2014 NCAA Football

[trickyputt]

99 total points scored on 1170 total yards of offense in the Iron Bowl. I could see expecting 77 points plus a field goal or something around 80 points as a theoretical, but these teams were 20% more efficient than that. Amazing that the modern game has become so incredible effective.

[teamroper60]

I agree!

Be curious to see how the committee looks at OSU after losing their QB.    Had they not lost him, they are probably #4 but now?????    Looking at the scores from today, Baylor barely gets by TCU, and with the uncertainty of the OSU QB situation, I am thinking TCU gets #4.

I swear I really wasnt drunk when I wrote that..................    Damn......   Stuff is missing from what I originally wrote................    That orginally said Baylor barely getting by Texas Tech, while TCU easily handled Texas.........

I see Nebraska fired Pelini today.   I have to admit I didn't see that one coming, though after reading the article, I guess it shouldn't be surprising.

[smellysell]

I think Wisconsin beats Ohio without Barrett. Going into that game with an ailing run d has to be terrifying for Ohio.

[Golfingdad]

I'm going to assume that the injury to Barrett is going to keep OSU on the outside looking in at this point.  I presume TCU jumps up into the spot vacated by MSU.

Baylor and Ohio State need help from Georgia Tech, Missouri or Arizona.  And in Arizona's case, I think they'd have a pretty good argument to jump those guys into 4th if they win.

Will be a fun final week!

[k-troop]

I'm going to assume that the injury to Barrett is going to keep OSU on the outside looking in at this point.  I presume TCU jumps up into the spot vacated by MSU. Baylor and Ohio State need help from Georgia Tech, Missouri or Arizona.  And in Arizona's case, I think they'd have a pretty good argument to jump those guys into 4th if they win. Will be a fun final week!

Assuming FSU, Ore, and Bama all survive next Saturday, I think the final spot is between Baylor and TCU. Only problem is that TCU has been ahead of Baylor, even though Baylor is the likely conference champion and beat TCU head to head. The committee's published criteria include favoring conf champions and head to head wins. TCU has been more impressive down the stretch, but a big Baylor win against K-State could mean a lot.

[saevel25]

I think Wisconsin beats Ohio without Barrett. Going into that game with an ailing run d has to be terrifying for Ohio.

I don't think that is true.

If you look at last years game. OSU changed their defensive style for that game. Basically putting Roby on an island and forcing Wisconsin to throw the ball to beat OSU. OSU held Wisconsin to 104 yards rushing. I see a very similar scenario happening. The issue is, OSU has better cover corners this year. Wisconsin doesn't have the play maker in Abbrederas. Their passing attack has regressed this year from last year. Gordon only averages 0.2 more yards per carry this year over last year. This year he has more volume.

I think OSU would leave their DB's more on an island this game and force Wisconsin to beat them in the air. I don't see that happening. Their passing attack isn't nearly as good as last year. OSU has much better cover corners this year. I see OSU loading the box with 8-9 guys.

I don't see OSU holding Gordon to under 100 like last year. I think they hold Wisconsin to under 250 yards rushing. With the way OSU plays the field position game. That is maybe 3-4 scoring drives only. I don't see Wisconsin throwing for more than 150 yards in this game.

Historically OSU has done very well holding Wisconsin's rushing attack to near season lows. It's a strange stat, but if you look at it, except for one year, they pretty much have had Wisconsin's number when it comes to shutting down the run.

I see this game being Ohio State 33, Wisconsin 24, just not enough of a balanced attack to beat Ohio State. If Barrett was playing, I think it would be more 45 to 21 Ohio State over Wisconsin.

I'm going to assume that the injury to Barrett is going to keep OSU on the outside looking in at this point.  I presume TCU jumps up into the spot vacated by MSU.

Baylor and Ohio State need help from Georgia Tech, Missouri or Arizona.  And in Arizona's case, I think they'd have a pretty good argument to jump those guys into 4th if they win.

Will be a fun final week!

I can see why they want to take injuries into consideration, but still I don't like it. Team wins the game, it is like they are punishing the team for losing a player. I don't see how they can just assume losing one player will change the team. Look at Ohio State, Barrett smashed nearly every record at Ohio State this year. He was the third string guy going into spring training. He holds the Big Ten all time TD's record for a single season.

What if FSU's Winston gets taken out with a season ending injury in the NCAA Championship game. Do they keep FSU out even if they are undefeated? What if FSU takes that month off and gets the next guy ready and ends up demolishing a very good team in a bowl game. Do they look back and think, "Well shit it was stupid to assume FSU would have a major drop off?" I just don't see how you can hinge a season on that assumption. I say let it play out. These teams recruit players to play. Next man up, lets see what they can do.

[k-troop]

I can see why they want to take injuries into consideration, but still I don't like it. Team wins the game, it is like they are punishing the team for losing a player. I don't see how they can just assume losing one player will change the team. Look at Ohio State, Barrett smashed nearly every record at Ohio State this year. He was the third string guy going into spring training. He holds the Big Ten all time TD's record for a single season. What if FSU's Winston gets taken out with a season ending injury in the NCAA Championship game. Do they keep FSU out even if they are undefeated? What if FSU takes that month off and gets the next guy ready and ends up demolishing a very good team in a bowl game. Do they look back and think, "Well shit it was stupid to assume FSU would have a major drop off?" I just don't see how you can hinge a season on that assumption. I say let it play out. These teams recruit players to play. Next man up, lets see what they can do.

Obviously it doesn't change what the team has done, but the playoff committee said unequivocally they want to pick the four best teams. They listed some factors they'd consider, but at the end picking the four best teams was their charge. If you take away any team's best player, they're no longer the same team. Same would apply to Winston or Mariota. Look at what happened to Ole Miss when Treadwell went down.

[saevel25]

Obviously it doesn't change what the team has done, but the playoff committee said unequivocally they want to pick the four best teams. They listed some factors they'd consider, but at the end picking the four best teams was their charge.

If you take away any team's best player, they're no longer the same team. Same would apply to Winston or Mariota. Look at what happened to Ole Miss when Treadwell went down.

Yet, arguably Braxton was OSU's best player yet look how all this turned out. Barrett having a record breaking year. Just goes to show you that it is a team sport. OSU has enough talent around Barrett to give him the opportunity. Some are even saying should Barrett be the starter at QB next year. Braxton is the two time Big Ten player of the year. A Heisman candidate.

Yet the Committee is willing to just throw out a season because of one injury is just stupid. Especially with a month to prepare. This isn't like going one week to the next game.

Is it no longer the same team, yea I will give you that. The assumption that the committee can't make, because they haven clue, is the new team worse than the original. Their base assumption is that the team will be worse off. They can't make that assumption. They have no clue if the next guy up might actually play better.

Heck some really good teams in the past have had QB controversies. There have been a few teams in the past who played 2 QB's through out the year. Played the hot hand. How does the committee rank that. It is just all sorts of stupid to make an assumption.

Really if they wanted, they could just list the top 3 and pull a name out of a hat for that 4th spot and it would be fairer than them actually trying to logically pick the last team in. I would bet you would have less people complaining because a lot of people can't differentiate between the 4th team in and the next three teams who are the short list. I say draw a name.

[k-troop]

Yet, arguably Braxton was OSU's best player yet look how all this turned out. Barrett having a record breaking year. Just goes to show you that it is a team sport. OSU has enough talent around Barrett to give him the opportunity. Some are even saying should Barrett be the starter at QB next year. Braxton is the two time Big Ten player of the year. A Heisman candidate.  Yet the Committee is willing to just throw out a season because of one injury is just stupid. Especially with a month to prepare. This isn't like going one week to the next game.  Is it no longer the same team, yea I will give you that. The assumption that the committee can't make, because they haven clue, is the new team worse than the original. Their base assumption is that the team will be worse off. They can't make that assumption. They have no clue if the next guy up might actually play better.  Heck some really good teams in the past have had QB controversies. There have been a few teams in the past who played 2 QB's through out the year. Played the hot hand. How does the committee rank that. It is just all sorts of stupid to make an assumption.  Really if they wanted, they could just list the top 3 and pull a name out of a hat for that 4th spot and it would be fairer than them actually trying to logically pick the last team in. I would bet you would have less people complaining because a lot of people can't differentiate between the 4th team in and the next three teams who are the short list. I say draw a name.

OSU isn't FSU, currently undefeated. They aren't Bama, the best team in the (consensus) best conference. They're on the outside looking in. If the committee is choosing between Bay, TCU, OSU, etc it's hard to not take the injury into account. But if OSU puts up 300 yards passing and crushes Wisc next week then you've got something. I'll add that I agree it's hard to distinguish #3 through #6 on this week's likely list. Bay should have been ahead of TCU for weeks based on the head to head. I'll further add that your argument about quarterback by committee is weak. Aside from Tebow as a short yardage QB, I can't think of a team having BCS level success without a real quarterback.

