The CFP Selection Committee
Have we talked about the CFP Selection Committee members? I've been rather "not sober" for most of the last month, so I might have missed it if there was a thread.
There are currently 12 Committee members. Of the 12 members, 2 have direct ties to Michigan (Jeff Long, Herb Deromedi), one has ties to MSU (Ty Willingham), and of course there's Uncle Barry from Wisconsin.
Does the composition of the Committee help or hurt our chances to get in? They did keep us at 3 even after losing to Iowa.
http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/selection-committee
November 28th, 2016 at 10:59 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 28th, 2016 at 11:02 AM ^
We will be #5. There is no way they can put us ahead of a one-loss Washington team.
Saturday is going to be really interesting. We might have a Big Ten Championship game that means nothing if Washington loses to Colorado. I don't see how the committee can put Wisconsin or PSU ahead of Michigan if Colorado wins.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:17 AM ^
why? they put a 1 loss A&M in the first CFP poll over undefeated teams....
If anything, what we have seen from the committee is that they dont go on record alone nor do they let it control their decision making.
What they go on is quality wins first and foremost. Luckily for us, we have a few.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:21 AM ^
And by their crazy logic, a loss to Alabama equaled a win versus everyone else. Also, people did not realize the SEC was such a dumpster fire.
Also, the committee did say that if two teams were equal, they would slot the conference champion higher as a tiebreaker. Because of our narrow win vs. Wisconsin, they may slot Wisconsin over us if they win the B1G.
I can't believe I'm saying this, but I miss the computers. This might be one of those years where the computers could like us a whole lot.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:25 AM ^
Well, S+P is a computer and it has
1) bama
2) UM
3) osu
4) Clemson
which I think is exactly right. UM is better than OSU. Clemson is the weakest of those teams.
I think the CFP will of course be studying these metrics to make their decsions.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:33 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 28th, 2016 at 11:48 AM ^
Our strongest case is if PSU beats Wisconsin and Colorado beats Washington. Clemson losing would help too but seems long odds.
Unfortunately, I think we will be on the outside looking in.
I really think they should expand to 8 teams and give the Power 5 Champs automatic bids and have 3 wildcards. Yes, it would diminish the regular season, but so far there have been too many top teams left out. TCU, Baylor in 2014, OSU last year, likely M this year.
November 28th, 2016 at 1:47 PM ^
I think 6 teams is perfect. 1 & 2 get first round bye. quarterfinals played on campus.
November 28th, 2016 at 2:11 PM ^
Hey I was just saying this in another thread. In fact I have always been in favor of this so back off my idea, bro.
Seriously though 6 is perfect, gives an incentive to being #1 and 2, on campus is perfect, gives an incentive for being #3 and 4
November 28th, 2016 at 12:20 PM ^
Lets look at wins:
Michigan - top three wins - Wisconsin (#6) PSU (#8),and Colorado (#9) - one is OOC which helps
PSU - top three wins - OSU (#2), Iowa (#22) and Temple (haha)
Wisconsin - top three wins - LSU (#21), Iowa (#22) and Nebraska (#23)
Even adding a PSU/Wisco win to the other team doesn't make their wins better than ours although Wisconsin would get a fourth top 25 win (assuming nebraska stays ranked in the CFP). Plus we have the head-to-head against both of them.
Now losses:
Michigan - losses - at OSU (#2) and at Iowa (#22)
PSU - losses - at Michigan (#5) and at Pitt (#24)
Wisconsin - losses - vs OSU (#2) and at Michigan (#5)
Wisconsin losses are slightly better (or less worse) but they also have the only home loss amongst us.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:32 AM ^
stay in the CFP top 4 was very early in the season. Now, the committee has a full body of work available for each team. So, each win's quality can be better evaluated.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:10 AM ^
The B1G "champ" will be exluded from the CFP this year.
I believe we are in with just a Colorado victory over Washington. Go Buffs!!
November 28th, 2016 at 11:12 AM ^
on Washington is SOS. M still has 3 top 10 wins, including a potential PAC12 champion. M's 3rd best win will be Washington's first by a mile if they even win.
It could hurt them is all I'm saying.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:16 AM ^
not "could."
WILL hurt them.
November 28th, 2016 at 12:18 PM ^
The only win over a ranked team they have is a sad sack #17 Stanford. Michigan has 3 top 10 wins and effectively a tie against #2.
So is 11-1 with a terrible resume better than 10-2 with a dominant one? I would argue no and I think the committee thinks likewise because of A&M being above UW initially and us not moving after losing to Iowa. Would you put Western in over UW because Western is 11-0? No, because SOS matters
November 28th, 2016 at 11:17 AM ^
If Wisconsin and Colorado win, both will have 11-2 records and conference championships. Michigan will have 2 wins against both of those top 10 conference champions, a similar 10-2 record and a close double OT loss on the road to the potential number 2 team in the nation with some questionable officiating, and another top 10 win.
