Urban Meyer: 'Penn State deserved to be in playoff'

[4down20]

64 team play off dumb ass

Now you're getting there.Cherry picking doesn't equate to anything.Which is one of the flaws of using a committee .As opinions do not determine the best team.You're getting there.As I said if teams in other sports were determined by a committee.Games are played and won on the field.They aren't decided by discussions and opinions..That would be watering down the sport ........Now take your time and think about the process.And how much it can be improved and get back to me tomorrow

Decided by committee. Same as with baseball, all decided by committee. So are seeds, which mean a good bit in tournament difficulty.

You are the dumbass who claimed people would be outraged if it happened in other sports, apparently without a clue that the next 2 big sports in college do the same thing.

Because it's actually pretty fucking impossible to do it any other way given the number of eligible teams. So you either get a committee, or you get polls and a BCS system. But you two need something to bitch about, so reality doesn't mean a damn thing.

 

[outofyourmind]

The name power of Oklahoma is what sent Ohio State to the Playoffs.

I hope that cleared it up for everyone.

 

[Cave_Johnson]

Decided by committee. Same as with baseball, all decided by committee. So are seeds, which mean a good bit in tournament difficulty.

You are the dumbass who claimed people would be outraged if it happened in other sports, apparently without a clue that the next 2 big sports in college do the same thing.

Because it's actually pretty fucking impossible to do it any other way given the number of eligible teams. So you either get a committee, or you get polls and a BCS system. But you two need something to bitch about, so reality doesn't mean a damn thing.

You also have automatic bids for conference champs in those systems though. I think that's the point being made here. You should eliminate as much voting and committee selection as possible by making teams earn it on the field. At a certain number of playoff bids you do have to go to a committee for most of the selection at the collegiate level due to the number of teams. But I don't think that certain number is 4. Of course even if you do set a conference championship as a requirement you still do need the committee to eliminate one champion and do the seeding, but that's a necessary evil.

 

[4down20]

You also have automatic bids for conference champs in those systems though. I think that's the point being made here. You should eliminate as much voting and committee selection as possible by making teams earn it on the field. At a certain number of playoff bids you do have to go to a committee for most of the selection at the collegiate level due to the number of teams. But I don't think that certain number is 4. Of course even if you do set a conference championship as a requirement you still do need the committee to eliminate one champion and do the seeding, but that's a necessary evil.

conference champion is just a label. If they don't have the merit without, there is a reason for it. Penn St with multiple losses being a good example of that.

 

[AlaskaGuy]

conference champion is just a label. If they don't have the merit without, there is a reason for it. Penn St with multiple losses being a good example of that.

 

[Cave_Johnson]

conference champion is just a label. If they don't have the merit without, there is a reason for it. Penn St with multiple losses being a good example of that.

Well it was a label Penn St. had to earn. First by beating Ohio St. and then by winning an additional championship game that Ohio St. didn't even have to play.

 

[4down20]

Well it was a label Penn St. had to earn. First by beating Ohio St. and then by winning an additional championship game that Ohio St. didn't even have to play.

They earned by losing to Michigan, who was a worse team and one that Ohio St beat. This goes back to why divisions suck.

And the conference also doesn't take into account the out of conference records of teams, where Penn St had an additional lose, but the college football committee obviously has too.

 

[Cave_Johnson]

They earned by losing to Michigan, who was a worse team and one that Ohio St beat. This goes back to why divisions suck.

I could somewhat understand this line of reasoning if Ohio St. and Penn St. hadn't played each other during the season. But they did, and Penn St. won. Why are we using the transitive property here when we have a direct comparison? BTW I don't disagree that divisions are not the best way to determine who gets in the championship game.

And the conference also doesn't take into account the out of conference records of teams, where Penn St had an additional lose, but the college football committee obviously has too.

They did have an additional loss. The also had to play an additional game, which they won. Ohio St. didn't have to take that risk of playing another game. They were rewarded for sitting at home, which is why letting them in the playoff sets a bad precedent.

 

[NolePride]

CFB is not the NFL.

You can not equate one team's OOC games to another's.

You easiest and fairest why to find WHO IS NUMBER ONE...is quite simple.

All the Conf Champs go.

Now that will not assure you of a true #2...but that is irrelevant. #1 is all anybody
cares about.

Procedure is simple...

Wk #1: Sun Belt @ CUSA (Game 1)
Wk #1: MAC @ MWC (G2)

Wk #2: WG1 @SEC (G3)
Wk #2: WG2 @ P12 (G4)
Wk #2: AAC @ ACC (G5)
Wk #2: Big 12 @ B10 (6)

Wk #3: WG3 vs WG5 (Bowl Site)
Wk #3: WG4 vs WG6 (Bowl Site)

Wk #4 NC Game

There are no at-large teams. Whomever wins the Conf goes.
(The current Independents would need to join a league)

The value of a conf game will have never been higher.
The true #1 will emerge in that set-up and ALL of it
will be done on the Field of Play...the way it was meant to be decided.

