Official College Football Week 13 Thread

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

I wouldnt want to face USC either right now

Id give the USC train more love IF they had beaten anyone outside the Pac-12. Pac-12 seems like the NFL outside of Washington(a bunch of parity). Washington is a difficult team to judge right now.

1. Bama
2. Ohio St
3. Clemson
4. Washington (but I think Michigan would win more often than not at a neutral site if the stakes were the same)

Non conference wins against Rutgers, Portland State, and Idaho dont tell much of a story. What is the Pac-12's biggest out of conference win this year? Michigan beat one of Pac-12s best teams by 17.

[mauchow]

Pretty good year for the Big Ten.

Who will come out on top next week?

USC/CU vs UW
WI/PSU - Winner probably gets left out of playoffs still
Clemson/VT
OU/OSU

Lots can still happen next week.

[tarcone]

If they put Ohio St. in over PsU or Wiscy, it is the end of college football as we know it.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by tarcone

If they put Ohio St. in over PsU or Wiscy, it is the end of college football as we know it.

I guess its the end of college football as we know it cause Ohio State is a lock to be in the final four. Id say almost a lock for #2 unless Clemson puts on a performance for the ages.

[tarcone]

I think we move away from conferences. Or slide into the 4 16 team conferences and the best are in.
No champ game. Just 12 games and winner moves on.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by tarcone

I think we move away from conferences. Or slide into the 4 16 team conferences and the best are in.
No champ game. Just 12 games and winner moves on.

Conference Championships are for TV purposes.

Id assume if Wisky wins ud put them in over Ohio State but that falls right back to the same argument on why you wouldnt take Ohio State(not the B1G champion cause they lost to Penn State). Ohio State beat Wisconsin.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by tarcone

If they put Ohio St. in over PsU or Wiscy, it is the end of college football as we know it.

OSU should get the same treatment Baylor got for not being in a championship game 2 years ago.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Atocep

OSU should get the same treatment Baylor got for not being in a championship game 2 years ago.

If Ohio State was competing with the same teams from two years ago they probably would have gotten the Baylor treatment. Name 3 teams(other than Bama) right now you would put in over Ohio State?

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

If Ohio State was competing with the same teams from two years ago they probably would have gotten the Baylor treatment. Name 3 teams(other than Bama) right now you would put in over Ohio State?

Big 10 winner, ACC winner, Pac-12 winner.

[CrescentMoonie]

Bob Davie has done an underrated job at New Mexico. It took 3 years to get enough people in place to run his system, but they've increased their wins for 3 straight years now (as long as they don't blow their huge lead against Wyoming).

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

Big 10 winner, ACC winner, Pac-12 winner.

Them conference Championships arent even a true conference Championship
Ohio State lost to Penn St
Wisconsin loss\t to Ohio State
Penn St lost to Michigan who Ohio St beat.

You could just spin it around in circles

Odd tiebreakers and alignment decided the B1G championship game.

If they take the 4 champions from the larger conferences they can hardly leave out the Big 12 champion right?

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

I guess its the end of college football as we know it cause Ohio State is a lock to be in the final four.

Why? If you are talking about which four teams deserve to be there, I agree they are one of them. The committee has said they value conference championships highly, however. I don't see OSU's resume being enough better to overcome that. I think it's Alabama, Clemson, Washington, PSU/Wiscy if form holds next week, which it may well not, but as things stand ...

No question losing once is better than losing twice, but given the stated value for the conference title, Ohio State is at best arguable.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

If they take the 4 champions from the larger conferences they can hardly leave out the Big 12 champion right?

There's only four spots. Somebody has to get left out and I don't think there's much valid question that the Big 12, this year, will have the weakest champion.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Them conference Championships arent even a true conference Championship
Ohio State lost to Penn St
Wisconsin loss\t to Ohio State
Penn St lost to Michigan who Ohio St beat.

You could just spin it around in circles

Odd tiebreakers and alignment decided the B1G championship game.

If they take the 4 champions from the larger conferences they can hardly leave out the Big 12 champion right?

