CFB Rankings Week #4

[AliShaheed]

Not sure anyone said it was the "end all be all" to begin with. What was pointed out was that the committee did use it as THE reason that TCU was left out last season, AND it is listed at the top of their "protocol" when determining which teams to pick (I just posted it, straight from their site). It's at the top for a reason, let's not be foolish.

No I'm pretty sure that most here have said it should be mandatory to win your conference.

I see it listed as bullet points, not in any order of importance. Interpret it as you wish I really don't care.

 

[AliShaheed]

Well if it's 20 vs. 1 it's certainly not my call.

But if you'd like to move on, and you really feel it's 20 vs. 1...how in the holy hell can you be okay with tOSU getting in over PSU? Let's just use logic, common sense, and what we know about every other sport on the planet? There's a reason you're in the minority on this one...it doesn't make any logical sense.

Who said I'm ok with it? Up until 20 min or so ago, PSU wasn't the conference champion. So how I would I have been able to be ok with something that hadn't already occurred?

I've only said it about 5 billion times that it's an imperfect system and that I don't have any solutions to offer.

 

[AliShaheed]

Right, which is what I've said from day one. Are you now a malcontent because you see how foolish the entire playoff system is with only 4 teams and 5 "Power 5" conferences?

No, I'm not a malcontent because I'm not complaining about anything. I questioned the system of divisional alignments and how it relates to conference champions and it's impact on determining the top 4 teams.

AKA I'm a vapid robot who's going to bed. Goodnight.

 

[Lareux]

No I'm pretty sure that most here have said it should be mandatory to win your conference.

I see it listed as bullet points, not in any order of importance. Interpret it as you wish I really don't care.

So you are being foolish? Come on dude, they listed them in an order for a reason. That reason was backed up last season when they listed it as THE reason that TCU was left out. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out that they listed it in an order, whether numbered or not.

 

[Lareux]

false. was cussed out by skoalmint and so I cussed back at him. and at that point, this shit began to get irritating.

either way, are you ready to move on from it or do you want to continue this nonsense? as i said, i have no problem with u. but fuck it, it's 20 vs. 1 in this thread so we can just turn it into a huge internet brawl. your call.

Not for nothing, but if Skoal was the one that "cussed you out" why would you be stooping to that level with anyone but him? AND, you were saying that everyone was "crying and whining" a bunch of pages before Skoal's post that you're referring to. But that's just logic talking.

 

[AliShaheed]

So you are being foolish?

Yes, that's me. Goodnight and god bless.

 

[Lareux]

Who said I'm ok with it? Up until 20 min or so ago, PSU wasn't the conference champion. So how I would I have been able to be ok with something that hadn't already occurred?

I've only said it about 5 billion times that it's an imperfect system and that I don't have any solutions to offer.

If you're not okay with it, then how is it 20 vs. 1?

Logic wins again.

 

[Lareux]

Yes, that's me. Goodnight and god bless.

I'm an atheist, but thanks anyway.

R'amen

:shake2:

 

[Lareux]

No, I'm not a malcontent because I'm not complaining about anything. I questioned the system of divisional alignments and how it relates to conference champions and it's impact on determining the top 4 teams.

AKA I'm a vapid robot who's going to bed. Goodnight.

You're not complaining but you admit that it is going to be chaotic every single year based on the current set up? So, we like chaotic, and chaotic is what the committee is seeking out with their playoff? It would be the assumption that admitting it will be chaotic is on par with saying that it's not the right system (and you just said you're not okay with tOSU getting in, further proving you don't think it's the right "system"), which would essentially be what everyone else is saying that you're claiming are "malcontents." That damn logic...

 

[AliShaheed]

Not for nothing, but if Skoal was the one that "cussed you out" why would you be stooping to that level with anyone but him?

Didn't dig the trolling label or people making assumptions about my fandom or what arguments i would make in hypothetical situations. IOW, I've lost patience with this thread. I'll do my best to leave now permanently since my logic isn't up to snuff to partake. And tomorrow I'm sure y'all will be in full meltdown mode so it's prob best I steer clear.

