If they allowed the first-round play-ins to "float" with a top eight seed bracket, and only forced the four bye schools to be among the top eight, it would be 1. Oregon vs 8. ASU, 2. Georgia vs 7. Boise State, [3. Texas vs 12. SMU]vs[6. OSU vs 9. UTK], [4. Penn State vs 11. Clemson]vs[5. Notre Dame vs Indiana]. So all of the first round tie ins would be the same, but it the #1 and #2 conference champion seeds do not get killer paths to the playoff while one of the CCG losers gets the easiest path.
Let's watch Ryan Day and Chip Kelly run the ball up the middle with a weak OL all game instead of using their explosive receivers and maximizing the speed they have.
And only use the speed option once, for a first down and never to be seen again, and only use pulling guards & tight ends three times, each time to extend a drive that then fizzles out with hat on hat inside and outside zone runs, to end in missed field goals.
@@moose4ku440 Why, the transitive principle, of course, that long time refuge of scoundrels -- they barely beat TSUN, and then they lost to the team that lost to TSUN, so that made losing to the Buckeyes into a bad loss.
They beat two top ten teams since Oregon and only gave up 5 offensive touchdowns in 6 games, with the only TD to Michigan being an absolute gift from a bad interception that gave them the ball like 2 yards out of the end zone. Do you even watch the games? They clearly stepped up after Oregon.
@@BenDehmlow they played an IU team who overachieved this year at home, and a PSU team they always beat. Is that supposed to impress me? Sorry it doesn’t.
The numbers are the numbers, doesn’t matter if those teams impress you. They’re both in the playoff and Penn State hung with the country’s #1 team and conference champion, scoring 37 on them. Not saying Ohio State’s defense was world beaters in every single game but your original position is just wrong and biased if you dismiss their performances in two quality wins
@@BenDehmlow "with the only TD to Michigan being an absolute gift from a bad interception that gave them the ball like 2 yards out of the end zone." This isn't really about is OSU's defense good or not but I just want to get this off my chest because I heard this statement A LOT about Michigan's only TD. It is true that the TD immediately followed the interception and the drive was officially 2 yards. But no one ever seemed to acknowledge that the reason the interception happened with Howard standing in his own end zone was because Michigan had just gone on a very long drive that ended inside the 5. That is all. Carry on.
First of all, the North dominated this bracket and clearly owns football right now. I don't know what they're playing below the Mason-Dixon line but it's not football. Texas is good, and by virtue of twice beating Texas I guess so is Georgia. But the rest of the South? Yuck. SMU, Clemson, Arizona State...such mediocrity. Those teams getting in is a great argument for not expanding to 16. Tennessee is okay. And it's a joke that anyone wants to argue for Alabama. They lost to Oklahoma and Vanderbilt people! And they lost to Tennessee, which is just on the edge of decent. Alabama is NOT GOOD! And furthermore, they did not even come close to earning it (unlike SMU). If the committee was going to give in to the threats of Sankey, they had to rank Bama ahead of SMU before the conference championships. They didn't do that. Maybe if SMU had been blown out by Clemson they could have massaged that, but it didn't happen. Now, as for Ohio State (because let's be honest, this is an Ohio State podcast), I think they're probably going to win the whole thing. I've been hammering these points all year: Best roster money and loyalty can buy, all-time great coach with a tremendous record, proved it on the field in Eugene (home field is worth 3 points)...I mean, it's pretty much a lock. They said Natty or Bust all year for a reason. It's because of how loaded they are and the Natty is the only thing that matters. Sure, everyone has a goal of winning every game but that's just not realistic, nor is it important. Keep your eye on the prize, the Natty. The ONLY pause I have about OSU's path is that their first game is at home. I know that Doug and Bill said it was dumb to legitimately believe you're better off on the road. I mean, I get it. Certainly conventional thinking. And I'm not worried about the crowd turning on the team. The OSU fans love and support their team and would never do anything to make their own feel unwelcome or uncomfortable or make their lives miserable. No, my concern is more about the weather. It will be cold and possibly windy or maybe some dusting of flurries. That is the great equalizer that really impacts OSU. But if they manage to survive the elements they get to domes and warm weather, and it's smooth sailing from there.
