6 team playoff

[Yo Tee]

Your opinion doesn’t fit with what the committee’s purpose is. You’re basically saying you want them to ignore what they are tasked to do because you don’t like the outcome.

They absolutely have not set a precedent that conference titles don’t matter. They’ve actually been pretty clear that conference title games are pretty important, to the point the Big 12 caved and added a title game.

No, I dont want them to ignore what they are tasked to do, I want the criteria that determines how they do what they are tasked to do to change.

They have said the last two years that it doesn't matter if you win a conference title when it comes to comparing it to another team's resume. They did it to Penn State and they did it to Ohio State last year. It didn't matter that those two teams won their conference title because another team had a better resume then they did which is BS in my opinion.

 

[Wamu]

They can't be in the playoffs together, there is a rule of a max of two teams from the same conference in the playoffs.

Sounds like if a conference could get 3 teams in you'd be all for it.

 

[belcherboy]

1 loss, no conference title game appearance and no wins against top 10 teams because you didn't play a top 10 team all year long.

How many top 10 wins did Ohio State have last season?

 

[belcherboy]

Sounds like if a conference could get 3 teams in you'd be all for it.

I'm not sure I said that, but I'm good with the rule of having a max of two teams from a conference.

 

[7Samurai13]

No, I dont want them to ignore what they are tasked to do, I want the criteria that determines how they do what they are tasked to do to change.

They have said the last two years that it doesn't matter if you win a conference title when it comes to comparing it to another team's resume. They did it to Penn State and they did it to Ohio State last year. It didn't matter that those two teams won their conference title because another team had a better resume then they did which is BS in my opinion.

So in your opinion you want to reward teams for playing in weaker conferences and punish teams that play in tougher conferences.

 

[Mike A. S.]

The Committee got it wrong both years, in my opinion.

I kinda agree. But it should've either been Penn State in 2016 and Ohio State in 2017 or Ohio State in 2016 and Alabama in 2017 and no mixing and matching. Since they chose PSU in 2016 they set a standard and should've definitely chose Alabama in 2017. That being said, I do think it would've been more accurate to choose PSU in 2016 and OSU in 2017 than the other way around.

 

[Yo Tee]

How many top 10 wins did Ohio State have?

2. Penn State and Wisconsin. Also had a top 15 win over Michican State. 3 top 15 wins to Alabama's 0.

 

[TheDayMan]

No, I dont want them to ignore what they are tasked to do, I want the criteria that determines how they do what they are tasked to do to change.

They have said the last two years that it doesn't matter if you win a conference title when it comes to comparing it to another team's resume. They did it to Penn State and they did it to Ohio State last year. It didn't matter that those two teams won their conference title because another team had a better resume then they did which is BS in my opinion.

Well, I don’t agree with that, at all. I want them to consider multiple factors, conference championships should be only part of it.

Also, again, they absolutely have not said conference championships don’t matter the last two years. In 2016 they made clear statement with OSU and Washington that both resume, and conference titles are heavily considered.

 

[Yo Tee]

So in your opinion you want to reward teams for playing in weaker conferences and punish teams that play in tougher conferences.

Alabama didn't play a single top 15 team last year in the regular season while Ohio State played 4 and won 3 of them. How is that playing a tougher conference?

 

[Yo Tee]

Well, I don’t agree with that, at all. I want them to consider multiple factors, conference championships should be only part of it.

Also, again, they absolutely have not said conference championships don’t matter the last two years. In 2016 they made clear statement with OSU and Washington that both resume, and conference titles are heavily considered.

They made statements the last two years that conference titles don't mean as much as your resume. I don't agree with that. Yes, they should consider multiple factors, but I think the weight of importance is not heavy enough on conference titles. At least the last two years it hasn't been.

 

[7Samurai13]

Alabama didn't play a single top 15 team last year in the regular season while Ohio State played 4 and won 3 of them. How is that playing a tougher conference?

Who had the tougher SoS? Also Ohio state got their doors blown off twice while Bama lost one close game.

 

[belcherboy]

2. Penn State and Wisconsin. Also had a top 15 win over Michican State. 3 top 15 wins to Alabama's 0.

You make a good argument.

