Haha I seriously doubt you would be saying well it sucks but it makes sense because of the rubric. It probably would be more like how is Bama still have a shot after getting blown out twice and one of those being to a 4 loss team. It's obviously favoritism and committee just loves Bama and Saban. I feel like that would be more of the response we would get.

 

Hence why I say it's funny when an osu fan complains about the committee loving a team.

Would Bama still have a path in front of them to make it simply because the teams in front of them play each other? If so I would be saying the same thing.

Who has USC beat?

 

Which is my point; they've beaten Stanford and Arizona...now is the part where you tell me that Stanford and Arizona suck....and my response to you would be that Penn State hasn't beaten anyone and Michigan State is grossly overrated so I don't think either of them are good....which happen to be OSU's best wins.

Would Bama still have a path in front of them to make it simply because the teams in front of them play each other? If so I would be saying the same thing.

 

That's my point. Ohio State shouldn't be ranked in a position that allows them that path.

Which is my point; they've beaten Stanford and Arizona...now is the part where you tell me that Stanford and Arizona suck....and my response to you would be that Penn State hasn't beaten anyone and Michigan State is grossly overrated so I don't think either of them are good....which happen to be OSU's best wins.

So the committee ranks Penn State and Michigan State ahead of Stanford and Arizona because they are trying to boost OSU's resume? Is that what you are proposing? Look, I'm not trying to take a dig at USC. NOBODY wants to play that team with that QB. I think USC is a really good team and if OSU doesn't make the playoff, USC is the last team I want to face. Ahead of anybody. But if both teams win out the resumes won't be comparable. Thats not me saying that. Thats the committee saying that, thats the "experts" saying that, and thats Vegas saying that.

That's my point. Ohio State shouldn't be ranked in a position that allows them that path.

So rank a team with a better resume behind a team with a worse resume because you don't want to give them a path?

So rank a team with a better resume behind a team with a worse resume because you don't want to give them a path?

 

Where'd I say that? They don't have a resume. Ohio State has been curb-stomped twice. No team that gets blown out twice, especially by a mediocre team, deserves consideration.

Where'd I say that? They don't have a resume. Ohio State has been curb-stomped twice. No team that gets blown out twice, especially by a mediocre team, deserves consideration.

Penn State and Michigan State isn't a resume? Ok.

Penn State and Michigan State isn't a resume? Ok.

 

They don't make up for the embarrassments against Oklahoma and Iowa, no.

Would Bama still have a path in front of them to make it simply because the teams in front of them play each other? If so I would be saying the same thing.

 

Based off your previous post about Bama, I disagree. Or you would be saying the rubric needs changed if Bama can make it after 2 blow outs.

Penn State and Michigan State isn't a resume? Ok.

 

It would be if they didn't have 2 blow out losses. In fact it probably be fine with just one blow out loss, because we have seen a big number of good teams blown out this year in a game. However it wasn't just one blow out loss. It was 2 and one was against a 4 loss Iowa. The same Iowa that Wisconsin beat pretty easily.

Based off your previous post about Bama, I disagree. Or you would be saying the rubric needs changed if Bama can make it after 2 blow outs.

If you flipped the names and everything else was constant I would be saying Bama's path is obvious as well.

So the committee ranks Penn State and Michigan State ahead of Stanford and Arizona because they are trying to boost OSU's resume? Is that what you are proposing? Look, I'm not trying to take a dig at USC. NOBODY wants to play that team with that QB. I think USC is a really good team and if OSU doesn't make the playoff, USC is the last team I want to face. Ahead of anybody. But if both teams win out the resumes won't be comparable. Thats not me saying that. Thats the committee saying that, thats the "experts" saying that, and thats Vegas saying that.

 

Exactly so #theohiostatecommitee

It would be if they didn't have 2 blow out losses. In fact it probably be fine with just one blow out loss, because we have seen a big number of good teams blown out this year in a game. However it wasn't just one blow out loss. It was 2 and one was against a 4 loss Iowa. The same Iowa that Wisconsin beat pretty easily.

That OSU/Iowa game will go down the biggest statistical anomaly in the history of college football. I literally have nothing to say about that game. It still blows my mind.

Exactly so #theohiostatecommitee

My comments in another thread can be copied and pasted in here as well. It's hard to have conversations when every rebuttal is a conspiracy theory.

If you flipped the names and everything else was constant I would be saying Bama's path is obvious as well.

 

Yes the path is obvious. We just doubt you be so fine with that path being given. Especially with your Bama envy, I bet you would talk about the committee's love for Bama. Or how the rubric should change if Bama has such a clear path with 2 blow out losses. That would be like Bama getting blown out by UK...