If it were up to me, I would leave the Pac-12 champ out whether Washington wins out or not. I don't see how the Pac-12 has proven that they belong with the best in the ACC, SEC or Big 10.

 

Outside of themselves they haven't beaten anybody. As a conference they have only beat 3 FBS OOC schools with winning records. Both UCLA and Utah beat BYU (8-4), Stanford beat Kansas St (7-4), and Colorado beat Colorado St. (7-5).

 

At least the Big 10 schools still in the playoff consideration have some decent wins such as Wisconsin against LSU and Ohio St against Oklahoma. I think this year the Big 10 deserve to have two schools in the playoff.

 

I don't think the Pac-12 is any worse than the ACC.

I'm just glad Louisville don't have a chance in this conversation.

Top 4 should be.

 

1. Alabama

2. Clemson

3. Washington

4. Penn State

Chaos creates interest.

 

They aren't dumb

Buckeyes will be in the top 4.

That's not chaos. That's expected. The past 2 years the 8 conference championships have been won by the team that was predicted to win. Chaos would be Washington and Clemson losing.

 

His scenario is more chaos then yours. If your scenario happens, all that shows is we barely have 4 teams deserving of a playoff, so why go to 8? In his scenario it does help the chances of expanded to 8 more than yours. In his the committee will be faced with having to weigh a conference champion team vs a team that finished 2nd in their conference, and couldn't even make their league championship in OSU. As stated I think OSU make it. However that goes against two things of their criteria they like in being a conference champ and head to head. Say Penn state wins the Big 10. They have the conference championship and the head to head over OSU. So do you leave them out? Or do you leave a one lost OSU out who has a great resume? Or do you leave a one lost Washington team out who has a Heisman finalist, and a conference championship. Then you have Oklahoma who like Penn state has been doing great since early in the year and will be conference champs.

 

His scenario makes the committee having to choose which way to go with it on teams who are deserving which creates lots of chaos. Your scenario basically just creates a situation where there is so many two lost teams that maybe no one is truly deserving and easy to shoot down complaints anyone may have who don't make it.

His scenario is more chaos then yours. If your scenario happens, all that shows is we barely have 4 teams deserving of a playoff, so why go to 8? In his scenario it does help the chances of expanded to 8 more than yours. In his the committee will be faced with having to weigh a conference champion team vs a team that finished 2nd in their conference, and couldn't even make their league championship in OSU. As stated I think OSU make it. However that goes against two things of their criteria they like in being a conference champ and head to head. Say Penn state wins the Big 10. They have the conference championship and the head to head over OSU. So do you leave them out? Or do you leave a one lost OSU out who has a great resume? Or do you leave a one lost Washington team out who has a Heisman finalist, and a conference championship. Then you have Oklahoma who like Penn state has been doing great since early in the year and will be conference champs.

 

His scenario makes the committee having to choose which way to go with it on teams who are deserving which creates lots of chaos. Your scenario basically just creates a situation where there is so many two lost teams that maybe no one is truly deserving and easy to shoot down complaints anyone may have who don't make it.

I understand that, but I don't think it's chaos though. There isn't a decision to be made. It's easily Alabama, Ohio State, Clemson, and Washington. If you listen to what the committee has been saying, the criteria you are talking about Conference Champs, head to head, etc. is used in the case that 2 teams are so close that you need some sort of qualifier. They don't need a qualifier to put Ohio State in over Penn State. I'm not saying that's right, but in the end the committee has continuously said that they want the 4 best teams and that is their job. The rest is only criteria to judge two otherwise equal teams, the committee doesn't deem Ohio State and Penn State as equals.

It's 100% chaos if what I described happens. The committee is praying Washington or Clemson lose.

 

OSU is in I agree .

 

But they are either going to have to leave out a 1 loss conference champ or a team who beat OSU and won the Big 10 in the scenario I listed. Which again would contradict how the committee has done things the last couple years .

 

Penn State has 2 losses. One in conference and one out of conference. Washington and Clemson have 1 loss - to me, that is significant.

 

But Penn State does have a valid argument, if they win. They also still have to beat Wisconsin.

