2017 College Football Playoffs (and Other Bowl Games)

[Systems_id]

It has been mentioned and absolutely agree.

Here is the conference that bothers me no matter what; the ACC

OSU really needs South Carolina to take out Clemson or Pitt/UVA to hang a loss on Miami because if both stay undefeated before it, the loser of the ACC CG would have a valid argument as having a better resume than OSU.

I know we all keep saying no way the ACC gets two teams but that is just us. I could absolutely see the loser of that game, if say it's close and a well played high scoring game, be promoted for that 4th spot. There is no stated rule about how many teams per conference. It just says they are after the top 4 teams.

Clemson wouldn't have a strong argument if they lost considering they would have two losses, probably less Top 25 wins, and no conference championship. The only thing Clemson can say is that they didn't get destroyed by Iowa. Miami would have a better argument though, I agree.

 

[buckeyemania11]

Clemson wouldn't have a strong argument if they lost considering they would have two losses, probably less Top 25 wins, and no conference championship. The only thing Clemson can say is that they didn't get destroyed by Iowa. Miami would have a better argument though, I agree.

Dont think a 1 loss non ACC champ has a better argument than Ohio State besides "we only have 1 loss and didnt get killed by Iowa) - which given might be enough to sway some people but dont think enough.

Besides that ND win theyve done pretty much nothing else impressive.

The ACC is weak as hell this year with FSU and Louisville crapping the bed. Its literally Clemson and Miami. Va Tech is the 3rd best team and they are meh (just lost to Georgia Tech) 2 ACC teams in the playoff would be a total joke.

 

[ShowMeBuck]

No way if bama, OU, and Miami win out we aren't in.

They will not put a 2nd team from another conference in if they can't help it

Bama and Miami need to win out but I fail to see how OU winning out helps us. I guess our ass kicking at home doesn’t seem as bad? I’d rather have them lose, and in particular, have a team pass for 400 yards on them to make their defense efficiency ranking even worse. I believe they are somewhere in the mid 60th range? Regardless, a 2 loss Big 12 champs helps not hurts.

I’ve been a staunch supporter of staying at 4 team playoff because I’m convinced 8 teams lessens the regular season, and moreso CCG. It absolutely has to lessen those games and I don’t want that to happen. Even if my team this year is on the wrong side of the bubble. And I know that 8 teams gives a more realistic test to see a true NC. But, damn, just don’t lose twice if you are are NC contender. Is that too much to ask?

Regardless, this year seems more muddled than any of the previous 3 playoffs to me in figuring out the best 4. I realize there is more ball to play but there seems to be more parity than usual. You could make a case for any of 8-9 teams right now. Because of this, and of course money more than anything, those who want 8 will get their wish. Sigh.

 

[BuckeyeNation27]

The outcome of the games help everyone decide how good a team really is. You think it's dumb that a win could have less value because the team we beat ended up losing again?

I think it's dumb that somebody else is impacted because we sleep walked against Iowa.

 

[Jaxbuck]

Clemson wouldn't have a strong argument if they lost considering they would have two losses, probably less Top 25 wins, and no conference championship. The only thing Clemson can say is that they didn't get destroyed by Iowa. Miami would have a better argument though, I agree.

Yeah, don't think Clemson has a clearly compelling case but I could see a little bit of head to head between the two teams being influenced by last years drubbing (not saying that it's fair but it's human nature).

Who knows, first things first. Wisky needs to clear the tsun hurdle

 

[BigJim]

I think it's dumb that somebody else is impacted because we sleep walked against Iowa.

My perception of how good we are was downgraded after the Iowa game and thus I think it should be viewed as less impressive for Wisconsin to beat us. To me, our change in ranking appropriately quantifies the change in value (Wisconsin gets credit for beat the #9 team instead of the #5 team or whatever it would be).

 

[Systems_id]

Dont think a 1 loss non ACC champ has a better argument than Ohio State besides "we only have 1 loss and didnt get killed by Iowa) - which given might be enough to sway some people but dont think enough.

Besides that ND win theyve done pretty much nothing else impressive.

The ACC is weak as hell this year with FSU and Louisville crapping the bed. Its literally Clemson and Miami. Va Tech is the 3rd best team and they are meh (just lost to Georgia Tech) 2 ACC teams in the playoff would be a total joke.

True. Should things shake out that way then smoking Notre Dame might not be enough for Miami should OSU destroy a higher ranked Wisconsin team. Only card they could play is they've only lost one game but their SOS is far worse than OSUs in this scenario.

 

[BuckeyeNation27]

My perception of how good we are was downgraded after the Iowa game and thus I think it should be viewed as less impressive for Wisconsin to beat us. To me, our change in ranking appropriately quantifies the change in value (Wisconsin gets credit for beat the #9 team instead of the #5 team or whatever it would be).

I mean...yeah, we obviously have weaknesses. But we're not 30 some points worse than Iowa. Our D isn't give up 55 points against Iowa bad. That whole game was stupid.

