2014 NCAA Football

[saevel25]

I take most TV opinions with a huge grain of salt. Some people have an agenda and are biased. Some even admit it and make no bones about it. Some people are just ignorant and don't actually watch a lot of the teams they are talking about. And some are simply not very bright about the Xs and Os of football.

Pretty much just like "fans".

I normally like announcers that equally piss off both fan bases during a game or during commentary. It's actually hilarious when I check websites for two different teams during a game and both fan bases are absolutely convinced that the announcers are openly rooting for the other team.

It happens every single game that Vern and Gary call. Alabama fans think Colin Cowherd hates them. Fans outside of the SEC think Colin Cowherd is an Alabama and SEC homer.

It's best for TV and probably best for football when at least some teams in major nationwide TV markets are in the mix.

Mark May, the most ignorant idiot of them all!!

The more the announcers can actually talk football lingo over opinionated crap the better. I am a big fan of the X and O's of football.

[cowboydave1967]

Mark May, the most ignorant t of them all!! The more the announcers can actually talk football lingo over opinionated crap the better. I am a big fan of the X and O's of football.  [/quote]

[cowboydave1967]

Mark May, the most ignorant t of them all!! The more the announcers can actually talk football lingo over opinionated crap the better. I am a big fan of the X and O's of football.

[/quote] I love football. Especially college football. I am a huge Tennessee Vol fan. Btw, go Vols on a big overtime win over the Gamecocks. I also loce SEC football

[cowboydave1967]

My [quote name="cowboydave1967" url="/t/72907/2014-ncaa-football/330#post_1071374"] [/quote] I love football. Especially college football. I am a huge Tennessee Vol fan. Btw, go Vols on a big overtime win over the Gamecocks. I also loce SEC football[/quote] My phone is being stupid!!! I love SEC football because that is the conference my team plays in. They have been very strong for many years. But I really enjoy watching fundamentally sound football teams playing and executing, no matter the conference. I enjoy watching the media build up between out of conference games. As far as conferences go, there are strong and weak teams all conferences. There are plenty of mediocre teams in the SEC, including my beloved Vols. The SEC just happens to have some really strong teams right now. And all of them in the West division. There have been times it was the East. It has been the ACC, or BIG 12 or PAC 10 or Independent. It all comes down to good recruits, coaching. Teams "jelling" and basically play sound fundamental football. Imho, it will take more than 4 team playoff to actually decide a national champion. But that is just me. I believe they are headed in the right direction, But it still needs some tweaking. It will take time. And not everyone will be satisfied with any decision. But I believe they will get there. Until, let's watch andenjoy the next 5 weeks of football and see what unfolds.

[teamroper60]

I will say prove Penn State's defense isn't that good. I said DEFENSE not team.

Ok.   Using your own stats.     Northwestern is ranked 53rd but PSU gave up 361 yds, 17 first downs and 29 points to them.  You can't say the offense/special teams cost you the game when you gave up 17 first downs.   Using your stats, the offensive ranking of the 4 teams that PSU beat average 73rd.       The offensive ranking of the teams that beat them averages 52.5.

But the icing on the cake to me, is looking at who is ranked behind PSU on that chart.   Watch anything besides B1G football and you will know there are some really good defenses ranked well behind them according to those stats, which only go to prove just how skewed they are.  The most glaring example is the team ranked right behind PSU.  Auburn.   The offensive ranking of the teams Auburn has played averages 40th.   There is no way Auburn should be behind PSU on that chart if it wasn't skewed.    I said before that chart is no more useful than any other metric and given the obvious issues with it, perhaps less useful than some.   It's only real purpose is yet another talking point for those whose teams are on the outside looking in.

[teamroper60]

Mark May, the most ignorant idiot of them all!!

On this we can agree!

[saevel25]

Quote:

Originally Posted by teamroper60

Ok.   Using your own stats.     Northwestern is ranked 53rd but PSU gave up 361 yds, 17 first downs and 29 points to them.  You can't say the offense/special teams cost you the game when you gave up 17 first downs.   Using your stats, the offensive ranking of the 4 teams that PSU beat average 73rd.       The offensive ranking of the teams that beat them averages 52.5.

