U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > College Football
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-30-2016, 08:20 AM
 
4,022 posts, read 1,856,542 times
Reputation: 3950

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by David A Stone View Post
if wishes were horses, beggars would ride

The ...2016 playoff only has 4 teams.

Saying, "if we had 8 teams, team X would be in the 2016 playoffs" is ridiculous.
Okay Okay! Stop crying.

I just bumped my thread from last year.

I wouldn't let yourself get so riled up over something so trivial. It isn't good for your health David.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-30-2016, 10:38 AM
 
7,906 posts, read 4,892,133 times
Reputation: 4101
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAM88 View Post
You do realize in that link you posted from ncaa.com that USC, also referred to as Southern California, is ranked #11, right?


Thanks.

I looked at the rankings several times wondering why USC wasn't there. I just didn't pick up on "Southern California." Dumb. I shouldn't post in the early morning.

Regardless, Michigan apparently is being given no credit for its victories over Wisconsin and Penn State, top 10 ranked teams, in its ranking versus Washington, whose best victory is against number 20 Utah. Michigan's second lost was on the road in double OT against the number 2 team. With Michigan's much tougher schedule, should Michigan be penalized for having an extra loss versus Washington.

Hopefully, in the future, all top PAC-12 teams annually will have independent schedules comparable to USC and Colorado, even Oregon. Ditto, for all Power 5 conferences.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 11:10 AM
 
7,906 posts, read 4,892,133 times
Reputation: 4101
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadgates View Post
Not saying you are wrong, but name one other sport where winning your division/conference does not earn a playoff berth.
Watermelon and grape fruit comparison.

Football is very different given the extremely small size of the play-off field and the relatively small number of regular season games. It's likely the only sport where the majority of top 10 teams don't make the play-offs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chadgates View Post
As far as Michigan being "penalized heavily" they dropped to #5. They didn't drop at all after their loss to Iowa, and dropped two spots after losing to OSU. That is a total of 2 spots for two losses. How you can interpret that as "heavily penalized" is pretty amazing.
Michigan definitely is being punished versus Washington for Michigan's far superior strength of schedule. Washington, before Colorado, hasn't even played a top 10 team. Michigan has played four of them, winning three of these games and losing only to number 2 Ohio State in double OT.

How on earth is it fair or accurate that Washington is ranked higher, especially now before the Colorado game???

It's fairly clear that the committee set itself up to put Washington in the play-offs if the Huskies defeat Colorado, with the only explanation likely that the committee didn't want two teams from the same conference in the play-offs if that could be avoided.

The committee has never explained how Washington is a superior team to Michigan.

<<The Huskies’ schedule has “been a concern for the committee and I would say it continues to be a concern,” Hocutt said.>>

Ranking reaction: Washington in position; plenty of intrigue in Group of 5

A concern that the committee has strangely dismissed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2016, 08:49 AM
 
2,841 posts, read 1,782,984 times
Reputation: 1248
In regard to Michigan.


They should be out with a Clemson And Washington win.


Clemson Conference Champ plus One loss > Michigan
Washington Conference Champ plus One loss > Michigan


The negative: Folks seem to forget Michigan has played 4 road games. They HAVE NOT beaten a team on the road with a winning record this season. They have lost 2 of the last 3 games. They were third in their division.


The fact that a one loss Washington team that wins their conference would need style points is absurd.


Having said that, If either of those teams lose I slide Michigan into the Top 4.


If Clemson AND Washington lose
The two loss teams after Michigan
Next in line
PSU/Wisconsin Winner
Oklahoma If they win
Colorado if the win
Okie State if they win.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2016, 11:53 AM
 
7,906 posts, read 4,892,133 times
Reputation: 4101
Quote:
Originally Posted by eastcoastbias View Post
The negative: Folks seem to forget Michigan has played 4 road games. They HAVE NOT beaten a team on the road with a winning record this season. They have lost 2 of the last 3 games. They were third in their division.


The fact that a one loss Washington team that wins their conference would need style points is absurd.
By the same token, Michigan has not lost at home. It defeated two top ten teams at home. Michigan beat number 7 Penn State by a whopping 49-10 at Michigan Stadium. Washington lost to number 11 USC at Husky Stadium. Michigan wins by this criterion big time.

Washington's best road win was over number 20 Utah.

Michigan lost on the road to non-ranked Iowa and to consensus number 2 Ohio State in double OT.

Iowa beat Nebraska at home, 40-10.

On balance, Michigan's resume remains far superior to Washington's at this point, so Washington should not have been ranked higher than Michigan in the most recent FBS rankings.

