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

[RobBase]

So let's be clear here:

OSU was 11-1, PSU was 11-2. OSU had the better record.

(A.) In the Michigan-PSU-OSU triangle, OSU was 1-1 with an even point spread. PSU was 1-1 with a -36 point spread. OSU was unquestionably better in the triangle.

(B.) Outside that triangle, OSU was 10-0 with true road wins against two top-ten teams. PSU was 10-1 with only a neutral site win over the same top-ten team OSU beat on the road. OSU was unquestionably better outside the triangle.

Both teams had the same conference record. The reason OSU lost out was that Pitt was not in the Big Ten but Iowa was.

What you are saying here is that you care more about an arbitrary conference tiebreaker than the fact that OSU was unquestionably better over the course of the year. The only retort people seem to give is "but H2H" but again, that is a retarded response because then Michigan clearly makes it over OSU.

Their resumes weren't close. If you think PSU belonged in over OSU, there are two options: (1.) You think momentum should trump resume (I disagree, but this is very reasonable); or (2.) You think PSU had a better resume. If you believe #2, you are stupid...there is no other way to say it. Propositions A and B are unquestionably true and if you understand basic math, you realize that properties are additive. If one team is better in two subsets, and those two subsets encompass the whole, then we have proven that that team is better on the whole.

Problems is Ohio State barely beat a 3-8 Michigan State team, then one week later, PSU crushed that same MSU team. The writing was on the wall.

 

[cwerph]

Problems is Ohio State barely beat a 3-8 Michigan State team, then one week later, PSU crushed that same MSU team. The writing was on the wall.

Xichigan crushed PSU, Ohio State beat Xichigan, so of course Ohio State crushed PSU. Am I doing this right?

 

[RobBase]

Xichigan crushed PSU, Ohio State beat Xichigan, so of course Ohio State crushed PSU. Am I doing this right?

Probably not. I (and many others) called it weeks ahead of time. t0su never belonged, and everyone who said so was proven right. Just own it and move on.

 

[Lions=TeHsUcKs]

Probably not. I (and many others) called it weeks ahead of time. t0su never belonged, and everyone who said so was proven right. Just own it and move on.

Yup about as bad as MSU last year. Atleast MSU had an excuse with the Cook injury and lost to a more talented Bama team.

 

[963BUSC]

I think PSU was playing the best football at the end of the season. And won the conference championship, they deserved the playoff spot. But I am not sad Ohio State made it in, at least they had the nads to take on Oklahoma in Oklahoma. Now at least when people say you should play it safe with a soft schedule fans can point to tOSU's playoff bid. Should help have better OOC match ups.

 

[cwerph]

I think PSU was playing the best football at the end of the season. And won the conference championship, they deserved the playoff spot. But I am not sad Ohio State made it in, at least they had the nads to take on Oklahoma in Oklahoma. Now at least when people say you should play it safe with a soft schedule fans can point to tOSU's playoff bid. Should help have better OOC match ups.

That was counterbalanced by the abortion of an out of conference schedule thrown up by Washington. Either way can work. I'm glad Ohio State schedules these home and homes (OK is coming to Columbus next September) but it can cost you if you're not careful.

 

[TexasExes98]

Here's an idea: Maybe the B1G should have been left out of the playoff this time around.

 

[7Samurai13]

Yup about as bad as MSU last year. Atleast MSU had an excuse with the Cook injury and lost to a more talented Bama team.

"A more talented Bama team" is an understatement.

 

[963BUSC]

That was counterbalanced by the abortion of an out of conference schedule thrown up by Washington. Either way can work. I'm glad Ohio State schedules these home and homes (OK is coming to Columbus next September) but it can cost you if you're not careful.

You have a point, Idaho may have been the best team Washington played OOC. But without the Oklahoma win tOSU stays home. A huge OOC schedule can keep you in the drivers seat. Washington nearly was jettisoned by a weak conference and a pathetic OOC.

Pac 12 and Big 12 should do a weekend where they play each other. Tough on schools like SC since SC has ND already, and likes to travel around the country more usually picking up another decent P5 program. But not everyone from the PAC has to play every year, let SC skip years where they have premier games against other conference powers.

 

[WNY_FOOTBALL_DUDE]

I think PSU was playing the best football at the end of the season. And won the conference championship, they deserved the playoff spot. But I am not sad Ohio State made it in, at least they had the nads to take on Oklahoma in Oklahoma. Now at least when people say you should play it safe with a soft schedule fans can point to tOSU's playoff bid. Should help have better OOC match ups.

You could also look at Washington's schedule and say the direct opposite. If Oklahoma played Idaho, Portland State, and Rutgers, we would be talking about Oklahoma's undefeated record and the 5 above .500 opponents they beat.

Ohio State's entry shows that CC status doesn't matter.

A better system would recognize that you cannot pick 4 teams. Penn State makes a great argument. Oklahoma got its act together and won 9 straight games, and deserved a shot. Michigan has an argument: They beat Penn State, Colorado, and Wisconsin.

I think after 8, the argument becomes less and less legit.

 

[Deep Creek]

That was counterbalanced by the abortion of an out of conference schedule thrown up by Washington. Either way can work. I'm glad Ohio State schedules these home and homes (OK is coming to Columbus next September) but it can cost you if you're not careful.

Stoops said much the same thing. When asked if he thought the Ohio State and/or Houston losses cost his team a playoff spot, would he have scheduled differently in hindsight? His reply was NO and he'd still schedule that way. He said quality opponents are what players want to play against and fans want to see so he'd rather play good OOC opponents and let the chips fall where they may.

 

[963BUSC]

You could also look at Washington's schedule and say the direct opposite. If Oklahoma played Idaho, Portland State, and Rutgers, we would be talking about Oklahoma's undefeated record and the 5 above .500 opponents they beat.

Ohio State's entry shows that CC status doesn't matter.

A better system would recognize that you cannot pick 4 teams. Penn State makes a great argument. Oklahoma got its act together and won 9 straight games, and deserved a shot. Michigan has an argument: They beat Penn State, Colorado, and Wisconsin.

I think after 8, the argument becomes less and less legit.

8 is too many. There were zero undefeated teams that got left out. Go undefeated or quit your bitching.

 

[WNY_FOOTBALL_DUDE]

8 is too many. There were zero undefeated teams that got left out. Go undefeated or quit your bitching.

Bad logic. If going undefeated all what it is cracked up to be, then there's no reason to pick quality OCC games. None. Seeing as how scheduling is always uneven between the conferences and there's little-to-no interconference play, your mentality is logically wrong.

8 = 6% of the college football population. That's not "too many". 94% of the college football teams wouldn't make it in.