Started By
Message
re: Unlikely but possible scenario, does Clemson's schedule hurt them?
Posted on 7/19/19 at 10:45 am to antibarner
Posted on 7/19/19 at 10:45 am to antibarner
quote:Taking into account that is is decided not by a formula, but by live people behind closed doors:
Washington. Oklahoma, Alabama, Ohio State, Notre Dame, and Clemson all end up unbeaten. Who gets in?
Bama- SEC power, Saban reputation, whole lotta mystique going on. Shoe-in for #1 seed.
Clemson- has slayed the dragon (beat Alabama) twice in recent years. Absolutely gets in.
Ohio State vs Notre Dame vs Washington vs Oklahoma for the other 2 spots;
Seems like name value has played a part in selections past. TCU and Baylor get left out from the Big 12, but if it's Oklahoma, they've made it in.
So, with that said- Washington gets dropped first, with Oklahoma getting a spot.
That leaves Ohio State and Notre Dame, two teams that share similar demographics for their fanbases. I'd say Ohio State would be a lock if Urban were there, but it gets closer with him out.
Still, the Buckeyes have the Big 10 behind them, as well as a conference championship and extra game. And they've won in the playoffs/BCS before, while Notre Dame has gotten smoked consistently on the big stage.
Alabama
Clemson
Oklahoma
Ohio State
0
Posted on 7/19/19 at 10:46 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
lol how did they get in last year without a conference championship? They would have wins over @UGA and @Michigan, which is far more impressive than what osu would have.
Notre Dame was undefeated last year, OSU wasn’t. If both are undefeated, the conference championship is the extra chip ND doesn’t have. ND knows this and accepts that to stay independent.
Posted on 7/19/19 at 11:10 am to antibarner
Why is it when SEC teams beat up on each other, it’s “OMG SEC IS SO TOUGH!”
When the ACC & Big 10 teams beat each other, its “OMG THEY SUCK”
Last time I checked, the SEC was the only conference to have teams lose to Western Kentucky, North a Texas, Troy, Southern Miss, Temple, The Citadel, South Alabama, Toledo & Georgia Southern
When the ACC & Big 10 teams beat each other, its “OMG THEY SUCK”
Last time I checked, the SEC was the only conference to have teams lose to Western Kentucky, North a Texas, Troy, Southern Miss, Temple, The Citadel, South Alabama, Toledo & Georgia Southern
Posted on 7/19/19 at 11:15 am to jj06
quote:
Why is it when SEC teams beat up on each other, it’s “OMG SEC IS SO TOUGH!”
When the ACC & Big 10 teams beat each other, its “OMG THEY SUCK”
Because other conferences like the ACC have one, possibly 2 or maaaaaaaaybe 3 teams at the top that are truly good and difficult. Clemson for example, how many ACC games this year are they really gonna have to get up for and go all out to win? Zero.
In the SEC bama, uga, LSU, UF, AU, aTm are all games that an opponent is going to have to go balls out and play a damn excellent game to win. Even after that tier you've got teams like MSU/SC/UK/UT that are still good enough to hang around for a while.
It's not so much about the cream of the crop at the top, it's the depth from 1-8 that separates the SEC.
Posted on 7/19/19 at 11:29 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
Because other conferences like the ACC have one, possibly 2 or maaaaaaaaybe 3 teams at the top that are truly good and difficult. Clemson for example, how many ACC games this year are they really gonna have to get up for and go all out to win? Zero. In the SEC bama, uga, LSU, UF, AU, aTm are all games that an opponent is going to have to go balls out and play a damn excellent game to win. Even after that tier you've got teams like MSU/SC/UK/UT that are still good enough to hang around for a while. It's not so much about the cream of the crop at the top, it's the depth from 1-8 that separates the SEC.
bullshite
A loss is a loss
Posted on 7/19/19 at 11:36 am to jj06
Couldn't hurt them more than WA or OU's simply pathetic schedules
Posted on 7/19/19 at 11:39 am to jj06
quote:
A loss is a loss
Well that's simply not true...
Not all losses are equivalent. If we take the extreme example, for your statement to be accurate, you're saying that Clemson losing to any ACC team is the same as losing to any team in the SEC... Bama, LSU, UGA included... So a loss to 2018 Bama would be equivalent to a loss to 2018 UNC that went 2-9...
Obviously this isn't remotely accurate, so let's give you the benefit of the doubt and say you *meant* "within reason... ie... a middle of the pack team in either conference is equivalent.
2018 Georgia Tech went 5-3 in the ACC. 2018 LSU went 5-3 in the SEC... In your mind, losing to these two teams would be equivalent based on your statement.
Posted on 7/19/19 at 11:41 am to jj06
quote:
bullshite
A loss is a loss
what does this have to do with anything I posted?
In the SEC there are 4-7 games on the schedule that could legitimately beat you that you have to "get up" for.
