|
Post by sportsjock on Nov 30, 2016 11:18:02 GMT -5
What IF: We are #7 Penn State barely beats #6 Wisconsin, #8 Colorado destroys #4 Washington, Then who would they pick ? And what If Va. Tech surprises #3 Clemson, Would there be 2 vacancies ? Interesting scenario. Rather unlikely, but weirder things have happened. My perception is there seems to be a love affair with DeShawn Watson and Clemson, much the same as with Bama, don't know if the committee is caught up in the media hype and biases though. I can't see Penn State jumping from #7 to #4, unless there is more than one upset. Think Michigan gets in before Penn State. Wisconsin is a different matter....would be shocked if they didn't leap frog Michigan for that 4 spot. Upsets could make the final rankings quite interesting, but if the favorites get the job done, you can rubber stamp this latest, top four ranking.
|
|
|
Post by sportsjock on Nov 30, 2016 11:20:57 GMT -5
MSU was not the Big Ten's best team at seasons end and we all know who was. they won in C- Bus with their 2nd string QB. MSU was not the Big Ten's best team at seasons end and we all know who was.
|
|
|
Post by maplecityjake on Nov 30, 2016 11:22:41 GMT -5
I don't think it's anything to do with bias. We have recent history with Watson/Clemson in relation to Bama.
|
|
|
Post by maplecityjake on Nov 30, 2016 11:24:19 GMT -5
they won in C- Bus with their 2nd string QB. MSU was not the Big Ten's best team at seasons end and we all know who was. I saw it the 1st time. What's the premise? Because MSU got stuck playing Bama, and OSU played Notre Dame?
|
|
|
Post by cbus on Nov 30, 2016 14:15:00 GMT -5
What IF: We are #7 Penn State barely beats #6 Wisconsin, #8 Colorado destroys #4 Washington, Then who would they pick ? And what If Va. Tech surprises #3 Clemson, Would there be 2 vacancies ? That would be great and it's certainly possible. Who really knows how good Washington is and the line on the PSU v Wisc game is 2.5 pts so basically a tossup. I would put Penn St in but I think they would actually consider Colorado. As their guidelines say they favor Conference Champs over non-champs. So Michigan gets in only if they are clearly better than the conference champ and I don't think they can say that. Penn St losses were early and on the road and they beat both teams that beat Michigan.
|
|
|
Post by Rambo McClain on Nov 30, 2016 14:21:25 GMT -5
The Committee is really going out on a limb with their rankings. 12-0's first, 11-1's second, 10-2's third, etc 12-0 Alabama 11-1 Ohio State 11-1 Clemson 11-1 Washington 10-2 Michigan 10-2 Wisconsin 10-2 Penn State 10-2 Colorado 9-2 Oklahoma 9-2 Oklahoma State 9-3 USC 9-3 Florida State 9-3 Louisville
USC is way down at 11th because they challenged themselves and took on Alabama week 1. Lesson they just learned, schedule like Washington. Colorado is way down at 8th because they challenged themselves and took on Michigan. Lesson they just learned, schedule like Washington.
Washington played Rutgers, Idaho and Portland State USC played Alabama, Notre Dame and Utah State Colorado played Michigan, Colorado State and Idaho State
Had Colorado scheduled Rutgers instead of Michigan they would be 11-1 and either ranked 4th or 5th right now. Thanks committee for making it crystal clear that you rank them by record and only distinguish between teams of equal record with SOS, etc. Had USC not scheduled Alabama and instead scheduled Rutgers they would be 10-2 and sitting at 5th right now.
Had Penn State scheduled Bowling Green instead of Pittsburgh they would be 11-1 and ranked in the Top 4 right now.
I think the Committee is a joke, a 5 year old can rank them too if they are told to put 12-0's first, 11-1's second, etc
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2016 14:34:44 GMT -5
Western Michigan is 12-0.
