Playoffs
- Thread starter football follies
- Start date
I agree. They have the QB and the WR's to give our secondary a lot of trouble, especially if our 1st round corner is unable to go or isn't at 100%. We're definitely going to need our Freshman QB to step up because we'll need to score some points. If he plays poorly there's a good chance we could lose.
I don't think they've got the personnel, but I'm not sure anyone does better gameplanning than CP.
Considering that program should have been shut down for enabling and protecting a child rapist for 30 years I'm not going to lose any sleep on them being left out of the playoff.
Whose to say they wouldn't have lost the conference championship game? They didn't even make it there...
If ohio state deserves to be in now............. Then they should of been left out in the cold 2 years ago. The committee and NCAA is just absolutely favoring OSU. But then again they've been doing this in basketball for seeding for years...
What's your logic on that? They won the Big Ten in 2014 and only had one loss. TCU won the Big 12 and had one loss as well. The committee obviously got it right considering OSU beat Bama and dominated Oregon.
You're trying to compare a two loss Penn State vs OSU to the 2014 one loss conference champions, which the Big 12 is nearly always awful.
I think Bama is the best team this year but everyone always claims so and so has no shot against Bama until they do. Oklahoma overpowered them in the 2014 Sugar Bowl and Ohio State beat them in the 2015 playoffs. Both games, no one on here gave them a shot because "No one could possibly be as good as Alabama."
The truth is, we never know until the games are played. It's like saying "Because I can beat everyone in a race on my block, I must be able to beat everyone in the country."
I'll be rooting against Alabama no matter who they play.
Penn State lost 2 games. There is a reason why James Franklin isn't acting upset.
Obviously this isn't the opinion that counts, but tOSU got some nice advantages by losing to PSU. They didn't have to risk injury, have an extra week to let old bumps and bruises heal up, which is a big deal at this point in the season. My personal opinion is if you don't win your division or conference championship you don't deserve to play for a national championship. PSU won their division, they won their conference and the beat tOSU head to head. In my opinion getting into this playoff was a gift to tOSU and a push from ESPN.
Yep. Is anyone discussing today how they had all those scholarship reductions reinstated?
I would seriously love to compare this stance to what people said in 2011 with Alabama. Because a lot of the people pissed that OSU got in, were okay with Bama getting in for a rematch with LSU, which was total BS especially before there was even a playoff.
As it is set up right now, a power five conference champ is always going to be left out no matter what. So what the committee is saying is that conferences are not equal and if you're undefeated or a one loss conference champion, you will always have to leave it to human bias to determine our champion.
How else do you punish a school who got titles, bowl games, stars and prestige during that run? You don't have a time machine. You can't go back and erase those experiences for fans, players and the program. They enjoyed it at the expense of someone else.
I agree with your first point that OSU benefited by not having to play the extra game.
As far as the other point - I appreciate that you state it's your opinion about the conference championship being a pre-requisite to make the play-off. Obviously that's not the rule.
But if it were to ever become the rule, then teams lose basically all incentive to schedule any noteworthy out of conference games, as they would essentially serve no benefit. The only way they really get factored in would be in deciding between #4 and #5, assuming they have the same record.
Basically, you'd be selecting the 4 best P5 champions. That's it.
Why risk losing a non conference game if all that really matters is winning your conference?
Change the rule, and teams will operate differently. You can't change the rules after the season.
That would be akin to saying Trump doesn't deserve the Presidency because he didn't win the popular vote.
Is this a real question? You take all that away but you don't put the program under death penalty and punish people who had NOTHING to do with all terrible **** that went on.
Yep.
Just like you don't release a convict early just because his children miss their father.
I think both Bama lines will be too much for Washington,there is where we will see the difference
Ohio State actually scheduled Oklahoma while some other contenders schedule pathetic cupcake teams for OOC.
Let's look at the resumes.
SEC was down big time but Alabama won it with much ease and has a win over USC
Ohio State lost one game by three points but had wins over Oklahoma, Michigan and Wisconsin.
Clemson lost to a mediocre Pitt team but won the ACC and has wins over FSU, Louisville and Auburn.