It's not necessarily what's fair, but it's the precedent set by the committee themselves. They are the ones that said Baylor not playing in a conference title game had an impact on their decision that year. If Penn State beats Wisconsin they've contradicted themselves after putting the emphasis on conference championships.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

Why? If you are talking about which four teams deserve to be there, I agree they are one of them. The committee has said they value conference championships highly, however. I don't see OSU's resume being enough better to overcome that. I think it's Alabama, Clemson, Washington, PSU/Wiscy if form holds next week, which it may well not, but as things stand ...

No question losing once is better than losing twice, but given the stated value for the conference title, Ohio State is at best arguable.

Because of convincing wins at Oklahoma, at Wisconsin, Michigan, Nebraska.

The wins at Oklahoma, at Wisconsin, and at home against Michigan are going to mean a lot to the committee. Wins against some excellent teams.

[Suicane75]

The divisions are silly. You can have a title game and not have the dumb division alignment and take whoever finishes 1-2.

[RedKingGold]

Originally Posted by Suicane75

The divisions are silly. You can have a title game and not have the dumb division alignment and take whoever finishes 1-2.

If we abolished divisions, PSU would have won the conference as well with a better conference record than Michigan and Wisconsin and head to head over tOSU.

[hollmt]

Yeah, so I called this issue a few weeks ago, didn't I? Week 10 or 11 thread with Brian and Jon and a few others.

Now all of a sudden it seems people are on the side of the conference championship actually meaning something, when just a few weeks ago those same people argued that it really wasn't that important. I can go back and re-read and post those replies if I need to, but you can also just go read them yourselves.


Brian, how can you sit there with a straight face and say the OSU resume isn't "enough"? Really?

If anything...this will be the year that 2 teams from 1 conference get the nod and 2 other conference champs are left out. Pac and Big 12.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

If Ohio State was competing with the same teams from two years ago they probably would have gotten the Baylor treatment. Name 3 teams(other than Bama) right now you would put in over Ohio State?

I can't. Based on the raw data and the "rules" in place now, I can't. I have personal feelings about what happened today (and I made those known long before the rant by Harbaugh, I thought the refs were entirely one sided in this game and directly had an impact on the game because of their horrific performance)

I also think the resume of Ohio State and Penn State are pretty damned close. Ohio State has 5 one score games in their last 7. Penn State has been destroying teams. If Penn State were to blast Wisconsin, I think they should get in over Ohio State.

But they won't.

Bama, Ohio State and Clemson seem to be mortal locks at this point.

I think a Washington win gets them in.

The chaos comes into play if two things happen:

CU beats Washington in the PAC 12 title game
Oklahoma State beats OU next week

CU has 2 losses. 1 loss was at Michigan and they were leading the game when the starting QB was injured. The second loss was at USC without the same QB.

Oklahoma State has 2 losses. One of those losses should factually NOT be a loss. It isn't a judgement error that caused them to lose the game, it was a group of refs who didn't understand the rules of the game.

You would be talking about a 1 loss team who just beat one of the hottest teams in the country on the road. So you would have the Big 10 Champion, CU and OSU all who would be making a play for that fourth spot.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

There's only four spots. Somebody has to get left out and I don't think there's much valid question that the Big 12, this year, will have the weakest champion.

Sure there is a question. We know very little about Washington except they have beaten up their conference(other than USC). Their non conference schedule couldnt have been any easier.

If Oklahoma schedules Portland State instead of Ohio State they are 10-1 as well beating up on a lackluster conference.

It is not like the Pac-12 had some huge non conference wins to build up conference. The good teams in that conference have beaten up the weaker teams in the conference but non of them have any real impressive out of conference wins. I really have no idea how good Washington or USC is right now because it is quite possible that the Pac-12 is just really weak middle to bottom. Washington State lost to Eastern Washington and has done pretty decent in conference play.

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by Suicane75

The divisions are silly. You can have a title game and not have the dumb division alignment and take whoever finishes 1-2.

Not with conferences with more than 10 teams.

