Are you convinced the loser of Uofm osu is out?

I.B. Fine wrote:

Frank Ricard wrote:Normally I would love chaos. But this week I want status quo - Washington and Clemson win.

I still can't believe in if both UW and Clemson lost, they'd put in both the winner of the B1G AND umaa, and have 3 teams from the same conference in. If they did, the other conferences might actually just blow up the entire format and leave the NCAA.

This is one scenario where I'd love to see the chaos.
It's always fun when the curtain gets pulled back and you see what's really going on. Go PSU, Colorado and Hokies!

I agree plus it will be extra entertaining when UM gets their hopes crushed again.

What's even the point of me watching the conference championship game if both teams are automatically jumped by a OSU a team that didn't win their division?

steveschneider wrote:What's even the point of me watching the conference championship game if both teams are automatically jumped by a OSU a team that didn't win their division?

There isn't one

steveschneider wrote:What's even the point of me watching the conference championship game if both teams are automatically jumped by a OSU a team that didn't win their division?

What makes you so sure they won't be jumped by TWO other teams from the same division who didn't qualify for the championship?

steveschneider wrote:What's even the point of me watching the conference championship game if both teams are automatically jumped by a OSU a team that didn't win their division?

because you can bet on it.

This:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/columnist/george-schroeder/2016/11/30/college-football-playoff-rankings-ohio-state-washington-michigan-colorado-bedlam-winner/94654334/

And lets' face it. It doesn't really matter. Everyone else is playing for second after Alabama.

Un fucking real that all UM needs is CU to beat Washington and they are in.

If Michigan was called Iowa, theyd be ranked 9th.

Why even the play the games if the results dont matter?

TheReal_LWS wrote:And lets' face it. It doesn't really matter. Everyone else is playing for second after Alabama.

Im just not so sure. The SEC is so down this year, hard to get a read just how good Bama is.

But the res of college football is way way down. Just the fact Wisky, PSU, Colorao, Ok St, are ranked so high.

And even Clemson and O$U were much much better last year.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/columnist/george-schroeder/2016/11/30/college-football-playoff-rankings-ohio-state-washington-michigan-colorado-bedlam-winner/94654334/

"Again, that’s not a referendum on how good the Wolverines are, but they’re not getting in ahead of 11-1 Ohio State, which beat them. And if the Big Ten finds a way to get two teams in, it won’t be two teams that didn’t win the conference.

Got that?"

kingstonlake wrote:

steveschneider wrote:What's even the point of me watching the conference championship game if both teams are automatically jumped by a OSU a team that didn't win their division?

What makes you so sure they won't be jumped by TWO other teams from the same division who didn't qualify for the championship?

Yeah, it's absurd. This is like the year that MSU got jumped by Michigan for a BCS bowl vs. S. Carolina when we narrowly lost the B10 Championship game. I guess the big take away is don't go to the B10 Championship game?

The_Dude wrote:

TheReal_LWS wrote:And lets' face it. It doesn't really matter. Everyone else is playing for second after Alabama.

Im just not so sure. The SEC is so down this year, hard to get a read just how good Bama is.

But the res of college football is way way down. Just the fact Wisky, PSU, Colorao, Ok St, are ranked so high.

And even Clemson and O$U were much much better last year.

Agreed. Wish we had cook and crew this year.

WhiteBoyHatcher wrote:

steveschneider wrote:What's even the point of me watching the conference championship game if both teams are automatically jumped by a OSU a team that didn't win their division?

because you can bet on it.

In the end WBH, I think the flaw in your thinking (philosophy?  belief system) is that you have never given enough weight to brand name and suits at network.   Suits who were stung by the ratings taking a huge hit last year.  Suits that know if they get the right brand name, they bring in more money.  Oh, lets say we have a Harbaugh vs. Saban match up, two coaches who shot their mouths off at each other this summer.  How will america like that?  

