Good arguments as to why Michigan should be in CFP
November 27th, 2016 at 7:44 PM ^
Harbaugh will get our young team to gel through the year. May have 2 or 3 losses but we could upset this OSU team at home. Shit, who thought that PSU would win the B1G at the beginning of the season?
November 27th, 2016 at 8:13 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 7:41 PM ^
I'm also already with peace with the fact that Michigan has a down year in 2017 vs the usual suspects.
Got to cope,
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 27th, 2016 at 7:43 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 27th, 2016 at 8:40 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 7:43 PM ^
I think Clemson and Washington both have to lose. On Tuesday, the CFP rankings will probably look something like this:
1. Bama - Not losing the championship
2. OSU - Finished the season by beating #3
3. Clemson - Likely to beat VaTech
4. Washington - Likely to beat Colorado
5. Michigan
6. Wisconsin
7. Penn State
8. Colorado
I think our only shot is for either Washington or Clemson to lose AND for Penn State to win an ugly game against Wisconsin. Here are the resumes:
Colorado best wins: #24 Stanford, #22 Utah, #23 Washington State
Colorado losses: Nail-biter against #12 USC and blowout against #3 Michigan
Penn State best wins: Fluky win against #2 OSU, nail-biter over 8-4 Minnesota, blowout over 8-4 Iowa
Penn State losses: Blowout against #3 Michigan and nail-biter against 8-4 Pitt
Wisconsin best wins: Nail-biter against 7-4 LSU, nail-biter against 8-4 Iowa, nail-biter against #16 Nebraska (who is about to be unranked), win over 8-4 Minnesota
Wisconsin losses: Nail-biter against #2 OSU and nail-biter against #3 UM.
Michigan best wins: Nail-biter over #6 Wisconsin, blowout over #7 PSU, blowout over #9 Colorado
Michigan losses: Nail-biter against 8-4 Iowa, nail-biter against #2 OSU.
Breakdown: I think Wisconsin goes over Michigan if they win the B1G simply because their status as B1G champs combined with losses to #2 and #3 on the road will be hard to ignore. However, I think we could get in over the other two if you look at the entire resume. H2H blowouts are huge here, and the fact that Michigan has blown out two teams currently in the top 10 is impressive. Nevertheless, there's no guarantee if they win their conferences. We'll see whether the H2H blowout or the conference championship is more important.
November 27th, 2016 at 7:58 PM ^
1. Alabama
2. OSU
3. Clemson
4. Washington
5. Michigan
6. Wisconsin/Penn St
7. Penn St/Wisconsin
8. Oklahoma/Colorado
9. Colorado/Oklahoma
10. OK State
I think it really boils down to if Colorado can beat Washington. In that case, we've beaten the Pac12 champ head-to-head. No way Colorado jumps us and no way Washington doesn't fall below us. If Clemson loses, I could see a scenario where they hang onto a spot with wins against Auburn, L'ville, and FSU and having Deshaun Watson. But they could also easily fall below us. If either of those teams lose, the question then comes down whether or not the committee would have the guts to put in a B1G Champ that we beat head-to-head over us. Could easily happen, but after seeing the committee keep us at #3 even after the loss to Iowa, they definitely respect us a lot, and after a 2OT loss to the #2 team in the nation on the road, I can't imagine that respect waning much. Obviously, a lot has to happen.
But damn, I'd love to snag that #4 spot and have a crack at Alabama. Harbaugh v. Saban would be one hell of a matchup. Even if we were big time underdogs going into that game, we'd have the opportunity to play them tough and send a message around the country. And to win that game and see OSU in the championship would be a dream.
Our chances are slim, but it could happen.
November 27th, 2016 at 8:20 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 8:01 PM ^
Again, if you want the regular season to matter, then you have to factor in conference championships. Unfortunately, that means UM finishes behind 2-loss PSU or Wiscy and 1-loss OSU in the pecking order.
I'd be happy if they just used computer rankings again. At least that way, you can have an objective-ish metric to fall back on instead of "we feel this team is deserving now" weekly arguments.
November 27th, 2016 at 8:27 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 8:36 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 8:41 PM ^
He said...smart things?
He's 100% right though. If your mission first and foremost is to identify the best 4 teams and let them go in a playoff then it is crystal clear that 3 of those teams are Alabama, Ohio State, and Michigan. Washington & Clemson should be dueling for the 4th spot
The reason everyone is crowing about conference title games is 1) because of what happened to the Big 12 in the first year but mainly 2) because it's the literally the only thing they have to try to justify Ohio State & Michigan not being recognized as two of the top 4
November 27th, 2016 at 9:37 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 9:45 PM ^
Does anyone else think it's possible that OSU doesnt actually stay ahead of us at the end of it all? I mean they are ahead of PSU, whom they lost to.
We CLEARLY outplayed Ohio State yesterday. Everyone KNOWS we got robbed. These committees aren't stupid.
November 27th, 2016 at 9:53 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 27th, 2016 at 10:04 PM ^
If Washington beats Colorado, we're 100% out. Not a snowball's chance in hell after that. If Colorado wins, we'll have beaten two conference winners head to head. Potentially both in blowouts. Guarantee no other team in America can say that. So that potentially makes things interesting. If Clemson wins, it doesn't help, but we're not dead if they win. Would also help if the BTT game is an ugly slop fest where neither team looks very good. Not outside the realm of possibility either.
The committee is probably praying that Washington wins next week since that'll make things easy on them. But if not, it could make things interesting. A lot of folks out there still think Michigan is one of the four best teams in America, and the playoff is, in theory, predicated on finding the four best teams, not necessarily four conference winners. When it's all said and done, I doubt we make it. That loss to Iowa really set us back. But if Washington falls next week, we might have a puncher's chance.
