Interesting narrative I've not seen anywhere really...

B.A.R.

B.A.R.

CTG Partner
Staff member
I think we all can conclude that CFB is down this year...

One (maybe dominating) team

One damn good team

Another damn good team that got crushed by above team at home.

Handful of solid teams + Bama

Then you can group 11-25 interchangeably really.

--------- ---------- --------

Anyways, as the playoff rankings come to fruition in the 2h of the season each year, we start getting the ole debate of multiple teams from multiple conferences going to the playoffs (namely B16 and SEC).

This is a spirited debate each year and always has its own narratives such as...

'SEC should get 2-3 bids'
'Pac 12 sucks'
'We've seem Oklahoma in the semis enough'
'Big Ten sucks'
'Acc is Clemson and no one else'



Anyways, you all know the tried and true narratives.

In October, we started seeing the setup for 3 SEC teams (assuming Ala and Georgia won their divisions and UT hadn't got crop dusted at Scaralina. That dropped a bit after Bama loss (but not completely) and was wiped off the radar after the Vols Cocks game.

At the same time, media etc was pushing that the potential loser of UM and OSU had no shot at a playoff. This was especially true since most pundits had OSU winning.

Okay, let us fast forward to the past week or so. ..

With USC in the picture + a non B12 power in the top 4 things we changing...

As the upsets rolled in...we saw the committee have no choice but to bring in another non division winner to the playoff. There simply was very few candidates for the spot...

We have our final four now but what has been missing last week and this week?

Hardly a peep about a weak conference getting TWO teams in! I'm pretty sure TV/SM/CTG etc have been harping on the big 10 for years now as not worthy of two teams. Where's the outrage? I'm absolutely shocked.

This is the lowest the conference has been, imo, since the post Joe Pa/Hoke RR years at Michigan. Granted, this mini era here is shaping up like the 70s/80s with Big 2 / Little 10. As I've said about the SEC in previous years, they are a bit similar in that fact (sneak another team in on cycles as very good -- re: LSU burrow). Their middle ground is just better though.

So, let's breakdown WHY?

1. Nation as a whole down this year?
2. Buckeye are the exception?
3. They simply couldn't sneak Bama in?
4. Other?


Anyways, sorry for the ramble. Typing via celly with 30 to spare. Debate, tell me what I left out.
 
I think most people felt Michigan's non conference schedule would keep them out if they lost the Ohio St game.

I think the Big 10 sucks hyperbole has quieted the past couple years? Maybe I'm wrong.

I think for years the Big 10 was cast as not having the athletes to compete with the speed of the SEC, but Ohio St has definitely changed that.
 
B.A.R. said:
At the same time, media etc was pushing that the potential loser of UM and OSU had no shot at a playoff. This was especially true since most pundits had OSU winning.
Click to expand...

I personally had been hearing the same thing talking heads always say "well, if it's a close game does the loser get in?"

Is the "nation down" or are others simply "up" which thereby makes the supposed teams that would vie for the spot less potent because these other "up" teams have damaged them.

Certain teams will always be an exception as long as they can create a reasonable argument. Ohio State just has 1 loss. You have been saying that with 1 loss it is hard to have any other non-champion jump them who might have 2. So yes, Ohio State always fits the exception category because, they are Ohio State. I also want to add that we have a lot of savy people here, when I listen to media they don't talk much about the Big Ten being down. It is true that it is, but either purposefully or not, I don't think that gets talked about much. Maybe the opinion makers on twitter have been talking about it, but the more polished TV and radio types that I have heard have not been as negative towards the Big Ten's overall strength and therefore there may not be as much understanding that the Big Ten is weak and Ohio State's 11-1 record is weak. An Ohio State defender might counter a weak conference schedule argument with the wins over 2 8 win teams, one being Notre Dame and the other being a MAC Champion. That argument can possibly persuade some.

This is not my specialty to sort through the positions of a committee I literally have no use for. So I can't get into much other. But this is what I have observed.
 
CPA-hole said:
I think most people felt Michigan's non conference schedule would keep them out if they lost the Ohio St game.

I think the Big 10 sucks hyperbole has quieted the past couple years? Maybe I'm wrong.

I think for years the Big 10 was cast as not having the athletes to compete with the speed of the SEC, but Ohio St has definitely changed that.
Click to expand...

