against Minnesota while OSU won a game in overtime at home against Michigan...who DESTROYED Penn State.

However, the 49-10 beating Penn State received at the hands of Michigan will be what ultimately keeps them out. Had they lost in overtime (or by 1 score) I think they'd have a stronger argument...but you can't put someone in who lost by 4 scores to a team who beat those guys.

A 3 point loss on the road, at night...doesn't justify Penn State leapfrogging OSU, imo.

#1 Alabama
#2 Clemson
#3 Ohio State
#4 Washington
 
GTSaxophone said:
I ööööing hate this line of thinking. The regular season isn't a playoff when we're arguing back and forth between which loss by a team to excuse (or call "quality"), and whether actually lining up and beating a team on the field is a good enough accomplishment to be considered better than them.
Click to expand...

You are essentially saying head to head games don't matter which we have examples of this year. Why even play the season then? Let's just give all 4 playoff teams to the B1G. To say the Championship weekend isn't a playoff is delusional. Win and you are in. Clemson had to win to get in. How is that not a playoff type scenario? No, VT wasn't getting in with a win but they could have kept Clemson out.

The reason we have this system is because Alabama didn't win their division got to sit at home on championship weekend and still got in the NC game. Everyone cried and moaned. Now Ohio State does the same exact thing and we have people saying they MUST be in the playoff. It is a ööööing joke. And on top of that we have people wanting a second B1G team in the top 4 which is even more of a joke and again it is why we have this system because of LSU-Alabama in 2011. So essentially nothing was fixed. Tell me why this is any better than the system we had?
 
Timing matters. not just how many losses but when you lost. teams get better or worse over time

Penn State has 2 losses, but they occurred early in the season. they now won 9 in a row and the conference . .. they should be considered the better team and deserve the spot more than OSU
 
wesleyd21 said:
Changed my vote from Penn State to Ohio State. And I hate Ohio State. Here's why...

I was thinking Penn State had beaten Ohio State on the road. Wrong. The loss occurred on the road, at night for the Buckeyes...and it was only a 3 point decision.

Also, Penn State won a game in overtime at home against Minnesota while OSU won a game in overtime at home against Michigan...who DESTROYED Penn State.

However, the 49-10 beating Penn State received at the hands of Michigan will be what ultimately keeps them out. Had they lost in overtime (or by 1 score) I think they'd have a stronger argument...but you can't put someone in who lost by 4 scores to a team who beat those guys.

A 3 point loss on the road, at night...doesn't justify Penn State leapfrogging OSU, imo.

#1 Alabama
#2 Clemson
#3 Ohio State
#4 Washington
Click to expand...

I would say it like this
1) Alabama
2) Clemson
3) Washington
4) Let the Big 10 pick who they want to send and piss off one of their fanbases.
 
Saban vs Meyer final would mean higher ratings. Plus OSU is a bigger fanbase than PSU. They're not going to kick OSU out for Penn State. They could kick Washington out because a two loss big ten champion is still better than a one loss pac12 champion. I don't think the rest of the country would be too upset with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top