CFP Rankings @7pm
November 29th, 2016 at 11:18 AM ^
It's as much of a long shot as we all once thought.
But, I think everything hinges on Colorado. If they take out Washington, then it's possible. If not, the journey is over.
November 29th, 2016 at 11:19 AM ^
I agree that Colorado has a better chance but does a Clemson loss not accomplish the same?
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 29th, 2016 at 11:21 AM ^
But I just don't see that happening. Colorado definitely has the horses to take out Washington. Not sure about VA Tech.
November 29th, 2016 at 11:39 AM ^
if VA Tech takes out Clemson and we inevitably get screwed by the Committee and are not taken in the CFP we will likely end up playing VA Tech(ACC Champ) in the Orange Bowl. The same VA Tech that we recently played in our last "big bowl" in the Sugar Bowl....... the same VA Tech that Harbaugh already beat badly.......... in the Orange Bowl.
You just can't make up that kind of been there-done that.
November 29th, 2016 at 11:46 AM ^
Argument also works to strengthen our schedule and H2H criteria with the committee. As someone said in another thread, this is the year the committee will need to put up or shut up on how important conference championships are when you hvae...whatever the hell we have now.
A clusterfuck? That's it.
November 29th, 2016 at 11:54 AM ^
will give you a real sleeper that will turn the world as you know it on its head.
Why not Colorado? They were in a dead heat with us with their QB went down and they will have finished the season with three ranked victories if they beat Washington and will be a conference champ.
Your mind = blown.
November 29th, 2016 at 12:01 PM ^
I've considered this, but their resume isn't as strong as ours, even with an assumed win over Washington. I personally think Colorado could be #4 with some help, but it's a tough argument to put the Buffs in when we beat them and have been in the top 4 almost all year. They're darlings, but let's not forget they played Stanford and UCLA close, and they're...not great Bob. I have reservations about their defense being able to stop any of the offenses in the top 5.
November 29th, 2016 at 12:05 PM ^
agree, this process is just crazy. We completely want Colorado to beat Washington right now, but if they did and were up like 31-7 in the second half I would be rooting for Washington to make a furious comeback and fall just short.
November 29th, 2016 at 12:16 PM ^
I can get behind! =)
November 29th, 2016 at 1:53 PM ^
to be technical about it.
November 29th, 2016 at 1:24 PM ^
November 29th, 2016 at 2:54 PM ^
Good point. M's whole game injuries against CU are rarely discussed, especially compared to their QB who played most of the game.
November 29th, 2016 at 3:39 PM ^
That's all well and good until you remember that our last major bowl game against VT was 5 years ago and Stanford's trashing of them was 6 years ago. That is a long time (our last Orange Bowl trip is ancient history, too). I'd prefer we face FSU if we're not in the playoff but still think a win for VT is just as good as one for Colorado... our best chance is if they both win, in fact.
November 29th, 2016 at 12:11 PM ^
Clemson has been exposed numerous times by weak teams. I could see it happening again.
November 29th, 2016 at 11:21 AM ^
A Clemson loss would accomplish the same as a Washington loss. I just don't see how the committee can put Wisconsin or PSU ahead of us, unless they are going to put a tremendous amount of value on winning the conference championship game.
November 29th, 2016 at 11:23 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 29th, 2016 at 11:27 AM ^
They lost at UM by a touchdown (yes score was closer than the acutal game). They also beat LSU and Iowa @ Iowa, which we could not do.
But PSU didn't lose enough people to make up a 40 point loss to us. Even if UW or Clemson lose, we need PSU to beat Wisconsin to feel good about our chances.
November 29th, 2016 at 11:34 AM ^
hopefully it's easier and Wash and Clemson both lose.
November 29th, 2016 at 11:44 AM ^
don't think that changes things all that much. There is seriously no way that one conference is going to get three teams in the CFP. If both Clemson and Washington loses it is going to be one more BIG team and the winner of OU v. OSU.
