I heard finebaum and at least one other douche say PSU has to win big
- Thread starter demlion
- Start date
All of this spin leads me to the following conclusion -
They know the committee is going to select the winner of this game, and it isn't even close.
They know the committee is going to select the winner of this game, and it isn't even close.
Michigan beat Wisconsin by a TD. Ohio State beat Wisconsin in OT. Please tell me why PSU would have to win big to prove anything? I think they just have to win for it to be a quality win. Especially when comparing PSU to the other two teams.
It could be - and that would cause them to have a meltdown like this. I think it is a possibility. When PSU opened at #12, the committee noted that PSU kept getting better as the season went on. It is probably not lost on them that Ohio State has not even looked like a good team in half of their wins. The most recent common opponent was Michigan State.
It's for the media narrative. I thought that stuff wouldn't affect the CFP committee. But their lack of respect to PSU obviously shows it has.
You keep being wrong about this.
The protocol prohibits incentivizing margin of victory if comparing common opponents between teams on the margin. So the voters can't say Team A beat Team C by 12, but Team B beat Team C by 17 so Team A is better than Team B.
The voters are absolutely allowed to incentivize the margin of victory when looking at individual game performance. If teams are close, in their mind, then you absolutely can take margin of victory into account as long as you aren't directly comparing scores between common opponents. Take Clemson and PSU. The committee right now has Clemson as the favorite, but the committee is absolutely within their power to make a judgement based on the outcome of their game. If Clemson only beats VA Tech by 1, but PSU beats Wisky by 60 then they are allowed to take that into account.
Also, between OSU and PSU there is a reason the committee keeps saying they aren't close to each other. They are saying this to protect themselves from having to evoke the restrictions placed on the committee for comparing equal teams. If they say they aren't close, they don't have to explain how much conference championship, shared schedule, head to head, etc. played a part in their decision. They can just say 1 loss vs 2 loss makes them uneven and, fair or not, they are covered.
If you don't think they are allowed to incentivize margin of victory, then why would their official and proprietary software show margin of victory on the team comparison screen?
You keep beating on this dem ... Of course the committee is looking at margin of victory.
To think otherwise is just stupid.
It's all about the eye test, resume, etc - margin of victory impacts all these points.
That said, no B10 team has been better than PSU over the second half of the season!
But of course, when you play a team in September you don't know whether it will be important or not, so you HAVE TO run it up. The incentive is ALWAYS there, so it is a fraud to say you don't "incent" it.You keep being wrong about this.
The protocol prohibits incentivizing margin of victory if comparing common opponents between teams on the margin. So the voters can't say Team A beat Team C by 12, but Team B beat Team C by 17 so Team A is better than Team B.
The voters are absolutely allowed to incentivize the margin of victory when looking at individual game performance. If teams are close, in their mind, then you absolutely can take margin of victory into account as long as you aren't directly comparing scores between common opponents. Take Clemson and PSU. The committee right now has Clemson as the favorite, but the committee is absolutely within their power to make a judgement based on the outcome of their game. If Clemson only beats VA Tech by 1, but PSU beats Wisky by 60 then they are allowed to take that into account.
Also, between OSU and PSU there is a reason the committee keeps saying they aren't close to each other. They are saying this to protect themselves from having to evoke the restrictions placed on the committee for comparing equal teams. If they say they aren't close, they don't have to explain how much conference championship, shared schedule, head to head, etc. played a part in their decision. They can just say 1 loss vs 2 loss makes them uneven and, fair or not, they are covered.
If you don't think they are allowed to incentivize margin of victory, then why would their official and proprietary software show margin of victory on the team comparison screen?
He went to the University of Tennessee , and is still pissed about the *ss kickings we gave them in the 90's---Probably not pleased with their current DC either. --he's brainless
that is the hilarious part. the majority of the media analysts are picking Wisky, but all the talk is about what PSU would need to get in. their other talking point has been the UM margin of victory over PSU....with no mention of the context of that game. had Franklin known that the margin of that game would have been important, I am sure he would have played the final qtr differently. he cost himself a couple TD's with play calling.
If that happens, and it is us, I will happily announce that I have been wrong all week in saying we have no chance to get in, no matter what we do. Unfortunately, I still strongly believe that. We'll all know soon.
