- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why is Ohio State at 3?
Posted on 12/5/16 at 10:43 am to KosmoCramer
Posted on 12/5/16 at 10:43 am to KosmoCramer
0
Posted on 12/5/16 at 10:53 am to goldenbadger08
quote:So you ha e no evidence of the thing you said.
No, if you can't prove it wasn't used then the possibility is there. Nobody will ever know for sure unless one of the committee members slips up and tells us. In every sport and everything ESPN does is to maximize ratings, to think this is any different is just naive.
Meanwhile, I can show you a mountain of evidence that has nothing to do with anyone's name that show that Ohio State didn't get anything they didn't earn on the field.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 11:04 am to FootballNostradamus
I haven't read this thread, but to address the OP, the committee can't decide if they want "best" or "more deserving." It is clear that they moved Clemson up because with an extra win and a conference championship, they felt they were more deserving than OSU. There is no way they were sudenly convinced they were better. Which is fine by me. While still subjective, it's more objective than "best." They judt need to quit talking out of both sides of their mouth.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 12:43 pm to FootballNostradamus
here's a question:
If the big10 is the best conf this year, why is OSU only ranked 3rd?
Seems like OSU got in on the committee's belief that the BIG10 is the strongest conf this year. But they didn't afford PSU that same credit for winning the strongest conf.
If the big10 is the best conf this year, why is OSU only ranked 3rd?
Seems like OSU got in on the committee's belief that the BIG10 is the strongest conf this year. But they didn't afford PSU that same credit for winning the strongest conf.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 1:04 pm to RoyMcavoy
quote:
Seems like OSU got in on the committee's belief that the BIG10 is the strongest conf this year. But they didn't afford PSU that same credit for winning the strongest conf.
Maybe it has something to do with that pesky non-conference loss to Pitt putting a 2 in the loss column for PSU. Just a thought.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 2:51 pm to FootballNostradamus
quote:I don't know if you read my post in response to you earlier, but this isn't necessarily the case, and I explained it to you in clear and simple terms.
but then why did the committee overvalue Clemson's conference championship game win?
Posted on 12/5/16 at 2:57 pm to RoyMcavoy
quote:they have the #5 best record and #2 SOS.
If the big10 is the best conf this year, why is OSU only ranked 3rd?
quote:That's because you haven't spent time actually observing the actual mathematical reasons why Ohio State is in. 95 of the 100 systems in the Massey composite have OSU in the top four. There are mountains of evidence supporting the idea that they should be in the playoff.
Seems like OSU got in on the committee's belief that the BIG10 is the strongest
Please don't take this personally, but the idea that OSU got in because of anything that didn't happen on the field is ignorant.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 3:19 pm to FootballNostradamus
Committee is living in the past.
They want a rematch with OSU, but this isn't the same team on both sides.
They want a rematch with OSU, but this isn't the same team on both sides.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 4:46 pm to gobuxgo5
quote:
That has no factor in th ranking
Don 't be so foolish snowflake.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 4:54 pm to cuyahoga tiger
I can show you a mountain of mathematical evidence that indicates that Ohio State shouldn't be #4.
Do you have any evidence that money is the reason they aren't #4, snowflake?
Do you have any evidence that money is the reason they aren't #4, snowflake?
Posted on 12/5/16 at 4:55 pm to gobuxgo5
quote:
They also factored in the color of jerseys. Red is many of the members favorite color. Try to prove me wrong!
You need this.....
Posted on 12/5/16 at 5:32 pm to dukke v
Dukke what's up. Colts or Jets tonight?
Posted on 12/5/16 at 7:24 pm to beauchristopher
quote:
I said this as well, it's utter bs.
Why not put them at 4.
Because it's 100% obvious they did not want Penn St getting in. Ohio St getting in proved it's about nothing but ratings and money to them. Moving Clemson and not moving UW proved they want either a Clemson or OSU VS Bama National Championship. UW is the least likeliest to knock off precious Bama, so they are at 4. To show face about conference championships they moved Clemson up to 2.
It's all bullshite.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 7:31 pm to RileyTime
quote:
Because it's 100% obvious they did not want Penn St getting in. Ohio St getting in proved it's about nothing but ratings and money to them. Moving Clemson and not moving UW proved they want either a Clemson or OSU VS Bama National Championship. UW is the least likeliest to knock off precious Bama, so they are at 4. To show face about conference championships they moved Clemson up to 2.
It's all bullshite.
Or it's because Washington played no one....
Clemson played FSU, Auburn, Louisville. Ohio State played Michigan, Oklahoma, Wisconsin. Washington played USC (lost), Colorado (?) and ?????
Posted on 12/5/16 at 7:54 pm to Klendathu
quote:Not exactly, but Clemson has a higher SOS. #3 SOS as opposed to UW's #13. Both strong schedules, by one is clearly stronger.
Or it's because Washington played no one....
Posted on 12/5/16 at 8:03 pm to ballscaster
quote:How is that possible?
UW's #13
Posted on 12/5/16 at 8:05 pm to ReauxlTide222
PAC 12 has a lot of teams who don't rank poorly. Overall it boosts their SOS. BUT their OOC is really bad and it makes me mad the AD would feel they'd need to schedule like that --like they are trying to get Bowl Eligible vs be a playoff team
Posted on 12/5/16 at 8:07 pm to ReauxlTide222
Opponents' winning %: .537
Opponents' opponents' winning %: .594
The old BCS metric takes twice the former and once the latter and divides by 3. That spits out .556 for UW, which is the 13th best in the country.
Opponents' opponents' winning %: .594
The old BCS metric takes twice the former and once the latter and divides by 3. That spits out .556 for UW, which is the 13th best in the country.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 8:10 pm to gobuxgo5
quote:The OOC was REALLY bad. Not sure it was all their fault, though. I think hey had some last minute scheduling problems and just had to get whoever.
BUT their OOC is really bad and it makes me mad the AD would feel they'd need to schedule like that --like they are trying to get Bowl Eligible vs be a playoff team
Posted on 12/5/16 at 8:12 pm to gobuxgo5
quote:When Rutgers was added to UW's schedule, Rutgers was good.
it makes me mad the AD would feel they'd need to schedule like that
Another minor bonus for UW's SOS is that the one Pac-12 school they didn't play this year was 4-8 UCLA.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News