The ole schedule is what makes me chuckle.

Both big ten teams had bad schedules.

Take away the name on the jersey Week #1 for the Buckeye opponent and you have a different narrative.eus not forgot how bad ND was the first month plus.

Toledo is showing as a better win, but so is UConn for Michigan.

The UM crossover opponents were a bit tougher overall than the OSU crossovers.

Michigan road schedule in conference was harder (the advantage comes from playing AT Ohio St).

Neither schedule was all that great.


Now, we always forget to add in the fact that the B16 plays an extra conference game vs the SEC.

As we form the new super conference this will need to be leveled out. The extra "bye" week for many SEC teams in November is so overlooked. While they scrimmage, the other P5 teams are playing demanding conference games down the stretch which by losing has such an negative impact compared to early in the year.

SEC plays it smart... Two built in advantages ...

Less conference games
November bye week (for most).


-------

For the record, before he chimes in, I know LSU plays big games ooc now @twinkie13
 
B.A.R. said:
I think we all can conclude that CFB is down this year...

One (maybe dominating) team

One damn good team

Another damn good team that got crushed by above team at home.

Handful of solid teams + Bama

Then you can group 11-25 interchangeably really.

--------- ---------- --------

Anyways, as the playoff rankings come to fruition in the 2h of the season each year, we start getting the ole debate of multiple teams from multiple conferences going to the playoffs (namely B16 and SEC).

This is a spirited debate each year and always has its own narratives such as...

'SEC should get 2-3 bids'
'Pac 12 sucks'
'We've seem Oklahoma in the semis enough'
'Big Ten sucks'
'Acc is Clemson and no one else'



Anyways, you all know the tried and true narratives.

In October, we started seeing the setup for 3 SEC teams (assuming Ala and Georgia won their divisions and UT hadn't got crop dusted at Scaralina. That dropped a bit after Bama loss (but not completely) and was wiped off the radar after the Vols Cocks game.

At the same time, media etc was pushing that the potential loser of UM and OSU had no shot at a playoff. This was especially true since most pundits had OSU winning.

Okay, let us fast forward to the past week or so. ..

With USC in the picture + a non B12 power in the top 4 things we changing...

As the upsets rolled in...we saw the committee have no choice but to bring in another non division winner to the playoff. There simply was very few candidates for the spot...

We have our final four now but what has been missing last week and this week?

Hardly a peep about a weak conference getting TWO teams in! I'm pretty sure TV/SM/CTG etc have been harping on the big 10 for years now as not worthy of two teams. Where's the outrage? I'm absolutely shocked.

This is the lowest the conference has been, imo, since the post Joe Pa/Hoke RR years at Michigan. Granted, this mini era here is shaping up like the 70s/80s with Big 2 / Little 10. As I've said about the SEC in previous years, they are a bit similar in that fact (sneak another team in on cycles as very good -- re: LSU burrow). Their middle ground is just better though.

So, let's breakdown WHY?

1. Nation as a whole down this year?
2. Buckeye are the exception?
3. They simply couldn't sneak Bama in?
4. Other?


Anyways, sorry for the ramble. Typing via celly with 30 to spare. Debate, tell me what I left out.
Click to expand...
Only 1 thing has been different and thats transfer portal and NIL.....I am not smart enough to connect why those things have caused nation wide mediocrity but every conference is down at least big ten and sec specifically.

For sec people......when was the sec worse then this year ?

I would of thought the transfer portal would of filled holes and made teams better.....of course the exodus of 6 year guys from covid extra year could play a factor

I'm still wondering why a stacked Bama team just played so poorly this year against not great sec teams..perhaps sec brethren can provide more insight but Saban looked like saban from cleveland browns that got fired and didn't know how to coach a secondary
 
PAC 12 gets banged on for teams blowing their chance to position themselves for a playoff, but I think the PAC 12 was very strong this year. Not top heavy, but a really really good upper tier. I'm not looking to make sure, but I feel like this was one of the best seasons for PAC 12 I can remember. If you want to define best by 1-2 kick ass teams and then some other good teams, this year isn't that. No kick ass teams, but so many really good ones.
 
EL CAPO said:
Only 1 thing has been different and thats transfer portal and NIL.....I am not smart enough to connect why those things have caused nation wide mediocrity but every conference is down at least big ten and sec specifically.

