I also have to think Michigan is still in the discussion regardless of the BT championship game especially if a Clemson or Washington loses again.
UM might have 2 losses, but they own head to head comparisons by beating UW and throttling Penn State. That's 2 top 10 wins not including the Colorado win that looks pretty good right now.
I'm not sure there is truly a path for Bucky to make the playoffs anymore. If they beat PSU and Clemson AND Washington both lose then you're talking about Michigan moving back into the playoffs and I just don't think the committee will put 3 B1G teams in a 4 team playoff...especially when the Pac12 winner (in this scenario Colorado) is also a top 10 team with 2 losses. If Oklahoma (also 2 losses) won convincingly over OK St., becoming the Big 12 champ, then I believe they would also be in the playoff conversation in this scenario. Wisconsin has a legit case being the #6 team, the B1G champ (in this scenario), and their only losses coming to OSU and UMich, but again I don't think the committee will put 3 B1G teams in there.
If either Clemson or Washington lose while Bucky wins convincingly, then the committee should move Wisconsin in to the playoff over Michigan. I'm not sure that happens though.
If 3 B1G teams are deserving, then 3 should be in.
If Wisconsin wins the B1G, they're in. I don't get what that's so hard to see.
Washington does not have a signature win. WSU is not a signature win. The only other team they played was USC, and they got beat. If you watched any of the PAC 12, its mediocre at best. It's a very top heavy conference,and none of them stepped forward with quality non-conference games.
The Wisconsin win over LSU is better than any win Washington has on their schedule. LSU has 4 losses, all to teams in top 15, and they're the only team to give 'Bama a game.
Washington also lost by two scores to a team ranked in the 20s...at home... late in the season.
If you are one of the top 4 teams in the country...you take care of much lower ranked teams on your home field.
Michigan does have a pretty strong case. They have a better case than Washington does. You gotta play good teams, and teams that don't should be punished for it. The top of the B1G has done that. OSU played Oklahoma, Michigan played Colorado, Wisconsin played LSU... the only team that didn't schedule a quality non-conference opponent is Penn State. Their rise to the B1G championship game is really quite flukey.
Really that's what the conversation should be about- not about if Wisconsin/Penn St. gets bumped by Washington, but if Michigan should bump Clemson/Washington.
As much as I'd like Bucky to get to the playoff, I think it's unlikely they get in. I think they'll either take Ohio State or the UW/Penn State winner, but not both. I think it's Alabama, Clemson, Washington, Big10 team.
If they are really serious about the conference championship games, then Ohio State should be out, but I think they'll take OSU over Wisconsin or Penn State.
Even if Clemson or Washington lose, I think they'll be a lot of momentum for Oklahoma to go if they beat Oklahoma State. Oklahoma hasn't beaten anyone that good, but many will argue that taking two teams from the Big10 (especially when one has two losses) is something that shouldn't happen with other conference champs out there with the same number of losses.
You can't say Oklahoma should get in because they won their conference but WI should be out even though they won the best conference in the country.
Computer Strength of schedule rankings as of today.
OSU 4
Alabama 10
Michigan 11
Clemson 21
Wisconsin 25
Penn State 28
Colorado 42
Oklahoma 54
Washington 69
Those bottom three just don't deserve equal rating when in discussion with the top six.
Washington's strength of schedule ranks 69 out of 128 in the country. C'mon man!
Is that the SOS the committee uses? I know there are multiple ways to calculate SOS.
FreeSafety posted:You can't say Oklahoma should get in because they won their conference but WI should be out even though they won the best conference in the country.
I completely agree that they should be in for winning the best conference in the country. But, we better brace ourselves for not getting in and the committee picking O$U instead. We are going to see what the committee values more head to head matchup, conference titles, or the "eye test". They are going to pick O$U because they can use the excuse that they beat UW and have a good resume. Also, I just cant see a scenario that they drop Ohio St. 3 spots to #5 to leave them out.
With all that being said lets worry about Indy first and beat PSU. If they win that game and head to Pasadena that isn't that bad of a consolation prize and none of us thought they would even get that chance.
Hungry5 posted:Is that the SOS the committee uses? I know there are multiple ways to calculate SOS.
Good point. I don't know so I looked at a few of them.
