SprocketRocket
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2014
- Messages
- 548
- Likes
- 1,471
I don't understand why the committee rewarded Osu with a home game after that Melee with UM. That's the part I don't get.
I don't understand why the committee rewarded Osu with a home game after that Melee with UM. That's the part I don't get.
The biggest crime of the entire playoffs rankings was the decision to not punish teams for conference championship losses, while allowing those games to boost SOS rankings for the teams. Texas’s, SMU’s, and Penn State’s Strength of schedules increased greatly based on those exhibition games.The more I think about it, I think it came down to Ohio State beat Penn State and that was (on paper) a bigger win than our win over 9-3 Alabama.
The real issue is Penn State. They had 2 losses as well and played no one. The committee put too much energy into not having the Conference Championship Games not dock teams and it messed up the field.
Ohio State wasn't a fraud. They played Oregon close and beat Penn State. It was Indiana and Penn State from the B1G that had bloated records.
Giving a G5 team a bye week and a 3 seed was a joke as well. If you give Notre Dame that seed and move teams up, we are the 8 seed and hosting.
Very true statement. However, if the chairman, do you not believe the SEC teams would have been seeded in the better positions? That is why data should be feed into the computer and let the result come out the other end. Human involvement, is these situations will always end up with bias results.Simple. Because the committee was controlled by the Big 10.
The committee chair being a Big 10 AD is the biggest conflict of interest I can imagine. There was no way he was going to allow a Big Ten team to have to play at an SEC venue - especially this one.
And every decision made demonstrates just how overtly and intentionally biased he was in terms of where he put teams and what their seeds were.