ADVERTISEMENT

why were the two hottest teams left out of CFP?

W

withoutregard

Junior
Feb 6, 2014
691
167
43
No one can reasonably deny that USC and psu are hot as hell and could have created an upset or two. OSU and WA should have been replaced by these two teams, especially OSU.
I'm a Giants fan and look at what getting hot at playoff time delivers. I get it, USC was a tougher sell with three loses, but these teams are playing great.
Clearly the two best teams are in the final game, but the the first two games lacked competition, hot teams should matter.
 
withoutregard said:
No one can reasonably deny that USC and psu are hot as hell and could have created an upset or two. OSU and WA should have been replaced by these two teams, especially OSU.
I'm a Giants fan and look at what getting hot at playoff time delivers. I get it, USC was a tougher sell with three loses, but these teams are playing great.
Clearly the two best teams are in the final game, but the the first two games lacked competition, hot teams should matter.
Click to expand...
2 and 3 loses for each. They didn't earn the right to play in the CFP.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Steve91562, ScarletKnightRider, Giantfan82 and 10 others
its college football. not the nfl.

if you want nfl watch on sundays,
 
I don't like PU as much as the next guy, but say they go blow out USC like 38-3 .... they will have a point, and the committee will be questioned.
 
Still think PSU was the third best team in the B1G this year, but felt they deserved the spot for winning the conference. I know that the "playoff" is geared towards picking the best teams, not necessarily who earned it on the field.....but to me, that is a disservice and a mistake in the long run. And I absolutely loathe PSU. Not rewarding the conference champion is also setting us up to get screwed down the road. The one year in 25 or whatever that we squeak out the conference, and then they will throw Michigan or OSU into the final four because they are national names.

They need to get to the point where the division winners of the 5 Power Conference schools all are in the playoff. The conference Championship game becomes a "first round" of sorts for the playoff....and you can fill in around that structure somehow to make the numbers of teams work. Make the Big 12 add to 12 teams and have a conf championship game to maintain their autobid. My preference would be 5 conf champs + winner of 2 best non-power5 schools in a championship game, make the final 6. Top two seeds get a bye, 3 plays 6, 4 plays 5. 2 Extra games is all that's required.

With that said, I think Clemson and Alabama are a deserving final two. Good luck to them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RU62, jerseylion109 and Cheesesteak Vegas
Ohio State won at Oklahoma, what big road win did Penn State have? Purdue or Indiana.
 
Big road win does matter, the talking heads mentioned that win all season. Penn State was killed at Michigan on the road. Makes for good discussion.
 
Last edited:
shields said:
Big road win does matter, the talking heads mentioned that win all season. Penn State was killed at Michigan on the road.
Click to expand...
I know what the talking heads said, and I know at this moment in time the playoff committee has their criteria they are looking for, but OSU didn't win their own division. To me Division winner, and Conference Champion should trump the other stuff. Going forward I think it would be best to honor the division and conference champion over a strong team that failed to win their own division.
 
kjb32812 said:
Let's be honesty here. Penn State didn't deserve to be in over OSU. Not sure who else you would have them in over.
Click to expand...

That depends on how you value conference titles and head-to-head results.

Penn State also had a better resume than Washington, which could be highlighted further in Pasadena. The committee members will be big USC fans tomorrow.
 
WhiteBus said:
#allgamesmatter

Who cares who's hot at the end? It's about who had a great total season. There is no preseason . If you want to win a National Championship be ready to play great football from day 1.
Click to expand...

Unless you play Washington's nonconference schedule.
 
withoutregard said:
No one can reasonably deny that USC and psu are hot as hell and could have created an upset or two. OSU and WA should have been replaced by these two teams, especially OSU.
I'm a Giants fan and look at what getting hot at playoff time delivers. I get it, USC was a tougher sell with three loses, but these teams are playing great.
Clearly the two best teams are in the final game, but the the first two games lacked competition, hot teams should matter.
Click to expand...
Penn state doesn't deserve a football program...
 
Scarlet4ever said:
I know what the talking heads said, and I know at this moment in time the playoff committee has their criteria they are looking for, but OSU didn't win their own division. To me Division winner, and Conference Champion should trump the other stuff. Going forward I think it would be best to honor the division and conference champion over a strong team that failed to win their own division.
Click to expand...
So the OOC games should just be ignored? Then everyone will play FIU, Pottawotamie, and the Sisters of the Poor. That's great for football.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shields
Again when Washington signed to play RU Rutgers was coming off a nine win season and then Flood took over. And Rutgers had 5 players drafted after that year.
 
withoutregard said:
No one can reasonably deny that USC and psu are hot as hell and could have created an upset or two. OSU and WA should have been replaced by these two teams, especially OSU.
I'm a Giants fan and look at what getting hot at playoff time delivers. I get it, USC was a tougher sell with three loses, but these teams are playing great.
Clearly the two best teams are in the final game, but the the first two games lacked competition, hot teams should matter.
Click to expand...
The committee doesn't weigh late-season games more heavily than early-season games. Every game in the season matters. In 2008 we started 1-5, then went on a 7-game run in which we all of a sudden had one of the most explosive, dominating offenses in the country. There were few teams during our run that could have stayed with us (one of the ESPN announcers commented that it was a good thing WV got us early in the season). We were THE hot team in the country going into the bowl season. Had that happened this year, there is no way we would have deserved to have been in the playoffs. Early season matters to the committee, and PSU was blown out by UM and lost to Pitt. It's tough to let a team in who was throttled at all during the season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yesrutgers01
czxqa said:
So the OOC games should just be ignored? Then everyone will play FIU, Pottawotamie, and the Sisters of the Poor. That's great for football.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what the committee did with Washington.

