Could there be 2 Big Ten teams in the CFP?

Donate To GopherHole
matt

matt

Let's get weird
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
5,076
Reaction score
3,918
Points
113
Assume the following:

Michigan St beats Iowa
North Carolina beats Clemson
Florida beats Alabama

Does Ohio St sneak in to the playoff? In that scenario, I think the top 2 are Michigan St and Oklahoma and teams 3 and 4 are some combination of Clemson, Ohio St, and Stanford (assuming they beat USC). Really the most important thing is for Florida to beat Alabama as that gives Ohio St hope. It would be great to see the SEC get left out. The SEC (and ESPN) would be extremely vocal about expanding the playoff in that case as well which might be nice.
 

Definitely possible for OSU if either #1 or #2 get upset, though if Stanford wins I'd take them and a 1-loss Clemson over OSU. Resumes of an 11-2 Conference champion Stanford and an 11-1 Clemson would both be better than OSU's. Only thing that could change my thinking on that is if Clemson got blown out by Carolina.
 


Unrealistic Expectations Gopher Fan just handed me a note. It reads "Don't count the Gophers out of this one."

*crumpling paper*

Now back to your regular Gopher Hole shenanigans.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 

Florida is not beating Alabama, don't waste valuable seconds of your life pondering this
 


JZsportswhiz said:
Florida is not beating Alabama, don't waste valuable seconds of your life pondering this
Click to expand...

This. You could give Florida 7 points for crossing the 50, and I still might take Alabama in this one.
 

The Big Ten certainly could end up with two teams but seems fairly unlikely given all the other things that would have to happen to make it possible. The BIG should be well represented in the top 6 bowl games though as no matter what happens with Iowa/MSU I would think the loser would still be in the top 12.
 

It might play out better if Iowa wins the B1G championship.

1. Iowa (13-0)
2. Oklahoma (11-1)
3. Ohio State (11-1)
4. Stanford(11-2) or Alabama (11-2) or Clemson (12-1) or UNC (12-1)

3 and 4 would be an absolute crap shoot where they could pick a lot of teams.
 

Otis said:
It might play out better if Iowa wins the B1G championship.

1. Iowa (13-0)
2. Oklahoma (11-1)
3. Ohio State (11-1)
4. Stanford(11-2) or Alabama (11-2) or Clemson (12-1) or UNC (12-1)

3 and 4 would be an absolute crap shoot where they could pick a lot of teams.
Click to expand...

I think MSU losing to a weak Iowa team would prevent OSU from making it because it would make their loss to MSU look that much worse.
 



GopherHomer said:
This. You could give Florida 7 points for crossing the 50, and I still might take Alabama in this one.
Click to expand...

While highly unlikely, it is possible. We've seen weirder things happen this season.
 

As for the question, I think it is possible to get 2 teams in but highly unlikely. As others said, I think Stanford gets in over OSU if they win. Also, even though UNC's resume wouldn't be great, I think a 1-loss conference champ would get in over Ohio St.
 

If Mich. St. and OSU make it to the CFP, does that mean we would move up to the Outback Bowl?
 

I've said it before, as a football fan I don't want to see 2 B1G teams get into the CFP. The winner of the conference absolutely should, but the loser of the conference championship game should not. That game is basically a playoff game.
 



GophersInIowa said:
As for the question, I think it is possible to get 2 teams in but highly unlikely. As others said, I think Stanford gets in over OSU if they win. Also, even though UNC's resume wouldn't be great, I think a 1-loss conference champ would get in over Ohio St.
Click to expand...

The committee has already set the stage for OSU making it with a Clemson loss. UNC is ranked 10th, even with a win they aren't jumping Ohio St. I think its down to Stanford and Ohio St. if Clemson loses.

Will the committee be able to get over this; Northwestern beats Stanford by 10, Michigan beats Northwestern by 38, Ohio St. beats Michigan by 29
 

MaroonGold1 said:
The committee has already set the stage for OSU making it with a Clemson loss. UNC is ranked 10th, even with a win they aren't jumping Ohio St. I think its down to Stanford and Ohio St. if Clemson loses.

