Dr. Pomade

I think Ohio State destroys Mich State in a rematch in a neutral site and good weather.

I think an Ohio State - Oklahoma match would be epic. (And remember there's already an early season "rematch" next year.)

I think a Bama - Ohio State rematch would get fantastic ratings and be a great game. Henry is a monster, but so is our defensive line.

I think the committee DEFINITELY wants an excuse to put Ohio State in the playoff. You have Osborne and Alvarez who, I think, would lobby hard for 2 B10 teams and the strength of the conference this year. I can also hear them saying something like, "And I think there is something to be said about a returning champ having a shot at defending their title."

Maybe just wishful thinking on my part. But the committee is definitely a political process/entity.

The one I posted in here?

He said it was a follow up rant, so I am assuming it was one that happened after the one you posted.

Then again, I didn't think a one-loss B12 team had a prayer to get into the playoff, so what the hell do I know.

Tim Beck

 

Can you honestly say OSU has looked good on offense all year?

 

They looked good in the Rutgers game where JT was named starter and put up a million points and yards and they looked decent against a weak Michigan D. After the Rutgers game they looked mediocre against Illinois and Minnesota and then lost to Sparty. If it wasn't for OSU's D they would have lost to A few other teams this year.

 

You can be all excited for individual players but in the grand scheme as a Unit they were lackluster

 

Good thing they only played and beat three teams with a record of .500 or better

No, I've been very vocal in saying that OSU has looked fairly mediocre to terrible all year. It's weird to say this about an 11-1 team (or whatever we are), but they have been fairly disappointing all season long. They have looked cumbersome at best on offense, and, at worst, completely lost, like they did against Michigan State. The QB thing to begin the year was a mess, and I blame that on Meyer. The playcalling has been a combination of a snoozefest and some pathetic attempt to make sure certain players (like Braxton) get a certain amount of targets just for the sake of targeting them, which I blame on Tim Beck and also on Meyer. The defense has played great for the most part and - I agree - is the reason why they won as many games as they did. However, the offense has never really looked in sync, and it's shown. This team had so much promise on paper, and that never panned out. I guess that's why they bother to play the games and not just decide who wins and loses based on stat sheets, returning starters, and NFL potential.

I'm an Ohio State homer through and through. But this Ohio State team has looked fairly bad for the vast majority of this season. Based on their last performance, I'm optimistic that they have turned the corner and will play with the same style, aggression, and passion that they showed to end last year's run. Unfortunately, I don't think they'll be able to showcase anything in the playoff, as I don't think they'll make the playoff. And that, quite frankly, is their fault.

So, at this point, I am hoping that Ohio State plays the part of USC and just goes out to the Rose Bowl and absolutely waxes some Pac12 team. Hell, we might even get a chance to wax USC themselves out there this year.

You're still not quite getting what I'm saying. The team did what they were supposed to do. They did well. I'm not saying they're failures or a bunch of bums as you seem to be getting from my posts. I'm just not on the "they can beat anyone right now" bandwagon as you and I guess a lot of others are based on one game.

I'm just being antagonistic. I'm sorry. I'll stop.

Definitely didn't say that.

 

Since you couldn't get the gist of my post on your first run through, I'll try to make it simpler for you... OSU did what they should have done against Michigan given the recent exposure of their run defense without Glasgow. It did nothing to alleviate concerns with the passing game which was absent against Michigan State and not needed against Michigan. OSU probably wouldn't win games vs. Iowa or Alabama passing the ball 15 times for just over 100 yards.

1. Ohio State should have absolutely dominated some teams they played earlier in the season, but didn't. According to your logic, all they needed to do was watch some game film, find the opponent's weaknesses, and then plan accordingly for a recipe for success. WOW SO KNOWLEDGE MANY OBVIOUS. Wait, what's this, you mean to say they didn't dominate those teams like they should have?!? Well, I wonder what could have been wrong? I mean, all they needed to do was see where the other team was weak and then attack those weaknesses, right? Serious questions; please answer.

2. When you're running back runs for over 200 yards, you typically don't need to pass all that much. And if Elliot ran for over 200 yards on either Iowa and Alabama, I like our chances of winning regardless of Barrett's passing yards. I'd like to see the statistic on a team's winning percentage when the running back runs for over 200 yards. I bet it's a pretty big number.

3. They still aren't the '85 Bears, but we'll stay vigilant and let you know when they become them so you can give the team some credit.

