College football
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 7, 8, 9 ... 75, 76, 77  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763

PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2016 8:02 pm    Post subject:

Raijin wrote:
There's just no way you can deny Ohio State. Wins over #3 Michigan soon to be #5 Michigan, #7 Wisconsin, #8 Oklahoma and one loss to #6 Penn State. They're in without a shadow of a doubt and yes I would put money on it.


I understand your logic, but the committee has a history of rewarding conference champions. That's how OSU got into the playoff a couple years ago. I wouldn't take your bet, but I don't think it's a sure thing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vanexelent
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 30081

PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2016 8:56 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Raijin wrote:
There's just no way you can deny Ohio State. Wins over #3 Michigan soon to be #5 Michigan, #7 Wisconsin, #8 Oklahoma and one loss to #6 Penn State. They're in without a shadow of a doubt and yes I would put money on it.


I understand your logic, but the committee has a history of rewarding conference champions. That's how OSU got into the playoff a couple years ago. I wouldn't take your bet, but I don't think it's a sure thing.


If PSU beats Wisconsin they'll have wins over #2 OSU and #6 Wisconsin and their only losses were to a #4 Michigan team and Pitt by 3 points. Michigan dropped 2 of their last 3 games. They were playing way better when PSU faced them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31788
Location: Anaheim, CA

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2016 2:17 am    Post subject:

If Michigan and Ohio State both get in, I will not watch. I can stomach one non-conference champ, but two will simply push me over the edge. Michigan was the third-place team in its own division of its own conference. I think that Michigan got screwed in their game against Ohio State, but it's not like that result is changing. Michigan has lost two of its last 3 games. Michigan defeated one team outside the state of Michigan all year, lowly Rutgers. One of Michigan's losses was to Iowa, a team that isn't even ranked. I would take the Big 10 Championship Game winner over them. I would take the Bedlam winner over them. I would take even Colorado over them if they won the Pac 12. And I don't care that Michigan beat Colorado (and Colorado was winning that game before Liufau got injured). The committee has said that conference championships matter, year after year; it's why they shafted TCU a few years ago. I don't want to hear about Michigan's case. They might be a very good football team, but they should be on the outside looking in. There are a lot of good football teams (if not great ones), and they finished in third place in the East Division of the Big 10.

I just don't think it's fair if both Ohio St. and Michigan get in, and if they both do, I will not watch something that I think is egregiously unfair. Yeah, there isn't much between those 2 teams. But someone lost that game and someone won. The loser needs to be out, and that team was Michigan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
adkindo
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:21 am    Post subject:

ChickenStu wrote:
If Michigan and Ohio State both get in, I will not watch. I can stomach one non-conference champ, but two will simply push me over the edge. Michigan was the third-place team in its own division of its own conference. I think that Michigan got screwed in their game against Ohio State, but it's not like that result is changing. Michigan has lost two of its last 3 games. Michigan defeated one team outside the state of Michigan all year, lowly Rutgers. One of Michigan's losses was to Iowa, a team that isn't even ranked. I would take the Big 10 Championship Game winner over them. I would take the Bedlam winner over them. I would take even Colorado over them if they won the Pac 12. And I don't care that Michigan beat Colorado (and Colorado was winning that game before Liufau got injured). The committee has said that conference championships matter, year after year; it's why they shafted TCU a few years ago. I don't want to hear about Michigan's case. They might be a very good football team, but they should be on the outside looking in. There are a lot of good football teams (if not great ones), and they finished in third place in the East Division of the Big 10.

I just don't think it's fair if both Ohio St. and Michigan get in, and if they both do, I will not watch something that I think is egregiously unfair. Yeah, there isn't much between those 2 teams. But someone lost that game and someone won. The loser needs to be out, and that team was Michigan.


Conference championships only matter when it helps the committee explain how they are screwing over a more deserving team to ensure their preferred team is selected. This year, their preferred teams did not win conference championships so its only a matter of time before ESPN starts selling the narrative that each committee is different and this year the committee is not giving as much consideration to conference titles....then they will trot out their "impartial" analysts such as former Ohio State QB Herb Kirkstreet and WR Joey Galloway to really push the agenda right up to the final minutes before the committee votes. Same crap, different year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersken80
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 38750

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:45 am    Post subject:

The only reason why we as fans have to do so many mental gymnastics in college football is because the season is so short so every game matters but then some of these teams never play each other before the bowls. So fans are forced to reason between strength of schedule, point spread, in conference vs out of conference opponents, etc.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Huskers
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 28 Jun 2011
Posts: 481
Location: Nebraska

PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 10:35 am    Post subject:

I am really hoping for some chaos this weekend and want Colorado and VT to upset win this weekend. If that happens, the playoffs will be Alabama, Ohio State, Michigan and PSU/Wiscy winner. And the collective college football world will have their heads explode.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763

PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 10:52 am    Post subject:

Huskers wrote:
I am really hoping for some chaos this weekend and want Colorado and VT to upset win this weekend. If that happens, the playoffs will be Alabama, Ohio State, Michigan and PSU/Wiscy winner. And the collective college football world will have their heads explode.