For sec people......when was the sec worse then this year ?

I would of thought the transfer portal would of filled holes and made teams better.....of course the exodus of 6 year guys from covid extra year could play a factor

I'm still wondering why a stacked Bama team just played so poorly this year against not great sec teams..perhaps sec brethren can provide more insight but Saban looked like saban from cleveland browns that got fired and didn't know how to coach a secondary
Click to expand...
I think the portal and NIL contribute to a reduction of quality of play in two ways: teams can't build depth and roster chaos leads to uncertainty and acclimation periods. I don't have data to support this but my guess is that outside of just a few teams, backups are now underclassmen who aren't ready or upperclassmen who aren't very good. Talented kids aren't willing to sit for any amount of time. Because of roster volatility, teams don't really have a chance to build cohesion. Yes, my running back may be more talented than last year's RB, but he may be completely unfamiliar with my system, our culture, the playbook, our opponents, etc. Coaches may not know what they have until Week 5 or 6 at which point their season may be over...and then they have to recruit their current roster to keep their players from hitting the portal.
 
Grovehard said:
I think the portal and NIL contribute to a reduction of quality of play in two ways: teams can't build depth and roster chaos leads to uncertainty and acclimation periods. I don't have data to support this but my guess is that outside of just a few teams, backups are now underclassmen who aren't ready or upperclassmen who aren't very good. Talented kids aren't willing to sit for any amount of time. Because of roster volatility, teams don't really have a chance to build cohesion. Yes, my running back may be more talented than last year's RB, but he may be completely unfamiliar with my system, our culture, the playbook, our opponents, etc. Coaches may not know what they have until Week 5 or 6 at which point their season may be over...and then they have to recruit their current roster to keep their players from hitting the portal.
Click to expand...
Bingo
 
It's tough be build a truly dominate team, when any jackass with cash can recruit your roster - DURING THE SEASON.

It should only get worse for a few years - then smaller schools will have nothing left - big schools with money will then break off and form their own lil' NFL farm league.

BIG PICTURE issue for me - (I'm OLD yes) - this is clearly a TEAM SPORT, that's becoming an individual one. Elect me high sheriff, NOBODY, especially coaches - leaves before the season is over. If you do - you sit out for one year - period. You can't regulate boosters sure - but any player that accepts a deal not approved (by NCAA or whatever) is DONE. 'Nuther words - Drake Maye accepts a $5 million deal from Georgia to transfer - he's finished (UNC can give him as much as they want). You can't allow teams to BUY players off another (somehow)
 
to add to the quality points .. instead of working harder to become the starter, they just transfer now. So we are likely not getting the best out of each individual player the way we were before.
 
But maybe resources are allocated more properly. It doesn't make sense for JT Daniels to be second string at Georgia or USC when he is at least the 50th best QB in the country.
 
cubsker said:
But maybe resources are allocated more properly. It doesn't make sense for JT Daniels to be second string at Georgia or USC when he is at least the 50th best QB in the country.
Click to expand...
True..In theory...and it should make the bluebloods better if they use it correctly to fill gaps and it doesn't disrupt team chemistry. There should be no roster weak spots now. It should also help coaches like chip Kelly or old nfl coaches who don't wanna recruit high school guys

How much of a factor is the exodus of extra year covid guys ? ...the returning experience charts last year vs this year were vastly different...feel like lot of 5th year seniors last year.

Btw are players still getting extra years ? How is jt daniels still eligible
 
Just on a distribution of talent standpoint, on the most basic level, top talent that was previously 2-deep or 3-deep at top schools, are now starting at lesser or mid-range schools. At a macro level, that levels the playing field.
 
B.A.R. said:
I think we all can conclude that CFB is down this year...

One (maybe dominating) team

One damn good team

Another damn good team that got crushed by above team at home.

Handful of solid teams + Bama

Then you can group 11-25 interchangeably really.

--------- ---------- --------

Anyways, as the playoff rankings come to fruition in the 2h of the season each year, we start getting the ole debate of multiple teams from multiple conferences going to the playoffs (namely B16 and SEC).

This is a spirited debate each year and always has its own narratives such as...

'SEC should get 2-3 bids'
'Pac 12 sucks'
'We've seem Oklahoma in the semis enough'
'Big Ten sucks'
'Acc is Clemson and no one else'



Anyways, you all know the tried and true narratives.

