Tied 28 all late in the third quarter . . . but:


Fans know Big Ten championship game lacks relevance

Dec 3, 2016 at 5:21p ET

INDIANAPOLIS, Ind. -- It's right there, in bold type, on the College Football Playoff website.

"Every Game Counts." Well, and sorry if this seems a little weird, truth is that maybe not quite every game. Maybe the game that does not count is a conference championship game, like Saturday night's Big Ten matchup of Penn State and Wisconsin, and try to explain that one.

Because, in the very next paragraph, the playoff website's criteria go on to proclaim, "The selection committee ranks the teams based on conference championships won . . ."

In other words, a conference championship is the key factor.

Except when it isn't.

Critics used to mock the people who run the college football bowl games because they paraded around looking like peacocks in all those brightly colored blazers with their oversize logos, spending fall weekends wining and dining athletic directors.

Well, those guys look like Einstein compared to the clowns now in charge of the college playoff.

They played the Big Ten championship game Saturday night at the dome in Indianapolis, and as game time approached, tickets could be had for less than $10, which should give you some idea of what the public thought of it.

And about a dozen hours after the end of the game, Ohio State, which failed even to qualify for the conference title game, is expected to be chosen one of the four teams for the college playoff.

The Big Ten champion will finish the season with a high place in the national rankings and a boost in its recruiting. It just will not be given a chance to play for the national championship, not be allowed a Cinderella champion like Texas Western in 1966 or a Villanova in 1985 in the NCAA basketball tournament.

The consolation prize will be a trip to the Rose Bowl.

That's not bad.

And, an argument can be made that Ohio State was the best team in the Big Ten this year, anyway, and maybe it was, although it lost to Penn State and beat Michigan only because of a few dunderhead plays by the Wolverines in critical spots. But the point is the Buckeyes did not even win their conference championship and they are going to get a chance to play for the national championship and the team(s) that finished ahead of them in the conference are not.

You have to wonder what the geniuses who dreamed up the college playoff were thinking when, by design, they guaranteed a degree of controversy by setting up a four-team playoff among five power conferences. In other words, you know you are starting out by leaving out one of the conference champions. Period.

It's a small step from there to leaving out another.

The playoff, of course, was supposedly designed to eliminate the controversy that occurred in the past when the national champion was decided by a vote instead of, oh, say, an actual game. Which is how an undefeated Nebraska was selected over an undefeated Penn State in 1994 or several years when two groups of voters selected different teams as national champions, giving a little for everybody.

A word, "supposedly," appears in the previous paragraph because it would never pass a lie detector test. Let's face it, the playoff was set up to give a small group power and a bigger group money, because nothing much happens in college sports that does not really involve power and money.

The five major conferences brought six bowls into their playoff orbit and only under pressure allowed one of the dozen spots to go to a school not a member of their cartel. But they certainly did not want one of the outliers getting super rich on the playoff, which is why they limited the playoff field to four teams and put the rest into a so-called "Group of 6" bowl lineup which they controlled - and, of course, sold for a huge sum to television.

One interesting sidelight is that the people who run this sham championship arrangement, try as they might, could not fool everybody. You'd think, ordinarily, the championship game of the richest conference would be a huge magnet for fans, but since the fans realized it had so little to do with the national championship they smelled it for what it is.

On Stubhub earlier in the week, there were more than 15,000 tickets available for the Penn State-Wisconsin matchup. As late as Saturday morning, more than 5,000 were still available, with sideline seats going for as little as, get this, $9.71.

You can be sure that would not have been the case were the winner assured of going on to play for a bigger prize, but as it was, even Penn State and Wisconsin fans kept their wallets in their pockets because, since the meaning of the game was diminished, they'd prefer to save for, say, a trip to Pasadena instead of Indianapolis.

Going into the game, the coaches, of course, tried to downplay the bigger picture by simply talking about the import of a conference championship -- "huge," said Penn State's James Franklin -- and deferring any questions about the playoff possibilities.

But it didn't take a deep reading of Franklin's comments to know how he felt.

"You could make a really good argument that the Big Ten, specifically the Big Ten East, may be the best conference in all of college football right now," Franklin said.

He is probably right. The Big Ten is probably the best conference in college football right now, just a couple years after people were writing obituaries about the league's weakness. It's just not a good enough conference, apparently, to allow its champion to play for the national title.

It's a game to determine 3rd place. Michigan beat both of them already this season.

But they didn't beat the team they needed to in order to be playing tonight did they.

Excellent game.

Helluva come back, great game!

