so who are 4 teams with a better resume than Michigan and why?

[MSUMatt28]

If we're looking to the future, then obviously we want chaos.

Alabama losing to Florida...this will put the committee in a position where they are forced to face the question of whether or not a team will have to win their conference. If Alabama loses, then we can just throw out the conference championship idea.

Colorado beating Washington

Virginia Tech beating Clemson

if those games go down, then the committee will be forced to put in 1 or 2 teams with 2 losses.

Alabama is in no matter what. In a perfect world we want the conference championship games to mean something and for teams to punch their ticket by winning them, but if the goal is to put in the 4 best (or some combination of "best" and "deserving"), then it can't quite be that simple.

The committee probably painted themselves into a corner though by saying 2 years ago how important conference championships are as a way to give themselves an out in choosing OSU over TCU/Baylor. They could have simply said, "hey we think OSU is the better team and that 59-0 win over Wisconsin was a real eye opener" instead of putting it back on the Big 12 and their lack of declaring a single champion.

 

[UMRules06]

That rule does not exist, just like the rule that you can't throw your headset on the sideline is a technical foul in football. The playoff is not set up currently that you need to win your conference championship. You can debate whether or not that should be a rule, but it currently is not. In your situation, if Alabama loses to Florida, then they automatically drop out? I don't see that happening. Do you think that OSU will drop out? Again, nope. You are simply talking about a rule that does not exist.

It isn't favoritism. It is going by what actually happened on the field.

In my opinion the rule should exist. That's what I'm getting it. Because I believe that rule should exist, I also believe that any team that can't even win their own conference does not deserve to go on to be declared the nation's best team. It makes no logical sense. Different schedules or not, you want to be called the best? Win your damn games. Don't lose to Iowa. Don't lose to Ohio St when you should have won.

Alabama vs. Florida is a de facto playoff game. If Alabama loses, guess what sorry you're out. Florida beat you goodbye. If you're as good as you say you are, then win the game. This is just how I feel about it.

So either the conference champion rule should be valid across the board, or it should be irrelevant completely. Right now it seems stuck somewhere in the middle, and that's what leads to a lot of frustration.

 

[biggunsbob]

Not us so I do not give a shit. Should be a 8 or 12 team playoff. Be pretty easy to set up. Byes to top teams. DII, and DIII does it.

 

[hungry]

In my opinion the rule should exist. That's what I'm getting it. Because I believe that rule should exist, I also believe that any team that can't even win their own conference does not deserve to go on to be declared the nation's best team. It makes no logical sense. Different schedules or not, you want to be called the best? Win your damn games. Don't lose to Iowa. Don't lose to Ohio St when you should have won.

Alabama vs. Florida is a de facto playoff game. If Alabama loses, guess what sorry you're out. Florida beat you goodbye. If you're as good as you say you are, then win the game. This is just how I feel about it.

So either the conference champion rule should be valid across the board, or it should be irrelevant completely. Right now it seems stuck somewhere in the middle, and that's what leads to a lot of frustration.

I know I am comparing apples to oranges, but teams that aren't conference champions in basketball have been winning national titles for years and no one has questioned it. 68 teams get a chance in the NCAA tournament theoretically and most are not conference champs.

Using your rule, let's say that Alabama loses and Clemson loses...who would you put in?

winner of PSU vs UW seems to be the only lock to me and many would argue that neither team is one of the top 4 teams in the country

Let's say that Colorado beats UW. Does that put them in? They go from 9th to the top 4, even though the nation seems to agree that the pac12 isn't that tough a conference? Which conference champions should arbitrarily make the top 4 playoff? There are like 12 conferences.

 

[tinselwolverine]

I know I am comparing apples to oranges, but teams that aren't conference champions in basketball have been winning national titles for years and no one has questioned it. 68 teams get a chance in the NCAA tournament theoretically and most are not conference champs.

Using your rule, let's say that Alabama loses and Clemson loses...who would you put in?

Sure but in college basketball every conference championship tournament winner at least gets in and has a shot.

If in the tournament they lose to a team that didn't win it's conference championship game then oh well.

 

[UMRules06]

I know I am comparing apples to oranges, but teams that aren't conference champions in basketball have been winning national titles for years and no one has questioned it. 68 teams get a chance in the NCAA tournament theoretically and most are not conference champs.

Using your rule, let's say that Alabama loses and Clemson loses...who would you put in?

winner of PSU vs UW seems to be the only lock to me and many would argue that neither team is one of the top 4 teams in the country

Let's say that Colorado beats UW. Does that put them in? They go from 9th to the top 4, even though the nation seems to agree that the pac12 isn't that tough a conference? Which conference champions should arbitrarily make the top 4 playoff? There are like 12 conferences.

Basketball is a different animal. I'm not entirely in favor of they way that is setup either. 68 teams is way too many and it's purely a money grab in my opinion. There are not 68 teams worthy of competing for a national championship, especially when the lowest seed to ever win is what an 8 seed I think? People just love the tournament and the madness so they let it slide.

If Alabama and Clemson both lose, then yes I'd do Florida, Big-Ten Champ, Pac-12 Champ, and winner of Oklahoma vs Oklahoma St. Very unlikely, but if you want to earn your shot then win your most important games.

 

[UMRules06]

Your argument about which 4 conferences deserve to get in is a valid one though. That is an argument for why the playoff should be 8 teams instead of 4. Let the Power 5 conference champs get in, and then 3 wildcard teams. That's where your teams like Michigan and Ohio State get their chance.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Here's an idea...expand the tournament to eight.

The conference champions from the power 5 conferences (obviously Big 12 decides its champion without divisions or a conference championship game; no biggie) get automatics, and then three at large teams are selected.