Although, I still think the committee made a good choice in choosing Bama over Ohio State. Ohio State got smacked around on two occasions last year. Bama lost to their biggest rival...on the road.

 

[Ickey Shuffle]

Bottom feeders creating the term "mid-major" as a way to stick their chest out over non-P5's is one of the dumbest opinions I have read on here.

My apologies, but it's what some of them do lol. Maybe I really should lay off of Twitter.

But, here's the cold hard reality. If those two switched places and Cincy was receiving ACC P5 money, they'd be very, very similar to what Wake is in the ACC. They still wouldn't be up with the biggies in the P5.

Use Utah and TCU as examples. Both were upper G5 schools. And while both have benefitted from the revenue that comes from being able to eat at the P5 table, neither are on the same level as their conference brethren USC, UCLA, Texas or Oklahoma. Not all P5s are true P5s. In fact, only a handful are.

And before all the babble starts about "academic is important in P5 membership blah, blah, blah", Rice is waaaayyyyyyyy above nearly every P5 school when it comes to academics. Last I checked, they were G5.

Okay. I have no argument with this. That's fair.

But just to nitpick, I disagree about the TCU part. I think they're right up there.

 

[Yo Tee]

Who had the tougher SoS? Also Ohio state got their doors blown off twice while Bama lost one close game.

They got their doors blown off by Oklahoma? Last I checked that was 4 point game going into the 4th quarter. A 15 point win isn't getting their doors blown off. Yes, a terrible loss against Iowa, but OSU played tougher competition.

 

[TheDayMan]

They made statements the last two years that conference titles don't mean as much as your resume. I don't agree with that. Yes, they should consider multiple factors, but I think the weight of importance is not heavy enough on conference titles. At least the last two years it hasn't been.

I guess we’re just going to have to disagree. From what I’ve seen conference titles have got the perfect amount of consideration.

 

[Yo Tee]

You make a good argument.

Although, I still think the committee made a good choice in choosing Bama over Ohio State. Ohio State got smacked around on two occasions last year. Bama lost to their biggest rival...on the road.

They should not have lost to Iowa and they put the nail in their coffin. But losing by 15 to Oklahoma isn't a bad loss. Especially when it was a 4 point game heading into the 4th quarter.

 

[Yo Tee]

I guess we’re just going to have to disagree. From what I’ve seen conference titles have got the perfect amount of consideration.

I can't see how you see that after Penn State beat Ohio State for the conference title in 2016 and still got passed over by Ohio State, the team they beat for the conference title, for a playoff spot.

 

[TheDayMan]

I can't see how you see that after Penn State beat Ohio State for the conference title in 2016 and still got passed over by Ohio State, the team they beat for the conference title, for a playoff spot.

Okay, and I don’t see how you can think a team that lost to Pittsburgh and got their shit pushed in by Michigan should have been considered one of the top 4 teams.

 

[Yo Tee]

Okay, and I don’t see how you can think a team that lost to Pittsburgh and got their shit pushed in by Michigan should have been considered one of the top 4 teams.

Pittsburgh loss was a bad one, but like the same argument as the 2017 OSU team, losing to a top 10 team isn't a bad loss. But in this situation, Penn State beat Ohio State and won their conference. How is Ohio State better than Penn State if they couldn't beat them? This is why I'm saying they put more emphasis on resume than conference titles. Penn State beat Ohio State, the won their conference title and STILL were considered to be a lesser team to a team they beat 2 months earlier. Ohio State barely beat Northwestern and Michigan State who were a combined 10-15 in 2016.

 

[7Samurai13]

Pittsburgh loss was a bad one, but like the same argument as the 2017 OSU team, losing to a top 10 team isn't a bad loss. But in this situation, Penn State beat Ohio State and won their conference. How is Ohio State better than Penn State if they couldn't beat them? This is why I'm saying they put more emphasis on resume than conference titles. Penn State beat Ohio State, the won their conference title and STILL were considered to be a lesser team to a team they beat 2 months earlier. Ohio State barely beat Northwestern and Michigan State who were a combined 10-15 in 2016.

But there should be a penalty when you lose by FORTY FUCKING POINTS.