AND, you were saying that everyone was "crying and whining" a bunch of pages before Skoal's post that you're referring to. But that's just logic talking.

Didn't think it was in quite the same tone as was directed at me but my sincerest of apologies to anyone who was bothered by that comment.

 

[Lareux]

Didn't dig the trolling label or people making assumptions about my fandom or what arguments i would make in hypothetical situations. IOW, I've lost patience with this thread. I'll do my best to leave now permanently since my logic isn't up to snuff to partake. And tomorrow I'm sure y'all will be in full meltdown mode so it's prob best I steer clear.

But you were okay making assumptions about everyone else's fandom? I'm pretty sure (I'm actually quite certain) that outside of one or two guys, that NO ONE in this thread is a fan of any of the teams currently in contention for the "playoff." I'm sorry, but the hypocrisy is oozing out of my screen at the moment.

 

[AliShaheed]

You're not complaining but you admit that it is going to be chaotic every single year based on the current set up? So, we like chaotic, and chaotic is what the committee is seeking out with their playoff? It would be the assumption that admitting it will be chaotic is on par with saying that it's not the right system (and you just said you're not okay with tOSU getting in, further proving you don't think it's the right "system"), which would essentially be what everyone else is saying that you're claiming are "malcontents." That damn logic...

I never said I was ok or not ok with OSU getting in.

This isn't a function of "logic"...this is about reading the fine print and drawing conclusions that may or may not be accurate.

 

[Alan Tongue]

which one of you two will get the final word?

 

[AliShaheed]

But you were okay making assumptions about everyone else's fandom? I'm pretty sure (I'm actually quite certain) that outside of one or two guys, that NO ONE in this thread is a fan of any of the teams currently in contention for the "playoff." I'm sorry, but the hypocrisy is oozing out of my screen at the moment.

for fucks sakes man

GOOD NIGHT

 

[Lareux]

I never said I was ok or not ok with OSU getting in.

This isn't a function of "logic"...this is about reading the fine print and drawing conclusions that may or may not be accurate.

Who said I'm ok with it? Up until 20 min or so ago, PSU wasn't the conference champion. So how I would I have been able to be ok with something that hadn't already occurred?

Well then I guess you'll just have to let the cat out of the bag and tell us if you are or aren't. I suggested that you were okay with it, and you respond with "who said I'm okay with it." Now you're saying you actually are okay with it? This is getting confusing...and the results are now in...are you okay with it or not?

 

[Lareux]

which one of you two will get the final word?

Neither (although it's almost always me)...the committee has the final word. As ridiculous as that word is going to end up being.

:tiphat:

 

[twinkie13]

I don't have a preferred team I want to get in. I want a system where no ones opinion or preference makes the call of who gets in and who doesn't but rather a system that is inclusive to teams who accomplish objective measures.

Twinkie, I am ok with wild cards getting in along with conference champions, just not sure there is enough time/games in a post season to fit that in. As for the tougher schedule part, I think a fair opportunity would also decrease the level of imbalance we have in the conferences. You might start seeing conference realignment where an also ran power five school like Missouri, Iowa, Washington State, Georgia Tech, or Oklahoma State move to another conference where they would be more likely to win conference championships. This would eventually lead to more parity between conferences. But I would have no problem with wild cards so long as every conference champion had an invite.

It really isn't worth getting worked up over.

If we are to continue down this path, we might as well mothball conference championships. In the next few hours we are going to see a meaningless BigTen title game (Wisconsin and Penn State do not make it in no matter what the result is) and a worthless SEC title game (Bama is in no matter what, Florida is out no matter what). Yawn. I won't even watch the SEC game.

As for the Western Michigan scheduling ooc ... they scheduled a road game at a team that had preseason top 25 votes and took tosu to the wire, they scheduled a team that took georgia to overtime the year prior and was an undefeated conference champion the year prior to that, and then scheduled some team from a mediocre, overrated conference in the form of illinois. I dunno how you blast them for their ooc schedule ... it is certainly better than Michigan's hawaii ucf colorado (all at home) ooc schedule. And you are giving Michigan the benefit of the doubt with Colorado ... they had no idea that Colorado would finally be good again.

Good post.

