Week 10 What Are We Learning!

[Ticketwindow]

Auburn just has to hire Hugh Freeze don't they. Really they shouldn't even interview any other coaches.

Matt Ruhle

 

[RetroVK]

I think Georgia Ohio State Alabama and Michigan would be my top 4 in order as of today if I was asked to say who I THOUGHT was the best, and I would be pretty strong on Georgia as the best team. But razor thin between the next three.

My prior post was more about who deserves to be ranked based on results (you know the whole "That's why they play the game" or "sports" part).

Note Alabama is undeserving in my opinion as of today to be in the conversation let alone in the top of the conversation but that I THINK they are still one of the best 4 teams in the nation and I would make them the favorite on a neutral against Tennessee and maybe even the fave at Vols (maybe not because I am not handicapping but just going off of my beliefs here).

 

[s--k]

Also wise, there is no such thing as the Pac 12 South anymore, it's already jacked up in that teams can play each other a 2nd time in a conference ship, making the first one pretty irrelevant. Throw in to the mix with a larger playoff, we'll periodically see teams play a third time in one season. That BS is for the pros, not having rematches is one of the most pure things left about college football.

Amen

It was. We know both the BCS and the committee has given us rematches. It should not be that way.

 

[wiseplayer]

I think it’ll be just as compelling to watch (during the regular season), teams who are playing for a playoff berth from 5 seed to 12. Thats just me. I can barely watch Ohio St vs Northwestern. Was there much doubt OSU was winning? Wouldn’t it be compelling during the regular season to track a UNC or USC or TCU? Again, for me this makes the regular season much more attractive.

 

[M.W.]

I could not disagree more.

You are suggesting that the games yet to be played will be more meaningful.

But at the same time you are making the games that have already been played less meaningful. If teams that lost previous games still have an illegitimate chance to enter into a playoff, then what meaning did that game have, what consequences were their to losing that game? None.

And I do not agree that future games need to be made more meaningful. I think you, or advocates like yourself, are trying to create something that doesn't need created. You think allowing more teams to make a playoff will make more games matter. The games matter now. All games matter. It is the basis of competition and team athletics. What game doesn't or won't matter?

Every game has a consequence for reaching goals and objectives. Not every goal can or should be attainable when teams lose a game or games. But there are other goals and objectives that can be achieved by still winning.

All playoff expansion proponent are doing in my mind is giving undeserving teams a second chance to compete for the biggest prize in the sport. If Tennessee doesn't win their division, doesn't win their conference, they don't deserve a national title opportunity because they were not good enough in the games that mattered most compared to the team(s) they lost to who beat them.

It is ironic that you think changing the sport to some kind of 12 team playoff would make it more worth watching, while I feel the exact opposite - it is a huge turn off and I am not exaggerating when I say it would make me less likely to watch.

Just like college basketball.

 

[M.W.]

I miss voters and split national championships

Watching more and more meaningless games in the grand scheme of things will never be a solution for me, and I'm not sure you won't see more opting out because not playing 3-4 extra games is just a smart investment over a national title.

Good point on the opting out. Football ain’t basketball.

 

[HUNT]

Rematch of the Orange bowl?

Let's go!

 

[s--k]

I think it’ll be just as compelling to watch (during the regular season), teams who are playing for a playoff berth from 5 seed to 12. Thats just me. I can barely watch Ohio St vs Northwestern. Was there much doubt OSU was winning? Wouldn’t it be compelling during the regular season to track a UNC or USC or TCU? Again, for me this makes the regular season much more attractive.

I don't intend to make it personal or carry on, I'm sure we both have better things to do than argue over this. But your last post raises one curiousity...why aren't you tracking or following or enjoying UNC, USC or TCU now? What makes UNC vs UVA or WF or USC vs Cal or CU or TCU vs TTech or Texas more interesting or better to you if they play in some other games in January? I have a hard time getting past we need to make these games better when they are already good and dramatic as far as what is going to happen and how/why. And if your intention is to somehow add more weight or importance to some games involving some number of teams, what do we do for teams and games between like UK vs Missouri, or Oregon St vs Washington or Baylor vs Oklahoma - have any ideas to spice those games up? Maybe a 64 team playoff? You complain about Ohio State vs Northwestern, how would what you propose make that game more watchable? Would it magically become more compelling in the expanded playoff you want? I don't think what you are suggesting will do much more than give teams that lost games a chance to get a seat at a table they didn't earn.

 

[s--k]

@wiseplayer

I should say what I support rather than just criticizing your position.

1) Top 4 conference champions using a BCS ranking model to determine who the 4 champs would be
or
2) Top 8 conference champions using a BCS ranking model to determine who the 8 champs would be
or
3) 1 vs 2 using the old BCS rankings
or
4) Top 12 conference champions using a BCS ranking model to determine who the 12 champs would be
or
5) no playoff or national title game as it was pre-1998

all of that instead of
- the current system
- any expansion that permits non-conference champions to participate

AND, I would love to see a P5 and G5 top 4 conference champion playoff. P5 and G5 aren't the same anyway, it's time for the NCAA to reclassify and let the group of 5 have their own championship. It would be fantastic!

