I also have an issue with 11-1 PSU being ranked ahead of 10-2 OSU going into championship week. Too much emphasis was put on the Michigan loss and not enough emphasis placed on the GREAT win that OSU had....at PSU. OSU had the much more difficult schedule going to Oregon, PSU, and playing IU at home. They went 2-1 in those games. PSU went 0-1. I would have had 10-2 OSU ahead of 11-1 PSU based on SOS and the head to head. Then when PSU matched OSU's Oregon loss, it was a no-brainer to rank OSU ahead of them.
Explain PSU over OSU again
- Thread starter Sean Miller Fan
- Start date
I also have an issue with 11-1 PSU being ranked ahead of 10-2 OSU going into championship week. Too much emphasis was put on the Michigan loss and not enough emphasis placed on the GREAT win that OSU had....at PSU. OSU had the much more difficult schedule going to Oregon, PSU, and playing IU at home. They went 2-1 in those games. PSU went 0-1. I would have had 10-2 OSU ahead of 11-1 PSU based on SOS and the head to head. Then when PSU matched OSU's Oregon loss, it was a no-brainer to rank OSU ahead of them.
So PSU should’ve gotten in the playoff in 16. Precedent was set that unless (even then not always) records were identical head to head didn’t matter.
OSU 11-1
PSU 11-2
Mich 10-2
PSU beat OSU but lost to Michigan. OSU lost to PSU but beat Michigan. The 3 teams were essentially even so you have to go with OSU since they only had the 1 loss AND had a massive blowout win at Oklahoma, who finished #7. So not really much of a discussion.
I think sometimes SMF forgets that teams don't just play one game, they play a dozen. That one result might matter more than any other one particular one, but it doesn't matter more than the other 11 in aggregate. Or even come close to it.
After all, Northern Illinois was 1-0 against the top 12. How are they not in the playoff?
They lost like 5 games. You guys are comparing things that arent equal. OSU and PSU have almost identical resumes so you give it to OSU on head to head.
You keep coming back to your opinion that this should be only about the team's resumes, when the committee's actual remit is to select the best teams.
You can argue that you think they didn't pick the best teams, or didn't pick them in the correct order, but they aren't supposed to be ranking resumes. And you continuing to insist that that should be the criteria does not make it so.
There is more to it than just selecting the best teams, however. The committee has to factor in the team's resumes to an extent. OSU is better than PSU, no question in mind. I honestly think OSU is the best team in the country. But OSU is ranked where they deserve to be ranked (which is below PSU) based on resume, because the best teams don't always win, and OSU happened to lose twice.
So they thought PSU was a better team than OSU straight-up, not considering resumes?
Apparently some people think that losing to a mediocre (at best) Michigan team isn't actually a sign that your team is really good.
In 2016, Penn State beat Ohio State H2H, won the B1G East Division they were both in AND won the B1G conference championship. Ohio State took the 4th playoff spot; Penn State was relegated to 5th.
This year, Penn State finished with the better regular season conference record and higher placing, despite the H2H loss. And the committee sent a clear message that playing well, but losing, in your conference championship game will not be held against you and drop you below teams you were ranked ahead of and that didn’t make their conference championship game.
This year, Penn State finished with the better regular season conference record and higher placing, despite the H2H loss. And the committee sent a clear message that playing well, but losing, in your conference championship game will not be held against you and drop you below teams you were ranked ahead of and that didn’t make their conference championship game.
Last edited:
They think that losing to a 7-5 team proves you are worse than the team you beat at their place. But these are very stupid people. Politician-level dumb. These aren't people with doctor or lawyer-level IT'S. They applied the same logic to Pitt/UVa in hoops. Pitt blew UVa out at their place. Had better NET, better SOS, best win (at Duke). But we lost to Missouri on Halloween so UVa is better.
Sorry but this OSU team is really good. I called them the best in the country, and I admit that's debatable. But like I said, good teams sometimes lose. Sometimes they lose twice, which OSU did.