First, I agree about this BiG bullshit....unreal that one of these guys gets left out (Penn St....really tho?! How?!)

Much to a BAR chagrin, agree on Mishitgan schedule.

These games should count. Firmly agree.

And as I say that, as much as it pains me, if Bama dropped the game today, I'd have em in.........

System needs some fixin I agree.

Kyle, honest shit.....

You like the BCS better than now?

 

[Lareux]

Good post.

First, I agree about this BiG bullshit....unreal that one of these guys gets left out (Penn St....really tho?! How?!)

Much to a BAR chagrin, agree on Mishitgan schedule.

These games should count. Firmly agree.

And as I say that, as much as it pains me, if Bama dropped the game today, I'd have em in.........

System needs some fixin I agree.

Kyle, honest shit.....

You like the BCS better than now?

I'm not sure I necessarily liked the BCS better, but I also don't understand why we can't use the BCS system to pick the 4 teams for the playoff (for those that like the BCS system better). We all agreed (I think) that some type of playoff system was needed. It didn't have to become completely subjective though, as it defeats the purpose of having a playoff at that point.

I'm not sure the BCS is the answer though, as non-Power 5 teams would still be left out in the cold almost regardless of what they did. The best system would simply be to remove the subjectivity (as much as possible) by expanding the playoff to 6 teams and taking the Power 5 conference champions and one at large. Again, it seem quite obvious to most who pay attention to college football, yet the ones actually in charge see it a completely different way. It's completely asinine at this point.

 

[twinkie13]

Who is to say who has the harder road? The numbers we make aren't always right. Houston beat the Big12 champ, but had 3 losses in the American. Does that mean the AAC is harder then the B12?

On the ACC thing

You know it and I know it

Again, I "get it"......but these aren't the same schedules....I know shit happens, but the day in and out of the two just aren't the same.

I want the same as others...but the way it is described wouldn't be the answer either.

I don't think the road is harder for a WMU....they could very well beat Bama or OSU.....I get it, but you(others) have to see the other side too yes?

 

[twinkie13]

So, how in the world can anyone possibly justify tOSU getting in over PSU? It literally goes against exactly what the fuck the committee said. Period.

They can't....sadly, they just might...

 

[Alan Tongue]

On the ACC thing

You know it and I know it

Again, I "get it"......but these aren't the same schedules....I know shit happens, but the day in and out of the two just aren't the same.

I want the same as others...but the way it is described wouldn't be the answer either.

I don't think the road is harder for a WMU....they could very well beat Bama or OSU.....I get it, but you(others) have to see the other side too yes?

I don't know it. I have an opinion, and my opinion is quite often wrong

 

[Lareux]

No I'm pretty sure that most here have said it should be mandatory to win your conference.

I see it listed as bullet points, not in any order of importance. Interpret it as you wish I really don't care.

I forgot this point in my first response to this post...

Even if you see it listed as bullet points, and don't think it was in a particular order...PSU STILL holds at least 2 of the 4 over tOSU, if not 3 of the 4 (and that 3rd is pretty damn close either way)...and holds the 2 most important of those 4 regardless of what order the committee listed them in (or didn't). They won the conference and beat tOSU head to head...that's really all that should matter. We don't even need to agree on whether or not they listed them in order of priority.

 

[M.W.]

Or, they can simply use most in here's suggestion that they just expand the playoff to 6 teams, take the conference champion from each Power 5 and one wild card.

Some are arguing that the current system is unfair in practice. Your proposal is unfair by design.

Three conferences with 14 teams, one with 12, and one with 10. Unless the 12-team conference is better than the 14-team conferences and the 10-team conference is WAY better than the 14-team conferences, your proposal is outrageously unfair.

And that's one thing the Committee is doing right. The conferences whose champs are getting left out are the conferences it is easiest to win.

 

[M.W.]

Another thing the Committee is doing right: The conferences whose champs are getting left out are the conferences that play 9 conference games. Get out of your shells and play the rest of us so we can see whether you're really a "power" conference. The Big 12, the PAC, and -- starting next year -- the B1G are doing as conferences what Washington did as a team this year. The SEC and ACC are the only conferences that aren't afraid to put their reputations on the line.

