ESPN Cooks up a CFP "Doomsday Scenario" that includes Michigan
I couldn't help but salivate at the thought of this scenario playing out (hopefully in our favor).
Doomed if: Michigan wins the Big Ten. It's not anywhere near over in the Big Ten, which still has three undefeated teams and the possibility of a three-way tie in the East Division. If Ohio State beats Michigan State -- hardly a far-fetched result -- and Michigan wins out, then there will be a three-way tie between them, with each having lost to one another. In that scenario, it could come down to which team is ranked highest by the selection committee on Dec. 1. Let's say it's Michigan, and the Wolverines knock off an undefeated Iowa team to win the title: The committee would like the Wolverines. But would it like them enough to put a two-loss Big Ten champ in the top four? Probably not if the other Power 5 conferences have produced an undefeated champ or one with one loss.
LET'S WIN OUT AND MAKE ALL THE COMMITEE GO CRAZY!
November 4th, 2015 at 12:24 PM ^
November 4th, 2015 at 12:23 PM ^
But that's not the scenario they're talking about. They specifically referenced a three way tie for the division. If MSU loses twice, it's not a tie and there is no tiebreaker beyond the winner of OSU-UM head-to-head (resulting in Michigan advancing).
November 4th, 2015 at 12:13 PM ^
The records of all 3 will be compared. (Michigan being 10-2 and MSU and OSU being 11-1 means Michigan will be booted out ).
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 4th, 2015 at 12:17 PM ^
November 4th, 2015 at 12:26 PM ^
November 4th, 2015 at 12:35 PM ^
the tie-breaker is talked about by people who cannot read....
November 4th, 2015 at 12:47 PM ^
November 4th, 2015 at 12:54 PM ^
I didn't mean to imply that you cannot read, you obviously are capable of reading. However, you seemed to be confused and are not correctly reading the information being presented to you. If you are confused, just say you are confused, don't continue to argue a point that is not correct. It just doesn't make any sense.
November 4th, 2015 at 12:56 PM ^
November 4th, 2015 at 12:20 PM ^
Sigh. This been discussed ad nauseum here and elsewhere. The rule is poorly written, but it means that their records against one another are compared. They'd all be 1-1 against each other.
November 4th, 2015 at 12:15 PM ^
That says exactly what the above poster said it did. A three-way tie results in overall record as the first tiebreaker step. Michigan would be knocked out from that step and OSU would go as the winner of the MSU-OSU head-to-head in that scenario.
November 4th, 2015 at 12:21 PM ^
Uhh you're the one who is wrong.
1. The records of the three tied teams will be compared against each other.
Meaning each team would be 7-1 in the B1G and 1-1 vs each other. Amazing people can't comprehend this no matter how many times it's spelled out.
November 4th, 2015 at 12:33 PM ^
Maybe that's how they've chosen to interpret that, but the records of the three tied teams (10-2;11-1; and 11-1) is objectively not the same. If the rule stated "The records of the three tied teams in games played between the threed tied teams" then yes, they'd all be 1-1.
Perhaps that's just a really, really inartfully worded bit of drafting, but I would like to see something more than some conclusory statements from the board and a Tom Dienhart post to confirm if anyone has it.
November 4th, 2015 at 12:47 PM ^
It is badly worded. See my post above. Just look at the structure of tiebreakers 1 and 2, they are the same. The last three words of each clearly modifies records. The "against each other" is not modifying compared, it's modifying records. This is clearly also because none of the other tiebreaking points say "against each other." It's implied that they are comparing the records against each other, this "against each other" is meant to modify record.
November 4th, 2015 at 12:52 PM ^
it should be very obvious what was meant. Not only is #6 explicitly the overall record, but #2-4 are worded in the same manner as #1. There is no other reasonable interpretation.
November 4th, 2015 at 12:54 PM ^
November 4th, 2015 at 12:20 PM ^
November 4th, 2015 at 12:23 PM ^
To be fair, it's hard because the rules were written incredibly poorly. Instead of saying "The records of the three tied teams will be compared against each other" they should have said "The records of the three tied teams against each other will be compared."
November 4th, 2015 at 1:11 PM ^
...IF the CFP rankings + head to head result dosen't solve the tie.
I.E. the two highest ranked tied teams did not play head to head or if no team was ranked in CFP ranking.
November 4th, 2015 at 12:23 PM ^
My interpretation of reading this is that the first tiebreakers is how the teams did when they played EACH OTHER. So if any of the teams were 2-0 against the other two teams (in the event of a 3 way), they would get in. I don't read this to mean overall record.
"The records of the three tied teams will be compared against each other."
November 4th, 2015 at 12:24 PM ^
This is the correct interpretation. The rule definitely could have been written more clearly, but you are correct.
November 4th, 2015 at 3:16 PM ^
And this isn't possible with a round-robin division schedule (and everyone having one conference loss). Suppose Sparty beat OSU -- that'd make them 2-0 in the "tied group". Then, the loser of the Michigan / Ohio State game would have two conference losses and therefore wouldn't be involved in the tie in the first place.
The only way that tiebreaker #1 can be invoked is if each tied team has at least two conference losses.
November 4th, 2015 at 12:08 PM ^
O LET DO IT
November 4th, 2015 at 12:09 PM ^
November 4th, 2015 at 12:15 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 4th, 2015 at 12:09 PM ^
For my dreams, because the odds of us sneaking into anything at this point (including the B10 Championship Game) are slim. Hope isn't dead, but istill...
November 4th, 2015 at 12:13 PM ^
Making the playoff is virtually impossible for Michigan. That's ok; this is a rebuilding year. Even winning out is a hard ask, but let's say that Michigan does: It is not likely that we will leapfrog both once-beaten MSU and once-beaten OSU (even if we've just beat them) in the rankings. Our chances of making Indy in a three-way tie are almost nil.
