According to the Tony formula (margin of victory, minus opponent’s ranking, minus 2*number of opponent’s previous losses), Washington had the biggest win this weekend. It doesn’t always look pretty when you’re playing a top ten ranked team, but they were never behind, and dominated the stats for rushing, passing, turnovers, time of possession, etc. Even with Condi on the selection committee, there is no way they could not be in the top four.
The team to wonder about is not Washington, but Penn State. IMO they earned a spot over OSU.
I agree. I think it’s hard to argue otherwise, but traditionally, bowl selection committees have been pretty creative coming up with justifications for having the bowl they want rather than the bowl that schools and fans deserve. We’ll know in a couple of days, aye?
I think Penn State has a very strong case for the title game, but the argument for OSU will be that they have one fewer losses. The counter-argument is that that one loss came to Penn State, and it came mid-way through the season, unlike Penn State’s two losses. In my mind, it’s more valid to assess a team over the final 6-8 games of the year than the first 4 or so weeks. PSU has been a better team over the late stretch than pretty much anyone in the Big 10. And I’m not sure that they don’t match up better against Alabama or Clemson than Ohio State does, given the offensive balance that Penn State has.
OSU might have had another loss if they had played Wisconsin yesterday. Wisconsin took them to overtime when they played earlier in the season.
If they were in different conferences, or PSU hadn’t beaten OSU, it would be a tough call. IMO it’s an easy call when PSU is the B1G champ and OSU didn’t make it to the championship game. And beating them head to head should make it a no-brainer.
How can you leave out the conference champ, and pick another team from the same conference, let alone one that lost to the champ? Why do they even play the games, if at the end of the season they just pick who they want?
And just to be clear, I have no rooting interest in either team. I’ll be rooting for Washington, since (if my calculations are correct) Oregon won’t be invited.
The problem with conf champ games is that the “best” team doesn’t always win, which then leads to people trying to subjectively determine who belongs.
I’m in favor of a system that uses the conf champ game as a gate, even if it means the best team may not be in the playoffs. It does mean everyone knows exactly what they must do to get to the playoffs (mostly) and any committee input is to sort out who is stronger of all the conf champs.
I basically agree that Penn State should have gotten the nod, but I at least think there is an argument to be made for Ohio State. People could argue that Ohio State is a better team, in spite of the fact that they lost a close game to Penn State. You could argue that Ohio State had a bad night and that Penn State had two bad nights, and thus, Ohio State is more deserving than Penn State. That’s one way to approach that debate.
For the record, I don’t subscribe to that argument. I’d argue, as you apparently do, that there was an agreed-upon format for determining the team most deserving of being called conference champion and that Penn State clearly established itself as the best team based on that format. Further, I’d argue that Penn State was clearly a better performer down the final stretch of the season when teams have had a lot more time playing together and when we’re seeing teams play at their best. Teams playing in the CFP are more likely to play like they did during the final 4 weeks of the season than they are in the first 4. No team in the Big 10 was better than Penn State in the final 6-8 weeks of the season. In fact only Alabama (and maybe Western Michigan) can argue that they played as well as Penn State during that stretch.
Looks like we’re set now: Alabama v Washington and Ohio State v Clemson. I’ll have more detailed analysis and picks later, but just off the top of my head, I’d obviously think Alabama is a clear favorite, though I’d give Washington at least a fighting chance. OSU - Clemson should be a good game. I kinda lean Ohio State on that one but Clemson will be tough (I think).
Is the point of the playoff selection committee to be so terrible that fans will demand an 8 team playoff? Ohio State is in despite not only not winning its conference, but not winning its own division and even qualifying for its conference championship game.
Penn State wins its conference, but is bypass by the team it beat. Michigan has an identical record to Penn State and beat it, but is behind both Ohio State and Penn State.
Isn’t the mantra of the playoff system that “Every Game Counts”? I guess every game counts unless you are the committee favorite that loses when it counts.
I think the Committee’s argument is that Ohio State destroyed the Big12 champion Oklahoma while Penn State lost to ACC middler Pittsburgh and got slaughtered by Michigan, which Ohio State defeated. I don’t buy that argument myself, but it’s at least rendering something like a cogent argument – that and the fact that OSU only lost one game. Granted it was to eventual Big 10 champion Penn State, but having said that, having watched the game, OSU was actually in control of the game except for the 4th quarter.
I personally agree that Penn State should get the invitation over Ohio State but I don’t think that the decision to select OSU was an outrageous one. I would have been more upset had 2-loss Michigan beaten out Washington.
Basically, they don’t believe that Washington is better than OSU, despite the fact that they destroyed Colorado with a sub-par performance from their quarterback.
Or, if you prefer, as we who are Left Coasters (in my case, by birth) say, the system’s rigged against the Pacific Coast teams.
I think that was the mantra of the pre-playoff system. Now, every team gets 1 mulligan. (Alabama didn’t have to use theirs, so they get top seeding.) With an 8-team playoff, every team will get 2 mulligans and the regular season will matter even less. But I’ll save the rest of my ranting for Saint Cad’s thread, if he gives a link for it.
Last year there were several bad bowl gamess because of mismatches, and I blamed it all on Ohio State losing to MSU. A deserving (but unqualified) MSU made the playoffs and the ripple effect was bad bowl games all around. I don’t think that Ohio State is “unequivocally” better than Penn State, but they are better. I made a thread a while back about how head-to-head is overrated. If you think that PSU is BETTER (not more deserving) than OSU, then I have to ask you where Pitt should rank.
I think the playoff committee got it pretty much correct. They showed that conference championships matter by moving Clemson up 1 spot (although that only affects uniform colors) and PSU up 2 spots. They showed that SOS matters more by putting OSU at 2-3 and ahead of Washington. Washington makes the playoffs by being a 1-loss CC, but gets punished for having a weak NC schedule.
BTW, I think that Conference Championships should matter way more for the fact that they are an extra win over (what should be) a good team, and not so much for the title. e.g. Ok beating OkSt mattered very little (IMHO), because it was just their 12th game.
Agreed. Since Miami beat Pitt who beat Penn State who beat Ohio State, then Miami is three orders better than Ohio State.
I view a Penn State loss to Pitt as a lesser black mark than an Ohio State loss to Penn State. Any team can take a lesser opponent too lightly. Nobody seriously suggests that Pitt is a better team than Penn State. However, in a head to head matchup where both teams are prepared to play at their best, a head to head loss is more illustrative IMHO.
Every game counts - but not equally. Otherwise, Western Michigan would be the #2 seed.
Based on experience, I would say that the most important factors in determining the influence of a loss are (a) to whom, and (b) when. The closer it is to the end of the season, the more effect it has. Even somebody on the CFP committee said that they try and get the teams that are the best “now.”
Case in point: 1993 - Notre Dame beat Florida State and had only one loss (and not in its bowl game), but Florida State ended up passing ND in the rankings and winning the national championship. I doubt that would have happened had ND’s lost been before, as opposed to a week after, the FSU game.
