If the committee doesn't care about losses, why should we?

[itsacanething]

Each post you make is worse than the last.

hate to say it but OP makes a good point. have had this discussion with a few different people. a loss doesn't seem to matter. for us of course we would be penalized more than any of the other one loss teams and maybe more than a few of the two loss teams. thats why we have to win.

 

[drifters1234]

Each post you make is worse than the last.

hate to say it but OP makes a good point. have had this discussion with a few different people. a loss doesn't seem to matter. for us of course we would be penalized more than any of the other one loss teams and maybe more than a few of the two loss teams. thats why we have to win.

Unequivocally wrong, as you are conveniently ignoring Wisconsin. If Wisconsin and UM both have one losses we would not "of course ... be penalized more than" they would. The most likely scenario is that we would be ranked higher than Wisky, given that we are currently ranked higher than Wisky. It would depend on the losses. If we lose a close game to Clemson, and Wisky loses a close game in it's BIG 10 championship game then we would remain ranked higher, especially considering our marquee blowout win over ND.

The horse has been beaten beyond death, but as many of us have stated our close wins (especially against an abysmal UNC) hurt us. Our big wins over VA Tech and ND have largely -- but not entirely -- overcome it. That's why we're still behind Clemson: the committee, right or wrong, thinks Clemson is going to beat us. I think their analysis is nonsense. But it does not matter, as we play them.

I certainly agree that a loss to Pitt and a win over Clemson absolutely puts us in the playoff, as we'd have two monster wins -- ND and Clemson -- and a conference championship.

But even if our only loss is Clemson, provided its close, we still have a legit shot. That assumes Alabama wins out and eliminates Auburn and UGA, and someone (presumably OSU) beats Wisky. Under that scenario, I believe we would get in over OSU. While OSU would have the conference championship, our resume would be better, as they would have two losses, including a blowout loss to Iowa. Whereas, we would only have one close loss to a top-2 Clemson.

 

[caneworld]

If teams that shi$ the bed with 2 losses are still somehow in contention, what is the point of risking our best players at Pitt. What is the point of trying to go undefeated? No matter what happens, we are going to play Clemson for the ACC title. since the committee only cares about quality wins, should we rest our best players against Pitt. Beating Pitt guarantees us nothing if we lose to Clemson. Losing to Pitt but beating Clemson otoh would give us the only thing the committee cares about - quality wins.

This is how retarded the committees logic is. This is what happens when you discount losses and only care about quality wins.

When it comes to Miami, every loss will matter .... They would hate to see the "chain" gang in the hallowed playoff ranks...

 

[DaU83]

All I know is if we're losing a tight one to Clemson we need to fake a Malik injury.. for " they lost their starting qb" defense

 

[dudenate]

Jimmy Johnson preached 'Don't leave the outcome of a game in the hands of the refs.' In similar fashion, this UM squad shouldn't leave the determination of the 4 teams that make it in the hands of the voters. Win and advance has been the mantra from vt on.

 

[simplycanes]

The OP is correct. The committee thinks they are contextualizing losses, but what they are actually doing is marginalizing victories by other teams in contention for a playoff spot.

Clemson is the perfect example. Their loss to Syracuse is being downplayed because Bryant was hobbled. Excuse me, but if you're not playing up to snuff and an inferior opponent gets a shot on your QB, that's part of football, you're expected to overcome that against a poor opponent via that other 10 players on offense.

To keep this objective, let's compare that to Wisconsin, an undefeated Power 5 team. Have they played opponents equally inferior to them as Syracuse was to Clemson? Absolutely, and yet they won that game(s).

At this point in the season, your undefeated Power 5 teams should be in your 4 spots and you should be doing these comparisons amongst one-loss teams, not between them and undefeated teams.