Will the committee be able to get over this; Northwestern beats Stanford by 10, Michigan beats Northwestern by 38, Ohio St. beats Michigan by 29
Click to expand...

You're probably right. Then I wonder if a 1-loss Clemson team gets in over Ohio St.?
 

Two things need to happen. Stanford needs to lose to USC that would keep them from bumping Ohio State and Florida needs to beat Bama. Clemson is in regardless IMO One loss Clemson team has a better resume than OSU. Oklahoma's in as well.
 

The B1G is by far the best conference this year. If this year's B1G switched names with the SEC, Ohio State and Michigan St./Iowa would both be in, with Alabama being left out. What good team has Alabama beat?

I don't think Stanford has any chance over Ohio St. They lost to the 4/5th best team in the B1G and were also beat by Oregon at home, who also lost to Michigan St.
 

bemidjigopher said:
Two things need to happen. Stanford needs to lose to USC that would keep them from bumping Ohio State and Florida needs to beat Bama. Clemson is in regardless IMO One loss Clemson team has a better resume than OSU. Oklahoma's in as well.
Click to expand...

I for one would be SHOCKED if Clemson made it fresh off a loss. I think its more realistic UNC made it from the ACC than Clemson if UNC wins that game
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
What good team has Alabama beat?
Click to expand...

Alabama has 6 wins against teams in the Sagarin top 30. Oklahoma has 5, Stanford has 4, and no one else has more than 3, with the majority having 0 or 1. No one else has even played 7 top-30 games (soon to be 8). They've beaten Tennessee, LSU, Arkansas, Georgia, Mississippi St. and Wisconsin, not to mention A&M (#31) and Auburn (#39). You can add Florida to the list after they beat them on Saturday. When they enter the playoffs, they will have played against 2 cupcakes (UL-Monroe and Charleston Southern) and 11 bowl teams while going 12-1. By any measure, they have easily one of the toughest schedules in the country. Attacking Alabama's résumé is not particularly bright.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Alabama has 6 wins against teams in the Sagarin top 30. Oklahoma has 5, Stanford has 4, and no one else has more than 3, with the majority having 0 or 1. No one else has even played 7 top-30 games (soon to be 8). They've beaten Tennessee, LSU, Arkansas, Georgia, Mississippi St. and Wisconsin, not to mention A&M (#31) and Auburn (#39). You can add Florida to the list after they beat them on Saturday. When they enter the playoffs, they will have played against 2 cupcakes (UL-Monroe and Charleston Southern) and 11 bowl teams while going 12-1. By any measure, they have easily one of the toughest schedules in the country. Attacking Alabama's résumé is not particularly bright.
Click to expand...

Rankings that are boosted by the perception of the SEC. None of those teams would be ranked that high if they were in any other conference. You listed all SEC teams and one mediocre B1G team. Auburn and Florida were nearly beat by FCS teams. Arkansas lost to Toledo and Texas Tech, but beat Tennessee. Wisconsin had its worst offense in years. In non-conference games, ranked SEC teams are just 10-10 against the Power 5 in the last 2 years. The SEC either plays no one or loses to better teams in non-conference, yet are rewarded by beating up on each other in conference. It's a vastly overrated conference this year, just like it was last year.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
Rankings that are boosted by the perception of the SEC. None of those teams would be ranked that high if they were in any other conference. You listed all SEC teams and one mediocre B1G team. Auburn and Florida were nearly beat by FCS teams. Arkansas lost to Toledo and Texas Tech, but beat Tennessee. Wisconsin had its worst offense in years. In non-conference games, ranked SEC teams are just 10-10 against the Power 5 in the last 2 years. The SEC either plays no one or loses to better teams in non-conference, yet are rewarded by beating up on each other in conference. It's a vastly overrated conference this year, just like it was last year.
Click to expand...

Those are all based solely on statistical formulas. I would love to hear your argument of how the same statistical analysis applied equally to all teams can be biased in favor of a conference. Please, enlighten me.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Those are all based solely on statistical formulas. I would love to hear your argument of how the same statistical analysis applied equally to all teams can be biased in favor of a conference. Please, enlighten me.
Click to expand...