Colley Matrix, Sagarin and Congrove
OSU 4, 15, 3 Average 7.33
Alabama 10, 7, 6 Ave 7.66
Wisconsin 25, 20, 4 Ave 16.33
Penn St 28, 39, 15 Ave 27.33
Colorado 42, 23, 17 Ave 27.33
Michigan 11, 33, 41 Ave 28.33
Oklahoma 54, 18, 29 Ave 33.66
Clemson 21, 47, 47 Ave 38.33
Washington 69, 60, 43 Ave 57.33
My point remains: Washington hasn't been tested anywhere near what the other top teams have. And when they were, they lost by two scores at home to a team ranked well below them.
Thanks for pulling those FS. Beating Penn St in the B1G title game should carry a lot of weight it seems.
It trumps anything on Washington's resume... by a lot.
I think the committee factors in multiple criteria, but at the end of the day they pick who they believe are the best 4 teams in the country. I agree that the B1G winner SHOULD go, along with the SEC and PAC12 winners as those teams have gone through a gauntlet of inter-conference play AND won a championship outright. The Big 12 needs a championship game to legitimize their champion.
If you want to compare quality wins:
-Michigan has the best argument with 4 wins vs. Top 25 teams with 3 of those against now Top 10 teams. They have the best claim of 2 loss teams IMO.
-Clemson has the next best argument having 4 wins against Top 25 teams with 1 of them being a Top 15 team. Beating VTech would give them 5 Top 25 wins, that's pretty solid.
-Penn St. has 2 wins vs. Top 25 teams with 1 of those wins against a Top 10 team. Giving them another win against a Top 10 team, Wisconsin, AND being the B1G champ would make it hard to leave them out.
-Wisconsin has a good argument with 3 wins vs. Top 25 teams, keep in mind though that those wins are against teams ranked 21, 22, 23...not exactly signature wins. A win over Penn St. would be that signature win they need on a resume.
-Oklahoma has 1 win vs. a Top 15 team, West Virginia, which is moderately good, but not incredible. Beating OK St. would give them another Top 15 win, that's not bad but I'm not sure it's enough to leapfrog the B1G or Pac 12 champ.
-Washington has 1 win vs. Top 25 team, Stanford, who I wouldn't call a signature win either this year. Keep in mind that they have wins over a couple of teams on the periphery of the top 25 like Utah and Washington St. Those wins are as impressive as wins over Iowa and Nebraska, which is to say they a little bit impressive. Colorado would be a signature win.
-Colorado has 1 win vs. Top 25 team, Stanford. Same boat as Washington.
Pac 12 champ Washington vs. B1G champ Wisconsin would be a tough choice. Two teams with an equally mediocre amount of quality wins whose only losses are to now Top 10 teams. Ultimately I think record makes the difference, giving Washington the edge, but I can see arguments either way.
Grave Digger posted:Pac 12 champ Washington vs. B1G champ Wisconsin would be a tough choice. Two teams with an equally mediocre amount of quality wins whose only losses are to now Top 10 teams. Ultimately I think record makes the difference, giving Washington the edge, but I can see arguments either way.
Great post.
But in this last part I think this is where strength of schedule has to come into play. If you are going to use record to give Washington the edge, I cannot agree. Not with their weak SOS and the way WI had to face a gauntlet of quality opponents week after week.
And WI looked and played well in their only two losses.
Holding MI to 14 at the Big House after they had just put up 45 and 49 on two other now top 10 teams and being in the game right up until an amazing 4th quarter interception.
Taking OSU to OT and being one missed tackle on a sack away from winning.
I give those two tough performances even in losses more credit than I do some of the wins that Washington has over very weak opponents.
Grave Digger posted:
-Washington has 1 win vs. Top 25 team, Stanford, who I wouldn't call a signature win either this year. Keep in mind that they have wins over a couple of teams on the periphery of the top 25 like Utah and Washington St. Those wins are as impressive as wins over Iowa and Nebraska, which is to say they a little bit impressive. Colorado would be a signature win.
If you're just looking at numbers next to their team names, sure. But who have these teams played? What are their strength of schedules?
You will see that WSU got beat by E. Washington and doesn't have a single good win on their record- I don't even know how they're ranked. They fattened up on the weak underlings of the conference and lost every game against a team that didn't suck.
Utah has losses to Cal and Oregon (both really bad teams) in addition to losses to Washington and Colorado. The only win they seem to have that is of note is against an OK BYU team. I do not know why they were ever ranked either. They also got fat on their own terrible schedule and conference.