What the playoff should have been...
...if you value conference champs: Alabama, Clemson, Penn State, Washington

...if you value SOS and resume: Alabama, Clemson, Penn State, Ohio State

The problem this year is the committee valued one nonconference win (OSU over Oklahoma) more than a head-to-head loss and conference title, while then turning around and rewarding a conference champ that played the second-worst nonconference schedule in the nation.
 
Scarlet4ever said:
I know what the talking heads said, and I know at this moment in time the playoff committee has their criteria they are looking for, but OSU didn't win their own division. To me Division winner, and Conference Champion should trump the other stuff. Going forward I think it would be best to honor the division and conference champion over a strong team that failed to win their own division.
Click to expand...
If you listened to the committee they said winning your conference didn't automatically qualify you for the playoffs. It was part of the criteria to be considered. Now if the playoffs were expanded to 8 teams, then I agree conference champs should automatically qualify along with 2 at-large teams. You'll have the power 5 champs, 1 overall G five pick and 2 of the highest at-large teams (top 10) all qualify.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUsSKii, Scarlet4ever, RutgersRaRa and 1 other person
shields said:
Again when Washington signed to play RU Rutgers was coming off a nine win season and then Flood took over. And Rutgers had 5 players drafted after that year.
Click to expand...

And I have no problem with Washington scheduling Rutgers. But the fact that Rutgers had a down season in 2016 should be considered when evaluating Washington.
 
Cheesesteak Vegas said:
That's exactly what the committee did with Washington.

What the playoff should have been...
...if you value conference champs: Alabama, Clemson, Penn State, Washington

...if you value SOS and resume: Alabama, Clemson, Penn State, Ohio State

The problem this year is the committee valued one nonconference win (OSU over Oklahoma) more than a head-to-head loss and conference title, while then turning around and rewarding a conference champ that played the second-worst nonconference schedule in the nation.
Click to expand...
Don't take this the wrong way... OK please do. Go back to your board to complain about PSU being left out. Somehow you love to turn every thread into a PSU one. If any of us went to the PSU boards and mentioned Rutgers more than once in a positive manner we would be banned.:chairshot:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Loyal-Son, RUsSKii and mdh2003
cubuffsdoug said:
Don't take this the wrong way... OK please do. Go back to your board to complain about PSU being left out. Somehow you love to turn every thread into a PSU one. If any of us went to the PSU boards and mentioned Rutgers more than once in a positive manner we would be banned.:chairshot:
Click to expand...

I believe it was the OP who made this thread about Penn State and USC.

Happy New Year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kjb32812
I give credit to Pitt for playing Penn State and Oklahoma State this year.
 
It would help everyone to keep in mind that as it stands now, the guiding principle for the committee regarding who is chosen to be in the playoff isn't the conference champs--if that were the case, there would be no need for a committee. Part of the allure of college football versus the pros is that there is more subjectivity in college football, which is why many fans are so into it. In the pros, if you blow out a team it counts the same as winning by 1. In college, it doesn't count the same, and that's where the college landscape is a lot more engaging and gives more room for debate. College basketball vis-a-vis March Madness is a halfway house between the pros and college, since there are 64+ teams who make it into the tournament, but the final 5 or 6 are always subjective. College football will expand to eight within a couple of years, but it will go to 16 eventually. This won't remove subjectivity completely, but it will remove it from the top teams.
 
Cheesesteak Vegas said:
I believe it was the OP who made this thread about Penn State and USC.

Happy New Year.
Click to expand...
There are regulars who talk shop here. The OP comes from a poster who seldom post on any football thread except to talk about things beside Rutgers. He talked about NJ kids committing to PSU or Michigan, but seldom had anything to say about Rutgers itself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 17Q66 and redking
gotta love these closet PSU fans...just under 3 years on the board..a few hundred posts...

Any time i'm around Russians or chinese people ( ya never know who is a secret agent these days) i mention a secret military facility deep under ground in the middle of nowhere, State College PA. One can only hope that if shit gets bad they waste a few nukes on that target.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUsSKii, redking, GSGS and 1 other person
Cheesesteak Vegas said:
That depends on how you value conference titles and head-to-head results.

Penn State also had a better resume than Washington, which could be highlighted further in Pasadena. The committee members will be big USC fans tomorrow.
Click to expand...

If Michigan would have gotten in over us I would have been pissed. OSU, not so much.

We had two losses and one of them was a shellacking. Five was fine with me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: megadrone
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D

Bowl destination analysis

Replies
99
Views
5K
The Round Table
cshelley
cshelley
RUich

The rest of the way...

Replies
40
Views
3K
Rutgers Football
beaced
B
R

The only reason to hope...

Replies
7
Views
795
Men's Basketball
Scangg
Scangg
mb5789

Why Rutgers Will Be Better Next Season...

Replies
122
Views
6K
The Round Table
yellowlot
yellowlot
bac2therac

GAME 9 OHIO STATE: Stuck in a Moment RU can't get out of

Replies
78
Views
3K
Men's Basketball
Greene Rice FIG
G
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back