Scheduling

[jeffgt14]

I see nothing about 30 point losses. I see something about unequivocally one of the top 4 teams in the country which makes no sense if as many people in the country are making a claim they aren't.

 

[smathis30]

I see nothing about 30 point losses. I see something about unequivocally one of the top 4 teams in the country which makes no sense if as many people in the country are making a claim they aren't.

A team that is unequivocally one of the best four teams in the country doesn't stop blown out by 30 points. It basically is lawyer speak for an eye test. Yes their four bullets after that matter, but getting who they think are the four best teams is most important. So as it says in the document:
1. Get the teams in order
2. If there is a tie, the four criteria can Be used as a tiebreaker. It isn't the ranking criteria, just a tie breaking mechanism as they see fit. Seeing as to how the #5 and #6 teams both had 30 point losses and conf champs, the committee saw that having 30 point losses meant Alabama was unequivocally the better team.

 

[RonJohn]

I'm honestly surprised bama doesn't get flack for their schedule but their ok the field performance, ya know the committee defined "eye test", is hard to argue against. They beat every team uga did in common (bar auburn the second time). And playing a playoff caliber team before half their team got injured is something you also have to take into consideration. And for the larger conference slate, lets look at FSU and Clemson the last few years.
Clemsons losses IOIIIRIRIIROIIIIRIIIRO
Of their 22 most recent regular season losses, 14 were in in conference, 5 were rivalry games, and 3 were out of conference. 19/22 were from teams they play every year.
For Florida state in that same window:
OIIIIIIIIIIIROIIIOIIIOIIIIR
4/27 were out of conference. 2/27 rivalry games and 21/27 for a total of 23/27 losses come from teams they play. Roughly every year on a rotating home away basis. You can't be bama and dictate neutral sites on conference games. You have to win in the road. And that's why it's more difficult and why every conf with a 9 team schedule has been left out already and everyone with 8 hasn't been left out

So this year if Clemson had played Duke and UNC instead of USCe and Auburn, there is a greater chance that they would have lost one of those games? Also using your stats, if you just take out the rivalry games and consider that they play an FCS team each year, that would be 8 conference games and 2 non conference games per year. Those losses were 14 in and 3 out, which is very close to 8-2. If you do include the rivalry games, then it is 8 conference to 3 non conference and the loss record goes to 14-8 which is greater than the in to out ratio. I don't buy the conference games are harder than non-conference game hype.

 

[RonJohn]

A team that is unequivocally one of the best four teams in the country doesn't stop blown out by 30 points. It basically is lawyer speak for an eye test. Yes their four bullets after that matter, but getting who they think are the four best teams is most important. So as it says in the document:
1. Get the teams in order
2. If there is a tie, the four criteria can Be used as a tiebreaker. It isn't the ranking criteria, just a tie breaking mechanism as they see fit. Seeing as to how the #5 and #6 teams both had 30 point losses and conf champs, the committee saw that having 30 point losses meant Alabama was unequivocally the better team.

A team that is unequivocally one of the best four does not get left out of it's conference championship game. I don't care what any document says. If you have to argue about who is left out, there are deep issues with the system. If you argue about which non-qualifiers should get a second chance, then all non-qualifiers should just suck it up and qualify.

 

[smathis30]

So this year if Clemson had played Duke and UNC instead of USCe and Auburn, there is a greater chance that they would have lost one of those games? Also using your stats, if you just take out the rivalry games and consider that they play an FCS team each year, that would be 8 conference games and 2 non conference games per year. Those losses were 14 in and 3 out, which is very close to 8-2. If you do include the rivalry games, then it is 8 conference to 3 non conference and the loss record goes to 14-8 which is greater than the in to out ratio. I don't buy the conference games are harder than non-conference game hype.

