SIAP: CFP Chairman calls last week's loss 'impressive,' explains why we have a shot
November 30th, 2016 at 10:13 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 30th, 2016 at 10:20 AM ^
Either they are getting in as #4, or not at all.
November 30th, 2016 at 11:00 AM ^
Likely. I mean to say that Michigan, OSU and Alabama are the three best teams and I don't believe it is close. If they play Bama first, Michigan can win. No doubt in my mind. To do so would take a significant physical effort. I could not take a rematch with a battered Michigan team against OSU and lose. I want them fresh, healthy and as angry as, well, a cornered wolverine. They lay waste to them and move on to fight the epic battle with Bama. I thought this was the dream depository, no?
November 30th, 2016 at 10:21 AM ^
Uhh I'll take getting into the playoff however we can get. Even if that means getting slotted against Alabama.
But I see your point. I want OSU. Give me another shot against those guys on a neutral field with an even angrier, more pissed off defense. Those guys would play possessed. Taco might wrack up 4-5 sacks that day. Barrett's upper half would be completely severed from its lower half by the end of the game.
Beat those guys, and I don't care what happens after that.
November 30th, 2016 at 10:20 AM ^
that 4-7 are so close. That could be interpreted as just setting the table for "all things being roughly equal, you pick the conference champion." But agree with comment below that this is largely being made up as they go along.
November 30th, 2016 at 10:34 AM ^
We thoroughly outclassed and dismantled that team in every phase of the game. Even with all of their "improvements," I would still take Michigan by 2-3 TDs if we played them again. Home or away.
49-10 baby.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 30th, 2016 at 10:24 AM ^
Both Clemson and Washington lose, and PSU wins. Playoff is 1. Bama 2. OSU 3. PSU 4. Colorado.
I know this makes no sense. But the past 2 decades has shown that we clearly can't have nice things. This scenario would be maximum anguish for U-M fans knowing we rightfully beat 3/4 teams in the playoff.
November 30th, 2016 at 10:39 AM ^
You know who's sitting home on New Year's Eve to watch Nick Saban Murder Sefo Liufau and and a rematch between OSU/PSU? Nobody. This has 0% chance of happening.
November 30th, 2016 at 11:15 AM ^
Is not jumping from 8 to 4. They have no shot.
November 30th, 2016 at 11:12 AM ^
I will legit eat a lemon if we make it in. Bookmark this thread, e-mail me
karpodiem at gmail dot com
best thing that could happen is if Clemson, Washington, and PSU win.
1) Alabama
2) Clemson
3) Washington
4) PSU
that is the optimum outcome for Michigan.
November 30th, 2016 at 11:16 AM ^
What??
November 30th, 2016 at 12:23 PM ^
I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous.
1. Ohio State is getting in. Nobody has the resume, or can acquire the resume to rival them.
2. Nobody is going to watch Alabama put in their 2nd string against PSU in the 3rd quarter to rest for the championship game.
3. Washington cannot be higher than the 4 seed with their resume. i don't care who you are, you do not play Portland State and Rutgers for your OOC games, and call yourself a solid playoff team. They needed help, and got it from Iowa.
November 30th, 2016 at 12:33 PM ^
OSU has no claim over PSU if PSU wins and Clemson/Washington also win. You'd have an undefeated team, two teams with a 12-1 record after winning their conference, and a team that won their conference and a head to head matchup with the only other team that's fighting for that last spot.
You're smoking rocks if you think OSU gets in with the scenario I laid out. I'm not speaking for any other scenario, I'm speaking for a PSU/Clemson/Washington conference winner scenario.
It's the best outcome for Michigan because it keeps OSU out. Why is this so hard for people to understand?
November 30th, 2016 at 12:36 PM ^
I think you're detached from reality. Did you watch the CFP show? Hocutt said that OSU and PSU are not even close in the committee's eyes. They will be in the playoff.
Reminder: All the fancy dancy criteria you listed are taken into account when splitting hairs. This is not the case between PSU and OSU, and the committee has been vocal about that, even dating back to LAST weeks rankings.
