Started By
Message
re: Bama's Road Schedule
Posted on 6/15/16 at 12:43 pm to SummerOfGeorge
Posted on 6/15/16 at 12:43 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
Also, I find the "Top 25" argument to be a bit misleading. It is an arbitrary cut off that gives no partial points to a team ranked #22 compared to a team ranked #29. That is a bit silly when you are arguing an aggregate SOS.
I agree with this. However, I do think its one of the better way to look at things. Typically a team ranked #25 at the end of the season had a pretty decent year. If you can't make the top 25, then you probably weren't that great to begin with.
There's obviously no distinguishable difference between #25 and #26.... but once you get to #30 or so, the quality of teams drops off substantially, IMO.
So I still think looking at the final Top 25 is the best way to go.
2
Posted on 6/15/16 at 12:45 pm to BHMKyle
quote:
I agree with this. However, I do think its one of the better way to look at things. Typically a team ranked #25 at the end of the season had a pretty decent year. If you can't make the top 25, then you probably weren't that great to begin with. There's obviously no distinguishable difference between #25 and #26.... but once you get to #30 or so, the quality of teams drops off substantially, IMO. So I still think looking at the final Top 25 is the best way to go.
I think it can all depend on the year. Regardless, there is no perfect way to look at it. I prefer the statistically breakdowns because it gives a full picture, but I concede that there can be some headscratchers in there too.
Posted on 6/15/16 at 12:54 pm to BHMKyle
quote:
The whole point to go back to the OP is that this year appears like it could be different. I am fascinated to see how Bama handles what appear to be 3 very difficult road games.
I'm fascinated to see how Bama responds to a Tennessee team that on paper looks to finally be back to the old Tennessee we remember.
As I stated earlier, Bama typically catches every bit of scheduling luck imaginable. This year may end up turning out the same way. But if the season ends with Tennessee winning the East, and LSU and Ole Miss both finishing in the top half of the West, then the tables will have been turned. It's shaping up that Bama might actually catch the toughest schedule possible... which hasn't happened since arguably Saban's first season.
I think there is a strong possibility that Bama may fight through it regardless and still win the league. Bama could very well go 12-0 and hand LSU and Tennessee their only losses.
Either way, this is shaping up to be a different type of regular season schedule compared to the ones Bama has faced in the past 8 years, and I think it will be fascinating to see what happens. That was my entire point before Bama fans got butthurt that I pointed out they'd had it easy.
This whole idea is so silly. Bama plays in the SEC West, has UT and a rotating East opponent just like everyone else and schedules a good Power 5 OOC team every year. What else could you possibly expect from them? The fact that Bama knocks several teams out of the top 25 by blowing them out doesn't diminish the fact that they play a tough schedule every year. Everyone said the same things last year...truth is all of these teams that are ranked won't live up to the hype...that's true every year. I think while OM and UT are both good teams, they are both receiving so much hype that it's going to be tough for one, if not both, not to fall flat on their faces. I think it may be OM with all the distractions and loss of talent. When that happens, you'll be on here telling us how those same games you are pumping up right now as difficult really weren't that impressive.
All you really need it know is....4 national titles, 4 SEC titles in the last 7 years.
This post was edited on 6/15/16 at 12:56 pm
Posted on 6/15/16 at 2:04 pm to tider04
quote:
tider04
I'm not going to rehash everything in your post that has already been proven wrong. If you can't read, I can't help you.
It's been proven that Alabama has faced an easier regular schedule than every single one of its annual SEC opponents even if you take out common games, which makes the fact that they were beaten by Bama irrelevant.
Your team has had a relatively easy schedule compared to others. Nothing wrong with stating facts.... nor just accepting them. As I've said, facts are facts. Time to embrace reality.
Posted on 6/15/16 at 2:33 pm to BHMKyle
quote:
So I still think looking at the final Top 25 is the best way to go.
They have advanced SOS figures to determine strong / weak schedules that is a much better analysis than all of the picking and choosing you are doing in this thread.
Also one big flaw in your analysis that you can't really account for (or at least haven't yet I don't think) is that Alabama beats the shite out the ranked/almost ranked teams it plays at a much higher clip than everyone else on your list resulting in Alabama knocking out a bunch of its ranked/almost ranked opponents.