In that scenario, I think it would be Alabama, Ohio State, Colorado, and the PSU/Wisconsin winner. I don't see any reasonable scenario in which Michigan gets in as a two-loss non-champion. The Bedlam winner would have a better case.

But yeah, if that happened, heads would explode, and rightly so.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersken80
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 38750

PostPosted: Sat Dec 03, 2016 8:16 am    Post subject:

Pac-12 will probably finally get a team in the 4 team playoff.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerLanny
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 Oct 2001
Posts: 47565

PostPosted: Sat Dec 03, 2016 8:40 am    Post subject:

lakersken80 wrote:
Pac-12 will probably finally get a team in the 4 team playoff.


Yes, you can argue that Washington may or may not be one of the four best teams in the country right now but winning the Pac 12 with only one loss has to be in.

As far as Michigan, you lost any argument by losing to Iowa in my mind. Losing to Ohio State only the way that happened (hi refs!) might have given them an argument, but the Iowa loss and not even playing in conference title game has to rule them out.

USC vs Michigan would be a dream Rose Bowl if the 4 Team Playoff goes Alabama, Ohio State, Clemson, Washington as expected.
_________________
Love, Laker Lanny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersken80
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 38750

PostPosted: Sat Dec 03, 2016 11:57 am    Post subject:

LakerLanny wrote:
lakersken80 wrote:
Pac-12 will probably finally get a team in the 4 team playoff.


Yes, you can argue that Washington may or may not be one of the four best teams in the country right now but winning the Pac 12 with only one loss has to be in.

As far as Michigan, you lost any argument by losing to Iowa in my mind. Losing to Ohio State only the way that happened (hi refs!) might have given them an argument, but the Iowa loss and not even playing in conference title game has to rule them out.

USC vs Michigan would be a dream Rose Bowl if the 4 Team Playoff goes Alabama, Ohio State, Clemson, Washington as expected.


Kind of funny, I think USC lucked out because if they lost in the Pac-12 championship game, they would've gone to the Alamo Bowl instead of Colorado.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763

PostPosted: Sat Dec 03, 2016 9:23 pm    Post subject:

Historical irony:

40-50 years ago, in the early years of the Paterno era, PSU regularly got screwed by the lack of a playoff system. They never did well in the polls because they were an independent with a suspect schedule. One year, they went 12-0 and won the Orange Bowl, but finished fifth in the AP poll. Fifth.

Now we have a playoff, and they are the champions of what was arguably the best conference this year. They're about to get screwed again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Basketball Fan
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Posts: 24742

PostPosted: Sat Dec 03, 2016 9:31 pm    Post subject:

That was a good game even if I don't care for either team. The winner is always Indianapolis for the $$$$ they get from those Wisconsin and Penn State fans who made the trek to Indy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakers0505
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 10701

PostPosted: Sat Dec 03, 2016 9:46 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Historical irony:

40-50 years ago, in the early years of the Paterno era, PSU regularly got screwed by the lack of a playoff system. They never did well in the polls because they were an independent with a suspect schedule. One year, they went 12-0 and won the Orange Bowl, but finished fifth in the AP poll. Fifth.

Now we have a playoff, and they are the champions of what was arguably the best conference this year. They're about to get screwed again.


I don't understand why Clemson is a lock? Seems to me PSU has the better wins in hindsight?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31788
Location: Anaheim, CA

PostPosted: Sat Dec 03, 2016 11:33 pm    Post subject:

lakers0505 wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Historical irony:

40-50 years ago, in the early years of the Paterno era, PSU regularly got screwed by the lack of a playoff system. They never did well in the polls because they were an independent with a suspect schedule. One year, they went 12-0 and won the Orange Bowl, but finished fifth in the AP poll. Fifth.

Now we have a playoff, and they are the champions of what was arguably the best conference this year. They're about to get screwed again.


I don't understand why Clemson is a lock? Seems to me PSU has the better wins in hindsight?


