Cdog923

The Big Ten has a good chance of getting not one, but two teams in; both OSU and Wisconsin could get in if Wisky wins the CCG.

Dylan Utter is an undersized, FCS-at-best talent. The simple fact that he hasn't been beaten out by anyone else on the offensive line can be directly correlated to the lack of ready-to-play talent that is available at the position. I'm not going to comment on talent since the guy has started for 2 years in a row, but 295 is undersized for a FBS offensive lineman? That's news to me. I'm not sure if you know this, but more often than not linemen don't come in from high school ready to play. Those guys normally have to be developed. Given that the average D1 O-lineman in 2014 was around 6'3, 305, then yea, that's undersized. And I'm not sure you know this, but your second comment just proves mine; if we have a guy in the program that was ready to play at center, then Utter wouldn't be starting. So thanks for that.

Good point. And let's not forget that almost every time it's been 3rd or 4th and 1 and a sneak (thankfully! Where has that been the last 15 years) is called, we get 2 or 3 yards. Maybe this guy is smash mouth, but he's asked to play the dancing bear game too much. By "dancing bear", you mean "pass blocking", right?

PSU has head to head AS WELL. Theres the problem. PSU has head to head and be the conference champion. PSU would have to get in too. If they don't, then I'll quit watching CFB. Because what else could PSU do? Not lose 2 games... Likewise for OSU: they could have not lost the H2H against Penn State.

Considering he's already overwhelmed by the breadth and scope of the Presidency to the point where Obama is going to tutor him, I doubt most of this gets done.

No it isn't; if anything, it's the opposite.

C dawgy dawg, I did say way up in the thread that if Penn State were to demolish Wisconsin in Indy they could make a case for the playoff. Situationally speaking to this season, I don't see Penn State laying claim to being one of the four best teams this season unless they just demolished their opponent in Indy. So until you go with the 'Conference champs only' policy, I think I've explained my position on what I think the role of the committee should be/is currently. I don't necessarily disagree; I just have an issue with putting teams in the playoff that don't even win their division. Ohio State may have the most talent this side of Alabama, but how does it not completely invalidate the results on the field if PSU wins the Big Ten at 11-2, having beat both Wisky and OSU, and not get into the playoff? C-Dog, while you and I differ on this opinion, you do bring up a valid argument. It does create very muddy waters. However, the committee's task is to choose the 4 best teams in the country. I don't think there are any other imposed guidelines. If Ohio State were to finish 11-1 and Penn State were to finish 11-2, and having seen both of the teams this season, I would say that Ohio State is a better team than Penn State. Overall, I would agree with you; Ohio State is the better team, and 9 out of 10 times, they would probably win. Sometimes I'm too objective for my own good.

I agree 100%; part of the fun is the discussion (it's also why I don't really want to see them go to an 8 team playoff, even though that would probably be the fairest way to do it).

C dawgy dawg, I did say way up in the thread that if Penn State were to demolish Wisconsin in Indy they could make a case for the playoff. Situationally speaking to this season, I don't see Penn State laying claim to being one of the four best teams this season unless they just demolished their opponent in Indy. So until you go with the 'Conference champs only' policy, I think I've explained my position on what I think the role of the committee should be/is currently. I don't necessarily disagree; I just have an issue with putting teams in the playoff that don't even win their division. Ohio State may have the most talent this side of Alabama, but how does it not completely invalidate the results on the field if PSU wins the Big Ten at 11-2, having beat both Wisky and OSU, and not get into the playoff?

Dylan Utter is an undersized, FCS-at-best talent. The simple fact that he hasn't been beaten out by anyone else on the offensive line can be directly correlated to the lack of ready-to-play talent that is available at the position. The simple fact is that he's answered the bell because Cavanaugh's policies and approach ran off a guy like Thurston, who was as highly recruited out of HS as just about anyone. This is Dylan's first year as a true center and he's played pretty well overall. And yes, he was lightly recruited coming out of Nebraska, but he's been on scholarship since 2015 - and a lot of great Nebraska HS recruits were lightly recruited out of HS. Thurston left because he couldn't beat out Utter. Which doesn't help the situation at all.

What is the weakest overall position on the o-line right now?