 

[Lareux]

Some are arguing that the current system is unfair in practice. Your proposal is unfair by design.

Three conferences with 14 teams, one with 12, and one with 10. Unless the 12-team conference is better than the 14-team conferences and the 10-team conference is WAY better than the 14-team conferences, your proposal is outrageously unfair.

And that's one thing the Committee is doing right. The conferences whose champs are getting left out are the conferences it is easiest to win.

Another thing the Committee is doing right: The conferences whose champs are getting left out are the conferences that play 9 conference games. Get out of your shells and play the rest of us so we can see whether you're really a "power" conference. The Big 12, the PAC, and -- starting next year -- the B1G are doing as conferences what Washington did as a team this year. The SEC and ACC are the only conferences that aren't afraid to put their reputations on the line.

I don't necessarily disagree with any of this. The issue is that "my" proposal is still better than what they're using now...as evidenced by a non-champ more than likely getting in. What you just said is all well and good, until tOSU gets in and they didn't even play in their conference's title game.

And I'm all for making each Power 5 conference (or every conference, for that matter) equal in the amount of teams. That would have been the logical progression when they decided to label them "Power" conferences. They can't have it both ways...they can't label them "Power" conferences, then argue that one is better than the other simply based on the number of teams. That's not logical at all.

 

[RetroVK]

I don't know it. I have an opinion, and my opinion is quite often wrong

This.

In a nutshell, Alan hit it out of the park in two sentences.

 

[Lareux]

Another thing the Committee is doing right: The conferences whose champs are getting left out are the conferences that play 9 conference games. Get out of your shells and play the rest of us so we can see whether you're really a "power" conference. The Big 12, the PAC, and -- starting next year -- the B1G are doing as conferences what Washington did as a team this year. The SEC and ACC are the only conferences that aren't afraid to put their reputations on the line.

Also, to the point about those playing 9 conference games (as opposed to 8 right?)...that conference is actually playing all of the other teams in their conference, so how is that seen as a negative? Not to mention, they don't have a conference title game (because the NCAA won't let them), and we've been told that's why they have been left out...yet this year there's a team that didn't play in their conference's title game that is probably going to be in...they can't have it both ways. Just because your conference plays a title game is a meaningless point if your team isn't even in that title game.

 

[M.W.]

I don't necessarily disagree with any of this. The issue is that "my" proposal is still better than what they're using now...as evidenced by a non-champ more than likely getting in. What you just said is all well and good, until tOSU gets in and they didn't even play in their conference's title game.

If OSU and PSU played again, I would make OSU the favorite, but if I were picking playoff teams I would pick Penn State because of the conference championship primarily (though the head-to-head win wouldn't hurt),

 

[Lareux]

If OSU and PSU played again, I would make OSU the favorite, but if I were picking playoff teams I would pick Penn State because of the conference championship primarily (though the head-to-head win wouldn't hurt),

And that's fine, I may make tOSU the favorite as well...but it's a meaningless point for the reasons you just mentioned. In the NFL do they decide that some team should be in the playoffs because they'd be a favorite over a team actually in, or talk about SOS at all? Of course not, because that's not how sports are supposed to work (actually not even supposed to work, it's not how it actually works in any other sport on the planet). The entire setup is asinine on its own premise, and is even more asinine if the committee isn't even going to follow the protocol they laid out them selves for fuck's sake.

 

[RetroVK]

MW, don't you think there is a different level of complaint in play though with what you are talking about compared to the lack of opportunity on the other side?

For example, you have person A and person B and they are going to roll the dice 100 times each and the one who rolls the highest total wins a hundred bucks. That is fair.

But what if person A and person B don't get to roll it the same amount of times? Say person A gets to roll 100 times and person B 99 times. It is unfair, on a certain level, that person B gets 1 less roll. Definitely.

But what if person B goes from 1 less roll to not being able to roll the dice at all?

The level of complaint of a team with a harder schedule just pales in comparison to me when matched up against the complaint of a team that is not even allowed to compete for the title.

