CFB Daily has us behind Ohio State AND Baylor

[blacklistedbully]

Sehorn talked about how OSU passes the "eye test", and has been the best team in the NCAA the past month (but didn't want to get into schedule analytics). Then Lugenbill raved about Baylor, and how you should watch out for their defense, not just their offence.

Not a word about MSU's capabilities.

[Leroy Jenkins]

Good thing "loogs" doesn't have a vote. How many of them had us at the top before the season?

[FlabLoser]

I won't be concerned until I see the CFP poll. The talking heads have been consistently wrong about what the CFP committee is evaluating.

[blacklistedbully]

I won't be concerned until I see the CFP poll. The talking heads have been consistently wrong about what the CFP committee is evaluating.

They were talking about if everybody wins out as well.

[Bully041184]

They (media, analysts, etc) were all in agreement that we should be #1 during the time span that we were but when we lost to Bama their tune started to change.

What I don't get is why they are now discrediting our LSU, A&M and AU wins--those wins are what got us to become #1. Those wins were against top 10 rankings formed by their(media) own personal votes. I know those three teams mostly started losing after losing to us but they mainly have been beating up It's not our fault that those three teams were highly ranked to begin with.

Its becoming really hard to listen to all this talk. I just hope the right thing is done if/when we win out.

[ShotgunDawg]

Guys, this is really simple. They don't want to see 2 SEC teams in the playoff. It has nothing to do with us personally.

They only talk about other teams in order to create perception. After Ohio State was struggling to beat Indiana the other day, it should be absolutely obvious that they are not one of the top 4 teams. Their resume doesn't add up and the eye test doesn't add up.

Ohio State shouldn't even be in this conversation. They are out of the playoff due to their loss and overall resume.

[UMCDawg16]

Baylor has beaten 3 teams with winning records. Their resume is clearly better than ours******

[Leroy Jenkins]

Guys, they referred to jamis Winston as "that poor kid". Anything they say after that is not credible.

[Johnson85]

Baylor has beaten 3 teams with winning records. Their resume is clearly better than ours******

They do have three decent wins. The only completely asinine argument is that OSU should be in the playoffs. I think we have the better resume than either TCU or Baylor, but you can at least make a sincere argument that they deserve to be the 4th team.

You can't make an argument for OSU. They don't have good wins, they have a terrible loss, and a bad strength of schedule. If you think you shouldn't be in the playoffs if you didn't win your conference, then TCU or Baylor still deserves the nod over them. The only argument you can make for them is to say that no matter what the express purpose of the playoff committee is, they should ignore putting the best four teams in the playoffs and should put the four conference champions that play in conference championship games, provided they don't have more than one loss. That is the only argument you can make for OSU. They will have a conference championship, from a championship game, and only have one (horrendous) loss. Their wins will not be as good and their losses will be worse than the other six teams being considered. If Georgia wins the SEC championship game, Georgia will have a just as good if not better argument for why they should be in the playoffs.

[HoopsDawg]

Do you know why OSU has looked good? B/c they are playing other Big Ten teams.

[maroonmania]

Here's your eye test -- 51-0 over a conference foe.

[ShotgunDawg]

Do you know why OSU has looked good? B/c they are playing other Big Ten teams.

But they haven't even looked good. They struggled with a poor Indiana and went to overtime with Penn State. Ohio State isn't even in the discussion to a reasonable person

[BulldogBear]

They (media, analysts, etc) were all in agreement that we should be #1 during the time span that we were but when we lost to Bama their tune started to change.

What I don't get is why they are now discrediting our LSU, A&M and AU wins--those wins are what got us to become #1. Those wins were against top 10 rankings formed by their(media) own personal votes. I know those three teams mostly started losing after losing to us but they mainly have been beating up It's not our fault that those three teams were highly ranked to begin with.

Its becoming really hard to listen to all this talk. I just hope the right thing is done if/when we win out.

SEC W on track to finish 59-25.

Yeah, our schedule sucks*

[blacklistedbully]

One can't help but wonder if this avalanche of anti-MSU/SEC is going to influence the committee just enough.

Like I said, boys, we cannot count on, "win & in". Anybody hoping Bama goes to the SECCG instead of us, is playing with fire.

I hate to say it, but War. Damn. Eagle!

[ShotgunDawg]

One can't help but wonder if this avalanche of anti-MSU/SEC is going to influence the committee just enough.

Like I said, boys, we cannot count on, "win & in". Anybody hoping Bama goes to the SECCG instead of us, is playing with fire.

I hate to say it, but War. Damn. Eagle!

They didn't pick the right people for the committee if the media is influencing them. This was the entire reason they sold the public on picking people of integrity. Now the rubber meets the road.

If C Rice can take criticism about he invasion of Iraq, she should be able to handle Ohio State fans.

[Offshore Dawg]

If C Rice can take criticism about he invasion of Iraq, she should be able to handle Ohio State fans.[/QUOTE]

Now that is one SOLID, true statement !!!!!!