Our path to the playoff is a Clemson or Washington loss and a PSU ugly victory in the BIG title game. If they both lose our equation doesn't change because they will slide in the winner of Bedlam into the CFP. If Wisconsin wins they are in. It is only one spot that we are fighting for and we are fighting against Wisconsin.
November 29th, 2016 at 1:04 PM ^
1. We don't really know that they would slide in the winner of Bedlam (that would be a good jump - depending on how they are ranked tonight).
2. We don't know that they would put WI ahead of MI with a win (we still have the head to head and with this so close that may be the decider unless Wisky just blows the doors off PSU)
3. No one really knows that three B1G teams is not possible
November 29th, 2016 at 11:45 AM ^
huh? LSU is not a great win. We beat Wisconsin head 2 head and have a much better overall resume with 3 top 10 wins. There is really no way to justify Wisc over UM unless you put a bunch of weight on the conference championship.
November 29th, 2016 at 11:50 AM ^
don't want to discredit the conference championship game. If Penn State wins the BIG title game, they have an out to put Michigan in (a team they would much rather have then Penn State for ratings, Penn State's "gross" rep, and the overall knowledge that Alabama would mercy Penn State) because Michigan beat Penn State by 50 and putting Penn State in over Michigan would be a real head scratcher to even a casual observer.
But the Wisconsin game was close at the Big House, and like it or not, the LSU win will still carry some weight. Additionally, Barry Alverez will "recuse" himself from discussion about Wisconsin just as soon as I crack the starting 5 for the Pistons.
We badly want Penn State to win the BIG title game. Wisconsin wins and they are in.
November 29th, 2016 at 1:07 PM ^
Legitimate question here.
I keep seeing a lot of "the CFP wont want to discredit the conference championship games"
Why? and where are you getting your info?
I'm not saying they wouldn't want to or that they havent stated that. But I've never seen anything like that myself and I really don't see why they would care. They are two seperate entities that have virtually nothing to do with each other. The only real interest I could see the CFP having in conference champions is when determining 1 out of 2 teams both from a conference who havent played prior to their conference championship meeting.
November 29th, 2016 at 2:50 PM ^
See the criteria they use here: http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/selection-committee-faqs
The relevent bit is:
The committee selects the teams using a process that distinguishes among otherwise comparable teams by considering conference championships won, strength of schedule, head-to-head competition, comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory) and other relevant factors that may have affected a team’s performance during the season or likely will affect its postseason performance.
Everytime I have seen this discussed on television, they have talked as if the list is ordered from highest priority to lowest. It is quite possible that the committee has stated this somewhere, but if so, I don't know where.
November 29th, 2016 at 3:57 PM ^
IMO is this: OSU is in, there is zero doubt of that. OSU is not even playing in the conference championship, but the ratioale is they have one loss and have a superior resume to either PSU or Wisc. We are not playing in the championship either of course--but to put Michigan in the playoff, the committee would have to:
1. Put two teams from one conference in, always tough since it would mean eliminating the Pac 12 again or ACC.
2. But most importantly, can anyone see the committee putting TWO teams from the same conference when neither of them even played in the championship game? I think the odds against that are astronomical
November 29th, 2016 at 4:15 PM ^
I'm not at all convinced OSU is a lock to make it. If Washington and Clemson both win, that means there's only one spot for the Big10. If Penn State wins, they'll have victories over OSU and Wisconsin. They'll have two losses to OSU's one, but both of them were early in the year with a number of players injured, both factors the committee does take into account. I think it's quite possible that Head to Head matchup + Conference Championship + 9 game winning streak more than makes up for one extra loss.
Similarly, if Wisconsin wins, their only losses would be to Michigan and OSU by one score each. The would theoretically lose the head to head with OSU, but the game was tied at the end of regulation, so it's difficult to argue that the head to head established which team was better. Those are two really high quality losses. Victories over LSU and Penn State, and to some extent Iowa and Nebraska, are decent, certainly on par with Washington who will be getting in if they beat CU. I think it's less likely, but I still wouldn't be shocked if they got the nod over OSU.
