CollegeFootballPoll.com Message Board

...has thrown a wrench in the Championship works.

The conference was top heavy this year which goes a long way into achieving this. But this is expected to happen often and there isn't anything you can do about it. The OOC games add to the slurry as reported by some. But they shouldn't, there are 4 spots in the playoff and 5 major conferences and a few other good programs out there. Oklahoma all by itself clarified much uncertainty. They lost to Ohio State and Houston and won the Big 12...which means the Big 12 is out. (Now if they had beaten Houston, or Houston ran the table the picture would be ugly.) The other mud slinger is playing outside of your division. Michigan losing to Iowa loused things up really good. No good answer for this so we are pretty much where we have always been. A different stew, but it is still stew.

I think Oklahoma should be out. The rest of the conference champs should go. If you didn't win you own conference I can't see how you are the best team. If the committee would have left out Ohio State in 2014, will a much weaker schedule than others, they would never have had a chance to prove they were the best team. And they were the best team that year. Not this year. They lost to Penn State.

I normally would agree but with the 3 team blur atop the Big 10 I find myself not.

Penn St beat OSU at home by 3 points. That is pretty much a draw to me, if they had won by 6 or beaten them on the road my opinion would be much different. The Buckeyes resume is better. The committee has thought so up to this weekend and I don't know if Washington impressed enough to change that opinion. And more importantly I don't know if Penn St impressed enough to top Washington.

And I don't know anymore now than I did before...I was in rem state by the time Penn State mounted the comeback. Much as I was for the Washington 2nd half this week or any of their other games.

As I see it, this is the basic problem with the current system.

1. We talk about strong conferences meaning they are top heavy. Half the teams win a bunch of games and the bottom half not so many. Parity has teams with close to an equal number of wins and losses from top to bottom. (Remember the combined percentage of wins and losses for all teams combined is 50/50). Teams are punished because they are in a conference with parity when in fact, that is the goal of most conferences.

2. Out of conference wins are scored on an equal basis as conference wins. To the committee, there are no conferences in their formula.

3. It is more subjective than objective...examples are right in the committee's guidelines.

Conference championships are the only criterion that should matter for post game play offs. Other bowl games, let the owner of most of the bowls, ESPN, decide. That is what owners get to do and when you sell to the devil, the devil decides.

WoVeU wrote:I normally would agree but with the 3 team blur atop the Big 10 I find myself not.

Penn St beat OSU at home by 3 points. That is pretty much a draw to me, if they had won by 6 or beaten them on the road my opinion would be much different. The Buckeyes resume is better. The committee has thought so up to this weekend and I don't know if Washington impressed enough to change that opinion. And more importantly I don't know if Penn St impressed enough to top Washington.

And I don't know anymore now than I did before...I was in rem state by the time Penn State mounted the comeback. Much as I was for the Washington 2nd half this week or any of their other games.

If Washington were USC would we be having this discussion about their schedule? Penn State didn't have a draw against Ohio State. They won on the field. That is like saying Ohio State didn't beat Michigan. Both games were close. Both had a winner. One even won in regulation. I think Ohio State is a good team. I don't think they are a great team. They have issues that they can't seem to over come. There defense is top notch. One of the best in the country, but the offensive line, specifically the right side of the Oline can't pass protect. That makes the offense one dimensional, that would be doable if we still had Zeke Elliott. We don't he plays on Sunday's now.

Ohio State is playing with 16 new starter. Considering that they have had a great season, but that is precisely why they shouldn't be in the playoff. They aren't ready yet. Closer than I thought they would be, but still not capable of beating Alabama. I'm not even sure about Clemson.

donovan wrote:As I see it, this is the basic problem with the current system.

1. We talk about strong conferences meaning they are top heavy. Half the teams win a bunch of games and the bottom half not so many. Parity has teams with close to an equal number of wins and losses from top to bottom. (Remember the combined percentage of wins and losses for all teams combined is 50/50). Teams are punished because they are in a conference with parity when in fact, that is the goal of most conferences.

2. Out of conference wins are scored on an equal basis as conference wins. To the committee, there are no conferences in their formula.

3. It is more subjective than objective...examples are right in the committee's guidelines.

Conference championships are the only criterion that should matter for post game play offs. Other bowl games, let the owner of most of the bowls, ESPN, decide. That is what owners get to do and when you sell to the devil, the devil decides.

The problem, as I see it, is the subjectivity of the process. There should not be a committee.

Penn State should go to the play off...they beat Ohio State on the field and are conference champs...and have the same number of wins as the Buckeyes (albeit one more loss).

What should be

1...Alabama...going away

2...Washington or Clemson (both are 12-1 conference champs)

3...see above

4...Penn State

What will be..my projection

1...Alabama
2...Clemson
3...Ohio State
4...Washington


PSU plays Colorado...Michigan plays FSU....

We agree.

You have my Amen

EVERY single one of you were for Georgia not going in 07 because they didn't win the conference. They got dropped 2-3 spots when they didn't even play a game once the #2 and #3 teams fell on the last week that year.

Putting OSU in the Playoff is a BIG middle finger to Ga and Penn State, because they are showing (though they might not realize it), that this is about ratings and money, nothing more.

I'm defending PSU after I said the football program should be shut down for a year or two after the JoePa stuff. Never thought I would say that.

I think we all still believe that you should win your conference to go. No one has argued for Ohio State in the playoff.

Spence wrote:I think we all still believe that you should win your conference to go. No one has argued for Ohio State in the playoff.

Sorry, I was using "you guys" as a generalization for a larger swath of the public.

No problem. I do still believe that if you don't win your conference you can't be one of the two or four best teams.

My position was that the Buckeyes should be in. But I am going by the simple statement of them selecting the best 4 teams, with no acsolute criterion set. I would be good with PSU going, but the committee should declare a conference championship is requried. And I think it should be, as odd as that may sound.

Derek wrote:

Spence wrote:I think we all still believe that you should win your conference to go. No one has argued for Ohio State in the playoff.

Sorry, I was using "you guys" as a generalization for a larger swath of the public.

Ten years ago...I am not sure what I had for breakfast, so I may be guilty.

As I have said ad nauseam, none of this makes any sense to me. If you are not going to put Western Michigan in after you invited them to the drawing, then it is all just big school bullying, avarice and Disney stockholders.