2014 NCAA Football

[MS256]

Point shaving:

Remember the movie Blue Chips where the coaches went back to the film to see if the basketball player shaved points?

There have been a few times that I was suspicious of point shaving in college football over the years but not concrete enough to convince me. When watching the FSU/Louisville game there were several throws by Winston in the first half where I wondered how he could have made that decision, especially considering how well he always plays in the second half.

I wish I had that game recorded now that the point shaving allegations have come out so I could take a look at those throws again.

I can't help but think there is something there. Who bets on first half point spreads? If I wanted my high school friend to shave points under the radar and yet not lose the game I would go with first half point spreads.

[saevel25]

  MS256 said:

I can't help but think there is something there. Who bets on first half point spreads? If I wanted my high school friend to shave points under the radar and yet not lose the game I would go with first half point spreads.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/report-ncaa-investigating-jameis-winston-point-shaving-allegations/ar-AA7msbk

Man, can this guy not stay out of the news.

But, stat-wise, 2013 versus 2014 splits

I think overall he's having a worse year than last year. Still his completion % is nearly identical in the 2nd half between the two years. His first half is nearly 2% less. Not sure if that is significant or not. His 1:1 TD to INT ratio does stand out a bit. He had a 4:1 last year, and it was consistent through out both half's. He has 3:1 in the 2nd half this year.

I guess the easiest way to shave points would to give up the drive with an easy interception. Until they actually find evidence, I wont say he's guilty. Still, I wouldn't put it past him to do this.

[Golfingdad]

  None said:

  DoubleEagle said:

Let me really mess it up for you...Alabama wins out..loses in the SEC Championship Game...Oregon wins out, FSU wins out, TCU wins out, Ohio State loses again...

Now who do you have in the Playoff?

FSU

Oregon

TCU

?????

  saevel25 said:

Baylor or Alabama, thought don't forget Nebraska. They are a 1-loss team and probably the biggest challenge for Ohio State. So in terms of that actually being likely, I would say a 1-loss Nebraska team has an outside shot.

I doubt Baylor.  I'd have a hard time believing that they'd include two Big 12 teams and have zero SEC teams.  I'd put my money on Mississippi State (assuming they win all of their remaining non-Bama games) as that fourth team.  One loss (to Alabama) vs. Alabama with 2 losses, including one to some "crappy" SEC East team?

And I don't buy the whole "they don't deserve it because they didn't even make their conference championship game" argument either.  That's a farce.  Something that is ENTIRELY out of the kids control, and the nod goes to the Big 12 because they happen to be the ones fortunate enough to play in a conference without divisions?  Poppycock.

If MSU loses another, then I agree Nebraska next.  Followed by Bama and then maybe Ole Miss (assuming MSU's second loss is to them).

My dream scenario is that UCLA quietly squirms their way back into the conversation.  They'd need a considerable amount of help (obviously).  First and foremost, they need Zona to beat ASU to give them a second crack at Oregon.  They'd also need a bit of craziness in the SEC and the Big 12l, but hey, nuttier things have happened ... I think.

[MS256]

  Golfingdad said:

I doubt Baylor.  I'd have a hard time believing that they'd include two Big 12 teams and have zero SEC teams.  I'd put my money on Mississippi State (assuming they win all of their remaining non-Bama games) as that fourth team.  One loss (to Alabama) vs. Alabama with 2 losses, including one to some "crappy" SEC East team?

And I don't buy the whole "they don't deserve it because they didn't even make their conference championship game" argument either.  That's a farce.  Something that is ENTIRELY out of the kids control, and the nod goes to the Big 12 because they happen to be the ones fortunate enough to play in a conference without divisions?  Poppycock.

If MSU loses another, then I agree Nebraska next.  Followed by Bama and then maybe Ole Miss (assuming MSU's second loss is to them).

My dream scenario is that UCLA quietly squirms their way back into the conversation.  They'd need a considerable amount of help (obviously).  First and foremost, they need Zona to beat ASU to give them a second crack at Oregon.  They'd also need a bit of craziness in the SEC and the Big 12l, but hey, nuttier things have happened ... I think.

