Conference Championships

Submitted by UMVAFAN on
I don't think we are getting into the playoff, but I don't think that winning a conference championship game or even getting into a conference championship game is a good measure for determining worthiness of playoff inclusion. If you look at PSU's schedule compared to OSU's and our schedule, you'll see they had a cakewalk in the West with Iowa as the only tough opponent. Unless teams are all playing "like" opponents, then it's difficult to say one team is more worthy than another. That being said, I wish we could go back to ten teams in the conference so we can have a true conference champion. In fact, wouldn't it be nice to have six ten team power conferences with the winners getting an auto bid into an 8 team playoff, with two at large bids. Rather than play conference championship games the first week of December, it will be the first round games, with the current New Year's Six format with traditional bowl games staying in place after this round.
MGoBoard

SBo

November 27th, 2016 at 8:28 PM ^

Conference championships aren't taken into account unless two teams are deemed equal, so we need one of Washington and Clemson to lose (ideally Washington).

Joined: 01/02/2016

MGoPoints: 12139

TrueBlue2003

November 27th, 2016 at 11:51 PM ^

to lose. It would just come down to us, and the winner of B1G and CU (both of whom we beat) and maybe winner of Oklahoma/Ok St?  In that case it would basically come down to whether the committee values a conference championship over a head-to-head win.  If Clemson loses to join the scrum, that just improves our chances and possibly even gives us a chance at a three seed.

Joined: 01/05/2010

MGoPoints: 38075

NittanyFan

November 27th, 2016 at 8:38 PM ^

Short of not counting those games among the conference record.  Which --- I'm not sure if that is a good solution either.

I guess you could also base the cross-division games on last year's standings.  But that's no guarantee either.  Some eastern team could have drawn (last year's standings) #1 Iowa, #5 Minnesota and #6 Illinois, while another eastern team could have drawn #3 Wisconsin, #4 Nebraska, and #5 Minnesota.  The numbers both add up to 12 - but not equal.

It is what it is.  One can only hope that in the long run it equals out.  But in the short-term, it definitely does not equal out.

Joined: 12/04/2012

MGoPoints: 43107

TrueBlue2003

November 27th, 2016 at 11:56 PM ^

because the division records makes it a three way tie, head to heads don't change the tie and then when it comes to the full conference record, we're back to square one. The only solution is to literally only use division record and then go to CFP for tie-breaker but that doesn't come out in time.  Probably have to live with it as is.

Joined: 01/05/2010

MGoPoints: 38075

AverageJoe

November 27th, 2016 at 8:41 PM ^

What is the conference payout for each team making the playoff? 

There is certainly a reason the ACC wants Clemson to win.

There is certainly a reason the Pac-12 wants Washington to win.

..and with Ohio State winning it gives the Big Ten the best chance at double dipping.

"Follow the money"

Just saying.

Joined: 11/06/2013

MGoPoints: 429

MonkeyMan

November 27th, 2016 at 8:56 PM ^

I hate beauty contests and subjective rankings- it smells like corruption and is un-american frankly

Lets just let in the teams that won their conference CG

If OSU wants to cry about Penn State then they should have beat them

Beauty contests and polls leave decisions to a back room committee

Maybe this is a reason why fewer people are watching football each year

its disgusting

Joined: 10/13/2013

MGoPoints: 1753

BlueInWisconsin

November 27th, 2016 at 9:04 PM ^

I've always been of the opinion that only conference champs should be considered for the CFP. But goof god the BIG championship game is a joke. Wisconsin is at best the 3rd best team in the conference and Penn State is an abomination that flukes its way past OSU and looked like a low level MAC school when they played Michigan.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 03/27/2009

MGoPoints: 4553

Ghost of Fritz…

November 27th, 2016 at 9:18 PM ^

a simple rule that conference champs only are eligible for the playoff, but only if there were no divisions in each conference.

The reality of divisions makes it possible (1) that strength of divisions will be imbalanced, (2) strength of cross division games will be imbalanced, and (3) the CCG may not actually include the two best teams in the conference (as is happening this year in the Big Ten.

The conference divisions make some sort of subjective test for picking playoff teams unavoidable. 

 

Joined: 10/04/2014

MGoPoints: 23880

One Armed Bandit

November 27th, 2016 at 9:21 PM ^

Is that OSU is presumingly going to make the playoff having to play one less game. So, if the committee is hell bent on putting OSU in, they should take into account that Washington, Alabama and Clemson had to play one more game to earn the right to get in. If all three win, the only fair thing to do would be to put OSU fourth and force them to play Alabama in the semi.