I don't understand all of the Louisville love, at least compared to the other top teams. A couple of pretty close calls against also-rans and a close loss to Clemson. Should this warrant 2 ACC teams in the playoff? Is the ACC that good? I don't see it. If OSU and UL win out without conference championships, don't think UL ends up ahead of OSU. No, it isn't. People are enamored with Lamar Jackson, and they are equating it with Louisville being a top 4 team (which they aren't).

Dylan Utter is an undersized, FCS-at-best talent. The simple fact that he hasn't been beaten out by anyone else on the offensive line can be directly correlated to the lack of ready-to-play talent that is available at the position.

Then get rid of the conferences, get rid of conference title games; hell, might as well not even play the games. Just let the selection committee pick the "best" 4 teams.

This is why I'm in favor of thr Conference Champions only ideal. Does it screw over really good teams? Yup. Should they have won that game they needed to win their division? Yup, but they didn't. So that just makes non-conference games exhibition games. Why even have them if they don't "mean anything"? Also, there could be a 3-loss division champ (in conference) sneak into a conference championship and if they have one lucky win, they make the playoff? The playoff is supposed to be the best 4 teams, period. Not the best 4 teams with a bunch of caveats. Then get rid of conferences and conference title games, and leave it completely up to the polls (aka the "human element"). If Penn State wants to complain, they shouldn't have lost to Pitt. Penn State shouldn't have gotten their ass handed to them by Michigan. Then Ohio State shouldn't complain, because they lost to Penn State. Yeah, but Ohio State would have only 1 loss (and a fluky loss at that), while Penn State has 2 losses (with one of those by 39 points). It's a complete resume review. A loss is a loss. And, under that scenario, no where on OSU's resume would you find "Conference Champion" or even "Division Champion".

This is why I'm in favor of thr Conference Champions only ideal. Does it screw over really good teams? Yup. Should they have won that game they needed to win their division? Yup, but they didn't. So that just makes non-conference games exhibition games. Why even have them if they don't "mean anything"? Also, there could be a 3-loss division champ (in conference) sneak into a conference championship and if they have one lucky win, they make the playoff? The playoff is supposed to be the best 4 teams, period. Not the best 4 teams with a bunch of caveats. Then get rid of conferences and conference title games, and leave it completely up to the polls (aka the "human element"). If Penn State wants to complain, they shouldn't have lost to Pitt. Penn State shouldn't have gotten their ass handed to them by Michigan. Then Ohio State shouldn't complain, because they lost to Penn State.

This is why I'm in favor of thr Conference Champions only ideal. Does it screw over really good teams? Yup. Should they have won that game they needed to win their division? Yup, but they didn't. So that just makes non-conference games exhibition games. Why even have them if they don't "mean anything"? Also, there could be a 3-loss division champ (in conference) sneak into a conference championship and if they have one lucky win, they make the playoff? The playoff is supposed to be the best 4 teams, period. Not the best 4 teams with a bunch of caveats. Then get rid of conferences and conference title games, and leave it completely up to the polls (aka the "human element").

This is why I'm in favor of thr Conference Champions only ideal. Does it screw over really good teams? Yup. Should they have won that game they needed to win their division? Yup, but they didn't. Nailed it. If PSU wins and OSU gets in instead of them, it's going to be the impetus to increase the playoff from 4 to 8, which would only weaken it, IMO.

It would be a clusterf*ck of epic proportions if Penn State wins the conference, but Ohio State gets in over them.

I absolutely agree; I just disagree with the notion that Lee is going to be a savior at the position, let alone the starter.

That's not on Cav.

The fact that some people are putting their faith in a washout from Tulane doesn't instill much confidence for next year.... +1 for Calvin, but the sentiment is misplaced.

The fact that some people are putting their faith in a washout from Tulane doesn't instill much confidence for next year.... Tanner is far from a wash up qb. He's transferring because the knew coaching staff runs the option. He could've transferred anywhere and will be the one of the most effective qbs we've had in a long time His passing statistics were worse than Armstrong's were, in a weaker conference. Kid may start by default, but don't expect "effective" off the bat.

The fact that some people are putting their faith in a washout from Tulane doesn't instill much confidence for next year....