Playoff Selections If I were on the committee

[dicemen99]

A few things are certain:
Clemson is out if they lose to VT.
Oklahoma St at Oklahoma loser is out.
Colorado/Washington loser is out
Penn State/Wisconsin loser is out.

That means that there will be 6 or 7 teams with resumes worthy of national championship consideration left, including Michigan.

It would be nice if we had an 8-team playoff system that would allow them all to compete on the field for the National Championship.

I'm still OK with the playoff being four teams. Ultimately, it would be great if they went to 4 conferences and the title games were defacto playoffs. Of course, Michigan and tOSU out in cold then, but nobody would be complaining about it if this were the set up.

I agree in principle, but still trying to come up with a scenario where Michigan gets in. I posted above they could be with a bunch of upsets, but I can't seem to come up with a scenario. I don't think there is any way they put 3 teams from same conference in the playoff.

 

[dicemen99]

The language provides for an exception to the norm. The exception is flexibility to select a non-champion (or independent) if the team is "unequivocally one of the four best teams in the country". The author has the same interpretation as I do which places a clear emphasis on winning one's conference over all other criteria.

8 spots selected in 2 years and all 8 have won their CC game (Oklahoma winning their CC). Show me otherwise.

I agree with this. tOSU has a case to be the exception this year.

 

[PSUPOWER]

The language provides for an exception to the norm. The exception is flexibility to select a non-champion (or independent) if the team is "unequivocally one of the four best teams in the country". The author has the same interpretation as I do which places a clear emphasis on winning one's conference over all other criteria.

8 spots selected in 2 years and all 8 have won their CC game (Oklahoma winning their CC). Show me otherwise.

That language discusses how committee members are supposed to distinguish between comparable teams.

There is no debate about Ohio State's resume being a top 2 resume in the country.

The question is how good is Michigan's resume.

Michigan has 2 losses, but, one of those 2 losses was the best loss in the country. And Michigan has beaten 3 top 10 teams this year, Colorado by 17, Wisconsin by 7 and Penn State by 39. Those wins just can't be ignored.

 

[G- RUnit]

No.

Win head to head and conference champion... Really demeans head to head and championship. Frankly what else is there? Shows absurdity of system.

 

[FanuSanu52]

Can the fact that either PSU or Wisconsin will have an extra win with the same number of losses be ignored? Whether they put extra weight on the CC or not, having a higher winning percentage seems to fall into the category of "setting one's resume apart."

Two-loss, non-conference-champ Michigan has no case.

 

[Rutgers85]

If I was a voter, I would not vote for Penn State even if they beat Wisconsin by 80 points, I would go public and state that I don't condone child abuse and those institutions that turn a blind eye to such abuse. Being selected to the college playoffs is a privilege, not a right, and Penn State based on their past behavior should not be granted such a privilege.

Would you really? I highly doubt it. Posts like this make us look so petty. No one cares about the scandal anymore except for some bitter/jealous RU/Pitt fans and the Joebots trying to pretend nothing happened.

 

[FanuSanu52]

Win head to head and conference champion... Really demeans head to head and championship. Frankly what else is there? Shows absurdity of system.

Still, no. Penn State has two bad losses and I don't think anyone in the country really believes it's a top 4 team, even Penn State ... because it's not. Its single big win just happened to be quite timely. Great win, but shouldn't give them an auto-bid on its own. OSU is still the better team. I'd agree CC/head to head should get them the nod if both teams had one-loss with similar resumes, but PSU blew it early on.

The system isn't designed solely to advance conference champs. In fact, it can't do that, period.

 

[FanuSanu52]

Would you really? I highly doubt it. Posts like this make us look so petty. No one cares about the scandal anymore except for some bitter/jealous RU/Pitt fans and the Joebots trying to pretend nothing happened.

Pretty sure the many victims still care, as does much of the CFB world.

 

[RURM85]

That language discusses how committee members are supposed to distinguish between comparable teams.

There is no debate about Ohio State's resume being a top 2 resume in the country.

The question is how good is Michigan's resume.

