No they said we were not "comparable" to Ohio State (because of 1 loss vs 2) so H2H did not factor into that discussion. If you were a Penn State fan in 2016 you would know that.
Bowl guru Palm has us back in the NY6
- Thread starter Jerry
- Start date
No they said we were not "comparable" to Ohio State (because of 1 loss vs 2) so H2H did not factor into that discussion. If you were a Penn State fan in 2016 you would know that.
Who says Illinois and Purdue are comparable?
And I know what was said--we weren't on the same level as Ohio State. Just like IMO Purdue isn't on the same level as Illinois
We'll see if Purdue stays with a score of Michigan
They said we weren't comparable because the records weren't the same. If we'd finished with the same record as OSU then H2H would have been applicable.
Records being the same don't make teams comparable
See Clemson not being considered with the 1 loss teams or 2-loss LSU being ahead of USC with 1 loss.
We were comparable with 1-loss Washington
Purdue has better wins than Illinois.
Purdue has better losses than Illinois.
Purdue has better road wins than Illinois.
Purdue has the head to head win over Illinois.
Illinois has you cheering them on.
Indiana is worse than Syracuse. Indiana lost to Rutgers.
You throw shit at the wall and have no idea what you're talking about, as evidenced by the stated selection criteria of the CFP website flying right in the face of criteria you claimed was not part of the process. Just ****ing quit.
Purdue doesn't have better losses--you're pretending Syracuse is good
Purdue has an FCS win, a 2pt win over 5-7 FAU at home, Minnesota without Ibrahim, 6 point win against Nebraska, an 8 point against NW at home
The lost at home to us, they lost to a bad Syracuse team, they lost by 21 to Iowa who shouldn't even score 10 at HOME and they lost to Wisconsin
How this is better than Illinois other than delusion?
You're only claiming this because we beat Purdue. I don't believe you think Purdue's better.
Oh and a 2 point win against Maryland--all impressive
You keep talking about whose losses are better then the other. It doesn’t matter. Bottom line Purdue beat Illinois on the field. That’s all that matters. You’re too hung up on the other stuff
Want more stats
Illinois outscored Big Ten opponents by 72
Purdue by 11--EVELEN and they didn't play Ohio State or Michigan
There's no comparison
Illinois outscored Big Ten opponents by 72
Purdue by 11--EVELEN and they didn't play Ohio State or Michigan
There's no comparison
It isn't all that matters. One game doesn't trump everything else that happened.
There's resumes for a reason
We're arguing about two teams outside the top 30 so it's moot anyway. Both suck--Illinois just sucks less
Illinois losing to Michigan by 2 is better than both of those--by a wide margin.
Especially since many here believe they won that game
This has to be an act - there's no way somebody could possibly be this big a nimrod.
Last edited:
H2H matters when records are the same. Of course nobody is claiming A&M is a better team than LSU. One won 9 games, the other 4.
Illinois and Purdue have the exact same record. Purdue even has a better conference record. They have a h2h victory. They beat Indiana. The only metric that Illinois has is they beat Iowa. Their OOC was terrible. Beating 3-7 Virginia isn't going to count more than a 3 pt loss to 7-5 Syracuse. I mean, I'd the ACC sucks, how bad of a team is UVA?
(And I generally cheer for UVA behind PSU)
It's not about "records being the same". Not all 8-4s or 10-2s are even
Beating Virginia is better than losing to Syracuse or beating 5-7 FAU at home by 2.
Virginia sucks but Syracuse beat them by 2--food for thought
Does it really bother you this much that I believe Illinois is the better team? The point differential in conference play alone supports that
The best team doesn't always win--as you know. Illinois should have beat Michigan State and Indiana--that's on them.
Doesn't mean I don't think if they played again Illinois wouldn't win by double digits.
The day wouldn't be complete without Lando twisting himself into wild contortions to "prove" Purdue is not a "good" Penn State win.
Lando, give it up, pal. Purdue is good. They won their division. Therefore, our win against them was good. You look increasingly silly with your obsessive blather to the contrary.
Lando, give it up, pal. Purdue is good. They won their division. Therefore, our win against them was good. You look increasingly silly with your obsessive blather to the contrary.
I’m going regardless. And hope we kick the crap out of them regardless. This bowl and game.. is all about our future..
Making the case that Purdue;s Minnesota win is lessened because Ibrahim was out is bogus. All teams have injuries.
TCU must beat KState or they will gleefully snub them for O$U. No self respecting PSU fan can hope for that even if it opens up the Rose Bowl. Then on the other side of the ledger we are stuck with the miserable choice of O$U or U$C. This one time I actually want U$C. Essentially my strategy is keep O$U out at all costs and we get the bowl we get. I also am not jazzed by getting to the Rose Bowl as the 3rd place team.
We will see how good Purdue is when they play scUM. I think they are decent but will still lose by at least 3 TDs. More a testament to how strong scUM is versus how weak Purdue is.
I don't know what Illinois did to come so close to beating scUM. I think part of it was scUM looking ahead. I also think Bielema and Jimmah have similar styles so Illinois matches up with scUM well and unfortunately better than we do or apparently better than the mighty Ohiya Buckeyes.
Cotton>>>>Citrus
If I'm going for the vacation aspect, we may as well play for the Bahamas Bowl or the Holiday Bowl.
Purdue nor Illinois would be a "good win"--my argument has nothing to do with Penn State
All of college football doesn't revolve around us
NY6 Bowl way better than Citrus. Citrus is going to feature two 4-loss teams.
Did you watch the game?
Minnesota is one of those teams that relies on their starters--they lack depth
Agreed, to argue that Illinois is better than Purdue is just idiocy. There's no basis in this assertion so he brings up point differential which is meaningless.
I literally broke it down. If you don't agree that's fine but there's legit reasons behind it.
This would be like someone saying you couldn't have argued Penn State was better than Clemson before the South Carolina game. Just because someone or most believe it doesn't make it a fact
Illinois > Purdue IMO and it's not really close
Penn state hasn’t played Clemson head to head so they’re not similar comparisons.
It's especially meaningless when they played on the field just a couple weeks ago with Division Title on the line and Purdue beat them.
I remember you saying a pick wasn't a pick. 🤷♂️🤣
I get it.
You think Illinois > Purdue. Nobody agrees. Does it need any further discussion?
Exactly, the most important nobody being Mr. Scoreboard in Purdue's favor. As I said, this has to be an act by this idiot because it's hard to believe anyone could really be this big a nimrod.
And Purdue lost to PSU by only 4….
This has got to be one of the stupidest debates in here given Purdue’s performance this year is easily superior than Illinois and it’s not particularly close especially given the head to head. I tend to try to give people the benefit of the doubt about not being troll but I think this is convincing me.
Says the guy who adamantly stated that LSU wouldn’t fall below Alabama by losing to Georgia because LSU won the head to head.
Losing to Georgia?
Yeah, if they would have beat A&M they wouldn't have fallen behind anyone not named USC.
Are we really trying to compare the two situations?
If Penn State played Illinois or Purdue this coming weekend who do you think would be more likely to upset us?