[CrescentMoonie]

Wyoming and San Diego St are doing their best to make next week's Mountain West championship game even less compelling. SDSU is losing to Colorado State 56-24 after 3 and Wyoming is losing to New Mexico 35-7 at the half.

[hollmt]

Originally Posted by TroyF

I can't. Based on the raw data and the "rules" in place now, I can't. I have personal feelings about what happened today (and I made those known long before the rant by Harbaugh, I thought the refs were entirely one sided in this game and directly had an impact on the game because of their horrific performance)

I also think the resume of Ohio State and Penn State are pretty damned close. Ohio State has 5 one score games in their last 7. Penn State has been destroying teams. If Penn State were to blast Wisconsin, I think they should get in over Ohio State.

Troy, stop blaming the refs for the loss of a game. This argument is so tired and boring. Refs unfortunately have an impact on every game, and sometimes they miss shit. Did a PI or 2 call get missed? Yes. Did it cost them the game? Don't know. Did Michigan throw 2 costly INT's and a bad fumble? Yes. Did it cost them the game? Probably.

Next. PSU and OSU resume aren't even close. At all. PSU beat OSU and lost to Michigan and a bad Pitt team (regardless of what they did to Clemson). OSU beat Oklahoma, Wisc, Nebraska (who was ranked at the time, lost Armstrong and they fell off the face), and Michigan and lost to PSU. That isn't 'pretty damn close' and the only thing that will help it out is the game vs Wisconsin and they haven't won that yet.

Now, with that said, I have said this since 3 weeks ago. If PSU/Wisc win the conference, with their record, they deserve a shot in the final 4. That got LAUGHED AT and now it is being considered. Go figure.

[Suicane75]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

Not with conferences with more than 10 teams.

Why?

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by hollmt

Troy, stop blaming the refs for the loss of a game. This argument is so tired and boring. Refs unfortunately have an impact on every game, and sometimes they miss shit. Did a PI or 2 call get missed? Yes. Did it cost them the game? Don't know. Did Michigan throw 2 costly INT's and a bad fumble? Yes. Did it cost them the game? Probably.

Next. PSU and OSU resume aren't even close. At all. PSU beat OSU and lost to Michigan and a bad Pitt team (regardless of what they did to Clemson). OSU beat Oklahoma, Wisc, Nebraska (who was ranked at the time, lost Armstrong and they fell off the face), and Michigan and lost to PSU. That isn't 'pretty damn close' and the only thing that will help it out is the game vs Wisconsin and they haven't won that yet.

Now, with that said, I have said this since 3 weeks ago. If PSU/Wisc win the conference, with their record, they deserve a shot in the final 4. That got LAUGHED AT and now it is being considered. Go figure.

What are you talking about? Nebraska was already getting blown out by OSU when Armstrong got injured. After that Armstrong played the following week before missing the Maryland game.

That bad Pitt team lost by 7 at a pretty good Oklahoma State team as well. They're 8-4 with all 4 losses being to bowl eligible teams that have 8 or more wins and only one was more than a TD difference. PSU improved dramatically over the course of the season and are playing as well as anybody not named Alabama right now. PSU is a better team than OSU right now.

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by Suicane75

Why?

You either have unbalanced schedules or no OOC games. Take the 14 team B1G. You could have a situation, if they stick with an 9 game conference schedule, where the two best teams pick up a loss and two lesser teams run the table without playing the two better ones. You're guaranteed to not play 4 of the teams in your conference at that point. Let's say OSU and Michigan are the two best teams in the conference. Then, let's say Wisconsin and PSU both have schedules without OSU, Michigan, and each other (which still leaves another conference opponent they don't play) and go undefeated. Everybody "knows" the best two teams are OSU and Michigan and yet neither is eligible for the championship game under that scenario.

You're either capping all the conferences at 10 teams or fewer, unless you eliminate OOC games, or you're having divisions with unbalanced schedules.

[Suicane75]

Yeah, hollmt. I'm with you on everything except Pitt being a bad team.

[hollmt]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

What are you talking about? Nebraska was already getting blown out by OSU when Armstrong got injured. After that Armstrong played the following week before missing the Maryland game.

