And the committee chose Ohio State because

[HangTen Lion]

When their fan base buys shirts that read, "keep calm and beat Penn" maybe this troll's posts are representative of the fans. Not sure but seems that way.[/QUOTE

LA has a lot of bandwagon fans that have never stepped foot on a college campus..

 

[Upperrwestsidetrojan]

Doesn't mean they got the right teams either. G'night.

true. it is a guessing game. but it is not like psu was blowing out good teams at the end of the year. psu is a good team, but far from dominant. cant you tell that by watching them?

 

[nitlion6]

Nobody is defending the decision. This is a classic case of people talking past each other. You are arguing from the point of how the committee should work. The "defenders" are explaining how the committee actually works.

If the argument is simply how the committee should work, then I agree with you. However, that's not reality. The reality is that we have a system that is flawed from its conception. It's the old saying, garbage in, garbage out.

Not sure that is accurate.
The way the committee did work, up to this year, was you needed to win your conference. Granted the sample size is small, but that is how it did work.

Again, the sample size is small, but hopefully someone has noticed the probable folly in taking a conference also ran over a better playing improving conference champion.

If there was any debate to whether or not Ohio State belonged in the playoffs - last night answered the question with a very emphatic "NO!"

 

[Upperrwestsidetrojan]

Let me be blunt: OSU "earned" sh*t. They were invited based on opinions. It's not a true playoff. It's an invitational dummy.

and based on having onel total loss to a good psu team at the psu home stadium on a fluke play. psu won the game, but were outplayed by osu. and the rest of the osu resume was better than psu's. their overall body of work was more impressive than psu's.

 

[YorkCoLion]

true. it is a guessing game. but it is not like psu was blowing out good teams at the end of the year. psu is a good team, but far from dominant. cant you tell that by watching them?

PSU 41 - Iowa 14

Next week. Iowa 14 - Michigan 13

Iowa is a decent team. PSU blew them out.

You really have made it a habit to be wrong. Being a contrarian in every argument doesn't make you appear smart, just so you know.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

true. it is a guessing game. but it is not like psu was blowing out good teams at the end of the year. psu is a good team, but far from dominant. cant you tell that by watching them?

Could you tell OSU was going to be blown out by Clemson? Why are you here?

 

[Upperrwestsidetrojan]

Well, after Monday, one of us is gonna have to shut their mouths!

if psu beats usc it will prove that psu is a good team who beat another good(not great team). it will also just prove that the b 10 conf is average as your conf. will have probably gone 4 and 6 or 5 and 5 in bowls. if psu beats sc badly it will prove that they were possibly a top 4 team. agree with that. if usc crushes psu then the reverse will be true. can we agree on that?

 

[pandaczar12]

Lol. Ohio State's 11-1 record trumps Penn State's 11-2 record because they played essentially the same schedules.

Ironically both PSU and OSU have the same record now, but PSU has a head to head win and the conference championship. Most people knew what the result would be before OSU was put into the playoff. Now the OSU fans understand too. Unfortunately Penn State couldn't save OSU the embarrassment.

 

[pandaczar12]

if psu beats usc it will prove that psu is a good team who beat another good(not great team). it will also just prove that the b 10 conf is average as your conf. will have probably gone 4 and 6 or 5 and 5 in bowls. if psu beats sc badly it will prove that they were possibly a top 4 team. agree with that. if usc crushes psu then the reverse will be true. can we agree on that?

We explained to you in another thread how you can't just look at bowl results to assess a conference. Why aren't you listening?!?!?

 

[BoulderFish]

and based on having total total loss to a good psu team at the psu home stadium on a fluke play. psu won the game, but were outplayed by osu. and the rest of the osu resume was better than psu's. their overall body of work was more impressive than psu's.

I was having my doubts about your intelligence -- and especially football IQ -- but now you've made it clear. You don't have much.

