So it was a big deal for the winner, but much ado about very little for the loser (to a 3 loss nobody)?
PSU drops 3 spots to justify TCU ranked above Ohio St
- Thread starter Online Persona
- Start date
Funny, I remember a team winning a ccg in 2016 and not jumping ahead of a team with fewer losses, but no ccg appearance, because nothing trumped fewer losses.
It could just be that Penn State's ranking was decided as part of the Rose Bowl's agreement to amend the shifting of the scheduling change from 2026 to 2024, since the Rose Bowl did not want a repeat of Utah vs. Ohio State. They agreed to shift and got PSU in the Rose Bowl. The committee just had to make it look right.
Yes and no. That drop would have cost us home field in the first round. The expanded playoff has plenty of opportunity for shenanigans outside of who gets in.
What top 10 wins do they have besides the game they just eeked out? You aren’t seriously including the Oklahoma win as a real top 10 win are you that would be a bit disingenuous? Their best wins outside of a good revenge game against TCU were at home vs Okie St and at home vs Texas Tech both finishing 7-5. I’m not even sure the TCU win was very impressive, we’ll see if they really deserve their spot against Michigan. My guess is they don’t. The Big 12 is just a horrible conference this year, imagine the Big 10 minus UM & OSU that’s about where they are this year.
Last edited:
Did you see what the 12 team playoff would look like this year after the final rankings? It's a mess. We would get OSU in the shoe.
I’m guessing you read the playoff committee’s rankings as the AP and the AP as the coaches.
As someone stated above the thing that really was brought to light was PSU being dropped to #11. If the expanded playoff was in, you make it, but hardly. Where this gets me, is depending how things play out and where divisions fall across College football, if the 12 team playoff was in, Purdue somehow beats Michigan, they are Conference champ, and an automatic bye to the next round. You would of had a 9-4 team advance. PSU in this scenario and if everything else plays out is probably bumped out at 10-2. I know that there is no way to close every loop hole but the thought that a team with 4 or 5 losses could make it to a bye in the playoffs is crazy to me. I wish they would have put a limit on the number of losses a team could have before they qualified for a bye if they won a conference championship. I get the automatic bids but , gees this is going to get some team that deserves to go booted out by a team that got lucky on one day.
If you’re living on the edge of the 12 team playoff and don’t get in under your scenario, you can only blame yourself. You’re a 2-3 loss team at that point. If the playoffs had expanded this year, does anyone think we’re a threat to win it all?
Yet I was voted to be a captain as a sophomore in high school. Most competitors want and expect to win. They much rather play in the playoffs than a bowl game. Watch the opt outs and see if they're for playoff or bowl teams. Do you want the spoiler answer for that?
Totally agree on the championship games. They really become superfluous with a 12-team playoff and could gum up the works in a number of ways.
As it is, they're adding potentially three more games to the season for the eventual champion. So a 12-game regular season...a potential 3-game playoff...plus a conference championship? That's crazy...and in no way good for the kids.
With a weekend plus of conference championship games and some upsets or near upsets in them preceding the final rankings before the bowls and playoffs, I would expect a re-review of everything that happened to this point, and greater movement than normal....the same with the bowls, even more so with teams down the rankings.
But you weren't living on the edge. You were #8 , you went to #11 after the final selection. If your at 10, 11,or 12 then sure your on the edge and the chips fall. You could be 11-1 and not in a conference Championship, and ranked 7th and if a few teams make it to a championship with 3 losses and win their Championship, you could fall to that edge. To me that is a flaw that will bite a good team at some point. As far as a threat to win it all, I never said PSU would have been a threat to win it all. The purpose of the post was the automatic bids for conference champions and where that puts other teams. PSU or not, its going to cost a deserving team at some point. When the likes of an 8-4 Purdue pulls an upset , gets lucky and gets a bye, while a team like Ohio State sitting at 11-1 has to play a playoff game. That to me is an issue.
Apples and oranges. The bowls add a potential 13th game for the vast majority of teams.
