We are in complete agreement. I was agreeing with your post about expanding the playoff in the first place. What is wrong with you?
LOL. Okay, then.
We are in complete agreement. I was agreeing with your post about expanding the playoff in the first place. What is wrong with you?
1) Should a team which doesn't participate in a conference championship game be part of the final four?
2) If a team in the top four loses their conference championship game be bumped by a team not playing in a conference championship game or outside the top 4 (specifically, if Clemson or Washington were to lose, should Michigan or the winner of Wisconsin-Penn St. move ahead of them?)
6 teams. P5 champs + 1 wild card. Top 2 seeds get byes. Works for me.
This year seems to be the perfect storm for the definitive four team playoff system to be as marred as anything else... just curious of some of the opinions of this group. Let me lay out a few questions to start the discussion (assuming it has not already been beat to death on a thread I've over looked for which accept my apologizes )
1) Should a team which doesn't participate in a conference championship game be part of the final four?
2) If a team in the top four loses their conference championship game be bumped by a team not playing in a conference championship game or outside the top 4 (specifically, if Clemson or Washington were to lose, should Michigan or the winner of Wisconsin-Penn St. move ahead of them?)
Look forward to your analysis and thoughts
Doesn't change your point, but Clemson was the #1 seed last year.
One question 1 - It depends. When Alabama lost to LSU they were 1-2 in the nation and the game came down to the last play. After Bama lost a whole bunch of things then went "right" for them in terms of other teams losing. It made sense they were given another shot.
This year if Clemson, Alabama and UDub win they are locks. If Wisconsin wins there will be no controversy with OSU going to the playoff. If Penn State wins there will be some controversy if OSU gets the nod.
2 - If Clemson loses to Va. Tech they are done.
If Alabama loses to Florida I bet they still get the nod (but they are NOT losing to Florida so it is a moot point).
If UDub loses to Colorado they are done.
Michigan is DONE. They are no longer relevant in this discussion. They lost to OSU and they will be behind PSU or Wisconsin after this weekend. There is no way the Big Ten gets three teams even if Clemson and UDub lose.
Let's say there's a perfect storm. Alabama, Clemson and UDub all lose. In that instance your playoff will be:
Alabama
Colorado
Ohio State
Penn State/Wisconsin
Michigan is completely irrelevant. They lost two of their last three games.
In that case, Michigan would have beaten three of the teams (Penn State, Wisconsin, Colo) potentially in the Final Four and lost to OSU in Double OT at OSU.
Right. And Iowa, who is awful.
Oh, you mean Pitt who beat Penn State who's playing in the B1G Championship Game ?
What happens in a year where a P5 conference champ is only ranked #15?
By 1 point at Iowa on a last second FG. Iowa actually was much better toward the end of the season. After the Michigan game, they beat Illinois 28-0 at Illinois and then beat 16th ranked Nebraska 40-10.
It's not like Michigan lost at home to a middling team like Clemson did with Pitt.
I would certainly call Iowa a middling team.
Michigan beat PSU, 49-10. Pitt beat PSU, 42-39.
Michigan has one win outside their state this year (Rutgers)
But there was an issue when Nebraska, who wasn't in their conference championship game , made it to the national title game (iirc Colorado upset Kansas State that year in the Big 12 championship or final game of the season). It was one of the reason cited for a playoff. So, here we have the same situation with OSU. Clearly a top team, but didn't win the B1G. Does this mean conference champions are irrelevant compared to opinions as to who the best team in the conference may be?