The Polls (AP, Coaches, & CFP, etc.)

[OSU_Buckguy]

I'm saying that 2 of the 4 years OSU has been fucked...

i do agree that we were fucked last year. we were fucked 55-24 by iowa.

i don't agree, though, that we were fucked in 2015. oklahoma got in over us. let's compare...

wins over teams ranked at time of the game

osu - #12 ttun
ou - #23 tenn, #23 wvu, #4 baylor, #11 tcu, #9 oksu


but i do agree that we were fucked a second time during the playoff years: 31-0 by clemson.

 

[Jaxbuck]

i do agree that we were fucked last year. we were fucked 55-24 by iowa.

i don't agree, though, that we were fucked in 2015. oklahoma got in over us. let's compare...

wins over teams ranked at time of the game

osu - #12 ttun
ou - #23 tenn, #23 wvu, #4 baylor, #11 tcu, #9 oksu


but i do agree that we were fucked a second time during the playoff years: 31-0 by clemson.

They used the record to block us in 2015 when we had the best team but 1 blemish

Then turn around and use the "eye test" in '16 and '17

The committee is more fucked than the BCS formula was.

 

[jwinslow]

If that's the case, then our 2014 National Championship is in jeopardy.

There have been a lot of years where the worthiness of their invitees was questionable. That one is certainly a valid suggestion.

The fact remains that under the current system, bama has to lose a lot more games than anyone else to be disqualified, even if they don't actually beat anyone of consequence. That's a problem and it would be if OSU were the annual beneficiary.

 

[ScriptOhio]

 

[kujirakira]

i don't begrudge the committee for last year, though. osu had more losses than bama, and bama didn't lose by 31 to a team that had 5 losses heading into the playoff berth decision. furthermore, it was the committee who bumped us up to #4 for 2014 when the ap had us at #5.


yes, the committee put msu in the 2016 playoff over psu. are you saying that psu deserved a spot over bama, clemson, or oklahoma? i don't at all see the 2016 playoff as one where the big ten was slighted.

I begrudge them and don't think Ohio State should have gone. Alabama was 3rd in their own conference... what nonsense is that ? And it's not like their loss was close or controversial. There were several other teams that deserved to go a lot more than a 3rd place team with just 8 conference games and FCS opponents.

 

[OSU_Buckguy]

I begrudge them and don't think Ohio State should have gone. Alabama was 3rd in their own conference... what nonsense is that ? And it's not like their loss was close or controversial. There were several other teams that deserved to go a lot more than a 3rd place team with just 8 conference games and FCS opponents.

so who deserved to get in over bama if not osu? auburn, with their 3 losses? wisconsin, whose résumé was no better than bama's? usc, who played in a lackluster conference and had 2 losses, one of them being by 35 points?

i guess the point is that if you're a program that didn't make clear its case for a playoff berth, don't complain when you're left out. osu could have not lost by 31 to a middling team. wisconsin could have scheduled a good conference opponent. usc could have not been shellacked on a national stage. auburn could have not lost 3 games. so, yeah, if i'm looking at a bunch of programs with roughly similar résumés, i'm defaulting to arguably the best coach of all time who is running arguably the best program of all time that is arguably on the best run of all time. to be sure, bama under saban ain't losing 31-0 in the playoff.

 

[kujirakira]

wisconsin, whose résumé was no better than bama's?

UCF - was a perfect year to throw a G5 member into the playoff.
Wisconsin played 10 P5 opponents ... with no FCS. So that's flat out wrong. Their only loss was a CCG that Bama dodged by losing to Auburn.
USC played 12 P5 opponents ... with no FCS. I'd rather put a 2 loss conference victor that scheduled aggressively than a 3rd place 1 loss that hid behind a weak schedule and FCS opponents.
Auburn. If you're going to send a 2nd SEC team, should have been the one that split 1-1 against Georgia (and still held the aggregate score).

 

[BuckeyeNation27]

i do agree that we were fucked last year. we were fucked 55-24 by iowa.

i don't agree, though, that we were fucked in 2015. oklahoma got in over us. let's compare...

wins over teams ranked at time of the game

osu - #12 ttun
ou - #23 tenn, #23 wvu, #4 baylor, #11 tcu, #9 oksu


but i do agree that we were fucked a second time during the playoff years: 31-0 by clemson.

Cmon now. Ranked at the time of the game?