Yes, it was a great game and the best team on the field tonight won. I am a Badger fan but they got outplayed tonight. Penn State won this year when they had to and deserve to be Big 10 Champs.

Doesn't matter. OSU is probably the #2 team in the CFP. Clemson won -they're in, so did Wash so they're probably in too. Obviously 'Bama is in, so there's your playoff field. Penn will have to represent in the Rose Bowl. And there's a good chance that Michigan is still #5 going to the Orange Bowl.

Love to see the CFP expand to 8 teams. These kinds of arguments would be moot.

No they wouldn't.

1. Alabama
2. Washington
3. Penn St.
4. Oklahoma

Clemson nearly got beat.

I agree!

There are 10-15 teams that realistically have a chance to make a 4 team playoff. That's out of the 128 FBS teams. For the 110+ teams that don't stand a chance, conferences and conference championships serve a useful purpose. First, the group teams together in groups of *roughly* the same level of skill. Secondly, they give the teams not in the national championship running an achievable and worthwhile goal. That's all very well.

However, conference titles skew things when they are used as a factor in the national title because they only count games played against conference opponents. This results in scenarios such as the one we have with the Big 10. Penn State is a two loss team. While they have played well and certainly deserve the trip to the Rose Bowl they are going to get, there is no rational reason why they should be placed in the national playoff ahead of a ONE LOSS team, Ohio State. Had Ohio State lost their one game to a worthy non-conference team, say LSU or USC, nobody would have a problem with them being in the playoff. But because their one loss happened to be to a team that was also a member of an artificial and, from the national perspective, irrelevant construct - the conference - some think it's somehow unfair that a team with a better record should go to the playoff.

It's not. The fact that a two loss team won the conference doesn't make up for the fact that they are a two loss team and like the rest of the many fine two loss teams out there won't be going to the playoffs.

The system is designed to pick the 4 best teams, not the 4 best conference winners.

If you can't even win your conference division much less your conference, then you have no business playing for the national championship. NONE.

That jackass herbstreit was already pimping that the Big 10 Championship winner is headed to the Rose Bowl - and his homo buddy fowler was agreeing.

I'd go with:

Alabama
Clemson
Washington
Penn St

and send the suckeyes to the Rose Bowl and have their ass handed to them by USC. But I digress . . .

Your final four is a good choice IMHO. All conference champs.

The system is designed to generate the best television revenue. If it wasn't it would be like any other playoff system in sports.

If the team or teams that won the conference is passed over in favor of a team or teams that they beat and did not qualify for the conference championship game, then the team or teams that did not got it done on the field of play is subjective as to "best" and makes all games meaningless.

The best revenue generator would be Alabama-OhioState rematch. College football is to big a business to let a championship decided totally by play on the field.

Alabama
Clemson
Ohio State
Washington

That is a real problem and makes the whole process a shame.

also a sham

I agree whole-heartedly, and I also say that the same applies to any loss - a loss means that there is a team out there that is better than the team that lost; only an undefeated team has any claim to being a NATIONAL CHAMPION.

Not saying a team has to be undefeated, but needs to at least win their conference.

Isn't the primary purpose of college sports to be there as a vehicle for wagering?

I heard some sports talk guys last week who were advocating for an 8 team D1 Football play-off. The 8 teams would be the winners of the Power-5 Conferences and the 3 highest ranked teams that didn't win their conferences. It seemed like a good idea to me. Where do I place my bet?

Why do they not just create 8 conferences.
Two divisions in each conference.

Conference championships would constitute the first round of they playoffs, with 16 teams.

I know, big business and money.

Penn state earned it on the field. Period. That is what should count, but unfortunately it does not.

You are arguing that a team that finished the regular season 10-2 (Penn State) should go to the playoff over a team that finished 11-1 (Ohio State). You can't have it both ways.

Oh, BTW, your undefeated team "logic" means that the #2 team should be Western Michigan over Ohio State. WM has had a terrific season, but they simply haven't faced the quality of opposition for a playoff berth. Their most impressive opponents were Northwestern and Illinois. Not shabby, but not better than Ohio State either. It will be very interesting to see how WM does in a major bowl game, possibly against Wisconsin.

Penn St. finished 11-2 and won the conference, a power 5 conference.

If the whole season were an elimination tournament (where each game would be significant) where everyone is a participant, only the last undefeated team left standing would be the NATIONAL CHAMPION. Should there be more than one, then they (however many that might be) could engage in a play-off.

I remember a time when the national champion was determined by a vote of sports writers. Everyone said it was too subjective. Then we let a computer pick two teams to play for the championship. But everyone said it wasn't subjective enough.

