College Football Thread

[Stuhoo 79,850]

Not only is our only loss on the road to Ohio State, but Nebraska, Washington, and Michigan are now all above .500 and bowl eligible. Hell; Michigan might be able to hang with Ohio State.

Beat Purdue via comfortable margin and we are in. If we can’t accomplish that then I fully understand why we won’t be in.

[go iu bb 5,579]

Bama didn't just lose, they got  blown out 24-3 to (then) 5-5 OK.

All things being equal, 3-24 looks worse than 15-38 even though the latter lost by 2 more points. Only being able to score 3 points is no bueno.

[DChoosier 8,036]

37 minutes ago, Stuhoo said:

Not only is our only loss on the road to Ohio State, but Nebraska, Washington, and Michigan are now all above .500 and bowl eligible. Hell; Michigan might be able to hang with Ohio State.

Beat Purdue via comfortable margin and we are in. If we can’t accomplish that then I fully understand why we won’t be in.

Yep,

Lose to PU and I wouldn’t waste 2 words defending our inclusion in the playoff. They are terrible, will want to ruin our season but we need a 20-30+ win for the committee and for our offense to get back to actually doing things like protecting the QB, getting separation and completing passes.

[Certified Sunshine Pumper 8,941]

59 minutes ago, Stuhoo said:

Not only is our only loss on the road to Ohio State, but Nebraska, Washington, and Michigan are now all above .500 and bowl eligible. Hell; Michigan might be able to hang with Ohio State.

Beat Purdue via comfortable margin and we are in. If we can’t accomplish that then I fully understand why we won’t be in.

I still think Michigan is a well-above average football team. 5 losses-- 3 Top 10 teams-- @Washington and @Top 25 ILL 

[RaceToTheTop 25,128]

ESPN posted 13 'expert's' picks for what the picks will be post week 13.  11 had IU in;  the only one that didn't was a ridiculous one that had three (SMU, Miami, and Clemson) in and put Penn State at #10, behind two ACC teams and two two-loss SEC teams, so I would wouldn't take that 'prediction' seriously.

Of the 11 seedings, IU was:  5 at #9, 3 at #10, and 4 at #11.

What is important to note is that some IU is ahead of SMU in 5 of the 12 -- some have placed SMU as the ACC representative, some have placed Miami.  SMU has guaranteed their place in the ACC title game.  Their opponent in the championship game will either be Miami or Clemson, whom both have dangerous regular season games left (Miami at 8-3 Syracuse, Clemson plays 8-3 South Carolina).   If Miami is in the title game, they will only have one loss.  Clemson will have AT LEAST two losses.  The winner of the title game is in and then you would have to ask if the committee would put in the loser -- but IMO I don't see a scenario where a two loss Miami, a two loss SMU, or a three or more loss Clemson team gets in over a one loss Big Ten team or even a three loss SEC team.  So even if you are looking at two ACC teams in right now, I don't see how that would stick.  

But even if two ACC teams get in, there would need to be either three ACC teams OR a three loss SEC team getting in for IU not to (assuming they don't lose to ACC).  The worst case scenario IMO would be Clemson, MIami, and SMU all winning their regular season games and then SMU beating Miami in the ACC title game.  They'd all have two losses....but then I look at Clemson and see they lost to Georgia in a worse fashion than IU lost to Ohio State plus Clemson lost to Louisville at home by two scores in a game that wasn't as close as that.

 

[RaceToTheTop 25,128]

9 minutes ago, Certified Sunshine Pumper said:

I still think Michigan is a well-above average football team. 5 losses-- 3 Top 10 teams-- @Washington and @Top 25 ILL 

The whole 'IU has the 106th ranked schedule'......I have no idea where that is coming from.  Sagarin had it at 77 entering yesterday, so that is going to get bumped up quite a bit.  Entering yesterday, SMU was at 64, Miami 59, and Clemson 51.  Given each team's opponents in Saturday, IU's schedule is right there with all of those and they have looked more dominant than any of them (with maybe the exception of Miami)

[TTT 911]

Maybe, not recently, but several times has the underdog spoiled the season (kept the better team from going to Rose Bowl) of the better team in the Michigan vs Ohio State rivalry.  

[go iu bb 5,579]

7 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

The whole 'IU has the 106th ranked schedule'......I have no idea where that is coming from.  Sagarin had it at 77 entering yesterday, so that is going to get bumped up quite a bit.  Entering yesterday, SMU was at 64, Miami 59, and Clemson 51.  Given each team's opponents in Saturday, IU's schedule is right there with all of those and they have looked more dominant than any of them (with maybe the exception of Miami)

The 106 was from ESPN's system.