One loss vs. two. Same with Washington. It's utter hypocrisy if they let 2-loss Penn State in over 1-loss UW or Clemson. (Notice how Clemson isn't even mentioned as possibly on shaky ground in the media, while UW is.) The extra loss has to matter. If the extra loss doesn't matter, then let's just let 3-loss USC in, since they are playing better than anyone except Alabama at this point. If Washington had 2 losses, it would be at least logical if they didn't make it. But if the Pac-12 gets the shaft again with a 1-loss champion and the committee lets in a 2-loss champion, it's going to be, pardon the pun, bedlam.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakers0505
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 10701

PostPosted: Sat Dec 03, 2016 11:52 pm    Post subject:

ChickenStu wrote:
lakers0505 wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Historical irony:

40-50 years ago, in the early years of the Paterno era, PSU regularly got screwed by the lack of a playoff system. They never did well in the polls because they were an independent with a suspect schedule. One year, they went 12-0 and won the Orange Bowl, but finished fifth in the AP poll. Fifth.

Now we have a playoff, and they are the champions of what was arguably the best conference this year. They're about to get screwed again.


I don't understand why Clemson is a lock? Seems to me PSU has the better wins in hindsight?


One loss vs. two. Same with Washington. It's utter hypocrisy if they let 2-loss Penn State in over 1-loss UW or Clemson. (Notice how Clemson isn't even mentioned as possibly on shaky ground in the media, while UW is.) The extra loss has to matter. If the extra loss doesn't matter, then let's just let 3-loss USC in, since they are playing better than anyone except Alabama at this point. If Washington had 2 losses, it would be at least logical if they didn't make it. But if the Pac-12 gets the shaft again with a 1-loss champion and the committee lets in a 2-loss champion, it's going to be, pardon the pun, bedlam.


Oh, my mistake, totally overlooked that extra defeat.

In general I find the entire college setup to be a bit of a joke. They setup the ranking with an unknown measurement process in week 1, and they we see ripple effects of that through the season which automatically results in magnification of whatever errors existed in the initial rankings.

This committee at the very least should be doing rankings from week 1. At least keep the subjective measurement constant through out.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
fansincemagic
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 11048

PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2016 12:33 am    Post subject:

This would have been a terrible year to have the old 1 vs 2. Having to figure out the last team in among 4 is a lesser evil. It's still nonsense to go beyond 4. It may seem a little messy, but I don't feel sorry for the team left out...even if it is somehow my Bucks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763

PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2016 7:07 am    Post subject:

Well, now that it's done, and now that everything went as expected, I think the committee got it right. I have my doubts about UW. They played Rutgers, Idaho, and Portland State for their non-conference games, then managed to get through the soft Pac-12, beating up on the usual array of over-ranked teams like WSU and Stanford. They lost to the one legitimately good team in the conference (USC). I think Alabama is going to humiliate them.

PSU's non-conference schedule was tougher (Kent State, Temple, and Pitt), but not exactly imposing. Plus they lost to Pitt. The Big 10 was a much tougher conference, but PSU got spanked by Michigan. Still, Ohio State and Wisconsin were better teams than anyone UW beat.

In the end, I don't think PSU is clearly a better team than UW. The one-loss team trumps the two-loss team, even if the one-loss team played a weaker schedule. Besides, PSU gets the consolation prize of playing in the Rose Bowl against USC. That ain't bad at all. They lose the longshot chance of shocking Alabama, but they avoid the more likely scenario of getting beat 49-3.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
adkindo
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South

PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2016 12:21 pm    Post subject:

Maybe you think they got it right, or maybe you think they got it wrong.....but the Big 12 Commissioner has a very logical question is why does the committee keep changing their logic each year? Maybe they should have not said the things they have said in the past....but the point is they have said them. Like Bowlsby said, after TCU and Baylor were jumped in 2014, the committee implored how important they consider conference champions...and specifically the 13th data point (championship game). If this was true, Penn State would take the place of Ohio State this year.....the committee has also said one of the primary factors is the head to head outcome....again, Penn State beat Ohio State. Finally, the committee has said they are reluctant to select a team with a weak out of conference schedule recognizing that if the conference is over or under ranked as a whole, the out of conference competition will provide better insight to the team.....but Washington scheduled a cupcake schedule.

So what are the real factors the committee utilizes? I do not think the committee has produced better results than the BCS in regards to ranking, except it is now much more secretive and less accountable. I think the committee was always going to get Ohio State into the playoffs, and they were never going to allow Ohio State to play Alabama in the playoff game.

