College Gameday & Conf. Title Games Open Thread

Submitted by mgokev on

Rece: "...lobbying for your program to get into the playoff like any good AD would do..."

It may not matter in the end...but, Warde! Y U NO LOBBY?

MGoBoard
Football

mgokev

December 3rd, 2016 at 10:32 AM ^

Nothing to suggest that was the case, IMO. He just kept saying, "I can't speculate as to what the other members will think..." when given a variety of scenarios. But, he did call Washington's win vs CU "impressive" which at 41-10 isn't exactly controversial. 

Joined: 06/17/2009

MGoPoints: 18955

M-Dog

December 3rd, 2016 at 12:26 PM ^

Carolina blue is right.  Holcutt just gave us the kiss of death.

He said in no unabmiguous terms, and he said it twice, that Washington's win was impressive.  They are already ahead of us at #4.  They are not going to drop below us.  They are in.

Then he siad something new . . . that the gap between Michigan and Wisc/PSU was small.  This is a different tone than we heard earlier in the week.  He is saying pretty clearly that we are all basically equal.

Remember, the CFP's 4 tiebreakers - conf championship, SOS, head to head, and performance versus common teams - kicks in if teams are "equal".

Because Colorado tanked last night, we lost our big OOC "win".  They will drop well out of the top 10.  So of the 4 criteria, we only win head to head.  

Wisc/PSU will have a conference championship.  They will have a roughly equivalent SOS, so that's a push.  And then as far as common opponents go, PSU will have beaten both the teams that beat us - Iowa and OSU, and Wisc will have beaten Iowa and took OSU to OT.  

We only win one of the criteria - head to head.  The Wisc game was close, and PSU can play the "all our starting linebackers were injured" card . . . which has worked better for them so far than it should. 

We really needed Colorado to win or lose very close. That they got crushed last night closes the door on us.

It's over.  *sigh*

 

 

Joined: 07/06/2008

MGoPoints: 257478

1VaBlue1

December 3rd, 2016 at 12:38 PM ^

I've only read what he said, but will agree with your assessment, M-Dog.  The committee gave us every opportunity to get in, but we fumbled it away by having to rely on CU.  I do think, had CU won, that there wouldn't have been a chance for the B1G CG winner to jump us.  But what he said last week is very different from what I hear he just said.  And so be it...

Its a waste that this defense will be left behind in the jumbled heap of also-rans this year.  It was too good for that.  I have no doubts that, playing 10 games each, UM would beat every team 8 times, with the exception of Bama and OSU.  Think OSU would get 4, Bama would take 5-6, maybe 7.

Damn shame.

Joined: 01/31/2016

MGoPoints: 127086

LS And Play

December 3rd, 2016 at 1:12 PM ^

You are assuming that the four criteria the committee uses are weighted equally. Michigan and PSU have similar SOS, Michigan won H2H, and PSU would have the conference championship and common opponents. But who in their right mind would weight "how you did against other teams" equally to "how you did against each other" when considering the two teams? What is more persuasive? PSU smoked Iowa and Michigan lost to them, or Michigan beat PSU by 6 TDs? I'm not saying we are getting in if Clemson loses, but there is definitely a shot, and probably a decent one. 

Joined: 08/25/2012

MGoPoints: 8457

ak47

December 3rd, 2016 at 2:32 PM ^

They actually said the gap from 4-7 was small on Tuesday but everyone ignored it and focused on the gap between Michigan and Washington being razor thin. Honestly well know even if Clemson wins since either way Wisconsin or psu could jump us to 5

Joined: 05/05/2011

MGoPoints: 33614

ijohnb

December 3rd, 2016 at 10:28 AM ^

was just on basically conceded that the winner of the BIG champ game isn't going. I still think it is us if Clemson loses.

Joined: 09/21/2009

MGoPoints: 69986

llandson

December 3rd, 2016 at 10:34 AM ^

Agreed. The BTCG is for the Rose Bowl. Contrary to what another poster said, I think Holcutt cemented Michigan being first in line by saying the committee regards Michigan as the best 2-loss team. 

Fergodsakes, the committee basically said they considered Michigan almost on same level with 1-loss Washington. My gut is that the committee regards Michigan's loss to OSU as something slightly less than a full loss. A 3/4 loss, if you will. 

Joined: 08/27/2013

MGoPoints: 891

ijohnb

December 3rd, 2016 at 11:31 AM ^

played the first half without their QB. It will still be a Top 15 win, with PSU and Wisky also being Top 10. I don't think the BIG champ game is for the playoff. They can't tip their hand anymore than they have. Clemson isn't losing though. Orange Bowl v. Florida State is pretty awesome though. Haven't played them in ages. Two very good programs with engaged fan bases. That will be a cool game and a live atmosphere, and I like that it is before the playoff. That game will be highly anticipated, and will probably get ratings on par with Bama/UW.