So now we have a committee picking 4 teams for a playoff. And everyone is complaining about if the criteria are too subjective or not.

I could care less who the "national champion" is. No one argues that Alabama isn't the best team in the country. They would be the champs regardless of what system has ever been used. They will be this year unless something goes horribly wrong in one of their games. And if it does, everyone will still think they were the best team this year, despite who becomes the national champion.

Nope! No way to know other than subjective. The conference champs should be in play off for the CFC

Good post - this whole NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP business is about two things: money and fans being able to proclaim that their dick is bigger than someone else's because "their" team is the NATIONAL CHAMPION.

Even if the 2nd place team in another conference is clearly better? You see this in the NFL quite often. The divisional winners some years have finished 8-8 and made playoff's while 13-3 teams in other divisions watched on TV.

The NFL uses a 5 game playoff system to determine the Worlds Champion. I think we are already asking student athletes to play too many games over too long of a season as it is.

Historically I've never strongly disagreed with any team that got the title. Even back in the days when it was simply voted on after the bowl games. There have been a few years when #1 and #2 could make a strong argument about the order. But the current system prevents that. The only real arguments are usually over in which order you start ranking teams out of the top 5.

The system ain't perfect, but unless you want something like the NCAA basketball finals it is the best we can do.

How do you determine the second place team is clearly better? They finished second is enough to eliminate them from the national championship picture.

Yeah but they didn't beat the Buckeyes.

How about a better OVERALL record? That seems simple enough for anyone.

Conference championships only count CONFERENCE games. This distorts results enough that a team that lost ALL it's non-conference games and stood 8-4 could still be conference champion over an 11-1 team that lost only one game to a division opponent. The system is set up the way it is to avoid this. This seems to confuse some people, even when it's explained to them. Repeatedly.

The committee has been crystal clear that they are going to pick the best teams - in this case the 4 teams with the best OVERALL records - and not the 4 best conference championships.

13-0?

I would rather see Penn State in it than Washington. Yeah they won their conference but look at the strength of schedule.... Washington never won against a top 10 school all year but Penn State beat 2 of them.

I think it should be

Alabama
Ohio State
Clemson
Penn State

No, Penn St beat tOSU and the other teams in the conference and won the conference Championship. tOSU finished behind Penn St. Penn St deserves to be in the playoffs tOSU does not.

Alabama should be awarded the National Championship for what they accomplished during the season.

Second place should be determined by the subjective play off or not so subjective playoff of conference winners of the remaining power conferences..

Who gives a [bleep] about being first loser anyway.. ?

Clemson dam near got beat and Washington didn't really play anybody. . . . . .PSU should definitely be in.

This would save a lot of trouble and do away with the nuisance of playing any games.

Penn State does not get in. And there are four teams in -- all of which are very happy they do not have to play Penn State.

Alabama -- In. They just kept winning.
Clemson -- In. A conference champion but won the title game against a #23 ranked team by only a touchdown, which makes Penn State's 7-point win against #6 Wisconsin a better quality win. And they got narrowly beaten by Pitt, who also narrowly beat Penn State.
Ohio State -- In, but didn't win their conference championship, didn't win their division title, didn't beat Penn State. And Penn State is now a much better team than they were the day they played Ohio State.
Washington -- In. But they never beat a top 10 team, and had a late-season conference loss at home against the #2 team in the other half of their conference USC.
Penn State -- Out. They won the toughest division in the toughest conference, beat the #7 team in a vicious second half comeback, beat Ohio State (at best the third-place team in their conference), won 9 straight, getting better every week, and though they lost to Michigan big, that was a long time ago and even the selection committee has PSU ranked ahead of Michigan. Plainly, the selection committee values early season games with more weight than the improvement of a team over time, so if you lose early it doesn't matter how good a team you become.

Here's my question: Could Washington win the Big Ten title? Very, very doubtful. Yet they're in. The selection committee said a long time ago that there won't be two teams from the same conference in the final four. If that's what they wanted, why is the B1G conference winner not in the mix. When the playoffs were set up, this wasn't supposed to happen.

Again, four teams have been selected, all of which are glad they won't have to play Penn State.

Steve.

What's with all of this "damn near got beat" BS? Every team out there except for Bama and WMU "almost got beat!" Especially PSU and tOSU. And most especially in their final games.

Good Grief!

Also, were I WMU I'd be major pissed.

Someone (maybe OO?) posted an 8 team scenario that sounded perfect and tailor made for this scenario. Maybe this will be the impetus for that. You know the committee will discuss it today. They have to because the media's definitely going to ask about it.

