It was reported on both ABC and ESPN yesterday that in this scenario, Penn St. plays in the championship game. I'm not saying that this makes it 100% the truth, but does mean that both networks would have royally screwed up their analysis.Originally Posted by Hal...
Not correct. Michigan will be a conference 2 loss team if Ohio St beats them. They would have losses to Iowa and tOSU. The tie breaker would be between Ohio St and Penn St, and Penn St would win it based on head-to-head.
Washington looked like shit in their loss yesterday. I don't think they'll beat Washington State in two weeks.
Yes, you're right about conference record. The mistake was the newspaper's. And my mistake wasn't realizing that the article was written prior to Michigan's loss to Iowa. Sorry. Also, I made a mistake when I said in my previous post, "UM goes 2-1." That was a typo. I meant "UM goes 1-1."
But everyone's been misreading or misinterpreting the B1G's rules for a tie. They don't look at conference record. The rules apply to divisional ties. In fact, at their website, the heading reads, "Big Ten Conference Football Divisional Tiebreaker."
So, everyone who's saying that, "if OSU & PSU both win out, then PSU wins the East," are wrong. Here are the rules in the event of a 3-way divisional tie, which could happen if OSU and PSU win out and Michigan beats Indiana, since they'd all end up with 5-1 divisional records:
(b) If three or more teams are tied, steps 1 through 6 will be followed until a determination is made. If only two teams remain tied after any step, the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the representative.1. The records of the three tied teams will be compared against each other.
2. The records of the three tied teams will be compared within their division.
3. The records of the three teams will be compared against the next highest placed teams in their division in order of finish (4, 5, 6, and 7).
4. The records of the three teams will be compared against all common conference opponents.
5. The team with the best overall winning percentage (excluding exempted games) shall be the representative.
6. The representative will be chosen by random draw.
I just realized that Purdue's student newspaper got it wrong, too. From what I've read elsewhere, rule #1 is solely about overall record. If OSU wins out and Michigan beats Indiana, there's a 3-way divisional tie. In that case, you have to look at overall records. UM ends up 10-2, OSU 11-1, and PSU 10-2. OSU wins the East division.
“From thirty feet away she looked like a lot of class. From ten feet away she looked like something made up to be seen from thirty feet away.” – Philip Marlowe
How is there a 3-way divisional tie in this scenario? Michigan would have 2 conference losses, whereas the others would have only 1. Divisional records are not compared until step 2 of the tiebreaker (in other words, divisional records is a tiebreaker step, not the status itself that leads to a tiebreaker). The "tie" that leads to the tiebreaker scenario in the first place is overall conference record. If Ohio State was to beat Michigan, then it would be a 2-team tiebreaker that Penn St. would win by virtue of having beaten Ohio State (if both Penn St. and OSU win out).
In other words, Penn St. has a pretty easy path to the Big 10 championship game (beat Rutgers and Michigan State).
If they were to win the Big 10, I do think that there would be 2 Big 10 teams in the playoffs, if OSU was to also win out. Probably the same if Wisconsin was to do it.
Where does it say "overall conference record"? No where. All it says is, "The following procedure will determine the representative from each division in the event of a tie:" Since the rules are about determining the winner of the division, it's logical to me to interpret that as a tie in the division. It doesn't mention anything about conference games until step 4.
“From thirty feet away she looked like a lot of class. From ten feet away she looked like something made up to be seen from thirty feet away.” – Philip Marlowe
Alright, well, I just found this, The Big Ten Football Weekly Release. Here's what it says:
• As the Big Ten season comes down to its final two weeks, the battle remains tight for division titles and a berth in the Big Ten Championship Game on Dec. 3 at Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis. In the East Division, Ohio State and Penn State have moved into a three-way tie for first place with Michigan. All three teams have a chance to earn at least a share of the division title this weekend, but none can punch a ticket to Indianapolis.