Michigan has 2 losses, but, one of those 2 losses was the best loss in the country. And Michigan has beaten 3 top 10 teams this year, Colorado by 17, Wisconsin by 7 and Penn State by 39. Those wins just can't be ignored.

All 3 wins coming in September (Wisconsin win on October 1) and Penn State and Colorado were clearly not ranked in the top 10 (most likely not ranked) when Michigan won these games. I can make a case for all 4 teams, inclusive of Michigan, having comparable wins and losses. It's an art not a science according to the Committee.

 

[AreYouNUTS]

OSU
Mich
Wiscy
Washington

Screw 'Bama and the ACC lol! I kid, I kid:

 

[PSUPOWER]

I'm still OK with the playoff being four teams. Ultimately, it would be great if they went to 4 conferences and the title games were defacto playoffs. Of course, Michigan and tOSU out in cold then, but nobody would be complaining about it if this were the set up.

I agree in principle, but still trying to come up with a scenario where Michigan gets in. I posted above they could be with a bunch of upsets, but I can't seem to come up with a scenario. I don't think there is any way they put 3 teams from same conference in the playoff.

128 teams is way too many to compete at the same level. But, until those 128 teams are divided up into more competitive groups, a playoff system must be in place to give all 128 of those teams a chance at the national title.

Since the 10 FBS Conferences are not equal, it would be impractical to base the entire FBS playoff field solely on conference winners.

If two or three of the best teams in the country appear to be from the same conference or division, all of those great teams are more deserving of a playoff spot than many conference champions that are clearly not top 10 teams.

14-team conferences like the ACC & SEC only play 8-game conference slates, where some of their best teams don't always play each other. Occasionally, there are FBS independents that are great teams. Frequently, 14-team conferences like the ACC, B1G & SEC have two teams that are much better than any Group of 5 team or Big 12 team, where only 10 teams reside despite the name Big 12.

Let's get the best 8 teams in a playoff to decide the national champion on the field. Some years there are 4 great teams. Other years there are 5 great teams. Some years there are 6 great teams. And other years there are 7 great teams.

With an 8-team playoff system that gives teams extra credit for winning their conference beyond their record and overall Strength Of Schedule, a great team can earn a true national championship on the field by winning 3 playoff games. This would be much better than the 4-team playoff system that we have now.

 

[jeffro5]

Michigan out pretty much no matter what else happens....PSU or Wisky as conference champ easily ahead of them....should also be ahead of Ohio State.....Conference Championship must mean something.

 

[PSUPOWER]

All 3 wins coming in September (Wisconsin win on October 1) and Penn State and Colorado were clearly not ranked in the top 10 (most likely not ranked) when Michigan won these games. I can make a case for all 4 teams, inclusive of Michigan, having comparable wins and losses. It's an art not a science according to the Committee.

Where an opponent is ranked when you play them isn't as important as where that opponent is ranked at the end of the year when Strength Of Schedules can be calculated based on all FBS games and teams can be ranked accordingly.

 

[rubigtimenow]

psupower, you are dead on with at least your last 3-5 posts. I've been paying close attention to the committee rankings and what they say about their rankings. Obviously you have been too!

 

[PSUPOWER]

All 3 wins coming in September (Wisconsin win on October 1) and Penn State and Colorado were clearly not ranked in the top 10 (most likely not ranked) when Michigan won these games. I can make a case for all 4 teams, inclusive of Michigan, having comparable wins and losses. It's an art not a science according to the Committee.

The 12/13-game regular season begins in August. Every regular season game is important.

 

[PSUPOWER]

psupower, you are dead on with at least your last 3-5 posts. I've been paying close attention to the committee rankings and what they say about their rankings. Obviously you have been too!

Yes I have and thanks. There is a lot of politicking and regional provincialism going on though.

No conference has thoroughly dominated the FBS world as much as the B1G has this year.

Too many people mistake various tiebreaker rules and other types of off the field awards as core values of a teams overall Performance Based Power Index.

 

[RURM85]

The 12/13-game regular season begins in August. Every regular season game is important.