Apparently Everyday Hunter does...

The best case scenario for thw National Championship is Ohio State and Alabama.

Anyone promoting anything else is either butt hurt in some fashion or has an agenda (scared).

8-team playoff . . . here's how it would work this year


I just watched the ESPN Game Day interview with Big 10 commissioner Jim Delany. When asked to explain the selection committee protocol for selecting the four semi-finalists, and how important a conference champion was compared to "the four best teams," Delany iterated that four years ago he lobbied for selecting the four best conference champions for the playoff, but "we lost that election, and decided to go with the four best teams, which I'm fine with." (Boos from the PSU and Wisonsin fans could be heard in the background.) So now, it is total subjective touchy-feely, make up selection criteria as you go, eye-test BS. Basically, Delany was a gibbering fool trying to bring clarity to what exactly is the objective criteria to be declared one of four "best" teams.

So let me help out the CFP selection process. The CFP committee could still be used to seed the "best 16 teams" in the country for an 8-team, on the field playoff, but within a structured, objective and transparent framework, that heavily relies on the results of games played during the entire season. All of the eventual Top 16 teams would play on "Championship weekend, (which started last night) and the winners of those eight games would move into the 8-team Quarter finals of the CFP. The fair, objective framework would require the five conference champions from the Power 5 conferences, plus the top ranked (as decided by the CFP committee) Group of 5 conference champion. That leaves the four highest (CFP committee) ranked "non-conference champions" Wild Card teams to go against each other in two "play-in" games, which are played on championship weekend.

So how would it look this year?

1. Western Michigan beat Ohio (MAC Champion - Top Group of 5 winner)
2. Washington beat Colorado (PAC 12 Champion)
3. Oklahoma beat Oklahoma St (Big 12 Champion)
4. Alabama beat Florida (SEC Champion)
5. Penn St. beat Wisconsin (Big 10 Champion)
6. Clemson beat Virginia Tech (ACC Champion)

WILD CARD Play-in games (Played at the higher seed home stadium)
7. USC vs Ohio State
8. Michigan vs Wisconsin

See how this blend of objective, on the field results can be blended with the subjective eye-test criteria?

Pedophile State University shouldn't even be allowed to play college football, but given that they do, I'd rather see them in the playoffs than Urban "crier" Myer and his guys. Especially since Pedophile State already beat them. 'Bama would beat PSU by 60.

Good game

How about Saban just playing against a Big Ten team he hasnt won against?

How much would they beat tOSU by?

Also, the serendipity of the 16 team playoff is you don't have to listen to the dum azzes on ESPN flappin' their jaws about who is the best team. It is already organized to be settled on the field of play. Herbsteit, Davis, Pollack, and Dinich to name just a few

No, the one team that was 12-0, Alabama and the three teams that were 11-1, Clemson, Ohio State and Washington.

Yes I know that Western Michigan was also 12-0, but they play in a far weaker conference than any of the above teams and have no strength of schedule. The MAC is where Big 10 teams go to schedule their cupcake games. It's a terrific achievement to go unbeaten in any conference, but they didn't beat a single ranked team, much less a top 10 team. It's going to be interesting to see them play in the Cotton Bowl against Wisconsin.

It's amazing that the committee says how they are going to evaluate the teams and when they do exactly what they say they are going to do people tear their hair and rend their garments because the committee doesn't evaluate the teams they way THEY think they should. For the last time: conference championships are a poor way to compare teams at the national level. That's why the results don't always favor conference winners.

I'd say 14 at least.

I like it!!

Galloway too.

Once again, "My kingdom for a sarcasm icon".

Yeah I forgot him, He is horrible, as well as Robert Smith, Jason Sehorn, and Kevin Carter.

The College Football Playoff pairings are set.

After months of debate and 14 weeks of games, the committee came down with its final decision Sunday.

No. 1 Alabama will play No. 4 Washington in the Peach Bowl.

No. 2 Clemson and No. 3 Ohio State will face off in the Fiesta Bowl.




The final committee Top 25:

1. Alabama (13-0)

2. Clemson (12-1)

3. Ohio State (11-1)

4. Washington (12-1)

5. Penn State (11-2)

6. Michigan (10-2)

7. Oklahoma (10-2)

8. Wisconsin (10-3)

9. Southern California (9-3)

10. Colorado (10-3)

11. Florida State (9-3)

12. Oklahoma State (9-3)

13. Louisville (9-3)

14. Auburn (8-4)

15. Western Michigan (13-0)

16. West Virginia (10-2)

17. Florida (8-4)

18. Stanford (9-3)

19. Utah (8-4)

20. LSU (7-4)

21. Tennessee (8-4)

22. Virginia Tech (9-4)

23. Pittsburgh (8-4)

24. Temple (10-3)

25. Navy (9-3)

Two teams will be very embarrassed by Alabama, the first being Washington..