Just throwing out a bad game against Northwestern is not relevant . Teams have their ups and downs. Very rarely do you see teams consistently hold teams on an exact number every game. The stats will fluctuate around an average. You don't see teams giving up 17 points every game. You might see something like 24 points, 10 points, 31 points, 6 points, ect.. So just picking that one lone high score as a way to disprove something is what is wrong with just going with the "eye test" method of evaluating a team.

Quote:

Originally Posted by teamroper60

But the icing on the cake to me, is looking at who is ranked behind PSU on that chart.   Watch anything besides B1G football and you will know there are some really good defenses ranked well behind them according to those stats, which only go to prove just how skewed they are.

Your first sentence makes no sense. You are just assuming because you think that PSU doesn't have a good defense then it is skewed because they are ahead of what you perceive as a better defense. Not really a good argument founded on anything substantial.

---

Quote:

Just a reminder that Indiana, winless in the Big Ten, owns the head-to-head over the SEC East's division leader.

-Eleven Warriors Blog

[MS256]

Colin Cowherd (that SEC homer) is really in hot water now. He just predicted that the SEC won't have anybody in the 4 team playoff. OMG I can already hear the uproar! LOL

I predicted before the season that no SEC school would have less than 2 losses. Looks like I may have been wrong (mostly due to TAMU not being as competitive as I thought they would be).

If I could re-predict right now I would say that both Auburn and Mississippi State each have a 60% chance of beating Alabama.

With Treadwell out Ole Miss becomes an easier win for State so I figure they have a 70% chance to win that game.

I thought Georgia would be a test for Auburn and that's not looking very smart at this point but if I throw out the Florida game as a freak, and figure a boost when they get Todd Gurley back, I give Georgia a 25% chance to win that game.

Whoever ends up playing in the SEC Championship from the West has a 70% chance of winning that game.

Add it up and both Auburn and Mississippi State may end up with less than 2 losses but it's not a sure bet yet.

[Golfingdad]

Colin Cowherd (that SEC homer) is really in hot water now. He just predicted that the SEC won't have anybody in the 4 team playoff. OMG I can already hear the uproar! LOL

I predicted before the season that no SEC school would have less than 2 losses. Looks like I may have been wrong (mostly due to TAMU not being as competitive as I thought they would be).

If I could re-predict right now I would say that both Auburn and Mississippi State each have a 60% chance of beating Alabama.

With Treadwell out Ole Miss becomes an easier win for State so I figure they have a 70% chance to win that game.

I thought Georgia would be a test for Auburn and that's not looking very smart at this point but if I throw out the Florida game as a freak, and figure a boost when they get Todd Gurley back, I give Georgia a 25% chance to win that game.

Whoever ends up playing in the SEC Championship from the West has a 70% chance of winning that game.

Add it up and both Auburn and Mississippi State may end up with less than 2 losses but it's not a sure bet yet.

But that's the beauty of having the committee in place of the computer polls now.  For arguments sake, lets assume that FSU, Oregon, TCU all win out and also assume that Miss St loses to Alabama and Ole Miss, Auburn loses to Alabama, Ole Miss loses to Arkansas and Alabama loses to LSU giving them all two losses.

Miss St would be out and certainly there would only be one spot open for the SEC, but I see no way that they put Michigan State or Notre Dame ahead of all three of the remaining SEC schools.

Computer systems may have done that, but I think the committee will not.

[saevel25]

But that's the beauty of having the committee in place of the computer polls now.  For arguments sake, lets assume that FSU, Oregon, TCU all win out and also assume that Miss St loses to Alabama and Ole Miss, Auburn loses to Alabama, Ole Miss loses to Arkansas and Alabama loses to LSU giving them all two losses.

Miss St would be out and certainly there would only be one spot open for the SEC, but I see no way that they put Michigan State or Notre Dame ahead of all three of the remaining SEC schools.

Computer systems may have done that, but I think the committee will not.

I don't think that would happen. History in the BCS has shown that the Big 10 was always fighting the computer polls to try to make it to the top of the BCS.