Sure, the Committee cares about the early season results the same as the November games.

 

[PSUPOWER]

Sure, the Committee cares about the early season results the same as the November games.

They care about September games, October games, November games, Conference games and OOC games. These teams don't play 162 regular season games like baseball teams do.

12/13-game regular season schedules can still only build a relatively small data set. You shouldn't be trying to shrink it even further when evaluating teams.

 

[RURM85]

They care about September games, October games, November games, Conference games and OOC games. These teams don't play 162 regular season games like baseball teams do.

12/13-game regular season schedules can still only build a relatively small data set. You shouldn't be trying to shrink it even further when evaluating teams.

They care about the quality of play this weekend as opposed to what happened in September when they re-rank teams after the CC games. Even the protocol states the effects of injuries heading into post season play a factor in their decisions, which is now and not 2 months ago. Penn State has won 8 in a row; Wisconsin 6 in a row; Michigan riding a 2 loss streak. This Committee will spend all of 60 seconds discussing Michigan.

You should try not to make this into a year long scientific calculation because it's not.

 

[dicemen99]

They care about the quality of play this weekend as opposed to what happened in September when they re-rank teams after the CC games. Even the protocol states the effects of injuries heading into post season play a factor in their decisions, which is now and not 2 months ago. Penn State has won 8 in a row; Wisconsin 6 in a row; Michigan riding a 2 loss streak. This Committee will spend all of 60 seconds discussing Michigan.

You should try not to make this into a year long scientific calculation because it's not.

Agree with this. Although early season wins build resumes, late season trending also counts in the committee's stated criteria - PSUPOWER does not account for this. Injuries also are taken into account.

 

[PSUPOWER]

They care about the quality of play this weekend as opposed to what happened in September when they re-rank teams after the CC games. Even the protocol states the effects of injuries heading into post season play a factor in their decisions, which is now and not 2 months ago. Penn State has won 8 in a row; Wisconsin 6 in a row; Michigan riding a 2 loss streak. This Committee will spend all of 60 seconds discussing Michigan.

You should try not to make this into a year long scientific calculation because it's not.

The committee cares about the quality of play this weekend IN ADDITION TO what has happened throughout the entire year not as opposed to what has happened earlier like you stated.

Michigan has a one game losing streak not two. Michigan beat Indiana by 10 and then played a great game against #2 Ohio State last week.

If you think that Michigan's 7 point win over Wisconsin and Michigan's 39 POINT WIN over Penn State doesn't matter and that all that matters is that Michigan has a one game losing streak you are wrong.

The committee is smarter than that.
Stop trying to shrink the season into what you think is more important and consider the entire season for a change.

Then decide who you think has a better resume between Michigan, Wisconsin and Penn State.

 

[SkilletHead2]

There are nine really good teams left at this point. Two (Bama, OSU) have a spot locked in based on being dominant teams.

Seven teams are battling for two spots. Six of them are playing in conference championships, four of them against one another. Two of them, PSU and Wisky, are the #3 and #4 teams in their conference.
The arguments here point me to a simple conclusion: dump the conference championships and expand the playoffs to eight teams. Then you only have to decide whether to leave PSU, Okla, or Colorado out of the eight. I'd dump Colorado. Then you've got massive excitement for three weeks.

 

[PSUPOWER]

Agree with this. Although early season wins build resumes, late season trending also counts in the committee's stated criteria - PSUPOWER does not account for this. Injuries also are taken into account.

I do account for ALL games.

Trends don't eliminate portions of resumes. They may present an advantage for one team over another when the resumes of those teams is comparable.

Tiebreakers don't over rule resumes. They may present an advantage for one team over another when the resumes of those teams is comparable.

When the resumes of teams aren't comparable, trends and tiebreakers don't matter.