It's become en vogue to paint all OSU fans as "the lunatic fringe". Every portion of every fan base has a percentage who is extreme. OSU fans are passionate, and their standards are high, not too different from most programs in the south. This team has underachieved so far, period. So far, the Ryan Day era has not lived up to expectations. When that happens, there will be criticism. To the chagrin of ESPN and some of the national media, the criticism is warranted. How do you think Bama fans would react to losing to Auburn 4 years in a row? These kids are paid now, booing is a part of it. I don't like Bama. Like everyone else, I am tired of hearing everything that is "SEC". However in this situation, I think they have a valid argument. The ACC is a joke. They do not deserve two bids. I understand that Bama lost three games, two of the losses being pretty bad. You have to take into consideration the level of competition that these SEC teams play week to week and that setting teams up for letdowns. It also has an impact on health. When you have one team who's best wins are Pitt, Duke, Louisville, and TCU. Team two's best wins are UGA, Mizzou, LSU, and South Carolina. Strength of record is 15 vs 60. 9-3 in the SEC is > than 11-2 in the ACC.
"This team has underachieved so far, period. So far, the Ryan Day era has not lived up to expectations. " I mean, that's running counter to your prior point which is that OSU fans are sane, unless you're claiming to be part of the fringe, lunatic base. You say, "OSU fans are passionate, and their standards are high, not too different from most programs in the south," as though that's evidence that it's normal to expect to be Saban's Alabama. No one is Saban's Alabama, including now Alabama. Urban Meyer was historically great at OSU (.902 winning percentage). Did you think that would go on forever? Like Saban at Bama, Meyer (who only won one National Championship at OSU) set an impossibly high standard. Ryan Day's winning percentage at OSU is second only to Meyer (well, also to some guy named guy named Carroll Widdoes who coached for two years). Day has two Big Ten championships and has just made his FOURTH playoff appearance in six seasons. And he would have had a third Big Ten title except that the conference expanded which just means you need to adjust expectations. Adding Oregon (and Washington and USC) of course makes it harder to win the conference. Saying this team underachieved this year makes no sense to me unless you're coming at it from the standpoint of having irrationally high standards. Let's say OSU won the Big Ten and Oregon did not this year. Would that mean Oregon underachieved? So no matter what, any good team that doesn't win the conference underachieves? That's silly. OSU's baseline achievement for this year was host a playoff game and they are doing exactly that. And they could still win the whole thing! (And if you read my comment below, you will see that I am certain they will.) Ryan Day is meeting expectations. He might even be exceeding them, to be honest. He's simply not meeting the expectations of the irrational fans, which I will acknowledge it is redundant to say "irrational" when saying "fans" because fans are fanatics and inherently irrational.
@@BenMichigan It sounds like he is meeting your expectations, that's great to see. Ryan Day says that the program has 3 goals each year: 1.) Beat Michigan 2.) Win the Big 10 title 3.) Win the national title. I'll ask you this, which one of those goals has he met in the LAST 4 YEARS? I don't think beating Michigan every single year is attainable. I also don't think winning the national title every single year is the slightest bit attainable (I'd be happy with once every 8-10 years). I know, those are crazy expectations from a "lunatic fringe" fan. However, when you don't beat Michigan and don't win the Big 10 title 4 years in a row, you aren't living up to expectations. Mind you, they haven't even got to Indianapolis since 2020. Those aren't "irrational", 'lunatic", or "crazy" expectations. Those are Day's own goals, and I believe the expectations of most "sane" fans. My point is that the media, and apparently people like you, want to label a large portion of this fan base as "insane" or 'irrational" for the coach to meet his goals once every two years (Michigan), once every 3(ish) years (Big 10), and once every 8 to 10 years (National Title). People who are satisfied with the last 4 years, and who are satisfied with making the 12 team playoff are lowering the standard at OSU. Those people cannot say that OSU is a top 3 or 4 program any longer, they are a top 12 program. You say that if Oregon didn't join the Big 10 this year, that OSU would've won the Big 10 title. How do you know that? You put it in a context as if we should overlook not winning the BIG 10 because Oregon joined the conference. Oregon joined, OSU didn't even make it to Indy. Failed goal. OSU hasn't made it to Indy since 2020. But again, we can assume without Oregon, they would've won it. Gotcha. Not meeting expectations. Making the 12 team playoff is great, I am proud of them. But like most other objectives that Day supporters like to point out, there are