This new system is no less of a cluster [bleep] than the old one. I could care less who gets in but how do you not win your conference and get a shot at the title?

Yes it is and will continue to be. Take it to a top 8 team playoff bracket and the majority of the issues will likely be resolved. Eliminate the conference championships and put in a 16 team bracket and no one can bitch about anything anymore.

A true sport will always be determined by the merits of a team or single athlete. Once you inject subjectivity it becomes a pageant. Computers, judges and especially press writers are awful models for determining the best teams in the country and should stick to dance shows and cheerleading competitions.

This

Well said.

Big 12 commissioner seeks clarity on Ohio State, Washington playoff berths

Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby would like some clarity from College Football Playoff officials on the importance of conference championship games and strength of schedule, he told ESPN on Sunday after the selection committee put 11-1 Ohio State in at No. 3 despite the Buckeyes not winning the Big Ten East Division or their conference title.

In the end, the top four teams entering the conference championship games -- Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State and Washington -- were selected for the College Football Playoff.

"Obviously I acknowledge the difficulty of the task, but I'm not sure what I advise my members right now, because we've been telling them that non-conference schedules matter, and one of the four has an exceedingly weak non-conference schedule," he said, referring to No. 4 Washington, which notched wins over Rutgers, Idaho and FCS Portland State. "And we've been telling them the 13th data point matters, and we added a conference championship game because of that. We've always heard that conference championships matter and division championships matter, and now it's confusing."

He added, "I'll have some questions to ask when the time is right."

In 2014, after TCU dropped from No. 3 to No. 6 in the final rankings for the first year of the playoff, the Big 12 went through more than a year of discussions and debates and even hired data consultants to help determine whether it needed to add a conference championship game to best position the league for the playoff. In June, the Big 12 decided to bring its title game back in 2017 and announced in October that the game would pit the league's top two teams against each other instead of going to divisions.

At that time, Bowlsby said, "Given our round-robin, nine-game scheduling model, it is expected the Big 12 champion will be uniquely positioned for College Football Playoff consideration."

Now he's not so sure.

"I'm just looking for clarity," Bowlsby said. "We didn't have a team that was a likely participant in the playoff, and so from that standpoint it doesn't make a lot of difference to us this year, but I'd just like to know what we're supposed to advise our members. Does the 13th data point make a difference, or does it not? Does the conference championship game make a difference, or does it not? Are they only used as tiebreakers, or is it other metrics?

"In TCU's case, they fell out of the playoff. They had a great year and had a Heisman Trophy candidate at quarterback and won by 50 points on the last day of the season, but we were told the reason they didn't get in, the reason they fell, was they didn't have a 13th data point and they didn't have a championship. Now I think it's reasonable to seek clarity on that, and when the time is right, I will ask those questions."

After Baylor's abysmal nonconference schedule had been called into question in each of the first two years of the playoff, the Big 12 also issued a scheduling mandate throughout the league to help boost strength of schedule. The Big 12's current scheduling policy is that schools aren't allowed to play more than one FCS opponent and they have to play one other Power 5 opponent.

"We've told our schools you shouldn't be surprised if you don't get in if you play a weak nonconference schedule, and then somebody with a weak nonconference schedule does get in," Bowlsby said. "It's just another case in which we need to seek clarification."

"They have a difficult job to do," he said of the 12 members on the selection committee. "We just need to know what the rules are."

Hmmm....that didn't exactly happen last year!! Is there something different about this season?

Pretty much same 2 teams right?

Put pictures of Bob Bowlsby and a capybara side-by-side sometime.

Not a Bama fan but I've watched them enough this season to be comfortable with my prediction. 🤓

Will enjoy the Clemson-Bama match up. Clemson will hang with Bama for a while.

I hope Alabama wins it all but there have been enough upsets this season that nothing is a given.

Yes they(CFP) knew it and continued on with this stupid 4 team format

Agree with all of these.
This year exposes the worst parts about the 4 team format.

This year there is no dispute about #1 so the playoff seems meaningless.
Meanwhile #5, #6, #7 all will have a legitimate claim to #1 if they win their bowl games.

Would have been far better with traditional bowl invitations/matchups then decide.