November 30th, 2016 at 12:45 PM ^
And there's historical precedent for that - there are examples in this thread where the Top 4 'actual' teams didn't go.
They also said Michigan said an outside shot, which is 100% inaccurate. Michigan IS NOT getting in. Period.
Also, what are you talking about with respect to splitting hairs? Everything I laid out, with the exception of PSU winning, is highly probable. Washington is favored in their game by 7. Clemson is favored by 10. PSU is a 2.5 point underdog.
Put it this way - I'll bet you $25 to the Chad Carr fund that if the scenario I laid out happens, OSU doesn't get it. Feel free to match me, I don't need $25. I'll donate $25 either way.
November 30th, 2016 at 12:51 PM ^
Splitting hairs in terms of when you watch a team on the field over the course of a season, you can't tell if one is better than the other. The committee is saying that when they watch tape on OSU and compare that with the tape they have on PSU, they are not close.
Sure, bet is on. I'll be looking forward to your contribution!
November 30th, 2016 at 6:17 PM ^
November 30th, 2016 at 1:02 PM ^
Period, end of discussion.
December 1st, 2016 at 1:35 AM ^
Talk about a snoozefest of a CFP!!
Alabama vs. Penn St.
Washington vs. Clemson
Good luck with that.
November 30th, 2016 at 10:51 AM ^
Washingtons SOS means little...thats what so frustrating about any selection process..They say it matters but in the end it doesnt...wtf?
November 30th, 2016 at 10:57 AM ^
The analysis of the article, not so much. To me the tell is the author's discussion of Florida State and Louisville. The author seems to believe the fact FSU is one spot ahead of Louisville means that FSU will get the ACC auto-bid to the Bowl game if Clemson goes to the Playoffs. This is incorrect. If a conference champion goes to the Playoffs instead of using the conference's auto bid, the Bowl game as first CHOICE on ANY team from the conference; they are not bound by the Playoff Committee rankings or anything else. The author's DERP on this point, and it was a major point in the article not just a throw-away comment, causes me to question whether the rest of the analysis is sound.
The Committee members comments cause me to feel much better about Michigan's chances when compared to Conference Champions of Colorado, Penn State, Wisconsin, Oklahoma or OK State. In my mind, a one loss champion trumps a one loss non-champion trumps a 2 loss champion trumps a 2 loss non-champion (among P5 schools; Western Michigan is not a Playoff team in my opinion). But, the Committee member said that the margin between a hypothetically one loss Pac 12 Champion Washington and a 2 loss non-champion Michigan is "razor thin." That tells me we have a decent shot if Clemson or Washington loses, and we compete with a 2 loss champion with a less impressive resume.
The problem with all of this is that Michigan is done for the year. We're like the downhill skier or the diver that has completed his last run or dive. We're in good position now, but the teams with a game to play have a chance to move past us, and we can do nothing. I don't worry about Penn State or Colorado, because Michigan won those games decisively. However, I think that if Wisconsin wins decisely over Penn State, they have a strong argument. Their only two losses would be close losses on the road to the consensus two best other teams in the B1G, and they have that psychologically huge win over a decent SEC team early in the season. I have no idea what to make of Oklahoma or OK State. Keep in mind that OK State "lost" to Central Michigan only because the officials allowed the last play of the game that everyone now agrees was a mistake. It takes no imagination at all to consider the game to be over, in accordance with the rules, one play earlier and with OK State the winner. If they win the Big 12, they really have only one loss and one embarassingly close win over a MAC team. What does the Committee make of that?
Like everyone else, I would dearly LOVE a rematch with OSU. Beating them in the Playoffs would cleanse the stink of losing "the Game" for the 999th time in 1000 tries. (I kid, but only slightly). As many observed, Michigan's intensity would be beyond 100% for that game, and I feel a win would establish psycological parity between the two teams for next season.
We live in interesting times.
November 30th, 2016 at 3:24 PM ^
The downhill skier analogy is only partially true. A skier who has complete their run can only move down as others take their turns. Michigan can in fact move up if those yet to play lose.
