Do you think the best B1G team made it into the playoff?

[cwerph]

tOSU definitely had ZERO business being in the playoff this year. The Buckeyes were an ass hair away from being a 5 loss team and were not a dominant team and needed lots of luck. Were lucky to beat an awful MSU squad, barely beat N'Western and needed OT to beat Michigan and Wisconsin. Now their team last year would have won it all and deserved to be in the playoff, this year not so much.

Tell it to the committee and to the BCS formulas. Both had them in. In fact, if this were the old BCS, Ohio State would be getting ready to get decimated by Alabama right now.

If that's the standard, Clemson didn't belong. They were a blown field goal from being a 2 loss team.

 

[JuiceTheGator]

My analysis is two-fold:

1) Y'all are fags up in here.
2) Iowa was the best B1G team this year.

Thank you for your attention.

 

[Great Dayne]

PSU would've been crushed since their QB is a one trick pony that just chucks shit up for grabs and we seen how that worked for them vs USC.

 

[Great Dayne]

USC was the best PAC team and it was by a landslide. However it was enjoyable watching those soft little bitches get destroyed.

 

[Churchillin]

I don't know, thought it should have been Iowa, but they looked awful today.

Call me crazy, but as a Buckeye fan I thought playing Oklahoma in Norman was a pretty big 'away game'.

I agree - overlooked

 

[Maverick426h]

Better overall resume?

Penn St. won the head to head and was the B1G Champion...what more do they need on their resume?

Exactly. End of story. Why is this even a question? Do people really think Clemson would've blanked Penn State on a neutral field when the Lions put up 49 in the Rose Bowl!? PSU only lost that game due to some very poor coaching/qb decisions late.

 

[WNY_FOOTBALL_DUDE]

It comes down to what you believe the committee should reward, the best resume or the hottest team. Penn State was definitely the hotter team and has played better for the past several weeks. As of today, they are clearly the better team. I still think considering the entire regular season, OSU was the better overall team with the better overall resume.

Penn State had the better resume. Lets review:

Ohio State and Penn State won 11 games, 5 of them were against +.500 FBS competition.

Penn State won the conference AND the head-to-head.

Ohio State had 1 less loss.

I would rather go with the team which won the H2H and the conference than the team which had one less loss. Also, Penn State was the hotter team, winning more convincingly down the stretch.

With that said, I don't believe the results of the Clemson-OSU match-up was a validation that Penn State should have gotten in over Ohio State or even Washington.

 

[Smart]

Penn State had the better resume. Lets review:

Ohio State and Penn State won 11 games, 5 of them were against +.500 FBS competition.

Penn State won the conference AND the head-to-head.

Ohio State had 1 less loss.

I would rather go with the team which won the H2H and the conference than the team which had one less loss. Also, Penn State was the hotter team, winning more convincingly down the stretch.

With that said, I don't believe the results of the Clemson-OSU match-up was a validation that Penn State should have gotten in over Ohio State or even Washington.

If you think that a three point home win for Penn State over OSU overcomes the fact that OSU had 2 fewer losses in the rest of their schedule playing a much tougher schedule (including beating a team which PSU got crushed by), then you are putting an insanely high value on head to head. And your logic falls apart when Michigan enters the table.

Because if H2H carries that much weight, then Michigan's resume was laughably better than Penn State's. If a 3 point home win is worth more than 2+ losses, how on Earth could you possibly argue that Michigan with the same number of losses and a 39! point win isn't at least two games up on Penn State? Do you really think the fact that Iowa is in the B1G but Pitt isn't is worth at least two wins?

Again, it's fucking ludicrous and people's attempts to claim PSU had a better resume are incredibly stupid. When usually-logical posters sound like they belong in an alternative school, it's probably a sign that the position you are trying to take is indefensible.

 

[JuiceTheGator]

I don't know, thought it should have been Iowa, but they looked awful today.

It was the competition. They're the best in the B1G.

 

[DHoey]

I think it proves that humans shouldn't pick playoff teams.

 

[Hornsstampede2.0]

Pay no attention to the 39 point loss to Michigan.

39 point loss.....

It doesn't exist because Penn State also LOST to USC while scoring a lot of points in an exhibition.

You would think Penn State actually won the Rose Bowl if you follow all the revisionist anger.

Since they lost in a meaningless game, we need to go back in time and yell at the committee??????

Ohio State was the correct choice.