That bad Pitt team lost by 7 at a pretty good Oklahoma State team as well. They're 8-4 with all 4 losses being to bowl eligible teams that have 8 or more wins and only one was more than a TD difference. PSU improved dramatically over the course of the season and are playing as well as anybody not named Alabama right now. PSU is a better team than OSU right now.

It is pretty obvious what I am talking about. When OSU played Nebraska they beat them and Nebraska was ranked..10th at the time. Armstrong got hurt in that game, and hasn't played since has he? If he has I haven't paid attention, and my bad. Either way, I was talking about PSU/OSU resumes and how they were 'pretty damn close' when they aren't.

Pitt still has 4 losses. That isn't debatable. Bad might be debatable though, and I will take that comment back. Apologies.

And reread my last sentence, since you quoted it about PSU. I've said it for weeks now. PSU/Wisc winner, which seemed to be where this BIG champ game was headed, deserves a shot. I am not arguing that fact. PSU beat OSU, they were better that day. Are they better today. Neither of us know that. Maybe we will find out though.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by hollmt

Brian, how can you sit there with a straight face and say the OSU resume isn't "enough"? Really?

Because the committee has consistently said that conference championships weigh heavily. What will happen, is not what I think 'should' happen, per our earlier discussion. Those are two entirely different things.

So take a look at what the committee has to decide.

1. Alabama.

Duh.

If Clemson and Washington win their conferences, they have 1 loss each and a weaker resume overall than Ohio State -- but they won their conferences. Ohio State didn't even play for theirs. Per the committee's stated things that they value, they don't get in over them.

Then somebody goes from the Big Ten. Whether Penn State or Wisconsin wins, putting Ohio State in means taking a team that wasn't in the championship game over a team that won it. Again, I don't see the committee doing that, unless they don't value conference titles as much as they've said ... and in the past, voted ... that they do.

If Colorado beats Washington, or Clemson loses to Virginia Tech, then this changes. There's more room to say Ohio State is clearly superior to the team that won the conference title. The H2H results certainly don't give them that against Penn State or Wisconsin.

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Because of convincing wins at Oklahoma, at Wisconsin, Michigan, Nebraska.

Only two of those wins were convincing. By definition, OT wins are not convincing. Notwithstanding, those are good wins and I agree Ohio State gets a lot of credit for them. What I don't agree with is that being enough to overcome not being Big Ten Champions, when the committee has specifically said that's a big consideration. My question is, what have they done to indicate they will overturn that principle in this case?

[Suicane75]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

You either have unbalanced schedules or no OOC games. Take the 14 team B1G. You could have a situation, if they stick with an 9 game conference schedule, where the two best teams pick up a loss and two lesser teams run the table without playing the two better ones. You're guaranteed to not play 4 of the teams in your conference at that point. Let's say OSU and Michigan are the two best teams in the conference. Then, let's say Wisconsin and PSU both have schedules without OSU, Michigan, and each other (which still leaves another conference opponent they don't play) and go undefeated. Everybody "knows" the best two teams are OSU and Michigan and yet neither is eligible for the championship game under that scenario.

You're either capping all the conferences at 10 teams or fewer, unless you eliminate OOC games, or you're having divisions with unbalanced schedules.

Yeah, hadn't thought of that. OK, lemme go back to the drawing board. I'll fix this yet. Or eat and go to sleep.

[hollmt]

I'm scared for OSU. I don't think they are going to make it in unless what Brian says happens. Wash/Clemson lose. Just one of them have to lose. That would put in and seed like this imo:

Bama
OSU
Clemson/Wash
PSU/Wisc

If both Clemson and Washington win. OSU is out and its:
Bama
Clemson
Wash
PSU/Wisc

and by the way, the 4 team playoff is under consideration for restructure in 2020? anyone know when exactly?

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by hollmt

It is pretty obvious what I am talking about. When OSU played Nebraska they beat them and Nebraska was ranked..10th at the time. Armstrong got hurt in that game, and hasn't played since has he?