Like somebody said, does anybody really believe if Michigan's name was Iowa and they lost two of three they wouldn't be further down than 5th?   We were always told that it's when you lose that matters.  Really?   Bullshit.  It's not when you lose, it's the band name you have when you lose.  

I wouldn't even have started this thread if I didn't believe that would be a huge factor.  If anyone can find the head of the committee talking to ESPN last night after he came out, he looked nervous. I think he knows he was full of shit.   

And you know who really is being anal raped in all of this?  Oklahoma State.  They did not lose to Central, not by any definition of the rule.  That game was over.  If they don't have that phony loss hung on them, they have to be between Wisconsin and PSU right now.  If they win in Bedlam?   Shit, they should be the one leap frogging shit. 

I'm telling you guys, Clemson or Washington takes a loss here.   Call it whatever you like, but OSU vs. (clemson or washington) and Michigan vs. Bama.  

I called it here first.

DWags wrote:

WhiteBoyHatcher wrote:

because you can bet on it.

In the end WBH, I think the flaw in your thinking (philosophy?  belief system) is that you have never given enough weight to brand name and suits at network.   Suits who were stung by the ratings taking a huge hit last year.  Suits that know if they get the right brand name, they bring in more money.  Oh, lets say we have a Harbaugh vs. Saban match up, two coaches who shot their mouths off at each other this summer.  How will america like that?  

Like somebody said, does anybody really believe if Michigan's name was Iowa and they lost two of three they wouldn't be further down than 5th?   We were always told that it's when you lose that matters.  Really?   Bullshit.  It's not when you lose, it's the band name you have when you lose.  

I wouldn't even have started this thread if I didn't believe that would be a huge factor.  If anyone can find the head of the committee talking to ESPN last night after he came out, he looked nervous. I think he knows he was full of shit.   

And you know who really is being anal raped in all of this?  Oklahoma State.  They did not lose to Central, not by any definition of the rule.  That game was over.  If they don't have that phony loss hung on them, they have to be between Wisconsin and PSU right now.  If they win in Bedlam?   Shit, they should be the one leap frogging shit. 

I'm telling you guys, Clemson or Washington takes a loss here.   Call it whatever you like, but OSU vs. (clemson or washington) and Michigan vs. Bama.  

I called it here first.

This is coming perilously close to the CFP becoming the new BCS.

One way out is to take four of the five P5 conference champions.  One gets left out and there will always be controversy about that.  Another way out is to take the five P5 champs and three at-large teams.

I'm open to either, but leaving out conference champs in favor or at-large teams is pure bullshit.  I don't care if they aren't "the best" four teams.

DWags wrote:

WhiteBoyHatcher wrote:

because you can bet on it.

In the end WBH, I think the flaw in your thinking (philosophy?  belief system) is that you have never given enough weight to brand name and suits at network.   Suits who were stung by the ratings taking a huge hit last year.  Suits that know if they get the right brand name, they bring in more money.  Oh, lets say we have a Harbaugh vs. Saban match up, two coaches who shot their mouths off at each other this summer.  How will america like that?  

Media is just lazy and loves to repeat themselves. Should be easy enough to make up stories about other teams to get ratings but that would take effort when instead you could just say block M, bo, helmets, harbs.

Floyd Robertson wrote:

DWags wrote:


In the end WBH, I think the flaw in your thinking (philosophy?  belief system) is that you have never given enough weight to brand name and suits at network.   Suits who were stung by the ratings taking a huge hit last year.  Suits that know if they get the right brand name, they bring in more money.  Oh, lets say we have a Harbaugh vs. Saban match up, two coaches who shot their mouths off at each other this summer.  How will america like that?  

Like somebody said, does anybody really believe if Michigan's name was Iowa and they lost two of three they wouldn't be further down than 5th?   We were always told that it's when you lose that matters.  Really?   Bullshit.  It's not when you lose, it's the band name you have when you lose.  

