OT: PSU Football

[CAPPY]

Yes according to Mark B above, PSU needs to win and then for both Clemson and Washington to lose.

[Craftsy21]

Seems really odd to have a 2-loss team with a Big Ten championship behind a 2-loss Big Ten team without one. Flies in the face of whatever Lar was saying about valuing championships.

OSU I get, 1-loss is 1-loss. But UM? I don’t know. I think they probably are better than us on paper, but results have to matter too.

[Skeeza]

They were also better than us on the field.

You gotta imagine that having Michigan absolutely blast us earlier in the season had something to do with it. That game wasn’t even close, it was an absolute beatdown.

[tjb]

They’re saying that OSU has some separataion, and UM has head to head against both Penn State and Wiscy. I think we’re done.

[CAPPY]

Judging the College Football Rankings: Penn State rank proves committee is clueless - CBSSports.com

Judging the College Football Rankings: Penn State rank proves committee is...

[psu76]

[quote=“CAPPY, post:8381, topic:1119, full:true”]
Yes according to Mark B above, PSU needs to win and then for both Clemson and Washington to lose.
[/quote]Hopefully that means if the Wisconsin/Penn State winner looks good winning, they do can move ahead of Michigan.

[tjb]

[UncleLar]

I think Dave underestimates the emphasis that the committee will put on conference championships. Since the very creation of the committee, both their charter and their actions indicate that a win on Saturday will be a HUGE feather in PSU’s cap.

After watching ESPN’s selection committee show last night, I’m beginning to come around to Dave’s way of thinking. That said, if PSU wins and get’s left out, it’s really going to bring into question the Committee’s charter.

[tjb]

Saquon named B!G offensive player of the year, Trace second team QB behind Barrett.

[UncleLar]

After watching ESPN’s selection committee show last night, I’m beginning to come around to Dave’s way of thinking. That said, if PSU wins and get’s left out, it’s really going to bring into question the Committee’s charter.

I’ve come back off my ledge and I’m again starting to think that we get in. On a conference call with the news media, selection committee chair Kirby Hocutt said “The separation there, 4-7, is not a wide margin of separation”.

Since Michigan’s resume is complete, they really don’t have any opportunity to improve it. Whomever wins the Big Ten championship will add one big feather to their cap which should separate them from Washington. If both Washington and PSU win, then Michigan will drop to 6th (and maybe even 7th behind the B12 champ), Wisconsin and Colorado would drop but Wisconsin would remain ahead of Colorado.

So it then becomes a comparison between Washington and PSU. Penn State will have two wins (Ohio State and Wisconsin) that will both be better than Washington’s best win (Colorado). Washington should also get dinged for the horrible out of conference schedule, 127th out of 128 teams. I think those two criteria more than make up for the one extra win that Washington has (if we played the same OOC schedule that Washington did, we’d only have one loss too).

It would also help if Va Tech’s expected loss to Clemson would drop them out of the top 25 opening up a spot for Iowa and giving us another top 25 win - Temple beating Navy would also make room for a slot that Iowa could fill.

So I’m back on the glass half full side of the equation now.

[tjb]

I think you have too much faith in human reason! I think this will be an eyeballs deal, and their eyeballs will confirm what they have already decided.

Eight teams are called for. It allows you to schedule aggressively OOC, because you can still win your conference. (Though also vice versa, although you will dampen your chances for an at-large with a cupcake OOC.) It rewards actual results in a more equitable way than scattered head-to-head results. And it doesn’t punish good teams in down conference years (Penn State 1994.)

It also balances out the eyeballs view with reasonable objective criteria.

[Craftsy21]

I agree with Lar, I think…

I really don’t know what they’ll do, but I do think that putting Michigan 5th THIS WEEK was a very intentional move in that gives them flexibility should UW or Clemson lose.

If Michigan were 6th, 7th, or 8th right now and UW lost… you would have a hard time jumping UM over the winner of the B1G championship for that spot. Would be difficult to even have them in the conversation. So I think because they’re resume is done they get the benefit of the doubt with that 5 spot to keep them relevant in future discussions, depending on how this all shakes out Saturday.

I have a feeling that none of this is going to matter though and UW/Clemson will take care of business, but nice to convince yourself that there is still hope!

[rwd5035]

I get that Conference Championships should be valued more but even if we beat Wisconsin, we still won’t have Ohio State’s resume. Michigan beat us by nearly 40. As much as I want us to be in the playoff, I can’t see a way for us to get in. I think Michigan would get in before we would.

[tjb]

Good on Moorhead:

Not everyone is surprised by Penn State's offensive turnaround

[jyd]

The fascinating thing to me is that virtually everything that was promised about this offensive strategy switch came true. Hackenberg would be even worse in this offense than he was in the prior one because it takes a mobile QB as a running threat to completely pull this off. (And that’s not a criticism of him, either - that’s just not how he plays.) About the only missing or incomplete component that I thought was coming was a consistently faster pace out of the no-huddle. While PSU does without a huddle and gets to the line pretty quickly, they’ll often take a step back with everyone looking to the sideline for how to proceed. It has been incredibly fun to watch, and when the offensive line develops even further, it will do nothing but get better.

[tjb]

No. 18 QB in the class, but seems to be the one they wanted.

http://www.roarlionsroar.com/penn-state-football-recruiting/2016/11/924/four-star-2018-georgia-dual-threat-quarterback-justin-fields-commits-penn-state

[mjg]

No. 18 QB in the class,

I saw #4 dual threat qb on some twitter stuff. Guess it depends which service you believe. His highlights are impressive.

[tjb]

I shouldn’t have dissed him with that … just saw all the excitement and wondered why.

Deferring to the judgment of those whose paychecks depend on being right seems like the best policy. Just glancing at some coverage, it seems staff had this kid at camp and went after him hard. And recruiting has to be picking up, so this must be the guy.

[tjb]

Four-star Justin Fields is an enormous get for Penn State’s 2018 recruiting class: here’s why

http://www.pennlive.com/pennstatefootball/index.ssf/2016/12/four-star_justin_fields_is_an.html

And

Penn State’s 2018 recruiting class now ranks as the nation’s best

http://www.pennlive.com/pennstatefootball/index.ssf/2016/12/penn_states_2018_recruiting_cl.html

[NittanyIllini]

Cool…I’ll have to make it a point to see Justin play next Fall here in GA. This is big, as it seems PSU has tapped my home state with Grant Haley, Blake Gilliken and now Fields.