It has more to do with road games. Almost half those losses came in years where those teams each had 6 losses. The point Shaw was making was that the years where you have just 2 losses, those are the years where those conference losses matter more. They aren't going to be better every year, but every odd year or so upsets happen. Last year's games against Louisville and Pitt are a far better example. Or all of 2014 FSU. It won't happen every year, but one every three of four it will bite them in the ***. 2012? Clemson against NC state is a point and example.

 

[smathis30]

A team that is unequivocally one of the best four does not get left out of it's conference championship game. I don't care what any document says. If you have to argue about who is left out, there are deep issues with the system. If you argue about which non-qualifiers should get a second chance, then all non-qualifiers should just suck it up and qualify.

Disagree. Injuries happen. Conferences are better or worse than each other. The fact that almost three teams from the same divisions were in playoff discussion in two of the four years (2014 sec west, 2016 big ten west) who's how big the power struggle can be. The best teams don't lose twice.

 

[RonJohn]

It has more to do with road games. Almost half those losses came in years where those teams each had 6 losses. The point Shaw was making was that the years where you have just 2 losses, those are the years where those conference losses matter more. They aren't going to be better every year, but every odd year or so upsets happen. Last year's games against Louisville and Pitt are a far better example. Or all of 2014 FSU. It won't happen every year, but one every three of four it will bite them in the ***. 2012? Clemson against NC state is a point and example.

Syracuse beat Clemson this year and the general consensus is that Bryant being hurt was the reason for the loss. If Bryant had been hurt during the Auburn game, would Clemson have won? If Bryant had been hurt during the USCe game, would Clemson have won? Would Clemson have lost the Syracuse game if Bryant hadn't been hurt? Is it more difficult for Clemson to play Syracuse than it was to play Auburn?

Teams play games against other teams. It really doesn't make a difference if Auburn is in the SEC or ACC and if Syracuse is in the SEC or ACC when it comes time to play the game.

 

[smathis30]

Syracuse beat Clemson this year and the general consensus is that Bryant being hurt was the reason for the loss. If Bryant had been hurt during the Auburn game, would Clemson have won? If Bryant had been hurt during the USCe game, would Clemson have won? Would Clemson have lost the Syracuse game if Bryant hadn't been hurt? Is it more difficult for Clemson to play Syracuse than it was to play Auburn?

Teams play games against other teams. It really doesn't make a difference if Auburn is in the SEC or ACC and if Syracuse is in the SEC or ACC when it comes time to play the game.

Conference games have more on the line and tend to be more like rivalry games that normal OOc games. They also rotate home and away and due to conference proximity, draw less home field advantage. Just look at Clemson and FSUs two-three loss seasons. They always lose to a conference opponent (or rival) they shouldn't have due to more being at steak than in a regular non con game. They also usually get forced into playing on the road which is always harder to play in. See: GT @ UVA, Auburn @ LSU and Clemson @ GT.

 

[jeffgt14]

A team that is unequivocally one of the best four teams in the country doesn't stop blown out by 30 points. It basically is lawyer speak for an eye test. Yes their four bullets after that matter, but getting who they think are the four best teams is most important. So as it says in the document:
1. Get the teams in order
2. If there is a tie, the four criteria can Be used as a tiebreaker. It isn't the ranking criteria, just a tie breaking mechanism as they see fit. Seeing as to how the #5 and #6 teams both had 30 point losses and conf champs, the committee saw that having 30 point losses meant Alabama was unequivocally the better team.

Lucky for uga they got a garbage time TD in with 2 minutes left to beak the 30 point limit or they'd be sitting at home. Damn Iowa running the score up with a TD with a little over a minute left destroyed OSU's hopes.

 

[RonJohn]

Disagree. Injuries happen. Conferences are better or worse than each other. The fact that almost three teams from the same divisions were in playoff discussion in two of the four years (2014 sec west, 2016 big ten west) who's how big the power struggle can be. The best teams don't lose twice.