South Florida is 10-2.
|
|
|
Post by DrTorch on Nov 30, 2016 14:36:09 GMT -5
random thoughts:
1. 3-1 vs the top-9 of the committee's teams. If we win it all we could end up 5-1 vs the top-6...us being the 6th.
2. Big-10 Divisions are beyond ridiculous. What a bunch of unequitable gerrymandering. That's why we can't lose a Big-10 game but Bama can get pasted by Ole Miss two years in a row. Needs fixed. Send UM West. Bite the bullet. Hasn't been a rivalry in 30 years, just alternating runs of lopsidedness.
3. lol @ SEC
4. Seriously, Iowa made a Big-10 title game over us. When is the last time we even played in Iowa City?
|
|
|
Post by sportsjock on Nov 30, 2016 14:50:03 GMT -5
Nobody is mentioning that Alabama is benefitting from a down and weak SEC this year.
Everybody has some great points and perspectives on things, but I think Alabama and Ohio State have separated themselves from the rest of the field and are essentially above and separated from most of the discussions on who gets the coveted #3 and #4 spots......nice.
|
|
|
Post by Rambo McClain on Nov 30, 2016 14:50:39 GMT -5
Western Michigan is 12-0. South Florida is 10-2. ummm, those are mid majors, they will never be allowed to the party
|
|
|
Post by Rambo McClain on Nov 30, 2016 14:52:41 GMT -5
Alabama 43-40 over (5-7) Ole Miss. That's right Bama the greatest Defense in the history of mankind gave up 40 points to (5-7) Ole Miss. They also gave up 30 points to Arkansas. Greatest defense ever though, that's all I hear.
|
|
|
Post by cbus on Nov 30, 2016 15:12:55 GMT -5
random thoughts: 1. 3-1 vs the top-9 of the committee's teams. If we win it all we could end up 5-1 vs the top-6...us being the 6th. 2. Big-10 Divisions are beyond ridiculous. What a bunch of unequitable gerrymandering. That's why we can't lose a Big-10 game but Bama can get pasted by Ole Miss two years in a row. Needs fixed. Send UM West. Bite the bullet. Hasn't been a rivalry in 30 years, just alternating runs of lopsidedness. 3. lol @ SEC 4. Seriously, Iowa made a Big-10 title game over us. When is the last time we even played in Iowa City? The BIG divisions are set up geographically. There is no gerrymandering. I think you want to introduce gerrymandering.
|
|
|
Post by DrTorch on Nov 30, 2016 15:28:01 GMT -5
half of Indiana makes the West but none of Michigan?
there's the Gerry Mander boss, that and the unbalanced schedules...what percentage of Big-10 titles overall have UM and OSU combined for? to have them in the same division is insane
|
|
|
Post by Rambo McClain on Nov 30, 2016 15:32:19 GMT -5
Ohio State played Wisconsin Michigan played Wisconsin Penn State did NOT play Wisconsin What if PSU had to travel to Wisconsin this year? Oh that's right, they would have lost, as PSU is 0-2 on the road vs above .500 teams. That would mean Ohio State would have won the East and not PSU.
Unbalanced schedules is the worst thing about these huge 14 team conferences. Iowa last year not having to play OSU, MSU and UM.
Urban Meyer is 39-2 in regular season Big Ten games the last 5 years, and only has 1 Big Ten Title. Wisconsin won the Big Ten in 2012 with a 4-4 Big Ten Record Wisconsin is playing in the Big Ten Championship game this year with a 7-2 record. Yet 39-2 has only gotten Ohio State into 2 Big Ten Championship games.
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Nov 30, 2016 15:36:34 GMT -5
Western Michigan is 12-0. South Florida is 10-2. Virginia is 2-10 which is just as relevant.
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Nov 30, 2016 15:45:31 GMT -5
half of Indiana makes the West but none of Michigan? there's the Gerry Mander boss, that and the unbalanced schedules...what percentage of Big-10 titles overall have UM and OSU combined for? to have them in the same division is insane Half Of Indiana is in the Central time Zone. All of Michigan is in the Eastern Time Zone.