Let's say Wisconsin had to play Maryland instead of Michigan this week.....and while they were looking ahead to us, they tripped and got Iowa-ed. Now all of a sudden 2 loss Ohio State isn't as good as 2 loss Clemson........but if Wisconsin beats fictional Maryland, the same 2 loss Ohio State is better than the same 2 loss Clemson? Seems dumb.

 

[BigJim]

I mean...yeah, we obviously have weaknesses. But we're not 30 some points worse than Iowa. Our D isn't give up 55 points against Iowa bad. That whole game was stupid.

Let's say Wisconsin had to play Maryland instead of Michigan this week.....and while they were looking ahead to us, they tripped and got Iowa-ed. Now all of a sudden 2 loss Ohio State isn't as good as 2 loss Clemson........but if Wisconsin beats fictional Maryland, the same 2 loss Ohio State is better than the same 2 loss Clemson? Seems dumb.

I think of it this way -- there are two ways of ranking teams:
1) Based on how good we think teams are (ignores flukiness the best we can)
2) Based purely on actual performance

Lets say OSU beats Iowa 9 of of 10 times that game is played. The Iowa game has minimal impact on #1 and a huge impact on #2.

In my IMO, actual rankings should be heavily weighted toward #2. I personally think quality wins (used to separate similar teams) should be based mostly on #2 as well, but I will admit that I can see your argument that maybe it should be weighted more toward #1.

 

[Systems_id]

I mean...yeah, we obviously have weaknesses. But we're not 30 some points worse than Iowa. Our D isn't give up 55 points against Iowa bad. That whole game was stupid.

Let's say Wisconsin had to play Maryland instead of Michigan this week.....and while they were looking ahead to us, they tripped and got Iowa-ed. Now all of a sudden 2 loss Ohio State isn't as good as 2 loss Clemson........but if Wisconsin beats fictional Maryland, the same 2 loss Ohio State is better than the same 2 loss Clemson? Seems dumb.

Yeah that whole Iowa game was just weird. The defense getting shredded by a terrible Iowa offense only to completely stonewall a better Sparty offense just makes you think the team was either completely exhausted by Penn State or unfocused. Oklahoma doesn't look all that bad either considering their 31 points and 490 yards of offense might go down as one of the LOWEST offensive outputs they've had this season. Their offense could just be that good.

 

[UrbanBuckeye]

Thing that worries me is Bama's run defense has looked pretty vulnerable these past couple of weeks.

Especially with the injuries.

 

[Taosman]

Strength of schedule is a big factor.
And the perception that a team is on a roll and destroying people.

https://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/ranking/schedule-strength-by-other

 

[UrbanBuckeye]

Total chaos, even if Ohio State doesnt make it.

Would love to see -

UGA lose to either GA Tech or Kentucky, then beat Bama in the SECCG

Oklahoma lose to WVU. Leaving a 2 loss Big 12 champ for sure.

Clemson lose to South Carolina and then beat Miami in the ACCCG (or Clemson just beating Miami even if they win out)

Someone besides a 2 loss USC win the Pac 12

Would make for one hell of a mess in that final selection room

I like the way you think. Like I said... If we're not getting in, fuck the committee. Make it as difficult as possible.

 

[UrbanBuckeye]

We're good at 9. We'd jump ND with a win over undefeated Wiscy. Just need Bama, OU, Miami to win their [Mark May].

Which means all but 1 won't. 2015 all over again. On the outside looking in.

I almost feel as if this is karma for getting in last year without a title. I REALLY REALLY hate to compare us to those mutants at PSU, but our whole situation looks pretty much like theirs last year if we were to win the B1G....

-- Last minute win over a #2 team
-- Road loss... blowout
-- 2 losses, 1 to a ranked team, 1 unranked

Further Possibilities:

-- B1G Champs with a win over Wisky
-- Passed over for a non-conference champ

The one thing we do have going for us they didn't is (most likely), one of the best schedules and most wins against ranked teams.

Sucks PSU wasn't ranked #2 at the time we played them as the first set of rankings didn't come out until the following week. Also, their 2nd loss very well could provide us with a way in (we could've gotten passed up same way we did last year). Yet, it makes the win look not as good. Fuckers.

IF we were to get in, it would be another first to mark down for our team in the Playoff era...
2014-- Lowest ranked team to make it initially, worst loss
2016-- First non-conference champ
2017- First 2 loss team?

 

[BuckeyeNation27]

I think of it this way -- there are two ways of ranking teams:
1) Based on how good we think teams are (ignores flukiness the best we can)
2) Based purely on actual performance

Lets say OSU beats Iowa 9 of of 10 times that game is played. The Iowa game has minimal impact on #1 and a huge impact on #2.

In my IMO, actual rankings should be heavily weighted toward #2. I personally think quality wins (used to separate similar teams) should be based mostly on #2 as well, but I will admit that I can see your argument that maybe it should be weighted more toward #1.

Yeah I'm not saying we should put it all on either 1 or 2.....just the weirdness of how we need Wisconsin to beat Michigan or else we won't be considered as good really bugs me.