This thing will always "stink" until it allows teams to control their own destiny....just like every other sport in college and professional. Go to 6 or 8 teams...or reduce the Power 5 to the Power 4 (16 team conferences)...but the Power conference champs should be in the playoffs...hence controlling their own destiny. It is only Ohio States fault that they did not win their conference championship.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31788
Location: Anaheim, CA

PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2016 2:48 pm    Post subject:

I think they should have an 8-team playoff, give automatic berths to the 5 "power 5" conference champs, and then have 3 at-large selections.

So this year, Alabama, Clemson, Washington, Penn St., and Oklahoma would get automatic berths. The contenders for the 3 at-large berths would likely be USC, Colorado, Ohio St., Michigan, Wisconsin, and Oklahoma St. My guess is that Ohio St. and Michigan would be a lock. So it would come down to the other schools for the final spot. I'm guessing that USC would've gotten it, but who knows.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
adkindo
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South

PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2016 3:44 pm    Post subject:

ChickenStu wrote:
I think they should have an 8-team playoff, give automatic berths to the 5 "power 5" conference champs, and then have 3 at-large selections.

So this year, Alabama, Clemson, Washington, Penn St., and Oklahoma would get automatic berths. The contenders for the 3 at-large berths would likely be USC, Colorado, Ohio St., Michigan, Wisconsin, and Oklahoma St. My guess is that Ohio St. and Michigan would be a lock. So it would come down to the other schools for the final spot. I'm guessing that USC would've gotten it, but who knows.


I know there would be debating who got the at-large bids, but no Power Conference team can claim they are not responsible for missing the playoff if the conference champion is an auto bid....that all I think we can ask for. All three at-large bids may have went Big 10 this year (OSU, Michigan and Wisconsin), and I would be right there complaining about Big 10 favoritism....but if I am a USC fan or an Oklahoma State fan...I at least know my team had ultimate control of their destiny.

I would still give an at large bid to highest ranked non Power 5 conference school to make sure every team had a path....so I guess Western Michigan...then it appears OSU and Michigan would get the at-large bids.....let the committee rank them 1-8.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Raijin
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 08 Feb 2009
Posts: 6576

PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2016 4:23 pm    Post subject:

Washington's going to get manhandled. I'm just curious about Alabama players. Does the game stop being fun when you realize your team is basically the all star team of college football?
_________________
"It was tough," Kobe Bryant said. "But when it got really tough for me, I just checked myself in."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
adkindo
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South

PostPosted: Tue Dec 06, 2016 7:18 am    Post subject:

Raijin wrote:
Washington's going to get manhandled. I'm just curious about Alabama players. Does the game stop being fun when you realize your team is basically the all star team of college football?


I really dont understand some of these high school players decisions during the last decade. I recall about 10 years ago, USC had signed like 3 of the top 6 RB's in that class!?! If your the 6th best RB, and USC already signed the #1 and #3 RB in the country....shouldn't you take visit to UCLA?

Saban piles them in there year after year. I would want to go somewhere that I can start and have a better chance at making a name for myself. Depth is truly what separates the handful of elite programs.....thats why a school like Purdue can play with Big 10 elite schools for a quarter or so.....then the elite schools just have wave after wave of fresh bodies without much drop in talent.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144432
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Tue Dec 06, 2016 10:41 am    Post subject:

It likely comes down to coaching. Successful programs typically have very good coaching staffs. If I want to play in the NFL and make NFL money, I would rather receive quality coaching and learn to play the game under the best staff. If I am a top 6 RB of my class, and have received exceptional coaching, I can show my stuff at the combine and take my chance at the NFL. And with football being a physical sport, if an injury occurs then I get to show what I can do for Alabama.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
adkindo
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South

PostPosted: Tue Dec 06, 2016 11:25 am    Post subject:

venturalakersfan wrote:
It likely comes down to coaching. Successful programs typically have very good coaching staffs. If I want to play in the NFL and make NFL money, I would rather receive quality coaching and learn to play the game under the best staff. If I am a top 6 RB of my class, and have received exceptional coaching, I can show my stuff at the combine and take my chance at the NFL. And with football being a physical sport, if an injury occurs then I get to show what I can do for Alabama.


your not wrong....we continue to see "backups" get drafted as early as the 3rd, and maybe even 2nd round of the draft...then succeed in the league....maybe I would just want the glory more than they do because I would rather be getting 23 carries a game at Purdue than getting 4 or 5 as the 3rd RB @ Michigan. Chicks dig TD's
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerLanny
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 Oct 2001
Posts: 47565

PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 6:00 pm    Post subject:

Love USC -7 over Penn State in the Rose Bowl.

I think USC is going to put a beatdown on them.
_________________
Love, Laker Lanny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 7, 8, 9 ... 75, 76, 77  Next
Page 8 of 77
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB