Started By
Message
re: The True Scheduling Disadvantage
Posted on 9/22/13 at 3:54 pm to Gardevoir
Posted on 9/22/13 at 3:54 pm to Gardevoir
quote:
I'm not sold on the 4-team playoff; it might just be worse than the BCS.
This.
At least it gets us one step away from a better scenario - an 8 team playoff.
When teams play as vastly different schedule strengths as we see now, you can't go by overall record. Louisville this year doesn't play ANYONE worth a damn. You HAVE to consider who they played. Saying they are undefeated so they "deserve" to be there is just lazy.
0
Posted on 9/22/13 at 3:55 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
Everyone is really naive if they think the SEC is going to get two teams in every year.
Who would be the fourth team?
As we see it now, the only conferences with basically a guaranteed berth for their conference champion are the SEC and the PAC 12.
Right now, if this season plays out the way most think it will, you would have, in a 4-team playoff:
1. SEC Champion (Alabama or LSU)
2. PAC 12 Champion (Oregon, Washington, or Stanford)
3. Unbeaten Big Ten OR ACC team
4. 1-loss SEC school
Posted on 9/22/13 at 3:58 pm to RTR America
Haha. Got another one scared. 
Posted on 9/22/13 at 4:02 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
1. SEC Champion (Alabama or LSU)
2. PAC 12 Champion (Oregon, Washington, or Stanford)
3. Unbeaten Big Ten OR ACC team
4. 1-loss SEC school
You assumed that EITHER tOSU or an ACC team would be unbeaten. How about we tweak your scenario:
1. 1 loss SEC champ
2. 1 loss Pac 12 champ
3. 1 loss Clemson, ACC champs
4. Unbeaten Ohio State
(5?) Unbeaten Louisville?
Which of those would be replaced by a one loss SEC team? None.
But if LSU runs the regular season and loses to a 1 loss South Carolina in the SECC, they would have a better resume than anyone on that list.
Posted on 9/22/13 at 4:39 pm to Othello
quote:
Seriously I'm sick of hearing how good Oregon's offense is every year when they play nobody and when they play a good D like Stanford they get stuffed.
Also pollsters should punish teams like Ohio State and Oregon for playing such shitty teams.
Beating Nicholls Stae by 60 = Beating Colorado State by 25 when yout coach doesn't want to run up the score on his buddy who knows your defense like the back of his hand.
The media jerks off to big scores without considering who they are coming against a lot of the time.
I feel the same way. Numbers are often misinterpreted in college football. People rarely think deeply before they make an observation.
Posted on 9/22/13 at 4:57 pm to Gardevoir
quote:
See, that's where I'm divided. Is 8 too high?
When you include 8 teams, you allow teams that didn't win their division or conference to get rematches versus the team that beat them in the playoff. Furthermore, wouldn't adding more games increase the chances of someone getting injured? Team nowadays are fortunate to stay relatively healthy and compete through 13 or 14 games. Imagine that number increasing to 15 or 16.
I would prefer 8.
- 5 major conference champs.
- The highest ranked conference champ of the little 5 conferences.
- Independent teams if ranked in the top 8(I'm sure ND would lobby for top 10)
- The rest are at large.
Theoretically that leaves the possibly for no true "at large" bids, and only a maximum of 2. If Notre Dame is good, that only leaves the possibility of one.
Posted on 9/22/13 at 5:02 pm to Crimson Legend
quote:
Which of those would be replaced by a one loss SEC team? None.
Exactly. The ONLY way is the 5th 6th and 7th all have two losses, and even then it is probably a stretch. I posted in a different thread the final standings of the BCS before bowl season of the last ten years. I could only find one scenario where the SEC would have gotten two teams in... 2011.
quote:
2012
Notre Dame
Alabama
Oregon
Kansas State
2011
LSU
Alabama
Stanford
Oklahoma State
2010
Auburn
TCU
Oregon
Wisconsin
2009
Alabama
tu
Cincinnati
TCU
2008
Oklahoma
Florida
tu
USC
2007
Ohio State
LSU
Virginia Tech
Oklahoma
2006
Ohio State
Florida
Michigan
Wisconsin
2005
USC
tu
Penn State
Notre Dame
2004
USC
Oklahoma
Auburn
Utah
2003
Oklahoma
USC
LSU
Michigan
2002
Miami
Ohio State
Georgia
USC
Posted on 9/22/13 at 5:16 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
I would prefer 8.