I don't get how people can actually think the opinions of a committee is any better than computer polls. To me all it the committee is a way for them to vote in a way to appease the fans. God knows fans know exactly who the best top 4 teams are (sarcasm).

I am not saying this to push for MSU or ND to get to the playoff. I am saying this that the selection committee is not the best way to determine who gets in. I get they want to copy NCAA Basketball, but the issue with that is there are so many spots in the tournament that no one really cares who gets the in the last 4-10 spots. It isn't like Duke is going to be left out because they are only picking the top 4 teams.

To me the best way would to bring back the BCS rankings, take the top 4 teams and have at it. I really would prefer the top 8 teams.

Heck you can pretty much go by wins and losses as the primary first criteria for the selection committee. It was the two undefeated teams, then the next 15 teams were 1 loss teams. I might say LSU might be better than a lot of the one loss teams. Their only losses are to Miss. State and Auburn. I mean, seriously. If that is how deep they are going to think, then bring back the BCS rankings.

[Golfingdad]

I don't think that would happen. History in the BCS has shown that the Big 10 was always fighting the computer polls to try to make it to the top of the BCS.

I don't get how people can actually think the opinions of a committee is any better than computer polls. To me all it the committee is a way for them to vote in a way to appease the fans. God knows fans know exactly who the best top 4 teams are (sarcasm).

I am not saying this to push for MSU or ND to get to the playoff. I am saying this that the selection committee is not the best way to determine who gets in. I get they want to copy NCAA Basketball, but the issue with that is there are so many spots in the tournament that no one really cares who gets the in the last 4-10 spots. It isn't like Duke is going to be left out because they are only picking the top 4 teams.

To me the best way would to bring back the BCS rankings, take the top 4 teams and have at it. I really would prefer the top 8 teams.

Heck you can pretty much go by wins and losses as the primary first criteria for the selection committee. It was the two undefeated teams, then the next 15 teams were 1 loss teams. I might say LSU might be better than a lot of the one loss teams. Their only losses are to Miss. State and Auburn. I mean, seriously. If that is how deep they are going to think, then bring back the BCS rankings.

I completely agree that an 8 team playoff would be ideal, as do, I think, most people, but it's silly to keep complaining about improvements because they aren't perfect.  The BCS was better than the previous system, and the 4 team playoff is better than the BCS (for those that actually care about deciding a true National Champion, that is)

And, to be fair, I will withhold judgment on the value of the committee over the computer system.  If there are two 2 loss SEC teams in the playoffs in front of a one loss MSU, TCU, KSU or ND, then I'll probably agree with you.  The same would be true if there are somehow zero SEC teams in the playoffs.

Leaving things open to judgment calls from humans allows for them to correct mistakes that the computers might make, but it also allows for them to potentially eff things up worse.  We'll have to wait and see.  For now, though, as per my usual, I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt. ;)

[teamroper60]

Just throwing out a bad game against Northwestern is not relevant. Teams have their ups and downs. Very rarely do you see teams consistently hold teams on an exact number every game. The stats will fluctuate around an average. You don't see teams giving up 17 points every game. You might see something like 24 points, 10 points, 31 points, 6 points, ect.. So just picking that one lone high score as a way to disprove something is what is wrong with just going with the "eye test" method of evaluating a team.

Your first sentence makes no sense. You are just assuming because you think that PSU doesn't have a good defense then it is skewed because they are ahead of what you perceive as a better defense. Not really a good argument founded on anything substantial.

I notice you focused on the Northwestern game and want to eliminate it, yet convienently left off the statistics which showed the best offensive teams Penn State played were collectively worse (offensively, since that was your criteria) than the teams Auburn has faced.   Nice.    Use stats when they are convienent to you but eliminate them when they hurt you.  Anything to make your point, huh?    You should go into politics, you would be good at it.

Yes, Indiana beat Missouri.   Of course, since you want to eliminate the Northwestern game as an outlier, we'll just toss out the Indiana game too..   After all, picking one lone score to prove anything is wrong...........   At least, according to you.......