 

[OSU_Buckguy]

Cmon now. Ranked at the time of the game?

i didn't write it that because of trickery. it's merely because it's far easier to note the ranking from the wiki page than it is to cross-check each and every opponent with its final ranking. regardless, without checking first, care to wager that oklahoma still faced more opponents who were ranked in the final poll than did ohio state?

 

[BuckeyeNation27]

i didn't write it that because of trickery. it's merely because it's far easier to note the ranking from the wiki page than it is to cross-check each and every opponent with its final ranking. regardless, without checking first, care to wager that oklahoma still faced more opponents who were ranked in the final poll than did ohio state?

Nope. I just need to abolish that line of thinking. Reason number one being that Tennessee gets used as a legit game.

 

[Jaxbuck]

I can live with a 4 team playoff but let's go back to a BCS type formula for the rankings. The idea of putting a group of humans behind closed doors with no discernible criteria other than "pick the four best teams" is nuts when the definition of "best" changes week to week and year to year. A formula at least gives some transparency. That said, /playoff talk for me.

The lesson I have learned in stages over these past four years is to go back to basics. College football has the single greatest regular season in all of sport. I am going to cure myself of the NC or bust mentality. The only thing that matters is winning 1) The Game and 2) The B1G.

I have seen 2 NC's in the 30 some odd years I've been watching the Buckeyes. Using that as the measurement of enjoyment is just stupid (speaking of myself, not others).

 

[kujirakira]

2015 - I don't think we got screwed. We lost to MSU and therefore lost the conference champ tie-in. Sparty went.
2016 - What's lost in all the comparisons with '17 Bama and PSU crying is that we didn't go over PSU -- we went in place of BXII champ OU for beating that ass in their home. Our OOC schedule and the way it played out is what got us in.
2017 - Bama flat out shouldn't have been in the conversation. This sets a very clear precedent that reverses previous trends... all the scheduling we've seen since 2014 where SEC teams are at least putting other P5 schools - and the better ones at that - on the schedule (even if it's a "neutral" home game) goes down the toilet.

With Bama, the precedent going forward is to schedule as many cupcakes as possible, put up obscene numbers against them so it raises ESPiN's "power" rankings, and have the best record at the end of the year... even if you didn't have a single win against a good team (and Bama didn't).

 

[OSU_Buckguy]

I'd rather put a 2 loss conference victor that scheduled aggressively than a 3rd place 1 loss that hid behind a weak schedule and FCS opponents.

in regards to bama's schedule, they didn't play fcs opponents. they played a single fcs opponent. not a good opponent? absolutely. is mercer really any worse, though, than the non-conference doormats most top teams schedule each and every year? was mercer really that much worse than the 2-9 kent state we beat 66-0 in 2014? moreover, i don't think bama was exactly "hiding" with their schedule. florida state, fresno state, and colorado state form a pretty solid trio. it just turned out bad because then-#3 fsu decided to suck.

listen, i'm not hear to argue "for" one particular playoff berth spot over another. these are all debates we had last season. the particulars are tedious. my point is if you don't make your case and make it absolute, then you have only yourself to blame if you don't make it in. don't lose by 31 to a middling team like we did. don't lose by 35 like usc did. don't lose 3 games like auburn did. don't schedule non-powerhouses like wisconsin did.

 

[shetuck]

... It's worth noting the initial voting for the preseason poll that had Ohio State ranked No. 3 was done before Urban Meyer's paid administrative and announced three-game suspension.

Somebody set me straight... is it normal/sensible to tie a ranking to expected future performance rather than on-the-field performance? A coach's administrative status figures into a preseason poll? So now, even though takes care of its business the ranking drops because, umm, presumably the fact that Urban Meyer can't coach outweighs the team's actual performance on the field?

Maybe we should start coaches comments as a way to indicate whether a team will be able to handle upcoming opponents. No?

How does tsun even stand a look in that case? If a coach can influence a ranking, how is Hairball allowed to even appear in public?

I'm being serious... this isn't a rant. Just a WTF!?!

 

[OSU_Buckguy]

I can live with a 4 team playoff but let's go back to a BCS type formula for the rankings.

i think it's stupid to have 4 playoff spots when there are 5 major conferences. there will always be issues whether it's a committee determining contenders or if it's a combination of humans and computers determining contenders. the only reasonable decision, in my opinion, is to expand the playoff to 8 spots composed of this:

1. 5 automatic bids (i.e, conference champs) from majors
2. 2 at-large
3. 1 non-major ranked above n-th place or 1 more at-large if there is no worthy non-major


of course, all of this has been hashed, rehashed, and triple-hashed. until then, it's up to each program to leave no shadow of a doubt.