FREE PUB!

RaceBannon said:

The pac 12 is getting SEC bumps for beating each other. So much for all the whiny bitches here with their conspiracy theories.

Oregon jumped an unbeaten team by beating conference opponents. They have no good non conference win now that Sparty is exposed. You can't say the B1G sucks so Ohio State doesn't belong and claim a home win over Michigan State as a good win.

If UW should beat Arizona their loss looks worse than anyone else's

It's a fluid situation

Beating a 2 loss ranked non-conference opponent is still a good win. HTH.

oregonblitzkrieg said:

salemcoog said:

greenblood said:

whatshouldicareabout said:

greenblood said:

RaceBannon said:

Then Ohio State should be ahead of Oregon. Winning at Michigan State is better. Bama and TCU have better conference wins. The pac 12 sucks. Winning at LSU is better than winning at Utah. Bama lost on the road to a top 5 team at the time. Oregon lost at home to a shitty team.

Bama plays Mississippi state and Auburn while Oregon plays Colorado and the Beavs

They jump Oregon rather easily

And Virginia Tech is a powerhouse

If they take injuries into account for Oregon losing an OL, then they should take into account Ohio State losing a Heisman front-runner QB.

Imagine if Oregon played only 2 games with Mariota this year. That's what Ohio State is going through this season.

The difference is, Oregon got their injured player back and improved because of it. Ohio St. lost their guy during the off season, and he won't be back until next season. Lets also not forget he had about a month of practice before the season started and he also had three prior non-conference games. It's not like he was thrown to the wolves.

Taking account injuries is used to justify a loss that otherwise wouldn't happen now that the team is at full strength. Ohio State has the same QB that lost to Virginia Tech. You can't use that argument for Ohio St. when the same quarterback would be playing in the playoffs. Sorry but not the same thing.

Way to Quook on.

But you're wrong on 2 counts.

So by your rationale, Oregon losing an O lineman was somehow more of a factor than tOSU losing their Heisman QB candidate. Whew!!!

You're also assuming that with your Olineman back, it's an automatic victory against a team that has torched your asses 2 years in a row.

There is no evidence of that since they plungered you last year at their house and beat you soundly despite the score, in your house this year.

The fact that Oregon is ranked #2 above at least 3 teams that would plunger them on a neutral field shows that this new playoff selection process will be a shit show in the end.

A one touchdown win after a faggot ass penalty by our bowing player is not 'soundly' in any book. Fucking coog.

It's always cuog. Get it right

MikeDamone said:

RaccoonHarry said:

An 8 team playoff can't get here soon enough...

Do it like the FCS or don't do it at all. 24 teams to the playoffs. All games except the championship are at the school with home field advantage. Fuck, how hard is it?

No bowls in the playoffs. Bowls can be the NIT of football and the teams that didn't get in can play in a bowl.

Do this or go back to the way it was before the BCS.

I'm a huge fan of this style. In fact, to appease the academics, shorten the non conference. All schools play two non conference games and 8 conference games. Have a selection committee select a 16 team NCAA Tourney, a 16 team tier 2 tourney, and a 16 team tier 3 tourney.

Big 5 conference champs get automatic bids into the NCAA. The rest are At-Large bids, except 3 spots need to be guaranteed to non Big 5/Notre Dame pariticipants. That will leave another 8 spots for Big 5 at larges.

For the lower tier tournaments, I think a minimum of 4 non Big 5 schools should be accepted in each, and the rest At-Large.

Also, 5 wins needs to be mandatory to be in any tourney. That means at worst you can be 5-5.

If you aren't in the top 48, then stay home.