Toggle sidebar

CF Playoff Committee

KrAzY3 said:
There's still a couple of interesting things going on there. One is nudging Michigan ahead of Clemson. I can't fault the committee for that, the ranking was so close in the BCS. A bit of Big 10 bias seems to show up as well with Penn State ranked ahead of Oklahoma by the committee (Oklahoma has a much higher SoS and the same record). There's a little more of a gap there in the BCS standings, and the committee has better paved the way for multiple Big 10 teams to get in.
Click to expand...

It's true that OU has a stronger SOS, but the key component is they haven't really BEATEN anybody all that good save perhaps WVA. Penn State is 2-2 against the Top 30, OU is 1-2 against the Top 30, and they have a common opponent - whom Penn State beat and OU got killed by.

So yes, OU has PLAYED tougher teams, but I think one would be hard-pressed to say they've BEATEN better teams. Penn State's opponents have an overall record of 66-44. Take away the record of the two foes that beat Penn State (e.g. Pitt and Michigan) and they've BEATEN teams with an overall record of 39-37. Of course, ten of those wins were from one team, Ohio State.

OU's opponents have an overall record of 66-55, but subtract the 19-3 record of the two teams that clobbered them and they've BEATEN foes with an overall record of 47-52. While I realize it's not 'that simple,' I think it's no doubt defensible. Penn State's best win is over Ohio State and OU's is over WVA.

So I can at least understand that one. I wouldn't call it B1G bias since it's defensible.
 
bamacon said:
Man Heather Dinich is just unbearable. Her latest refrain is that even if they don't win out Ohio St. is not a lock. Painful.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Well, they're not.

Maybe they SHOULD be, but they're not. In fact, ONLY unbeaten Alabama is a lock provided we stay unbeaten.

Seriously. It shouldn't jangle too much, but stranger things have happened.
 
JBama_in_PCOLA said:
Sad thing is, it has the stuff to be a good show. It's like they aren't trying outside of whining.
Click to expand...
As much as I like him, I believe that this is on Rece. It is his job to control and moderate the discussion. The others in the room with him, for whatever reason, simply will not allow him to do so. I can listen to them throw out thoughts with which I disagree (like the USC stuff last night), but the way that they do so makes me want to change the channel. I don't need them to parrot back to me what I believe to be true, but I do need them to act in a civil manner.

Rece needs to get these guys in a room and set up ground rules, then enforce then on the show. Right now he is just another voice being drowned out by the rest. He needs to take control.
 
B1GTide said:
As much as I like him, I believe that this is on Rece. It is his job to control and moderate the discussion. The others in the room with him, for whatever reason, simply will not allow him to do so. I can listen to them throw out thoughts with which I disagree (like the USC stuff last night), but the way that they do so makes me want to change the channel. I don't need them to parrot back to me what I believe to be true, but I do need them to act in a civil manner.

Rece needs to get these guys in a room and set up ground rules, then enforce then on the show. Right now he is just another voice being drowned out by the rest. He needs to take control.
Click to expand...

I wish that I could speak to that with you, but I don't even watch. If it is on Rece, then yes he needs to fix it.


Sent from my iPhone 7 Plus [emoji336] using Tapatalk
 
Maybe it is a good thing that Meechegan and Ohio State gets to both play in the play offs. Could you imagine the screams if two SEC teams were picked. Maybe they will pave the way.
 
The real value (and what I think the committe would like to happen) is for Michigan to win this weekend and another loss by Washington. Otherwise there will be no other way to justify Ohio St. getting in over Oklahoma or Wisconsin without backlash that they are not confrence champions.

I have a hard time thinking the committee wants Oklahoma making it in any scenario.


Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
I was surprisingly disappointed in Herbstreit on the show last night. He's using extremely flawed logic when evaluating some of the teams. Rewind to last week and Kirk was beating the drum for Louisville. His argument was that Louisville has Lamar Jackson and thus the best chance to beat Alabama, they pass the "eye test" and are a team that "no one wants to play" right now. He said all of that on the show Tuesday night then Louisville got obliterated by Houston Thursday night. So fast forward then to last night. Most of the discussion was about whether or not USCw should be a playoff contender with 3 losses. Again, Kirk is arguing that USCw is one of the hottest teams right now and a team that "nobody wants to play." My problem with his argument for Louisville last week and USCw this week is that his argument is not tangible and solely his opinion. He's not basing it on what's happened on the field or the teams resume and body of work. Kirk is normally one of the more level headed analysts and I haven't heard him use the approach before so I'm not sure why he's doing it now. I understand that everyone has an opinion but when deciding the 4 teams that make the playoffs the vast majority of that decision should be based on resume and body of work and not just a flippant opinion..
 
They just need better panelists than Pollack, Kannell, and Galloway. The format isn't intrinsically bad, they just have a bunch of dopes up there.

B1G benefits from strong teams at the top and not much depth, so Ohio State, Mich, Wisc, and Penn St rack up wins against scrubs like Rutgers, Illinois, Purdue, etc. I personally think they're the 3rd best conference but based on the overall performance of each Power 5 conference there's a legitimate argument to be made they've been the best.

I do think it becomes very interesting if Washington wins the Pac-12, because despite being clearly inferior Penn State has a legitimate argument they should be in over Ohio State if they win the B1G. Head to head win AND conference title. I do think that's the only realistic scenario where two B1G teams get in -- Ohio State and Penn State (over Oklahoma or Colorado... And maaaybe Washington although that would be highly controversial.) I think even if Wisc wins the B1G Ohio State's head to head over them will make it easy for the committee to leave them out.
 
selmaborntidefan said:
It's true that OU has a stronger SOS, but the key component is they haven't really BEATEN anybody all that good save perhaps WVA. Penn State is 2-2 against the Top 30, OU is 1-2 against the Top 30, and they have a common opponent - whom Penn State beat and OU got killed by.
Click to expand...
Quality analysis...

I have a problem with the quality win stat because it has a magical cut off point. Just like I'm not a big fan of counting conference championships, which technically can be won on things like a coin flip. So, yeah I concede you can make an argument for Penn State over Oklahoma, but the computers see a real gap there in favor of Oklahoma.
 
russtang said:
There's already been a lot of talk about how good OK has been since the Ohio ST loss and they beat WV.
A lot of talking heads will want them in over a second B1G team.
Click to expand...

Yeah, if OU handles OK State easily then it is possible the B1G champion will be left out in favor of OU and tOSU. So much for you gotta be a conference champion.
 
selmaborntidefan said:
Which 'they?'

The problem is that SUPPOSEDLY the committee is placing big emphasis on conference championships. Ohio State exemplifies the problem with that argument. Yeah, Penn State won the game, good for them.

LSU beat Alabama in 2011 regular season - and anyone watching it knew it was a game of breaks that went against Alabama.
Click to expand...

Sorry, bad grammar Penn St should be in if they win Big 10.
 
CrimsonForce said:
I was surprisingly disappointed in Herbstreit on the show last night. He's using extremely flawed logic when evaluating some of the teams. Rewind to last week and Kirk was beating the drum for Louisville. His argument was that Louisville has Lamar Jackson and thus the best chance to beat Alabama, they pass the "eye test" and are a team that "no one wants to play" right now. He said all of that on the show Tuesday night then Louisville got obliterated by Houston Thursday night. So fast forward then to last night. Most of the discussion was about whether or not USCw should be a playoff contender with 3 losses. Again, Kirk is arguing that USCw is one of the hottest teams right now and a team that "nobody wants to play." My problem with his argument for Louisville last week and USCw this week is that his argument is not tangible and solely his opinion. He's not basing it on what's happened on the field or the teams resume and body of work. Kirk is normally one of the more level headed analysts and I haven't heard him use the approach before so I'm not sure why he's doing it now. I understand that everyone has an opinion but when deciding the 4 teams that make the playoffs the vast majority of that decision should be based on resume and body of work and not just a flippant opinion..
Click to expand...
In both cases he said that but also said that he doesn't know if that means that they should be in the playoff. In other words, especially with USC, he was saying that he thinks that they are one of the 4 best teams RIGHT NOW, but that their 3 losses has them wondering "what if".
 
