Good arguments as to why Michigan should be in CFP
November 27th, 2016 at 6:14 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 27th, 2016 at 6:31 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 6:44 PM ^
what difference does it make? Winning conference title or division so overrated. Take the best 4. Period. If one of the best 4 didn't win their division or conference title then so be it.
November 27th, 2016 at 6:51 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 6:56 PM ^
Can't believe I'm saying this, but they need to shift OSU or Michigan back to the other division.
It won't ever happen now that Michigan is relevant again. Doubt the other schools would like having OSU vs Michigan rematches every other year.
November 27th, 2016 at 6:57 PM ^
November 28th, 2016 at 12:10 AM ^
The funny thing is this year there are only 5 teams that should even be considred for the playoff, Bama, OSU, Clemson, Michigan, Wash. Any other team is far worse.
November 28th, 2016 at 9:13 AM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 6:58 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 7:45 PM ^
It's really hard to identify the best four, so I'm in favor of going with the champions unless it's clear that the "champion" is clearly not a Top 4 team (e.g. a team getting into their conference championship game from a weak division and then winning one game).
Also, the eye test says the Big 12 sucks. The upcoming championship game is between one Oklahoma team that got smoked at home by OSU and one that lost to Central Michigan at home.
November 27th, 2016 at 7:16 PM ^
Conference championships are flawed. They don't take into account tie-breakers. They don't take into account the strength of the conference (or division).
If one conference division had the #1,2,3 and 4 teams.....
November 27th, 2016 at 8:10 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 6:45 PM ^
So using your logic, staee was deserving and a good choice to be on the CFP last year!!!
Snap, they scored on them again!
November 27th, 2016 at 7:48 PM ^
They won the B1G while going through Columbus.
Sorry, but OSU blew their chance when they lost at home to MSU. No mulligans.
November 28th, 2016 at 12:13 AM ^
Last year imo 1. OSU (by far) 2. Uofm 3. MSU 4. Iowa
This year 1. Uofm 1b. OSU 3. wisconsin 4.Iowa 5. PSU
November 27th, 2016 at 6:15 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 27th, 2016 at 6:20 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 6:48 PM ^
Then can't take Penn State, Wisconsin, or Colorado either right?
November 27th, 2016 at 6:56 PM ^
OU only has 1 win over an AP top 25 team (WVU), Michigan has 3 wins over top 10 teams. The idiots in the Coaches poll have Wisconsin ahead of Michigan. The CFP seems to be smarter than those in the coaches poll.
If Washington (only 1 win over AP top 25) and Clemson (2 wins over AP top 25) lose, I don't see how Michigan is kept out. Even if they win, based on resume, Michigan has as good an argument as anybody (3 top 10 wins vs. 0 top 10 wins for Clemson and UW) outside of the top 2 teams.
That doesn't mean they'll get in, but if the CFP wants the top 4 teams in the country, UM should be in. To be honest though, I don't think Michigan can beat Alabama at this point, and I'd rather have a great New Year's Day bowl win heading into next year than a loss in the CFP. Maybe I'm in the minority, but I think it's better to end on a high note.
November 27th, 2016 at 6:15 PM ^
As happy as that would make me, its a pipe dream.
If the committe takes OSU over the winner of PSU/Wisconsin, they need to shut their fucking mouths with the "conference champion" rhetoric forevermore.
That said, if some miracle happens and we get in (we won't), I'll gladly take it.
They'll take a lesser Washington team.
November 27th, 2016 at 7:13 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 6:16 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 27th, 2016 at 6:27 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 27th, 2016 at 6:36 PM ^
Upvote. Nothing said today is more true. We shat the bed on the road closing out big games.
November 27th, 2016 at 6:40 PM ^
Is this a trend under Harbaugh? Please tell me it isn't a trend.
Did he have these issues at Stanford?
November 27th, 2016 at 7:00 PM ^
Doesn't seem like it since he had an amazing QB at Stanford that didn't have issues overthrowing or turning the ball over at crucial times (exception Oregon).
November 27th, 2016 at 7:03 PM ^
and continued with Hoke players under Harbaugh. I think it is mostly a mental thing why they cannot close out games. The players seem to freeze up and are unable to execute basic plays, such as poor throws, poor blocks, not hanging onto the ball.
We'll have to wait and see during the next couple years if this will be a Harbaugh trend? I doubt it, his teams usually finish strong.
November 27th, 2016 at 7:06 PM ^
No matter how much Harbaugh molds these dudes, there's still some Hoke left in em. Can't wait to see Michigan with 4 years worth of Harbaugh dudes.
November 27th, 2016 at 7:07 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 7:12 PM ^
No, it wasn't. What Harbaugh was known for at Stanford was the use of tight ends and fullbacks, and having a punishing Offensive line that wore people down. There was one game (I think it might've been against USC) where Stanford ran the same running play I believe 10 or 11 times in a row. The other team knew what was coming, but couldn't stop it. The team got better every year, he beat USC, and he helped nudge Carrol out of USC (and the sanctions of course).