 

[nitlion6]

and based on having total total loss to a good psu team at the psu home stadium on a fluke play. psu won the game, but were outplayed by osu. and the rest of the osu resume was better than psu's. their overall body of work was more impressive than psu's.

Geez. One of the selling points of a playoff is it is earned on the field and the time wasted on "best" "resume'" was supposed to be history.

 

[pandaczar12]

What is more pathetic, Ohio State's effort last night? Or their fans here trying to justify their inclusion into the playoff? If OSU really deserved to be in the playoff, their fans wouldn't need to come here and convince us.

 

[Upperrwestsidetrojan]

PSU 41 - Iowa 14

Next week. Iowa 14 - Michigan 13

Iowa is a decent team. PSU blew them out.

You really have made it a habit to be wrong. Being a contrarian in every argument doesn't make you appear smart, just so you know.

you people love head to head. how about psu vs mich. didn't mich qb get hurt towards the end of the yr? which games?

 

[pandaczar12]

I was having my doubts about your intelligence -- and especially football IQ -- but now you've made it clear. You don't have much.

There was plenty of time left even of OSU made that FG for PSU to do what they did all season... pull out the win in the 4th quarter. Saying that it was a "fluke" shows he has no idea what he is talking about. PSU was DOMINATING OSU in the second half. Even if the game went to OT, I am 100% sure PSU pulls it out.

 

[Upperrwestsidetrojan]

Geez. One of the selling points of a playoff is it is earned on the field and the time wasted on "best" "resume'" was supposed to be history.

not best historical resume. osu looked better this yr overall. they looked like the best team in the conf.

 

[BoulderFish]

and based on having onel total loss to a good psu team at the psu home stadium on a fluke play. psu won the game, but were outplayed by osu. and the rest of the osu resume was better than psu's. their overall body of work was more impressive than psu's.

But is the goal to have the four best "bodies of work," or to have the four best teams in the playoff?

If the goal is to crown the best "body of work" with the title of "national champion," rather than the best team with the title of "national champion," then that is a problem.

Who out there doesn't want the "national champion" to be that year's best team? Are there actually people that think it's better to determine who has this so-called best "body of work" than it is to determine who is the best team?

 

[Upperrwestsidetrojan]

Guess we will find out tomorrow, typical loud-mouthed Trojan. Hope your 3 loss team that should not be in the Rose Bowl in the first place is able to back up all the $hit you talk about PSU.

you dont read my posts. i predicted a psu win about 50 times.

 

[pandaczar12]

you people love head to head. how about psu vs mich. didn't mich qb get hurt towards the end of the yr? which games?

He only missed the Indiana game. Michigan's QB played against Iowa and OSU... try again. PSU was down a ton of defenders when they played AT Michigan. There is no comparison!

 

[BoulderFish]

There was plenty of time left even of OSU made that FG for PSU to do what they did all season... pull out the win in the 4th quarter. Saying that it was a "fluke" shows he has no idea what he is talking about. PSU was DOMINATING OSU in the second half. Even if the game went to OT, I am 100% sure PSU pulls it out.

If he had any football IQ, he would understand that the only reason the score was as close as it was is because of fluke plays that went in OSU's favor. Without those actual fluke plays, we win that game by two scores.

 

[lionville]

not best historical resume. osu looked better this yr overall. they looked like the best team in the conf.

Really? Did you watch their game vs a piss poor MSU? Did you watch that shit show vs Michigan?

They were exposed by PSU as a bad offensive team. Everybody knew it but the idiots in clown suits who set up last night's shit show.

 

[demlion]

but clem only had one total loss. psu had two including a blowout loss. usc was the hottest team in the country at the end of the yr. we are favored against psu. but there is no way we should be in the playoffs. even if we had won our conf champ we should not be allowed in. our resume is not great. we have proven we are beatable more than once. we got blown out once. wait a second, this sounds just like psu. interesting.

So losing to Pitt does not matter. Not what your little buddy said.