Clemson this season has what, maybe 1 ACC game you can say the same for?
Posted on 7/19/19 at 11:45 am to antibarner
I think the only scenario where Clemson's schedule will hurt them is if they lose a game. In that case, they may find themselves behind quite a few other 1 loss teams.
Posted on 7/19/19 at 11:46 am to wm72
quote:
I think the only scenario where Clemson's schedule will hurt them is if they lose a game
If they lose a game there is zero chance they make the playoffs, assuming the other big P5 teams also have 0-1 loss.
Posted on 7/19/19 at 11:52 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
I think the only scenario where Clemson's schedule will hurt them is if they lose a game
quote:
If they lose a game there is zero chance they make the playoffs, assuming the other big P5 teams also have 0-1 loss.
Zero chance? Without going back and comparing the other team's in contention records, Clemson has been to the payoffs two years already with a loss during the season, so to say there is "zero chance" is inaccurate. And that doesn't even take into consideration the additional credibility they gained from this year's championship game.
Posted on 7/19/19 at 11:55 am to antibarner
No chance that many go undefeated and no chance CU's ACC schedule disqualifies them out since they are the rightful defending champs. But as usual they will head into the playoff with a head of steam since they will have not played a team with barely a pulse. They other three will have blown much of their wad getting thru the season then the league champ while CU can rest and prepare for their 2 game schedule. Hell of a deal but there you go.
Posted on 7/19/19 at 11:56 am to antibarner
Clemson is not going undefeated this year. Period.
Posted on 7/19/19 at 12:01 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
quote:
You won't get a legitimate argument of who should've been in besides Bama in '17.
I know, because there isn't one.
I'm bored on a Friday. I'll way in. There are a few.
The committee could have said we value conference championships so we gave Ohio State the edge. Literally no argument against would have been any better than the arguments used to justify why bama got the nod.
The committee could have said UCF deserved a shot because they beat all their opponents. The argument about strength of schedule vs winning would have been about as strong as the argument in favor of tOSU or bama.
In the end there is a legitimate argument because there is no objective criteria to determine who gets to play in the playoff. It's whatever the committee says and everyone else has to accept it. We have already seen the criteria is adjusted to the need of the season in question.
Posted on 7/19/19 at 12:01 pm to scrooster
quote:
Clemson is not going undefeated this year. Period.
Well that settles it. Thanks. I’ll let Dabo know.
Posted on 7/19/19 at 12:05 pm to Tigerman97
quote:
The committee could have said we value conference championships so we gave Ohio State the edge. Literally no argument against would have been any better than the arguments used to justify why bama got the nod.
except the fact OSU had 2 losses to bama's 1. And bama's loss was to the #2 ranked team on the road while OSU had 1 good loss and one atrocious, indescribably bad loss.
quote:
The committee could have said UCF deserved a shot
lol, no.
quote:
In the end there is a legitimate argument because there is no objective criteria to determine who gets to play in the playoff.
just because it's not written in black and white doens't mean there's not criteria; it's the best resume/most deserving. And the committee has gotten it right in that regard every year.
quote:
We have already seen the criteria is adjusted to the need of the season in question.
how?
Posted on 7/19/19 at 12:11 pm to antibarner
They play A&M and SC and are the defending champions. They will get the kiss just like Bama.
Posted on 7/19/19 at 12:11 pm to scrooster
quote:
Clemson is not going undefeated this year. Period.
Ostarine is a helluva drug...
Posted on 7/19/19 at 12:11 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
quote:
The committee could have said we value conference championships so we gave Ohio State the edge. Literally no argument against would have been any better than the arguments used to justify why bama got the nod.
except the fact OSU had 2 losses to bama's 1. And bama's loss was to the #2 ranked team on the road while OSU had 1 good loss and one atrocious, indescribably bad loss.
quote:
The committee could have said UCF deserved a shot
lol, no.
Thanks for offering support to my argument. The arguments are irrelevant. The only thing that matters is what the committee decides matters.
quote:
it's the best resume/most deserving
exactly...a person could choose to say the undefeated season of UCF was the best resume after all we know they were good enough to beat the team that beat two play off teams and played another playoff team to one score on the road. oh yea, they also had a conference title thus making UCF more deserving.
or....a person could say that the conference championship cancelled the bad lost because championships mean something thus making tOSU more deserving.
This post was edited on 7/19/19 at 12:14 pm
Posted on 7/19/19 at 12:16 pm to RT1941
quote:Auburn
You won't get a legitimate argument of who should've been in besides Bama in '17.
Auburn was ranked ahead of Bama before having to play an additional game due to winning their division
The logic it takes to then drop them behind Bama is mind numbing to me
It’s simple, there should be a rule stating a team playing an additional game for the conference title can’t drop below a team sitting at home. How can anyone argue that logic? Take personal teams and emotion out of it
This post was edited on 7/19/19 at 12:19 pm
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News