Based on what I have seen over a whole lot of years of watching college football, using stats is probably the worst way to pick who is in and who is out.   Those stats are always skewed by the cupcake games on a teams schedule and really tell you nothing about the caliber of the team.    If you really want to make it fair, a tournament of conference champions is the way to get it done.   That would eliminate all the guess work out of it for everybody.   Win your conference, you get in the dance.   Lose and you are a spectator just like the rest of the nation..

[MS256]

With the expansions of conferences, more regular season games, more money for traditionally under-funded programs from conference TV contracts, and added conference championship games it stands to reason that it's going to become harder and harder to go through a season with less than 2 losses for teams in those conferences.

The way it used to be all you had to do was win the games on your schedule. Now you may have to beat the best team twice just to get in the playoff. Even if they weren't on the schedule you are guaranteed of facing another team that has played well enough to win their division.

Nothing wrong with that but it's also going to take some time for college football fans to get used to it and teams that don't have a conference championship have a pretty big built in advantage.

Remains to be seen how the committee will take different things into account. I happen to think that things like Ohio State's "bad loss" because of who beat them and that Indiana beating Missouri somehow extrapolates to the overall strength of the conferences are equally silly.

Ohio State lost because they didn't play well enough to win that game. Missouri lost because they didn't play well enough to win that game. It happens but it doesn't mean much more than that. If either team played those opponents 10 times they would probably win 9 of them.

Nobody thinks much about it when a last place team in the NFL beats a first place team. They just chalk it up to one of those flukes that happen during an NFL season.

[saevel25]

I notice you focused on the Northwestern game and want to eliminate it, yet convienently left off the statistics which showed the best offensive teams Penn State played were collectively worse (offensively, since that was your criteria) than the teams Auburn has faced.   Nice.    Use stats when they are convienent to you but eliminate them when they hurt you.  Anything to make your point, huh?    You should go into politics, you would be good at it.

Yes, Indiana beat Missouri.   Of course, since you want to eliminate the Northwestern game as an outlier, we'll just toss out the Indiana game too..   After all, picking one lone score to prove anything is wrong...........   At least, according to you.......

Based on what I have seen over a whole lot of years of watching college football, using stats is probably the worst way to pick who is in and who is out.   Those stats are always skewed by the cupcake games on a teams schedule and really tell you nothing about the caliber of the team.    If you really want to make it fair, a tournament of conference champions is the way to get it done.   That would eliminate all the guess work out of it for everybody.   Win your conference, you get in the dance.   Lose and you are a spectator just like the rest of the nation..

I never eliminated Northwestern, I never even mentioned them. You mentioned them. I agree, their defense had a bad game against Northwestern. Great defenses can have a bad game. To throw that game out there to discredit the entirety of Penn States season when looking at their defense is just stupid. That was my point. Even great teams have a game were they don't play their typical best. But to zero in on that one game as the final say in how good that team is is stupid.

That game is already accounted for in those rankings. Same with Auburn's opponents they faced. The fact is, Penn State has played better defense against weaker opponents then Auburn has played better defense against stronger opponents. Basically their defense are nearly the same since they are ranked one apart. I am not saying Penn State is head and shoulders above Auburn's defense. You could easily group them in the same tier in terms of how they performed this year.

Why is stats the worst way? What about LSU, ranked 9th in the F/+ rankings. Has 2 losses against two of the top 5 team as their only losses. Yet they are ranked 19th in the college football playoff selection. Stats do not help people with cupcake schedules. There is examples all over those rankings were teams have been bumped up or bumped down due to the teams they played. Those rankings are ADJUSTED FOR STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE. How is favoring a cup cake schedule? It wouldn't be

Why is conference champions the best? What if a two loss team from another division happens to beat an undefeated team. Is that two loss team more deserving because they happen to win one game at the end of the year? A winner take all conference championship, from a conference that has divisions, is the worst way to decide who gets selected.

The Missouri jab was more in line with that SEC fan boys like to claim their middle of the pack teams would dominate other conferences. Yet Indiana has a winning record against the best of the SEC east. That was just me having some fun.

