Official 2016 College Football Thread

**stealthee** · 12-05-2016, 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by Alan92RTTT

Then why is Pitt not ranked higher than Clemson and USC not Ranked higher then Washington?

Neither one of them won their conference, or even went to their conference championship, same as OSU.

When they were interviewing the representative from the committee after the decision was made public the guy couldn't even look straight at the camera. He looked scared shitless. IMO they got Alabama (obviously), Clemson, and Washington right. They all won their conference/conference championship. I would bet money they put OSU 3 and Washington 4 because they knew if they put OSU 4 that they would have to explain harder why they were 4 over PSU, who not only beat them head to head but won their division AND their conference. They also didn't want Bama destroying them in the 1st round.

Two years ago the Big 12 was told that TCU was dropped from the CFP because they didn't have a conference championship and winning a conference championship is important. The Big 10 DOES have a conference championship and OSU didn't even go to it. Is it not important for the Big 10?

Flat out, they got it wrong.

**AdamVR4** · 12-05-2016, 06:19 PM

I wasn't going to be overly surprised if OSU got the TCU treatment, but there was no 1 loss replacement team. Put any B12 team (other than OU or Texas) in OSU's situation, and you know the committee is going to find out how that ass takes the length lol

The thing that bothers me the most about this system is that it still rewards soft schedules and just can't account for any nuance. It's all so frustratingly binary. "Team A only lost once, so they're clearly superior to 2 loss Team B."

Michigan losing at OSU in overtime is not proof that OSU is better. OSU losing at Penn state in OT is not proof that PSU is better. The road teams shouldn't be treated like they lost these games IMO.

Washington proved you don't need to beat anybody good OOC. Or hell, anybody good at all. When Washington state (they lost to Portland state week 1) and Colorado (perennial 2 to 4 win team that appeared to have given up on footbaw) are your best wins, sorry, you haven't proven much.

**DK77** · 12-05-2016, 09:35 PM

Yeah I would probably put Penn State in over Washington and leave Ohio State in, if anything.

Ultimately this just further proves that we really need an 8 team playoff. IMO it should be the Power 5 conference champions are automatically in, the highest ranked Group of 5 team is in, and 2 at large bids.

Comparing this to the BCS, at least 3 teams that are somewhat equally deserving will all get a chance to get rekt by Bama instead of only 1.

**stealthee** · 12-05-2016, 10:49 PM

While Washington's OOC schedule was weak they did win their conference. Ohio State did not. I don't understand how anyone can argue for OSU without a conference championship. If you are going to have 4 different conferences then you need the conference champions from those conferences.

I disagree on needing 8. If it goes to 8 then you are going to have 9 and 10 bitching. Then it will go to 12, and 13 and 14 will bitch, then we will end up having a tournament of 64 and the regular season won't mean shit.

Look at basketball. 64 wasn't enough so they went to 65, and now they have 68

**DK77** · 12-06-2016, 12:15 AM

The problem with 4 is there are 5 power conferences. Someone has to be on the outside looking in. I do agree about people always wanting more, but if they go to 8, they can have a legitimate selection process and get rid of some of the subjectivity of college football which is what we have all been bitching about. I suppose they could do 6 teams, and run it like one of the conferences of the NFL where rank #1 and #2 get a "bye" and the teams that get in are the Power 5 conference champions plus the highest ranked Group of 5 school. I'd be ok with that as well. I like the At Large bids of the 8 team system though for situations where more than one team from a conference is deserving of getting a shot (or an independent school since they would be in a weird position in my proposed 6 team playoff).

**Echo419** · 12-06-2016, 07:00 AM

it was a popularity issue and that's it. OSU will draw more viewers and more people will travel to watch them than Penn. simple as that. well the could count losses as the most important thing because not only did Penn beat OSU but they won more games due to conference championship. there's really no excuse because if they're going to do this then we might as well dissolve conferences and just base the bowls on merch sales.

**Alan92RTTT** · 12-06-2016, 02:28 PM

Originally Posted by Echo419

it was a popularity issue and that's it.

LOL. If that was the case they'd have found a way to keep MI in the top 4.

**Echo419** · 12-06-2016, 02:37 PM

Originally Posted by Alan92RTTT

LOL. If that was the case they'd have found a way to keep MI in the top 4.

not popular enough.

besides I was referring to why OSU got in over Penn. popularity, simple as that.

**stealthee** · 01-02-2017, 12:31 AM

Originally Posted by HilbillyHomeboy

It will take care of itself, imo. While Ohio State is a good team, I believe they are overrated. Probably looking at the exact same NC game as last year. Super exciting...

Jeremy

Called it.

The destruction of OSU was oh so glorious to watch. Wonder what Mike's excuse will be now.