 

[pawildcat]

1. Alabama -In no matter what If Florida wins conference they’re still out.



2. Ohio St- In no matter what



3. Michigan- Out no matter what.



4. Clemson- In - must beat Virginia Tech. If Virginia Tech wins they’re out. and winner Wisc/PSU in.



5. Washington-In -must beat Colorado. If Colorado wins they’re out.



6 Winner Wis/PSU In. - If either Clemson or Washington loses.



8. Oklahoma- In If they beat OSU, and both Clemson & Washington lose.

No way a two-loss Oklahoma team should beat out a two-loss Michigan team that blew out Pac-12 finalist Colorado and went two OTs with an Ohio State team that handled Oklahoma.

 

[letterman]

for me,any playoff this year that doesn't include southern cal is wrong. theu are the best team,other than Alabama, and it is not close. they actually have a fast and dynamic offense, loaded with skilled athletes that can match up with Alabama. does anyone who has watched ohio st; honestly feel that that offense has a chance of moving the ball against Alabama? wiconsin and penn st. are not championship caliber teams. southern cal would smoke both Clemson and Michigan. theu already embarrassed Washington. we need an eight team playoff. this year is a joke without southern cal in the picture.

 

[FanuSanu52]

for me,any playoff this year that doesn't include southern cal is wrong. theu are the best team,other than Alabama, and it is not close. they actually have a fast and dynamic offense, loaded with skilled athletes that can match up with Alabama. does anyone who has watched ohio st; honestly feel that that offense has a chance of moving the ball against Alabama? wiconsin and penn st. are not championship caliber teams. southern cal would smoke both Clemson and Michigan. theu already embarrassed Washington. we need an eight team playoff. this year is a joke without southern cal in the picture.

USC ... hahahaha. They have a chance moving the ball against Alabama like they did so well ... when they played Alabama. What are you snorting?

A THREE loss team that can't even play for its conference championship .. yeah, sure, they should be a lock. I assume you're a USC homer because that's the only way on earth to justify your undying love and support. The only thing that's a joke is your misplaced rant.

 

[RURM85]

The committee cares about the quality of play this weekend IN ADDITION TO what has happened throughout the entire year not as opposed to what has happened earlier like you stated.

Michigan has a one game losing streak not two. Michigan beat Indiana by 10 and then played a great game against #2 Ohio State last week.

If you think that Michigan's 7 point win over Wisconsin and Michigan's 39 POINT WIN over Penn State doesn't matter and that all that matters is that Michigan has a one game losing streak you are wrong.

The committee is smarter than that.
Stop trying to shrink the season into what you think is more important and consider the entire season for a change.

Then decide who you think has a better resume between Michigan, Wisconsin and Penn State.

The better team out of the 3 is the team that wins the Big Ten Championship.

The Committee has full discretion as to how they decide who the best 4 teams are and and there's no template or calculation used. Conference Champions are smiled upon and maybe the Committee wants to avoid conference conflict. W-L records, SOS, head-to-head data points scrutinized but not adhered to. Game videos watched including the eye test as a factor. Injuries are factored or at least that's what they state.

It's not what I think is most important or your data points.

 

[jason21psu]

I've put into a spreadsheet comparing resumes based on S&P+ data. I used S&P+ because it takes the quality of the opponent into account and it the best way I think to be able to compare teams from different leagues. To wit Clemson actually has a pretty impressive schedule. You can argue well Louisville has 3 losses, they shouldn't be so high but I didn't want to add my bias so I took the data as is. To project what will happen it assumes all teams will win their last game. Obviously that can't happen so once PSU beats Wisconsin or vice versa the other is immediately eliminated. Anyway here it is:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bw7p0XD4TVWBeGZTeWcwYXpxODQ

 

[AreYouNUTS]

BTW - RU finished 12th in SOS per Sagarin. I figured all along this might be the hardest schedule we ever faced but damn!

 

[jason21psu]

BTW - RU finished 12th in SOS per Sagarin. I figured all along this might be the hardest schedule we ever faced but damn!

It was #1 according the FEI: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/fei

 

[Scarlet4ever]

I hate PSU with all my heart, but if they win against Wisconsin, they should be in. Conference Championship should mean something in all this.

 

[G- RUnit]

So rather then head to head competition and conference championships... it's all just a popularity contest. This is why you need real playoffs like every other Division and all college sports. That Conference Championship of the best league in the country... you beat the other team head to head... in the end that means nothing.... Just seems silly and absurd and contrary to what sports is all about.