I'm as pissed as anybody, but people need perspective. Compare Michigan road games versus those under Hoke and Rodriguez (not a high bar no doubt) and it's night and day. The offensive line works hard, but his first 2 o lines are likely to be the worst 2 o lines while Harbaugh is coach at Michigan. With recruiting big, smart, athletic lineman, and the tutelage of Drevno, and the future O lines are going to be scary good.
As bad as that loss to Ohio feels, remember that Michigan, in only it's 2nd year under Harbaugh, on the road, lost in double overtime on a b.s. 4th down call, with one-sided officiating and 3 turnovers to a team of basically all 4 and 5 star recruits.
Once Harbaugh has his star QB and a dominant O line, you'll see the tide shift in this rivalry. I don't know if Harbaugh will run Meyer out of Columbus, but what I do know is he's more competitive than we are, he and the players are the ones putting in the long days and hard work and who are likely going to be angrier than we are, and he was working with only his first full recruiting class. Things will get better. And as the saying goes, you can't spell C_ck__cker without OSU.
November 27th, 2016 at 7:59 PM ^
one in double OT and one on a walkoff FG.
That's an excellent year.
And you can expect it to get better once the team is stocked with Harbaugh-level recruiting classes with a couple years of Harbaugh development under their belts.
November 27th, 2016 at 6:18 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 6:21 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 6:21 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 6:23 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 27th, 2016 at 7:09 PM ^
and out played OSU and should have won. The Iowa game they did not play well at all. Just think if they played Iowa the way they played OSU, we would have won easily and we would probably get into the playoffs with one loss. Though we would probably be the fourth team and have to play Alabama. Though, I think Michigan is the only team with the defense that could make the Alabama game close.
November 28th, 2016 at 1:29 AM ^
They won't be left out.
If either Washington or Clemson falter, Michigan will go in.
Mark it.
Whole point of the a committee hand-selected playoff (which is then by definition not a true "playoff" as we understand it in American sports) was to get the 4 best teams, then Michigan has a great shot.
You think if Alabama loses to Florida, thus not winning the Conf. Champ. the CFP won't take them?
If it is the best 4 teams, then Michigan still has a shot.
November 27th, 2016 at 6:23 PM ^
Particularly if Colorado beats Washington....we've got wins over Colorado wisconsin n Penn St...and Oklahoma got blown out at home to osu....send big n PAC champs to rose bowl
November 27th, 2016 at 6:25 PM ^
I just can't see them taking 2 big ten teams, neither of which won the conference, nor can I see them taking 3 big ten teams. I'd love to be proven wrong, but people should not get their hopes up.
However, if it is all about money, as folks often claim, a Michigan Ohio State rematch for the national championship would probably be the most profitable game in the CFP's short history, so take note selection committee.
November 27th, 2016 at 7:13 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 6:25 PM ^
and Penn State beats Wisconsin, then I have two arguments for you.
1. Michigan 45, Colorado 28.
2. Michigan 49, Penn State 10.
And I'm wrong saying it's an "argument". It's an indisputable fact. So when you add those "facts", along with Michigan losing to what will be a ranked Iowa team on the road on a last second field goal, and losing to a top 3 Ohio State team on the road in double overtime, I think you have an argument.
But Colorado and Penn State have to win.
November 27th, 2016 at 6:37 PM ^
Simply losses by Washington and Wisconsin could do the trick.
Losses by Oklahoma and Clemson as well (or some combination of 3 out of 4 with one of those being a Wisconsin loss) would do the trick).
November 27th, 2016 at 6:26 PM ^
Overemphasizing conference championships – ironically an idea originally championed by Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany, now perhaps to his detriment – sacrifices common sense.
I actually agree with that - conference champion should not necessarily be the determining factor when looking at two teams that are close in resume (especially when they are comparing teams with obvious differences in resume), especially when those two teams are this year's Penn State and Wisconsin. If either of them found a backdoor into the CFP, there is something seriously cracked about the criteria.
November 27th, 2016 at 6:49 PM ^
I disagree there. Even though it kills our CFP chances for this year, conference championships matter and should be given very strong weighting by the committee (otherwise, why have them and the championship games they entail). If a team was not strong enough to win their conference, what right do they have to claim a national championship?
This also gives strong incentive for some of the directionally-challenged schools (i.e. the Figthings) to finally live in the 21st century and join a conference.
November 27th, 2016 at 6:55 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 27th, 2016 at 6:26 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 6:27 PM ^
case for: we are undoubtably one of the 4 top teams in the nation
case against: we didn't win our division
November 27th, 2016 at 6:50 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 9:28 PM ^
The only thing with that is that the East is being recognized as the best division in college football this year. I'm not saying we have a significant chance, but it is still non-zero
Just taking care of business at Iowa makes this a moot point. /slams head on desk again
November 27th, 2016 at 6:30 PM ^