I wouldn't even have started this thread if I didn't believe that would be a huge factor.  If anyone can find the head of the committee talking to ESPN last night after he came out, he looked nervous. I think he knows he was full of shit.   

And you know who really is being anal raped in all of this?  Oklahoma State.  They did not lose to Central, not by any definition of the rule.  That game was over.  If they don't have that phony loss hung on them, they have to be between Wisconsin and PSU right now.  If they win in Bedlam?   Shit, they should be the one leap frogging shit. 

I'm telling you guys, Clemson or Washington takes a loss here.   Call it whatever you like, but OSU vs. (clemson or washington) and Michigan vs. Bama.  

I called it here first.

This is coming perilously close to the CFP becoming the new BCS.

One way out is to take four of the five P5 conference champions.  One gets left out and there will always be controversy about that.  Another way out is to take the five P5 champs and three at-large teams.

I'm open to either, but leaving out conference champs in favor or at-large teams is pure bullshit.  I don't care if they aren't "the best" four teams.

I dont think you can just blantantly say ake all the P5 champs because what happens if Va Tech or Florida upsets Bama or Clemson?

VT and Florida arent even top 20 teams and just because they pull one upset doesnt mean they get in.

With unbalanced scheduling, I dont agree with conference champs getting a free pass. Only if you played everyeon in your conference, then it would make sense.

Look at the B1G this year...the 3rd and 4th best teams are playing for the title.

Our division had a round robin to determine the champ

1 - PSU
2 - O$U
3 - scum

if you swapped the names with exactly the same results, no one would be saying the best team PSU is staying at home.

The_Dude wrote:

Floyd Robertson wrote:

This is coming perilously close to the CFP becoming the new BCS.

One way out is to take four of the five P5 conference champions.  One gets left out and there will always be controversy about that.  Another way out is to take the five P5 champs and three at-large teams.

I'm open to either, but leaving out conference champs in favor or at-large teams is pure bullshit.  I don't care if they aren't "the best" four teams.

I dont think you can just blantantly say ake all the P5 champs because what happens if Va Tech or Florida upsets Bama or Clemson?

VT and Florida arent even top 20 teams and just because they pull one upset doesnt mean they get in.

With unbalanced scheduling, I dont agree with conference champs getting a free pass.  Only if you played everyeon in your conference, then it would make sense.

Look at the B1G this year...the 3rd and 4th best teams are playing for the title.

What I said was I don't care if the "best" four teams aren't playing.

You want in? Win your conference.  I don't care about unbalanced conference schedules. If you can't win your conference, you're out, unless the field expands to eight.

I want as much subjectivity out of this as possible.

What about Western Michigan?

There should be a special trophy for the team that goes undefeated during the regular season and gets hosed by the selection process.

Go Hokies!

CORNER BLITZ wrote:Our division had a round robin to determine the champ

1 - PSU
2 - O$U
3 - scum

if you swapped the names with exactly the same results, no one would be saying the best team PSU is staying at home.

Exactly. If UM didnt have the brand name, they'd be ranked 8th and no even relevant in the playoff process.

Its a popularity contest for $$.

Last year, MSU TOOK what they wanted, and couldnt be denied as the uninvited guess. Similar to Washington...go 12-1 and win your conference, you're in.

my self-esteem is wrapped up in scUM not making the tournament.. please, PLEASE.. don't let them make it.

The_Dude wrote:

CORNER BLITZ wrote:Our division had a round robin to determine the champ

1 - PSU
2 - O$U
3 - scum

if you swapped the names with exactly the same results, no one would be saying the best team PSU is staying at home.

Exactly.  If UM didnt have the brand name, they'd be ranked 8th and no even relevant in the playoff process.

Its a popularity contest for $$.

except you just said...except you just said...

Look at the B1G this year...the 3rd and 4th best teams are playing for the title.

If michigan makes the cfp and the big ten champion doesnt then college football is dead and no longer worthy of attention. Hell, even if they put in three big ten teams its dead. Its getting to be nothing more than a reality show for men.

