Kesley, I agree with your assessment about Alabama. I just don't think they are unbeatable. Our defense forces our opponents to play their absolute best and covers up for our offensive mistakes.
With the new standings, it certainly leaves open that Michigan can get into the playoffs. Neither they nor Ohio State have games to play this weekend. But if Washington or Clemson were to lose in their conf champ game that would open the door for UM to sneak in to the playoffs. If both of them lose and Wisc wins could 3 of the 4 playoff spots go to B1G schools?
That would be interesting if 2 teams from the same conference make it into the playoffs and neither even played for their conference championship! Hmmm? :shock: What would people say if this was the SEC? Corey would be shooting up the Beltline! :lol:
I was listening to ESPN radio and they had a guy on the committee who said the difference between Michigan and Washington is very, very small. This just absolutely vexes me. Michigan has lost what 2 of their last 3? They didn't win their division or conference? Nothing against Michigan personally, but I don't see how that resume stacks up. They had a great year, sure, but you gotta say accomplishments and titles are exactly that at some point in time.
So here's another problem. If Navy beats Temple for the AAC championship that could paralyze the whole bowl selection because their season won't be over, they still have Dec 10 Army/Navy game. Go Navy! http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/18171618/navy-midshipmen-win-aac-title-game-paralyze-bowl-system
Corey, if Washington wins, I suspect they are in. But, if Colorado wins, the teams vying for the 4th spot would likely be Wis, PSU, Colo, and Mich. Michigan beat all three teams blowing out PSU and Colorado aand beating Wi 14-7. All four teams would have 2 losses. Michigan's argument would be based on head to head competition. That being said, I still think the winner of PSU v Wis will likely jump over Michigan. We blew our shot by losing to Iowa. If we won that game, OSU would likely have been the B10 champ and we would have had a strong argument for the 4th spot based on strength of schedule.
It certainly would be interesting if a spot opens up and Wisc wins the B1G championship but does not jump over UM based on the strength of schedule and the head to head. It would make sense to me, but it certainly flys in the face of the value of winning the Conf Championship vs not even winning your division.
TOK, there have been three occasions when a team failed to win its conference championship but still played in the BCS championship game. In 2001 Nebraska played Miami after a blowout loss to Colorado in the final regular-season game and did not play in the Big 12 Championship game. In 2003 Oklahoma played LSU despite losing to Kansas State 35–7 in the Big 12 title game. In 2011, Alabama was selected to play LSU in a rematch despite losing the earlier matchup and not winning their division, let alone their conference.
Bobda, Has there ever been 2 teams that didn't win their conference play for the National Championship?
Bob that was always a weakness of the Bush it was a formula with so many moving parts that nobody understood it. I remembered the OU year had forgotten about Nebraska though... OU and Neb were thrashed in their games. But if the 4 best teams include OSU and UM so be it. Otherwise we need to go back to an expanded BCS where conf champions no matter the record are given preference.
And Terry I am fine with that but that was not what a lot of folks said when Alabama was chosen to play LSU in the BCS game. :?
If they both win people will not have anything to say. If they both lose there will be justifiable howling. In 2006 Florida was the brunt of "you shouldn't be here" criticism but then after their winning performance in the Title game we heard very little of that kind of talk.
No doubt kp, my anti SEC dominance easily put me in that crowd who didn't like the rematch in the championship game. But it's what the BCS math gave us. Same as those games that Bobda mentioned...BCS math dominated where we needed some human input. I guess it might be careful what we wish for with the CFP committee! :shock:
Oh Terry it is just amusing how easily people justify reversing sides in the discussion. I think Ohio State and Michigan both have legitimate arguments for being in the final four. I have no problem with it. Let's get the 4 best teams in it.
Looking back to my feelings in 2011-12 I thought it was too bad that the championship game was a rematch and was 2 teams from the same conference. At the same time I thought it was the two best teams and it was proper that they play for the title. In an ideal world, the championship game woulda been the only 2 undefeated teams with strong strength of schedules and who came from different conferences...but has that even ever happened? Also looking back at the 2012 Championship game...my Cleveland Brownies got Trent Richardson and Barkevious Mingo out of that game...somebody please stop the pain. :roll:
Uh... yes.... yes it has.... in 1995 when 12-0 Florida was pummeled unmercifully by.... THE TRAIN.... THE BIG RED TRAIN... :lol:
I already am and this year has nothing to do with the SEC. I guess the real question boils down to 'how do you determine the best teams?' One would think that conference championships and head to head would have something to do with that, but it looks like this year, that isn't the case. I have a very serious issue with 1, let alone 2, teams who didn't win their division let alone conference getting into the playoffs. There's still plenty of football left to be played, so I am going to let it all play out. Those 3 examples that were used were also fuel for the drive to ditch the BCS and create the playoffs. The flaw in the system is that they stuck with a 4 team format instead of an 8 team format. The problem really isn't with the kids or the coaches, it's with the adults who are suppose to know what they are doing yet prove time and time again, that they do not.