Care to list the big wins that Clemson and Washington had?

Based on final rankings, Clemson beat 11, 13, 14, and 22 with its 1 and ONLY loss to 23.

Based on final rankings, Washington beat 10, 18, and 19 with its 1 and ONLY loss to 9.

And for consistency, based on final rankings, Oklahoma beat 12 and 16 with its 2 losses coming to 3 and an unranked team.

Seems pretty clear that the Clemson and Washington are more deserving based on their entire body of work, and for the record Penn St. and Michigan are both more deserving than Oklahoma based on their entire bodies of work as well. Oklahoma scheduled well in the non-con, but epically failed in those games.

Knockout blow for moranis, or will mike pull a b_l and keep arguing anyway?
Stay tuned for the next episode.

Would you like to list the team names rather than their final rankings?

Because, as I see it, crappy OK State just beat the living **** out of #10 Colorado. #19 Utah needed a last minute FG to beat a terrible Indiana team. #18 Stanford started 4-3 this season and looked like a MAC team. I'm not even going to get into those ACC teams and who beat them.

but I thought bowl games don't matter (and frankly they don't matter when figuring which teams should be in what bowl games).

But since you brought it up. Houston lost by 24 to San Diego St. Miami beat West Virginia by 17. Virginia Tech beat Arkansas by 11. You can't just pick and choose which Bowl Games you want to look at and ignore the other ones.

But you said they did matter. Can't have it both ways.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/30/2016 9:32:00 AM (view original):
But you said they did matter. Can't have it both ways.

When you are talking about who is deserving to make a bowl game, the bowl games don't matter because they haven't been played. But if you are going to mention bowl games, then you can't just pick the three that support what you want and ignore the others. Of course that is your m.o.

So it would be wrong of me to point out a loss to CMich then ask "But a good team shouldn't even be in that positions" and ignore the games where the consensus 2 and 3 were in that exact situation? Got it.

BTW, so much for Clemson's big win over Louisville. Fournette-less LSU shitkicked them.

Big 10 exposed.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/31/2016 5:26:00 PM (view original):
BTW, so much for Clemson's big win over Louisville. Fournette-less LSU shitkicked them.

FSU was ranked higher than Louisville. Funny you ignored their bowl game. How'd they do?

Posted by edsortails on 12/31/2016 9:44:00 PM (view original):
Big 10 exposed.

Pretty poor showing by conference on the whole thus far.

Good lord. There have been 12 playoff teams. 2016 Ohio State has easily been the most overmatched. Oklahoma would have put up a better fight than OSU or Washington. Neither had a chance by the end of the first half.

B-L must have hacked Mike's ID, because even Mike knows that what happens in one game has absolutely zero to do with whether or not a team deserved to be in that game. Heck, the recent D3 (or whatever they call it now) semi-finals were decided by 38 and 58 points respectively. Even though both losing teams worked their way into and through a 12-team playoff, the above "logic" says they didn't deserve to be there. Any NC games blowouts? Any NFL Playoff or SB games ever been blowouts? Guess all those teams didn't deserve to be there.

2015 playoffs were decided by 7, 39, and then 22 in title game.

2016 playoffs were decided by 20, 38, and then 5 in the title game and that 38 was a shut out.

So in each yeah a team has lost worst than Ohio St. Obviously the Buckeyes got their *** handed to them but doesn't mean they weren't supposed to be there.