To me it only shows that the committee is as much about trash talk type of discussions as they are about actual football. Ole Miss and Miss State were ranked in the top 5 and were unbeatable in 2014, until that started losing. They didn't live up to the hype that year. The SEC West gets hype every year, but most of their teams don't play anyone outside of the conference that is any good. This year Alabama played FSU(not good this year) and Auburn played Clemson. What teams did the SEC West beat out of conference? FSU? But they get all of the credit for beating each other because they are the best division in football(even though they don't play anyone outside of the conference. The only quality team they played out of conference beat them).

 

[smathis30]

Lucky for uga they got a garbage time TD in with 2 minutes left to beak the 30 point limit or they'd be sitting at home. Damn Iowa running the score up with a TD with a little over a minute left destroyed OSU's hopes.

Uga got lucky that they had a redemption game to erase the deficit. They dropped out of the top 4 after the loss. Wow. Consistency. Iowa was up 40 points in the fourth quarter. They only scored because Ohio state needed an inside kick and failed to recover it. They only ran the ball to run out the clock and scored. Oops. Happens. We did it against Cuse serveral years ago.

 

[WreckinGT]

Disagree. Injuries happen. Conferences are better or worse than each other. The fact that almost three teams from the same divisions were in playoff discussion in two of the four years (2014 sec west, 2016 big ten west) who's how big the power struggle can be. The best teams don't lose twice.

So if Auburn had beaten UGA you would have left them out of the playoffs?

 

[jeffgt14]

Uga got lucky that they had a redemption game to erase the deficit. They dropped out of the top 4 after the loss. Wow. Consistency. Iowa was up 40 points in the fourth quarter. They only scored because Ohio state needed an inside kick and failed to recover it. They only ran the ball to run out the clock and scored. Oops. Happens. We did it against Cuse serveral years ago.

So if Bama beat Auburn and uga beat Bama in a close game, Bama would still be in because they pass the eye test but uga would be left out because they got blown out by Auburn and Top 4 teams don't get blown out (unless they get lucky enough to redeem themselves with a rematch)?

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Not lose by 30 points.

Neither did Central Florida but they didn’t lose a game.

 

[smathis30]

To me it only shows that the committee is as much about trash talk type of discussions as they are about actual football. Ole Miss and Miss State were ranked in the top 5 and were unbeatable in 2014, until that started losing. They didn't live up to the hype that year. The SEC West gets hype every year, but most of their teams don't play anyone outside of the conference that is any good. This year Alabama played FSU(not good this year) and Auburn played Clemson. What teams did the SEC West beat out of conference? FSU? But they get all of the credit for beating each other because they are the best division in football(even though they don't play anyone outside of the conference. The only quality team they played out of conference beat them).

3 teams with 9 wins and 6 with 8 might be one of the greatest division accomplishments of all time. With wins over West Virginia, Boise State, Wisconsin, Memphis, Texas Tech, Kansas state. Every team was bowl eligible and every team went undefeated OOC and everyone's bar MSU played at least one power five. They shat the bed in the playoffs but played about as good as you expect

 

[smathis30]

So if Bama beat Auburn and uga beat Bama in a close game, Bama would still be in because they pass the eye test but uga would be left out because they got blown out by Auburn and Top 4 teams don't get blown out (unless they get lucky enough to redeem themselves with a rematch)?

Teams play bad. Uga also only lost once. None of the other contenders with a schedule worth a damn could say that

 

[jeffgt14]

Teams play bad. Uga also only lost once. None of the other contenders with a schedule worth a damn could say that

So teams play bad is an excuse for uga but not OSU?

 

[smathis30]

I neither did

Neither did Central Florida but they didn’t lose a game.

They also didn't beat anyone worth a damn which is how the committee ranks teams.

 

[smathis30]

So teams play bad is an excuse for uga but not OSU?

No they played bad once. And redeemed it. Ohio state played bad once but ten didn't redeem it by playing even worse

 

[jeffgt14]

No they played bad once. And redeemed it. Ohio state played bad once but ten didn't redeem it by playing even worse

So 2 losses are what matters now. So Auburn shouldn't have been in the playoffs if they best uga right?