In other words, according to your very rudimentary analysis of SOS the better you are and more you win the worse your schedule is. That hurts Alabama more than any team in the country. It is a serious flaw in your analysis. However, the effort you are putting in is admirable and has sparked interesting conversation.
Posted on 6/15/16 at 2:47 pm to elposter
quote:The effort Kyle has put into this is admirable indeed. I personally wouldn't waste this kind of time on my team's biggest rival, let alone a cross-division program that my team only gets to play on a rotational basis.
However, the effort you are putting in is admirable and has sparked interesting conversation.
Posted on 6/15/16 at 3:11 pm to elposter
quote:
They have advanced SOS figures to determine strong / weak schedules that is a much better analysis than all of the picking and choosing you are doing in this thread.
THere is not "picking and choosing" going on. If an opponent finished ranked in the Top 25, they are counted. The problem with a lot of SOS metrics is this: If Team A plays six teams that all finished with a record of 4-8 and Team B played six teams that finish with a record of 1-11, then an SOS metric is probably going to say that for those portions of the schedule, Team A's schedule was 4x more difficult. But the fact of the matter is whether a team has 1 win in a season or 4 wins in a season, those are all horrible opponents. No credit should be given to either team for those opponents.
Secondly, if Team A plays Troy and Team B plays North Dakota State, a lot of metrics are going to penalize Team B for playing an FCS school.... but everyone knows that FCS school is way better than a Sun Belt opponent.
There is really no great way to factor these things.
This is why games played against teams that finish in the Top 25 is a good method. Most teams that finish in the top 25 are pretty decent. Most teams that don't finish in the Top 25 aren't that good. You're left squabbling over 10-12 teams in the middle that might be a difference.
quote:
Also one big flaw in your analysis that you can't really account for (or at least haven't yet I don't think) is that Alabama beats the shite out the ranked/almost ranked teams it plays at a much higher clip than everyone else on your list resulting in Alabama knocking out a bunch of its ranked/almost ranked opponents.
Not accounted for yet? Do you know how to read? It's be explained ad nauseum.
First off, Bama beating a team alone is not going to knock them out of the Top 25. In fact, in all likelihood that loss is hardly counted against a team in most years. For a team to finish outside the Top 25, they'll have a minimum of 3 losses... and likely more like 5. There were a lot of other teams besides Bama that beat those teams to cause them to drop out of the TOp 25.
Secondly, we're talking about games PLAYED against Top 25 teams... not games WON. Bama fans are claiming that had Bama not beaten Georgia (#26), Mississippi State (#28), or Arkansas (#30) last season then those teams would have been finished ranked... well fine but guess what? Every other SEC team that played those 3 also don't get to count them. So when comparing schedules, if Bama doesn't get to count MSU, nor does any other Western Division team who also all played MSU.
quote:
In other words, according to your very rudimentary analysis of SOS the better you are and more you win the worse your schedule is.
Nope. Not necessarily the case. Since 2007, Auburn has faced the most Top 25 teams during regular season play.... yet they've played for two national titles during this span. Obviously it hasn't punished them.
Meanwhile, aside from Bama, Kentucky has played the fewest Top 25 teams during the regular season. Obviously getting beat by most everyone hasn't had that effect on Kentucky.
So your theory doesn't hold water.
Posted on 6/15/16 at 3:26 pm to RT1941
quote:
I personally wouldn't waste this kind of time
It's a message board... for college sports of which you have 14,000+ posts. That's a lot of wasted time. As far as who the time was spent on, I'd say he's clearly picked what most would consider the top team in the SEC - which has nothing to do with team alliances - and provided an analysis that points out that this year might be more difficult than many RollTiders might believe. I think getting UT on the heels of a rough stretch is likely to decrease the "degree of difficulty" there, but I'd say the basis for comparison is strong (stronger than most SOS calculations I've seen).
Posted on 6/15/16 at 3:42 pm to BHMKyle
quote:
Since 2007, Auburn has faced the most Top 25 teams during regular season play.... yet they've played for two national titles during this span. Obviously it hasn't punished them.