The top 3 seeded teams by the committee each take on an at large; and #4 and #5 teams play each other in the quarter finals.

The winners go to a semi final round, and then winners play in the national championship game.

Easy peazy?

 

[tinselwolverine]

Your argument about which 4 conferences deserve to get in is a valid one though. That is an argument for why the playoff should be 8 teams instead of 4. Let the Power 5 conference champs get in, and then 3 wildcard teams. That's where your teams like Michigan and Ohio State get their chance.

Dude, you beat me by two minutes!!!

 

[mhughes0021]

To be fair....for those of you stating we have a better resume.....colorado and penn st werent even ranked when we beat them. You cant speak out of both sides....we now know they are ranked high because of their easy schedules....so should those wins really help our resume? And yes....if/when both those teams lose next weekend it should hurt our resume.

Oklahoma might not have as glamorous of wins as we do....but they probably have similar if not better losses in OSU and Houston. If they beat okla state next weekend im sure a lot of their fans will be saying they deserve a shot over a michigan team thats sitting at home not playing.

 

[dubbsco]

Well, those fans would be morons because Oklahoma has played one less game than Michigan. So that doesn't make sense that they are playing on the last weekend and Michigan isn't.

 

[tinselwolverine]

To be fair....for those of you stating we have a better resume.....colorado and penn st werent even ranked when we beat them. You cant speak out of both sides....we now know they are ranked high because of their easy schedules....so should those wins really help our resume? And yes....if/when both those teams lose next weekend it should hurt our resume.

Oklahoma might not have as glamorous of wins as we do....but they probably have similar if not better losses in OSU and Houston. If they beat okla state next weekend im sure a lot of their fans will be saying they deserve a shot over a michigan team thats sitting at home not playing.

Are "quality losses" still a thing?

I remember at least for a period of time back in the BCS era there was actually a column that gave any team in the rankings some margin of credit for a "quality loss."

If that's the case, certainly Michigan's loss at Ohio State in the biggest rivalry of all would have to be seen as a "quality loss."

 

[Monster]

At this point, we don't deserve a playoff game. I'll take a big bowl game, though, and be happy. Back to back years with over 10 wins? When was the last time that happened? I honestly don't remember. Early 2000's?

The thing that really pisses me off is that if we'd have just beaten Iowa, we'd be in. Sitting at 11-1 with an overtime loss at OSU in the last game of the year would have at least put us at 3 or 4 in seeding.

 

[hungry]

To be fair....for those of you stating we have a better resume.....colorado and penn st werent even ranked when we beat them. You cant speak out of both sides....we now know they are ranked high because of their easy schedules....so should those wins really help our resume? And yes....if/when both those teams lose next weekend it should hurt our resume.

Oklahoma might not have as glamorous of wins as we do....but they probably have similar if not better losses in OSU and Houston. If they beat okla state next weekend im sure a lot of their fans will be saying they deserve a shot over a michigan team thats sitting at home not playing.

We all can agree that preseason rankings are meaningless. The rankings at the end of the season will be the ones that hold the most weight. They weren't ranked earlier, because people didn't know they were any good.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Well, those fans would be morons because Oklahoma has played one less game than Michigan. So that doesn't make sense that they are playing on the last weekend and Michigan isn't.

That's a point.

 

[hungry]

At this point, we don't deserve a playoff game. I'll take a big bowl game, though, and be happy. Back to back years with over 10 wins? When was the last time that happened? I honestly don't remember. Early 2000's?

The thing that really pisses me off is that if we'd have just beaten Iowa, we'd be in. Sitting at 11-1 with an overtime loss at OSU in the last game of the year would have at least put us at 3 or 4 in seeding.

Yet, Michigan still would not have qualified for a spot in the conference championship. In this scenario, OSU would be going to play UW.

 

[wlvrnstlr4life]

To be fair....for those of you stating we have a better resume.....colorado and penn st werent even ranked when we beat them. You cant speak out of both sides....we now know they are ranked high because of their easy schedules....so should those wins really help our resume? And yes....if/when both those teams lose next weekend it should hurt our resume.

Oklahoma might not have as glamorous of wins as we do....but they probably have similar if not better losses in OSU and Houston. If they beat okla state next weekend im sure a lot of their fans will be saying they deserve a shot over a michigan team thats sitting at home not playing.

Yeah, No. OU was curb stomped in Oklahoma by OSU and curb stomped by Houston. We were 1 inch from beating OSU in Ohio and beaten on a last second field goal in Iowa. Iowa is 8-4 Houston is 9-3

I'd say our losses look waaaaay better.

 

[tinselwolverine]

At this point, we don't deserve a playoff game. I'll take a big bowl game, though, and be happy. Back to back years with over 10 wins? When was the last time that happened? I honestly don't remember. Early 2000's?

The thing that really pisses me off is that if we'd have just beaten Iowa, we'd be in. Sitting at 11-1 with an overtime loss at OSU in the last game of the year would have at least put us at 3 or 4 in seeding.

I doubt Michigan gets in.

If not, I'm hoping Rose Bowl.

 

[hungry]

I doubt Michigan gets in, as well.

I'm just throwing this discussion out there. Seems to be a worthwhile topic.

 

[tinselwolverine]

I doubt Michigan gets in, as well.

I'm just throwing this discussion out there. Seems to be a worthwhile topic.

It is; and aside from the outside that Michigan manages to get in, I think the best I can hope for is the favorites - or most or many of them, anyway - lose the conferences games coming up and once again we have chaos in this supposedly mended system.

Oh, and Michigan in the Rose Bowl.