In this case, the Strength of schedules between psu and TOSU are close enough (7th and 16th by sagarin which means it could easily be subjectively determined that psu had the harder schedule, but basically means it is a wash) that it doesn't really come into play at all. so you basically have head to head, conference championships and comparative results vs common opponents. I suppose the big difference there will be Michigan in favor of TOSU. It is obviously the least important.

Here is the other factor... from the bigten championship game until the playoffs, two years ago, TOSU got a lot better. Give urban all those practices, with all that talent and who knows what happens.

Gonna be interesting tomorrow.

 

[RetroVK]

Mine would be

1. Alabama
2. Western Michigan
3. Clemson
4. Washington

Ten best teams in football right now

1. Alabama
2. Oklahoma
3. Washington
4. USC
5. Michigan
6. Clemson
7. ohio State
8. LSU
9. Florida State
10. Louisville

 

[Lareux]

Mine would be

1. Alabama
2. Western Michigan
3. Clemson
4. Washington

Ten best teams in football right now

1. Alabama
2. Oklahoma
3. Washington
4. USC
5. Michigan
6. Clemson
7. ohio State
8. LSU
9. Florida State
10. Louisville

As I'm reading through your best 10 teams in football right now list, it strikes me (and maybe this point has been made before) that for the foreseeable future, and pretty much for the past 5 or so years, this list could be/will be/was pretty much the same (outside of a few teams being substituted every couple years) every single year, talent wise. So, why not simply pick the Top 10 in the beginning of the season, which will essentially be the same 6-8 teams each year, plus the other dozen or so who will pop in and out of the Top 10 based on talent. Make them their own "league" and have them each play each other for 9 games, and the top 2 at the end of the year play for their title...call it the Heavyweight title of the NCAA.

The rest of college football can play in their own "league," have a playoff and figure out their own championship, maybe with an 8, or a 16 team playoff. They can be the Intercontinental" title champions, and everyone can eat it up. Or they can simply relegate the bottom 2 (or 3, maybe 4) from the Top 10 after each season, and the next however many from the Intercontinental league take their place.

It works for the WWE, why not?

If it's ratings their after, I don't see how that doesn't get ratings up almost across the board, at the very least in the 16 game playoff they can have for the "Rest of us" league, and most certainly each week, in every time slot, when it's 5 games between their 10 favorite -I'm sorry, the best- teams each week, one at a time.

 

[Lareux]

Hehe

 

[Lareux]

It can be Michigan, tOSU, Bama, Oklahoma, USC, FSU, Clemson (maybe LSU, maybe ND) and then fill in the blanks each year.

 

[M.W.]

According to their own website, it's their number 1 metric.

it's a bit hard to be crowned the best team in the country when results on the field show you weren't even the best team in your conference (or even division)

I agree with that.

 

[HUNT]

If Penn state gets in... I already know how you all feel about osu... but does Michigan beating Penn state 49-10 count for anything?

Don't use the injury thing please. Both teams had injuries. Pretty hard to count on 2 or 3 guys making that score prettier than losing by 40.

My top 4
1. Bama
2. Osu
3. Washington
4. Clemson

Fwiw I think Michigan should be in but they won't be.

Oklahoma has really impressed me the past month. That's a great win in Norman, at night by osu.

Are you rewarded for big ooc wins out not?

 

[HUNT]

*or

 

[Skoalmint]

If Penn state gets in... I already know how you all feel about osu... but does Michigan beating Penn state 49-10 count for anything?

Don't use the injury thing please. Both teams had injuries. Pretty hard to count on 2 or 3 guys making that score prettier than losing by 40.

My top 4
1. Bama
2. Osu
3. Washington
4. Clemson

Fwiw I think Michigan should be in but they won't be.

Oklahoma has really impressed me the past month. That's a great win in Norman, at night by osu.

Are you rewarded for big ooc wins out not?

You can't use head to head, Hunt. The committee has decided that doesn't matter this year.

 

[Schrute]

If Penn state gets in... I already know how you all feel about osu... but does Michigan beating Penn state 49-10 count for anything?

Don't use the injury thing please. Both teams had injuries. Pretty hard to count on 2 or 3 guys making that score prettier than losing by 40.