Ive been saying it for years now, but the solution is quite simple. Get rid of the big 12, have four 16 team conferences. The winners of each division play in the championship game which would essentially be the quarter finals. Winners advance. Simple. No muss no fuss, no polls no stupid eye test. Theyll never do it because thry thrive on controversy.

with the officiating last night at the basketball game, I definitely don't need scUM to get into the football playoff.

my emotions have had enough already this week.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:If michigan makes the cfp and the big ten champion doesnt then college football is dead and no longer worthy of attention. Hell, even if they put in three big ten teams its dead. Its getting to be nothing more than a reality show for men.

Ive been saying it for years now, but the solution is quite simple. Get rid of the big 12, have four 16 team conferences. The winners of each division play in the championship game which would essentially be the quarter finals. Winners advance. Simple. No muss no fuss, no polls no stupid eye test. Theyll never do it because thry thrive on controversy.

The beauty is in the simplicity.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:If michigan makes the cfp and the big ten champion doesnt then college football is dead and no longer worthy of attention. Hell, even if they put in three big ten teams its dead. Its getting to be nothing more than a reality show for men.

Ive been saying it for years now, but the solution is quite simple. Get rid of the big 12, have four 16 team conferences. The winners of each division play in the championship game which would essentially be the quarter finals. Winners advance. Simple. No muss no fuss, no polls no stupid eye test. Theyll never do it because thry thrive on controversy.

Bottom line they need to come up with a system where wins and losses determines who makes it. That's it end of discussion.

This evaluation process is pure bull shit.

CORNER BLITZ wrote:

The_Dude wrote:

Exactly.  If UM didnt have the brand name, they'd be ranked 8th and no even relevant in the playoff process.

Its a popularity contest for $$.

except you just said...except you just said...

Look at the B1G this year...the 3rd and 4th best teams are playing for the title.

I dont get what one has to do with the other.

steveschneider wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:If michigan makes the cfp and the big ten champion doesnt then college football is dead and no longer worthy of attention. Hell, even if they put in three big ten teams its dead. Its getting to be nothing more than a reality show for men.

Ive been saying it for years now, but the solution is quite simple. Get rid of the big 12, have four 16 team conferences. The winners of each division play in the championship game which would essentially be the quarter finals. Winners advance. Simple. No muss no fuss, no polls no stupid eye test. Theyll never do it because thry thrive on controversy.

Bottom line they need to come up with a system where wins and losses determines who makes it. That's it end of discussion.

This evaluation process is pure bull shit.

It's bullshit because you will always have the human element which is swayed by money and brand names.  As much as people believe they can be unbiased, they are always willing to be swayed.

Not always dwags. 4 conferences with 8 8 team divisions. No human element at all. Except for the refs who obvi hate michigan.

DWags wrote:

steveschneider wrote:

Bottom line they need to come up with a system where wins and losses determines who makes it. That's it end of discussion.

This evaluation process is pure bull shit.

It's bullshit because you will always have the human element which is swayed by money and brand names.  As much as people believe they can be unbiased, they are always willing to be swayed.

Pretty much.

At least the division champs are based on a w/l record.

Both Wisconsin and PSU earned their division championships. At least that part is BS free.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:If michigan makes the cfp and the big ten champion doesnt then college football is dead and no longer worthy of attention. Hell, even if they put in three big ten teams its dead. Its getting to be nothing more than a reality show for men.

Ive been saying it for years now, but the solution is quite simple. Get rid of the big 12, have four 16 team conferences. The winners of each division play in the championship game which would essentially be the quarter finals. Winners advance. Simple. No muss no fuss, no polls no stupid eye test. Theyll never do it because thry thrive on controversy.

Exactly this. If Michigan is selected to the playoff then college football is essentially WWE wrestling and we should start calling it "sports entertainment."