But, while unlikely, it's not impossible to imagine MSU losing to OSU and getting shocked by PSU. If that happens, our path to Indy is open.
Frankly, all these scenarios are spurious. There is one thing that matters for the rest of the year: Beat Ohio.
November 4th, 2015 at 12:24 PM ^
Well put, but if we can find a way to get through the rest of the pre-OSU schedule with wins, and OSU beats Sparty, THE GAME will have a lot of meaning again.
Whatever happens, we are building in a great direction. Getting to the Big Ten championship game is a tall order now, but it could come about. Finish with a streak of wins, and Harbaugh-mania could influence the committee in the standings post-OSU UM victory. You never know.
November 4th, 2015 at 12:24 PM ^
OSU beats MSU, at least somewhat convincingly. Michigan then goes on to beat undefeated OSU, also at least somewhat convincingly.
Even if our overall record has one more loss than MSU and OSU at that point, their losses came right at the end of the season.
I think there would be a shit-storm (like 1974) if OSU went to Indy over Michigan in that scenario.
November 4th, 2015 at 1:36 PM ^
Well, we're not talking about tempramental polls here. We are, at least in theory, talking about an objective committee.
So it's possible. But we have an extra loss. The team is better than any team MSU or OSU played out of conference, but it is a loss. And, when you get into nitty-gritty comparisons, MSU has both a victory over us AND they played both major games on the road. OSU split, while we got both at home.
In a three-way tie, barring an unexpectedly lopsided game result somewhere, I would expect MSU to get the nod.
November 4th, 2015 at 2:03 PM ^
The 10-10 tie against OSU. If Franklin did not break his arm during the game, the Big 10 ADs would have voted for Michigan to go to the Rose bowl but 8 of them voted for OSU! My biggest disappointment of not playing in the Rose bowl as a 10 year old young Michigan fan!
November 4th, 2015 at 2:21 PM ^
as 74 in my head. Thanks for the correction.
That mess happened a few years before I was born. And I'm still pissed about it.
And for this season I'd be perfectly happy with ruining the Big 10's shot at the playoffs and going to the Rose Bowl.
November 4th, 2015 at 1:25 PM ^
And beating PSU and Indiana would help to. Neither game a gimme
November 4th, 2015 at 12:15 PM ^
1969 WILL repeat. Spartans will falter, and we play the game of our lives against OSU at home.
If we can get enough cred for beating #1 to end up above them in CFP standings, we can do it. I am an OSU fan until games end on Nov. 21. We need them to be #1 coming in. We have to finish on the uptick though. That's why the W at MN was so important; we may all look back at that as a turning point.
November 4th, 2015 at 12:16 PM ^
I'd bet that if Michigan wins out, they're in the Big Ten Championship game. As long as MSU loses to OSU I see us leapfrogging them, just have to get within 1 spot of OSU after beating them. Not great odds, but I think it's more than "slim."
November 4th, 2015 at 12:40 PM ^
Not mathematically impossible that any of this happens, but I'd advise everyone here to sleep on it. There's still a lot left to play for. Getting a NYD bowl like the Citrus or Outback Bowl is absolutely attainable, and if we do manage to win out, I'd bet a NY6 bowl is in the cards.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 4th, 2015 at 12:18 PM ^
Something is wrong with your medulla oblongata.
November 4th, 2015 at 12:21 PM ^
LIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINK please
November 4th, 2015 at 12:24 PM ^
This is exactly what I have been telling my coworkers. When we win out and then beat an undefeated Iowa that will be ranked in the top 10 we will get in!!
November 4th, 2015 at 12:26 PM ^
I don't think it's possible for 2 loss Michigan to overtake 1 loss OSU and 1 loss MSU in the CFP rankings barring some act of God. The most likely chaos case is MSU drops 2 including 1 to OSU, Michigan beats OSU and then wins the head to head tiebreaker to get into the championship game to beat Iowa and create chaos
November 4th, 2015 at 12:26 PM ^
November 4th, 2015 at 12:28 PM ^
If Ohio State slips up before the Michigan game. Let's say Ohio State loses this week to Minnesota and then beats Michigan State. We then beat Ohio State giving them a second loss but MSU finishes 11-1 with a loss to OSU. We would be tied with Sparty, but they would own the head-to-head tie breaker. We actually need Ohio State to be 11-0 coming into our game to make the three way tie work.
November 4th, 2015 at 12:30 PM ^
That sounds awful
November 4th, 2015 at 12:53 PM ^
How about in your scenario MSU just goes ahead and loses to Penn State.
November 4th, 2015 at 12:30 PM ^
If we get to OSU undefeated, with all the top 11ish teams that have to play each other between now and then you know we would enter that game probably in the 7-10 range at worst. Should OSU and Iowa win out, they're probably both top 5 when we see them. So entering the OSU game top 10 and finishing it off with wins over two top 5 teams will be enough to get in
Now, the statistical likelihood of that happening is probably just barely non-zero but should it happen then no doubt we're in
November 4th, 2015 at 12:32 PM ^
Not going to happen. Our only chance is a 2 loss MSU and a UM win over OSU. We are going to struggle against both PSU's and OSU's defenses. This will not pass the eye test to jump us to the highest ranking.
November 4th, 2015 at 12:37 PM ^
November 4th, 2015 at 12:43 PM ^
Got to beat Penn State, away, with The Game looming as a look-ahead, and even possibly at night.
No easy task, especially considering how opposing QB's have been turning into superhumans as of late.
That game is scaring me more as the season goes on.