Skip to content

Bucks are "In" at #3...

College Football Forum
22 11 1.0k
  • sydS syd

    @jrb12711 said:

    I mean, I'm obviously happy OSU is in and I think they had a strong argument to be in the field as well. However, I'm also not disagreeing that the CFP needs to clear this shit up a little bit too.

    If Ohio State got in because of a strong schedule they navigated well (which I totally get) that sets the idea of SOS as a critically important. However, by that logic why did Washington get in over PSU? They also tell us that winning the conference and head-2-head are critically important . By that logic, even with 2 losses why did PSU get left out over OSU? Does it really show that 2 losses pretty much eliminates you from contention barring incredible circumstances?

    At the end of the day, I think the only team they messed up was Washington over PSU. They literally only beat one team worth a crap (Colorado) who got beaten by the 3rd best team by ranking in the B10 conference. I get why people are pointing fingers at OSU, but leaving a team out with one loss who has beaten the 6th, 7th, 8th best teams would be total nonsense no matter the conference outcome. The problem is that conference routes aren't created equal which obviously heavily favored OSU as well.

    Point is, the CFP committee could have sent a clear signal with Alabama, OSU, Clemson, and Penn St. That 4 team bracket would show that winning a conference matters AND that having a strong OOC schedule matters as well.

    I am not a fan of the huskies ofc schedule it was a joke,but to say they did not beat anyone besides the buffalos is just wrong they rolled the cardinals and the cougers also beat the utes and pretty much stepped on the throats of all the lower ranked pac-12 teams now as far as penn state there ofc is not that strong and they lost one of those and of their two quality wins they won those both with a combined 10 points,so it came down to which champ they wanted in a one loss team or a two loss team also to dig a little deeper the huskies lost to usc while penn lost to pitt and got killed by m,so ya know just saying I really do not see a argument for penn getting in over washington

    @syd said:

    I am not a fan of the huskies ofc schedule it was a joke,but to say they did not beat anyone besides the buffalos is just wrong they rolled the cardinals and the cougers also beat the utes and pretty much stepped on the throats of all the lower ranked pac-12 teams now as far as penn state there ofc is not that strong and they lost one of those and of their two quality wins they won those both with a combined 10 points,so it came down to which champ they wanted in a one loss team or a two loss team also to dig a little deeper the huskies lost to usc while penn lost to pitt and got killed by m,so ya know just saying I really do not see a argument for penn getting in over washington

    First off holy moly use a period to break sentences up.

    Washington beats the teams ending up ranked 10th, 18th, and 19th. Penn State beat teams ending up ranked 3rd, 8th, and 24th.SOS strongly favors PSU as well by most metrics. The one I like to use had Washington ranked 41st while Penn St was at 16. http://sagarin.com/sports/cfsend.htm. Penn St. objectively played in the harder conference and won it while beating its best team in the process (OSU). The ONLY negative PSU has is losing twice, literally that's it.

    So yes, there is objectively using facts and data an argument for why PSU should have gotten in over Washington. That is EXACTLY as I noted before the CFP needs to better clarify what they are looking for.

  • @syd said:

    I am not a fan of the huskies ofc schedule it was a joke,but to say they did not beat anyone besides the buffalos is just wrong they rolled the cardinals and the cougers also beat the utes and pretty much stepped on the throats of all the lower ranked pac-12 teams now as far as penn state there ofc is not that strong and they lost one of those and of their two quality wins they won those both with a combined 10 points,so it came down to which champ they wanted in a one loss team or a two loss team also to dig a little deeper the huskies lost to usc while penn lost to pitt and got killed by m,so ya know just saying I really do not see a argument for penn getting in over washington

    First off holy moly use a period to break sentences up.

    Washington beats the teams ending up ranked 10th, 18th, and 19th. Penn State beat teams ending up ranked 3rd, 8th, and 24th.SOS strongly favors PSU as well by most metrics. The one I like to use had Washington ranked 41st while Penn St was at 16. http://sagarin.com/sports/cfsend.htm. Penn St. objectively played in the harder conference and won it while beating its best team in the process (OSU). The ONLY negative PSU has is losing twice, literally that's it.

    So yes, there is objectively using facts and data an argument for why PSU should have gotten in over Washington. That is EXACTLY as I noted before the CFP needs to better clarify what they are looking for.

    @jrb12711 said:

    First off holy moly use a period to break sentences up.

    Washington beats the teams ending up ranked 10th, 18th, and 19th. Penn State beat teams ending up ranked 3rd, 8th, and 24th.SOS strongly favors PSU as well by most metrics. The one I like to use had Washington ranked 41st while Penn St was at 16. http://sagarin.com/sports/cfsend.htm. Penn St. objectively played in the harder conference and won it while beating its best team in the process (OSU). The ONLY negative PSU has is losing twice, literally that's it.

    So yes, there is objectively using facts and data an argument for why PSU should have gotten in over Washington. That is EXACTLY as I noted before the CFP needs to better clarify what they are looking for.

    hey I noticed a couple of comma's up there

    GO BUCKS