- 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: 11/29 CFB Playoff Rankings | 1. Alabama 2. tOSU 3. Clemson 4. Washington
Posted on 11/30/16 at 2:02 pm to buckeye_vol
Posted on 11/30/16 at 2:02 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:Good win. I will concede and call it good. Nothing about it was impressive. And you're lying if you think that game was against a top 10 team in the country. OSU played an absolutely pitiful team that day. They were pitiful that day. That week. That month. They were a horrible football team.
What? You're the one that is making an asinine statement saying that the Oklahoma win isn't even good.
quote:I recognize all of that. And my argument is the head to head loss division title and conference title trump those things. And should fairly easily(IMO) after a potential win vs Wisc.
BUT if you can't see why a win over Oklahoma + PSU's loss to Pitt + a better IN CONFERENCE schedule (right now PSU's cross-division teams were 19-17 while OSU's were 25-11)--at least gives OSU a worthy argument, then you clearly can't be convinced.
3
Posted on 11/30/16 at 2:24 pm to ReauxlTide222
quote:Well then I would call your USC win impressive, but they were even more "pitiful" going 1-3.
And you're lying if you think that game was against a top 10 team in the country. OSU played an absolutely pitiful team that day. They were pitiful that day. That week. That month. They were a horrible football team.
I thought your LSU win was good too, but they won't 2-2 in November so I guess that wasn't good either.
Auburn seed like a good win, but they went 2-2 in November as well, and only beat a 4-7 FCS school (ranked 240 by Sagarin) and a 6-6 Vanderbilt by 7 (ranked 60th by Massey Composite) at home.
Texas A&M seemed like a good win, but they went 2-3 after they played Alabama.
Tennessee seemed like a good win but they were in the middle of a 3 game losing streak.
Western Kentucky seemed like a solid win (9-3) but they started 3-3.
Arkansas seemed like an OK win but they went 4-5 in conference and barely won 2 of their 3 non-conference games.
The rest of your schedule was against teams with losing records.
So using your logic, your own team has 0 "good" wins. I disagree with that, but it's your own argument.
Posted on 11/30/16 at 2:30 pm to ReauxlTide222
quote:I'll give you head-to-head, but technically OSU and PSU tied for the division title--PSU won the tiebreaker to play in the championship game. The conference championship will add to their argument, but since the non-conference does matter too, you can't just ignore that as an argument counter to the playoffs.
And my argument is the head to head loss division title and conference title trump those things.
Posted on 11/30/16 at 3:38 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:Who the shite thinks that was an impressive win after knowing what we do about them?
Well then I would call your USC win impressive, but they were even more "pitiful" going 1-3.
I absolutely believe that Alabama doesn't have many, if any, complete victories. It was nice to see Hurts and company look good against USC. I guess they have a good defense. Unlike Oklahoma, btw.
A few of the wins that looked good scare me a bit, and did at the time of the win as well.
Posted on 11/30/16 at 3:43 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:I'm not ignoring it. I'm saying I don't think it's as impressive as y'all do because I think Oklahoma was the definition of average at best. And I think the head to head and PSU winning your division and conference out them ahead of the OOC stuff.
but since the non-conference does matter too, you can't just ignore that as an argument counter to the playoffs.
Posted on 11/30/16 at 4:01 pm to ReauxlTide222
quote:
head to head loss division title
They don't get bonus points for winning a tiebreaker. Their loss to Michigan more than makes up for this, and then some.
Posted on 11/30/16 at 4:07 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
I don't like your style any longer
Posted on 11/30/16 at 4:14 pm to ReauxlTide222
Sorry bout it. I want the four best teams. Everyone here should want that.
Posted on 11/30/16 at 4:22 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
Who are they?
And do you not see how this is dangerous? The committee has pretty much determined that Mich, Wisc, OSU, and PSU(hell even Nebraska at one point) are all better than other conference's 2nd best teams.
Maybe not exactly that, but something like that.
I think most of those teams are.....meh AF.
I secretly think they're a buncha unathletic offenses who can't really separate from each other so they mostly play close games. Don't tell anybody I said that.
And do you not see how this is dangerous? The committee has pretty much determined that Mich, Wisc, OSU, and PSU(hell even Nebraska at one point) are all better than other conference's 2nd best teams.
Maybe not exactly that, but something like that.
I think most of those teams are.....meh AF.
I secretly think they're a buncha unathletic offenses who can't really separate from each other so they mostly play close games. Don't tell anybody I said that.
Posted on 11/30/16 at 4:29 pm to ReauxlTide222
Alabama
Ohio State
Clemson
Michigan
It's more dangerous to say only conference champs.
Ohio State
Clemson
Michigan
quote:
And do you not see how this is dangerous?
It's more dangerous to say only conference champs.
Posted on 11/30/16 at 4:32 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:Well I would never say that.
It's more dangerous to say only conference champs.
And the heck is PSU getting punished for their 3 point Pitt(who beats Clemson) loss on the road months and months ago even though they'll have a 10 game win streak......but Mich isn't getting punished for losing to Iowa(who PSU destroyed)?
Answer me that one!
Posted on 11/30/16 at 4:49 pm to ReauxlTide222
Why don't you care about head-to-head?
Posted on 11/30/16 at 4:51 pm to ReauxlTide222
What I don't understand is why everyone is penciling Bama in regardless of the outcome of the SECCG.
Posted on 11/30/16 at 4:53 pm to tress4pres
Only Bama is allowed to win NCs without winning their conference.
Posted on 11/30/16 at 4:53 pm to tress4pres
Because tOSU is already penciled in. If you aren't going to punish tOSU for not winning the division or the conference, you can't punish Bama for making it and losing
Posted on 11/30/16 at 4:54 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
OSU #2 
Posted on 11/30/16 at 4:54 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:I do care
Why don't you care about head-to-head?
Posted on 11/30/16 at 4:55 pm to tress4pres
But you understand everyone just penciling in OSU? If OSU is automatically in, then so is bama. Even more so
Posted on 11/30/16 at 4:55 pm to tress4pres
quote:Bc Alabama hasn't given up a TD in 17 quarters and UF only has 1 in their last 10.
What I don't understand is why everyone is penciling Bama in regardless of the outcome of the SECCG.
Posted on 11/30/16 at 4:55 pm to ReauxlTide222
quote:Because they have the same record, BUT had a tougher schedule AND destroyed (didn't just beat) PSU. If they had more losses, then PSU would ahead of them.
And the heck is PSU getting punished for their 3 point Pitt(who beats Clemson) loss on the road months and months ago even though they'll have a 10 game win streak......but Mich isn't getting punished for losing to Iowa(who PSU destroyed)?
Page 14 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News