I think they do. Biggest win of the year for any team. OU lost to a weak team, so did Wisconsin. Only difference is the 2nd loss to Ohio St. Not saying they’re in, but interesting argument. Also it could be my orange glasses.
Totally agree, and won’t be surprised if the bucks hit the throttle. Just wondering if this matters at all if they can hang in there. They have some pretty good wins, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota. Oklahoma not as impressive of a resume imo
They shouldn't, but they do. I've never been a fan of "Team A won more games and had a better season than Team B, but Team A's loss came on this date instead Team B's losses on those dates." The team that had the best season should be awarded, not the team with the least recent loss.
If WIS wins...they bring a much more impressive resume than OU with a tougher schedule. Still think the deciders want the Fields, Hurts, Burrow narratives. They might all be in NYC for the Heisman presentation (to Burrow) and are tranfers.
I'm not so sure. Alabama's best win is over a five-loss, unranked A&M. Texas has a more impressive win than that (OSU is ranked in a poll or two). Wisconsin, at least, would have the same number of losses, one more win, a conference championship, and a statement victory. Oregon as well, to a lesser degree. And neither of them are missing their best player. Aside from pedigree, Alabama has no argument.
OU would have wins over #7 and 25 with 1 loss to an unranked Wisky would have wins over #16, 14, 18, and 1 with a loss to #1 and 1 unranked With the win vs#1 redeeming/avenging one loss A few notes on this.... 1. Some people have been saying of this Ohio St team runs the table they may go down as the best cfb team ever (for whatever that's worth) 2. I sure bet Wisky would like a do-over on that 2 pts. Loss to the Illini 3. OU loses style points on close escapes to Iowa st., TCU, and BU twice
Hard to say. If they hold on & win, they’ll have wins over teams currently ranked 1, 14, 16, & 18. However, they also lost to a 6-6 team & another game by 31 points. OU will have wins over teams ranked 7, 7 & 25, with a lone loss by one score to an 8-4 team. Remember a few years ago when tOSU was overlooked for having 2 losses with one a blowout loss, despite being B1G champs, in favor of an 11-1 Alabama that didn’t even win its division? Seems the precedent on 2-loss teams has been set, but who knows, this Committee is different than the one that made that decision.
My thoughts exactly. I thought it was just my hatred for Oklahoma, but Wisconsin has a real argument if they can hang on
I feel like OU would get the nod, but I do think it's the first time in a while (with no Bama involved) that a "sneaker " has come into play with what I feel like would be a pretty strong argument at least worth having. I can tell you right now, how this second half goes will say alot. If Wisky somehow wins and pulls away doing so, that would definitely heat the argument up in that committee room. May be a moot point..Ohio State with a quick strike.
With the exception of the ACC, the differences in schedule difficulty among Power 5 teams is hard to measure and mostly based on human perception, which is subjective at best (S-E-C!! S-E-C!!). It shouldn't be used as the main measuring stick. Instead: 1. Best record 2. In case of a tie, conference championship 3. If still tied, "impressive resume" Not the other way around.
How about the team with least injuries to major players? the great game is beginning to look more like a demo derby than what we knew as football
They have to select the committee weii in advance but I'll give you they could mix in someone from a less likely participant more often.
There should be zero avtive AD’s on this crapshoot. Here is the current list of schools with their AD’s on the 13 member committee. Oklahoma Oregon Iowa Arkansas State A$M Florida Ga Tech They should simply admit they have no intention of fairness. Having a selection committee is dumb. Having a bunch of active AD’s on the committee is dumb on steroids. But the worst part is that fans fall for the flawed process and act like this is really a legit playoff.
Only 1/7 had any chance of making the playoff and they did. That's acceptable to me seeing as OU by default was the best choice for #4.
In theory the AD of a school under discussion has to leave the room and cannot vote for their school. Key phrase is "in theory". Nothing to stop them from "you scratch my back and I will return the favor" before the discussion.
If not the ADs, whom? The presidents? I have a big picture of Fenves asking the clown of Norman - what is this about again? Media? More biased than fans At least the P5 are all represented
Predidents, no. Media, hell no! But you do not make a family member a judge in a beauty contest where your daughter is a contestant. There is a long list of very savvy football minds, retired and stiil employed, but out of the game, who know more about the sport than AD’s. You probably know more about football than some AD’s. (You damn sure know more than most media and all college presidents.) In addition, most AD’s do not watch as much football as you, or others, because they are at their own games. The selection committee is a flawed process and tainted by the use of a select few D-1 athletic directors. Best solution? Get rid of the selection process. Second best, clean up the committee member selection .
So when the committee was selected they knew that these other AD’s would not have a team in the hunt? Perceived bias further damages an already ugly process. Let us just grow up and have a real playoff. All conference winners and maybe an “at large” option. That’s what the big boys do. What is D-1 afraid of?
Annoyed that OU is in rather than Oregon. Guessing that OU is a surrogate for Bama ... committee wants a former Ala QB, rather than Ducks. Expect the fairy tale narrative for Hurts begin soon. Wonder if Ga will be interested in their bowl game this year?