Joined: 09/21/2009

MGoPoints: 69986

MGolem

December 3rd, 2016 at 12:33 PM ^

Deserves the 2 seed. If Clemson wins they should move to 2 and Washington should move to 3. OSU is not the second best team and its really shitty that they could play less games (than the other 3 participants), and not win their conference (unlike the other 3), and still get to stay at the cushy number 2 slot. I'm all for leaving them out altogether but at the very least the extra wins for the other 3 teams should mean something.

Joined: 10/14/2010

MGoPoints: 13592

Mediocracy3

December 3rd, 2016 at 12:59 PM ^

It looks as if the top 4 will hold from last week. OSU may move to #3 depending on how good Clemson looks though. But a Clemson v OSU matchup in Arizona looks all but inevitable. 

Will be interesting to see how the committee views M tomorrow. I think the Orange Bowl is our likely destination.

Joined: 11/30/2016

MGoPoints: 152

1VaBlue1

December 3rd, 2016 at 12:43 PM ^

What is it about the "abhorrent" officiating do you think he considers a problem?  We know he's a fan of OSU - look at the Sugar Bowl a few years back.  Look at the B1G review of officiating after the OSU game - they said only 1 call was missed.

Face it, as long as Delany is in charge of the B1G, OSU will ride on top of everyone else.  Integrity of the game be damned...

Joined: 01/31/2016

MGoPoints: 127086

mGrowOld

December 3rd, 2016 at 10:36 AM ^

I't not the "Michigan Way" Kev.  Other things not the "Michigan Way"

 

1. Fourth quarter 1st downs

2. Night games at home

3. Fair officiating

4. Standing up to the B1G 10 when you're getting fucked over in scheduling

Joined: 10/04/2010

MGoPoints: 212943

One Armed Bandit

December 3rd, 2016 at 10:54 AM ^

Who says he's not? Since he's been AD, how much have we really heard from him? Shouldn't a good AD work behind the scenes instead of being front and center all the time, like a certain former AD? I'm sure Warde is doing the best he can to help Michigan, but he doesn't need to hold a rally or parade to do so.

Joined: 12/23/2010

MGoPoints: 5016

mgokev

December 3rd, 2016 at 11:30 AM ^

Because it's impossible for UM to jump UW and Clem if they both win and strengthen their resumes. Should've lobbied right after OSU and help the court of public opinion all agree UM was top-4. That way maybe we aren't talking about who needs to lose to get in but whether others' wins are enough to overcome UM's resume.

Makes no sense to start lobbying after the fact...by then it's too late unless a team loses. 

And public opinion matters. Human nature seeks confirmity. There are fascinating studies o this where an elevator is full of people facing the back wall not the door - certainly unorthodox. The test subjets calls the elevator and when the doors open, confusingly also stands facing theback wall for no other reason than that's what everyone else was doing. 

A massive PR campaign, talking heads getting on board, etc. would all be hard to ignore and a commiittee could be influenced...for the same reason grand juries aren't supposed to watch the news, read opinions, etc. It could've only helped, IMO. 

Joined: 06/17/2009

MGoPoints: 18955

mGrowOld

December 3rd, 2016 at 11:23 AM ^

He's just staying silent.

Remember how strongly he came out in support of Harbaugh after our getting fucked over by the officials in Columbus "the B1G  has made their decision.  We willl have no further comment on the matter."

WOW - WHAT A FIREBRAND!  I mean you can feel the paint peeling at the conference HQs with missive like thjat.  Canham and Bo would've been proud.

No guys sorry to burst your optomistic and hopeful bubble.  He's staying silent cause he's being silent.  We wont lobby.  We wont comment.  We wont do ANYTHING in support of our football team if it upsets the B1G. 

Nothing.

Joined: 10/04/2010

MGoPoints: 212943

Hard-Baughlls

December 3rd, 2016 at 11:33 AM ^

Harbaugh is the firebrand.  This is how it will always be.  We have a superstar coach that rubs a lot of people the wrong way - simply because he is brash (whereas Urban Meyer enables murderers and is a scumbag but the media loves his degenerate ways).  We probably need a low key AD so they can do the good cop - bad cop routine, otherwise nothing we bitch about will ever get any attention.

