2016 College Football Season

[AWvsCBsteeeerike3]

Right but the point of replay is to 'get it right ' what people should argue is the point of replay is get it right sometimes.

Sure. I'm not convinced that they got it wrong, and I haven't seen anything to show otherwise. Is it questionable? Sure. I think a case could be made either way. If they hadn't given it to him, then Ohio State fans would be saying the same thing that you're saying ("replay sucks"). I don't think this is an example of replay failing. I think this is a case of replay being inconclusive.

but going back to my original point, replay does not guarantee a correct call. And if people argue for replay based on thst logic, they should account for times where it won't result in a conclusively correct call.

[AWvsCBsteeeerike3]

Why even play conference games if conf. Championships mean nothing?

[Socnorb11]

Tosu has a good resume, no doubt. But to put them in over the b1g champ is absurd. Especially when they just squeaked by michigan in columbus. Can we not make the argument that michigan is the better team and wins that game 7 times out of 10? Sure you could just make the argument osu won and that's all that matters, but they did not win the b1g yet will go into the playoffs ahead of thr b1g champ.....

Winning the B10 championship shouldn't be the only factor, in my opinion. Body of work matters. Ohio State's only loss is by 3 points, to a really good Penn State team, on the road. Ohio State also beat the current #8 team (on the road) and the current #6 team (on the road) and the current #3 team. They are 1 of only 4 teams with zero or one loss.

I can't fathom why any other team would be more deserving.

[Socnorb11]

Right but the point of replay is to 'get it right ' what people should argue is the point of replay is get it right sometimes.

Sure. I'm not convinced that they got it wrong, and I haven't seen anything to show otherwise. Is it questionable? Sure. I think a case could be made either way. If they hadn't given it to him, then Ohio State fans would be saying the same thing that you're saying ("replay sucks"). I don't think this is an example of replay failing. I think this is a case of replay being inconclusive.

but going back to my original point, replay does not guarantee a correct call. And if people argue for replay based on thst logic, they should account for times where it won't result in a conclusively correct call.

I think it gives you a much better chance of getting the call right.

[Socnorb11]

Why even play conference games if conf. Championships mean nothing?

I think conference championships are important, but not necessarily the only deciding factor in the championship series.

[AWvsCBsteeeerike3]

Right but the point of replay is to 'get it right ' what people should argue is the point of replay is get it right sometimes.

Sure. I'm not convinced that they got it wrong, and I haven't seen anything to show otherwise. Is it questionable? Sure. I think a case could be made either way. If they hadn't given it to him, then Ohio State fans would be saying the same thing that you're saying ("replay sucks"). I don't think this is an example of replay failing. I think this is a case of replay being inconclusive.

but going back to my original point, replay does not guarantee a correct call. And if people argue for replay based on thst logic, they should account for times where it won't result in a conclusively correct call.

I think it gives you a much better chance of getting the call right.

Not good enough, imo. Guarantee results or don't bother.

[Socnorb11]

Right but the point of replay is to 'get it right ' what people should argue is the point of replay is get it right sometimes.

Sure. I'm not convinced that they got it wrong, and I haven't seen anything to show otherwise. Is it questionable? Sure. I think a case could be made either way. If they hadn't given it to him, then Ohio State fans would be saying the same thing that you're saying ("replay sucks"). I don't think this is an example of replay failing. I think this is a case of replay being inconclusive.

but going back to my original point, replay does not guarantee a correct call. And if people argue for replay based on thst logic, they should account for times where it won't result in a conclusively correct call.

I think it gives you a much better chance of getting the call right.

Not good enough, imo. Guarantee results or don't bother.

That's weird logic.

Why not just use 3 officials then, rather than paying 7 of them? Sure, 7 will give you a better chance of calling the game correctly, but it doesn't guarantee results, so why bother?

[MrCrowesGarden]

Yeah, there's not a great view that I know of. Have you seen one that's right on the first down line? Based on what I've seen, I'm not sure how it can be conclusive that the ball didn't get there.

Either way, Michigan turned the ball over 3 times. I'm not going to conclude that they lost because of a questionable mark that none of us can be sure of, even after replay.

That was only part of it though. OSU got just two penalties for 6 yards the whole game. They also got away with PI in overtime.

On an unrelated note, this is the first time the committee will have a tough decision to make.

Eh. I'm sure Michigan got away with some stuff, too.

I actually think this is an easy decision for the committee. As far as I can tell, there will only be 4 teams with zero or one loss. All 4 of those teams should get in (Ohio State, Clemson, Alabama, Washington).

I watched and thought it was pretty one sided. I have no interest in either team.

Also, if that's your standard, Western Michigan is undefeated.

[Socnorb11]

Also, if that's your standard, Western Michigan is undefeated.

OK.

Who do you think should get in? You think there are other teams with a better resume than Ohio State, Alabama, Washington, and Clemson?

[MrCrowesGarden]

I think if Penn State wins the Big Ten, they will.