 

[Upperrwestsidetrojan]

Let me try to state this as simply as possible, because some of our visitors seem to have trouble with what seems obvious to us, but might be nuance to them.

Ok, here we go...

No team that did not win its conference should get in the playoff unless the the team that won said conference also got in.

So, under your hypothetical, maybe/probably Penn State would not be in. BUT, if not, neither should anyone else from that conference.

If it is determined that the winner of a particular conference isn't worthy of the playoff, then neither is any team that couldn't even win that conference.

Get it now?

i understand your point. you would need an 8 team playoff for that.

 

[Upperrwestsidetrojan]

But is the goal to have the four best "bodies of work," or to have the four best teams in the playoff?

If the goal is to crown the best "body of work" with the title of "national champion," rather than the best team with the title of "national champion," then that is a problem.

Who out there doesn't want the "national champion" to be that year's best team? Are there actually people that think it's better to determine who has this so-called best "body of work" than it is to determine who is the best team?

4 best teams. i feel they picked the best teams. i believe that on a neutral field osu and mich would beat beat psu 7 out of 10 times. after the top 4 i feel that fsu and mich were the next best after that. then psu and usc. vegas feels that way too, but puts usc ahead of psu.

 

[Upperrwestsidetrojan]

Really? Did you watch their game vs a piss poor MSU? Did you watch that shit show vs Michigan?

They were exposed by PSU as a bad offensive team. Everybody knew it but the idiots in clown suits who set up last night's shit show.

not a bad offense, and up and down offense.

 

[Upperrwestsidetrojan]

So losing to Pitt does not matter. Not what your little buddy said.

clem only had one loss. they looked like a top 4 team.

 

[nitlion6]

not the big ten's best team. they are simply the conf champs. it does not mean you are the best team in your conference when you win it. vegas and the playoff committee felt osu was the better team.

Again, many words to rationalize a point.
Objective information
Big10 Champion Penn State
Big10 eastern division champion Penn State
Penn State 24 Ohio State 21, on field result.
There is no objective data available that says Ohio state is a better team than Penn state
It all says Penn state is the superior team.
Yes Virginia, conference champion generally means that is the best team in the conference. This isn't a mean nothing end of season basketball tournament, where the 10th seeded team gets on a run.

As far as the committee and their ability to put personal bias aside and deal with their responsibility objectively - Ohio state's complete and absolute inability to compete proves the committee got it very, very wrong.
That is if we view the available data objectively

 

[Upperrwestsidetrojan]

Could you tell OSU was going to be blown out by Clemson?
no. i thought clem would win a close one. osu s a very good, but young team.

 

[Upperrwestsidetrojan]

Again, many words to rationalize a point.
Objective information
Big10 Champion Penn State
Big10 eastern division champion Penn State
Penn State 24 Ohio State 21, on field result.
There is no objective data available that says Ohio state is a better team than Penn state
It all says Penn state is the superior team.
Yes Virginia, conference champion generally means that is the best team in the conference. This isn't a mean nothing end of season basketball tournament, where the 10th seeded team gets on a run.

there is data to prove both of our arguments. these are just opinions based on some facts after all.

 

[AWS1022]

yes. i played college football. 3rd or 4th string. you can win your conf and be weaker team than a team that loses their conf. you are changing the rules/criteria of the playoff committee to suit you,. head to head matters with osu even though they onlu one close loss? and psu had 2 including a blowout loss. but according to to you, head to head does not matter with mich.? even though they blew psu out and their other loss is a better loss than your other loss. you say non conf is important. well osu had a better non conf win than you. mich killed psu and had a solid non conf. win against col. they lost to iowa which is similar to your pitt loss. but they beat psu badly head to head. you should have no issue with not getting in.