Either way, a year like this will likely push the general population and the media to start asking for an expanded field. Maybe 6 teams where the 1 and 2 seeds get bye weeks.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 27th, 2016 at 10:38 PM ^
Michigan 45, Colorado 28
Michigan 49, Penn State 10
Not to mention Michigan is in the top 4 in almost all advanced metrics and rankings. And there is your answer.
If Wisconsin wins, that hurts our chances since they will likely be ranked just below us or maybe even ahead of us by a spot. But the fact is that all teams would have two losses and Michigan would have beaten them both head to head. The chances are slim, but they are definitely there.
November 27th, 2016 at 11:41 PM ^
I'll be interested to see if what happened in last years BTCG (slopfest) and then the results from putting those two teams in the the playoffs (ass-kicking) and the Rose Bowl (ass-kicking) affects the thinking of the committee this year. Perhaps they will learn from their mistake and realize that having two inferior teams make it into high-level bowl games simply because of the conference championship results in ugly, borderline unwatchable football for the general nationwide audience. I turned both the Iowa and MSU game off early last year because they were over so quickly. I would expect the exact same result if PSU/WIS make the playoff/Rose Bowl again this year. Hoping that they can learn from those results and be more willing to make unpopular decisions to ensure quality football from the four best teams in the nation.
November 28th, 2016 at 1:02 AM ^
If Clemson and Washington both lose I think Michigan definitely has a shot to get in and potentially 3 Big Ten teams. Given that is very unlikely, there is some logic to the possibility.
It would be #1 Alabama and #2 Ohio State. Then #3 and #4 would be up for grabs between the B10 winner, Michigan, Colorado, and the Big 12 winner (and maybe a slight chance of Clemson still, but doubt it). All of those teams would be sitting at 2 losses. Then it would just depend on what the committee weighs the heaviest. Would they favor head-to-head wins or conference championships more? If head-to-head wins are favored more then Michigan definitely has the advantage after defeating the B10 winner and the Pac 12 winner, Colorado. If conference championships are weighed more, Michigan would be behind the B10 winner, maybe Colorado, and maybe even the Big 12 winner (which is unlikely due to a much weaker schedule and no Top 10 wins).
Here is how resumes would look in this scenario:
If PSU wins: 11-2 Big Ten Champs, Big wins: Ohio State 24-21 & Wisconsin* (*B10 loser would be presumably right around #10 after a BTTG loss) Big losses: Pitt 39-42 & Michigan 10-49.
If Wisconsin wins: 11-2 Big Ten Champs, Big wins: Penn State* (Nebraska, Iowa, & LSU all medicore wins), Big losses: Ohio State 23-30 OT, & Michigan 7-14.
Colorado: 11-2 Pac 12 Champs, Big Wins: Washington (WSU and Utah medicore wins), Big losses: Michigan 28-45, & USC 17-21.
Michigan: 10-2, no confernce championship, Big Wins: Colorado 45-28, Penn State 49-10, & Wisconsin 14-7, Big Losses: Iowa 13-14 & Ohio State 27-30 2OT.
Oklahoma: 10-2, Big 12 champ, Big Wins: OK St^, WVU^ (^both would be around #15) Big Losses: Houston 23-33 & Ohio State 24-45.
Oklahoma St: 10-2, Big 12 champ, Big Wins: OU^, WVU^, Big Losses: CMU 27-30 (disputed) & Baylor 24-35.
Clemson: 11-2, no conference championship, Big Wins: Louisville 42-36 & Auburn 19-13 (both not as impressive as before Week 13) Big Losses: Pitt 42-43 & VA Tech
If going purely off resume in that situation Michigan would look to be #3. No matter who wins the BTTG, that team is just adding a win against a team that Michigan already beat. Wisconsin wouldn't have a bad loss and finally have a big win. Penn State would have 2 big wins, one loss to a medicore team and a blowout loss to a good team. I would put either of them at #4. Colorado wouldn't look as impressive as they would only have 1 top-notch win and would most likely be #5. The other 3 don't have nearly as impressive resumes. The biggest win for any of them would be against likely around a #15 team (B12 loser, WVU, Louisville, or Auburn).
Michigan would probably hope for a PSU win because comparing to PSU and Colorado, Michigan beat them both pretty easily.
In this scenario it could be #1 Alabama, #2 Ohio State, #3 Michigan, #4 B10 Winner which would lead to a crazy semifinal rematch between Michigan and Ohio State on a neutral field in.
It could possiby be #1 Alabama, #2 Ohio State, #3 B10 Winner, #4 Michigan. If we're being honest Michigan likley wouldn't get past Alabama, but it would have the potential for a Michigan vs Ohio matchup in the National Championship game. It would literally be the biggest game in the history of college football.
All in all, having Clemson and Washington both lose is very unlikely but not out of the question. And I doubt how much politics would come into play with the Big Ten getting 3 teams and 75% of the revenue and the ACC, Pac 12, and Big 12 getting none. I doubt the committee would want that. The Pac 12 and Big 12 would definitley cry foul for not including their conference champs. But based strictly off resumes, the Big Ten would deserve 3 teams.
November 28th, 2016 at 1:29 AM ^
The only way we get in is if the committee gets a wild hair and decides that they want to send a clear unambiguous mesage about OOC strength of scheduling.
If they do they will ding Washington who they have been down on all year and rank Michigan above them. We'll know on Tuesday.
That does not mean that we would stay ahead of them if they win out since their SOS would improve significantly by playing Colorado.
But it shows where the committee's head is at, and if they do it it opens the door for a team like Michgian to get in over a conference champion with a lesser resume.
Ironically, Ohio State helps us here. The committee is going to put OSU in, so they've already set the prescedent of putting in a team with a strong resume over some conference champ.