The committee should be very proud of the job they did, totally jobbing the number #1 and only undefeated team in the land by making them play the most talented team in the field in their 1st game. I don't mind expanding the field, but, you need to reward the only undefeated team not f*** them.
They need to stop giving byes to these crappy teams that win these weak conferences.
Yep. It's really a disgrace. What chaps my ass the most is that Ped st. got what should have been Oregon's draw. If they can't seed more appropriately next year, they need to go back to 4 teams.
It looks like getting a bye may not have been an advantage. They all might lose.
It is a disgrace. If the best that the champion of your conference can do is to be losing to the third place team in their conference at halftime by four touchdowns then, heck, they should probably just exclude your conference from the playoffs entirely. Play in the FCS playoff instead.
If everyone played their schedule up to, say (using this year's calendar) November 30, and then the first round of the playoffs was on December 7 and the second round was on December 14 then I think the bye would be beneficial. But not playing from December 7 until January 1 is too long to be an advantage. The teams that played December 21 and then had a week and a half to the next game have the clear advantage.
Wow … some interesting stuff posted on here. Like us, Pitt plays in the ACC. If you think the B1G is a bad conference, what’s your opinion of ours?
I’ll take you inferiority complex you suffer from out of the next question.
SMU / Boise were easy? The same SMU team that beat Pitt 48-14?
Come on down
I come here because I like the school my daughter is a graduate. I laugh a lot at the post.
We poke fun at the Dawgs for all their driving skills but we win 1 out of 10 on the field. That’s what Pitt would win against them. Except it .. life would be better for you.
Happy New Year
They really need to get to this type of schedule for this playoff setup. This would be championship week.
In fairness, the aura that currently exists with Ohio State wasn't really breathed into existence until last week. As of the end of the regular season, people proclaimed they weren't the same Ohio State team and weren't that good. Lost to Michigan, could have lost to Nebraska, etc.
The greedy bastards that run the sport aren't going to get rid of the conference championship games, so go to something like (again, using this year's calendar), conference championships December 7, first round playoff games December 14, second round playoff games December 21, semifinals today, then take a week off and play the championship game either on Thursday, January 9 before the first round of NFL playoffs, or if you prefer to not play on a Thursday, play it on Tuesday, January 14 after the first weekend of NFL playoff games.
Well we have a 5, 6 , and an 8 seed in the final 4 so far and that includes no upsets. That speaks volumes about the seeding blunders!
They've looked like the best team all year to me. Yeah, Chip Kelly's offense laid an egg against Michigan. But they looked excellent against PSU and Indiana, and nearly won playing on the west coast at Oregon. Statistically, they had the best defense this season in the entire FBS.
UVA beat Syracuse twice. Pitt lost to Syracuse. UVA won at Clemson. UVA had a better ACC record. UVA beat TAMU & Florida. Florida easily defeated Pitt.
Unlike tOSU or PSU in football, UVA & Pitt were both irrelevant nationally in hoops last year, so it doesn't really matter. UVA obviously has the better resume tho.
UVa had the much easier ACC schedule which is why Pitt's overall SOS was better. Pitt has better wins. At Duke. At Virginia. NC State twice. Not even a question that Pitt was more deserving.
Terrible draw for the #1 seed. My guess is that Vegas metrics would have shown that OSU would have been favored over on a neutral field over the 11 other teams....which means they have the best team in the playoffs. You cant go ONLY by Vegas metrics but you also cant seed the best team 8th and completely f*** the 1 seed. Remember, had Oregon won yesterday, they then get rewarded with a road game at Texas in Arlington.
Rewarding the top 4 conference champions by guaranteeing them a top 8 seed and at minimum, a home game is fine.
Would have been:
1. Ore
2. UGa
3. Texas
4. PSU
5. ND
6. OSU
7. Boise
8. ASU
9. Ten
10. Indiana
11. SMU
12. Clemson
I for 1 am happy oiregon lost so that SEC idiots can stop bitching about who deserved to be in or not. O$U is going to win the natty, only question now is going too be bye how much?