[RaceToTheTop 25,128]

I found where the '106th SOS' came from.  It was ESPN's FPI.  And AFTER the Ohio State game, IU's SOS jumped to #51 on it.  (FPI SOS stinks, FWIW -- IU did NOT have the 106th toughest schedule entering and there is no way SOS should jump 55 spots in week 13).

Also, FWIW, ESPN FPI projects IU with a 97.7% chance to make the playoffs (so basically, just need to beat Purdue).  

Percentage chance to make CFP:
Oregon 99.8%

Ohio State 99.5%

Penn State 98.9%

Texas 97.9%

Indiana 97.7%

Georgia 90.6%

Notre Dame 90.1%

MIami 79.6%

Tennessee 76.3%

Boise St 68%

SMU 62.5%

Alabama 37.4%

Iowa State 27.5%

Arizona State 25.9%

BYU 25.5%

Tulane 24.8%

Clemson 23.8%

South Carolina 23.1%

UNLV 15.9%
 

Army 12.6%

Colorado 6.7%

Texas A&M 6.3%

Ole Miss 6.2%

Everyone else is below 2%

[RaceToTheTop 25,128]

5 minutes ago, go iu bb said:

The 106 was from ESPN's system.

Yeah, found it.  And it's now 51 after the Ohio State game.  It's a sham ranking system.  Sagarin's is better.

[AZ Hoosier 6,607]

Bama didn't just lose, they got  blown out 24-3 to (then) 5-5 OK.
All things being equal, 3-24 looks worse than 15-38 even though the latter lost by 2 more points. Only being able to score 3 points is no bueno.

And the Bama loss was hung on them by a 5-5 team whereas IU lost to a 10-1 team ranked #2 nationally.

[AZ Hoosier 6,607]

The whole 'IU has the 106th ranked schedule'......I have no idea where that is coming from.  Sagarin had it at 77 entering yesterday, so that is going to get bumped up quite a bit.  Entering yesterday, SMU was at 64, Miami 59, and Clemson 51.  Given each team's opponents in Saturday, IU's schedule is right there with all of those and they have looked more dominant than any of them (with maybe the exception of Miami)

It’s pretty much anything the talking heads can do to disparage IU football. We get no respect, but we have a chance to prove ourselves vs a hapless Toiletmaker team… and 11-1 is a great record regardless of the SOS. The schedule is what it is, and IU has done very well against what we were given. Look at the margins of victory over some of these bowl-eligible teams.

[Hovadipo 55,242]

30 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

Yeah, found it.  And it's now 51 after the Ohio State game.  It's a sham ranking system.  Sagarin's is better.

It has our SOS higher than Oregon’s now though, so maybe we should weaponize it. 

[DChoosier 8,036]

A guy with Sports Illustrated updated his playoff projections and has IU at ND with the winner playing SMU. Would take that in a nanosecond.

[Hovadipo 55,242]

14 minutes ago, DChoosier said:

A guy with Sports Illustrated updated his playoff projections and has IU at ND with the winner playing SMU. Would take that in a nanosecond.

Austin Mock from The Athletic has IU @ ND too. Playing into Oregon though. 

[Uspshoosier 45,284]

Whoever made this is awesome. lol 

[OliviaPope40 6,460]

21 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Whoever made this is awesome. lol 

Did Paul Finebaum release this for them?

[spe317 478]

FYI Kevin Wilson out at Tulsa. They were not great on the field but sources mentioned the “culture” that wasn’t easily fixed in addition to on-field results leading to the decision. Sound familiar?

[RaceToTheTop 25,128]

19 minutes ago, spe317 said:

FYI Kevin Wilson out at Tulsa. They were not great on the field but sources mentioned the “culture” that wasn’t easily fixed in addition to on-field results leading to the decision. Sound familiar?

I can't see him getting another D1 head job.  Two times not only did he fail to win enough but he also produced toxic cultures.  He needs to stick to being an OC.

[IUHoosierJoe 1,111]

1 hour ago, spe317 said:

FYI Kevin Wilson out at Tulsa. They were not great on the field but sources mentioned the “culture” that wasn’t easily fixed in addition to on-field results leading to the decision. Sound familiar?

You'd think (hope) he would have learned something.  Guess not.