what if you were 10-3(2 non conf, losses), won your conf, beat a 12-1 mich team. so should you get in that time as well. you won your conf and mich did not as they lost head to head with psu. thios is why conf. champ does not mean that much. you can win your conf and still not be as good as the second place team. your resume is weaker than psu and mich. 2 loss teams should never get in unless all the top teams have two losses. one yr the two best teams were bama and lsu. but one of those teams lost their division and conference championship-bama. but those were the two best teams. it should be the 4 best teams regardless of who wins the conf. and psu tied for first in the conf. t hey won a 2 way tie for first place. they were not really outright champions. they have to pick one team. psu won a tie breaker to play in the champ. game. it was a tie for first place that they had to solve in some way. psu did not really win it outright. you did beat wiskly, but so did osu and mich.

So let's just go back to the old bowl system since nothing changed.

 

[AWS1022]

but clem only had one total loss. psu had two including a blowout loss. usc was the hottest team in the country at the end of the yr. we are favored against psu. but there is no way we should be in the playoffs. even if we had won our conf champ we should not be allowed in. our resume is not great. we have proven we are beatable more than once. we got blown out once. wait a second, this sounds just like psu. interesting.

And why is USC the hottest team? They won 8 in a row and Penn State won 9 in a row including a championship game.

 

[AWS1022]

i think the big 10 looked great early on. but now they are showing that they are just an an average big conf. the acc has come on as of late with bottom feeder teams like wake and nc having decent teams. then you some solid to good teams like gt, nc, lville, pitt, miami. and by the end of the year you had 3 teams that were playing really good/great football in vt, fsu and clem. that is a very impressive conf from top to bottom. on any given day most of those teams can beat just about anyone in the country. and the acc just took out your two big traditional powerhouses. acc is great this yr.

ACC's #1 team did not play the Big's #1 team and the ACC's #3 team beat the Big's #4 team.

 

[nitlion6]

there is data to prove both of our arguments. these are just opinions based on some facts after all.

Nope.

All objective data available it is Penn State.

Any attempt to argue Ohio State was superior requires a combination of two things.
1.Subjective rationalization
2. Dismissal of objective data.

Achieve those two then we can have an opinion filled debate.

 

[BoulderFish]

4 best teams. i feel they picked the best teams. i believe that on a neutral field osu and mich would beat beat psu 7 out of 10 times. after the top 4 i feel that fsu and mich were the next best after that. then psu and usc. vegas feels that way too, but puts usc ahead of psu.

On what basis (try to be objective) do you think OSU would beat PSU 7/10 times on neutral site?

PSU beat OSU by 3 (what vegas typically discounts for home field) while gifting 5 points via fluke/unforced events, and PSU has clearly improved since that game, while OSU has tread water - or arguably regressed.

Before last night, I said PSU would beat OSU 7/10 times if playing today. After last night, I'm now confident it's more like 9/10.

And Michigan... They're even more gone than OSU.

It's reasonable - probably right - to believe OSU and UM would have lost to UW in the B1G champ game if they were good enough to earn that right.

Come on, dude. Wipe away your preconceived notions about OSU and UM and look at things objectively.

 

[AWS1022]

you people love head to head. how about psu vs mich. didn't mich qb get hurt towards the end of the yr? which games?

How about this....how about USC not play their top 6 LB's against us in the Rose Bowl and then pull their seventh LB part way into the 1st quarter, and let's see how USC does. Then when PSU beats the hell out of them, you can't bring up the fact that you're using 5h string LB's because that doesn't matter apparently.

 

[topdecktiger]

Not sure that is accurate.
The way the committee did work, up to this year, was you needed to win your conference. Granted the sample size is small, but that is how it did work.

Again, the sample size is small, but hopefully someone has noticed the probable folly in taking a conference also ran over a better playing improving conference champion.

If there was any debate to whether or not Ohio State belonged in the playoffs - last night answered the question with a very emphatic "NO!"

No. That's not accurate. The committee has not ever been set up so that team needed to win it's conference. Here is a link to the committee's selection protocol, and here is an excerpt:

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.