I literally typed that he played in the next game. He missed the Maryland game, two weeks later, but that's it. He played against both Minnesota and Iowa.

[hollmt]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

I literally typed that he played in the next game. He missed the Maryland game, two weeks later, but that's it. He played against both Minnesota and Iowa.

Yeah, I got that. Again, my point was resumes. OSU/PSU resume aren't 'pretty damn close'. We good now?

[jbergey22]

So the idea of choosing the 4 best teams is no longer their job? It is whoever wins conference Championships.

The idea that Penn State is better than Ohio State is pretty crazy to me. Penn State almost lost to the Gophers and got destroyed by Michigan. Ohio State dominated the first 3 quarters of that game and lost the momentum late. It was kind of fluky how it all went down. Because of that 1 quarter of bad ball apparently Ohio State doesnt deserve to be in the top 4. Ohio State is really like 11 3/4 - 1/4.

Conference Championships are just loaded BS anyway.

Michigan much the same situation. Lost the fluky game to Iowa where things didnt go right played at Ohio State as close as you possibly could.

1 game doesnt decide who the better team is anyway. Too many variables in each game. To get the entire picture the season as a whole is how you get a better look.

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by hollmt

I'm scared for OSU. I don't think they are going to make it in unless what Brian says happens. Wash/Clemson lose. Just one of them have to lose. That would put in and seed like this imo:

Bama
OSU
Clemson/Wash
PSU/Wisc

If both Clemson and Washington win. OSU is out and its:
Bama
Clemson
Wash
PSU/Wisc

and by the way, the 4 team playoff is under consideration for restructure in 2020? anyone know when exactly?

I could see OSU over Wisconsin if they win the conference due to the head-to-head. I don't think OSU is a lock if Colorado beats Washington. Colorado's losses are a red hot USC and at Michigan where they led before their QB was knocked out of the game. They would also finish the season with 3 straight wins over teams that were ranked at the time. OSU probably gets in under that scenario, but Colorado would be much tougher to pass up than Virginia Tech.

[hollmt]

I don't get the Colorado love. No offense to Colorado at all. Probably more because I haven't seen them play and that is my fault. I am though, rooting for Colorado, because I think that is OSU's best bet. Virginia Tech probably isn't beating Clemson, but hell if they do, then OSU is in for sure.

A co-worker keeps mentioning the Wisc beating PSU scenario as helpful for OSU as well. I see it and get it but I just cant wrap my head around that one yet.

What I find really funny is through all of this, Oklahoma is being left out of the conversation. I don't think they deserve to be in it, but I still find it funny.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

The idea that Penn State is better than Ohio State is pretty crazy to me. Penn State almost lost to the Gophers for crying out loud. Ohio State dominated the first 3 quarters of that game and lost the momentum late. It was kind of fluky how it all went down. Because of that 1 quarter of bad ball apparently Ohio State doesnt deserve to be in the top 4. Ohio State is really like 11 3/4 - 1/4.

I think their job is to pick the best four teams, and they value conference titles more than I think they should. However, it is what it is. Looking at the above, I think it's a slanted look at Ohio State. True as far as the PSU game goes, and they certainly blew their share of teams out. By the same token, they came close to losing to Michigan State, Michigan, Northwestern, and Wisconsin. Two OT wins in which they trailed late. They still won, make no mistake, but if you are looking at the whole season -- these things have to be factored in as well.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

I think their job is to pick the best four teams, and they value conference titles more than I think they should. However, it is what it is. Looking at the above, I think it's a slanted look at Ohio State. True as far as the PSU game goes, and they certainly blew their share of teams out. By the same token, they came close to losing to Michigan State, Michigan, Northwestern, and Wisconsin. Two OT wins in which they trailed late. They still won, make no mistake, but if you are looking at the whole season -- these things have to be factored in as well.

Im looking at it from the computer power ratings side of things. The matchups Id love to see in the 1st round are Alabama vs Michigan and Ohio State vs Clemson cause I have a good feeling we be seeing great games. I mean it is very possible Penn St/Wisconsin or Washington can push Alabama and create the underdog environment people love but I think the odds are Alabama would easily handle any of them teams. I just wish the committee would make up their mind of what they are actually trying to accomplish. Most deserving teams OR Best Teams so we can at least settle on what we are suppose to be debating.