a lot of coaches out there who would make the 12 team playoff with Ohio State. Especially with a 20 million dollar roster. Winning percentage? This is my favorite one. There are a lot of coaches out there who would have a great winning percentage against Minnesota and Northwestern if they coached at modern day Ohio State. Let's look at the talent acquainted games. What is Day's record in those? No, I am not asking for a .750 avg, but .500 avg would be nice. Most people in college football believe that OSU is the best football job in the country, at least top 3. Citing Day's accomplishments against inferior opponents does nothing for me. He is well below average in games when the other team has equal talent. Again, not meeting expectation. Is Ohio State elevating Ryan Day, or is Ryan Day elevating Ohio State? Ryan Day does less with more. He seems to be a great man, I've rooted for him to succeed, but unless he makes a deep run in these playoffs, this one measly irrational fan has seen enough. Day supporters act like Ohio State football is equal to North Carolina football. No history, no built in advantages. How dare we (irrational fans) not support this coach? If we move on, we will fall into the great abyss! What about the recruiting???? Ryan Day needs Ohio State a lot more than Ohio State needs him. Day has all the built in advantages, and I don't think it's irrational to ask him to meet those self imposed goals more frequently than what he has in the last 4 years. I know, that's crazy lunatic fringe talk. Who in the world would ask a coach to hit 50% of his goals (Michigan) 33% goals (Big 10), or 10% (National Title)? The lunatic fringe, that's who. STOP WITH THE EXCUSES
@@BuccoDan72 For four years, Day did not meet his stated goals--except we still have a TBD on the most important one. For his first two years, he met two out of three. Okay, in 2020 he didn't beat Michigan but he likely would have had Michigan played. But you just want to discount the first two years as though they no longer matter or are a part of his record. Day is 19-9 vs. top 25 teams, a .679 winning percentage. You say what about "talent acquainted games" which I assume means where talent is equitable? I don't know which games you would count. Alabama and Georgia are ranked higher in recruiting rankings than OSU almost every year so those probably don't count as equal talent. (If they do count as equal talent then so is Penn State). And then OSU is ranked ahead of everyone else so those don't count as equal talent either. I imagine you would say that because OSU recruits better than Oregon historically that means OSU should never lose to Oregon. Well, that's what I call unrealistic. You don't get to win every single game. They lost by 1 point on the road to what is the only undefeated team in the country. That's not failing expectations. "You say that if Oregon didn't join the Big 10 this year, that OSU would've won the Big 10 title. How do you know that?" Well, I don't know that, but without the expansion it seems very likely OSU would have won the East (they beat PSU and IU this year) and then would have faced some Big Ten West team, like Iowa I suppose, who they crushed earlier in the year. Just seems like a really good, solid assumption. "You put it in a context as if we should overlook not winning the BIG 10 because Oregon joined the conference." Yes! Exactly! There was no hidden message there to decode. I stated this: "except that the conference expanded which just means you need to adjust expectations." The expanded conference added other quality teams which makes winning the conference significantly harder than it used to be. This isn't the Big 2 and Little 8. The expanded playoffs means making the playoffs is the new measure of success for elite teams, as well as more important than winning the conference. There are seven non-conference champions in the playoffs. I mean, one of the big talking points about playoff expansion has been about how unimportant and devalued the conference championships are now. I understand that "Beat Michigan, win conference, win national title" are the stated goals, but that doesn't mean those are actually the expectations. It's just rhetoric. Literally every team has a goal of winning every game. Tressel won one national title in 10 years. Urban won one national title in seven years. Day is in year 6 and might do it this year! Tressel and Urban won the Big Ten when the biggest threat came from Paul Chryst and Mark Dantonio. They beat up on RichRod, Hoke, and early Harbaugh teams. Holding Day to _those_ standards is not reasonable. This would be like Michigan fans being upset that Michigan doesn't win games with a point a minute because that's what Yost did in the 1900s. These are different eras. Holding coaches to past standards from previous eras is _irrational._ Now, that doesn't mean that being irrational is uncommon. It's very common. Many fanbases suffer from this. It is in no way unique to Ohio State. But that's why one of Doug's stated goals (which is probably less attainable than Day's stated goals) is that fans should learn to enjoy their teams, because OSU fans can't seem to figure out how to do that.