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:Not always dwags. 4 conferences with 8 8 team divisions. No human element at all. Except for the refs who obvi hate michigan.

You're logic is sound and man would I love that.  Then just fucking win and your in.  ND?   Join a conference.  However, just for arguments sake, lets say we get rid of the big ten conference instead of the big 12.  Are we all good with that?

DWags wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:Not always dwags. 4 conferences with 8 8 team divisions. No human element at all. Except for the refs who obvi hate michigan.

You're logic is sound and man would I love that.  Then just fucking win and your in.  ND?   Join a conference.  However, just for arguments sake, lets say we get rid of the big ten conference instead of the big 12.  Are we all good with that?

As long as MSU joins the new 16 team big 12 conference, yes.

DWags wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:Not always dwags. 4 conferences with 8 8 team divisions. No human element at all. Except for the refs who obvi hate michigan.

You're logic is sound and man would I love that.  Then just fucking win and your in.  ND?   Join a conference.  However, just for arguments sake, lets say we get rid of the big ten conference instead of the big 12.  Are we all good with that?

Honestly, as long as we had some geographic opponents (meaning I have no desire to be in a conference with Utah, Va Tech, Boston College, and TCU) I'd be fine with them blowing-up the Big Ten.

Clarett's Folly wrote:

DWags wrote:


You're logic is sound and man would I love that.  Then just fucking win and your in.  ND?   Join a conference.  However, just for arguments sake, lets say we get rid of the big ten conference instead of the big 12.  Are we all good with that?

Honestly, as long as we had some geographic opponents (meaning I have no desire to be in a conference with Utah, Va Tech, Boston College, and TCU) I'd be fine with them blowing-up the Big Ten.

I don't even care about that really.

steveschneider wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:If michigan makes the cfp and the big ten champion doesnt then college football is dead and no longer worthy of attention. Hell, even if they put in three big ten teams its dead. Its getting to be nothing more than a reality show for men.

Ive been saying it for years now, but the solution is quite simple. Get rid of the big 12, have four 16 team conferences. The winners of each division play in the championship game which would essentially be the quarter finals. Winners advance. Simple. No muss no fuss, no polls no stupid eye test. Theyll never do it because thry thrive on controversy.

Bottom line they need to come up with a system where wins and losses determines who makes it. That's it end of discussion.

This evaluation process is pure bull shit.

You mean like the NFL? Where a 9-7 Lions team could win their division, while teams with better records (probably in the East) could miss the playoffs? And not only that but then the Lions get to host a team with a better record for the first round of the playoffs?

All systems are imperfect. You have to have rules for qualifying to make the playoffs. This is why I was against the CFP, everyone was saying how great it would be, but I knew there would be whining about the teams that were #5-8 complaining they should be there over #4. To quote Abraham Lincoln (a great Republican!): "You can't please all of the people all of the time."

WhiteBoyHatcher wrote:

Clarett's Folly wrote:

Honestly, as long as we had some geographic opponents (meaning I have no desire to be in a conference with Utah, Va Tech, Boston College, and TCU) I'd be fine with them blowing-up the Big Ten.

I don't even care about that really.

The roadies, bruh. How am I supposed to go to all these road games when it's a two day drive just to get there?

Clarett's Folly wrote:

DWags wrote:


You're logic is sound and man would I love that.  Then just fucking win and your in.  ND?   Join a conference.  However, just for arguments sake, lets say we get rid of the big ten conference instead of the big 12.  Are we all good with that?

Honestly, as long as we had some geographic opponents (meaning I have no desire to be in a conference with Utah, Va Tech, Boston College, and TCU) I'd be fine with them blowing-up the Big Ten.

Being devils advocate, I can honestly see a ton of people from college administrators to influential alumni to coaches and fans that would bitch about their conference being dissolved.

We are older now and have enough money to fly and expand our horizons. (regardless I think my days of driving to Bloomington and/or flying to Utah are over for the next few years, thus my indifference)