[hollmt]

Yeah but Brian, that is the whole transitive relation theory and it doesn't work. Different weeks, different matchups. PSU just dismantled MSU today and OSU struggled against MSU. It doesn't really mean anything though. Did MSU just give up in the 2nd half? Lose morale and ready to go home?

OSU won close games AT top 10 Wisconsin and AT MSU (MSU and Dantonio has OSU/Meyer's number and Meyer knows it and coaches the game knowing it) and against #3 Michigan. PSU didn't even play Wisconsin or Nebraska, or another highly ranked team like Oklahoma.

One more week of 'meaningless' conference championship games and more debates to come I am sure.

[CrescentMoonie]

OSU has been a bit helter skelter on offense this year. 62-3 in consecutive weeks sounds great until you realize it was sandwiched by a 4 point win over a mediocre Northwestern team and a 1 point win over the worst MSU team since 2006. I think they're one of the 4 best teams, but it's not nearly as cut and dry as people want to make it seem.

[hollmt]

I am still for an 8 team playoff. It isn't a big stretch of more games really.
5 power 5 conference champs get auto bid.
3 at large from wherever. Say a W. Michigan. That would be exciting and deserving. OSU? Michigan? Colorado? Whatever, grab your 8, reseed them, play some money hungry games. That is what it is all about anyway.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by hollmtt

Yeah but Brian, that is the whole transitive relation theory and it doesn't work. Different weeks, different matchups.

No it's not, I'm not making a transitive argument. One close game against a specific opponent is one thing: four is something completely different. I'm saying when you look at the whole season, they've had some very impressive games, 2-3 poor ones, and some middling ones. These things are very much relevant in the kind of 'body of work' comparisons that always come up this time of year.

[hollmt]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

OSU has been a bit helter skelter on offense this year. 62-3 in consecutive weeks sounds great until you realize it was sandwiched by a 4 point win over a mediocre Northwestern team and a 1 point win over the worst MSU team since 2006. I think they're one of the 4 best teams, but it's not nearly as cut and dry as people want to make it seem.

Oh, no doubt their offense has been sketchy. I harped on Barrett and the offense for weeks for not throwing the damn ball in the air for 20 yards or more for weeks. I noticed it first happening in the IU game and then the Wisc game after that and it was dismissed as great game planning by Wisc...but something was there (or in the offenses case, wasn't there). Their defense won them the game today and in other games either won it or kept them in it long enough for the offense to semi-wake up.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by hollmt

I am still for an 8 team playoff. It isn't a big stretch of more games really.
5 power 5 conference champs get auto bid.
3 at large from wherever. Say a W. Michigan. That would be exciting and deserving. OSU? Michigan? Colorado? Whatever, grab your 8, reseed them, play some money hungry games. That is what it is all about anyway.

But then we argue on who deserves the 7th and 8th spots and we want 16 teams. It never ends.

Some years the system works fine others like this year it just doesnt fit together real well as a (un)deserving team feels left out because numerous losses happened with the top 10 this year.

[hollmt]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

No it's not, I'm not making a transitive argument. One close game against a specific opponent is one thing: four is something completely different. I'm saying when you look at the whole season, they've had some very impressive games, 2-3 poor ones, and some middling ones. These things are very much relevant in the kind of 'body of work' comparisons that always come up this time of year.

PSU was 3-1 in games decided by 7 or less. (16 total points)
OSU was 4-1 in games decided by 7 or less. (18 total points)

1 of those was with each other. Not much difference.

[hollmt]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

But then we argue on who deserves the 7th and 8th spots and we want 16 teams. It never ends.

Some years the system works fine others like this year it just doesnt fit together real well as a (un)deserving team feels left out because numerous losses happened with the top 10 this year.

HA...yeah I know and agree. I just think that IF, the end goal is to reward conference champs, that solves that problem first, then we can at least move towards the 3 at large teams.