My top 4
1. Bama
2. Osu
3. Washington
4. Clemson

Fwiw I think Michigan should be in but they won't be.

Oklahoma has really impressed me the past month. That's a great win in Norman, at night by osu.

Are you rewarded for big ooc wins out not?

Who do you think should be left out to justify Michigan getting in?

Also I strongly disagree with Oklahoma being one of the 4 best teams in the country. Other than that I pretty much agree with ClownCars rankings

 

[s--k]

Acutally no, in this case, Michigan beating Penn St does not matter.

Michigan finished 3rd in their own division:
Big Ten East Divisional Standings:
1. Penn St 9-1
2. Ohio St 8-1
3. Michigan 7-2

Then, while it may splitting hairs, Penn St has a better winning percentage and has played more teams and beat more teams with a winning record. I rank Penn St 1 spot ahead of Michigan, but it really doesn't matter since I'm only taking conference champions...Michigan could be ranked ahead of Penn St and it wouldn't matter.

My rankings:

>Teams in bold is who I would have in the 4 team playoff - as previously stated, I only believe conference champions should be eligible.
>Number in parenthesis is wins vs teams with winning record
>Quality win is any win vs a IA/FBS team with a winning record
>Quality loss is any loss vs a IA/FBS team with a winning record (regardless of margin of victory – debatable, some could call some of those bad losses even though the team had a winning record)
>Questionable Performance is an uninspiring win or a game that was nearly a loss vs a :500 or worse team.
>Bad loss is any loss vs a IA/FBS team with a :500 or losing record
>Wins or losses vs IAA / FCS teams are not factored for or against teams (shown in overall w / l record, but not in the wins vs teams with winning record parenthesis number or questionable / bad loss category if applicable).
>I only use head-to-head for ranking order when records are the same, head-to-head will trump all else when the w/l record is the same.

1. Alabama 13-0 – (9)
Best wins: 9-3 vs USC 52-6, vs 10-3 WKU 38-10, at 8-4 Tenn 49-10, vs 8-4 aTm 33-14, at 7-4 LSU 10-0, vs 8-4 Auburn 30-12, vs 8-4 FL 54-16
Questionable Performance: at 5-7 Ole Miss 48-43

2. Ohio State 11-1 – (5)
Best wins: vs 9-3 Tulsa 48-3, at 10-2 Oklahoma 45-24, at 10-3 Wisconsin 30-23, vs 9-3 Nebraska 62-3, vs 10-2 Michigan 30-27
Quality loss: at 11-2 Penn St 21-24
Questionable Performance: at 3-9 Michigan St 17-16, vs 6-6 Northwestern 24-20

3. Clemson 12-1 – (6)
Best wins: at 8-4 Auburn 19-13, vs 9-3 Troy 30-24 (or is this questionable?), at 8-4 Georgia Tech 26-7, vs 9-3 Louisville 42-36, at 9-3 FSU 37-34, vs Virginia Tech 42-35
Quality loss: vs 8-4 Pitt 42-43
Questionable Performance: vs 6-6 NC St 24-17

4. Washington 12-1 – (5)
Best wins: vs 8-4 Idaho 59-14, vs 9-3 Stanford 44-6, at 8-4 Utah 31-24, at 8-4 Wash St 45-17, vs 10-3 Colorado 41-10
Quality loss: vs 9-3 USC 13-26
Questionable Performance: at 3-9 Arizona 35-28

5. Penn State 11-2 (5)
Best wins: vs 10-3 Temple 34-27, vs 8-4 Minnesota 29-26, vs 11-1 Ohio St 24-21, vs 8-4 Iowa 41-14, vs 10-3 Wisconsin 38-31
Quality loss: at 10-2 Michigan 10-49, at 8-4 Pitt 39-42

6. Michigan 10-2 – (3)
Best wins: vs 10-3 Colorado 45-28, vs 10-3 Wisconsin 14-7, vs 11-2 Penn St 49-10
Quality losses: at 8-4 Iowa 13-14, at 11-1 Ohio St 27-30
Questionable Performance: vs 6-6 Indiana 20-10

