• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

2017 CFB Bowl Games Open Thread

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
redguard117 said:
Should they take recent performance into consideration? No. Do they? Absolutely. It's human nature, for better or worse.

You're the committee, you have to pick the 4 *best teams* to compete for a NC. This year, when you went by resume, you picked the Top 3 pretty easily. The last spot was the tricky one - OSU or Alabama? There are good arguments for and against both sides.

Unfortunately for us, at the end of the day, the committee is made of humans. And humans rely on gut instinct just as much as facts. The committee "knows" exactly what they're getting with Bama. They're getting a team that has won 5 of the last 9, and has lost by 2 TDs only once in the past decade. With us, they have no idea what they're getting. We left any good will we had accumulated with the committee in Glendale, after we embarrassed them for controversially selecting us over a conference winner. So this year, they picked Bama - the 'safe choice.'

It sucks, but the solution is to not let subjectivity play a role. Don't lose to Iowa by 30 points. 11-1 + Conference winner (objectively)> 11-1 Non-Conference winner.
Click to expand...
Again, they were HANDED the opportunity 3 times. They for sure earned their victories once they played the games but they were the beneficiary of the subjectivity you speak of.

If they're going to give Alabama that benefit of the doubt they should've given us that benefit in 2015. The defending national champions, the team they deemed a top 4 team all year (and the prior year), with the deepest roster of any team that year, but lost their 2nd to last game of the year was left out.

Now we were given that opportunity in 2016 and at the time we all thought we were worthy but if we aren't kidding ourselves 2016 was a make up for screwing it up in 2015. As you said they're human and this year they had the chance to put us in but with the combination of us making them look dumb the year prior and the 2nd team being Alabama made this an easy decision for them.
 
Upvote 0
Buckeyeskickbuttocks said:
They got to play ND instead of Ohio State playing ND. If the Buckeyes were eligible that season, it was Alabama who would have been out, not ND.
Click to expand...
I know... that's what I'm saying. They got to play ND while we sat at home ineligible.

What hurts with that is we all know we would've beat them nearly as bad as well. Can't believe we screwed that up by playing Florida in the freaking Gator Bowl.

Factor in blowing it against MSU in 2013 and we literally could be right there when it comes to Natty's.'

Have to give this to Alabama though. When they're given the chance they don't miss often.
 
Upvote 0
Never gonna happen, but maybe there should be a rule that if the committee is determined to put in more than one team from the same conference, that they have to play each other in the semis. You know, as if they were competing for the conference title first.*

*Never mind. Sure the committee would find some way to say that if Bama lost the semi, it entitled them to play for the championship.
 
Upvote 0
I don't understand trying to make the argument now that Bama didn't deserve to be in. They beat Clemson and UGa whom everyone seems to think belonged. It is like trying to tell Mark May that OSU deserved to be in in 14 after we won it. It is just stupid. Obviously Bama deserved to be there. They were the best team.
 
Upvote 0
Hstead said:
I don't understand trying to make the argument now that Bama didn't deserve to be in. They beat Clemson and UGa whom everyone seems to think belonged. It is like trying to tell Mark May that OSU deserved to be in in 14 after we won it. It is just stupid. Obviously Bama deserved to be there. They were the best team.
Click to expand...

Perhaps what bothers many people is that, of course, if you're in it, a decent team has the opportunity to win. There was an undefeated team out there that never got a chance to find out this year (still undefeated, even after their bowl game against the SEC, btw). Since participation isn't decided on the field, it would be nice if at least there was some consistency in applying rules by the tiny group of people that determine who gets a chance.
 
Upvote 0
Hstead said:
I don't understand trying to make the argument now that Bama didn't deserve to be in. They beat Clemson and UGa whom everyone seems to think belonged. It is like trying to tell Mark May that OSU deserved to be in in 14 after we won it. It is just stupid. Obviously Bama deserved to be there. They were the best team.
Click to expand...

Because that's not how arguments are made. Bama proved that, given a second chance, a good team will often take advantage of it. That doesn't mean they're the only team that could've won it from that spot. The same was true when they were given a do over versus LSU in the BCS, only that case was actually much worse. The decision to put Bama in wasn't made based on "we think they're the only other team who could win", unless that's the criteria and it wasn't stated publicly. Allegedly, there are criteria by which teams are evaluated including the infamous "eye test" which is a fancy way of saying muh feelz.

"They were the best team" may or may not be the same as winning a four team playoff. UCF never lost, beat the team who beat Bama, but were never given the opportunity. You can respond by telling me how you "know" UCF didn't belong, but that will only bring us back to muh feelz, again. This system is far too subjective.
 
Upvote 0
Jake said:
Because that's not how arguments are made. Bama proved that, given a second chance, a good team will often take advantage of it. That doesn't mean they're the only team that could've won it from that spot. The same was true when they were given a do over versus LSU in the BCS, only that case was actually much worse. The decision to put Bama in wasn't made based on "we think they're the only other team who could win", unless that's the criteria and it wasn't stated publicly. Allegedly, there are criteria by which teams are evaluated including the infamous "eye test" which is a fancy way of saying muh feelz.

"They were the best team" may or may not be the same as winning a four team playoff. UCF never lost, beat the team who beat Bama, but were never given the opportunity. You can respond by telling me how you "know" UCF didn't belong, but that will only bring us back to muh feelz, again. This system is far too subjective.
Click to expand...
Maybe UCF did belong, but to say Bama didn't when they beat two teams is kind of stupid to me. Maybe one should make the argument that Clemson did not belong way before saying Bama did not belong, because they clearly did, just like we clearly did in 14 when we won it all and guys like May and Pollard said we didn't.
 
Upvote 0
LostLassie said:
Perhaps what bothers many people is that, of course, if you're in it, a decent team has the opportunity to win. There was an undefeated team out there that never got a chance to find out this year (still undefeated, even after their bowl game against the SEC, btw). Since participation isn't decided on the field, it would be nice if at least there was some consistency in applying rules by the tiny group of people that determine who gets a chance.
Click to expand...

Some people will never get it. When one entity is given special treatment repeatedly of course they're going to be the only one to "prove" they deserved it - no else was afforded the chance.

"They won. See? That proves the committee was right."

And we wonder how we end up with some of the systems and processes we get on a national level. :roll1:
 
Upvote 0
Jake said:
Some people will never get it. When one entity is given special treatment repeatedly of course they're going to be the only one to "prove" they deserved it - no else was afforded the chance.

"They won. See? That proves the committee was right."

And we wonder how we end up with some of the systems and processes we get on a national level. :roll1:
Click to expand...
Have you forgotten last year already? OSU was given a "special" chance. To cry now about Bama not deserving or belonging is really really stupid to me. They won it all. They were the best team in college football. To sit here and act like they should have never been in the playoffs and only were granted a spot because they are getting special treatment embarrasses our fan base and sounds like Ped State fans.
 
Upvote 0
Hstead said:
I don't understand trying to make the argument now that Bama didn't deserve to be in. They beat Clemson and UGa whom everyone seems to think belonged. It is like trying to tell Mark May that OSU deserved to be in in 14 after we won it. It is just stupid. Obviously Bama deserved to be there. They were the best team.
Click to expand...
Ohio State was the best team in 2015. They didn't deserve to get in.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top