I bet Oregon is happy they scheduled Auburn

[michaeljordan_fan]

Onviously winning huge ooc games helps. BUT currently winning those games doesnt help as much as losing hurts.

There are exactly zero times under the current format where a 1 loss team with a great ooc win got in the playoff over another 1 loss team because of that ooc win. Zero.

There are numerous times a 2 loss team has been left out after losing a tough ooc game.

Right now the ONLY certainty we have about the playoff is you cant lose more than one time. Thats it.

Knowing this as the only certainty pretty much tells you theres not nearly enough upside in playing a great ooc game as the 8 ball you put yourself behind if you lose it.

Until the committee puts a 2 loss conference champ with a tough ooc loss in over a 1 loss team with a subpar ooc there will continue to be no point in scheduling tough ooc

You don't think 2014 Oregon over Baylor or TCU qualifies?

 

[rmilia1]

You don't think 2014 Oregon over Baylor or TCU qualifies?

Oregon was going with or without their win over MSU. The 4 seed that year was OSU whp played a mediocre ooc and lost to a 6-6 team. Even a win over a middling P5 ( as opposed to MSU ) leaves Oregon with a better resume than OSU

 

[Wild Turkey]

You don't think 2014 Oregon over Baylor or TCU qualifies?

No.

The deciding factor in that one was the Big 12 was retarded and awarded a duel championship even though Baylor beat TCU on the field. TCU had the higher rank and the Big 12 was trying to game the system and they got punished for it. End result the Big 12 created an unnecessary CCG when they should have just given the championship to Baylor and sucked it up.

They deserved to be left out for being retards.

 

[Across The Field]

Onviously winning huge ooc games helps. BUT currently winning those games doesnt help as much as losing hurts.

There are exactly zero times under the current format where a 1 loss team with a great ooc win got in the playoff over another 1 loss team because of that ooc win. Zero.

There are numerous times a 2 loss team has been left out after losing a tough ooc game.

Right now the ONLY certainty we have about the playoff is you cant lose more than one time. Thats it.

Knowing this as the only certainty pretty much tells you theres not nearly enough upside in playing a great ooc game as the 8 ball you put yourself behind if you lose it.

Until the committee puts a 2 loss conference champ with a tough ooc loss in over a 1 loss team with a subpar ooc there will continue to be no point in scheduling tough ooc

If Oregon had not blown it against Auburn this year, even if they won it 21-20 close, they are 100% in the CFP over Oklahoma. If they had scheduled a patsy and won, I don't know if would've been enough.

You are basing your opinion on speculation alone, and it's about a system that's only a few years old. There hasn't been near enough time for a precedent to be set.

Also, regardless of if you're right or wrong, it's what these kids want. They want bragging rights and they want to face the top dogs, as does every college football fan. If anything, there should be significantly more big-time OOC matchups so we can end this stupid pissing match at the end of the year over which conference has the better 10-2 or 9-3 teams. It clarifies a tremendous amount, and it would make the committee's selections a lot easier to digest for teams sitting on the outside.

 

[Across The Field]

Oregon was going with or without their win over MSU. The 4 seed that year was OSU whp played a mediocre ooc and lost to a 6-6 team. Even a win over a middling P5 ( as opposed to MSU ) leaves Oregon with a better resume than OSU

Oregon was going, but think of if Baylor had scheduled a good P5 OOC team and beaten them. We might be talking about OSU having a nice win in the Cotton Bowl instead of going to the CFP and winning the National Title.

 

[Wild Turkey]

If Oregon had not blown it against Auburn this year, even if they won it 21-20 close, they are 100% in the CFP over Oklahoma. If they had scheduled a patsy and won, I don't know if would've been enough.

You are basing your opinion on speculation alone, and it's about a system that's only a few years old. There hasn't been near enough time for a precedent to be set.

Also, regardless of if you're right or wrong, it's what these kids want. They want bragging rights and they want to face the top dogs, as does every college football fan. If anything, there should be significantly more big-time OOC matchups so we can end this stupid pissing match at the end of the year over which conference has the better 10-2 or 9-3 teams. It clarifies a tremendous amount, and it would make the committee's selections a lot easier to digest for teams sitting on the outside.

Litmus test...Beat Auburn and you punch your ticket.

 

[NU_FTW]

0regon Sucks

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

0regon Sucks

If 11-2 is "sucks", then that does not bode well for 90% of the team in CFB.

 

[NU_FTW]

If 11-2 is "sucks", then that does not bode well for 90% of the team in CFB.

It is what it is