 

[Owlfan_in_North Jersey]

Truth be told, the 4 that should play are conference champions of the 4 highest rate conferences in that particular season. The 5th P5 conference champion gets the at large vs the G5 champ.

 

[PSUPOWER]

The better team out of the 3 is the team that wins the Big Ten Championship.

The Committee has full discretion as to how they decide who the best 4 teams are and and there's no template or calculation used. Conference Champions are smiled upon and maybe the Committee wants to avoid conference conflict. W-L records, SOS, head-to-head data points scrutinized but not adhered to. Game videos watched including the eye test as a factor. Injuries are factored or at least that's what they state.

It's not what I think is most important or your data points.

The committee spoke:

01 Alabama
02 Ohio State
03 Clemson
04 Washington
05 Michigan
06 Wisconsin
07 Penn State
08 Colorado
09 Oklahoma
10 Oklahoma State

 

[shields]

Oklahoma vs Penn State would be good bowl game.

 

[RU-ROCS]

You just listed Nebraska as a quality win for Wisconsin, but don't list Iowa for PSU. Iowa finishes ahead of Nebraska in the B1G and beats them H-T-H 40-10 last week. By the way, Iowa beat Michigan. The week after PSU blasted them at Iowa. And the mediocre Pitt team that you cited as a reason to downgrade PSU went on the road and beat a playoff team (Clemson), while they only beat PSU by 3 at home early in the season.

People just see what they want them to see. Wisconsin and PSU with very similar resumes this year. The only boost they are getting (why talking heads are saying they have a shot) is because they will have beaten a team in the playoff (tOSU) AND won the conference they play in. I don't really agree with that, they probably need Clemson or Washington to lose to get in, but if they do - PSU will deserve it.

Armstrong was healthy and Nebraska was ranked when Wisconsin beat them. He was a mere shadow of his former self hobbling around against Iowa, a team RU came within a TD of beating -- enough said! And, Wisconsin beat LSU who was in the top 5 at the time, and who is still in the top 25. PSU has no comparable win OOC, and their slaughter at the hands of Michigan should count against them. They did not look like they belonged on the same fiield as UM. Just saying what my eyes saw.

 

[RU-ROCS]

Oklahoma vs Penn State would be good bowl game.

Agreed. A team with a great offense and no D against a team with a great defense and little O.

 

[zwicker]

That language discusses how committee members are supposed to distinguish between comparable teams.

There is no debate about Ohio State's resume being a top 2 resume in the country.

The question is how good is Michigan's resume.

Michigan has 2 losses, but, one of those 2 losses was the best loss in the country. And Michigan has beaten 3 top 10 teams this year, Colorado by 17, Wisconsin by 7 and Penn State by 39. Those wins just can't be ignored.

Their losses can't be ignored either. Michigan is OUT. They lost two out of three down the stretch. They should not even be ranked this high. They got lucky the week they lost to Iowa because about 5 top ten teams lost which kept them from falling. The winner of UW and PSU will hit 11 wins and jump UM. 11-2 > 10-2.

 

[zwicker]

I hate PSU with all my heart, but if they win against Wisconsin, they should be in. Conference Championship should mean something in all this.

No. The winner of that game will jump Michigan. They will still need either Clemson or Washington to lose and that will put the winner of that game in.

 

[zwicker]

Still, no. Penn State has two bad losses and I don't think anyone in the country really believes it's a top 4 team, even Penn State ... because it's not. Its single big win just happened to be quite timely. Great win, but shouldn't give them an auto-bid on its own. OSU is still the better team. I'd agree CC/head to head should get them the nod if both teams had one-loss with similar resumes, but PSU blew it early on.

The system isn't designed solely to advance conference champs. In fact, it can't do that, period.

ONE bad loss. One loss was by three to a top 25 team. Was that a bad loss for Clemson?

PSU's loss was early. UM lost two out of the last THREE. End of season is more important to the committee than start of season.