The Pac 12 is just bad this year. Only Washington, Colorado, USC are even decent- that's it. Stanford got exposed like MSU did, but because they play in the Pac 12 they were able to recover to get 8 wins. The middle teams below them are only winning because they scheduled dog crap in the non-conference and they beat up on some horrible conference teams. The quality of play has also been bad- look at the points given up in that conference this year, even by the good teams. Ridiculous.
No, it's a far better argument to make that 3 B1G teams make it than the B1G Champion be left out. I said earlier that Washington might be considered if Clemson loses- the more I think about it, the more sense it makes that Michigan be considered ahead of Washington.
Grave Digger posted:-Washington has 1 win vs. Top 25 team, Stanford, who I wouldn't call a signature win either this year. Keep in mind that they have wins over a couple of teams on the periphery of the top 25 like Utah and Washington St. Those wins are as impressive as wins over Iowa and Nebraska, which is to say they a little bit impressive. Colorado would be a signature win.
Colley looks like they give a quality rank to each win or loss. Look at them side by side in the link. The Utah win has a quality rank below Bucky's win vs Minnesota and way below the wins over Iowa and Nebraska.
Wisconsin's loss to OSU is very near the quality rank of Washington's win vs Portland St.
WI total quality number is 344
Washington is at 361
Lower is better.....OSU is at 275
My point every which way you look to compare Wisconsin and Washington....WI looks to have the better reseme.
The B1G is a tougher gauntlet for sure. If things were being decided now I think Wisconsin has a better case than Washington, but if Washington pounds Colorado (a top 10 team) and Wisconsin does not win convincingly, which they haven't always done this year, then I think the committee sides with Washington. B1G doesn't have much representation on the committee besides Alvarez. I'm sure he will make his case, but I'm not sure it will be enough. Ultimately that's what it comes down to, we can compare quality wins and SOS and all the data available, but if the majority of the committee sides with Washington over Wisconsin or Michigan then that is that. If I was filling out the playoffs right now I would go Alabama, OSU, Clemson, Michigan. I think those 4 teams are playing the best football right now.
In the end whoever is in that 4th spot has to go get slaughtered by Bama, so maybe it is better to be left out and go win the Rose Bowl against Colorado! This might be the best Bama team we have seen under Saban, they're dominant.
I heard what might be the most logical argument so far on the Big Ten contenders, but it's not necessarily good for Wisconsin.
If you were to rank the top 4 teams in the Big Ten (forget West v East) right now UW is 3rd. Even with a win v Penn State I'm not sure they leapfrog Michigan. Why? They've already beaten 3 top 10 teams including both UW and Penn State.
The other factor is Michigan is just a better team and more equipped to handle an Alabama or Clemson or even Ohio State in the playoffs. Plus they have star power. That matters IMO.
I am as big of a Wisconsin homer as there is but I can't see the Badgers making it in unless the stars align - which is possible but not likely.
Still a hell of a season no matter what
Plus they have star power. That matters IMO.
Everything I've read about the committee/selection process mentions nothing about star power.
WIS on a neutral field is as good as any team in the country not named Alabama.
Grave Digger posted:In the end whoever is in that 4th spot has to go get slaughtered by Bama, so maybe it is better to be left out and go win the Rose Bowl against Colorado! This might be the best Bama team we have seen under Saban, they're dominant.
Right and that is the win-win scenario for WI if they beat Penn St. We can all have fun and argue for a spot in the playoff, but if we don't get in....Rose Bowl vs Colorado will much more fun to watch than having to face Alabama.
When Wisc wins and does not get in my guess is Freesafety will be on suicide watch
I hate the "I'd rather play in the Rose Bowl instead of facing Bama" argument.
Getting a chance to play Bama in this scenario is why you play the game.
Everybody seems to forget That Bucky went to Iowa and beat them while Michigan lost at Iowa. That should count for something when considering Badgers vs. Michigan for a playoff spot.
But Michigan beat Wisconsin head to head. That means something more if you are comparing two teams with the same W/L record.
Wisconsin has had a great year and hope they beat Penn State to be in the playoff discussion. If they don't make it in that would be a bummer but would not be a surprise either.
The two close losses to Ohio State and Michigan are still losses. Win one of those two and they in for sure.
I have to agree.
Best case scenario was Michigan winning and Bucky winning the title game.
