Optimistic Buckeye Pessimist's picture

Optimistic Buckeye Pessimist

Member since 30 September 2011 | Blog


  • NFL TEAM: Browns
  • NHL TEAM: Blue Jackets
  • NBA TEAM: Cavs
  • MLB TEAM: Indians

Recent Activity

Comment 31 Dec 2016

Correct. However they deal with perception of who people think will win and are willing to risk their own money to say so. Most importantly, people that bet to make or support a living wait until the end to place their bets. This movement suggests that people who bet for a living think Clemson is the better play here, continuing to bet on Clemson until they would win the game. These professionals aren't 100% accurate, but they are better than you and me and they feel strongly that Clemson to win is a good use of their money. These guys are basically analysts that back up their picks with their money. 

Comment 31 Dec 2016

Fyi. Additional discussion here:


not a good omen though. 

Comment 31 Dec 2016

Doesn't bode well for us. If you believe that professionals wait until the end to place their bets, this is saying that the sharps and pro money is taking Clemson, and taking them basically to win. 

Comment 09 Dec 2016

I can make that happen. I'll take cash. Let me know when you're ready. 

Comment 09 Dec 2016

Pretty big stretch but I guess I can see that. 

Comment 09 Dec 2016

De La Salle?  

Are you serious Clark?  If you knew him, you'd know better. 

Comment 09 Dec 2016

1. Washington had one less than other B1G programs not in the playoff. 

2. Rematch in 4 team playoff is far more difficult I agree  

1./3. You originally lobbied for conference champs, but now the questions you've raised can be easily answered with "because they did or did not win their respective conference."

Comment 09 Dec 2016

1. Those teams had at least 12 chances to make their own case. Nonetheless, we can't be the only team in the country to have fluky losses. The fact of the matter here is that when you lose a game, you also lose control of your own destiny. Those are the  rules at the beginning at the season and they don't change during the season or on a per team basis. FWIW, if the playoffs expand, my opinion is that conference championship games would disappear. 

2. Regardless of how many other top teams one team has played, the point is about rematches. No one wants those other than the losing side. Do you want to play Michigan again?  

3. One loss didn't end anything for anyone. The second loss did. Regarding a second loss, see point 1 of this post. 

Comment 09 Dec 2016

I disagree and look at this year to make my points. 

Regarding your 1, OSU was not given this opportunity despite the fact that they tied to win their division. 

2. If you look at teams 5-8 this year, OSU played all of them this year. I would argue giving these teams a rematch devalues the regular season outcome. 

3. OSU is at 3 because they played and beat OU and OU is out because of this. If you let OU in, not only have you devalued a regular season game, but you've removed the incentive given to the winner of the game to schedule this. With 9 conference games, my guess is most ADs would not schedule home and home with marquee names, but would instead take the easy W and the revenue. 

Comment 04 Dec 2016

I'm not sure, but think it's worth noting that they were in the finals last year. 

Comment 04 Dec 2016

 I think that's one of the most interesting things about this debate. Will the committee ignore a loss in favor of a head-to-head matchup and a conference championship? 

Comment 04 Dec 2016

But then you'd be ignoring a head to head match up that actually happened. 

Im not just around to play counterpoint. In fact, I though we were a slam dunk before PSU won. I didn't see PSU winning because I don't think they're great. However, they won and in doing so, made a strong case for their inclusion - the strongest point being that they beat us. But their case is t without weakness. They do have 2 losses. I am just a bit amused that the points in favor of PSU and UW are the same things we argued a few years ago and beyond in our own favor. Can't have it both ways. 

Comment 04 Dec 2016

I have a hard time seeing the PAC 12 conference champ, with a similar record as other conference champs and playoff teams, getting left out. 

We can harp on our resume all we want, but penn state has a pretty good resume too. I think the final spot is between OSU and PSU. Now the committee must set the precedent for the future comparing overall records, head to head, in conference play and conference titles, and out of conference/early season performance.