- 5 major conference champs.
- The highest ranked conference champ of the little 5 conferences.
- Independent teams if ranked in the top 8(I'm sure ND would lobby for top 10)
- The rest are at large.
Theoretically that leaves the possibly for no true "at large" bids, and only a maximum of 2. If Notre Dame is good, that only leaves the possibility of one.
I realize that no system will be perfect, for the word "perfect" is subjective here. Anyways, outside of reality, it would be great if there were 4 super conferences featuring the greatest programs. There are several ways you could match up the winners of the 8 divisions, but the most basic and and reasonable way would be to use the conference championships as part of the playoff.
Regardless of the system, there will always be some luck involved. You could just randomly match up the 8 teams, and the winner of the bracket is the national champion.
Posted on 9/22/13 at 8:25 pm to Gardevoir
Funny how TCU has become an average program now that they are in the Big12. They were winning 10-11 games easily before.
Also look at WVU, how they are sucking it up now too.
And Boise State even isn't very good this year.
All of those BCS Buster type teams can win in a one-game situation against a top 5 team, but if you put them in a good conference and week in and week out they had to play better teams, they'd fold a lot more.
Also look at WVU, how they are sucking it up now too.
And Boise State even isn't very good this year.
All of those BCS Buster type teams can win in a one-game situation against a top 5 team, but if you put them in a good conference and week in and week out they had to play better teams, they'd fold a lot more.
Posted on 9/22/13 at 11:48 pm to Gardevoir
quote:
Any SEC team that wants to make it to the national championship can count on playing at least 2 Top 15 opponents beforehand.
There is no doubt the SEC produces some of the toughest schedules. Florida plays 5 teams currently in the top 15 this year... that's nuts. But all SEC schedules are not that tough. Both Alabama and Texas A&M both only play 2 teams currently in the top 15, and 3 total top 25. Is that really any better than Oregon that plays the current #5, 13, and 16 teams?
The other thing to remember when comparing schedules is the SEC historically schedules the most number of non-AQ teams. Texas A&M plays Rice, SMU, Sam Houston St, and UTEP. Alabama plays Colorado St., Georgia St., and Chattanooga. The only non-AQ Oregon plays this year is Nicholls St. As mediocre as Virginia and Tennessee are (the other 2 OOC on Oregon's schedule), they are still an SEC and ACC school that very well could still go bowling by the end of the year.
So blanket statements on SEC schedules don't work. Does LSU have a tougher road to the NCG than Oregon. Absolutely. Does Alabama... no.
This post was edited on 9/22/13 at 11:59 pm
Posted on 9/23/13 at 12:10 am to Surd
And one other piece of relevant trivia. Before the 2011 season, no BCS national champion finished the year with fewer than 4 wins against teams that finished in the final top 25. The 2011 Alabama national championship team finished with only 2 wins against final top 25 teams - LSU and Arkansas. And then in 2012, Alabama became only the second team to achieve this feat with only 3 wins against top 25 teams.
BCS Champion wins against top 25
BCS Champion wins against top 25
Posted on 9/23/13 at 5:38 pm to Gardevoir
Alambam doesn't play fla,geo, or SC same as last year.On top of that they will never play AUB,GEO,MS, and Florida in a row. I would hope the other teams would raise hell as to who plays whom and how they fall on the schedule.
Posted on 9/23/13 at 8:51 pm to Patches
quote:
Alambam doesn't play fla,geo, or SC same as last year.On top of that they will never play AUB,GEO,MS, and Florida in a row. I would hope the other teams would raise hell as to who plays whom and how they fall on the schedule.
Again, this thread regards how easy the path for non-SEC teams is. Even though some conferences have 3 or 4 Top 25 teams right now, the SEC looks like it might regularly have 4-8. It is improbable that a team doesn't play at least two legit opponents in the SEC. You can't say the same thing for other conferences. I can see an argument regarding how teams fall on the schedule but please don't turn this into an Alabama avoiding SEC East powers thread.
Posted on 9/23/13 at 9:02 pm to Gardevoir
it really isn't a disadvantage at this point (like it may have been back in say 2002, 2003, or 2004)
At least for the schools that get a good break on the cross division schedules they can play two real schools for teh entire regular season... then face the opposite division champ (who may likely have also played only two real opponents in the course of the regular season).
The winner of the SEC CCG (e.g. UGA or Bama last year) is then pretty near guaranteed a shot at teh NC... which can be an easy game if they get a media favorite like Notre Dame.
At least for the schools that get a good break on the cross division schedules they can play two real schools for teh entire regular season... then face the opposite division champ (who may likely have also played only two real opponents in the course of the regular season).
The winner of the SEC CCG (e.g. UGA or Bama last year) is then pretty near guaranteed a shot at teh NC... which can be an easy game if they get a media favorite like Notre Dame.
Posted on 9/23/13 at 9:05 pm to Surd
quote:
There is no doubt the SEC produces some of the toughest schedules. Florida plays 5 teams currently in the top 15 this year... that's nuts. But all SEC schedules are not that tough. Both Alabama and Texas A&M both only play 2 teams currently in the top 15, and 3 total top 25. Is that really any better than Oregon that plays the current #5, 13, and 16 teams?
Seeing how our opponent in Atlanta is always ranked and ranked highly at that, and in the Pac 12 that doesn't seem to always be the case, yes.
Posted on 9/23/13 at 9:13 pm to Gardevoir
quote:
@LSU fans: Again, this thread is about how the SEC is at a disadvantage when compared to other powerhouses around the country.
Boucher logic: The schedule was fair in 2010 when Tennessee and Vandy rotated onto LSU's schedule, while South Carolina and Florida rotated onto Alabama's (along with half the teams having an off week prior to playing 'Bama).
The schedule is unfair when LSU is forced to play two half-way decent teams from the east, while Alabama gets a breather.
Posted on 9/23/13 at 9:33 pm to BradPitt
quote:
Boucher logic: The schedule was fair in 2010 when Tennessee and Vandy rotated onto LSU's schedule, while South Carolina and Florida rotated onto Alabama's (along with half the teams having an off week prior to playing 'Bama).
The schedule is unfair when LSU is forced to play two half-way decent teams from the east, while Alabama gets a breather.
Don't mention 2010. LSU fans like to use that season as an example of Alabama not being able to handle tough schedules; they must have forgotten 2009. Furthermore, they ignore the injuries, complacency, and the bye week scandal.
Posted on 9/23/13 at 10:13 pm to Gardevoir
Its worse - its gets Baylors and Boise's in without the grind of sec.
The playoff is for idiots unless its 32.
It takes all other bowls and makes them meaningless. Meanwhile Baylor and BYU are in the HUGE HUBBUB that will be the final 4.
How about the choice between a 10-2 LSU, 10-2 FLA 10-2 GA, 10-2 A&M and 10-1 Baylor, 10-1 tOSU, 10-1 Bama and 10-1 Stanford and you get Stanford, Baylor, tosu, Bama. With 5 SEC teams that would be favored against 3 teams in the 4. It will SUCK. and the other sec will have nothing worth a shite to do.
The playoff people are idiots
The playoff is for idiots unless its 32.
It takes all other bowls and makes them meaningless. Meanwhile Baylor and BYU are in the HUGE HUBBUB that will be the final 4.
How about the choice between a 10-2 LSU, 10-2 FLA 10-2 GA, 10-2 A&M and 10-1 Baylor, 10-1 tOSU, 10-1 Bama and 10-1 Stanford and you get Stanford, Baylor, tosu, Bama. With 5 SEC teams that would be favored against 3 teams in the 4. It will SUCK. and the other sec will have nothing worth a shite to do.
The playoff people are idiots
Posted on 9/23/13 at 10:52 pm to Gardevoir
Frankly, Alabama's schedule is comparatively light when measured against the LSU schedule ... That said, I would not be surprised if the Tigers win the S.E.C. This year ... 
Posted on 9/23/13 at 11:56 pm to Gardevoir
quote:
When you include 8 teams, you allow teams that didn't win their division or conference to get rematches versus the team that beat them in the playoff.
I wouldn't think that this would be an issue for you.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News