So strength of schedule isn't based on historical ratings and the perception of the strength of conference? Name one SEC team who beat anyone of significance out of conference? Wisconsin is the best out of conference win for the SEC, which is pathetic. You can find far more bad losses than you can good wins, and I didn't even mention South Carolina losing to the Citadel.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
So strength of schedule isn't based on historical ratings and the perception of the strength of conference?
Click to expand...

Not even a little bit. Nothing that happened before this season is relevant whatsoever. Thanks for confirming your ignorance!

GopherWeatherGuy said:
Name one SEC team who beat anyone of significance out of conference?
Click to expand...

They don't exactly play a powerhouse nonconference schedule, but neither do most schools at most conferences. Why are you giving more weight to their non-conference schedule (roughly 25%) than their conference schedule (roughly 75%)? How is it the SEC's fault that they play mostly solid schools (at minimum) in-conference?

GopherWeatherGuy said:
Wisconsin is the best out of conference win for the SEC, which is pathetic.
Click to expand...

Alabama has to apologize for beating a top 25 team?

GopherWeatherGuy said:
You can find far more bad losses than you can good wins, and I didn't even mention South Carolina losing to the Citadel.
Click to expand...

That's great. What exactly does that have to do with Alabama?
 

dpodoll68 said:
Alabama has 6 wins against teams in the Sagarin top 30. Oklahoma has 5, Stanford has 4, and no one else has more than 3, with the majority having 0 or 1. No one else has even played 7 top-30 games (soon to be 8). They've beaten Tennessee, LSU, Arkansas, Georgia, Mississippi St. and Wisconsin, not to mention A&M (#31) and Auburn (#39). You can add Florida to the list after they beat them on Saturday. When they enter the playoffs, they will have played against 2 cupcakes (UL-Monroe and Charleston Southern) and 11 bowl teams while going 12-1. By any measure, they have easily one of the toughest schedules in the country. Attacking Alabama's résumé is not particularly bright.
Click to expand...

I do think the Sagarin overrates a few teams (have Ole Miss at #9 and TN at #16). And even though they haven't beaten any top teams they have beaten a lot of good teams like you mentioned. As much as I dislike them, I think they are rated right where they should be.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Not even a little bit. Nothing that happened before this season is relevant whatsoever. Thanks for confirming your ignorance!
Click to expand...

Then please enlighten me on how Week 1 Sagarin predictions are calculated without anyone playing a game? Shouldn't everyone start at 0?

dpodoll68 said:
They don't exactly play a powerhouse nonconference schedule, but neither do most schools at most conferences. Why are you giving more weight to their non-conference schedule (roughly 25%) than their conference schedule (roughly 75%)? How is it the SEC's fault that they play mostly solid schools (at minimum) in-conference?

Alabama has to apologize for beating a top 25 team?

That's great. What exactly does that have to do with Alabama?
Click to expand...

Several SEC teams struggled with and had losses to FCS teams. The SEC lost a number of games to P5 conference teams and small conference teams. These SEC teams should be rewarded for losing these games? These same teams that struggled and or lost count as being strong wins on Alabama's resume. How does that make sense? Based on this years results, what makes you think the SEC is a strong conference?

The B1G has better out of conference wins and 5 teams ranked in the top 15 of the college football playoff rankings, compared to 2 from the SEC. As for Wisconsin, they are not ranked in the college football rankings and wouldn't be ranked in other polls had they played just one of Ohio St, Michigan, Michigan St. or possibly even Penn St.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
Then please enlighten me on how Week 1 Sagarin predictions are calculated without anyone playing a game? Shouldn't everyone start at 0?
Click to expand...

Initially, he incorporates data from last year until he has enough data from this year, by which point any historical data is eliminated from the formulas.

GopherWeatherGuy said:
These same teams that struggled and or lost count as being strong wins on Alabama's resume.
Click to expand...

First of all, "struggling" is irrelevant. Winning or losing is all that matters. Ohio St. "struggled" with Northern Illinois. Iowa "struggled" in several games this year. Does that mean those teams are terrible?