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Nov 30, 2016 15:56:48 GMT -5
If Wisconsin or Penn St wins convincingly, I think they should be in the top 4 over Washington. It probably won't happen but I think they are deserving. What if Washington "wins convincingly"? Which is more likely
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Nov 30, 2016 16:00:35 GMT -5
MSU was not the Big Ten's best team at seasons end and we all know who was. I saw it the 1st time. What's the premise? Because MSU got stuck playing Bama, and OSU played Notre Dame? No, JT was eventually given the starting QB job FOR GOOD and by Notre Dame was much more comfortable
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Nov 30, 2016 16:20:12 GMT -5
What IF: We are #7 Penn State barely beats #6 Wisconsin, #8 Colorado destroys #4 Washington, Then who would they pick ? And what If Va. Tech surprises #3 Clemson, Would there be 2 vacancies ? That would be great and it's certainly possible. Who really knows how good Washington is and the line on the PSU v Wisc game is 2.5 pts so basically a tossup. I would put Penn St in but I think they would actually consider Colorado. As their guidelines say they favor Conference Champs over non-champs. So Michigan gets in only if they are clearly better than the conference champ and I don't think they can say that. Penn St losses were early and on the road and they beat both teams that beat Michigan. Their "guidelines" say nothing of the kind. The Committee is charged with selecting THE BEST 4 teams after 12/3. If the #4 and last spot comes down to 2 or more comparable teams, they have 4 equally weighted criteria to consider in making their decision. Only one of which is Conference Titles. As a matter of fact, the word "guideline" isn't found in the selection document
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Nov 30, 2016 16:38:40 GMT -5
random thoughts: 1. 3-1 vs the top-9 of the committee's teams. If we win it all we could end up 5-1 vs the top-6...us being the 6th. 2. Big-10 Divisions are beyond ridiculous. What a bunch of unequitable gerrymandering. That's why we can't lose a Big-10 game but Bama can get pasted by Ole Miss two years in a row. Needs fixed. Send UM West. Bite the bullet. Hasn't been a rivalry in 30 years, just alternating runs of lopsidedness. 3. lol @ SEC 4. Seriously, Iowa made a Big-10 title game over us. When is the last time we even played in Iowa City? The original original set up had U of M in the West and OSU in the East. THEN the machinations began. OSU and U of M HAD to play the last week of the regular season. HAD to be considered THE "rival game". When in different Divisions it was possible OSU and U of M could play in the last game of the regular season then turn around and play each other again the following week in the Big Ten Title game. The only way to satisfy all of those issues was to put them in the same Divisions. BUT, then OSU and U of M could be THE 2 best teams in the Big Ten and NEVER play for the Big Ten Championship. It was considered the best (but not perfect) for OSU and U of M ALONE, to be in the same Division. Yet they will NEVER play each other for the Big Ten Title, THUS they put MSU in the West......THEN the Big Ten added two more schools with BAD football programs to get to 14, another stupid idea. THUS, another reshuffle putting MSU, U of M and OSU in the same Division. BTW with Penn State.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2016 22:22:34 GMT -5
Western Michigan is 12-0. South Florida is 10-2. ummm, those are mid majors, they will never be allowed to the party Both are ranked and a 5 year old may not know they are mid majors.
|
|
|
Post by sportsjock on Dec 1, 2016 5:46:20 GMT -5
Watched a great game between the Toledo Rockets and Western Michigan in the Glass Bowl recently, should WM be in the playoff mix? Pretty stupid question, huh? The Broncos would be a .500 team if they were in a power 5 conference. Still think the NCAA should create a sub-category for mid-majors that would provide them with a separate ranking and their own playoff.