Honestly, you're being somewhat condescending. What are talent acquainted games? Well, not Purdue or Northwestern. You cite recruiting rankings, and that Georgia and Bama are normally ranked ahead of us, and question if those are talent acquainted games? If you have to ask what defines a talent acquainted game, I don't need to have any other dialogue with you. Since Ohio State out recruits Oregon," I am sure you think Ohio State should never lose to Oregon". In my opinion, you're the worst type of fan. You look down at any other fan who dares to justifiably criticize. You want to be positive? Go for it. I highlighted in the previous post that beating Michigan every other year, winning the Big 10 every three years, and winning a national title every 10 years is acceptable, and you still want to label fans like me as "irrational"? Does that make you feel like you're superior? The context of your responses leads me to believe so. "Now that doesn't mean that being irrational is uncommon. It is very common. Many fan bases suffer from this." You talk about Doug saying to just enjoy this. This is what I want you to do. Go back and listen to the Kings of the North podcast from 11/29. You are watching a podcast where both hosts said that they would move on from Day. Are they irrational fans? Maybe irrational hosts? Let me guess mind reader, they are just playing it up to us irrational fans? In 2020 he would have "likely" beat Michigan. Just as he was "likely" to beat Michigan two weeks ago? Day would have "likely" beat Penn State in the Big 10 title game this year. We "likely" beat Penn State even though we haven't even been to Indy in 4 years. You like assuming things. I am glad that "rational" "intelligent" fans, like you can identify what goals are "stated" and what goals are "rhetoric". Making the playoffs is more important than winning your conference? What type of logic is that? If you win the Big 10, you're obviously in the playoffs. In the future, winning your conference will be important, it should get you a more advantageous path to winning the title. That was an egregious error on the committee's part, and will undoubtedly be fixed in the near future. If Day beats Michigan, instead of playing Tennessee and Oregon, they are likely playing SMU and Boise. So again, tell me, how is just making the playoffs more important than finishing at the top of your conference? You don't think Urban was a big reason why you look at Harbaugh's early tenure as "the early Harbaugh years"? Giving Urban no credit for keeping his foot on Harbaugh's throat is lunacy. TBD, right? Pal, I pray that I am wrong. I pray that you're right. But what I am sure of is that if things go sideways this month you will still look down on any fan who questions if we have the right coach. You will "be a fan until the end" and "will support the team no matter what" as if the "irrational" fans won't do the same.
@@BuccoDan72 Okay. Going point by point is going to be useless now. Some of your responses above were reasonable, some of them missed what I was saying. I think this has mostly boiled down to this: Ryan Day inherited three goals as the coach of OSU, which have long-been the stated OSU goals--beat Michigan, win the conference, win the National Championship. Are those goals, all of which were achieved by Woody, Tressel, and Urban, the actual standard just because they are stated out loud (much in the same way that Michigan says the goals are beat OSU, win the conference, win the National Championship)? You say, yes it is. The reason those are the expectations is because those are the stated goals. You can even further state they are attainable at OSU because three out of the last six coaches have done it (not including Fickell). But I would counter that the other three all achieved two of those goals, lacking only the national championship. Earl Bruce coached nine seasons and won 9 to 11 games every year except the last one when he won 6. So he got fired when his teams couldn't win against the lesser teams. Cooper--who only beat Michigan twice!--coached 13 years, took _six_ years to get above 8 wins, and then after a great six year run, was fired after he went a combined 14-10 over his final two seasons. So he got fired when his teams couldn't win against the lesser teams. Ryan Day beat Michigan and then lost to historically great Michigan teams. This year is an obvious exception to that. Criticism is clearly warranted! But that is _one_ game. I know he has lost _other_ games but we already had our debate above about how realistic it is to "expect" to win against Georgia, Clemson, Oregon, Alabama where he is 1-5 (and we discount his Rose Bowl and all his wins over PSU). So, yeah, I'm of the mind that he is very much meeting the standard. I suppose he's not meeting the "expectation" which I label as aspirational. Sorry that I leaned into the word "irrational." It seems to have been overly offensive, not my intent.
I love your explanation why 12 teams (as flawed as it is) is an improvement
If there is a Penn State/ND vs. Oregon final, Greg Stankey will be breaking out the nuclear codes..
Can someone explain how the mountain west gets an auto bid?
If they allowed the first-round play-ins to "float" with a top eight seed bracket, and only forced the four bye schools to be among the top eight, it would be 1. Oregon vs 8. ASU, 2. Georgia vs 7. Boise State, [3. Texas vs 12. SMU]vs[6. OSU vs 9. UTK], [4. Penn State vs 11. Clemson]vs[5. Notre Dame vs Indiana]. So all of the first round tie ins would be the same, but it the #1 and #2 conference champion seeds do not get killer paths to the playoff while one of the CCG losers gets the easiest path.