[Jack Lambert]

They didn't pick the right people for the committee if the media is influencing them. This was the entire reason they sold the public on picking people of integrity. Now the rubber meets the road.

If C Rice can take criticism about he invasion of Iraq, she should be able to handle Ohio State fans.

I like Rice and a Conservative but I do want to point out that Powell was the Secretary of STate when we invaded Iraq.

[ShotgunDawg]

I like Rice and a Conservative but I do want to point out that Powell was the Secretary of STate when we invaded Iraq.

Your probably right. I'm sure she has been criticized for more than than this though.

[maroonmania]

I like Rice and a Conservative but I do want to point out that Powell was the Secretary of STate when we invaded Iraq.

Well she was the National Security Advisor to the President at the time so she was still very much in the mix of what decisions were being made.

[fishwater99]

We will be #3 or #4 tomorrow in the Playoff Poll, all we need to do is beat the Bears by 14+ and all is good..

Take care of business and we will be in.

[State82]

Your probably right. I'm sure she has been criticized for more than than this though.

No doubt. For Rice, this football stuff is nothing but child's play. She will scoff at anybody getting riled up at her about it.

[ShotgunDawg]

One more thing, strategically, analysts can't put us at #5 because, in order for their list to have credibility, they have to remove us from the conversation because:

1. The only thing they have against us is that we likely won't be a conference champion. If you put us at 5, you are saying we are still in contention, and they don't want that.

2. Our resume is far and away better than the others under consideration. Analysts have to remove us from the conversation and the only way to do that is to create a buffer by putting us at 6 or 7.

3. The truth is, by consistently doing this, the analysts are admitting that we are the 4th best team and that the only reason we shouldn't be in the playoff is because we aren't a conference champion.

Because of all this, you, most likely, won't see MSU ranked #5 by anyone. The people that don't think conference championships are trump cards will have us #3 or #4 and the people that think conference championship are trump cards will have us #6 or #7. They won't put us at 5, because at #5 we are still in the conversation, and their agenda doesn't allow that.

Hopefully, the committee understands that the "Conference Champion" debate is a line in the sand that will ultimately decide who is #4. It's really that simple because MSU's resume is simply better than the other 3 under consideration.

[Dawgowar]

Ohio State also struggled with Navy.

ESPN is hyper-senstive to the whole SEC-bias accusations. The ones that lad Chris Fowler to have his little pre-TSUN-LSU snit about it not being true. All these critics come lately are nothing more than deflector shields for the pot shots fired from lesser conferences. I am not so cocky to think we don't get left out because the committee decides to value TCU over us due to their winning the Big 12, but I do not think they can be influenced from external forces.

Big 12 can blow cock. They allow Texas to bully them into disparity in conference $. Texas gets their own network and they lose a major fan base and television base in A&M as well as a conference power in Mizzou. Nebraska bolts. So two traditional rivalries are defunct because of their ineptitude. Their brand sucks now. Texas sucks. OU is in a tailspin. That conference is a dumpster fire.

Wisconsin lost to LSU. Ohio State to a 5-6 Virginia Tech (who lost to Wake Forrest saturday). There is not a rational person on that committee that can convince me the B1G 10 and Big 12 are power players this year.

**** these talking heads. Just tune them out. Tuesday is coming again and again the talking heads have no voice. Bout damn time.

[DudyDawg]

If this was Illinois, or any other non historical power in that league for that matter, at 10-1 in the B1G and a loss at home to a 5-6 team, are they being talked about leapfrogging MSU, TCU, Baylor?

Hint: the answer is no.

[ShotgunDawg]

If this was Illinois, or any other non historical power in that league for that matter, at 10-1 in the B1G and a loss at home to a 5-6 team, are they being talked about leapfrogging MSU, TCU, Baylor?

Hint: the answer is no.

I think that's part of it, but I also believe that much of the country simply doesn't want to see 2 SEC teams in the playoff, regardless of how much the SEC deserves 2 teams.

We live in an era of "Everyone gets a trophy" and that it shouldn't matter how superior the SEC's teams are to other conferences. Frankly, you can't change their minds because it's all they got.

Hopefully the committee does the right thing and that's to include the best teams. I don't think Slive would've agree to this setup if the committee wasn't instructed to be fair and do the right thing.

[DudyDawg]

I think that's part of it, but I also believe that much of the country simply doesn't want to see 2 SEC teams in the playoff, regardless of how much the SEC deserves 2 teams.

We live in an era of "Everyone gets a trophy" and that it shouldn't matter how superior the SEC's teams are to other conferences. Frankly, you can't change their minds because it's all they got.

Hopefully the committee does the right thing and that's to include the best teams. I don't think Slive would've agree to this setup if the committee wasn't instructed to be fair and do the right thing.

I agree, as far as media goes. But as far as the committee, I have confidence that they'll just pick the best four. They've had two SEC teams either in or one in and one right outside since their rankings came out. The media just needs to get over it. Best four will get in IMO

[blacklistedbully]

I agree, as far as media goes. But as far as the committee, I have confidence that they'll just pick the best four. They've had two SEC teams either in or one in and one right outside since their rankings came out. The media just needs to get over it. Best four will get in IMO

The problem is, the committee has said all along that conference championships would be "a factor", though not necessarily the over-riding factor. They have said it could make the difference if there are 2 teams they feel have practically equal resumes.