Joined: 12/23/2010

MGoPoints: 5016

Ghost of Fritz…

November 27th, 2016 at 10:16 PM ^

If OSU had to play Wisconsin in the CCG, they would have about a 40-45% probability of losing. 

Why should OSU get to stay ranked no. 2 merely by virtue of avoiding the chance of losing that the other teams in CCGs will face?

Non-conference champ selection teams should get the 4th slot almost automatically.

Joined: 10/04/2014

MGoPoints: 23880

TrueBlue2003

November 28th, 2016 at 12:16 AM ^

non conference schedule? They played three fewer games than everyone else already.

Seriously though.  The committee should essentially view the conference championship games as a chance to prove yourself compared to teams not in conference championship games, but shouldn't be penalized (relative to non title game participants) for losing one.  So if you're in the top 4 in the second to last week, you can't drop behind a team that didn't play in one, but you can move ahead of a team that didn't play in one.

For example, it'd be reasonable for the committee to make these the rankings after this week:

1) Bama

2) OSU

3) Clemson

4) Michigan

5) Washington

6) Wisconsin

Washington could win and move ahead of Michigan, but Clemson couldn't lose and drop behind Michigan because they were deemed better when both teams had played 12 games.  Clemson (and Michigan) could drop behind Washington and Wisconsin though.

Joined: 01/05/2010

MGoPoints: 38075

One Armed Bandit

November 27th, 2016 at 9:18 PM ^

Your Big 10 hierarchy would be:

OSU 2-1 (Beat Mich and Wisc, lost to PSU)

Michigan 2-1 (Beat Wisc and PSU, lost to OSU)

PSU 1-1 (beat OSU, lost to Mich)

Wisconsin 0-2 (lost to OSU and Mich)

 

So technically, the third and fourth best teams in the conference are going to play for the title. By this logic, Michigan should be ranked ahead of Wisc and PSU at this time. Even if PSU beats Wisc, it ends up 2-1, but have lost to Michigan in the head-to-head matchup. Wisconsin would only have one quality win against the other three, if it wins the title game.

 

Joined: 12/23/2010

MGoPoints: 5016

samdrussBLUE

November 27th, 2016 at 11:10 PM ^

In reality, this should be the case. Should! If you can omit Western as a conference champ because you dont feel they are one of the best four teams you can omit any conference champ and any team from any conference if you dont feel they are one of the four best.

I just don't think they make decisions along these lines. They could. But they don't. And likely won't



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 01/21/2012

MGoPoints: 18004

BoFan

November 28th, 2016 at 1:02 AM ^

As said before the games that determine division championships should start with only games in your division. We all play everyone in our division yet we have different crossover games. This would eliminate the issue where one team has to play the two toughest crossover games and the other the two easiest.

For example, Wisconsin is undefeated in their division. So they are in without question.

Michigan, PSU and OSU each have one loss. No one is eliminated since we each have one loss to each other. Now in this case no matter how you set it up after that, either OSU or PSU goes to the final. We still would have had to beat OSU.

Joined: 03/09/2012

MGoPoints: 19940

suh_dude_goblue

November 28th, 2016 at 9:34 AM ^

As much as I have been an advocate for how horrible and blatantly one sided the officiating was in that game (watched probably a million football games, never seen one like that where there were zero make up calls and unequitable distribution of "no calls"), if we take care of business in Iowa - we are not even talking about this and are booking our tickets to ATL.

I know the Speight injury, but that field goal against Iowa will forever haunt me. Why doesnt JH have Jabrill do the Kam Chancellor run and jump over the line? What is the downside to letting your best athlete do that? Penalty? Ill take my chances that a high school hurdler like that can jump over the line. I would love for someone more knowledgable about the program really delve into why he is so against doing this. I even thought this weekend he could have on that chip shot at the end.

Oh well, I was sitting in the endzone and had to form tackle a 60 year old man after he tried swinging at me to get a better spot to rush onto the field. You dont make this up. Grown men weeping that their team just got gifted a victory against the #3 team in the land. Such a joke, and that fanbase is unequivocally the worst and most wretched one in the land. Not even close. 

Joined: 02/05/2016

MGoPoints: 48