the two losses seem to be focal in analysts discussions. they refer to the massive blowout by UM and the loss to Pitt which was smaller than the game played out. only a couple times have i heard to the state of the PSU team during that stage. UMich we had many players out and UM scored last two TDs late to make the score look even worse.
analysts continue to point to PSU losses
- Thread starter blion72
- Start date
Gotta hand it to Pitt. They may end up ruining the PSU season. Losing to a team of that low a reputation is a bad thing.
I'd love to ask them how Clemson maintains its high rank after losing to that same Pitt team....at home?!!
Are teams not allowed to get better as the season goes on?
Are teams not allowed to get better as the season goes on?
Just about every team tries to explain away losses. 39 point losses are nearly impossible to explain away. If we win the BigTen I think we make the final four, but if we don't get in, that blowout will be the reason why.
The Pitt loss will not ruin our season. The 39 point loss to Michigan is the killer. If anyone we were competing against had a similar blowout loss we would shouting it from the rooftops as a reason they should be kept out.
OK...but I wouldn't call it "ruining our season". Pitt's got a good team, they'll play in a major bowl (with few people in the seats).
Fact is, we lost two games. UM will probably lose Saturday with their injured QB but nobody cares, just like they don't care about our 14 injured linebackers when we played Pitt and UM.
We win, we go to a NYD bowl...I am good. We win, have a little luck, we play in the B1G championship>Rose Bowl>nat championship series. What's not to like?
Not if the committee goes by the rules that have been set for them. According to the committee's protocols, margin of victory isn't supposed to matter. A loss is a loss, by how much is irrelevant.
I knew someone would swallow the bait. I was hoping it would be a Pitt troll.
The Pitt loss is still a big minus for PSU.
I suspect that margin of victory might not matter but it sounds like margin of defeat might
I just don't agree.I knew someone would swallow the bait. I was hoping it would be a Pitt troll.
I think it is more of the UM loss due to the point differential. Pitt is an average team and a crappy ACC Coastal division and they still have 4 losses. We won that game going away of we played now.
One loss vs two is the difference per the committee. Losses matter.
#1 is undefeated; 2-5 have one loss; 6-10 have two losses.
Need Clemson or Washington to lose or shoot for the Rose Bowl.
Eh, we lost to a shitty nobody team, a team that nobody respects, a program that is knee-deep in shit at its very best. We also got beat soundly by a blue-blood team.
It's true. No arguing with the results. Any team that loses to a shitstorm team like Pitt, a program covered in filth and detritus like Pitt, is bound to suffer some consequences. We lose to the likes of a crappy, low-life, low-rent, D-2 level program like Pitt, and we are bound to suffer.
(Anybody see what I did there?)
And at the end of the day, we win our next two games, and none of it matters. Pitt is still a shitstorm program covered in filth, Michigan is still a blue-blood program, and we are probably in the goddamned playoffs no matter what anybody says. I defy anybody to keep us out. It will never, ever happen.
We may not deserve to be in the final four, in some measure, but by God if we win the Big Ten they will have no ****ing choice.
It's true. No arguing with the results. Any team that loses to a shitstorm team like Pitt, a program covered in filth and detritus like Pitt, is bound to suffer some consequences. We lose to the likes of a crappy, low-life, low-rent, D-2 level program like Pitt, and we are bound to suffer.
(Anybody see what I did there?)
And at the end of the day, we win our next two games, and none of it matters. Pitt is still a shitstorm program covered in filth, Michigan is still a blue-blood program, and we are probably in the goddamned playoffs no matter what anybody says. I defy anybody to keep us out. It will never, ever happen.
We may not deserve to be in the final four, in some measure, but by God if we win the Big Ten they will have no ****ing choice.
It's a moving target, in some ways. Someone can argue the relative strength or weakness of a team by using any one of the following: number of losses, division championships, quality wins, quality loss, bad losses. overall resume, improvement through the season, strength of schedule, margin of victory, and (my personal pet peeve) eye test. The whole playoff committee isn't any better than the coaches poll or any other poll. It's still a popularity contest based on what you think makes that team popular (or better than others in this context). If it's not going to be conference champions, then it should be hard criteria, not opinion.
Yet the USC loss to Alabama -- 52-6 -- is not a problem for the Trojans because they have won 7 in a row. Granted Michigan is not Alabama, but the USC game was at a neutral field, while the Michigan-PSUn game was in Ann Arbor.
Of course it's a problem, or part of one. They're 12th and no one is sugesting they should get in ahead of us.
Championships matter too. If it comes down to it, the Big Ten Championship is going to weigh at least as much as Ohio State's one less victory. Then it will come down to head-to-head and we own that tiebreaker over them. But, for purposes of argument, let's assume that the committee believes that Ohio State is the #2 team no matter what. In that case, our win over the #2 team in the country, should make up for the one additional loss that we have when compared to Clemson or Washington. We'd also have a likely win over #7 Wisconsin. Neither Clemson nor Washington could point to comparable wins. Clemson's best win would be #11 Louisville while Washington's best win would be over #9 Colorado (plus we'd have a nine game win streak which would be much better that the three and five game streaks the other two would have). We'd be champs of easily the best division in football and champs of arguably the best conference with a win over the #2 team in the land. I don't see how they keep us out
Last edited:
While it may not be hard criteria, what they do have is fairly firm. It eliminates several of the things that you talk about such as eye tests or margins of victory.
Selection Committee Protocols
By "no one" I guess you mean no one outside the halls of ESPN. I didn't mean to imply that you had suggested USC; however, I have heard/read that many "ESPiNners" are touting USC as the "hottest team in the country" and as "the team that nobody wants to play right now." After all, the Trojans' 7-game winning streak is much more impressive than Penn State's 7-game winning streak.
I knew someone would swallow the bait. I was hoping it would be a Pitt troll.
Is it also a big minus for Clemson?
"Analysts also predicted that there would be no stock market crash" way back when.
SCREW THEM!
As Galloway said last night. If those losses mattered so much they wouldn't have PSU at 7. They already have them factored in.
I also heard some analyst arguing for USC being one of the best teams right now. I'm not wanting to have that debate, but rather point out that losing is losing period. Sure this team likely beats Pitt now and whoops them at home, and keeps it close with UM. There is no preseason, it's about the entire body of work. Win out and hope for the best.
What impact could Temple have? They are one win from the AAC title game against 25th ranked Navy.
You forgot that we got blown out by a team that is k
Nope, you can drink that koolaid if you want, but it's a popularity contest. There is no way that 20 people in a conference room can decide who is the best team or the best 4 teams. It can only be decided by 85 players and however many coaches when they face an opponent and one of them scores more points than the other. Second best is to assign a known, specific point value to a home win, road win, championship win, non-power five win, etc., which at least would eliminate any potential for bias, although still somewhat subjective.
This thread speaks to the need of a.............8 team playoff. 5 Conference champions and 3 at large bids. Seems so simply, yet the powers that be always seem to be 10 years behind the curve.
Exactly! Been on board with this idea since the 4 team BS came about lol
Big 12 needs to get on board with the championship game, and every winner of the power 5 conferences deserve a chance for something bigger.
I have also heard statements like we have wins that don't "look good". one comment around Rutgers was that all our points came late and we struggled. Herbie made the comment that we are leading the nation in negative rush plays - so something seriously wrong with OL that would make it incapable of playing top level team. tOSU loss is also being portrayed as just luck and flukes.
Latest posts
-
FB Recruiting Penn State QB target Bryce Baker set to decide Saturday
- Latest: Crusher1950
-