I'm guessing the playoff committee is really hoping for wins from Alabama, Clemson, Washington, and Penn State. In that instance, they can choose all conference champions, and a head to head win of Penn State over OSU. A Wisconsin win with OSU getting the nod with head to head win is also a possibility.
Any way you look at it, it can be a very messy and long Sunday for the committee.
November 28th, 2016 at 12:05 PM ^
However, I would guess that the committee would choose OSu over Washington. I say that because they elevated OSU to no. 2 recently, and it will be hard to drop them to no. 5 just because Wisconsin (OSU beat them) beats Penn State.
But who knows?
November 28th, 2016 at 11:35 AM ^
UM is one of the best 4 teams in the country. I think they should be ahead of WI and CO if they're both 11-2. I hope that view prevails.
However, I think the committee would not do that if WA loses. They want conference championships to mean a lot, and I think they'll use this example to plant that flag. They have the excuse that the CO and WI wins were at The Big House, and were early in the year. Despite UM's resume, H2H, and tape, I don't have much hope for sound committee reasoning.
EDIT: To take the two non-BTCG participants over the B1G and PAC12 champs is too much for the committee. One will piss someone off already.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:08 AM ^
think we will have a good idea whether Michigan is going to get in, or has a chance to get in, on Tuesday. If they have pretty much decided that the winner in Indy is getting the fourth spot with a Clemson or Washington loss, we will be ranked below Penn State and Wisconsin on Tuesday. They really could not justify having either team jump us after the BIG championship game when the fact remains that we still beat them both.
I think we are either going to be ranked #5 or # 7 on Tuesday, and we will have our answer then as to whether we have any prayer.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:21 AM ^
agreed. this tuesday's rankings are absolutely crucial to UM's CFP hopes.
if we see either PSU or Wisky in top 4 - no chance we make it.
however, if it looks like this, which I think it will:
1. bama
2. OSU
3. Clemson (or UM)
4. UM (or Clemson)
I believe we will still have a very good shot at making the playoffs.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:40 AM ^
There is precedent for the opposite. Ohio St jumped the Big 12 teams in the final poll first go-round. Some of that was the Big 12 trying to be cute in not naming a champion, but I wouldn't discount the additional quality win the Big 10 Champion will have next week.
I don't see any chance for us in the playoff, unless total chaos occurs, such as Washington losing, Oklahoma winning and Clemson losing.
Then your choices are Alabama (obviously) + 3 of the following:
Ohio State (didn't win division 1 loss to PSU, beat Wisconsin)
Big Ten Champion Wisconsin (lost to both OSU and Michigan) OR
Big Ten Champion Penn State (beat OSU, lost to Michigan)
Oklahoma (2 losses, one being OSU)
Colorado (2 losses, one being Michigan)
Clemson (2 losses, didn't win conference, won division)
Michigan (2 losses, one to OSU, beat Colorado, both Big 10 champion options)
6 teams 3 spots. You can make any circular argument you care to amongst those last 5 teams.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:28 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 28th, 2016 at 11:01 AM ^
November 28th, 2016 at 11:49 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 28th, 2016 at 11:01 AM ^
UM didn't fall after losing to Iowa because Clemson and Washington also lost.
I doubt the composition of the committee will really help much. The most help we can hope for will come from Virginia Tech, Colorado, and PSU.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:20 AM ^
That's what I was thinking, to be honest - if there is help, it may need to come from a series of unfortunate events (well, unfortunate for some) in the games which will be played this coming Saturday, including our own conference championship. The odds of all the stars aligning are slim really, and I don't know that even that would be enough but it would definitely remove obstacles.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:03 AM ^
November 28th, 2016 at 11:12 AM ^
I agree. Alverez will be a big, authoritative personality in the room. Although he is suppose to recuse himself when they discuss Wisky. Don't know how that works.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:16 AM ^
As someone who has been in different types of "rooms where it happens", what will happen is this: Barry will recuse himself when Wiscy is discussed. But, when he is in the room, he will shit on everyone and everything else that is his competition. He will do it in the most generic, reasonable way possible, e.g., "well, if we put team X in, it means we don't value the conferences and their championships. Is that the message we want to send?" etc. I've seen people operate who are good at this and by the end, everyone ends up agreeing with them and half of them not even understanding how they've been manipulated.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:28 AM ^
I'm sure wily ol' genius Barry is going to pull the wool right over Condi's eyes. There's no way she'll see through that ruse.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:15 AM ^
'Committee members associated with any team under consideration during the selection process will be required to recuse themselves from any deliberations associated with that team;'
November 28th, 2016 at 12:42 PM ^
"any deliberations associated with that team" - what does that mean?
