re: Case Can Be Made For Strengthening SEC Football Schedules

You’re on point Surge. But I agree it must be mandated for all P5 schools, we shouldn’t do it unilaterally.

This may be getting esoteric but I might add one other criteria to reduce the luck factor. I think a team’s relative strength should be a 3 or 4 year rolling average so, for example, Bama gets credit for beating FSU last season. By the end of the year, that win was totally discounted which wasn’t fair to us. We beat a top 3 team and just happened to ruin their season but I am convinced a healthy FSU is nowhere near a 6-6 team.
By the same token, I don’t want anyone getting too much credit for beating a flash in the pan team like UCF or Western Michigan. Judging those teams based on a 3 to 4 year rolling average record would smooth out the spikes both up and down.

Regarding rankings, each team should be ranked based on it's performance relative to the quality of it's opponents for the current season only. No consideration should be given to anything prior to the current season. The committee adheres to that, as they should.

The committee refused to rank UCF any higher than they did because of their schedule. They knew all of the teams they ranked ahead of UCF could've also been undefeated against UCF's slate of opponents.

Kirby Holcutt stated more than once that the committee valued Bama's win vs FSU and felt they were a much better team before the costly injuries they suffered in that game.

Holcutt also indicated that they felt Bama's performances vs Miss State and Auburn were impacted by so many injuries, especially its LB corp, and considered that Bama would have several of them back for the playoffs.

The committee does a very good job, imo.

quote:

---

I think a team’s relative strength should be a 3 or 4 year rolling average so, for example, Bama gets credit for beating FSU last season.

---

quote:

---

Pitt was a shitty team/schedule.

---

They beat Clemson, but it doesn't really matter. Point is Penn State wouldn't have lost to a worse team, and they would've gotten in over Ohio State had they been 12-1 with a conference championship and head to head win over OSU. Instead they got left out because they were 11-2 vs Ohio State's 11-1.

quote:

---

This is false. Ohio St getting blown out by an otherwise 6-6 team by 30 points is what did Ohio St in. 

---

If Ohio State had been 12-1 with their only loss being that blowout to Iowa, they would've gotten in. The committee said themselves Ohio State and Alabama were very close. 1 less loss would've absolutely made the difference based on what the committee said.

quote:

---

Georgia has no margin for error whatsoever with that shitty OOC schedule. Kirby better win impressively and not stumble or they will be left out.

---

Same for Bama. We can't afford to lose a game. L'ville finished unranked last year. We play UT & Mizzou from the East, both weak. Ark & OM likely won't be very good. AU, LSU, MSU & ATM may be our best hope for wins vs ranked teams. But they all play us and each other. AU plays TN & UGA. LSU plays UGA & UF. MSU plays UK & UF. ATM plays UK & USCe. It would help our SOS for AU to beat Wash., LSU to beat Miami, MSU to beat Kan. St. and ATM to upset Clemson in College Station.

The SEC could get left out of the CFP this year. The top teams from the other P5 conferences all play more P5 opponents than UA & UGA. Ohio St and USC play two more and no FCS. Oklahoma also plays no FCS. Clemson plays an FCS, but plays two pretty good SEC teams, ATM & USCe.

quote:

---

They beat Clemson, but it doesn't really matter. Point is Penn State wouldn't have lost to a worse team, and they would've gotten in over Ohio State had they been 12-1 with a conference championship and head to head win over OSU. Instead they got left out because they were 11-2 vs Ohio State's 11-1.

---

This is a really silly game you are playing. If Alabama hadn't played Auburn in 2013, if this team hadn't played this team they lost to in whatever year.

It's all bullshite because you can't pick those games out. Penn St didn't give a shite about Pitt when they scheduled it, and it doesn't matter what is said, they are still going to schedule the games. There is a reason it's an upset.

That said, Penn St also lost to Michigan that year by 39 points while only beating Ohio St by 3. The head to head is important, but it's hard to really say Penn St was a better team and that Ohio St wasn't just having a bad night. I certainly thought Ohio St was the better team.

quote:

---

If Ohio State had been 12-1 with their only loss being that blowout to Iowa, they would've gotten in. The committee said themselves Ohio State and Alabama were very close. 1 less loss would've absolutely made the difference based on what the committee said.

---

No, they wouldn't have. And if they did, it would have been because we lacked a high quality win, the very thing you are saying punishes people.

In reality, what punishes people is losing. And you can sit here and say "take away this loss and that loss" game all you want, but the reality is - you have to prove you are among the 4 best teams.

quote:

---

Exactly and playing a harder schedule puts you at risk to lose more. Until I see the committee punish a P5 team for a really weak schedule (i.e. a 2 loss team getting in over a 1 loss team because of their schedule), I say we schedule the way we have been. It's worked out perfectly so far.

---

Wisconsin last year.

Auburn if they hadn't lost to Georgia the 2nd time.

Now you've seen it.

I would like 9 conference games, and only schedule power 5 teams. I would want this for all power 5 conferences though. I would also like the SEC to implement a bye week. If all teams have the same weekend off, then it's not an advantage.