Washington won their conference, had wins against Colorado and a decent Stanford team but played no one OOC and got dominated by a USC team that is playing like a top four team in the country now.
Penn State won the conference and had a win over OSU and Wisconsin but got blitzed by Michigan (39 points) and lost to Pitt.
Penn State is the only team with two losses. So if you then want to make a case to include a two loss Penn State team then why not Michigan who has the same record and beat the piss out of Penn State?
Let's look at the resumes.
SEC was down big time but Alabama won it with much ease and has a win over USC
Ohio State lost one game by three points but had wins over Oklahoma, Michigan and Wisconsin.
Clemson lost to a mediocre Pitt team but won the ACC and has wins over FSU, Louisville and Auburn.
Washington won their conference, had wins against Colorado and a decent Stanford team but played no one OOC and got dominated by a USC team that is playing like a top four team in the country now.
Penn State won the conference and had a win over OSU and Wisconsin but got blitzed by Michigan (39 points) and lost to Pitt.
Penn State is the only team with two losses. So if you then want to make a case to include a two loss Penn State team then why not Michigan who has the same record and beat the piss out of Penn State?
Yeah, it's a real question. That's BS though because you can't really take it away. You can try and do some retroactive crap but they still played the game, players still got the ring, fans still witnessed it and enjoyed it while another team who didn't cheat, had to sit home not to mention the money, the success in recruiting because of those wins, etc.
Is it fair to the new players to hurt them? No. But it;s the only thing you can do to hurt the school who enjoyed all of those accomplishments and benefited for years because of it.
How did you come away with this?
We're saying that you have to punish THE PROGRAM because we do not have a time machine to punish them back then so because they benefited for years through wins, prestige, recruits, fan experiences, money, etc so you have to punish in the now.
My stance is the same, Bama had their shot at LSU and got beat, shouldn't have played in the NC game. But a few schools always get the benifite. If Washington had I wouldn't have been surprised Michigan getting in over PSU. But it wasn't just the conference championship, PSU beat tOSU head to head on the field, They weren't the best team that day
I don't like Mich, PSU or tOSU, but PSU has something on their resume the other 2 don't have, Conference champion, they also have a win head to head over tOSU. I think the Big10 was the best conference this year, it would be hard to argue them not getting 2 teams in. But to take one who didn't even play for the conference title makes their conference title seem unimportant.
Ohio State got left out last year despite being more worthy to be in the playoff than Oklahoma. Why Oklahoma is ever allowed to be in the playoff or championship is beyond me. How many *** kickings does one team get to have before we move on and stop giving them chances?
Big Ten deserved two last year, IMO.
Big Ten deserved two last year, IMO.
If that ends up being the matchup in the NCG, I really like our chances. Contain the zone read and cover Samuel and they won't be able to do squat offensively.
If you require a conference champion you have to do either of two things. Select one without a game, or select the two best teams in the conference to play and winner advance. Ohio state finished 7-1 in conference, same as penn state. Penn state held tiebreaker and played. Their opponent was 6-2 in the same conference, a loss to a team with a better conference record who did not get to play for said championship. Why should Wisconsin got a second (actually third chance) when Ohio state didn't have that same choice.
If florida would of upset Alabama. How many on here of been saying they should not have gotten into the playoffs? Bet that argument would be different. A team who has two top ten road wins, another top ten win at home, and only loss was in overtime at number five don't deserve in playoffs?
If florida would of upset Alabama. How many on here of been saying they should not have gotten into the playoffs? Bet that argument would be different. A team who has two top ten road wins, another top ten win at home, and only loss was in overtime at number five don't deserve in playoffs?
We are just going to disagree, tOSU choked their way out of the playoffs last year, did the same this year and the selection committee gave them a mulligan. No one other than ESPN wanted to see a Bama/LSU rematch, well Bama fans did, and anyone other than Bama, wouldn't have gotten the chance. Maybe they were the 2 best teams, but Bama had their shot and lost, someone else should have gotten the opportunity, But ESPN gave them a mulligan.