[teamroper60]

I never eliminated Northwestern, I never even mentioned them. You mentioned them. I agree, their defense had a bad game against Northwestern. Great defenses can have a bad game. To throw that game out there to discredit the entirety of Penn States season when looking at their defense is just stupid. That was my point. Even great teams have a game were they don't play their typical best. But to zero in on that one game as the final say in how good that team is is stupid.

That game is already accounted for in those rankings. Same with Auburn's opponents they faced. The fact is, Penn State has played better defense against weaker opponents then Auburn has played better defense against stronger opponents. Basically their defense are nearly the same since they are ranked one apart. I am not saying Penn State is head and shoulders above Auburn's defense. You could easily group them in the same tier in terms of how they performed this year.

Why is stats the worst way? What about LSU, ranked 9th in the F/+ rankings. Has 2 losses against two of the top 5 team as their only losses. Yet they are ranked 19th in the college football playoff selection. Stats do not help people with cupcake schedules. There is examples all over those rankings were teams have been bumped up or bumped down due to the teams they played. Those rankings are ADJUSTED FOR STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE. How is favoring a cup cake schedule? It wouldn't be

Why is conference champions the best? What if a two loss team from another division happens to beat an undefeated team. Is that two loss team more deserving because they happen to win one game at the end of the year? A winner take all conference championship, from a conference that has divisions, is the worst way to decide who gets selected.

The Missouri jab was more in line with that SEC fan boys like to claim their middle of the pack teams would dominate other conferences. Yet Indiana has a winning record against the best of the SEC east. That was just me having some fun.

You basically eliminated them when you discounted the performance against them and blew it off as "a bad game" and discount that game's performance as an outlier.  Did it ever occur to you that PSU had a bad game BECAUSE of Northwestern, rather than  in spite of them?

I disagree that the stats don't help teams that schedule cupcake teams.   I showed you that the teams PSU lost to had an average offensive ranking of 52.5 and the teams they beat were much worse than that.   Auburn has one loss, to the team with a current offensive ranking of 8 (I believe it was higher than that last week but I can't be positive).   The average for the teams Auburn faced was 40 (not going to redo the math to see if those changed after this weekend).  The only feasible way for a PSU to have a higher ranking is the cupcakes, because they lose the SOS badly.  You failed to even acknowlege these stats TWICE, so clearly stats only matter to you when they support your argument and become irrelevant when they don't.  Given the fact OSU struggled to beat PSU, it is in your (and OSU's) best interest to pump them up to make your team's struggle against them look better.  So I am done debating PSU's defense.

To change gears to the playoffs.   Why is stats a bad way to choose who is in the playoff?   Again because stats are always skewed.    You talked about PSU having a bad game and how every team can have a bad game.   But those bad games play into the stats, just as beating bad teams play into the stats.    Moral victories don't count.  Wins and losses is the only stat that really matters.   If that weren't true, then you wouldn't really care that a 2 loss team might get in to a champions only playoff.  Requiring a conference championship in order to make the dance provides an easy to follow road map for teams and fans since it becomes very clear that to get in, you have to win your conference.   Simple and straightforward. It also makes every conference game just that much more important.   To your comments about a 2 loss team getting in as conference champ, sure it is possible.   Stuff like that happens in the NCAA basketball tournament frequently and I seem to recall Seattle slipping into the NFL playoffs a few years ago as the NFC west champ with barely a .500 record. Since a tournament requires seedings, a 2 loss team is probably going to be seeded lower than the one-loss teams, so they are going to draw a tough first round opponent  (likely the top seed).  That system seems to work pretty well without much arguing about who should or should not be there in most post season playoff situations and nobody really debates whether or not the winner was in fact the champion.  Further, limiting the playoffs to conference champions also removes the possibilty of a stacked deck in favor of any one conference and the resulting bickering about biases for or against a conference.  (It would have also put Boise State in there during those years when people debated whether they should have been included or not.)   Finally, yeah, I know Notre Dame, Navy, BYU and a couple of others aren't in a conference.   To that I say, join one if you want a shot at the dance.  ND is halfway in one now.   Commit and get it over with.   BYU quit a conference, they can re-join one.  The others can find one as well.

