Posted by MikeT23 on 12/22/2016 1:46:00 PM (view original):
Well, yeah, they did.

Knowing you're a Buckeye guy, and that they are generally considered the 2nd/3rd best team in CFB this season, they were in several situations, late in the season, where 1 play gives them an L. Loss to PSU, 4 points over Northwestern, 1 point over MSU and OT vs Michigan. The 2nd/3rd best team should have never been in position to lose to NW or MSU. Yet they were. That's also why the Clemson loss was so ugly. They couldn't pick up one yard on two plays to put the game away. And they should have lost to NC State. So you really can't say "Should a good team have even been in that situation?" because the consensus 2 and 3 were in those situations several times.

Sure, but Ohio State also beat Oklahoma, Michigan, Wisconsin, etc. They have a body of work that allows a close game or two to a bad team. Though Central Michigan is a bad team in the MAC, which is inherently worse than a bad team in the Big Ten. Oklahoma St.'s only win against a top 25 team in the final playoff rankings was West Virginia. West Virginia doesn't have a single win against a top 25 team, so it is hard to even argue they should be a top 25 team.

You sort of skipped the point. I'll recap:

You said "Should a good team even be in a situation to lose a game against a Central Michigan type?"
I responded with "The consensus #2 and #3 were."
Then you moved the goal posts.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/24/2016 4:00:00 PM (view original):
You sort of skipped the point. I'll recap:

You said "Should a good team even be in a situation to lose a game against a Central Michigan type?"
I responded with "The consensus #2 and #3 were."
Then you moved the goal posts.

But you missed my point. My point was Oklahoma St. isn't a good team. They don't have the body of work and lost to a MAC team that was below .500 in the MAC. It isn't moving the goal posts to point out a team like Ohio St. or Clemson that has some very strong wins and has a close game or two to a bad team isn't the same thing as a team that has no strong wins that loses to a bad team.

I don't recall claiming OK ST was a good team. I'm just countering the statement of "Should a good team even be in a situation to lose a game against a Central Michigan type?" as the answer is "no" but two very good teams were in that exact situation more than once.

Except that was part of a sentence in a complete paragraph about how Oklahoma St. wasn't a good team. Same old typical **** you pull where you pull out part of a statement and pretend like that is the whole thing.

And for the record, Michigan State is not a Central Michigan type. Virginia, who finished 1-7 in the ACC beat Central Michigan by 14 points. I'd call Michigan St. and Virginia fairly comparable teams this year both well ahead of Central Michigan.

If you're going to use an example to explain why Oklahoma shouldn't be considered because the best win they had was against a team that lost to CM but shouldn't have, don't get all angry when I point out that the #2 and #3 teams also had close games that shouldn't have been.

You should be happy. I'm not saying OSU should be out. I could easily use your argument from last year that H2H is the most important thing. Oopsie, the conference champ beat OSU.

I didn't say head to head was the most important, you have me confused with someone else. I said schedule strength was the most important thing.

Again, my larger point which you always seem to skirt is that the Big 12 as a conference has no quality out of conference victories, so you can't realistically claim Oklahoma is a great team just because it ran roughshod through that conference, especially when Oklahoma lost at home by 21 points to Ohio State and lost by 10 points to a group of 5 team that ended up with 3 regular season losses and was no where near its conference title game. Oklahoma St. not only lost to Central Michigan but Baylor as well. Baylor was at best a middle of a road team in the terrible Big 12. Oklahoma St.'s only top 25 win was a West Virginia team that has 0 top 25 wins. The Big 12 was a terrible conference this year. The champion of it belongs no where near a 4 team playoff when said champion failed in its two most important non-con games.

Well, now we've gone full circle. Oklahoma at the end of the season was not the same team that lost to OSU or Houston(and Houston wasn't the same team that beat OK just like Louisville wasn't the same team that soulcrushed FSU).

I put more weight on NOV games than I do SEPT games. You seem to treat them the same. When you're talking about 19-20 y/o, they develop a lot over the course of 7-8 games/30+ practices. That's why making a bowl matters. Not because teams get another game but because they get 14-15 practices.

But you can't say Oklahoma at the end of the season was not the same team. Maybe Ohio St. beats them by 35 if the game was in November. Playing creampuffs and looking good doing so doesn't make you a great team. Your whole schedule matters and the Big 12 wholly failed in its scheduling so you have no idea how good Oklahoma actually is. Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if pretty mediocre Auburn beats OU in the Bowl. Oh wait, I remember you don't think Bowl Games mean anything, so I guess we won't learn anything about OU in that one either.

Is it your contention that teams get worse? OK, that's dumb.

Let's ask Fournette and McCaffrey how important bowls games are.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/28/2016 2:53:00 PM (view original):
Is it your contention that teams get worse? OK, that's dumb.

Let's ask Fournette and McCaffrey how important bowls games are.

ALL teams get better (barring injury, suspension, etc.). That is why the whole schedule matters. I mean Houston should be a better team now than they were the first week, right?

One would think. Do you think all teams get better equally?

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/29/2016 8:42:00 AM (view original):
One would think. Do you think all teams get better equally?

Nope. Of course not, but you can't say Oklahoma improved so much when it played in a **** conference against **** competition. Oklahoma got **** kicked at home by Ohio State and lost to a 3 loss Houston team that finished 4th in its AAC division. You can't just ignore those games, which is your m.o.

And I'd suggest we can't ignore a loss to PSU, 4 point win over Northwestern, 1 point win over MSU and OT win vs Michigan but I know you will. And I'm willing to because I think OSU is one of the 4 best teams in the nation despite mediocre outings against mediocre teams(excluding MI) late in the season.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/29/2016 1:00:00 PM (view original):
And I'd suggest we can't ignore a loss to PSU, 4 point win over Northwestern, 1 point win over MSU and OT win vs Michigan but I know you will. And I'm willing to because I think OSU is one of the 4 best teams in the nation despite mediocre outings against mediocre teams(excluding MI) late in the season.

The whole schedule. Ohio State has wins against 3 top ten teams (final rankings) its only loss was on the road at night to a top ten team in overtime. Oklahoma played 1 top ten team and lost by 21 at home and lost by 10 to an unranked team.

I'm a schedule guy. Schedule matters.