 

So maybe the committee is praying that Penn State loses.

Penn State has 2 losses. One in conference and one out of conference.

 

He's saying if they all win, one of Clemson, Washington, and Penn State will be left out.

 

The B1G has been the top conference all year. I can't fathom a scenario where Penn State wins the conference title and doesn't get in. Best conference in the country, there is no way the committee will leave the regular season and title game winner out of the playoff.

 

If Washington and Clemson both win as well, I see Ohio State being the odd team out. Probably the only person on here that thinks it plays out that way though.

He's saying if they all win, one of Clemson, Washington, and Penn State will be left out.

 

The B1G has been the top conference all year. I can't fathom a scenario where Penn State wins the conference title and doesn't get in. Best conference in the country, there is no way the committee will leave the regular season and title game winner out of the playoff.

 

If Washington and Clemson both win as well, I see Ohio State being the odd team out. Probably the only person on here that thinks it plays out that way though.

 

I agree with this and also agree, this is the scenario where the playoffs get expanded to 8. The 5 conference champions from the P-5 and 3 at large bids. I can't see how Penn State gets left out if they win the championship.

 

If Ohio State goes over Penn State, why do we have conference championships? This would be the equivalent of Florida winning the SEC in basketball, beating Ky twice in the regular season, winning the SEC basketball tournament and then the committee picking Kentucky to be in the NCAA tournament and leaving Florida out.

I understand that, but I don't think it's chaos though. There isn't a decision to be made. It's easily Alabama, Ohio State, Clemson, and Washington. If you listen to what the committee has been saying, the criteria you are talking about Conference Champs, head to head, etc. is used in the case that 2 teams are so close that you need some sort of qualifier. They don't need a qualifier to put Ohio State in over Penn State. I'm not saying that's right, but in the end the committee has continuously said that they want the 4 best teams and that is their job. The rest is only criteria to judge two otherwise equal teams, the committee doesn't deem Ohio State and Penn State as equals.

 

Still curious how you flipped flopped on this. When you said a 2 lost big 10 champ would deserve to be in over a 1 lost Michigan back when we discussed that scenario. Only thing changed is the team you love is in that spot and the team you hated was in that spot when we originally discussed it. Oh well, I give up on getting you to see how it was the same lol

 

A team like Penn st. Would have a great argument if they get left out. They beat the number 2 team, finished ahead of them in their division and won the conference championship in the same conference OSU is in. Doesn't that say they are better and more deserving than osu? Not sure how you can say Penn state and OHIO state are not equal when Penn state beat them and won the conference over them. So if OSU deserves to be in why doesn't Penn st? Or if OSU is in doesn't Penn state deserve to be in with them since they beat them and won the conference they are in, which may be the toughest conference in America. Then obviously how could you leave Washington out.

 

Basically it comes down to how can you judge a conference champ vs another conference champ vs a team with the resume but failed to win their conference. It's a very tough process. Which could lead then to an 8 team playoff where winning the conference championship automatically puts you in, and three at larges. Allows teams to know exactly what to do to make it, instead of people's opinions deciding it only.

 

Your scenario may make interesting who they choose, but does nothing to show we need 8 teams. He wants the chaos that could lead to change.

Leave out both Clemson and Penn State. Committee can just issue a one sentence explanation for why OSU, Washington, and whoever else made it.

 

"Champions don't lose to Pitt."

And Clemson barely beat UL and we now know that UL isn't any good.

Drop Clemson for barely beating UL at home while U.K. Beat them at UL.

I've said it before and I'll keep saying it until it happens and I think we all know it's going to happen. We need an 8 team playoff...

How about this?

 

Navy beats Temple and wins the American.

 

Western Michigan loses to Ohio in the MAC Championship.

 

The decision on who goes to the Cotton Bowl is delayed until after the Army/Navy game.

 

If Army beats Navy, a whole new can of worms could be opened. Wyoming, San Diego State, and Western Kentucky could be in play.

 

Therefore, any bowl "tied" to the teams mentioned above cannot make a decision on which team they select until after the Army/Navy game.

 

Navy Midshipmen win in AAC title game would 'paralyze' bowl system