Now even if Bucky wins, they are still going be be considered a lesser 2 win team. And, TBH, Michigan did beat both the B1G champs regardless. My argument would be that Bucky did not lose at Iowa like Michigan did... but head to head should count too.
I would have loved a Michigan/Bucky title game. It would have been epic.
But, it's not what is.... I can see the national arguments for what it should be for 2 teams in the playoffs and unfortunately we didn't have that win against Michigan or O$U.
All we can do is go win the B1G championship. Do that and the rest of the chips fall into place. Does it mean playoffs? Probably not, but if you don't win, it doesn't.
If you do win, well then probably the Rose Bowl.
I am ALWAYS happy to watch Bucky in the Rose Bowl on New Years Day.
What would be awesome is if Clemson and Washington both lost. Talk about chaos. You could then make a case that both Michigan and Wisconsin are in - along with Ohio State.
When you start getting in to the comparisons of common opponents though it gets murky and not really that helpful. Michigan dominated Penn St., OSU lost to Penn St., but it doesn't matter because OSU won the head to head with UMich. Penn St. also beat Iowa, who beat Michigan. On the other hand, North Dakota St. also beat Iowa, who beat Michigan. Then you throw Pitt into the mix who beat both Penn St. AND Clemson, but lost to Miami who lost to Florida St., who got beat by Louisville, who lost to Clemson and Kentucky, who got beat by Mississippi St., who got beat by LSU, who got beat by Wisconsin, who got beat by Ohio St., who got beat Penn St., who again, got beat by Pitt. Full circle.
If you want the 4 teams playing best right now USC should be in.....can of worms indeed.
when only 4 are in the mix lots of fans around the country will be irate.
Me only beef is with anybody who insists a one loss Washington should be ahead of Wisconsin.
Badgers still 6
How Washington is ahead of them even now is complete bullsh*t... if the Badgers played their schedule they would be undefeated. Washington would most certainly have more losses with Wisconsin's schedule. They wouldn't even be in the conversation.
I usually don't watch all of ESPN's playoff coverage but I did last night. They had a show before the actual rankings coming out with some random ESPN tools (redundant I know) talking about the playoffs.
And I am starting to wonder what their criteria is for putting teams in. One of the things they discussed was if they should put teams in there if they don't think they match up well. And I will give you ONE guess which team they were showing on the screen when they said that. Yep Wisconsin. The other comment was that they won't come out and say it but TV ratings are going to matter. They wont say it but they want the O$U's, the Michigans, etc. in there. And you know they committee would LOVE to have a rematch of that one.
I think it would take some complete chaos for UW to get in and I think it would take Washington and probably Clemson losing as well. Michigan is sitting there at #5 and if only one of those teams stumble? Michigan will go and I don't doubt that for a second. Now I am not saying they wouldn't put UW in there if they win the BIG but I have my doubts. UW is going to have to absolutely paste PSU to make them think twice.
If WASH or CLEM lose and WIS smacks PennSt WIS will be in. OSU and MICH don't move if they don't play.
I saw some talk yesterday about how with the committee keeping Washington so high, it seems like we still have the problem with teams being punished for scheduling tough opponents and other teams being rewarded for scheduling weak opponents. That is the opposite of what we want.
It was a problem the BCS system was supposed to help with, but the committee seems to be taking things backward a step if they insist on keeping Washington ahead of teams like WI and Oklahoma....and now MI.
MI clearly has the biggest beef with being put behind Washington. Every computer ranking that I can find has MI solidly above WASH. There is no objective metric that suggests the WASH should be ahead of MI.
The committee is making things interesting by throwing WASH up in there this week but they are hoping like hell they look bad on Saturday so they can drop them out of the top 4 IMO.
Ratings and clicks? Which top 4 keeps the discussion in the forefront?
I agree on Michigan. They have a stronger case than Wisconsin to be in before Washington. Plus they have a team that (I think) can match up well with any of the top teams.
Defensively, the Badgers are there and can play with anyone. Offensively? They only scored 7 against Michigan and not sure they score at all against Bama. That's a problem.
I hope they can beat Penn State and I think they can but I sure get the feeling here that it is going to be easy, almost an afterthought.
I watched some show on ESPN at lunch today and they were talking about if the B1G champion should be left out, and all they talked about was that Penn State should have a chance but they won't. Never even MENTIONED the Badgers. That show has apparently already given the B1G title to PSU.