 

[WNY_FOOTBALL_DUDE]

If you think that a three point home win for Penn State over OSU overcomes the fact that OSU had 2 fewer losses in the rest of their schedule playing a much tougher schedule (including beating a team which PSU got crushed by), then you are putting an insanely high value on head to head. And your logic falls apart when Michigan enters the table.

Because if H2H carries that much weight, then Michigan's resume was laughably better than Penn State's. If a 3 point home win is worth more than 2+ losses, how on Earth could you possibly argue that Michigan with the same number of losses and a 39! point win isn't at least two games up on Penn State? Do you really think the fact that Iowa is in the B1G but Pitt isn't is worth at least two wins?

Again, it's fucking ludicrous and people's attempts to claim PSU had a better resume are incredibly stupid. When usually-logical posters sound like they belong in an alternative school, it's probably a sign that the position you are trying to take is indefensible.

OSU went 11-1 in the regular season. PSU went 11-2. That's not 2 fewer losses.

Michigan beat PSU. Nobody is questioning that. However, Michigan didn't win the conference and lost to OSU and Iowa. PSU beat Iowa 41-14. Nice try.

The argument doesn't fall apart, but yours does.

 

[WNY_FOOTBALL_DUDE]

Pay no attention to the 39 point loss to Michigan.

39 point loss.....

It doesn't exist because Penn State also LOST to USC while scoring a lot of points in an exhibition.

You would think Penn State actually won the Rose Bowl if you follow all the revisionist anger.

Since they lost in a meaningless game, we need to go back in time and yell at the committee??????

Ohio State was the correct choice.

Pay no attention to who won the conference and head-to-head.

 

[GNG]

Did the committee get it right? Should more weight have been given to how teams are playing toward the end of the season?

The committee got it wrong as usual.

 

[GNG]

So 8 teams is what I'm hearing

An 8 team playoff would be ideal.

 

[Smart]

OSU went 11-1 in the regular season. PSU went 11-2. That's not 2 fewer losses.

Michigan beat PSU. Nobody is questioning that. However, Michigan didn't win the conference and lost to OSU and Iowa. PSU beat Iowa 41-14. Nice try.

The argument doesn't fall apart, but yours does.

Wow, you are really dense. I said that they had two fewer losses in the rest of their schedule. Are you literate? You are relying on the H2H to say PSU is better. But outside of that, OSU was TWO games better. You are double-counting the H2H game when you rely on it in the record and then rely on it again to say that it means PSU is better. Why not just count it a third, fourth, and fifth time?

Again, it is shockingly easy to prove OSU had a better resume:

1. Who was better in the OSU-PSU-Michigan circle?

2. Who was better over the course of the rest of the season, PSU or OSU?

Can you please answer these for me? Because it is pretty indisputable that the answer to #1 and #2 is OSU. And if both of those are true, we have PROVEN that OSU has a better resume. This is like a logic puzzle or an IQ test. It's not up for debate. It's just a clear fact. That's how math works. If A1>B1 and A2>B2, then A1+A2>B1+B2. So unless you have some great explanation for how going 1-1 with a -36 point margin is better than 1-1 with an even point margin, your point is the equivalent of you yelling "I don't understand how elementary math and logic work."

 

[cwerph]

The committee got it wrong as usual.

Cool. Let's go with the BCS formula instead...

he BCS would've given us the same Playoff (again)

The only difference would have been OSU 2, Clemson 3

 

[GNG]

Cool. Let's go with the BCS formula instead...

Screw both of them.

 

[trojanfan12]

Exactly. End of story. Why is this even a question? Do people really think Clemson would've blanked Penn State on a neutral field when the Lions put up 49 in the Rose Bowl!? PSU only lost that game due to some very poor coaching/qb decisions late.

I disagree about the coaches. I thought their decision making was solid. However, the qb made some poor decisions, especially on that last interception.

 

[Cowboyinexile]

Best, yes. Most deserving, no.

I think talent wise Ohio State was the best in the conference and Meyer is by far the most accomplished coach of the top 4 teams. Of the top 4, they had the best ooc victory by far.

That being said, in the first playoff season thecommittee made a point to say that playing in and winning a conference title game was key to making the playoff. In doing so they implied a weak ooc schedule had less value than a conference title in their eyes.

Additionally the Big 10 team that played and won the conference title beat their conferences playoff representative head to head.

All the committee taught us this year is that their rules don't apply when it comes to Ohio State.