 

Joined: 09/28/2016

MGoPoints: 6637

Hard-Baughlls

December 3rd, 2016 at 1:21 PM ^

and I'm pissed too and would like them to make a huge stink about a game that look rigged as hell by 2 OSU fanboy officials to me.

However, we're fucked if we do. fucked if we don't.

DId B1G send us to the Rose Bowl after the OSU tie? - Or did they fuck us that year too?  

Joined: 09/28/2016

MGoPoints: 6637

trueblue262

December 3rd, 2016 at 11:56 AM ^

And it's because he didn't "have Harbaughs back"? Or because he's not enough like Don Canham? I can't wait for the reality to set in for most, that the finger pointing and blame should be on what happened on the field last week. Or in this case what didn't happen......like scoring inside the 5 yard line instead of fumbling. Was the fumble on Manuel too?? If we score on that posession, all this "bad officiating" isn't even an issue. The refs did blow calls......but really? Our answer to what happened is "Our AD didn't have our coaches back" Quit diggin' and start focusing on cheering on our team wherever they land in the bowl season. And Go Hokies

Joined: 07/01/2008

MGoPoints: 10357

1VaBlue1

December 3rd, 2016 at 12:56 PM ^

You're on a pretty tall horse, there, saying it's either this way or that way.  It's perfectly reasonable to be bitterly dissappointed with what happened, and still be excited for where the program is today vs where it was exactly two years ago today.  But the discussion here is about the former, not the latter.  I am disgusted that UM just took the fine and allowed itself to get screwed.  If nothing else, Manuel should have gone public with M's argument about the officiating.  Acknowledge the loss, but state explicitly that DISPITE the game errors, why did UM also have to beat an obviously one-sided officiated game.  Release some footage of missed calls and challenge the B1G/OSU to release footage of calls that would have benefitted UM.  And eat the inevitable fines.  Call out the hypocrisy of the B1G saying only 1 call was missed.  Make them explain that.

Challenging behind closed doors won't change this.  Delany has been running things like this for years.  Call it out publicly.  The integrity of the league, and to some extent the game, was harmed.

Joined: 01/31/2016

MGoPoints: 127086

mGrowOld

December 3rd, 2016 at 1:36 PM ^

It's been so long since we stood up for ourselves many people here don't think it can be done.  Well it can an- and it should've been - just as you described.

Tired of being this league's punching bag.

Tired of being a pussy and rolling over and taking whatever they tell us so we can be liked.  I dont give two shits about being like BTW - they hate us either way.

Joined: 10/04/2010

MGoPoints: 212943

charblue.

December 3rd, 2016 at 11:06 AM ^

but the league seems to believe that as long as Michigan is willing to act the punching bag for tortutous decisions and moves to challenge its history and tradition, the more this will continue to happen. You do go to stand up to that or nothing changes no matter how politely and gentlemanly your approach is.

Demanding accountability for poor officiting is response to a longterm issue not a short-term controversy. The league will never respond to this until the season is over. And then it will do so in a verry backchannel way while quietly moving to shore up the problem. At least, that's what I expect to happen on that front.

Playing martryr to the outcome of a season you controlled by your own play doesn't enhance your league authority one bit. But two things that are apparent that nothing will change, and politics will always be on the side of the Wolverines, and that is it's brand popularity and pull as a drawing card on TV, ticket sales and merchandising.

Hard to ignore the reality of the TV numbers last week's game brought home. Perhaps the biggest reason Michigan is still a consideration for some vague playoff consideration, if perhaps the best reason and only reason at this point, is its national draw in any playoff matchup you could imagine. That is why the consolation prize for Michigan happens to be two of the New Year's Day games which, I know for most of us, are small consolation for what might have been.

But winning in college football is like winning a national election. And we all know how that went this year. Somebody won the popular vote and somebody won the electoral college vote. We have a system, and that's the way it goes no matter who you thought was the better and more deserving candidate and winner.

 

 

Joined: 05/25/2010

MGoPoints: 11402

victors2000

December 3rd, 2016 at 12:18 PM ^

do about this? He might get a few moments on ESPN but he'll just come across as another Michigan Homer with sour grapes. Begging, whining. No one is going to do anything because there is nothing to be done. The committee would still have put Washington in 4th because it is the safest decision to make with two teams separated by a hairs' breadth, let it be settled on the field. This way if Washington won they remain in the top 4, if they lose they drop out. Unlike if Michigan was placed fourth and Washington blows out Colorado; that would have left a very unpleasant decision to make. The Big Ten would have said the same things they already said, issued the fine they already did. I doubt anything more would come of it, except maybe some letter later which may still happen.

Joined: 03/21/2009

MGoPoints: 12910