Anyone hear Cowherd?

 

https://www.facebook.com/TheHerd/videos/1756846474536544/

I've typically agreed with Cowherd over the years, and even those in the late 2000's when he was trashing Ohio State for getting smoked by the SEC and USC. I think he calls it pretty well. I agree with him here, too. Ohio State has clicked, and I like their chances against anyone right now. I could not say that at any other time this year.

I dont know that they will move UNC to #4. UNC played 2 FCS teams this season and them being ranked #10 shows the committee is punishing them for that.

Yeah a UNC at #6 or #7 would tell me the committee was poised to put them into the top 4 with a win over Clemson. Them at #10 puts them too far out of striking range, IMHO.

Ohio State at #6 is great for their chances.

Stanford at #7 scares me. They need to lose to USC to avoid the conference championship leapfrog effect.

And $100 bar tab sounds like a good start to a great night.

DJ, can call me and I will put you on speaker.

Jive, game starts at 8pm. I would probably like to get there a little before that.

I'm thinkng the BW3's in Dublin off Avery Murfield.

While I'm going all kamikaze on this thread, here's something that's fucking fantastic:

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2015/11/30/9821260/navy-helmets-uniforms-army-game-ships-boats-kaboom-2015

If Ohio State doesn't get in the playoff (most likely scenario) I REALLY want to play Notre Dame. I HATE... HATE Notre Dame and would love to end the season throttling them and sending their stupid fans back down to earth.

 

Top 5 most hated teams

1) Notre Dame

2) USC

3) Michigan

4) Every SEC team

5) Penn State

Here's my list:

1. Wisconsin

2. Florida

3. USC (who I would love if I didn't hate)

4. Notre Dame

5. Michigan

6. Penn State

7. South Carolina

8. Every other SEC team except Georgia, who I kind of like (because I feel sorry for them)

The list is somewhat interchangable, depending on various factors (like how good or bad the team has been lately).

Also, coming on strong and may find it's way on to most hated list:

Baylor - because those fucking idiots are a bunch of whiny thugs

Teams that I actually like/root for most of the time:

1. Oklahoma (and Bob Stoops, who gets shit on way too much for no reason)

2. Oregon

3. Clemson

4. UCLA

5. West Virginia

Bama's offense isn't just Derrick Henry. They have the deep ball and a good passing game as well. They lean on Henry yes but it's more of game control and clock management. It isn't their only weapon unlike LSU.

 

I'm guessing you haven't watched a lot of Bama games this year.

 

 

Now you want to talk about one trick pony, how's the QB option for JT Barret working for you LOL.

I'm guessing since you were driving back from the plie contest in Minnesota last Saturday you didn't catch the game, either: Alabama ran Henry about 864 times. In fact, I think he just got another carry. Seriously, you keep telling yourself Bama has a versatile offense.

Out of curiosity is the playoff set up for conference champions only or the best 4 teams? Because listening to them last year and this year, I feel like I keep hearing them say that they are trying to get the 4 best teams in. If that is the case, why so much weight on winning a pathetic conference (ACC, SEC)?

 

Hypothetically speaking UNC beats Clemson and USC beats Stanford. If the committee is true to their word by putting the 4 best teams in the playoff there is no way they can insert UNC over Ohio State. Nobody can say UNC is better than Ohio State unless UNC throttles Clemson by 17+. I know Alabama fans will be begging and praying that UNC gets in over the Buckeyes. Alabama's one trick pony offense won't be able to move the ball on Ohio State's defense and they know it.

 

Realistically, I hope Michigan State gets Bama first round and punches them in the mouth. After 3 straight bowl losses, no way Alabama gets the benefit of the doubt like they have gotten this year in coming years.

Look at all this truth and intelligence in this post. Look at it, everyone. Look

Iowa has beat Wisconsin' date=' northwestern and pitt. Three quality wins. If they lose to sparty they will drop to #5 seed and sparty takes #4 seed. Their resume is much better then Ohio States.[/quote']

 

It's clear - at least to me - that the committee values the eye test over resume, especially as the end of the season nears. And a team that loses the last game you saw them play - like Iowa would with a loss to MSU - would likely not rate highly on the eye test. It's very psychological at that point, too: people just have a very difficult time rewarding a losing team. If they didn't, then we likely would have seen either USC or Michigan play for the title in 2006.