Most analysts are seeing this as a litmus test of how important the conference championship is. Is it enough to put a 2-loss team in ahead of a 1-loss team?
The other team I'm keeping an eye on is Oklahoma. Much like Penn State, they lost twice early in the year, and if they beat Oklahoma State, will have strung together 9 straight wins. I don't see them beating out a two loss Big 10 champion for a spot, but again, depending on how the committe weights a conference championship, I could imagine them getting the nod over OSU. This would be an even more interesting scenario if OSU hadn't beaten them head to head, which I think likely rules this scenario out, but I don't think the chance is zero.
November 29th, 2016 at 6:42 PM ^
Thank you - I've been saying these same points in the other threads and it's just like speaking to a wall. No one wants to believe both UM and OSU will both be shut out, although it is a definite possibilty.
November 30th, 2016 at 12:24 PM ^
because I would put every cent I had on it. OSU is in, it is a lock, and there is not one occurence possible that will change that. A one loss OSU beats a two loss Wisc. or PSU EVERY time, under any circumstances.
November 29th, 2016 at 12:28 PM ^
They had a very tough schedule and their only losses were at Mich in a close game and OSU in overtime. Maybe they don't have the quality wins but add in a conference championship, and I see absolutely no way we'd get in ahead of them. Our only shot is PSU winning and then getting screwed over because there's also no way we get in over OSU. But I don't see how the committee can take OSU over PSU, so ultimately I really don't think we have a chance.
November 29th, 2016 at 12:40 PM ^
just realized this exact same thing. There is really no way.
The only way is if ESPN instructs the committee that Harbaugh v. Saban is just way too awesome to pass up and orders them to pick Michigan.
I think that it is time that we all start to settle into our slot in the Orange Bowl and hope it is an interesting opponent.
November 29th, 2016 at 12:52 PM ^
They haven't beaten anybody. What exactly does a conference title mean when if UM or OSU would have clinched Wisconsins division 2 weeks ago if they were in it. Michigan already played and beat PSU badly in the regular season, the resumes are not comparable.
November 29th, 2016 at 1:26 PM ^
They beat LSU on a neutral-ish field. They won @ Iowa (we did not) and they have better losses than we do. Add in a conference championship win over PSU and it's just not happening. I'm not saying I personally think they are more deserving. I'm saying the committee is absolutely not going to take us over Wisconsin.
November 29th, 2016 at 1:07 PM ^
As has been discussed nationally, PSU over OSU only if they are considered very close. Even with a PSU B1G win Saturday, it may not be close enough. And I don't see PSU over the team they lost to by 39.
November 29th, 2016 at 11:48 AM ^
Agreed that PSU beating Wisconsin would makes things a lot easier for us but I still think a Wisconsin win doesn't eliminate us.
When comparing "quality" wins, the Colorado win looks better than the LSU win now. Michigan has the head to head with Wisconsin. We both might have a PSU win.
I guess that Iowa game could be the one that tips the scale. Fuck me.
November 29th, 2016 at 11:32 AM ^
They could put wisconsin or psu ahead of us pretty easily since they would be the conference hampion of the conference we are in, with the same number of losses, and having finished stronger with 6 or 8 straight wins as opposed to us who would have lost 2 out of 3. The playoff comitte doesn't want to devalue the conference championship that much.
I think our best hope is that the comitte tries to send a message about OOC scheduling by leaving Washington at 5th and putting us in 4th still. That gives Washington the chance to jump us with a win next week so the playoff comitte isn't ruling them out but by doing that it would leave a buffer between us and wisconsin/psu. If we are ranked 5th and wisconsin and psu are and ranked 6/7 either would one of them would easily jump us with a top 10 win the final week, especially if its convincing. PSU's resume wouldn't even really be worse than ours, we would have head to head but they would have 9 straight wins, wins over 2 top 10 teams including the number 5 team in the country and both losses would be on the road to ranked teams. Throw in a conference champiosnhip and I think its a clear argument that a game from 9 weeks ago in which PSU had zero healthy linebackers isn't enough to overcome a conference championship and similar resume's.