In October, we started seeing the setup for 3 SEC teams (assuming Ala and Georgia won their divisions and UT hadn't got crop dusted at Scaralina. That dropped a bit after Bama loss (but not completely) and was wiped off the radar after the Vols Cocks game.

At the same time, media etc was pushing that the potential loser of UM and OSU had no shot at a playoff. This was especially true since most pundits had OSU winning.

Okay, let us fast forward to the past week or so. ..

With USC in the picture + a non B12 power in the top 4 things we changing...

As the upsets rolled in...we saw the committee have no choice but to bring in another non division winner to the playoff. There simply was very few candidates for the spot...

We have our final four now but what has been missing last week and this week?

Hardly a peep about a weak conference getting TWO teams in! I'm pretty sure TV/SM/CTG etc have been harping on the big 10 for years now as not worthy of two teams. Where's the outrage? I'm absolutely shocked.

This is the lowest the conference has been, imo, since the post Joe Pa/Hoke RR years at Michigan. Granted, this mini era here is shaping up like the 70s/80s with Big 2 / Little 10. As I've said about the SEC in previous years, they are a bit similar in that fact (sneak another team in on cycles as very good -- re: LSU burrow). Their middle ground is just better though.

So, let's breakdown WHY?

1. Nation as a whole down this year?
2. Buckeye are the exception?
3. They simply couldn't sneak Bama in?
4. Other?


Anyways, sorry for the ramble. Typing via celly with 30 to spare. Debate, tell me what I left out.
Click to expand...


This year is down as a whole. I think NIL, the portal, etc really had an effect on a lot of overall play this year that I just couldn't keep up with/cap this off season. Team chemistry is so big, look at the mass exodus some of these schools are having in the portal. It affects betting.
 
No dominant defenses this year...at all.

A lot of inconsistent play from so many teams this year as well, which made it difficult to cap imo.
 
B.A.R. said:
I think we all can conclude that CFB is down this year...

One (maybe dominating) team

One damn good team

Another damn good team that got crushed by above team at home.

Handful of solid teams + Bama

Then you can group 11-25 interchangeably really.

--------- ---------- --------

Anyways, as the playoff rankings come to fruition in the 2h of the season each year, we start getting the ole debate of multiple teams from multiple conferences going to the playoffs (namely B16 and SEC).

This is a spirited debate each year and always has its own narratives such as...

'SEC should get 2-3 bids'
'Pac 12 sucks'
'We've seem Oklahoma in the semis enough'
'Big Ten sucks'
'Acc is Clemson and no one else'



Anyways, you all know the tried and true narratives.

In October, we started seeing the setup for 3 SEC teams (assuming Ala and Georgia won their divisions and UT hadn't got crop dusted at Scaralina. That dropped a bit after Bama loss (but not completely) and was wiped off the radar after the Vols Cocks game.

At the same time, media etc was pushing that the potential loser of UM and OSU had no shot at a playoff. This was especially true since most pundits had OSU winning.

Okay, let us fast forward to the past week or so. ..

With USC in the picture + a non B12 power in the top 4 things we changing...

As the upsets rolled in...we saw the committee have no choice but to bring in another non division winner to the playoff. There simply was very few candidates for the spot...

We have our final four now but what has been missing last week and this week?

Hardly a peep about a weak conference getting TWO teams in! I'm pretty sure TV/SM/CTG etc have been harping on the big 10 for years now as not worthy of two teams. Where's the outrage? I'm absolutely shocked.

This is the lowest the conference has been, imo, since the post Joe Pa/Hoke RR years at Michigan. Granted, this mini era here is shaping up like the 70s/80s with Big 2 / Little 10. As I've said about the SEC in previous years, they are a bit similar in that fact (sneak another team in on cycles as very good -- re: LSU burrow). Their middle ground is just better though.

So, let's breakdown WHY?

1. Nation as a whole down this year?
2. Buckeye are the exception?
3. They simply couldn't sneak Bama in?
4. Other?


Anyways, sorry for the ramble. Typing via celly with 30 to spare. Debate, tell me what I left out.
Click to expand...
I’m just amazed that Harbaugh pulled it off. Two straight over the Buckeyes — wow!
 
