OsuCavsfan103 wrote:OU didn't just lose twice, they were beaten soundly, especially to OSU where they were for the most part, dominated. Had OSU lost twice in 2014, they wouldnt have even been near the CFB. Hypothetically if OSU lost again in 2014 but still made the B10 title game and won like they did, OSU still would have never been even close to in, they barely made it in with 1 loss.
OU is done, should be and will be nowhere near playoffs unless a major CFB collapse like 2007 happens. No argument could be made, tough schedule or not, if you can't beat either of the two teams who very likely are in the hunt for the playoffs, you do not deserve to be in the playoffs either... especially w/o a conference championship game. OU is done and nothing like OSU of 2014.
As far as your crux, it varies. OU tried to have a good schedule, did, but lost. Why penalize a team that only lost once with a pretty decent schedule when that team tried to have a competitive schedule? Case and point, last year OU was a playoff team, this year OSU plays them, beats them easily, and yet people are saying OSU plays nobody.... How is that OSU's fault that OU isn't as good? Same argument for Vatech the last few years, when scheduled they were ranked every single season, now they've fallen off before OSU played them, do we deserve to be punished? Schedule strength at times picks up and at times dropped off, if a reasonable attempt to schedule competitively is made, then that definitely should and will trump a 2 loss team with a brutal schedule.
As for not trying to schedule anyone tough and going undefeated, no mercy here. You cannot control conference slate, you cannot control if OOC teams remain good, but if you are filling your OOC with St Marys Tech and the like, you are not trying to do what you can. If you are taking on USC or Auburn, once powerhouse teams who are currently down, it's clear and attempt at a competive schedule was made and that should be factored in.
You seem to fail to grasp the fundamental argument, which is that there should be an 8-team playoff. I'm not arguing that Oklahoma should make a 4-team playoff if they win out. I'm arguing that there should be an 8-team playoff.
Again, 2014 OSU is a great test-point: as you mention, they almost didn't make the playoff that they went on to win. On the one hand, I guess they won, so aren't we happy now that the committee apparently got things right?
H*ll no.
I'm not happy at all. There are lots of scenarios in which that exact Ohio State team with that exact resume doesn't make the playoff, wins a random other bowl, and that's the end of it. That's a horrible situation. And we don't know that that's not exactly what happened with TCU: if you swap TCU and Ohio State in 2014 -- which was incredibly close to happening, and is incredibly easy to envision without changing anything about the quality of either team -- isn't it possible that TCU goes on to win the playoff, while Ohio State goes and romps in the Peach Bowl?
I'm not commenting whether they got it right or wrong in selecting Ohio State over TCU for a 4-team playoff.
I'm saying they got it wrong in selecting a 4-team playoff in the first place. I think choosing between Ohio State and TCU was an impossible, ridiculous task, and it should have never come to that at all. Ohio State, TCU, and Baylor should have ALL made it into an 8-team playoff.