BTW, I do not propose the champions only idea because of Mizzou.    Barring a bout of food poisoning taking out the whole SEC west champ, I don't see Mizzou or anybody else from the SEC east as having a snowball's chance to win the conference.     BUT, you should really hope they do (that chaos you talked about would set in for sure)

[MS256]

As far as I'm concerned the stated goal of picking the best 4 teams is the flaw. Maybe a noble undertaking but too controversial, too hard to do, and not worth it.

Conferences are not equal, and schedules are not equal. Every year somebody is going to feel slighted whether justified or not.

If the stated policy was that only conference winners could get in the playoff (once everybody got used to it) it would take the constant griping and whining out of the equation.

To make it relatively fair I think any independent should be forced to join or at least align with a conference and every conference should be forced to play a conference championship game.

That wouldn't completely level the playing field but it would be closer than what we have now.

Would the playoff of conference winners necessarily have the "best" 4 teams? No but so what. The "best" team doesn't always win anyway.

[saevel25]

Given the fact OSU struggled to beat PSU, it is in your (and OSU's) best interest to pump them up to make your team's struggle against them look better.  So I am done debating PSU's defense.

I'm not pumping up anything. I am just stating the fact that Penn State's Defense is very good. I have not once overestimated how good Penn States Defense is.

How would my pumping up the Buckeyes matter at all. I have no contact with the selection committee. You make it seem I have some magical power to decide it all with this argument on the thread.

To change gears to the playoffs.   Why is stats a bad way to choose who is in the playoff?   Again because stats are always skewed.

So are people's opinions, typically more so than actual stats.

But those bad games play into the stats, just as beating bad teams play into the stats.    Moral victories don't count.  Wins and losses is the only stat that really matters.

Wrong because you can have a 2-loss team that is more deserving than a 1-loss or no-loss team. Heck I would say that Florida State could be a team that might not be deserving enough to to make it even undefeated.

http://sagarin.com/sports/cfsend.htm

By Sagarin's strength of schedule, they have the 40th best SOS. If it ended today I would say the top 4 from the SEC west are all more deserving off play off spots.

I know shocking right, a big ten fan is saying the playoff should have all SEC teams.

BTW, I do not propose the champions only idea because of Mizzou.    Barring a bout of food poisoning taking out the whole SEC west champ, I don't see Mizzou or anybody else from the SEC east as having a snowball's chance to win the conference.     BUT, you should really hope they do (that chaos you talked about would set in for sure)

Uh oh now you have gone and jinxed them

I just want to see it be a huge mess at the end of the year. One it  will help Ohio State. Two, I thought the 4 team playoff was too conservative of a step. I always thought 8 teams were the optimal number. I rather see chaos and talking points so they will change it.

Still we have 5 major conferences, so to mach up with your theory, take the 5 conference champions then the next best 3. That way you can actually pick a non-major conference team as well. Lets say ND goes undefeated on year.

That way if ND wants to stay out of a conference the only penalty would be to have the back door win in the conference championship, but they are still not shut out.

[Golfingdad]

Pretty safe bet that tonight's top 4 teams will be MSU, FSU, Auburn and Oregon ????

MSU and Auburn clearly have the bumpiest remaining roads.  FSU has a couple of usually-tough rivalry games in Miami and Florida coming up, but no games against ranked teams.  And if Oregon doesn't have any trouble getting by Utah this weekend (they shouldn't) then it's a cakewalk for them the rest of the way.

In looking at all of the top teams, the two that intrigue me the most are TCU and Michigan State and both have their biggest remaining game this weekend (K-State and Ohio State, respectively).  I feel like if one of them can win out, after the dust settles on the SEC West mess, that team would be the fourth playoff team.  If both of them win out, then, well, hmmmm ...

Here's my just-for-fun prediction (guaranteed to be dead wrong):

Mississippi State wins out, leaving Ole Miss and Alabama with 2 losses each, and Auburn loses to Alabama, leaving them with 2 as well.  Oh, and TCU loses to K-State.

Final Four:

1. Mississippi State
2. Florida State
3. Oregon
4. Michigan State

Mississippi State and Oregon to play in the first Playoff Championship game.