Something none of the "experts" ever talk about
We'll look at the top 10 teams in the CFP rankings since no one else really matters.
1. Alabama - 9 power 5 wins (about to be 10)
2. Ohio State - 9
3. Clemson - 9 (probably about to be 10)
4. Washington - 10
5. Michigan - 8
6. Wisconsin - 8 (could get to 9)
7. Penn State - 8 (could get to 9)
8. Colorado - 8
9. Oklahoma - 9
10. Oklahoma State - 8
While all these "experts" rage about UW's weak non conference schedule (and it was weak, no question), they're ignoring the fact that UW has more power 5 wins than anyone in the nation as we speak, and is assured of finishing no worse than a three way tie for first.
Obviously the response to this is "Rutgers doesn't count" and I'm fine with that. But if Rutgers doesn't count and we dock UW to 9, we also have to dock Ohio State to 8, dock Penn State to 7/8 and dock Michigan to 7. So if Rutgers gets removed UW falls to at most a three way tie for third with Oklahoma and potentially Wisconsin.
None of this matters because we're getting in anyway, just tired of hearing UW's entire schedule shit on all the time. Our non conference schedule sucked. Our overall schedule is right there with basically anybody's.
And that's before you realize nobody else in the top 10 (and probably nobody else in the nation) has multiple 30 point wins over teams assured of finishing in the top 20.
UW's resume holds up a lot better than I thought it would once I started digging into it. UW's a legit top 4 team both via the eye test and on paper. And we have a real shot at the 2/3 game.
Outside of Bama, nobody in the country has a clearly better resume than us.
One hell of a season.
Comments
-
Thank you dnc for always researching and writing shit that I agree with so I don't have to research and write it.
But yeah, the so-called experts are popping off with bullshit narratives and stirring the pot. WIW, etc. -
Our schedule sucks. But we have some decent wins wsu, Utah, Stanford, Colorado and our loss was to a good team in USC.
Wisconsin and penn states resume is not more impressive. You are only giving them credit for losing games. I would put our best wins against theirs. The top 4 was set last week. -
The transitive power of football shit is fucking nonsense. Once you start to drill into that shit, the whole house of cards falls down.
I don't care if Michigan passes the 'eye test', they're fucking losers who lost their play-in game to Ohio State. Ohio State are losers who lost their play-in game to Penn State. Bugger them both with my 3.87" cock, and just send the conference fucking champions.
Winners win, and that starts with winning your goddamn division. -
Michigan had more trouble with colorado at home than we did on a neutral site. the only common opponent. why should Michigan win the tiebreak?PatHadenFS said:The transitive power of football shit is fucking nonsense. Once you start to drill into that shit, the whole house of cards falls down.
I don't care if Michigan passes the 'eye test', they're fucking losers who lost their play-in game to Ohio State. Ohio State are losers who lost their play-in game to Penn State. Bugger them both with my 3.87" cock, and just send the conference fucking champions.
Winners win, and that starts with winning your goddamn division.
-
Rutgers is the other common opponentdhdawg said:
Michigan had more trouble with colorado at home than we did on a neutral site. the only common opponent. why should Michigan win the tiebreak?PatHadenFS said:The transitive power of football shit is fucking nonsense. Once you start to drill into that shit, the whole house of cards falls down.
I don't care if Michigan passes the 'eye test', they're fucking losers who lost their play-in game to Ohio State. Ohio State are losers who lost their play-in game to Penn State. Bugger them both with my 3.87" cock, and just send the conference fucking champions.
Winners win, and that starts with winning your goddamn division. -
scrimmages don't countdnc said:
Rutgers is the other common opponentdhdawg said:
Michigan had more trouble with colorado at home than we did on a neutral site. the only common opponent. why should Michigan win the tiebreak?PatHadenFS said:The transitive power of football shit is fucking nonsense. Once you start to drill into that shit, the whole house of cards falls down.
I don't care if Michigan passes the 'eye test', they're fucking losers who lost their play-in game to Ohio State. Ohio State are losers who lost their play-in game to Penn State. Bugger them both with my 3.87" cock, and just send the conference fucking champions.
Winners win, and that starts with winning your goddamn division.
-
48-13 vs 77-0. Michigan beats us 29 to neg 13. Quite simple really.
-
In defense of Ohio State, they won the XII today.PatHadenFS said:The transitive power of football shit is fucking nonsense. Once you start to drill into that shit, the whole house of cards falls down.
I don't care if Michigan passes the 'eye test', they're fucking losers who lost their play-in game to Ohio State. Ohio State are losers who lost their play-in game to Penn State. Bugger them both with my 3.87" cock, and just send the conference fucking champions.
Winners win, and that starts with winning your goddamn division. -
The shitty non conference schedule is a double edged sword. Ours gets used against us, but if we would have scheduled a top 10 team and lost, we wouldn't be going to the playoff.
Oklahoma is a good example of this. If they didn't lose to Ohio State and played Idaho instead, I'm not sure if they wouldn't be going to the playoff. -
IT MAKES NO FUCKING SENSE TO PUT A TEAM IN THE PLAYOFF IF THEY HAVE ALREADY LOST TO ANOTHER TEAM IN THE PLAYOFF.
Fuck.
Ohio State gets to skip the extra test and (IMO) should sit, but they won't because the whole god damn thing doesn't make a bit of fucking sense.
A poll is a poll is a poll and we have a poll system like we always have. This isn't a fucking playoff, it's a poll system with a tournament as a reward.
There's no fucking need for it and expanding it will only make the whole season worse.