 

[Justin Tyme]

Tell Urban he's a fvcking idiot for him thinking Penn St. should have went instead of Ohio St. Tell him winning the head to head, the division and the conference doesn't mean jack fvcking shit. Tell him.

Can't tell him the first part because I don't think he"s a fucking idiot, and can't tell him he's an idiot because I don't think he's an idiot. What I can tell him is this

Urban, winning the head to head, the division and the conference didn't mean jack motherfucking shit, This is according to the CFP. And the CFP proved this by not putting PSU in the playoffs.

As far as I'm concerned, having a handful of people meeting in some backroom and then walking out and saying, Here are your playoff teams is a travesty. And all I'm trying to say is unless there is some strange things happening, I don't think the CFP will put a two loss team in the playoffs, deserves or not.

 

[KingKoolKat75]

Tell Urban he's a fvcking idiot for him thinking Penn St. should have went instead of Ohio St. Tell him winning the head to head, the division and the conference doesn't mean jack fvcking shit. Tell him.

Did you read the link you posted. Urban didn't say that.

 

[cwerph]

^Doesn't know what coach speech is.

Urban is trying to motivate his team this year. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[cwerph]

Just applying you're debating process.Anyone can talk in circles or redirect.They beat Ohio State, win the division. And one of those last sees waas to the same team that beat a Clemson team that destroyed OSU. If we're being indirect. That's a much bigger example showing PSU was actually the better team.As I said get back to me when you have a legitimate reason. Why there shouldn't be play off expansion. Or a clear set of guidelines not based on opinions....... When you have legitimate reasons against expanded play offs a better selection process. We can discuss it

 

[4down20]

I could somewhat understand this line of reasoning if Ohio St. and Penn St. hadn't played each other during the season. But they did, and Penn St. won. Why are we using the transitive property here when we have a direct comparison? BTW I don't disagree that divisions are not the best way to determine who gets in the championship game.

Ok then, Michigan should have gone since Michigan beat Penn St. But wait, Michigan lost to Ohio St and to Iowa.

They did have an additional loss. The also had to play an additional game, which they won. Ohio St. didn't have to take that risk of playing another game. They were rewarded for sitting at home, which is why letting them in the playoff sets a bad precedent.

It's not the committess fault the Big10(and others) have a crappy way of defining a conference champion. Their job is to put in the 4 best teams - which they did.

 

[4down20]

CFB is not the NFL.

And that's why what you say will never happen.

It's called anti-trust laws.

The NCAA can not and will not EVER tell a school they can or can not be at a certain level. It MUST include anyone and everyone who wants to be included. The only thing they can do is set certain guidelines and requirements, but ANY school that wants to be included WILL be included as long as they meet those requirements.

That's why you see new schools come into the FBS all the time. It's not getting smaller, it's getting bigger. And it's going to keep getting bigger. And each of those schools MUST be eligible for all such things, even if it's extremely unlikely and would basically never happen.

Thus, you can't say "only these conferences" or "only conferences". You can't tell Notre Dame it has to be in a conference to be eligible...but the committee can decide they don't deserve it.

I'm surprised people don't remember how much of a big deal this stuff was during the BCS with everyone crying about mid-majors being given a fair chance.

 

[Hook'Em0608]

It's easy to say the committees get it right when you are a fan of a blue blood who always gets the benefit of the doubt with committees. I felt Penn St got fucked over. I get the argument for Ohio St. It's even a compelling argument, but when you don't even play for your conference, I don't see how you deserve a shot at a national title. Someone else eliminated you already, on the field of play, when it mattered.

 

[4down20]

It's easy to say the committees get it right when you are a fan of a blue blood who always gets the benefit of the doubt with committees. I felt Penn St got fucked over. I get the argument for Ohio St. It's even a compelling argument, but when you don't even play for your conference, I don't see how you deserve a shot at a national title. Someone else eliminated you already, on the field of play, when it mattered.

Because the assumption that the conference champion = best team is false. 2011 proved that.

Penn St lost twice, that is why they weren't included.

 

[Hook'Em0608]

Because the assumption that the conference champion = best team is false. 2011 proved that.

Penn St lost twice, that is why they weren't included.

Our playoffs aren't designed to crown the best team. It's meant to design the most deserving team. A NFL style playoff crowns a best team. We don't do that.

 

[4down20]

Our playoffs aren't designed to crown the best team. It's meant to design the most deserving team. A NFL style playoff crowns a best team. We don't do that.

Selection Committee FAQs | College Football Playoff

What is the mission of the selection committee?

The committee’s task is to select the 25 best teams in college football, rank the teams for inclusion in the playoff and selected other bowl games and then assign the teams to bowl sites.

 

[Hook'Em0608]

Selection Committee FAQs | College Football Playoff

What is the mission of the selection committee?

The committee’s task is to select the 25 best teams in college football, rank the teams for inclusion in the playoff and selected other bowl games and then assign the teams to bowl sites.

Oh well, if they say so.