 

[B.A.R.]

So as of today just looking at 1 and 0 loss teams (sorry two loss teams you are out until conference championships are over) and using strength of schedule as a metric for how quality those records are (granted just using sagarin here and not a combo), it would make sense for them to be ranked as follows:

1. Ohio State 0 losses, 32 sos
2. TCU 0 losses, 33 sos
3. UGA 0 losses, 40 sos
4. Michigan 0 losses, 71 sos
5. Tennessee 1 loss, 21 sos
6. USC 1 loss, 41 sos
7. Oregon 1 loss 43 sos
8. Clemson1 loss, 49 sos
9. Ole Miss 1 loss, 61 sos
10. UCLA 1 loss, 63 sos
11. North Carolina 1 loss, 65 sos
12. Tulane 1 loss, 96 sos
13. Liberty 1 loss, 109 sos

If it ended today we have a pretty clear top 4.
It appears a 1 loss vols would be over a 1 loss TOSU/Michigan loser

I was kind of shocked to see Ohio State's sos ranked tougher than TCU. I was expecting this to result in a TCU #1 ranking.

Notre Dame coming to life has helped immensely.

 

[EL CAPO]

Is the quality at the top really that bad...or is it always kind of this way? Was it Baylor or TCU in 2014?

To me the college football national champion should come from a very exclusive pool, teams who have had the most outstanding seasons. Excellence. Elite. Perfection or damn near perfection. Some years there will be more than a couple, some years there might only be 1 or 2 that fit the bill. The last thing I think the sport needs is a half dozen or a dozen teams thrown in the pool for a made for TV schedule of games. The season usually tells us there are very few teams who have a most outstanding season. Conference champions through the course of their season have established themselves as the best in their neighborhood. Losers in the SEC, or any conference should not and never should be included. They lost games that matter. But this common sense is out the window when there is money to be made. 5 teams from one conference in the preferred future format? I don't care if they are all "awesome". Some process is in place to determine the league winner and that is the way it sorts itself out for who advances to a national title playoff. The only thing I can do is not watch as my protest for the bogus system they are going to present.

I just heard somebody, I think it was a head coach promote a 128 team college basketball tournament. I don't watch basketball, but it's the same shit. It's all about money and what is good for the people who make the decisions. No human should be picking the teams to participate whether there are a bunch of great teams at the top or just a couple.

believe it was baylor.....also think tcu may been good enough to win it all one year when they beat wisconsin in the rose bowl

Just my opinion, but as a bettor, 12 teams is more opportunities to bet, as well as a fan imo its more meaningful games as bowl games nobody even plays in these days

......the truth is there are teams that lose their conference championship that are better then the team that won it......ohio state in 2015 for example instead of sparty , and they would of been more competitive in a playoff........in fact i think some teams that lose the conference will win the title.

Is that fair to make the playoff and not win your conference ? maybe not but not all the conferences play the same opponents, not same schedules within a conference, etc....it's to the point that to me the most fair system is to allow second chances like most sports.

the regular season has already lost it's luster to what it used to be when it was just the top 2 bcs era.....in those days you could feel the drama when a top team was losing and you don't feel it anymore.

 

[s--k]

I think it's more of a sign of how bad the quality is at the top this year.....because some years a team that was good enough to win the playoff didn't even make it... baylor was more deserving then oh state to make the playoffs the year they won it for example

Was it Baylor TCU or Baylor in 2014?

believe it was baylor...

The debate in 2014 before the conference championship games was between #3 TCU, #4 Baylor and #5 Ohio State. Both Baylor and TCU finished 11-1. Baylor beat TCU by 3 points, but lost to WVU. TCU's only loss was Baylor. Head-to-head tie breaker would yield Baylor as the Big Xll Champion. They already decided it on the field - although the Big Xll did not officially declare a winner, rather they seemed content with leaving it up to a third party.

Here are playoff rankings based on final committee rankings in 12/7/2014

#1 Alabama - playoff
#2 Oregon - playoff
#3 Florida State - playoff
#4 Ohio State - playoff
#5 Baylor
#6 TCU
#7 Mississippi State
#8 Michigan State
#9 Mississippi
#10 Arizona
#11 Kansas State
#12 Georgia Tech
#13 Georgia
#14 UCLA
#15 Arizona State
#16 Missouri
#17 Clemson
#18 Wisconsin
#19 Auburn
#20 Boise
#21 Louisville
#22 Utah
#23 LSU
#24 USC
#25 Minnesota

You tell me, which teams beyond the Big Xll champion deserve a playoff that year?