Unlike most people, and without anymore to go on than they do, I rate the top of the Pac 12, the top of the SEC, and Ohio State equally at this point. I rate FSU and TCU below any of those. Sorry but I don't give TCU much credit for a last second win against West Virginia (who lost to Texas) and I can't get past the fact that they don't have to play a conference championship game.

I truly think that if FSU or TCU went into Death Valley on a Saturday night they would get completely manhandled.

Disclaimer: I reserve the right to be wrong just like everybody else.

[Golfingdad]

  MS256 said:

Unlike most people, and without anymore to go on than they do, I rate the top of the Pac 12, the top of the SEC, and Ohio State equally at this point. I rate FSU and TCU below any of those. Sorry but I don't give TCU much credit for a last second win against West Virginia (who lost to Texas) and I can't get past the fact that they don't have to play a conference championship game.

I basically agree.  I originally thought that FSU was overrated then changed my mind after the classic win over ND.  But my opinion of ND was framed by their victory over Stanford.  Well, it turns out that Stanford isn't all that good this year, and after seeing what ASU did to ND, my opinion of them drops as well.  Therefore, by the transitive, I can't help but revert back to my original hunch that FSU is overrated. (Isn't this fun? ;))

One problem with that though, is that is EXACTLY how I felt about them last year as well.  I was sure they were going to get run out of the building against Auburn.  Shows what I know.

No real strong opinion one way or the other about TCU.

  MS256 said:

Disclaimer: I reserve the right to be wrong just like everybody else.

I reserve the right to be wrong-er though.

[Golfingdad]

I'm going to my first (and probably only) game of the season this week ... USC/Cal on Thursday night.

Should be fun.  (Go Bears ;))

[saevel25]

  Golfingdad said:

I'm going to my first (and probably only) game of the season this week ... USC/Cal on Thursday night.

Should be fun.  (Go Bears ;))

I'll root for UCLA just because I never liked USC since they had Pete "The Cheat" Carroll there.

[MS256]

  saevel25 said:

I'll root for UCLA just because I never liked USC since they had Pete "The Cheat" Carroll there.

Well if you root for UCLA in the USC/Cal game at least you can't lose.

[saevel25]

  MS256 said:

Well if you root for UCLA in the USC/Cal game at least you can't lose.

I don't know why I thought it was UCLA versus CAL. Oh well, one of those California schools, doesn't matter which

[Golfingdad]

  saevel25 said:

I don't know why I thought it was UCLA versus CAL. Oh well, one of those California schools, doesn't matter which :whistle:

Cuz you assumed a UCLA fan wouldn't go to the Coliseum if UCLA weren't playing? (Obviously why I'm rooting for Cal) My brother is a big SC fan and got season tix this year but can't make it Thursday so off I go. Lucky for me, I'm not an actual SC hater so I can appreciate a game there, and their band, mascot, etc. I will wear blue though. ;)

[MS256]

  Golfingdad said:

Cuz you assumed a UCLA fan wouldn't go to the Coliseum if UCLA weren't playing? (Obviously why I'm rooting for Cal)

My brother is a big SC fan and got season tix this year but can't make it Thursday so off I go. Lucky for me, I'm not an actual SC hater so I can appreciate a game there, and their band, mascot, etc. I will wear blue though. ;)

Very few split families around here.  Usually anybody that splits off from whichever side of the Alabama/Auburn rivalry the family is on is quickly disowned and shunned.

[trickyputt]

  Golfingdad said:

[quote name="saevel25" url="/t/72907/2014-ncaa-football/420#post_1073770"] I don't know why I thought it was UCLA versus CAL. Oh well, one of those California schools, doesn't matter which :whistle:

Cuz you assumed a UCLA fan wouldn't go to the Coliseum if UCLA weren't playing? (Obviously why I'm rooting for Cal) My brother is a big SC fan and got season tix this year but can't make it Thursday so off I go. Lucky for me, I'm not an actual SC hater so I can appreciate a game there, and their band, mascot, etc. I will wear blue though. ;)[/quote] Nebraska over Bama? Thats some old school stuff right there.

