Lots of Iowa references in this morning’s CFP debate on ESPN. Not particularly flattering ... examples ... “you don’t lose to Iowa and get in the CFP” ... “Alabama, on its worst day, would not give up 55 points to Iowa.”
The “Iowa” factor in CFP selection
- Thread starter AuroraHawk
- Start date
The rub is the fact tOSU lost by 31 to Iowa and gave up 55 in the process. Bama had their chance and lost to a three loss team. Boo hoo Satan.
If Bama gets in, it will be because of Iowa.
Well I mean, it’s not untrue right? A championship caliber team shouldn’t be getting stomped by Iowa. We are a middle of the road team (on a good day) and would indeed get pummeled by the likes of Alabama no question.
Would we get pummelled? With this team I dont know from one week to the next.
The Iowa team that Ohio St. played that day would of beat most teams in the country if not all of them.
OSU has better wins, won their division and conference. Bama didn’t win their division, the division winner didn’t win the conference.
If OSU and USC are left out in favor of 2 SEC teams it screams playoff expansion.
If OSU and USC are left out in favor of 2 SEC teams it screams playoff expansion.
They're right. Iowa is 7-5.
You can make a compelling argument for both Ohio State and Alabama based on the other's shortcomings (Alabama's schedule, Ohio State's bad loss to Iowa). To be honest, though, I think a lot of the controversy is due to the fact we are talking about Alabama. People outside of Tuscaloosa are sick of Bama and want someone else. I really believe if you compared both Bama and OSU's resume as Team Y and Team Z most people would pick the resume that matched Bama's.
You can make a compelling argument for both Ohio State and Alabama based on the other's shortcomings (Alabama's schedule, Ohio State's bad loss to Iowa). To be honest, though, I think a lot of the controversy is due to the fact we are talking about Alabama. People outside of Tuscaloosa are sick of Bama and want someone else. I really believe if you compared both Bama and OSU's resume as Team Y and Team Z most people would pick the resume that matched Bama's.
Valid point, but I still think we do. I believe if OSU hadn’t played such a sloppy game or lost one of their quality players that we don’t win that game or win so handily. Lots of momentum swings happened our way. But 9 out of 10 times we lose to OSU on a normal day
OSU was the beneficiary of that being overlooked last year. Now, they want to play that card this year. How ironic.
Bama has one loss on the road this year to a Top 10 team. Bama also opened up the season beating then #3 FSU. Ohio State got trounced at home vs Oklahoma. It's easy in hindsight to say FSU wasn't that good, but if their starting QB doesn't go down for the season who knows how their season plays out.
Ohio State has 2 losses, one of them being a beat down at the hands of a mediocre 7-5 team. There are compelling arguments in favor of OSU (namely they won the B1G), but it's not as cut and dry as some would like to make it (I'm guessing largely due to a bias against Bama). Personally, I think Bama has a better resume by default: they only have one loss (to a Top 10 opponent on the road) and didn't lose by 31 to a mediocre team.
No, PSU won the conference, they are in OSU's division. Bama didn't win their conference and their division winner didn't win the conference.
That is actually a really good point that I haven't heard the media mention yet.
Iowa was winning 10 times out of 10 on that day.............it was all taken care of.
Lol. Okay.
I think the point is Ohio State didn't win their division. But if that's the profound angle that makes you feel OSU getting into the playoffs last year was justified and why Bama should be left out this year, then lol, sure thing, dude.
I think it’s going to be really hard to leave out two power five conferences. Then you have fan bases of two conferences not interested in the playoffs and they lose a ton of Big Ten tv viewers which hurts the ratings and they make less $$$$$$$$$$$
Now, some of those are good points. However, clearly biased. You arbitrarily throw in a non-fbs game as part of the analysis (why?) but fail to include Team A's 31 point drubbing against a 7-5 team.
It's interesting too that a team with 2 losses can play for a conference title but a team with 1 loss doesn't even make their title game.
The whole point of the playoff system was to get the 4-best teams in. You can have rigorous debates about who those teams are, but part of the appeal of the CFP system was to get away from any sort of obligation to a conference winner. If two teams from the same conference are two of the four best teams in football, then so be it. If not, then so be it. But don't give me this "they didn't win their conference" crap.
I'm just not in favor of Ohio State going based upon their resume. I don't care that they're a B1G team. They lost by 31 to a 7-5 team and have two losses for the year. And they beat an overrated Wisconsin team (who beat no one who is a legitimate Top 25 team) to win the conference. Yawn.
USC is more deserving than Ohio State is.
USC is more deserving than Ohio State is.
No, but that’s how the people in charge make a lot of these decisions
True. But Clemson lost by 3.
And Clemson only has one loss this year. AND, they beat the following teams who were ranked accordingly at the time: #13 Auburn, #14 Louisville, #12 Virginia Tech, #20 NC State, #24 South Carolina, #7 Miami (FL).
BirdistheWord
HB Legend
Its a shame this team could not manufacture one more win from MSU, Purdue, Northwestern. 8-4 would have felt completely different IMO. I view the PSU and ISU games as balancing out (should have probably lost to ISU and beaten PSU). The Wisky game is what it is. The OSU and Neb games show some of the potential ceiling but the Purdue and Wisky turds also showed the floor.
In the end we were 7-5, with one great win (OSU) and one solid win (ISU) but not much else to speak of.
Yes. The Conference title should be the play in to CFP. I thought PSU should have represented B1G last year.
Why's that? Because they play an extra cupcake giving the conf more bowl teams and teams a better shot at being ranked?
You make it sound like the team OSU played was the same team that played msu/nw/wi. IT WASN'T!
If Iowa played all their games like that week, they sure hell aren't 7-5
There is no way bosa brings a 30 point swing for a little over a half. Lets get real.....
On ESPN this week, OSU’s loss to Iowa was considered the worst loss / biggest surprise in the country this season. Had Iowa won a couple of games they could / should have (Purdue, NW, MSU, PSU) they wouldn’t be pegged as average and mediocre. Then OSU’s case would be stronger.
Last edited:
A
anon_i8nzeu2gbf0ba
Guest
Solve this year's Ohio State-Alabama problem by selecting USC. Then do what should have been done in the first place: Go to 8 teams with ALL FIVE conference champions automatic selections. Then you can debate the other 3. As it is, the CFP is only a slightly better farce than the BCS. No one...and I mean NO ONE...can prove which team is more deserving of the final CFP slot. It will be purely political, financial, and subjective opinion, which is exactly what the CFP was supposed to eliminate.
And I'll add this: Put two SEC teams in there this year, and at least half the country will be justifiably miffed and will ignore the bogus "playoff" games.
And I'll add this: Put two SEC teams in there this year, and at least half the country will be justifiably miffed and will ignore the bogus "playoff" games.
If OSU is left out, Delaney should immediately go back to an 8 game conf season with 3 cream puffs and one OOC P5 game just like the SEC.
It shouldn’t matter if you beat an over ranked team early that turns out to be a real turd.