But now we're talking about a potential 16-game season for two teams, and that's crazy.
Ditch the conference championship games. Their value has always been questionable -- if you doubt that, look at the history of the Big-10 -- and with a 12-team playoff, they truly add nothing.
By the way, not many people, be they players or coaches or fans, would view games like the Rose Bowl as a "glorified scrimmage."
They do. Whether they say it publicly is a different story
We agree about CCGs
FCS does it. Why can't FCS. Hell some HS teams play 15
So today we're pretending I'm a Pitt fan--cool
It's honestly just sad you all would rather play in the Rose Bowl than be traveling to Columbus or Fort Worth this weekend in a playoff. Or want bowl games instead of a 24 team playoff which could have seen us hosting Tulsa or UTSA last week before moving on. It's defeatist.
Yeah, the SEC and Big Ten both had 2 top 8 teams sitting at home while a subpar team played for the title
CCGs, like bowls, are a joke and exist as a money maker.
Only 1 of the P5 championship games was even decent.
What if UNC had beaten Clemson? Or Purdue over Michigan? Or LSU over Georgia? It had already been established that the three undefeated teams were essentially safe. But then suddenly you have teams in the bottom have of the top 25 or unranked trying to play into the playoffs in the extended format. I believe last may the playoff selection committee gave way to have conferences essentially do away with divisions in selecting who will play for a conf championship. But does that mean OSU and Michigan could play each other 3x in one season if the stars align? I can’t see how keeping conf champ games makes sense AT ALL. Kansas St’s resume before Saturday was not that great. And they got a second crack at TCU, who lets be honest, had little to lose unless the frogs got absolutely blown out. Feel like I could just go on and on with bad scenarios with expanded playoff and CCGs. There’s way too much for the underdogs in all these games to gain and little to nothing for the better team to lose in these scenarios.
Agree, conference championship games need to go or be significantly revised with the 12 team playoff. They might just be gone as it’s adds another game for many of the top 12 teams and delays a playoff.
The crappy divisions needs to go. There is not value in a crappy Big 10 west or ACC coastal ten playing in conference champ games due to goofy division alignment.
This wasn't a re-review, it was needing to keep Ohio St from jumping TCU despite TCU losing to a 3 loss team. So they had to take away Ohio St's top 10 road win. Therefore PSU had to be pushed below two 3 loss teams with losses to a non-power 5 and to 6 loss Florida.
Exactly right.
But there's yet another equally important consideration: the health and welfare of the players.
I can remember waaay back in the day an argument some made against adding an 11th game to the regular season...and then 15 years ago a similar objection when a 12th game was added: hey, this isn't the NFL, these kids are not professionals...and most never will be.
Now here we are. The athletes are faster and bigger than ever...the injury toll steeper...and we're talking about some of these guys potentially playing 16 games over the course of a season. Something's got to give.
I love that they're finally expanding the playoff, but as a trade-off at least drop the conference championship games. Maybe even think about going back to an 11-game regular season. A pipedream I realize.
Honestly, as a fan I hate this opt-out thing, but I find myself having more and more sympathy for the guys who do it to protect their hoped-for futures. Hell, the coaches, schools, and conferences are clearly in it for the money, so why not the kids.
Maybe it's time to jettison the now tattered nostalgia for the Old Days, drop all remaining pretenses, and simply pay kids to play. I mean, we're halfway there already anyway.
Right. You can survive one loss. Not two. PSU was out of the playoff in 2016 when they lost to Michigan, just like Bama was out this year when they lost to LSU, Clemson was out when they lost to So. Carolina, Oregon was out when they lost to Washington, etc. PSU got to win a conference championship by playing in the CCG in 2016. They weren’t going to overcome 2 losses to get in the playoff.
TCU still only has 1 loss. They’re 12-1, OSU is 11-1. Who has the better record?
Who has a better record us or ksu? You justified ksu moving up courtesy of their big 12 championship. That’s what I was responding to and you failed to address it here.