The Iowa loss obviously hangs heavily on Michigan, and obviously will be fatal if Washington defeats Colorado. However, by elevating Washington above Michigan, the FBS committee is awarding a team for scheduling a pathetically weak schedule. It's a bad precedent IMO. Washington's loss to number 11 USC at home is a more fatal flaw IMO than Michigan's two losses on the road, one against Ohio State in double OT, when Michigan's vastly superior home record is taken into account.

The total resume, including style points, should be the objective basis on which the FBS committee makes decisions.

To argue otherwise is what is truly ABSURD.

Without a convincing Washington win over Colorado, hopefully there is a possibility that Michigan jumps over the Huskies for the final play-off spot.

http://www.freep.com/story/sports/co...-cfp/94681926/

Many football fans believe that Michigan would match up much better with Alabama than Washington, so it will be a shame if we're treated to the likely pounding that Alabama will inflict on Washington because the FBS committee so cavalierly overlooked strength of schedule.

Last edited by WRnative; 12-01-2016 at 12:10 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2016, 12:05 PM
 
4,022 posts, read 1,856,542 times
Reputation: 3950
Quote:
Originally Posted by WRnative View Post
By the same token, Michigan has not lost at home. It defeated two top ten teams at home. Michigan beat number 7 Penn State by a whopping 49-10 at Michigan Stadium. Washington lost to number 11 USC at Husky Stadium. Michigan wins by this criterion big time.

Washington's best road win was over number 20 Utah.

Michigan lost on the road to non-ranked Iowa and to consensus number 2 Ohio State in double OT.

Iowa beat Nebraska at home, 40-10.

On balance, Michigan's resume remains far superior to Washington's at this point, so Washington should not have been ranked higher than Michigan in the most recent FBS rankings.

The Iowa loss obviously hangs heavily on Michigan, and obviously will be fatal if Washington defeats Colorado. However, by elevating Washington above Michigan, the FBS committee is awarding a team for scheduling a pathetically weak schedule. It's a bad precedent IMO. Washington's loss to number 11 USC at home is a more fatal flaw IMO than Michigan's two losses on the road, one against Ohio State in double OT, when Michigan's vastly superior home record is taken into account.

The total resume, including style points, should be the objective basis on which the FBS committee makes decisions.

To argue otherwise is what is truly ABSURD.
What's Michigan's best road win??
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2016, 12:29 PM
 
7,906 posts, read 4,892,133 times
Reputation: 4101
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadgates View Post
What's Michigan's best road win??
What's Washington's best home win??? Again, Michigan thumped number 7 Wisconsin at home 49-10.

Michigan lost on the road in double OT to number 2 Ohio State. There were over 110,000 fans at Ohio Stadium. Surely, this trumps greatly Washington's best road win, a victory over number 20 Utah.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2016, 12:29 PM
 
Location: At my house in my state
638 posts, read 714,667 times
Reputation: 667
I'm sorry but Washington being in Pac12 should automatically deduct points against their rise over Michigan's rank. Michigan should be top 4 still.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2016, 01:00 PM
 
2,841 posts, read 1,782,984 times
Reputation: 1248
Quote:
Originally Posted by WRnative View Post
What's Washington's best home win??? Again, Michigan thumped number 7 Wisconsin at home 49-10.

Michigan lost on the road in double OT to number 2 Ohio State. There were over 110,000 fans at Ohio Stadium. Surely, this trumps greatly Washington's best road win, a victory over number 20 Utah.
Best Home win??? Best Road win? Neutral site? If we are deciding which is more impressive hard to debate that a key road win isn't the best.

Michigan beat Penn St. 49-10. The win was somewhat scrutinized because Penn St. had key personnel out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2016, 01:04 PM
 
4,022 posts, read 1,856,542 times
Reputation: 3950
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadgates View Post
What's Michigan's best road win??
That would be vs 3-9 Michigan St.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WRnative View Post
What's Washington's best home win???
That would be vs 9-3 Stanford


Maybe Michigan shouldn't have lost @ Ohio St and then they'd still be in.

To argue a 2 loss Michigan is still deserving of 1 of the FOUR spots is absurd indeed.

IF we had an 8 team playoff then you could certainly argue for them being in, but with only 4 spots?

Gimme a break.


You simply cannot lose 2 games and then ***** about being left out. That is just reality.

You CAN lose two and still make it, but you need help in the form of other teams losing two.

Barring upsets this weekend Clemson and Washington will be 1 loss conference champs. No way to overcome that with two losses and no Conference title.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > College Football
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top