Tennessee's non-conference loss - Oklahoma

LSU - 0 non-conference losses

Arkansas's non-conference losses - Toledo and Texas Tech

Georgia - 0 non-conference losses

Miss. St. - 0 non-conference losses

Texas A&M - 0 non-conference losses

Those were Alabama's quality wins that I mentioned earlier - all of their non-conference losses are to good or elite teams. If you want to hold it against Alabama that South Carolina, Vanderbilt, Kentucky, and Mizzou (none of whom they played this year) all sucked, be my guest, but it's a pretty nonsensical statement.

You quickly backpedaled away from your initial "point" (that Alabama had a weak schedule) when proven wrong, and somehow turned it into a discussion of SEC vs. Big Ten, which isn't a point I was debating nor is it a discussion I'm interested in having.

You can also feel free to dismiss the statistical evidence, but I'm just presenting it as it is. It's not as though I'm making this up.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Initially, he incorporates data from last year until he has enough data from this year, by which point any historical data is eliminated from the formulas.



First of all, "struggling" is irrelevant. Winning or losing is all that matters. Ohio St. "struggled" with Northern Illinois. Iowa "struggled" in several games this year. Does that mean those teams are terrible?

Tennessee's non-conference loss - Oklahoma

LSU - 0 non-conference losses

Arkansas's non-conference losses - Toledo and Texas Tech

Georgia - 0 non-conference losses

Miss. St. - 0 non-conference losses

Texas A&M - 0 non-conference losses

Those were Alabama's quality wins that I mentioned earlier - all of their non-conference losses are to good or elite teams. If you want to hold it against Alabama that South Carolina, Vanderbilt, Kentucky, and Mizzou (none of whom they played this year) all sucked, be my guest, but it's a pretty nonsensical statement.
Click to expand...

You left out who those 6 teams quality wins were in the Non Conference so I will help. Those 6 teams beat a total of 3 Power 5 conference teams in the non conference (apologies if I missed any but this is all I could see on quick glance): Syracuse (2 ACC wins), Arizona St (4 Pac 12 wins) and Georgia Tech (1 ACC win).

PS; Do Texas Tech (Wins; SHSU, UTEP, ARKANSAS, ISU, Kansas, KSU, Texas) and Toledo count as "Good" or "Elite" teams in your outline.
 

MaroonGold1 said:
You left out who those 6 teams quality wins were in the Non Conference so I will help. Those 6 teams beat a total of 3 Power 5 conference teams in the non conference (apologies if I missed any but this is all I could see on quick glance): Syracuse (2 ACC wins), Arizona St (4 Pac 12 wins) and Georgia Tech (1 ACC win).
Click to expand...

As I've already stated, their non-conference schedules aren't particularly tough on the whole, but why would they be? They are always the best or at worst one of the best conferences in the country, so why would they make their non-conference schedule brutal as well? They have no incentive to make ridiculously tough non-conference schedules.

MaroonGold1 said:
PS; Do Texas Tech (Wins; SHSU, UTEP, ARKANSAS, ISU, Kansas, KSU, Texas) and Toledo count as "Good" or "Elite" teams in your outline.
Click to expand...

They're both top 50 teams and both going to bowl games, so good, obviously.
 

dpodoll68 said:
As I've already stated, their non-conference schedules aren't particularly tough on the whole, but why would they be? They are always the best or at worst one of the best conferences in the country, so why would they make their non-conference schedule brutal as well? They have no incentive to make ridiculously tough non-conference schedules.
Click to expand...

So if their non-conference schedules aren't particularly tough on the whole, and had a number of losses to the good teams on their not particularly tough non-conference schedules, then where is the ratings bump coming from if there is no historical precedence factored in? It doesn't add up.

As for your other post, I never said Alabama's schedule was weak. I asked who of significance have they beaten? Alabama lost to the best team they played Ole Miss, who lost to an unranked, non-P5 Memphis team.

Florida will be a quality win? They somehow still won the SEC east without a QB, needed OT to beat a 3 win Florida Atlantic team at home, and were rolled by Florida St. Auburn? The same team that needed OT to beat FCS Jacksonville St at home.
 

To be fair to Florida when their starting QB was suspended that changed their whole season
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom