Post here if your team would have 1 or 0 losses

[jon2tanman]

 

[HuskerinBig10]

Is it me or does Wisconsin always shit the bed in the CCG?

I would say no. Plus, Wisconsin has been there four times and Ohio State only twice. Both are .500 in the CCG.

Nebraska was there once, Wisconsin shit all over Nebraska's bed that is for sure.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

If you played Washington's schedule.

You know you want to....come on now...don't be shy...and please call out anybody that is bullshitting us

Michigan would probably fit this bill, given we only missed the mark by 4 points with our schedule.

 

[AlaskaGuy]

 

[socaljim242]

Well most

Michigan would probably fit this bill, given we only missed the mark by 4 points with our schedule.

Umm Michigan lost to Iowa in November. So you are where you should be ,no dreaming about different schedules.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Well most


Umm Michigan lost to Iowa in November. So you are where you should be ,no dreaming about different schedules.

Yes, we did, but with Washington's schedule we never would have had to play an Ohio State team ranked in the top 2 at the end of the year...or our other 3 team 10 matchups. We very easily would have ended up with, at minimum, only one loss.

You don't get the point of this thread if you're pointing out failures within our current schedule. Washington's toughest and probably only true top 10 game this season was against USC, and they lost it. I think Michigan beats USC and could have stumbled at some point elsewhere and still been a 1 loss team.

 

[TheDayMan]

I'm going to enjoy watching Alabama eviscerate Washington. Do you guys remember what they did to USC?

"Oh but that was before they changed quarterbacks!"

Worst case is we lose to Alabama in the semifinal, like the whole college football world expects.

What's best case for Wisconsin? They beat Western Michigan?

I hope you lose because of a late controversial call, so we can watch you guys whine about losing to western Michigan all off season.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Worst case is we lose to Alabama in the semifinal, like the whole college football world expects.

What's best case for Wisconsin? They beat Western Michigan?

I hope you lose because of a late controversial call, so we can watch you guys whine about losing to western Michigan all off season.

Ouch....

 

[TheDayMan]

Yes, we did, but with Washington's schedule we never would have had to play an Ohio State team ranked in the top 2 at the end of the year...or our other 3 team 10 matchups. We very easily would have ended up with, at minimum, only one loss.

You don't get the point of this thread if you're pointing out failures within our current schedule. Washington's toughest and probably only true top 10 game this season was against USC, and they lost it. I think Michigan beats USC and could have stumbled at some point elsewhere and still been a 1 loss team.

No, they would have lost to Stanford, Utah, or WSU (all = or better then Iowa) and USC (possibly).

 

[socaljim242]

Yes, we did, but with Washington's schedule we never would have had to play an Ohio State team ranked in the top 2 at the end of the year...or our other 3 team 10 matchups. We very easily would have ended up with, at minimum, only one loss.

You don't get the point of this thread if you're pointing out failures within our current schedule.

The point of this thread is to get people like you to whine. Michigan played 8 home games , wtf is that? So you get to cherry pick the part of Washington schedule but ignore that? Ignore that Washingtons only loss is to a top ten team while Michigan twice and lost to Iowa who lost to North Dakota State and is 6-4. You beat Iowa you might have gotten in. Its Michigans fault they are where they are not Washingtons schedule.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

No, they would have lost to Stanford, Utah, or WSU (all = or better then Iowa) and USC (possibly).

There's a lot of teams better than Iowa, that doesn't to mean Michigan shits the bed against them. Iowa was a game where Michigan was caught looking forward. That doesn't happen 4 different times. This thread is about finishing with 0 or 1 losses, and because Michigan wouldn't have to face 4 different top 10 teams, and we're sitting with 2 losses because of 4 total points, I think it's safe to say we would have had at least 1 less loss with an easier schedule.

 

[socaljim242]

There's a lot of teams better than Iowa, that doesn't to mean Michigan shits the bed against them. Iowa was a game where Michigan was caught looking forward. That doesn't happen 4 different times. This thread is about finishing with 0 or 1 losses, and because Michigan wouldn't have to face 4 different top 10 teams, and we're sitting with 2 losses because of 4 total points, I think it's safe to say we would have had at least 1 less loss with an easier schedule.

You want a schedule with teams easier to beat than Iowa? Well no shit , most teams would have less losses.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

The point of this thread is to get people like you to whine. Michigan played 8 home games , wtf is that? So you get to cherry pick the part of Washington schedule but ignore that? Ignore that Washingtons only loss is to a top ten team while Michigan twice and lost to Iowa who lost to North Dakota State and is 6-4. You beat Iowa you might have gotten in. Its Michigans fault they are where they are not Washingtons schedule.

Yup, we played a bunch of home games. Next year we only have 6, and part of it was because of the B10 going to a 9 game schedule this year. We also had to face MSU away 3 of the last 4 years because of it.

I think you're flat our wrong. Yes, Michigan could have won either the Iowa or OSU game and been in -- but that doesn't mean we wouldn't have done better with an easier schedule. Teams with harder schedules are at a disadvantage in this system. Quite honestly, it's best to schedule as easy of teams as possible because if you're from a power 5 and get to the end with no, or one loss, you're likely in the playoff.

I'm not blaming Washington for their easier schedule. They did what was needed to get in with the schedule they were given.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

You want a schedule with teams easier to beat than Iowa? Well no shit , most teams would have less losses.

Sometimes good teams lose to bad teams. That just happens sometimes. It sucks and it's on the team that lost, but it happens. The 2014 OSU team that won a national title lost to 7-6 Virginia Tech.

If we're speaking in hypotheticals, which this entire thread is about, I think Michigan finishes with 1 loss or less with Washington's schedule. Again, we were 4 points away from being undefeated in our current schedule and/or a debatable ref spot from being a top 4 team.

 

[socaljim242]

Yup, we played a bunch of home games. Next year we only have 6, and part of it was because of the B10 going to a 9 game schedule this year. We also had to face MSU away 3 of the last 4 years because of it.

I think you're flat our wrong. Yes, Michigan could have won either the Iowa or OSU game and been in -- but that doesn't mean we wouldn't have done better with an easier schedule. Teams with harder schedules are at a disadvantage in this system. Quite honestly, it's best to schedule as easy of teams as possible because if you're from a power 5 and get to the end with no, or one loss, you're likely in the playoff.

I'm not blaming Washington for their easier schedule. They did what was needed to get in with the schedule they were given.

The thing is. You lost to a crap team. If you lost two games both to top teams then you have something bt when you overlook a team like Iowa and lose you have no one to blame but yourself. Washington only lost once to USC whos really good. If they had one more loss or lost to a bad team their bad OCC schedule would have doomed them. They aren't getting help from their OCC schedule it's hurt them. So they had to either win out or lose to the one team thats really good. Just like your loss to ohio state isnt whats holding you back it's Iowa.
If you played Alabamas schedule youd be in probably. They played USC first game who was horrible. You win that for sure then OCC of chattanooga and Western Kentucky. Both games against JR Colleges. Then the crappy SEC schedule where LSU game is your only tough game. So either run the table or one loss with that schedule.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

The thing is. You lost to a crap team. If you lost two games both to top teams then you have something bt when you overlook a team like Iowa and lose you have no one to blame but yourself. Washington only lost once to USC whos really good. If they had one more loss or lost to a bad team their bad OCC schedule would have doomed them. They aren't getting help from their OCC schedule it's hurt them. So they had to either win out or lose to the one team thats really good. Just like your loss to ohio state isnt whats holding you back it's Iowa.

Nah, no team with two losses was going to be in, even if it were top 10. The game that was important to the very end was OSU. In this scenario, I don't see two B10 teams in the end. It was always going to be Clemson, Alabama, Washington and 1 B10 team. Who that team was, was decided by our game against OSU. Remove that Iowa loss and do you really think the committee is putting in another B10 team over Washington who finished the season with one loss to a top 10 USC team?

In the end, the OSU game was the only thing that mattered. And with that, we wouldn't have had to play OSU with Washington's schedule so I do think we could have easily finished with 1 loss or less given a schedule swap. But there's no way to prove I'm right with that belief because it's entirely hypothetical.

 

[socaljim242]

Nah, no team with two losses was going to be in, even if it were top 10. The game that was important to the very end was OSU. In this scenario, I don't see two B10 teams in the end. It was always going to be Clemson, Alabama, Washington and 1 B10 team. Who that team was, was decided by our game against OSU. Remove that Iowa loss and do you really think the committee is putting in another B10 team over Washington who finished the season with one loss to a top 10 USC team?

In the end, the OSU game was the only thing that mattered. And with that, we wouldn't have had to play OSU with Washington's schedule so I do think we could have easily finished with 1 loss or less given a schedule swap. But there's no way to prove I'm right with that belief because it's entirely hypothetical.

For the record your team played great at Ohio State and I dont think that QB got the first down.

 

[TheDayMan]

There's a lot of teams better than Iowa, that doesn't to mean Michigan shits the bed against them. Iowa was a game where Michigan was caught looking forward. That doesn't happen 4 different times. This thread is about finishing with 0 or 1 losses, and because Michigan wouldn't have to face 4 different top 10 teams, and we're sitting with 2 losses because of 4 total points, I think it's safe to say we would have had at least 1 less loss with an easier schedule.

No, it doesn't, but you look pretty silly if you act like if only you had an easier OOC schedule you would have won... it's not at all safe to say.

Lucky for you Colorado had an amazing turnaround, if it was the team you guys though you were getting your schedule you wouldn't have much of an argument about having a better schedule. At least you guys tried to have a weak OOC schedule. Maybe it'll work out next time.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

No, it doesn't, but you look pretty silly if you act like if only you had an easier OOC schedule you would have won... it's not at all safe to say.

Lucky for you Colorado had an amazing turnaround, if it was the team you guys though you were getting your schedule you wouldn't have much of an argument about having a better schedule. At least you guys tried to have a weak OOC schedule. Maybe it'll work out next time.

Even without Colorado, Michigan faced 3 top 10 programs and beat two of them (not even talking about what happened against OSU). Our SOS still would have been pretty darn good.

 

[TheDayMan]

Even without Colorado, Michigan faced 3 top 10 programs and beat two of them (not even talking about what happened against OSU). Our SOS still would have been pretty darn good.

Yeah, you still lost to a not top 10 program.