[saevel25]

  trickyputt said:

Nebraska over Bama? Thats some old school stuff right there.

Umm, there was nothing about Nebraska over Bama in that post you quoted

[MS256]

The more I think about this "playoff" system they came up with the dumber I think it is.

Nobody in their right mind would have a pool of 5 major conferences, some "minor" conferences, and independents that don't even play each other all that much and think that there's any chance in Hell of selecting the "best" 4 teams out of that mess.

I don't want the "playoffs" to turn into March Madness or high school football where everybody makes the playoffs but an initial playoff of 8 teams would have made much more sense.

I would require that each team from the 5 major conferences play a rotating schedule of two regular season games against  teams from another of the 5 major conferences. I would also require that each conference play a conference championship game regardless of the size of the conference.

Notre Dame is loosely affiliated with the ACC and they should also be subjected to playing in the ACC conference championship game.

Wishful thinking for fun but of course will never happen:

Since they have fewer teams and just because I think it would really be fun I but wish the winner of the Big "12" (or whatever it's called now) had to play the second place team from a division of the SEC, Pac 12, Big "10", and ACC on a rotating basis as their equivalent to a "championship game". That game would not only be fun to watch but it would help clear up who should be selected for the final 8 teams.

[Golfingdad]

  MS256 said:

The more I think about this "playoff" system they came up with the dumber I think it is.

Nobody in their right mind would have a pool of 5 major conferences, some "minor" conferences, and independents that don't even play each other all that much and think that there's any chance in Hell of selecting the "best" 4 teams out of that mess.

Come on, you have to recognize that each of these little changes is not perfect, but at least a step in the right direction??

Look at your second sentence:

"Nobody in their right mind would have a pool of 5 major conferences, some "minor" conferences, and independents that don't even play each other all that much and think that there's any chance in Hell of selecting the "best" 4 teams out of that mess."

Now, if this was last year we got in a time machine and went back to the beginning of the BCS era, then you could say the exact same thing with one minor difference:

"Nobody in their right mind would have a pool of SIX major conferences, some "minor" conferences, and independents that don't even play each other all that much and think that there's any chance in Hell of selecting the "best" TWO teams out of that mess."

Then if we got back in the time machine and went back to the regular bowl era, again, you could say the same thing:

"Nobody in their right mind would have a pool of SIX major conferences, some "minor" conferences, and independents that don't even play each other all that much and think that there's any chance in Hell of selecting the "best" ONE teams out of that mess."

Bottom line:  You can't compare the system to what you believe to be the perfect system and then say "Since this new proposal isn't perfect then we should not try to improve at all."  The logical thing to do is to make whatever changes you can make in the increments you can make them to try your best to improve, is it not?

When you're trying to select the best, 8 might be better than 4, but 4 is at least better than 2, which was certainly better than 1.

---

That said:  Your other proposals are pretty cool.  I'd be on board with all of those.

[trickyputt]

  saevel25 said:

[QUOTE name="trickyputt" url="/t/72907/2014-ncaa-football/432#post_1073804"] Nebraska over Bama? Thats some old school stuff right there.[/QUOTE] Umm, there was nothing about Nebraska over Bama in that post you quoted :whistle:

You have to read the thread occasionally big guy. It was prior.

[Golfingdad]

  trickyputt said:

You have to read the thread occasionally big guy. It was prior.

If there is anybody out there who reads this thread more than Matt and @MS256 , I'd like to meet him.

What he meant was that you quoted the wrong post.  That's all.  Regardless  ...

  trickyputt said:

Nebraska over Bama? Thats some old school stuff right there.

I don't follow Nebraska at all ... Tom Osborne is still their coach, right???

[saevel25]

  trickyputt said:

You have to read the thread occasionally big guy. It was prior.

  Golfingdad said:

If there is anybody out there who reads this thread more than Matt and @MS256 , I'd like to meet him.

What he meant was that you quoted the wrong post.  That's all.  Regardless  ...

I don't follow Nebraska at all ... Tom Osborne is still their coach, right???

What @Golfingdad said