I'm guessing you're going to argue losses matter for the playoffs but not beyond, which is bullshit. The criteria should be consistent across the board.
Is that the burr under your saddles? How this final ranking would affect PSU’s seeding in a 12-team playoff? They’re only seeding a 4-team playoff right now and after that, while they’re trying to rank the teams, they’re also filling bowl slots. I don’t have the time or interest to look at all the moves in the poll and all of the bowl matchups. PSU is playing the PAC-12 champ in the Rose Bowl. I can’t imagine you’d want to be playing in any other bowl. The committee doesn’t make a final poll so whatever ranking is higher, the AP or Coaches poll, is what will go in your media guide.
I’m going to wait and see how they do things in their stupid and ill-conceived 12-team playoff. But if anyone has a reason to be upset by projecting the current rankings on a 12-team playoff, it’s Washington fans. They’re ranked 12th but they’d get bumped for currently 16th ranked Tulane as the 6th highest ranked conference champion. They’d have every reason to be posed. (And PSU would be playing a rematch with OSU in Columbus. Whoopee! What a system.)
You’re playing Utah in the Rose Bowl. Where do you think you should be? At the Sugar Bowl playing Alabama instead of KSU? Or in some other bowl playing KSU so you can settle it on the field?
KSU is 10-3 with a conference championship and a win over a top 5 team. PSU is 10-2, no championship, with a win over, who? Purdue? Auburn? Maryland? They lost twice against top 5 teams. I think it’s perfectly reasonable to rank KSU over PSU.
I think they should have been in the playoff in 2016 with a conference championship, win over a top 5 team and the h2h win.
If KSU ranked in front of PSU is justifiable this year, PSU ahead of OSU in 16 is just as justifiable.
You're talking out both sides of your mouth if you're saying more losses matter when its 1 vs 2 but doesnt matter if its 2 vs 3.
The committee really only determines the top 4 though. If there was a 12 team playoff this year TCU wouldn't be 3 and we wouldn't be 11
I don't see an issue here. Kansas State secured one of the best wins of the season and Utah beat USC twice so should be ahead of them (they aren't in the coaches Poll). I just think this was the result of some teams gaining quality wins that PSU just doesn't have. It doesn't really matter anyway, PSU will get their opportunity to earn a top 10 ranking.
Also, while the committee says the rankings don't reflect match ups, I'm sure that's total BS and I think that's also fine. No one wants to see rematches in the first round. TCU has one more win than OSU so in some ways it makes sense. I do think most think OSU passes the eye test over TCU, but just be honest, the committee and the fans don't want the rematch in the first round.
Also, while the committee says the rankings don't reflect match ups, I'm sure that's total BS and I think that's also fine. No one wants to see rematches in the first round. TCU has one more win than OSU so in some ways it makes sense. I do think most think OSU passes the eye test over TCU, but just be honest, the committee and the fans don't want the rematch in the first round.
If the 12 team playoff was this year:
Penn State, despite being 3rd best in the Big Ten, looked to be the #4 at large team prior to the conference championship games.
6 highest ranked predicted conference champions in week 14: Georgia, Michigan, TCU, USC, Clemson, Tulane
6 predicted at-large berths in week 14: Ohio State, Alabama, Tennessee, Penn State, Kansas State, Utah
There were two upsets in the conference championship games. That dropped Penn State to the final at large team.
6 highest ranked conference champions week 15: Georgia, Michigan, Clemson, Utah, Kansas State, Tulane
6 at-large berths week 15: TCU, Ohio State, Alabama, Tennessee, USC, Penn State
Even being “only” the 3rd best team in the Big Ten, and even after two upsets in the conference championship games, Penn State still would have qualified.
I get that. Doesn’t mean I can’t point out the inconsistent logic, which is really the committee’s trademark at this point.
The number of spots they’re playing around with starting in 2 seasons will just give them more opportunities to weigh specific criteria differently depending on the brand, not less.