B.A.R. said:
Now, we always forget to add in the fact that the B16 plays an extra conference game vs the SEC.

SEC plays it smart... Two built in advantages ...

Less conference games
November bye week (for most).

-------

For the record, before he chimes in, I know LSU plays big games ooc now @twinkie13
Click to expand...
Bit of a different tangent than this thread has been going, but @B.A.R. is spot on with these comments above. Any discussion of schedules has to be from bottom up.

Who are the bottom three out of conference games on your schedule?

Michigan: Colorado St, UConn, Hawaii
Alabama: Utah St, UL-Monroe, Austin Peay

Very similar. Sorry, Bama doesn’t get extra credit for Texas … that’s just your 9th conference game.

Other SEC teams look very similar. Even the @twinkie13 Tigers, despite @B.A.R. giving him credit.

LSU: UAB, N. Mexico, Southern
UGA: Ga Tech, Sanford, Kent St
Tenn: Ball St, UT-Martin, Akron

Compare that to the parallel set of B1G teams that add a 10th Power Five game. (To be fair, UGA did have a 10th P5 in there)

OSU: Notre Dame, Toledo, Ark St
PSU: Auburn, Ohio, C Michigan
MSU: Washington, W Michigan, Akron
Neb: Oklahoma, Ga So, N Dakota

If you want LSU’s or Alabama’s schedule to line up with one like Ohio St, then schedule Florida St AND Notre Dame out-of-conference … or Texas AND Oklahoma.
 
Tin&Lint said:
Other SEC teams look very similar. Even the @twinkie13 Tigers, despite @B.A.R. giving him credit.

LSU: UAB, N. Mexico, Southern
UGA: Ga Tech, Sanford, Kent St
Tenn: Ball St, UT-Martin, Akron

Compare that to the parallel set of B1G teams that add a 10th Power Five game. (To be fair, UGA did have a 10th P5 in there)

OSU: Notre Dame, Toledo, Ark St
PSU: Auburn, Ohio, C Michigan
MSU: Washington, W Michigan, Akron
Neb: Oklahoma, Ga So, N Dakota

If you want LSU’s or Alabama’s schedule to line up with one like Ohio St, then schedule Florida St AND Notre Dame out-of-conference … or Texas AND Oklahoma.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm not following along well enough, but why would LSU or Alabama need to schedule FSU AND ND to be on par with tOSU? The 4 teams from the Big 10 you just posted do not have 2 games equal to Texas AND Oklahoma or FSU AND ND, they have ONE game against an opponent such as that. I'm confused as to why an SEC team would have to schedule 2 games while it looks like the conference you're comparing them to only schedules ONE.
 
jedi ninja said:
Maybe I'm not following along well enough, but why would LSU or Alabama need to schedule FSU AND ND to be on par with tOSU? The 4 teams from the Big 10 you just posted do not have 2 games equal to Texas AND Oklahoma or FSU AND ND, they have ONE game against an opponent such as that. I'm confused as to why an SEC team would have to schedule 2 games while it looks like the conference you're comparing them to only schedules ONE.
Click to expand...
Look at P5 games. They have to schedule 2 OOC to get to 10 P5 games. OSU schedules 1 to get to 10 P5 games.

Doesn’t have to be Texas and Oklahoma specifically, not that Okla was any good, but could be Texas and Iowa, Texas and Purdue, Texas and Wash St, etc.

Are you playing 3 Non-P5 cupcakes, or 2 Non-P5 cupcakes? That does matter. SEC knows that matters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B.A.R.
Summer CFB Discussion-- Texas RBs dropping like flies
2 3
Replies
109
Views
3K
B.A.R.
B.A.R.
Wiretowire
NCAAF Bowls 2023
Replies
5
Views
362
KJ
KJ
Br@ssknux
Championship Week Writeups(kind of) and Hopefully Feedbck
Replies
44
Views
2K
bones
bones
E
El Cap 24 CFB
Replies
19
Views
536
HUNT
HUNT
DOUBLEUP4LIFE
MARVELOUS MONEY$$ to be MADE on the MAC FUTURES + CFB PREDICTIONS + EURO24/COPA+OLYMPICS
2
Replies
80
Views
2K
DOUBLEUP4LIFE
DOUBLEUP4LIFE
Back
Top