• Meanwhile, in the West Division, Nebraska and Wisconsin are tied atop the standings, one game ahead of three other schools — Iowa, Minnesota and Northwestern. The Cornhuskers and Badgers can clinch at least a share of the division crown this weekend, but only Wisconsin can clinch a berth in the Big Ten Football Championship Game this Saturday.
Based on that, they are obviously looking at conference records, not division records. Jesus, I wish they had made that clear in the tiebreaker rules. As written, it's ambiguous.
“From thirty feet away she looked like a lot of class. From ten feet away she looked like something made up to be seen from thirty feet away.” – Philip Marlowe
It means overall conference record. No conference would consider teams to be tied based on their divisional record and not their overall conference record. You are not interpreting this properly. If you don't believe me, perhaps check every single other professional news outlet reporting on this story.
(Just a small sample here)
http://www.cleveland.com/osu/index.s...iebreaker.html
http://www.sbnation.com/college-foot...re-tiebreakers
http://www.cbssports.com/college-foo...ps-penn-state/
"Tied" in a conference does not mean tied by conference divisional record. It means tied by conference record. That is why breaking such ties by divisional record is listed as one of the tiebreakers.
You must have posted right after my second post. See above.
“From thirty feet away she looked like a lot of class. From ten feet away she looked like something made up to be seen from thirty feet away.” – Philip Marlowe
I agree that the wording is ambiguous.
OSU moves up to #2 after last weekends upsets.
A Comfort Zone is not a Life Sentence
I'm not convinced they deserve to be there, but we'll see after The Game™.
“From thirty feet away she looked like a lot of class. From ten feet away she looked like something made up to be seen from thirty feet away.” – Philip Marlowe
I think they deserve to be there right now, but the committee has shown in the past two years that they kind of work like an '80s game show - nothing that happens in the first weeks of the poll necessarily has any bearing on what happens in the final round of selections. They'll jump teams over each other for no apparent reason, and will manipulate the seeding to maximize television interest.
As far as this week goes, who else deserves to be #2? Michigan lost the game and its quarterback. Clemson lost at home to an unranked team. Washington got manhandled. Louisville's schedule has been much softer than OSU's.
The OSU/Michigan game should clarify things.
I am not a big believer in conspiracy theories, but a sneaky little thing happened when the college football playoff rankings came out yesterday. While most of the attention was focused on the 4 playoff spots at the top, much deeper in the rankings somehow Boise State moved in front of Western Michigan even though WMU has been ranked ahead of Boise since the poll came out. WMU won their game last week and Boise still has their loss, so nothing has changed. The problem with this is even though Boise has 1 loss, if they win out (and assuming WMU wins out) it would most likely knock WMU out of a Cotton Bowl berth. There is a theory out there that the major conferences do not want a MAC school playing in one of their big bowl games and this appears to support that theory. There is no logical reason for this reversal in ranking order, and it is also odd that WMU is ranked #14 in both the AP and Coaches poll, but #21 in the “official” poll. Conspiracy? We’ll see how it all comes out in the end, but if WMU ends up running the table it would really suck for us to not get the chance at a New Year’s Day bowl.
We will be at the college game day broadcast Saturday morning. The weather is supposed to absolutely horrendous, so we’ll see what kind of crowd shows up.
That's a good question. Michigan State?
Speaking of which, what the hell happened to MSU this season???
Anyway, yeah, Clemson nor Michigan should have lost and Washington's schedule is a bit of a powder puff. Still, IMO – and it pains me to say it – Bama looks to be the best of the class. I just looked at the rankings. So, OSU a... distant second? I don't know. I expected them to beat Nebraska & Maryland, altho not by as much as they did. So maybe I'm not giving them enough credit. Hell, if they got their mojo back, then yeah, a solid 2nd. <shrugs> I'm still pissed they lost to PSU.
Oh, yeah. The weird thing is that if OSU wins out, there's a good chance the B1G champion may not go to the playoffs, especially if Clemson & Washington win out. Still, if PSU or Wisconsin thump their opponent (assuming they both go to Indy), I could see them being jumped up into the top 4 and OSU left out. I'll root for 'em, of course, but I think Bama's gonna win it all. Altho, I haven't had a chance to see them play this year – other than much of the first half of the Bama/LSU game, of which I was not impressed – so I don't know.The OSU/Michigan game should clarify things.