7. Oklahoma 10-2 (3)
Best wins: vs 8-4 Kansas St 38-17, at 10-2 West Virginia 56-28, vs 9-3 Oklahoma St 38-20
Quality losses: vs 9-3 Houston 23-33, vs 11-1 Ohio St 24-45
Questionable Performance: at 3-9 Iowa St 34-24

8. Wisconsin 10-3 (4)
Best wins: vs 7-4 LSU 16-14, at 8-4 Iowa 17-9, vs 9-3 Nebraska 23-17, vs 8-4 Minnesota 31-17
Quality loss: at 10-2 Michigan 7-14, vs 11-1 Ohio St 23-30, vs 11-2 Penn St 31-38

9. Colorado 10-3 (4)
Best wins: vs 7-5 Colorado St 44-7, at 9-3 Stanford 10-5, vs 8-4 Washington St 38-24, vs 8-4 Utah 27-22
Quality losses: at 10-2 Michigan 28-45, at 9-3 USC 17-21
Questionable Performance: vs 4-8 UCLA 20-10

10. Stanford 9-3 (2)
Best wins: vs 8-4 Kansas St 26-13, vs 9-3 USC 27-10
Quality losses: at 11-1 Washington 6-44, vs 8-4 Washington St 16-42, vs 10-3 Colorado 5-10
Questionable Performance: vs 4-8 Oregon St 26-15 (could’ve won by more), at 4-8 Notre Dame 17-10

11. USC 9-3 (2)
Best wins: vs 10-3 Colorado 21-17, at 11-1 Washington 26-13
Quality losses: vs 13-0 USC 52-6, at 9-3 Stanford 10-27, at 8-4 Utah 27-31
Questionable Performance: none other than the losses

12. Western Michigan 13-0 (3)
Best wins: 7-5 Eastern Michigan 45-31, vs 9-3 Toledo 55-35, vs 8-5 Ohio 8-5
Questionable Performance: at 3-9 Kent State 37-21

13. Houston 9-3 (3)
Best wins: vs 10-2 Oklahoma 33-23, vs 9-3 Tulsa 38-31, vs 9-3 Louisville 36-10
Quality loss: at 9-3 Navy 40-46, at 8-4 Memphis 44-48
Bad loss: at 5-7 SMU 16-38

14. Oklahoma State 9-3 (3)
Best wins: vs 8-4 Pitt 45-38, vs 10-2 West Virginia 37-20, at 8-4 Kansas St 43-37
Quality loss: at 10-2 Oklahoma 20-38
Questionable loss: vs 6-6 Central Michigan 27-30
Bad loss: at 6-6 Baylor 24-35

15. Louisville 9-3 (1)
Best wins: vs 9-3 Florida St 63-20
Quality loss: at 12-1 Clemson 36-42, at 9-3 Houston 10-36, vs 7-5 Kentucky 38-41
Questionable Performances: vs 4-8 Duke 24-14, at 2-10 Virginia 32-25

16. Florida State 9-3 (3)
Best wins: at 10-2 USF 55-35, at 8-4 Miami 20-19, vs 8-4 Florida 31-13
Quality loss: at 9-3 Louisville 20-63, vs 8-4 UNC 35-37, vs 12-1 Clemson 34-37
Questionable Performance: at 6-6 NC St 24-20, vs 6-6 Wake Forest 17-6

 

[HUNT]

Who do you think should be left out to justify Michigan getting in?

Also I strongly disagree with Oklahoma being one of the 4 best teams in the country. Other than that I pretty much agree with ClownCars rankings

No one. They aren't in my top 4 to make it. I just feel subjectively they should but who the hell are my eyes?

Thanks for the responses. Just was curious.

 

[tee*dub]

Boring now. Committees work was done last week. They put the top four on notice, sans Alabama: win and your in , lose and you are out. All won, work done except for seedings which only criteria is tv ratings.

no way they move last weeks top four. Personally I wanted to see mich tOSU rematch but only because I wanted to win one more TU playopcorn:

 

[ksimpsc]

If Penn state gets in... I already know how you all feel about osu... but does Michigan beating Penn state 49-10 count for anything?

Don't use the injury thing please. Both teams had injuries. Pretty hard to count on 2 or 3 guys making that score prettier than losing by 40.