November 30th, 2016 at 11:02 AM ^
That's why it's important to continue pointing out officiating bias Brian.
November 30th, 2016 at 11:36 AM ^
For 2 years now though, the best 4 teams did not get into the playoff. In 2014 the best 4 teams were Alabama, Oregon, Ohio St, TCU (Florida State was not a top 4 team but they were undefeated and defending champs).
Last year the top 4 teams were Alabama, Clemson, Oklahoma, Stanford. The comittee just couldn't justify putting a 2 loss conference champ over a 1 loss conference champ.
This year they would really be breaking previous strategies if they decide to truly go for the "four best teams"
November 30th, 2016 at 12:55 PM ^
November 30th, 2016 at 12:43 PM ^
Who think Michigan will pass Washington with any form of win, you'd be pretty mistaken. The committee would be lit on fire if a team won their title game sitting at the 4 spot was passed over by the #5 who didn't play.
Washington or Clemson HAS to lose. That's the only path forward.
November 30th, 2016 at 2:55 PM ^
November 30th, 2016 at 3:07 PM ^
Sorry. They are already #4. Winning the PAC-12 and adding another win to their resume cements them in the playoff.
One of the two has to lose.
December 1st, 2016 at 12:46 AM ^
Yeah, the committee has already played their hand by making Washington #4.
How could UW drop from #4 by beating a top 10 team and winning thier conference? It makes no sense. It would only add to their position, not take anything away.
November 30th, 2016 at 1:32 PM ^
Forget the official critieria - it is in the CFP committee's best interest to pick the #4 team with the greatest chance of giving Alabama a competitive game.
I don't think Wisconsin can do enough on offense to look like they would scare the Tide. Washington is going to have to dominate Colorado for the committee's decision to be easy on Sunday. After watching the OSU game, I think the committee will look at UM as a team that can give Alabama a good game.
If we get in, we probably owe a big thank you to our friends in East Lansing for embarrassing themselves on national TV last year on our behalf.
November 30th, 2016 at 1:42 PM ^
As great as being in the CFP would be, I think the bigger prize would be the opportunity to play Ohio State again and curbstomp them on a neutral field with (hopefully) impartial refs.
November 30th, 2016 at 1:59 PM ^
There is a chance we jump Washington (assuming they win a close game) to set up that matchup on 12/31. If you asked ESPN, I bet they'd say that is the best case scenario for them too.
December 1st, 2016 at 12:48 AM ^
We are not going to jump Wash if they win, they are already ahead of us and would only add to their resume.
The only way we meet OSU in the 1st round is if Clemson and Wash both lose.
November 30th, 2016 at 2:54 PM ^
If I'm going to remain intellectullaly honest, I don't want any non conference champs in a 4 team playoff. I've always said the thing I hate about basketball is 4th place teams having a shot at being National Champs. If they couldn't win their regular season, they have no business playing for a national championship. That's the one thing that makes college football so great. The regular season actually matters. Last year, OSU was one of the top 2 teams easily, but lost their chance by losing to MSU. I'll cheer my heart out if Michigan makes it, but I don't think either they or OSU should in a 4 team playoff. They didn't earn it in the regular season.
Until a 6 team playoff where top for conference champions and 2 at larges at most happen, I'll always believe the teams that earned it in the regular season should be in. I understand some schedules, like Penn State's make it easier to get there, but they still one they key one they needed.
November 30th, 2016 at 6:31 PM ^
I have a sinking feeling is that CFP Hocutt is playing the classic lap us up some best possible backhand praise to appease the mad crowd (or in this case the writer/reporter) but at the end the real slap happens when it counts. The soften the blow approach always is somehow taken when trying to minimize the aftereffect to Michigan. Of couse unless Washington & Clemson lose and a close win/loss by PSU or Wiscy.
November 30th, 2016 at 7:04 PM ^
December 1st, 2016 at 1:21 AM ^
There is no way #6 Wisonsin doesnt jump Michigan with a win?
Sure there is.
The committee believing that Michigan is STILL the better team.