We could do what the NBA and NHL do and just invite half the Division 1 teams to a tournament....

[Butter]

As far as the Baylor got left out argument.... All of the teams fighting for spot number 4 that year had one loss... Not the case this year. We're really trying to compare apples and oranges here.

Best scenario for Ohio State is Wisconsin wins the Big Ten title game... They own a head to head win there. If PSU wins you can argue unbalanced schedules there as OSU played the top two teams from the West while Penn State played Minnesota and Iowa... Not scrub teams but not what Ohio State went through.

[TroyF]

Responding to a hodge podge of posts:

1 - Ranking everyone outside of Bama is splitting hairs. I do not think Ohio State has the unbeatable resume everyone thinks they have. I think they will get in. I look at them as a team that had 5 one score games in their last 7, including a one point win and a 4 point win over 2 unranked teams. I don't give a rats ass about what anyone thinks of me and the refs, I thought they were essentially given that game yesterday. The calls were massive and were not 50/50. Virtually all of those calls led to points. It was a disgusting display by that crew.

2 - Again, don't worry about my opinion. I don't need the entire Ohio State bandwagon to tell me they deserve to be in. They WILL be in. Even if I were on the committee, it would take Penn State leveling Wisconsin for me to even consider dumping them. I don't see that happening. I just don't think it's as simple as a lot of people are making it out to be.

3 - As a fan of CU and OSU, they don't deserve to be in even if they beat Washington and OU respectively. With that said, the committee has always said they look at injuries and other circumstances in a teams resume.

Comparing Armtsrong's injury to CU's injury is comical. By the time Armstrong was hurt in the Ohio State game, he was 4-15 and the team was trailing 38-3. CU lost their starting QB at Michigan, losing 31-28 and the CU QB was 16-25 for 246 yards and 3 TD in just over 2 quarters. The backup came in and went 0-7 and CU didn't score again.

In the other loss, CU was beat on the road by USC by 4 points. Again, I'm NOT saying CU deserves to be there. I am saying if they were to knock off Washington and chaos happens elsewhere, they absolutely deserve a closer inspection.

As for Oklahoma State, that's a 10-1 football team right now (at least that's how I think the committee should be looking at them, that loss was simply not a loss). Were they to upset OU on Saturday morning (something I don't think will happen), you are talking about an 11-1 football team. Do they get in? I don't think so. The non conference resume is pretty putrid. (including the close game that should be a W against Central Michigan) It would include wins over 2 top ten teams. I just don't; think it's enough.

4 - Bama is going to murder any team that gets in anyway. I'm not even sure I'll watch the playoff because their dominance is not something I enjoy at all. I think Saban is the best college coach we've seen in decades. I also think he's a complete and utter scum bag. I have no joy in watching his teams win and no joy in seeing that team succeed. So why put myself through watching them dominate through the rest of the wasteland?

I'll watch my Buffs and OkState Cowboys play in their bowls and be a lot happier, even if my teams end up losing.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by TroyF

It was a disgusting display by that crew.

Somewhat OT, but I think the term "disgusting" is used too liberally these days.

Granted, it's what these guys are paid to do, and they may have gotten a few calls wrong. In a football game. It's not like they were flinging feces or sodomizing the elderly or flogging hobos. They were reffing a football game, and I don't think they were doing so with any malice.

Anyway, carry on.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Somewhat OT, but I think the term "disgusting" is used too liberally these days.

Granted, it's what these guys are paid to do, and they may have gotten a few calls wrong. In a football game. It's not like they were flinging feces or sodomizing the elderly or flogging hobos. They were reffing a football game, and I don't think they were doing so with any malice.

Anyway, carry on.

I watched the game hoping to see the two teams decide the game. ***I*** don't feel that happened because the refs were bad.

I did not attack their character in ANY way. There was nothing in my post that said it was malice, said they were horrible people, said they should be fired or anything of the sort. I said they put on a disgusting display of reffing. I stand by the statement, even if someone else disagrees with that viewpoint.