Dr. Pomade

I'm in.

Duuuuuuuude I was SCREAMING that Tressel needed to challenge that call (the fumble out of the endzone that everyone missed). That was really early on in the ballgame, and I think everyone's mentality was like, "Oh, this is just lowly Illinois - it won't matter in the end because they'll roll over and die soon enough." And Juice Williams pretty much converted every third down known to man that game on scrambles.

Didn't we lose at UCLA in or around 2000 or 2001?

I was at both the 2008 Penn State game and the 2009 USC game. You can blame me for both. I was also at the 2011 Wisconsin Hail Mary game. You can thank me for that win. In 2007, we lost at home to stupid Illinois. I remember away losses to Wisconsin in 2003 (that's when our linebacker choked their QB), Penn State in 2005 (that was back when they started the White Outs at Penn State and it was actually really intimidating/cool), and Michigan in 2004 (though it was not a night game).

Oddly, I'm worried less about this game because it's away than if it was at home. Maybe it's just me, but I swear Ohio State has played better on the road in big/night names than at home in the BCS era. I need to fact check that.

Special needs, yes. Will be waiting patiently. JK will be hitting refresh button furiously.

You know what else I use correctly? Victory and triple posts.

I don't think Mitch was doubting that I used the word correctly. Just the opposite, I think he was surprised someone actually used the term and used it correctly.

My pleasure.

http://forums.windowscentral.com/attachments/microsoft-lumia-950/117189d1448231196t-aint_even_mad_bro.jpg

Just FYI, I have yet to receive a PM about this. I will try to act like I am not offended gravely.

A few thoughts: - Even mediocre Penn State teams are difficult to beat at Happy Valley at night. - The Alabama game shouldn't have been even as close as it was. If you remember, Ohio State kind of sputtered around for the majority of the first half and couldn't get the ball into the end zone early on. Alabama is lucky that game didn't get out of hand for them. That score could have easily have been what Ohio State did to Oregon. - Cardale's arm strength and ability to hit Devin Smith and others vertically way down the field - and our receivers ability to catch well - was probably the X factor that made everything coalesce during Ohio State's playoff run. This donned on me as I watched JT underthrow receivers during the Indiana game. Once the defense was stretched because of the vertical threat, it opened up plenty of room for Elliott to bust huge rooms and huge scrambles from Cardale (which were particularly instrumental in the Alabama game).

LOL at my new name <3 Love

LAURENNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

But that would reward the lesser team (4) and penalize the better team (1). It's the same reason why the best teams in the NFL get a bye the first round of the playoffs. So to answer your question it's done to maintain fairness.

Great question. The committee has openly advised that they weigh "championships won" heavily in determining who gets into the playoff.* Therefore, Alabama and Ohio State would be valued higher by virtue of winning their conference relative to TAMU and Michigan. Similarly, Washington would be devalued by virtue of failing to win the PAC. Also, we all know that recent losses hurt far more than more distant losses, so that will serve to also work against Michigan (who would have just lost) and Washington (who would have just lost). Clemson would be a lock by virtue of being undefeated and a champion of the ACC. They are in as the number one seed: 1. Clemson 2. 3. 4. Next in would be Ohio State and Alabama. Again, they are champions, and the rest of the folks are not. Therefore, they will get the nod. 1. Clemson 2. Alabama 3. Ohio State 4. That leaves one spot open for the "wild card." I think it would come down between Utah and Louisville. The committee would be right or wrong either choice, depending on how you looked at it. Louisville would have a good resume, they only lost once to the #1 team in the nation at Clemson's place, and it was a hard-fought game that Louisville could have easily won. Utah also lost on the road, but their loss was to Cal - clearly it won't be viewed as much as a forgiving loss. Thus, by this criteria, advantage Louisville. However, Utah will be a conference champion, having won the PAC, whereas Louisville will not. Thus, justifiably, the committee could select Utah over Louisville and point to the conference championship criteria, and Louisville couldn't whine too much. I suppose a lot will depend on "eye test" stuff that we'd see play out through the year, and if one was clearly playing better than the other, then that could factor in substantially. However, to answer your question, I'd think Louisville will get the nod. They likely will have a Heisman candidate - if not the outright winner - on the team, whereas Utah will continue playing in the relative obscurity of the Mountain and Pacific time zones. Utah is a boring brand, whereas Louisville has that "new kid crashing the party" momentum going for them. For those reasons, I go with Louisville as the fourth man in: 1. Clemson 2. Alabama 3. Ohio State 4. Louisville Now that I just typed that, it doesn't seem like a ratings bonanza. Like jive (Lauren, where's that name change at, bro?) said, people would likely rather see Bama and Ohio State in the finals, and I doubt a lot of people would be really jacked over a redo semi final of Clemson and Louisville. Of course, last minute changes in seeding would go a long way to solving the ratings problem - like, I dunno, maybe Clemson looking "not all that great" and Bama "looking fantastic!" in their final games, justifying a switch at the top and Bama getting the #1 seed and Clemson falling to the #2 seed. I hope all of you can read the cynicism that I tried to incorporate there. *On the topic of "championships won" - I haven't looked closely at the criteria, so I don't know what the operational criteria of that is. However, I thought - again with a healthy dose of cynicism - does championships won mean championships this season or any season? LOL, think about it it - the committee might have found a way of saying they can give bonus points to blue bloods and teams that have had recent success. I mean, face it, Alabama, Ohio State, Oklahoma, USC, and Notre Dame have a lot of "championships won."

Do they blow the whistles to let other people know he passed that checkpoint and therefore isn't laying broken and dead in a copse of trees or something?

All Indiana has to do is beat Michigan and they'd be in second, all things being equal. You'd be be shocked if Indiana beats Michigan? I'd be surprised if that happened but not shocked. Who else is in contention to win the east? Penn State? Probably not. Sparty is a car fire. Maryland just got exposed. And Rutgers is, well, Rutgers. I think it's reasonable to see a scenario in which Indiana comes in 2nd. Hell Ohio State could drop 2 B10 games in the next 2 weeks.

Surprised, yes. Shocked, no.

Indiana's defense is not bad at all. I think Indiana will win a decent amount of games this year. I won't be shocked if they finish 2nd in the East. A solid defense will win a lot of games. So Ohio State looked fairly pedestrian yesterday on offense. I'm fine with that, provided it doesn't become a habit. It might be a bit of a wake-up call for Ohio State, who might have gotten a little too accustomed to hearing how great they are and where in the legends of the game they'll be mentioned at the end of the season. This game reminded me a lot of the Michigan State game last year, with the obvious difference being we found a way to finally distance ourselves and put the team away. Hopefully, that's cause for optimism moving forward.

I'd like to get my wife's Escalade detailed (inside and out). Detailers, if interested, please PM me - and provide a ballpark quote if you're able, whether you can come to the car or I need to bring it to you, and any other relevant information I'll need to consider.

Tennessee can still find its way into the playoff. There were some shellackings this weekend: - Washington's beat down of Oregon - Michigan's obliteration of Rutgers - and this one was shocking to me: Washington State's curb-stomping of Stanford Add Stanford to Oregon and Sparty as programs that have had recent success that have fallen on rough times this year.

That's about the most disappointing 21 point win I've ever seen.

ESPN is pimping Tennessee out hardcore this year. I think they get worked over by Texas AM.

Arkansas beats Alabama.