I also think UM's QB will start against OSU.
“From thirty feet away she looked like a lot of class. From ten feet away she looked like something made up to be seen from thirty feet away.” – Philip Marlowe
It's going to be hard for them to make a rational argument for removing Ohio St from the #2 position, especially if they beat #3 Michigan. And especially if Wisconsin beats Penn St in the league championship game. The other candidates just don't have a strong enough case.
P.S.
I'm also fairly unimpressed with my Buckeyes, seeing as how they couldn't beat Penn St.
Houston is kicking the shit out of #5 Louisville (31-0 at the half).
"My choice early in life was either to be a piano player in a whorehouse or a politician, and to tell the truth, there's hardly any difference"
President Harry S. Truman
This significantly increases the chances of a 2nd B1G team making the playoff. From what I heard come out of the voting this past week some voters aren't big fans of either Penn St. or Wisconsin and were looking hard at other teams for that 4th spot. Louisville was probably the sexiest of these teams, and now they're done. A lot of people (myself included) don't think that Washington will win out. Oklahoma is probably the next team that this faction will adopt. They had their losses early and are a household name.
Last edited by Facelift; 11-18-2016 at 12:59 AM.
Washington has to travel to Pullman to play Washington State in two weeks. The Cougars have to go play Colorado this weekend. WSU has no defense so both these games should be track meets.
The rest of the country should be thankful that they won't have to play USC in an 8-team playoff.
???????
Sports Illustrated has predicted that the Badgers will wind up #4 in the playoff rankings & play Alabama in the national semis!!!
Even with my prejudices, I don't think so.
"My choice early in life was either to be a piano player in a whorehouse or a politician, and to tell the truth, there's hardly any difference"
President Harry S. Truman
I think it's likely if they beat Penn St in the B1G title game. Ohio St and Clemson would be the other 2 likely entrants, assuming they win out.???????
Sports Illustrated has predicted that the Badgers will wind up #4 in the playoff rankings & play Alabama in the national semis!!!
Even with my prejudices, I don't think so.
I don't think Wisconsin winning out is too much of a stretch. Right now, the competitors for that final spot would be them, a 1 or 2-loss Pac-12 champion and a 2-loss Big-12 champion. By the committee's own stated comparison criteria, Wisconsin's credentials would have to be significantly better than another conference champion's for them to get picked as a conference's 2nd team over a conference champion - which I'm not certain would be the case, but certainly *could* be the case, depending on how things go. They won't get picked over a 1-loss Washington, but Washington will have a tough road to get to that point. The odds are probably against Wisconsin doing it, but the odds are against any particular one of those teams doing it, and the spot does have to go to someone.
I think Wisconsin gets picked over a 1 loss Washington team. Weak schedule, down year for the conference conspire against the Huskies. I think I saw a segment where they ran the metrics on the Pac-12, and it wasn't pretty.
I would disagree with that. Wisconsin's best win - and their only quality win this whole year so far - was a nail-biter home against a Nebraska team (currently #18) with even fewer high quality wins to their credit (zero). Washington's best win is significantly better - a 38-point road win at #12 (Utah). They also beat #24 at home (Stanford). If they were to continue to win, they'd also add a road win vs. Washington State (currently #22) and a neutral site win over #10 (Colorado) or #13 (USC).
Wisconsin isn't even in the conversation of making the playoffs ahead of Washington at that point unless they were to beat Michigan in the conference championship instead of Penn St, and even then I don't think they'd make it. But, Washington winning the rest of their games is a pretty tall order and I doubt that they'll do it. So, I think Wisconsin's chances are pretty decent.
I'd beware of a late-season surge of love for Oklahoma by the voters, if the Sooners were to win out. Alabama/Oklahoma will get much better ratings than Alabama/Wisconsin, and unfortunately the selection committee has already made it apparent that this is something that they think about.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks