How many teams did Indiana beat with a winning record?

You seem like an unhappy and unpleasant human. All caps, no less. That’s an OHIO grad that you’re trying to take shots at.

Channeling your inner-Monroe, eh?

They beat Michigan, who is 7-5, as well as both Nebraska and Washington, both of whom are 6-6, but have a bowl remaining, and could end up 7-6. Yes, I've pointed out that Indiana had an unusually easy schedule, and missed most of the teams in the top have of the Big 10/18. That's the problem with having such a big conference.

Has nothing to do with Rourke. In fact proud of him. It Indiana was not that good

So Mr Clarivoiant, tell me what I’m doing right now? The only one angry here is you and I have not taken a shot at Rourke. But you can feel free to spew your own hate

All this does is prove Indiana does not deserve the national championship. It does not prove they didn't deserve a spot in the CFP. Some other schools who shall remain nameless proved prior to the CFP that they don't deserve the national championship.

Iowa State, literally last year.

Why anyone wants a tournament that doesn’t take the best teams befuddles me. Look at basketball, winning games doesnt mean much if you are a mid. But in football people want them magically rewarded just for beating bad teams. Just my $.02

I think that you misunderstood what I am saying. I'm not saying strength of schedule shouldn't matter. In college you make your own schedule so it must matter. In the NFL the first question if how many games did you win. That can't be the first question in college. What should matter, IMO, is how many games SHOULD a playoff caliber team win against your schedule. I'm on record many times saying past football committees have over weighted SOS. I'm on record saying basketball analysts counting quality wins like it is only thing that matters screws over mids. If you have more quality opponents then the expectation is that you SHOULD have more quality wins. I'm also on record saying that this years committee did the opposite and didn't weight SOS enough.

What I am saying is the actual outcome of a close game should matter. If we are selecting the best teams and that is the only criteria then it obviously has almost no effect. If we lines up for a last second field goal to win the game then if they make that kick or not should affect their playoff chances. Oddsmakers get paid because they are the best at knowing what teams are actually better. Do you think an oddsmaker cares hardly at all about if that kick goes through? Really? Do you think that? Do you think that it SHOULD matter if it does?

I mean the outcome of these playoff games DOES matter. If SMU gets a whole lot of lucky bounces and beats Penn State we won't say that Penn State played better all year and SMU got some crazy bounces and got almost all of the 50/50 calls by the refs. It is obvious that Penn State is the better team and will give us a better matchup in the nest round so they advance. The outcome matters and, IMO, it SHOULD matter.

They did have an easy schedule and it is arguable that because of that they didn't belong. But we certainly shouldn't look at all those wins against good but not great teams and say any playoff team could do it. Alabama, the team people most argue for, played 2 teams on that level, Vanderbilt and Oklahoma, and lost. You could argue that maybe Missouri, Auburn, and Wisconsin were and Alabama won those. I think Alabama is literally one of the best teams in the country. They would barely be an underdog against Oregon, Georgia, Texas, Penn State, Notre Dame, Ohio State or probably even favored against several of those teams. I definitely think the fact that Alabama was unable to consistently win games like that gave Indiana a better resume. While I am not going to personally argue for either team, as I have said above the resume pretty much has to be at least part of the equation, otherwise, what are we even doing?

I did not say that Indiana didn't belong. What I did say is that 18 teams is too big of a conference for only playing 9 games, because you are going to get some very uneven schedules. The MAC schedules were not exactly equal, but with only 12 teams, they weren't nearly as divergent as the Big Ten/18.

Bryce Houston, Keye Thompson and the defense. Literally last year.