Mississippi State? 10-2 and Alabama beat them already
Michigan State? Ohio State and Oregon beat them already
Mississippi? they did beat Alabama, but also were 9-3
Arizona? Oregon already beat them in the PAC 12 title game
Kansas State? Baylor and TCU already beat them
Georgia Tech? Florida State already beat them in the ACC title game
Georgia? were 9-3 and didn't win the East
UCLA? were 9-3 and Oregon already beat them
Arizona State? were 9-3 and didn't win the South
Missouri? Alabama beat them in the SEC title game
Clemson? 9-3 and Florida State already beat them
Wisconsin? Ohio State already beat them in the Big Ten title game

Tell me, what teams in 2014 should've made an expanded playoff? You see 8 other teams there worth including? I sure do not.

 

[twinkie13]

Am I misremembering or was this the “punishment” for not playing a championship game for B12? Then they instated it?

 

[s--k]

Am I misremembering or was this the “punishment” for not playing a championship game for B12? Then they instated it?

Yes I think this was the whole "13th data point" thing. And as I recall the Big Xll didn't want to name a champion, they didn't want to break the tie or elevate TCU or Baylor above the other. So they left it up to a third party to decide, and they picked Ohio St fresh off demolishing Wisconsin in the B1G title. Ohio St had previously been viewed somewhat negatively for losing to a VT team who ended up not being very good.

 

[TahoeLegend]

He’s the last of their problems.
Was Gibbs their leading receiver in grabs?
And the defense is just not the same we are used to.

Twinkie, what's the story on Williams, the walk-on RB at LSU. He's not even listed in Phil Steele and I didn't see him mentioned early in the year, but he was the guy playing when the game was on the line against Bama

Where's he from? How did everyone miss on him and how did Kelly find him?

I was really impressed with him

 

[twinkie13]

Twinkie, what's the story on Williams, the walk-on RB at LSU. He's not even listed in Phil Steele and I didn't see him mentioned early in the year, but he was the guy playing when the game was on the line against Bama

Where's he from? How did everyone miss on him and how did Kelly find him?

I was really impressed with him

He’s from Houston. It’s really a great story.
I’d be lying if I I didn’t have probably a few texts MF’ing him in Tiger text chains….mainly about how I couldn’t believe LSU is in a position that we have a walk on (at RB no less) on the field that much.

I have more texts making those apologies that are obvious, now.

All things point to he’s a great kid that worked really hard and wanted to be at LSU no matter what. Gotta love those guys and the stories.

 

[TahoeLegend]

He’s from Houston. It’s really a great story.
I’d be lying if I I didn’t have probably a few texts MF’ing him in Tiger text chains….mainly about how I couldn’t believe LSU is in a position that we have a walk on (at RB no less) on the field that much.

I have more texts making those apologies that are obvious, now.

All things point to he’s a great kid that worked really hard and wanted to be at LSU no matter what. Gotta love those guys and the stories.

The exact type of player Kelly loves. I see why he's getting playing time. He sticks out every time he gets the ball.

 

[twinkie13]

The exact type of player Kelly loves. I see why he's getting playing time. He sticks out every time he gets the ball.

He’s was a scout team guy for the 2019 Championship team and now here he is

 

[EL CAPO]

The debate in 2014 before the conference championship games was between #3 TCU, #4 Baylor and #5 Ohio State. Both Baylor and TCU finished 11-1. Baylor beat TCU by 3 points, but lost to WVU. TCU's only loss was Baylor. Head-to-head tie breaker would yield Baylor as the Big Xll Champion. They already decided it on the field - although the Big Xll did not officially declare a winner, rather they seemed content with leaving it up to a third party.

Here are playoff rankings based on final committee rankings in 12/7/2014

#1 Alabama - playoff
#2 Oregon - playoff
#3 Florida State - playoff
#4 Ohio State - playoff
#5 Baylor
#6 TCU
#7 Mississippi State
#8 Michigan State
#9 Mississippi
#10 Arizona
#11 Kansas State
#12 Georgia Tech
#13 Georgia
#14 UCLA
#15 Arizona State
#16 Missouri
#17 Clemson
#18 Wisconsin
#19 Auburn
#20 Boise
#21 Louisville
#22 Utah
#23 LSU
#24 USC
#25 Minnesota

You tell me, which teams beyond the Big Xll champion deserve a playoff that year?

Mississippi State? 10-2 and Alabama beat them already
Michigan State? Ohio State and Oregon beat them already
Mississippi? they did beat Alabama, but also were 9-3
Arizona? Oregon already beat them in the PAC 12 title game
Kansas State? Baylor and TCU already beat them
Georgia Tech? Florida State already beat them in the ACC title game
Georgia? were 9-3 and didn't win the East
UCLA? were 9-3 and Oregon already beat them
Arizona State? were 9-3 and didn't win the South
Missouri? Alabama beat them in the SEC title game
Clemson? 9-3 and Florida State already beat them
Wisconsin? Ohio State already beat them in the Big Ten title game

Tell me, what teams in 2014 should've made an expanded playoff? You see 8 other teams there worth including? I sure do not.

I think baylor tcu and michigan state would of competed very well and stood a chance to win a game

All better teams then a usc this year......past that to 12 teams is watered down for sure. Maybe 8 is the answer. I would rather see those middling teams play each other then play the number 1 team