|
|
|
Post by BellevueBuckeye on Dec 1, 2016 8:56:07 GMT -5
half of Indiana makes the West but none of Michigan? there's the Gerry Mander boss, that and the unbalanced schedules...what percentage of Big-10 titles overall have UM and OSU combined for? to have them in the same division is insane A perfect east-west divide where the 7 westernmost schools are in the west division and the 7 easternmost schools are in the east division is not gerrymandering. Not only are MSU and UM further east than Purdue and IU, they are both further east than the entire state of Indiana. The B1G has 6 schools entirely east of Indiana, 6 schools entirely west of Indiana, and 2 schools in Indiana, with the one that's slightly more to the west in the west division and the one that's slightly more to the east in the east division. Gerrymandering would be the correct term to describe the initial Leaders and Legends setup that did not follow the geography at all.
|
|
|
Post by BellevueBuckeye on Dec 1, 2016 9:00:43 GMT -5
All of Michigan is in the Eastern Time Zone. The 4 counties in the Upper Peninsula that border Wisconsin are in the Central Time Zone
|
|
|
Post by cbus on Dec 1, 2016 9:19:26 GMT -5
That would be great and it's certainly possible. Who really knows how good Washington is and the line on the PSU v Wisc game is 2.5 pts so basically a tossup. I would put Penn St in but I think they would actually consider Colorado. As their guidelines say they favor Conference Champs over non-champs. So Michigan gets in only if they are clearly better than the conference champ and I don't think they can say that. Penn St losses were early and on the road and they beat both teams that beat Michigan. Their "guidelines" say nothing of the kind. The Committee is charged with selecting THE BEST 4 teams after 12/3. If the #4 and last spot comes down to 2 or more comparable teams, they have 4 equally weighted criteria to consider in making their decision. Only one of which is Conference Titles. As a matter of fact, the word "guideline" isn't found in the selection document Willard, Is this the wrong document? www.collegefootballplayoff.com/selection-committee-protocolProposed Selection Process:
Establish a committee that will be instructed to place an emphasis on winning conference championships, strength of schedule and head-to-head competition when comparing teams with similar records and pedigree (treat final determination like a tie-breaker; apply specific guidelines). The criteria to be provided to the selection committee must be aligned with the ideals of the commissioners, Presidents, athletic directors and coaches to honor regular season success while at the same time providing enough flexibility and discretion to select a non-champion or independent under circumstances where that particular non-champion or independent is unequivocally one of the four best teams in the country. As we expand from two teams to four teams we want to establish a human selection committee that: (1) will be provided a clear set of guidelines; (2) will be expected to take the facts of each case and specifically apply the guidelines; and (3) will be led by a Chairperson who will be expected to explain publicly the committee’s decisions. Some of the guidelines and protocols expected to be established to guide the committee would include, but not be limited to, the following:
|
|
|
Post by maplecityjake on Dec 1, 2016 10:49:24 GMT -5
The Committee is really going out on a limb with their rankings. 12-0's first, 11-1's second, 10-2's third, etc 12-0 Alabama 11-1 Ohio State 11-1 Clemson 11-1 Washington 10-2 Michigan 10-2 Wisconsin 10-2 Penn State 10-2 Colorado 9-2 Oklahoma 9-2 Oklahoma State 9-3 USC 9-3 Florida State 9-3 Louisville USC is way down at 11th because they challenged themselves and took on Alabama week 1. Lesson they just learned, schedule like Washington. Colorado is way down at 8th because they challenged themselves and took on Michigan. Lesson they just learned, schedule like Washington. Washington played Rutgers, Idaho and Portland State USC played Alabama, Notre Dame and Utah State Colorado played Michigan, Colorado State and Idaho State Had Colorado scheduled Rutgers instead of Michigan they would be 11-1 and either ranked 4th or 5th right now. Thanks committee for making it crystal clear that you rank them by record and only distinguish between teams of equal record with SOS, etc. Had USC not scheduled Alabama and instead scheduled Rutgers they would be 10-2 and sitting at 5th right now. Had Penn State scheduled Bowling Green instead of Pittsburgh they would be 11-1 and ranked in the Top 4 right now. I think the Committee is a joke, a 5 year old can rank them too if they are told to put 12-0's first, 11-1's second, etc
|
|
|
Post by maplecityjake on Dec 1, 2016 10:51:39 GMT -5
^sorry, I goofed, but Rambo, your premise is a bit off. These schools are way down despite scheduling up is due to not competing in those games. It's a matter of competing.
