College Football Playoff (2016-2017 Season)

[Jaxbuck]

1994 had 3 bad days, and then lost its bowl game as well to finish 9-4

oooohhh Mr fact fucking checker shows up


see my Woodford disclaimer (whichever one of you you are)

 

[Dryden]

selfishly as an OSU fan, think of how many great teams we'd have like to seen get a chance in a playoff that were left out because of one bad day

...

*fuck John fucking Cooper straight in his big game choking hillbilly fucking ass

So your wish is to see those Cooper coached teams in more big games?

 

[Dryden]

Jax, please tell little Jax to kick you in the nuts.

 

[Jaxbuck]

So your wish is to see those Cooper coached teams in more big games?

1998 team would have won out despite him, of that I am convinced.

 

[LordJeffBuck]

lSpeaking of ridiculous B1G tiebreakers;

Watching The Game'82. tsun has 0 losses in B1G play, OSU 1. tsun had already secured B1G title and RB because even if OSU won head to head (they did) the tie breaker was overall win %. So when the smoke cleared each team had 1 loss in conference play, OSU had defeated tsun by 2 TD's head to head and tsun went to the RB

This was the result of a weird scheduling quirk.

In 1982, Michigan and Ohio State both finished the regular season with identical 8-3-0 records. However, Michigan (and 7 other Big Ten teams) played nine conference games, while Ohio State (and Iowa) played only eight. Michigan lost to Ohio State, 24-14, to finish with a conference record of 8-1-0. Despite beating Michigan head-to-head, Ohio State had a previous loss to Wisconsin and finished with a conference record of 7-1-0. Hence, Michigan went to the Rose Bowl even though Ohio State had the same overall record and a win in head-to-head competition because Michigan had the better conference record.

 

[Jaxbuck]

This was the result of a weird scheduling quirk.

In 1982, Michigan and Ohio State both finished the regular season with identical 8-3-0 records. However, Michigan (and 7 other Big Ten teams) played nine conference games, while Ohio State (and Iowa) played only eight. Michigan lost to Ohio State, 24-14, to finish with a conference record of 8-1-0. Despite beating Michigan head-to-head, Ohio State had a previous loss to Wisconsin and finished with a conference record of 7-1-0. Hence, Michigan went to the Rose Bowl even though Ohio State had the same overall record and a win in head-to-head competition because Michigan had the better conference record.

 

[Jagdaddy]

This was the result of a weird scheduling quirk.

In 1982, Michigan and Ohio State both finished the regular season with identical 8-3-0 records. However, Michigan (and 7 other Big Ten teams) played nine conference games, while Ohio State (and Iowa) played only eight. Michigan lost to Ohio State, 24-14, to finish with a conference record of 8-1-0. Despite beating Michigan head-to-head, Ohio State had a previous loss to Wisconsin and finished with a conference record of 7-1-0. Hence, Michigan went to the Rose Bowl even though Ohio State had the same overall record and a win in head-to-head competition because Michigan had the better conference record.

If that was a 9-7 or 12-7 (something like that) home loss to Wisconsin, I went to that game. In fact, it might have been the first time I saw the Buckeyes play in person.

Edit: Nope the 12-7 shit show was November 17, 1985. And it wasn't my first game after all.

 

[Zurp]

2. Villanova's BBall championship and Florida's World Series are examples of the flaws in expanded playoffs - not their strengths. The bigger the playoff the greater the chance the "wrong" team wins. That is a mathematical certainty, not an opinion.

Agreed. People bring up that the more teams that make it into the playoffs means that there are more teams fighting to make it into the playoffs, and that makes it more exciting for more people. I buy that, but I don't buy that it's good for the sport. The champion should be the best team, and a team that lost 3+ times shouldn't be considered the "best team" (unless it was just a whacky season where everyone finished with 3+ losses, and then maybe they should just pack that season in and hope for better luck next year). I don't care that USC had the "wrong" quarterback starting the beginning of the year - those games counted and they lost 3 of them. They may be a great team, but they lost 3 times. I say "OUT!" Same with Penn State - you lost to Pitt and by 39 to Michigan.

3. The goal of the committee is NOT to get the best four teams into the playoff. It is to ensure that the best team gets in. Even if PSU should somehow win the BIG (they won't) I don't believe they belong in a discussion about top 4. They certainly have no business in a discussion about top 1.

Meh. I think their job is to get the best four teams. But I agree about Penn State. As I said, they shouldn't be in the discussion now.