Proposed Selection Process:
Establish a committee that will be instructed to place an emphasis on winning conference championships, strength of schedule and head-to-head competition when comparing teams with similar records and pedigree (treat final determination like a tie-breaker; apply specific guidelines).

The criteria to be provided to the selection committee must be aligned with the ideals of the commissioners, Presidents, athletic directors and coaches to honor regular season success while at the same time providing enough flexibility and discretion to select a non-champion or independent under circumstances where that particular non-champion or independent is unequivocally one of the four best teams in the country.

So, this is how the committee actually works. It has never been a requirement that you win your conference. The bylaws specifically state that the committee simply selects the 4 best teams, those 4 teams can include a non-champion, and conference championships are only used as a sort of tie-breaker.

The problem is that people misunderstand the system, as your comments illustrate. It has never been a requirement to win a conference championship to get in. What has happened in the past two years is that no non-champion had a better record than 4 of the conference champions. This year, both the Pac 12 and Big Ten champs had 2 losses, and Ohio St only had 1. That's the difference between this year and the previous two.

Now, I'm not defending the merits of the system. If you want to say conference champs should get in, I have no problem with that. What I'm saying is, the committee has simply never been set up that way, and much of this frustration is people basing their opinion on how the committee should work, as opposed to how it is actually constructed. The system itself is flawed, not the committee's subsequent selections.

 

[AWS1022]

No. That's not accurate. The committee has not ever been set up so that team needed to win it's conference. Here is a link to the committee's selection protocol, and here is an excerpt:


So, this is how the committee actually works. It has never been a requirement that you win your conference. The bylaws specifically state that the committee simply selects the 4 best teams, those 4 teams can include a non-champion, and conference championships are only used as a sort of tie-breaker.

The problem is that people misunderstand the system, as your comments illustrate. It has never been a requirement to win a conference championship to get in. What has happened in the past two years is that no non-champion had a better record than 4 of the conference champions. This year, both the Pac 12 and Big Ten champs had 2 losses, and Ohio St only had 1. That's the difference between this year and the previous two.

Now, I'm not defending the merits of the system. If you want to say conference champs should get in, I have no problem with that. What I'm saying is, the committee has simply never been set up that way, and much of this frustration is people basing their opinion on how the committee should work, as opposed to how it is actually constructed. The system itself is flawed, not the committee's subsequent selections.

And nowhere does it say they can't pick a team with two losses.

 

[BoulderFish]

Nope.

All objective data available it is Penn State.

Any attempt to argue Ohio State was superior requires a combination of two things.
1.Subjective rationalization
2. Dismissal of objective data.

Achieve those two then we can have an opinion filled debate.

Yep. 100%. Penn State has the longest winning streak of any P5 team not named Alabama, and in that win streak is a win over Ohio State.

Given that fact, the only way to claim OSU is better than PSU Is to introduce and lean on subjective opinion.

Objectively, and IMO subjectively, Penn State is better than Ohio State. And frankly, after last night, I don't even think it's remotely close any longer.

 

[Upperrwestsidetrojan]

And why is USC the hottest team? They won 8 in a row and Penn State won 9 in a row including a championship game.

just another opinion. ask vegas, not me.

 

[Upperrwestsidetrojan]

Nope.

All objective data available it is Penn State.

Any attempt to argue Ohio State was superior requires a combination of two things.
1.Subjective rationalization
2. Dismissal of objective data.

Achieve those two then we can have an opinion filled debate.

you have two losses. not a great team. simple as that.

 

[ChiTownLion]

Four teams in the CFBPlayoffs will never work as long as there are 5 power conferences. Every conference champion deserves a spot. Expand to 6 teams (with #1 and #2 seeds getting first-round byes) and make the 6th team an at-large bid.

1. Alabama SEC
2. Clemson ACC
3. Penn State B1G
4. Washington Pac12
5. Oklahoma Big12
6. Ohio State at-large