November 29th, 2016 at 11:59 AM ^
Penn State. The committee cannot overlook at 39 point loss, linebacker or not. Mone did not play that game did he? Did Lewis play? I know Clark got hurt.
39 points. 6 touchdowns and a field goal.
November 29th, 2016 at 12:09 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 29th, 2016 at 1:31 PM ^
Penn State was Lewis' first game back. He had two solo tackles and two kickoff returns.
November 29th, 2016 at 12:11 PM ^
Resume's are more than single game, that game was week 4, since then psu has won 8 and would be 9 straight including a top 5 win that we don't have, two top ten wins, a conference champiosnhip, etc. If head to head was the deal breaker you make it people wouldn't be putting osu in over psu. It is pretty easy to over look a loss early in the season when you clearly are improving, that is why its better to lose early than late.
November 29th, 2016 at 1:09 PM ^
when its a 39 point loss, you don't overlook that.
November 29th, 2016 at 11:41 AM ^
I disagree. We need Washingoton to lose to Colorado to give us quality wins. A Clemson loss helps us, but it doesn't give us a victory over a 2nd conference champion like a Washington loss would. TBH my biggest fear is that the committee may end up jumping the Big Ten champ over us.
November 29th, 2016 at 11:49 AM ^
PSU ahead of us because they'll put OSU in, and there's no way they could justify:
a) 3 teams from one conference being in and
b) Putting OSU and UM in but a PSU conference champ out even though they beat OSU
It almost feels like it's tinfoil hat time. Definitely at 7 PM tonight...and next week.
November 29th, 2016 at 12:02 PM ^
Yes, this is why I think it more important that Wisconsin beats Penn State. Wiconsin lost to Michigan and Ohio State, so the commitee might look at that as you already played 2 of the current 4 playoff teams and lost. Penn State if they won should get the nod over us since they beat Ohio State and are BIG Ten Champs.
Colorado over Washington
Wisconsin over Penn State
and we are in I think.
November 29th, 2016 at 12:09 PM ^
said it on a couple of threads yesterday and I swear this is the last time I will mention it. There are other reasons why Penn State may not be the look the CFP wants. Other very compelling reasons. Other very compelling reasons involving the early lifting of sanctions. Other very compelling reasons involving things that Penn State gloriously celebrated at their stadium earlier this season and was widely denounced. Other very compelling reasons that nobody on the committee wants to spend a month talking about.
There are other compelling reasons why I think Penn State is the team we want to be fighting for that last spot.
November 29th, 2016 at 12:17 PM ^
VaTech over Clemson, just for good measure.
November 29th, 2016 at 12:12 PM ^
I could see Wisconsin. I could see Penn State if they blow Wisconsin out. But if Penn State barely squeaks by in a poorly played game, I think we might have a chance.
November 29th, 2016 at 1:32 PM ^
That's exactly what they are going to do. People would throw a fit if two B10 teams go and neither made it to the conference championship. Probably everyone in this thread is agreement we should be in over Wisconsin and PSU. Furthermore, a computer would like us over OSU because a double OT loss @ Columbus would suggest we are the better team.
But all of that doesn't matter. The committee is not in it to make the most rational and objective decision. They have their own agenda, and that agenda is not going to help us. So we can all talk in circles about who beat whom, but we're not going to the playoff.
November 29th, 2016 at 11:23 AM ^
The Michigan resume is that much better if they have a H2H victory over the B1G champ and the Pac12 champ. If Colorado loses, that will move them down a little bit which will make the win over them less impressive. We need Colorado to beat Washington, in my opinion
November 29th, 2016 at 11:32 AM ^
Plus our OSU loss is the very definition of a "good loss", to the extent such a thing exists.
November 29th, 2016 at 11:40 AM ^