 

[LordJeffBuck]

If that was a 9-7 or 12-7 (something like that) home loss to Wisconsin, I went to that game. In fact, it might have been the first time I saw the Buckeyes play in person.

Edit: Nope the 12-7 [Mark May] show was November 17, 1985. And it wasn't my first game after all.

On October 9, 1982, Ohio State lost to Wisconsin by the score of 6-0.

It was the second most recent shutout suffered by Ohio State, the most recent being a 28-0 whitewashing by Michigan on November 20, 1993.

 

[DiamondBuck]

A few thoughts -

1. Folks arguing for an 8 or 16 team playoff need to remember this is not being played as a video game. These are real kids taking real hits. Too many hits over an already too long season. And in the playoffs they are big boy hits - not Youngstown St or Rutgers hits. The more you expand the more likely at least one of the teams in the CG will be playing without one or more of the stars that got them there.

2. Villanova's BBall championship and Florida's World Series are examples of the flaws in expanded playoffs - not their strengths. The bigger the playoff the greater the chance the "wrong" team wins. That is a mathematical certainty, not an opinion.

3. The goal of the committee is NOT to get the best four teams into the playoff. It is to ensure that the best team gets in. Even if PSU should somehow win the BIG (they won't) I don't believe they belong in a discussion about top 4. They certainly have no business in a discussion about top 1.

4. The current approach is about as good as you can reasonably get. Until we get a committee full of bone heads I think the way they are doing it is spot on and have agreed with their top four pretty much every week since their first vote 3 years ago.

5. Besides - as has been pointed out - controversy is half the fun.

Disagree. Their mission, however imperfectly executed, includes selecting the four "best" teams.

How to select the four best teams To compete for the College Football National Championship (Adopted unanimously by the BCS Group June 20, 2012)

Ranking football teams is an art, not a science. Football is popular in some measure because the outcome of a game between reasonably matched teams is so often decided by emotional commitment, momentum, injuries and the “unexpected bounce of the ball.” In any ranking system, perfection or consensus is not possible and the physical impact of the game on student athletes prevents elaborate playoff systems of multiple games. For purposes of any four team playoff, the process will inevitably need to select the four best teams from among several with legitimate claims to participate


http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/selection-committee-protocol

 

[Oh8ch]

Don't want to slip into semantics, but the reason we had a BCS and now a playoff is because we want to crown a "champion". While the first step in that process is to select the four "best" teams, I would argue that the only reason to do so is to ensure we have the "best" team in that group.

Of course, that still doesn't mean the "best" team will win, but it allows us to pretend the winner is the best team.

 

[DiamondBuck]

Don't want to slip into semantics, but the reason we had a BCS and now a playoff is because we want to crown a "champion". While the first step in that process is to select the four "best" teams, I would argue that the only reason to do so is to ensure we have the "best" team in that group.

Of course, that still doesn't mean the "best" team will win, but it allows us to pretend the winner is the best team.

Agree. There is a format where the participant pool size, injury attrition and statistical probabilities are co-optimized to produce the "best" team. Too big and the "best" team may fall victim to an anomalous result, i.e. lose to an inferior team. Too small and there is increased probability that the "best" team is excluded from competing.

 

[MD Buckeye]

A few thoughts -

1. Folks arguing for an 8 or 16 team playoff need to remember this is not being played as a video game. These are real kids taking real hits. Too many hits over an already too long season. And in the playoffs they are big boy hits - not Youngstown St or Rutgers hits. The more you expand the more likely at least one of the teams in the CG will be playing without one or more of the stars that got them there.

Not to mention the families of those players involved in the playoffs. The cost of attending games back to back to back to back weeks, potentially going from one side of the country to the other, would be ridiculous.

 

[Wingate1217]

On October 9, 1982, Ohio State lost to Wisconsin by the score of 6-0.

It was the second most recent shutout suffered by Ohio State, the most recent being a 28-0 whitewashing by Michigan on November 20, 1993.

Yes that was a miserable day. If I remember correctly it rainef what seemed like the entire game and the offense was very predictable. Run, run, pass, punt.....

 

[RB07OSU]

Not to mention the families of those players involved in the playoffs. The cost of attending games back to back to back to back weeks, potentially going from one side of the country to the other, would be ridiculous.

I feel like 6 teams is perfect. Reward the top two teams with a bye, the rest have to win three games to win it all. Maybe reduce the regular season by one game, especially with the conference championships...pretty easy to eliminate one cream puff in the non-conference and call it good.