Probably a legal obligation, too. Isn't that at least "conspiracy after the fact" if you cover for someone who you know is committing felonies?
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Playoffs are really not that out of reach...
- Thread starter Corn Manelton
- Start date
Probably a legal obligation, too. Isn't that at least "conspiracy after the fact" if you cover for someone who you know is committing felonies?
But, would a 1 loss Alabama then mean that 2 teams get in from the SEC? If you let Alabama in, then Florida should have a seat and Michigan is still excluded (as they are in pretty much every other scenario)
Unleash Hell
Well-Known Member
Where do you think we would rank right now had we not lost to USC?
He didn't cover for him.... you don't have a legal obligation to report that crime UNLESS you are bound by the PA teachers rules.... and there were arguments over whether he was a teacher or not..... it was ugly here for awhile and I don't remember exactly what happened except that Paterno was never charged....
Just curious....
did you watch the selection show?
if you did.... how do you reconcile the fact that Kirby Holcott said..... and I paraphrase....
They put Ohio State and Penn State together and they are not even close.... they put Washington and Michigan together and they are so close.... he also says that they go to conference champions as a factor IF the teams are close.... they will also look at head to head in that case....
these are things that the committee head SAID.....
That's a great question. We were 21 when we lost to USC. What happens if we win that game and finish 11-1? I believe we are 3rd behind Alabama and either Clemson or Ohio State.
You continue to discount the heavy premium they put on winning the conference and the fact that they stated specifically they do not calculate this premium until a team has actually won the conference. With 5 P5 conferences and 4 slots, no team has yet made it in without winning their conference.
Buffnik stated this very eloquently earlier in this thread and it was mostly ignored. The CFP operates at the discretion of the P5 conferences, not as an authority above the P5 conferences. If 1,2, or 3 conferences feel like they are not being fairly represented, it is going to fall apart very quickly. This is another reason I believe expansion to 8 is inevitable:
5 Conference Champs
1 G5 team (thanks, congress!)
2 P5 wild card teams
buffnik was not ignored.... he and I agreed that we are analyzing this from a different set of assumptions.... i even told him that I would pick the same teams as him if I interpreted the rules as he does.....
I am finding many analysts that are agreeing with you (and nik) and I am finding many that agree with me. This is exactly what the brass want.... they want as many teams as possible to argue their eligibility in this playoff because it is generating a huge amount of interest from 7 (maybe even 9) alumni bases....
This is also why I believe the CFP has been so successful. It creates completely different intrigue throughout the season to set up what will happen in the post season.
SINKRATZ
PhD in Analogy
That's because the CCGs have not been played or taken into account. I don't get why that fact continues to elude you. CU's resume actually becomes FAR better than Michigans, than it already is, when they beat UW.
I haven't read this whole thread and hope this is not a repeat, but a very interesting article, w/ a blind comparison of CU, pee state, Wisc and Mich:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...d-study-rankings-wisconsin-colorado/94681748/
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...d-study-rankings-wisconsin-colorado/94681748/
what you get from that is that PSU is LAST.
Michigan, Colorado, and Wisconsin all have arguments..... I think CU is slightly better than Wisconsin and Michigan is similar but has wins against all 3.... that is the tie breaker in my opinion.... THEY BEAT ALL 3 of us....
LongHaulBuff
Club Member
This is getting tiring
Michigan has only won 50% of its road games this year, including a loss at unranked Iowa. They were 2-2 overall on the road.
Michigan... the ONLY game they won outside of their state this year was at... Rutgers. Seriously, one win outside of their state, and it was Rutgers of all teams!
For comparison, both UW and CU have 4 out of state conference road wins.
Michigan won Zero road games in November. CU won one and UW won two. Not this this will show up in stats, but November is when Championship football is played.
Yes, Michigan has some quality wins. Take Colorado for one. Yes, Michigan is a Top 10 team IMO. I'm not saying they are bad. I just don't see their schedule as that difficult with only a few tough games, and all of them at home.
A two loss CU is better IMO because they are road warriors and get it done on the road in November with a tough, tough team that can beat you in multiple ways. A schedule can't be that hard when you don't beat a quality opponent on the road. Both CU and UW > Michigan this year. I like Michigan more than any other Big team but they blew there chances this year.
Michigan... the ONLY game they won outside of their state this year was at... Rutgers. Seriously, one win outside of their state, and it was Rutgers of all teams!
For comparison, both UW and CU have 4 out of state conference road wins.
Michigan won Zero road games in November. CU won one and UW won two. Not this this will show up in stats, but November is when Championship football is played.
Yes, Michigan has some quality wins. Take Colorado for one. Yes, Michigan is a Top 10 team IMO. I'm not saying they are bad. I just don't see their schedule as that difficult with only a few tough games, and all of them at home.
A two loss CU is better IMO because they are road warriors and get it done on the road in November with a tough, tough team that can beat you in multiple ways. A schedule can't be that hard when you don't beat a quality opponent on the road. Both CU and UW > Michigan this year. I like Michigan more than any other Big team but they blew there chances this year.
Only way I see CU jumping up that list sharply is if we crush UW in the CCG. Go Buffs!
chitownbuff
Club Member
Don't lump us in with those ****s.
When you lose kind of matters. And Michigan lost two games in November. Their offense is suspect, at least not elite, as Iowa and tOSU demonstrated. I don't see UM making it.
Wisconsin lost to tOSU and Michigan.
Penn State lost to Pitt and Michigan but beat tOSU
My conclusion is that tOSU which beat UM will get in while the B1G Champion will be left out and sent to the Rose Bowl.
Last edited:
I agree that it shouldn't. They should have received the death penalty. But we are where we are. However, I think it is more than fair, though far less than justice, for all inferences to be drawn against PSU for the next fifty years (about the lifetime of PSU's victims). And let's be clear about this. Those souls were not just Sandusky's victims, they were PSU's victims.
Jtre1212
New Member
Michigan has the best 2 loss resume in the country. Don't see how CU passes them up. When you're biggest argument is "we won more road games in november" the argument probably isn't very good. Michigan has wins over #6, #7, and #8. Lost to #2 in double overtime, and lost to Iowa who is ranked somewhere between 25-30. Colorado has beaten #18, #20, and lost to #5 Michigan, and #11 with a chance to add #4 win to the list. So overall Michigan has beaten 3 in the top 10 but Colorado wouldn't be close behind with 3 in the top 20. The problem Colorado has is that they lost the head to head to Michigan. And i know you're going to bring up how Sefo got hurt in the 3rd quarter. But no one seems to mention that Michigan was playing without Big 10 DB of the year Jourdan Lewis, and 1st team all big 10 DE Taco Charlton. Both teams had injuries so that argument is pointless. Not trying to knock on Colorado though you guys had a hell of a season and had us sweating for 3 quarters. All Michigan fans are all pulling for you guy, good luck the rest of the way!
It is funny how all Michigan fans conveniently forget what the committee has continually said is their largest criteria: Conference Championships. So, Michigan has a great regular season resume, but absolutely no championship resume, which is going to keep them out of the playoff.
Head-to-head matters. It was in September, though. If CU wins Friday, that's 7 straight with a win over #4 to finish it and claim a conference championship. Meanwhile, Michigan will go into the selection discussion having lost 2/3 and gone from a conference championship lock to being on their couches this weekend. If I buy your argument, I'd also have to buy that Clemson deserves to make the Playoff if it loses close because the conference championship doesn't matter and how a team finishes doesn't matter but what that team did in September & October is what's most important.
Michigan fans are delusional if they believe they are getting in the CFP in any scenario. Sorry, it's not happening.
Hey DD are you prepared to lose for the good of your family dynamic?
........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Keep in mind that only conference champions have been in the playoff so far and that the conference championship is not only a factor but, with the exception of the Big 12, the conference championship games create a 13th data point which is a massive advantage.
I am.
my question is whether anyone has a source they're citing, or if this is hypothesis based on two years precedent.
gotcha on the 13th game impacting SoS, but that's a separate discussion from whether conference championships weigh more than other criteria.
Watch what they do, not what they say. We've already seen the CFP committee give preference to Conference Champions in the past by ****ting on the Big 12 (TCU) a few years back because they don't have a CCG. Of course, they aren't going to reveal their selection criteria and what is weighted. They are leaving themselves as many "outs" as possible to justify whoever they put in the final four.