We have been considered "narrowly ahead" up until this point, but the conference championship factors have not been considered yet, as they are not yet determined. Once they are, it will be added to the equation. What is also being added in is the quality of opponent in wins and losses. Our win qualities have steadily declined, with the exception of UPig, and they're not yet likely to be considered a "quality win". TSUN's drop is really hurting us, as is the fact that Baylor gets to play K-State, and OSU gets to most likely play Wisconsin. If those become wins, that further bumps up their resumes relative to ours.

We should really hope Arky puts a whipping on Mizzou,that LSU handles TAMU, and that some teams ranked above them lose to we can get those as "quality wins. TSUN is a mess, because we need to dominate them, but in so doing, could likely drop them completely from the rankings, making our win over them less impressive. If AU loses to Bama, we probably want it to be a barn-burner so they don't drop in rankings.

If Bama wins the West, we could well be looking at as few as 1 Top-25 wins, that being an AU team that will probably drop below the #14 they are at now. If that happens, then the committee will see potentially Baylor with:

Win over #5 TCU
Win over a K-State that might still be Top 15 after a loss to Baylor
Win over a Top 20 OU
B12 Championship

For the life of me, I can't understand why some of us feel so damned certain we are fine if we just beat TSUN.

[BulldogBear]

TSUN will not drop from the rankings. An 8-4 SEC team who is the only loss for the #1 will be in the top 25 even if we win by 4 TDs. I don't know why anyone thinks they won't be.

[ShotgunDawg]

The problem is, the committee has said all along that conference championships would be "a factor", though not necessarily the over-riding factor. They have said it could make the difference if there are 2 teams they feel have practically equal resumes.

We have been considered "narrowly ahead" up until this point, but the conference championship factors have not been considered yet, as they are not yet determined. Once they are, it will be added to the equation. What is also being added in is the quality of opponent in wins and losses. Our win qualities have steadily declined, with the exception of UPig, and they're not yet likely to be considered a "quality win". TSUN's drop is really hurting us, as is the fact that Baylor gets to play K-State, and OSU gets to most likely play Wisconsin. If those become wins, that further bumps up their resumes relative to ours.

We should really hope Arky puts a whipping on Mizzou,that LSU handles TAMU, and that some teams ranked above them lose to we can get those as "quality wins. TSUN is a mess, because we need to dominate them, but in so doing, could likely drop them completely from the rankings, making our win over them less impressive. If AU loses to Bama, we probably want it to be a barn-burner so they don't drop in rankings.

If Bama wins the West, we could well be looking at as few as 1 Top-25 wins, that being an AU team that will probably drop below the #14 they are at now. If that happens, then the committee will see potentially Baylor with:

Win over #5 TCU
Win over a K-State that might still be Top 15 after a loss to Baylor
Win over a Top 20 OU
B12 Championship

For the life of me, I can't understand why some of us feel so damned certain we are fine if we just beat TSUN.

Here's the problem for Baylor though. They don't play a Big 12 Championship, so their "Championship" is essentially equal to MSU's Co-Western Division championship.
To this point, Baylor has only played 3 teams with a winning record and KSU will be the 4th.

On the other hand, the entire SEC West is bowl eligible.

Then you look at both team's losses and it's not close.

MSU has the best resume to anyone reasonable and without agenda. The only question is the conference championship. That's it.

Does the committee use it as a trump card or not? That's all this comes down to.

[blacklistedbully]

Here's the problem for Baylor though. They don't play a Big 12 Championship, so their "Championship" is essentially equal to MSU's Co-Western Division championship.
To this point, Baylor has only played 3 teams with a winning record and KSU will be the 4th.

On the other hand, the entire SEC West is bowl eligible.

Then you look at both team's losses and it's not close.

MSU has the best resume to anyone reasonable and without agenda. The only question is the conference championship. That's it.

Does the committee use it as a trump card or not? That's all this comes down to.

Shotgun, their schedule to date has already been factored in, and the committee has decided it's already really close. You need to think of it as putting a stake-in-the-ground now, with us having a slim lead. The committee could then be faced with a Baylor that could have an out-&-out conference Championship (and that will count for more than our 2nd-place finish in the West. In fact, they could easily view us as a 3rd place SEC conference behind the East winner vs sole B12 Champ. Even if they view us a tied for 1st in the West Division, that is not one of the criteria established. Conference Championship is.

Though they will have played more teams with losing records, it will probably end up being 2 more. Do you really not think the committee will put more stock in their "quality wins" than they will whether or not a couple more teams they beat badly had a couple more losses? As far as their loss goes, ours is better, but West Va is not as bad as it once looked, and I wonder if it would be more than offset by the extra "quality wins" they could end up having over us.

That "quality loss" advantage is only going to take us so far.