My top 4
1. Bama
2. Osu
3. Washington
4. Clemson

Fwiw I think Michigan should be in but they won't be.

Oklahoma has really impressed me the past month. That's a great win in Norman, at night by osu.

Are you rewarded for big ooc wins out not?

So as you say don't give me the injury thing because everyone is injured? But Penn St beating tOSU straight up on the field this year doesn't count for anything at all? And don't give me the it was a fluke last play, because they won the game.

They came back from a 14 point deficit last night to win the game in the Big Championship Game, which tOSU was not in. I know OSU is probbaly going to get in it just takes me back to objective measures vs subjective opinions. A ton of people on this board will subjectively say "Well tOSU is the better team right?" Are they? We do not know. They had a close game against NW at home, a team that WMU beat on the road. One score win against Wisconsin, similar to Penn St. Loss to Penn St. And a one score win over Michigan in a game where they did not look to be the better team but won it on the field.

So why are we giving tOSU the benefit of the doubt for winning it on the field vs Michigan, a team that also has 2 losses, but we are not giving Penn St the benefit of the doubt for beating tOSU straight up as 21 point dog and winning the conference?

 

[Lareux]

Boring now. Committees work was done last week. They put the top four on notice, sans Alabama: win and your in , lose and you are out. All won, work done except for seedings which only criteria is tv ratings.

no way they move last weeks top four. Personally I wanted to see mich tOSU rematch but only because I wanted to win one more TU playopcorn:

Win and you're in, but you forgot "stay home and do nothing" in that notice from the committee.

 

[~Utah]

Would just like to point ou that Pitt has 2 top 5 wins, which is insane. No one else in the country can claim that

Narduzzi is building something

 

[RetroVK]

So as you say don't give me the injury thing because everyone is injured? But Penn St beating tOSU straight up on the field this year doesn't count for anything at all? And don't give me the it was a fluke last play, because they won the game.

They came back from a 14 point deficit last night to win the game in the Big Championship Game, which tOSU was not in. I know OSU is probbaly going to get in it just takes me back to objective measures vs subjective opinions. A ton of people on this board will subjectively say "Well tOSU is the better team right?" Are they? We do not know. They had a close game against NW at home, a team that WMU beat on the road. One score win against Wisconsin, similar to Penn St. Loss to Penn St. And a one score win over Michigan in a game where they did not look to be the better team but won it on the field.

So why are we giving tOSU the benefit of the doubt for winning it on the field vs Michigan, a team that also has 2 losses, but we are not giving Penn St the benefit of the doubt for beating tOSU straight up as 21 point dog and winning the conference?

Committee not interested in your logic.

Committee plan of action

1. Decide who we want in no matter what.
2. Formulate reasons that could best explain #1.

This year it will be that "Ohio State is clearly one of the four best teams and our job is to get the four best teams. We feel over the entire season's body of work Ohio State proved to be one of these top four teams. This was not one of our harder decisions. They were almost unanimously firmly entrenched in the playoffs by those of us on the Committee. Alabama and Clemson were also strongly backed by the committee. Where we had difficulty was comparing Michigan, Penn State and Washington and trying to determine who should get that fourth spot. In the end, we decided that Washington was that team"

This is the diversion of trying to get people to stop thinking about Ohio State and start thinking of how the pac12 got in a team over Michigan and Penn State (bigten).

 

[braves]

anyone have a feeling that Wash could get left out here, They realy want UM in this thing

 

[tee*dub]

Would just like to point ou that Pitt has 2 top 5 wins, which is insane. No one else in the country can claim that

Narduzzi is building something

i would suggest he build a defense

 

[tee*dub]

anyone have a feeling that Wash could get left out here, They realy want UM in this thing

would create chaos for sure. I would be shocked

 

[Two Utes]

UW deserves to be in, it will be a travesty if they somehow screw them over. I tend to agree with S--K, the conference championship should mean something. I hate PSU and wish they would lose every game they played but they should represent the Big 10 since they won the conference. I think Dub is right, the #'s will remain unchanged from last week and then we will debate what changes need to be made to the system.