Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Does that constitute complaining?  Seems like just pointing out something factual to me.  

Only I don't think it is factual as we discussed early on in this thread.  IF Michigan was 10-2 with a home win over Incarnate Word instead of a road loss to Oklahoma, I don't think they'd be in anyway.  Their loss to #1 Ohio State would be forgiven but their best win would still be Washington (I think).  Washington is a 5-4/8-4 unranked team.  I just don't think that would get them in this year because there are 10-2 teams with better wins.  

Texas is clearly different.  If you replaced their road loss to tOSU with a home win over Incarnate Word then they'd be a 10-2/6-2 team with wins over ranked OU, Vandy, and aTm teams and a "quality" loss at Georgia.  Their only weakness would be their bad loss to Florida.  Their H2H wins over Vandy and Oklahoma would probably keep them above the Commodores and Sooners and they would likely be in.  

But I do like your point about there also being a question as to whether or not it's good for OU and OSU.

This is an important point because obviously 'benefit to the winner' is the offset to 'detriment to the loser' in the risk/reward calculus.  

For Ohio State this year, there is no material benefit but Ohio State is an unusual case as an undefeated team.  If you replaced the win over Texas with a win over Incarnate Word, Ohio State *MIGHT* drop to #2 but it would be irrelevant because they'd still be playing a CG against #1 for the #1 seed so no benefit.  

Oklahoma is a different question:
In the last CFP rankings the Sooners were the highest ranked 2-loss team.  Would OU be the highest ranked 2-loss team without the Michigan win?  I don't know.  They'd still have better wins than Notre Dame and a H2H win over Bama but I don't know.  Their case is definitely stronger WITH the Michigan win than it would be WITHOUT it.  

It just struck me that there is a team that has a pretty good chance to benefit from Circumstances pretty similar to Texas a few years back.

if Miami had not scheduled Notre Dame, any argument for the playoff would be close to dead in the water. But now they have the same record, our resume that isn’t notably worse than the Irish, and there’s a decent chance that forces the committee to put the hurricanes above them in most any configuration. And that might make all the difference this year.

Miami is ranked behind ND by a few spots, with the exact same record and a H-H win. 

Now it's been NFL'd.  I'm not speaking from experience since I don't root for an NFL team, but it strikes me that for fans of 31 teams, the season ends in tears every year.  There's only one goal, and only one team can achieve it.  Everybody else fails.  That used to be what cfb cleverly avoided, but has fallen victim to now. 

The only problem with your analogy is that out of 32 NFL teams you have a lot of variety on who wins the SB every year. Sure, there was a bit where the Patriots were pretty dominate, and then you have KC and the Eagles now, and at times past you had SF and DAL and some other teams.  But if you look at it over a 30 year cycle there are a lot of teams winning it, or at least playing for it.  Even within the conferences you have teams that win their conference that never sniff the SB.  

In College FB it's mainly about 5 teams that win in any given year, 5 that win in the other 50% of the time, and about 10-15 who *may* have a slim chance of even competing for it every 20 years.  Look at the last 30 year cycle.  It's all Ohio State, Alabama, USC, OU, Texas, USC.  Florida and Florida state are the only "new comers" in this group with 3.  Clemson may be about the only outlier.  
BRAD has pointed this out many times but if you're a fan of almost any other school outside of the Top Ten you have almost no chance.  And even when you have a good/great season you have to beat the competition and then the polls to have any shot.  

Both undoubtedly getting a big leg up because of the helmet they wear. Same as it ever was.

That's fine but your opinion is no more nor less valid than their opinion that they WOULD get in.  I don't view a Michigan fan opining that this could be the case, as complaining.  Do you?

There are other ways to complain, but simply voicing that opinion, isn't one of them.

And as to debating that opinion, well, Notre Dame is an excellent example of a 2-loss team that lost to the only two good teams it played and yet is still very much in the CFP discussion.  I think Michigan would be as well.

Essentially the difference this year is losing to Oklahoma in September vs losing to Oklahoma in one of the CFP play-in games. 

I was listening to the Michigan podcasts after they lost to OSU, and they said that they don't want to play those games anymore because they'd be in the playoffs without the Oklahoma loss. One of them pointed out that Oklahoma really didn't gain anything by beating Michigan either, since they'd be a 2-loss SEC team either way. So I posed the question in this here thread that Medina started as to whether or not OSU and Oklahoma gained anything by beating these teams instead of North Texas and Central Michigan.

So flip the script... You say that if they'd scheduled a patsy, then they'd be 10-2 but they'd have an extraordinarily weak 10-2 resume, as medina points out below. 

However, what if they'd scheduled Oklahoma, and won? Now they're still 10-2 but they actually have a marquee win on their resume. 

Only I don't think it is factual as we discussed early on in this thread.  IF Michigan was 10-2 with a home win over Incarnate Word instead of a road loss to Oklahoma, I don't think they'd be in anyway.  Their loss to #1 Ohio State would be forgiven but their best win would still be Washington (I think).  Washington is a 5-4/8-4 unranked team.  I just don't think that would get them in this year because there are 10-2 teams with better wins. 

Texas is clearly different.  If you replaced their road loss to tOSU with a home win over Incarnate Word then they'd be a 10-2/6-2 team with wins over ranked OU, Vandy, and aTm teams and a "quality" loss at Georgia.  Their only weakness would be their bad loss to Florida.  Their H2H wins over Vandy and Oklahoma would probably keep them above the Commodores and Sooners and they would likely be in.  This is an important point because obviously 'benefit to the winner' is the offset to 'detriment to the loser' in the risk/reward calculus. 

For Ohio State this year, there is no material benefit but Ohio State is an unusual case as an undefeated team.  If you replaced the win over Texas with a win over Incarnate Word, Ohio State *MIGHT* drop to #2 but it would be irrelevant because they'd still be playing a CG against #1 for the #1 seed so no benefit. 

Oklahoma is a different question:
In the last CFP rankings the Sooners were the highest ranked 2-loss team.  Would OU be the highest ranked 2-loss team without the Michigan win?  I don't know.  They'd still have better wins than Notre Dame and a H2H win over Bama but I don't know.  Their case is definitely stronger WITH the Michigan win than it would be WITHOUT it. 

That's my argument above. Oklahoma scheduling a patsy would be a VERY weak 10-2 resume. They would only have one good win (Bama). No bad losses, but only one good win. I think the Michigan win adds a significant boost to their resume, and is probably why they're #8 instead of something lower like 2-loss teams Miami or Vandy.

Miami is ranked behind ND by a few spots, with the exact same record and a H-H win.

And we’ll see how things fall in the rankings that count.