Alabama has 33 more wins than Auburn in the last 8 years alone. Horrible example for you to use. Again Alabama is beating a lot more of its ranked/borderline ranked teams than Auburn is which impacts how many of Alabama's opponents end the year ranked compared to Auburn. Like I said Alabama is beating almost all the ranked and borderline ranked teams it plays, more so than everyone else, and this absolutely impacts the number of teams it plays that end up ranked at the end of the year. It impacts Alabama more so than any other team and that is a fact. Not sure why you would even try to deny it/ignore it. Stated another way if Alabama plays those ranked teams / borderline ranked teams at a similar winning/losing clip as other teams do, you would see Alabama's number of end of year ranked opponents go up. This is the flaw in your analysis.
I'm not saying Alabama has played the toughest schedule in the SEC, but the significant flaw in your analysis overstates the perceived weakness in Alabama's schedule. The bottom line is the better you do against your ranked/borderline ranked opponents, the more ranked opponents you knock out of your final tally. Over a period of 8 years of winning at the clip Alabama has, it makes a difference even if you refuse to acknowledge it.
This post was edited on 6/15/16 at 3:43 pm
Posted on 6/15/16 at 4:51 pm to elposter
quote:
This is the flaw in your analysis
He refuses to acknowledge that is analysis is fundamentally flawed. He is so blinded by his hatred of Bama to even reflect on why is analysis is flawed. This analysis isn't even original and this same argument has been made in a hundred other threads.
The only thing you can criticize Bama about re: scheduling is that we have probably benefitted a little from out permanaent cross division rival that has had several down years. However, Bama's record in the West, the SECCG, BCSCG, and Playoffs speaks for itself.
Posted on 6/15/16 at 4:54 pm to elposter
quote:
Alabama is beating almost all the ranked and borderline ranked teams it plays, more so than everyone else, and this absolutely impacts the number of teams it plays that end up ranked at the end of the year.
It doesn't seem to effect other teams who've won the SEC during the last decade or so. Why not play some opponents who will certainly finish in the top 15?... that way they are guaranteed not to fall out just because your team beat them.
Here are the # of Top 15 teams beaten during the regular season by all SEC or National Championship teams since 2007:
4- 2010 Auburn (#8 LSU, #10 Alabama, #12 Arkansas, #15 Miss. St.)
3- 2007 LSU (#9 Virginia Tech, #13 Florida, #15 Auburn)
3- 2011 LSU (#1 Alabama, #4 Oregon, #5 Arkansas)
1- 2011 Alabama (#5 Arkansas)
1- 2013 Auburn (#7 Alabama)
1- 2009 Alabama (#10 Virginia Tech)
1- 2014 Alabama (#11 Miss. St.)
1- 2008 Florida (#13 Georgia)
1- 2012 Alabama (#14 LSU)
0- 2015 Alabama
Teams not named Alabama that won an SEC or National Title since 2007 have averaged beating 2.4 teams per year that finished ranked in the Top 15. The four Alabama squads that have won Championships since 2007 beat a combined 3 opponents during the regular season that finished in the Top 15.... resulting in 0.75 such opponents per team.
So in other words, all the other teams to have won an SEC Title since '07 have averaged playing more than 3x the number of Top 15 opponents during the regular season compared to Alabama. They don't seem to have this same predicament you claim your team does.
This post was edited on 6/15/16 at 4:56 pm
Posted on 6/15/16 at 5:00 pm to BHMKyle
quote:
Why not play some opponents who will certainly finish in the top 15?...
How do you predict years in advance when the schedule is made who will finish a season in the top 15?
Posted on 6/15/16 at 5:04 pm to 14&Counting
quote:
How do you predict years in advance when the schedule is made who will finish a season in the top 15?
Not saying you should know in advance. All I'm saying is that this idea that only bama is penalized by teams dropping out of the Top 25 and finishing #26 or #27 is ridiculous. Most every other team that has won the SEC since 2007 has played enough solid opponents during the regular season that they don't have to worry about them dropping out after their win.