|
|
|
Post by DrTorch on Dec 1, 2016 11:21:22 GMT -5
half of Indiana makes the West but none of Michigan? there's the Gerry Mander boss, that and the unbalanced schedules...what percentage of Big-10 titles overall have UM and OSU combined for? to have them in the same division is insane where the 7 westernmost schools are in the west division and the 7 easternmost schools are in the east division is not gerrymandering. Not only are MSU and UM further east than Purdue and IU, they are both further east than the entire state of Indiana. The B1G has 6 schools entirely east of Indiana, 6 schools entirely west of Indiana, and 2 schools in Indiana, with the one that's slightly more to the west in the west division and the one that's slightly more to the east in the east division. Gerrymandering would be the correct term to describe the initial Leaders and Legends setup that did not follow the geography at all. but it's not perfect, it's awful...and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan does exist, whether you want to believe it or not: www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjR7f2GsdPQAhXIs1QKHd7hAH8QjBwIBA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fassets.sbnation.com%2Fassets%2F2547365%2Fsbn-b1g.png&psig=AFQjCNHescoZy25-dBsxKoLZKc6Jo_b5NQ&ust=1480695048816874they could have easily done North and South Divisions and had Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, OSU, Penn State, Rutgers, Maryland in the South and Michigan, Little Brother, Northwestern, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Iowa, and Minnesota in the North, we aren't locked into East/West, that's is still a whole heckuva lot less travel than schools in the Pac-12 or Big-East make If UM and OSU want to play each other every year they should just schedule it as an out of conference game...I'd be fine if we only saw them in the Big-10 Title Game, now that would be a rivalry. The best rivalry I've seen in the last 30 years was MiamiU vs Notre Dame, now that was a bitter rivalry and they weren't in the same Division. I'm just tired of watching OSU lose one stinking game and getting shut out of the title. It's ridiculous. Like Rambo posted, 39-2 and a single Big-10 title. That's strange and perplexing to me.
|
|
|
Post by scout15 on Dec 1, 2016 11:39:50 GMT -5
Last year is last year.....
I think the rankings are correct at this point in time. Still a lot of football to be played this weekend and for whatever ESPN, FOX, etc. seem to be forgetting that. That being said, they need ratings.
How do you get ratings? Talk about Alabama, talk about Ohio state, etc.
Personally, I think Washington is the least deserving right now.
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Dec 1, 2016 13:43:15 GMT -5
Their "guidelines" say nothing of the kind. The Committee is charged with selecting THE BEST 4 teams after 12/3. If the #4 and last spot comes down to 2 or more comparable teams, they have 4 equally weighted criteria to consider in making their decision. Only one of which is Conference Titles. As a matter of fact, the word "guideline" isn't found in the selection document Willard, Is this the wrong document? www.collegefootballplayoff.com/selection-committee-protocolProposed Selection Process:
Establish a committee that will be instructed to place an emphasis on winning conference championships, strength of schedule and head-to-head competition when comparing teams with similar records and pedigree (treat final determination like a tie-breaker; apply specific guidelines). The criteria to be provided to the selection committee must be aligned with the ideals of the commissioners, Presidents, athletic directors and coaches to honor regular season success while at the same time providing enough flexibility and discretion to select a non-champion or independent under circumstances where that particular non-champion or independent is unequivocally one of the four best teams in the country. As we expand from two teams to four teams we want to establish a human selection committee that: (1) will be provided a clear set of guidelines; (2) will be expected to take the facts of each case and specifically apply the guidelines; and (3) will be led by a Chairperson who will be expected to explain publicly the committee’s decisions. Some of the guidelines and protocols expected to be established to guide the committee would include, but not be limited to, the following: I appologize, I glanced instead of reading carefully. Where you ended, the following: lists four equal criteria to be considered, one of which is Conference Titles.
|
|