I was right about one thing: Indiana at ND. The committee intentionally slid ND down to match them up with Indiana.
Georgia is so lucky. Poor Oregon
Might be NDs chance to win a big game playing against Stockton (most likely)
Let's watch Ryan Day and Chip Kelly run the ball up the middle with a weak OL all game instead of using their explosive receivers and maximizing the speed they have.
And only use the speed option once, for a first down and never to be seen again, and only use pulling guards & tight ends three times, each time to extend a drive that then fizzles out with hat on hat inside and outside zone runs, to end in missed field goals.
@BruceMcFarling Facts
AZ St and Boise St getting bye s is a joke.
It sure seems like the committee is saying who you play doesnt matter just how many losses you have.
Also how bad those losses are. Two bad losses -- you are out.
Explain Indiana with 1 loss all the way down at 10 then
@@moose4ku440 Why, the transitive principle, of course, that long time refuge of scoundrels -- they barely beat TSUN, and then they lost to the team that lost to TSUN, so that made losing to the Buckeyes into a bad loss.
13-0 Oregon...the KING of the North. Go Ducks 🦆
How has OSU’s defense shown to be better since Oregon? Who have they played to showcase that? UM had a horrible offense.
They beat two top ten teams since Oregon and only gave up 5 offensive touchdowns in 6 games, with the only TD to Michigan being an absolute gift from a bad interception that gave them the ball like 2 yards out of the end zone. Do you even watch the games? They clearly stepped up after Oregon.
Penn state and Indiana.
@@BenDehmlow they played an IU team who overachieved this year at home, and a PSU team they always beat. Is that supposed to impress me? Sorry it doesn’t.
The numbers are the numbers, doesn’t matter if those teams impress you. They’re both in the playoff and Penn State hung with the country’s #1 team and conference champion, scoring 37 on them. Not saying Ohio State’s defense was world beaters in every single game but your original position is just wrong and biased if you dismiss their performances in two quality wins
@@BenDehmlow "with the only TD to Michigan being an absolute gift from a bad interception that gave them the ball like 2 yards out of the end zone."
This isn't really about is OSU's defense good or not but I just want to get this off my chest because I heard this statement A LOT about Michigan's only TD. It is true that the TD immediately followed the interception and the drive was officially 2 yards. But no one ever seemed to acknowledge that the reason the interception happened with Howard standing in his own end zone was because Michigan had just gone on a very long drive that ended inside the 5.
That is all. Carry on.
You're punished for not making your conference championship game as it should be.
First of all, the North dominated this bracket and clearly owns football right now. I don't know what they're playing below the Mason-Dixon line but it's not football. Texas is good, and by virtue of twice beating Texas I guess so is Georgia. But the rest of the South? Yuck. SMU, Clemson, Arizona State...such mediocrity. Those teams getting in is a great argument for not expanding to 16. Tennessee is okay. And it's a joke that anyone wants to argue for Alabama. They lost to Oklahoma and Vanderbilt people! And they lost to Tennessee, which is just on the edge of decent. Alabama is NOT GOOD! And furthermore, they did not even come close to earning it (unlike SMU). If the committee was going to give in to the threats of Sankey, they had to rank Bama ahead of SMU before the conference championships. They didn't do that. Maybe if SMU had been blown out by Clemson they could have massaged that, but it didn't happen.
Now, as for Ohio State (because let's be honest, this is an Ohio State podcast), I think they're probably going to win the whole thing. I've been hammering these points all year: Best roster money and loyalty can buy, all-time great coach with a tremendous record, proved it on the field in Eugene (home field is worth 3 points)...I mean, it's pretty much a lock. They said Natty or Bust all year for a reason. It's because of how loaded they are and the Natty is the only thing that matters. Sure, everyone has a goal of winning every game but that's just not realistic, nor is it important. Keep your eye on the prize, the Natty. The ONLY pause I have about OSU's path is that their first game is at home. I know that Doug and Bill said it was dumb to legitimately believe you're better off on the road. I mean, I get it. Certainly conventional thinking. And I'm not worried about the crowd turning on the team. The OSU fans love and support their team and would never do anything to make their own feel unwelcome or uncomfortable or make their lives miserable. No, my concern is more about the weather. It will be cold and possibly windy or maybe some dusting of flurries. That is the great equalizer that really impacts OSU. But if they manage to survive the elements they get to domes and warm weather, and it's smooth sailing from there.
It's become en vogue to paint all OSU fans as "the lunatic fringe". Every portion of every fan base has a percentage who is extreme. OSU fans are passionate, and their standards are high, not too different from most programs in the south. This team has underachieved so far, period. So far, the Ryan Day era has not lived up to expectations. When that happens, there will be criticism. To the chagrin of ESPN and some of the national media, the criticism is warranted. How do you think Bama fans would react to losing to Auburn 4 years in a row? These kids are paid now, booing is a part of it.
I don't like Bama. Like everyone else, I am tired of hearing everything that is "SEC". However in this situation, I think they have a valid argument. The ACC is a joke. They do not deserve two bids. I understand that Bama lost three games, two of the losses being pretty bad. You have to take into consideration the level of competition that these SEC teams play week to week and that setting teams up for letdowns. It also has an impact on health. When you have one team who's best wins are Pitt, Duke, Louisville, and TCU. Team two's best wins are UGA, Mizzou, LSU, and South Carolina. Strength of record is 15 vs 60. 9-3 in the SEC is > than 11-2 in the ACC.
"This team has underachieved so far, period. So far, the Ryan Day era has not lived up to expectations. "
I mean, that's running counter to your prior point which is that OSU fans are sane, unless you're claiming to be part of the fringe, lunatic base.
You say, "OSU fans are passionate, and their standards are high, not too different from most programs in the south," as though that's evidence that it's normal to expect to be Saban's Alabama. No one is Saban's Alabama, including now Alabama.
Urban Meyer was historically great at OSU (.902 winning percentage). Did you think that would go on forever? Like Saban at Bama, Meyer (who only won one National Championship at OSU) set an impossibly high standard. Ryan Day's winning percentage at OSU is second only to Meyer (well, also to some guy named guy named Carroll Widdoes who coached for two years). Day has two Big Ten championships and has just made his FOURTH playoff appearance in six seasons. And he would have had a third Big Ten title except that the conference expanded which just means you need to adjust expectations. Adding Oregon (and Washington and USC) of course makes it harder to win the conference.
Saying this team underachieved this year makes no sense to me unless you're coming at it from the standpoint of having irrationally high standards. Let's say OSU won the Big Ten and Oregon did not this year. Would that mean Oregon underachieved? So no matter what, any good team that doesn't win the conference underachieves? That's silly. OSU's baseline achievement for this year was host a playoff game and they are doing exactly that. And they could still win the whole thing! (And if you read my comment below, you will see that I am certain they will.) Ryan Day is meeting expectations. He might even be exceeding them, to be honest. He's simply not meeting the expectations of the irrational fans, which I will acknowledge it is redundant to say "irrational" when saying "fans" because fans are fanatics and inherently irrational.
@@BenMichigan It sounds like he is meeting your expectations, that's great to see.
Ryan Day says that the program has 3 goals each year: 1.) Beat Michigan 2.) Win the Big 10 title 3.) Win the national title. I'll ask you this, which one of those goals has he met in the LAST 4 YEARS?
I don't think beating Michigan every single year is attainable. I also don't think winning the national title every single year is the slightest bit attainable (I'd be happy with once every 8-10 years). I know, those are crazy expectations from a "lunatic fringe" fan. However, when you don't beat Michigan and don't win the Big 10 title 4 years in a row, you aren't living up to expectations. Mind you, they haven't even got to Indianapolis since 2020. Those aren't "irrational", 'lunatic", or "crazy" expectations. Those are Day's own goals, and I believe the expectations of most "sane" fans. My point is that the media, and apparently people like you, want to label a large portion of this fan base as "insane" or 'irrational" for the coach to meet his goals once every two years (Michigan), once every 3(ish) years (Big 10), and once every 8 to 10 years (National Title). People who are satisfied with the last 4 years, and who are satisfied with making the 12 team playoff are lowering the standard at OSU. Those people cannot say that OSU is a top 3 or 4 program any longer, they are a top 12 program.
You say that if Oregon didn't join the Big 10 this year, that OSU would've won the Big 10 title. How do you know that? You put it in a context as if we should overlook not winning the BIG 10 because Oregon joined the conference. Oregon joined, OSU didn't even make it to Indy. Failed goal. OSU hasn't made it to Indy since 2020. But again, we can assume without Oregon, they would've won it. Gotcha. Not meeting expectations.
Making the 12 team playoff is great, I am proud of them. But like most other objectives that Day supporters like to point out, there are a lot of coaches out there who would make the 12 team playoff with Ohio State. Especially with a 20 million dollar roster.
Winning percentage? This is my favorite one. There are a lot of coaches out there who would have a great winning percentage against Minnesota and Northwestern if they coached at modern day Ohio State. Let's look at the talent acquainted games. What is Day's record in those? No, I am not asking for a .750 avg, but .500 avg would be nice. Most people in college football believe that OSU is the best football job in the country, at least top 3. Citing Day's accomplishments against inferior opponents does nothing for me. He is well below average in games when the other team has equal talent. Again, not meeting expectation.
Is Ohio State elevating Ryan Day, or is Ryan Day elevating Ohio State? Ryan Day does less with more. He seems to be a great man, I've rooted for him to succeed, but unless he makes a deep run in these playoffs, this one measly irrational fan has seen enough.
Day supporters act like Ohio State football is equal to North Carolina football. No history, no built in advantages. How dare we (irrational fans) not support this coach? If we move on, we will fall into the great abyss! What about the recruiting???? Ryan Day needs Ohio State a lot more than Ohio State needs him. Day has all the built in advantages, and I don't think it's irrational to ask him to meet those self imposed goals more frequently than what he has in the last 4 years. I know, that's crazy lunatic fringe talk. Who in the world would ask a coach to hit 50% of his goals (Michigan) 33% goals (Big 10), or 10% (National Title)? The lunatic fringe, that's who. STOP WITH THE EXCUSES
@@BuccoDan72 For four years, Day did not meet his stated goals--except we still have a TBD on the most important one.
For his first two years, he met two out of three. Okay, in 2020 he didn't beat Michigan but he likely would have had Michigan played. But you just want to discount the first two years as though they no longer matter or are a part of his record.
Day is 19-9 vs. top 25 teams, a .679 winning percentage. You say what about "talent acquainted games" which I assume means where talent is equitable? I don't know which games you would count. Alabama and Georgia are ranked higher in recruiting rankings than OSU almost every year so those probably don't count as equal talent. (If they do count as equal talent then so is Penn State).
And then OSU is ranked ahead of everyone else so those don't count as equal talent either. I imagine you would say that because OSU recruits better than Oregon historically that means OSU should never lose to Oregon. Well, that's what I call unrealistic. You don't get to win every single game. They lost by 1 point on the road to what is the only undefeated team in the country. That's not failing expectations.
"You say that if Oregon didn't join the Big 10 this year, that OSU would've won the Big 10 title. How do you know that?"
Well, I don't know that, but without the expansion it seems very likely OSU would have won the East (they beat PSU and IU this year) and then would have faced some Big Ten West team, like Iowa I suppose, who they crushed earlier in the year. Just seems like a really good, solid assumption.
"You put it in a context as if we should overlook not winning the BIG 10 because Oregon joined the conference."
Yes! Exactly! There was no hidden message there to decode. I stated this: "except that the conference expanded which just means you need to adjust expectations."
The expanded conference added other quality teams which makes winning the conference significantly harder than it used to be. This isn't the Big 2 and Little 8. The expanded playoffs means making the playoffs is the new measure of success for elite teams, as well as more important than winning the conference. There are seven non-conference champions in the playoffs. I mean, one of the big talking points about playoff expansion has been about how unimportant and devalued the conference championships are now.
I understand that "Beat Michigan, win conference, win national title" are the stated goals, but that doesn't mean those are actually the expectations. It's just rhetoric. Literally every team has a goal of winning every game.
Tressel won one national title in 10 years. Urban won one national title in seven years. Day is in year 6 and might do it this year!
Tressel and Urban won the Big Ten when the biggest threat came from Paul Chryst and Mark Dantonio. They beat up on RichRod, Hoke, and early Harbaugh teams. Holding Day to _those_ standards is not reasonable. This would be like Michigan fans being upset that Michigan doesn't win games with a point a minute because that's what Yost did in the 1900s. These are different eras. Holding coaches to past standards from previous eras is _irrational._
Now, that doesn't mean that being irrational is uncommon. It's very common. Many fanbases suffer from this. It is in no way unique to Ohio State. But that's why one of Doug's stated goals (which is probably less attainable than Day's stated goals) is that fans should learn to enjoy their teams, because OSU fans can't seem to figure out how to do that.