Posted on 6/15/16 at 5:04 pm to BHMKyle
quote:
4- 2010 Auburn (#8 LSU, #10 Alabama, #12 Arkansas, #15 Miss. St.)
3- 2007 LSU (#9 Virginia Tech, #13 Florida, #15 Auburn)
3- 2011 LSU (#1 Alabama, #4 Oregon, #5 Arkansas)
1- 2011 Alabama (#5 Arkansas)
1- 2013 Auburn (#7 Alabama)
1- 2009 Alabama (#10 Virginia Tech)
1- 2014 Alabama (#11 Miss. St.)
1- 2008 Florida (#13 Georgia)
1- 2012 Alabama (#14 LSU)
0- 2015 Alabama
Yep, Alabama continuing to prop up everyone's numbers.
Damn, pretty much need to be Alabama or beat Alabama to win a NC these days.
ETA: Never mind I see you've now changed the parameters again to teams in the top 15 that you beat.
This post was edited on 6/15/16 at 5:08 pm
Posted on 6/15/16 at 8:24 pm to elposter
quote:
Yep, Alabama continuing to prop up everyone's numbers. Damn, pretty much need to be Alabama or beat Alabama to win a NC these days. ETA: Never mind I see you've now changed the parameters again to teams in the top 15 that you beat.
The sole team that didn't on that list in the regular season, 2008 Florida, had to beat us in the SEC Championship game.
That team finished in the Top 15 too.
Yep.
Posted on 6/15/16 at 11:10 pm to SummerOfGeorge
Alabama is arguably on the most dominant run in CFB history, at least in the modern era. Those who are jealous are now truly grasping at straws to try and explain or undermine how this dominance has happened and is continuing to happen. Only an idiot wouldn't understand how a dominant team on the level of Alabama beating teams, and destroying many of them, affects the rankings of said destroyed opponents. 2010 AU scrapping by every opponent isn't going to make them drop the way Alabama demolishing UGA in 08 or 15 will, as an example. And yes, I used those specific examples on purpose. ;-)
Not only that but this faulty analysis refuses to take seriously Alabama's 11-4 post season record almost exclusively against highly ranked teams away from home. 8 of those wins coming in conference or national title games and a 9th in a playoff game. This omission alone invalidates the entire premise of the OP. I also wonder how many of those road losses came in 2007, a year in which Saban was transitioning the program with a talent depleted roster. The results of that year almost have to be tossed out as you will never see another Saban coached Alabama team with deficiencies like that one. Alabama is good period. At home, on the road, in neutral sites and especially when there's hardware on the line. Alabama may not win a crown this year, but they will almost certainly be in the hunt as they are every year.
Not only that but this faulty analysis refuses to take seriously Alabama's 11-4 post season record almost exclusively against highly ranked teams away from home. 8 of those wins coming in conference or national title games and a 9th in a playoff game. This omission alone invalidates the entire premise of the OP. I also wonder how many of those road losses came in 2007, a year in which Saban was transitioning the program with a talent depleted roster. The results of that year almost have to be tossed out as you will never see another Saban coached Alabama team with deficiencies like that one. Alabama is good period. At home, on the road, in neutral sites and especially when there's hardware on the line. Alabama may not win a crown this year, but they will almost certainly be in the hunt as they are every year.
This post was edited on 6/15/16 at 11:23 pm
Posted on 6/21/16 at 4:25 pm to tider04
quote:
tider04
*drops the mike*
Posted on 6/21/16 at 5:40 pm to TheDarrell McSteal
I see a couple of losses in there.
Of course they will beat the aggies like a drum.
Of course they will beat the aggies like a drum.
Posted on 6/22/16 at 6:15 am to 14&Counting
Its funny last year we had the #1 hardest schedule in the country, where numerous people stated we would lose atleast two to three games and now just because the teams we played didnt finish the season as expected of them, now our wins don't matter and we had it easy. I don't care where LSU, Arkansas, or TA&M is ranked in the end, I promise you them 3 teams alone can beat most of the teams in the top 30 easily. So I guess with Alabama is we're damned if we do, damned if we don't in some peoples eyes.
Page 8 of 8
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News