Skip to main content

The playoff committee is right to not think much of the Big Ten

Earlier today, it appeared as if some ESPN commentators thought the playoff committee wasn't showing the Big Ten enough respect with their latest rankings. On Tuesday night, the committee released their second batch of top 25 rankings, which included the following Big Ten teams:

8. Michigan State (7-1)

13. Nebraska (8-1)

14. Ohio State (7-1)

25. Wisconsin (6-2)

Michigan State was leapfrogged by Kansas State on Tuesday, Nebraska and Ohio State are behind two-loss Mississippi, and outside of Duke, the Cornhuskers and Buckeyes are the lowest ranked of the one-loss teams. So, do the ESPN talking heads have a point or is the playoff committee right in not giving the Big Ten as much respect as most other major conferences?

Well, I'm sorry to disappoint the ESPN "analysts," but there's a very good reason why the playoff committee isn't displaying much respect for the Big Ten conference; they're a power 5 worst 5-11 against the other four major conferences (and Notre Dame). Michigan State's defeat was a 19-point loss to Oregon. Nebraska lost by 5 to Michigan State. Lastly, Ohio State lost by 14 at home to 4-5 Virginia Tech. As for Michigan State's other non-conference opponents, they defeated: Jacksonville State, Eastern Michigan, and Wyoming. They're only good win of the season to this point was a 27-22 victory over Nebraska, in a game they almost blew in the 4th quarter. Nebraska's non-conference victories came against: Florida Atlantic, McNeese State, Fresno State, and Miami (Florida). They needed a late-game miracle to beat FCS McNeese State. Their lone semi-impressive win of the season was the 41-31 victory against Miami. As for Ohio State, their non-conference wins were against: Navy, Kent State, and Cincinnati. Sadly, their best win may have been double-overtime road victory against 4-4 Penn State.

So, judging by the resumes of the Big Ten's three one-loss teams, and of the conference in general, the Big Ten will be hard-pressed to get a team into the four-team playoff this year. Even if Michigan State, Nebraska, or Ohio State win out, a two-loss SEC, Pac-12, Big XII team, or Florida State or Notre Dame, could potentially leapfrog them due to their overall resumes. Unfortunately for the Big Ten conference, the next time they'll be able to impress voters is in the bowl games and in their non-conference games to start next year. Until that point, the playoff committee will continually be saying, "Well, there's this one-loss team from the Big Ten, but their one loss was pretty bad, the conference has been awful in their non-conference games, and their most impressive victory wasn't all that impressive, so let's go with this two-loss team instead." Even if Michigan State upends Ohio State over the weekend, they'll stay behind the TCU/Kansas State winner and may be leapfrogged by the Arizona State/Notre Dame winner in a week or two.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"