Clearly he can't be involved when directly discussing Wisky, but could he be involved when discussing Michigan, but Michigan's fate and Wisky's could be mutually exclusive.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:07 AM ^
I think it would be hilarious if Alvarez lobbied hard for Wisky, they get into the CFP, then Alvarez fires Chryst and coaches Wisky to a national title. It would seem about as legitimate and appropriate as the refs in our game this weekend... :-D
November 28th, 2016 at 11:10 AM ^
alvarez is recused from speaking about or lobbying for Wisky - thought this was common knowledge
November 28th, 2016 at 11:24 AM ^
OK, that seems like an air-tight, foolproof check against corruption.
Condie Rice: "Coach Barry, without mentioning Wisconsin, which teams do you like?"
Barry: "They all suck. None are worthy. I do like that Misconsin Madgers team, though."
November 28th, 2016 at 11:12 AM ^
"The selection committee ranks the teams based on conference championships won, strength of schedule, head-to-head results, comparison of results against common opponents and other factors."
Would seem to favor us getting in over several other teams that are in the hunt. Unless they're giving a ton of weight to conference champions, in which case OSU should be staying home too.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:30 AM ^
Not quite, OSU deserves to be in, they're an 11-1 team whose lone loss came against the division champ, and they beat Oklahoma big on the road, Wisconsin on the road and us. The Iowa loss really hurts us. If we had won that game, we'd have the same argument, being an 11-1 team whose lone loss would've been to the #2 team in the country.
What's strange is that the B1G's two best teams will not be playing for the conference title, but went 3-1 against the division champions.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:43 AM ^
There is no circumstance that I see where M gets in but not OSU. But I could see OSU getting in and not M. Regardless of how it happened, they have a better record and beat us head to head.
November 28th, 2016 at 12:35 PM ^
November 28th, 2016 at 11:13 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 28th, 2016 at 11:25 AM ^
We've beaten most of the teams we'll be competiting with for the last spot, assuming Clemson or Washington falls. We beat both B1G division champs (Wisconsin and Penn State), and if Washington loses, we will have beaten the Pac 12 Champ (Colorado). I do think Michigan is better than all these teams, but it's hard to say they deserve to be in ahead of them. The Iowa loss really screwed us.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:26 AM ^
our former coach Lloyd Carr was supposed to be a member of the Selection Committee. He was appointed earlier this year but well before the season started, he begged off that commitment citing health reasons.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:31 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 28th, 2016 at 12:35 PM ^
because he feels like we got what we deserved for going playaction from the endzone.
November 28th, 2016 at 11:28 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 28th, 2016 at 11:35 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 28th, 2016 at 11:47 AM ^
November 28th, 2016 at 12:06 PM ^
FWIW:
Oddsmakers have these odds of making the CFP
Bama 5/7
Osu 2/1
Clemson 6/1
UW 8/1
Wisconsin and Michigan 20/1
EDIT: These are actually football futures for winning the National Championship. Espn had these as actual odds of "making it." I looked up the futures on line.
November 28th, 2016 at 12:05 PM ^
I like our chances.
To make the playoff format legit for years to come, the 4 teams they want are the ones who are gonna claw each other to death for 4 quarters.
I think they saw that last Saturday.
Someone has to go up against Bama that's not a warmup game. Bama has rock OL, rock DL and running QB. Think of a team who did well to 97% shutdown probably the best running QB....Think of a coach who has a mind steely enough to go toe to toe with Saban.
The committee has already put a flag out denoting their propensity to go rogue by putting in aTm earlier in the season, I take it as a sign there's more coming and its not just going to be the 4 conference champions scrubbing it out until Bama trashes them all. Committee has already made it known that they "dont consider OSu and PSU to be in the same class of teams". In my opinion they bow to no conference nor any tradition.
Putting M against Bama in the 1v4 game would be huge. Giving both teams time to rest and prepare you can make the mental jump that it would be one hell of a game that would be watched nationwide, because of a) the controversy stirred to make that happen, and b) that M would matchup extremely well due to above factors.
Washington would seem to be the weakest link we would have to overcome. The P12 being garbage this year isn't helping them. Wash lost by 2 scores at Home to USC, we have 2 road losses by a combined 4 points. That we essentially flushed Colorado....if Washington plays them very close and/or loses, I can see enough logic for Michigan to enter based on top10 opponents overcome, common opponent test, and the doubt that has been sowed worldwide as to whether osu got "aid" in their victory.
If we continue to stay at position 5 on Tuesday then I think the table is set for above scenario to play out Saturday. I really like our chances here.
Of course I could be absolutely wrong and they go 1985 and put in the 4 conf champions. Ho Hum.
November 28th, 2016 at 12:07 PM ^