Honestly, you're being somewhat condescending. What are talent acquainted games? Well, not Purdue or Northwestern. You cite recruiting rankings, and that Georgia and Bama are normally ranked ahead of us, and question if those are talent acquainted games? If you have to ask what defines a talent acquainted game, I don't need to have any other dialogue with you.
Since Ohio State out recruits Oregon," I am sure you think Ohio State should never lose to Oregon". In my opinion, you're the worst type of fan. You look down at any other fan who dares to justifiably criticize. You want to be positive? Go for it. I highlighted in the previous post that beating Michigan every other year, winning the Big 10 every three years, and winning a national title every 10 years is acceptable, and you still want to label fans like me as "irrational"? Does that make you feel like you're superior? The context of your responses leads me to believe so. "Now that doesn't mean that being irrational is uncommon. It is very common. Many fan bases suffer from this." You talk about Doug saying to just enjoy this. This is what I want you to do. Go back and listen to the Kings of the North podcast from 11/29. You are watching a podcast where both hosts said that they would move on from Day. Are they irrational fans? Maybe irrational hosts? Let me guess mind reader, they are just playing it up to us irrational fans?
In 2020 he would have "likely" beat Michigan. Just as he was "likely" to beat Michigan two weeks ago? Day would have "likely" beat Penn State in the Big 10 title game this year. We "likely" beat Penn State even though we haven't even been to Indy in 4 years. You like assuming things.
I am glad that "rational" "intelligent" fans, like you can identify what goals are "stated" and what goals are "rhetoric".
Making the playoffs is more important than winning your conference? What type of logic is that? If you win the Big 10, you're obviously in the playoffs. In the future, winning your conference will be important, it should get you a more advantageous path to winning the title. That was an egregious error on the committee's part, and will undoubtedly be fixed in the near future. If Day beats Michigan, instead of playing Tennessee and Oregon, they are likely playing SMU and Boise. So again, tell me, how is just making the playoffs more important than finishing at the top of your conference?
You don't think Urban was a big reason why you look at Harbaugh's early tenure as "the early Harbaugh years"? Giving Urban no credit for keeping his foot on Harbaugh's throat is lunacy.
TBD, right? Pal, I pray that I am wrong. I pray that you're right. But what I am sure of is that if things go sideways this month you will still look down on any fan who questions if we have the right coach. You will "be a fan until the end" and "will support the team no matter what" as if the "irrational" fans won't do the same.
@@BuccoDan72 Okay. Going point by point is going to be useless now. Some of your responses above were reasonable, some of them missed what I was saying. I think this has mostly boiled down to this: Ryan Day inherited three goals as the coach of OSU, which have long-been the stated OSU goals--beat Michigan, win the conference, win the National Championship.
Are those goals, all of which were achieved by Woody, Tressel, and Urban, the actual standard just because they are stated out loud (much in the same way that Michigan says the goals are beat OSU, win the conference, win the National Championship)?
You say, yes it is. The reason those are the expectations is because those are the stated goals. You can even further state they are attainable at OSU because three out of the last six coaches have done it (not including Fickell).
But I would counter that the other three all achieved two of those goals, lacking only the national championship. Earl Bruce coached nine seasons and won 9 to 11 games every year except the last one when he won 6. So he got fired when his teams couldn't win against the lesser teams. Cooper--who only beat Michigan twice!--coached 13 years, took _six_ years to get above 8 wins, and then after a great six year run, was fired after he went a combined 14-10 over his final two seasons. So he got fired when his teams couldn't win against the lesser teams.
Ryan Day beat Michigan and then lost to historically great Michigan teams. This year is an obvious exception to that. Criticism is clearly warranted! But that is _one_ game. I know he has lost _other_ games but we already had our debate above about how realistic it is to "expect" to win against Georgia, Clemson, Oregon, Alabama where he is 1-5 (and we discount his Rose Bowl and all his wins over PSU).
So, yeah, I'm of the mind that he is very much meeting the standard. I suppose he's not meeting the "expectation" which I label as aspirational. Sorry that I leaned into the word "irrational." It seems to have been overly offensive, not my intent.