UntouchableCrew said:
They just need better panelists than Pollack, Kannell, and Galloway. The format isn't intrinsically bad, they just have a bunch of dopes up there.

B1G benefits from strong teams at the top and not much depth, so Ohio State, Mich, Wisc, and Penn St rack up wins against scrubs like Rutgers, Illinois, Purdue, etc. I personally think they're the 3rd best conference but based on the overall performance of each Power 5 conference there's a legitimate argument to be made they've been the best.

I do think it becomes very interesting if Washington wins the Pac-12, because despite being clearly inferior Penn State has a legitimate argument they should be in over Ohio State if they win the B1G. Head to head win AND conference title. I do think that's the only realistic scenario where two B1G teams get in -- Ohio State and Penn State (over Oklahoma or Colorado... And maaaybe Washington although that would be highly controversial.) I think even if Wisc wins the B1G Ohio State's head to head over them will make it easy for the committee to leave them out.
Click to expand...
You need to watch more B1G football. All conferences are down this year, but the B1G is the strongest conference of those down conferences.
 
B1GTide said:
You need to watch more B1G football. All conferences are down this year, but the B1G is the strongest conference of those down conferences.
Click to expand...

If you stacked up the B1G's 14 against the SEC's 14 I think I'd bet on the SEC to win the majority of the games. I think it's really understated how weak the bottom third of the B1G is.
 
UntouchableCrew said:
If you stacked up the B1G's 14 against the SEC's 14 I think I'd bet on the SEC to win the majority of the games. I think it's really understated how weak the bottom third of the B1G is.
Click to expand...
Yes, bottom third is horrible - IN EVERY P5 CONFERENCE. What matters is the top half. Match up the top half, SEC vs B1G teams, and B1G teams would be favored in almost every game this year. Maybe you haven't noticed how bad the SEC is this year.
 
B1GTide said:
Yes, bottom third is horrible - IN EVERY P5 CONFERENCE. What matters is the top half. Match up the top half, SEC vs B1G teams, and B1G teams would be favored in almost every game this year. Maybe you haven't noticed how bad the SEC is this year.
Click to expand...

I absolutely have noticed how bad the SEC has been this year (particularly the SEC East which has been awful.) But when you're discussing the strength of a conference with regard to the playoff you're essentially arguing how difficult it is to make it through the conference schedule without losing games, and IMO that means the bottom half matters.

I agree that the top half of the B1G is stronger than the top half of any other conference. But I think their records are inflated by a weak lower half. Teams like Rutgers, Illinois, Purdue, Maryland, and (shockingly) Michigan State prop up the records of everyone else because they just can't beat anyone.
 
B1GTide said:
Yes, bottom third is horrible - IN EVERY P5 CONFERENCE. What matters is the top half. Match up the top half, SEC vs B1G teams, and B1G teams would be favored in almost every game this year. Maybe you haven't noticed how bad the SEC is this year.
Click to expand...
It is a complicated situation. The Big 10 is no doubt benefiting from lack of depth. Top heavy produces teams with good records, and this year there are several such teams in the Big 10. The conference should be given their due, Sagarin has Ohio State at 2, Michigan at 3, Wisconsin at 8, and Penn State at 15. However, he has Alabama at 1, LSU at 9, Auburn at 12, Texas A&M at 17, and Florida at 20.

Looking at top to bottom, the SEC-West is still noticeably superior to anything else in college football (I can't recall seeing another division crack 80). They are ranked at 84.29. The Big 10 East is fourth with 78.13 and the Big 10 West is 75.48. The SEC East does continue to be an embarrassment, with 72.46. However, if you combine those numbers here's what you get:
SEC 156.75
Big 10 153.61

The Big 10 is top heavy, the SEC is lopsided. They're still ahead of the Big 10 though. Yes, the Big 10 would be favored in some big match-ups, but how far down the list can you go before that changes? The Pac-12 has an argument for being the best top to bottom conference this year though.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Posts

Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads

Top Bottom
Back