[saevel25]

OSU isn't FSU, currently undefeated. They aren't Bama, the best team in the (consensus) best conference. They're on the outside looking in. If the committee is choosing between Bay, TCU, OSU, etc it's hard to not take the injury into account.

But if OSU puts up 300 yards passing and crushes Wisc next week then you've got something.

I'll add that I agree it's hard to distinguish #3 through #6 on this week's likely list. Bay should have been ahead of TCU for weeks based on the head to head.

I'll further add that your argument about quarterback by committee is weak. Aside from Tebow as a short yardage QB, I can't think of a team having BCS level success without a real quarterback.

Why do Alabama, FSU, and Oregon get a pass on an injured player? To me you are basically saying the Committee has a cop-out because OSU is outside looking in. Isn't it sometimes the best team are the ones who find a way to win besides injury. That is part of the game as well. Basically the logic that an injury should be anywhere remotely considered by the committee is total BS.

Why should OSU have to put up 300 yards of passing? What if they run for 500 yards and only pass for 50 yards. Look at Auburn last year. Made it to the NC game with mostly just a dominant rushing attack. There were games they hardly passed at all.

Still doesn't Tebow prove that point anyways. Should Florida have been disqualified because they found ways to win outside the norm of having a proficient QB?

Sounds to me you would have the committee just say, "Oh their QB is outside the top 20 in QBR, they are disqualified even though they have won all their games"

I say give the team a shot. You never know if someone will step up.

[k-troop]

Why do Alabama, FSU, and Oregon get a pass on an injured player? To me you are basically saying the Committee has a cop-out because OSU is outside looking in. Isn't it sometimes the best team are the ones who find a way to win besides injury. That is part of the game as well. Basically the logic that an injury should be anywhere remotely considered by the committee is total BS.  Why should OSU have to put up 300 yards of passing? What if they run for 500 yards and only pass for 50 yards. Look at Auburn last year. Made it to the NC game with mostly just a dominant rushing attack. There were games they hardly passed at all.  Still doesn't Tebow prove that point anyways. Should Florida have been disqualified because they found ways to win outside the norm of having a proficient QB?  Sounds to me you would have the committee just say, "Oh their QB is outside the top 20 in QBR, they are disqualified even though they have won all their games" I say give the team a shot. You never know if someone will step up.

You're arguing points I didn't make, so rather than continue that argument I'll just say this: why does OSU deserve it over Oregon or TCU or Baylor?

[saevel25]

You're arguing points I didn't make, so rather than continue that argument I'll just say this: why does OSU deserve it over Oregon or TCU or Baylor?

Because they would have the same number of losses. OSU theoretically would have won one extra game being in a Conference Championship match. Which the Committee has said would weight in on the decision. Committee has shown that good wins are better than bad losses.

Again, why should the team be penalized due to an injured player if they actually win out?

A lot of people are saying OSU should leap frog TCU if they win out. So the only reason they wouldn't is because Barrett is injured. Yet their TEAM still won out, so that just shows you how good their team is that they can lose a player and still beat a very good Wisconsin Team.

You can make the point that the injured player hurts the team. I can make the point that you don't know that till you see them play again. That is an assumption I don't think the committee should make. I can also point out that if they win even with out their best player, that just shows you how good of a team they are. Really, it isn't who is the best QB gets in the playoff it is the best TEAM who gets in. Some teams rely more on their best player. Some teams have enough skill players to plug other players in and still be very good.

I guess some could say OSU has a chance next weekend to prove they can be a top 4 team with out Barrett if they handle Wisconsin. Yet, I am still really reluctant to drop a team that loses a player at the end of the season. Heck if TCU loses their QB on the last drive of the game next weekend. They still have a month to prepare the back up guy. Who is to say they would be any worse.

My point is, prove to me that the team wouldn't perform at the same level. No one in the committee can prove that because the team hasn't gotten a shot to prove it. So really the only thing you can do is judge a team on how they did up to the playoffs.

[k-troop]

Because they would have the same number of losses. OSU theoretically would have won one extra game being in a Conference Championship match. Which the Committee has said would weight in on the decision. Committee has shown that good wins are better than bad losses.

This is the only part of your post that's responsive to my question. So what you're saying is that the Big-XII is inherently disadvantaged because they only have 10 teams. All other things being equal, the B1G will always get the nod over the Big-XII team. Isn't that exactly the impression the committee is trying to avoid?

[Golfingdad]

Because they would have the same number of losses. OSU theoretically would have won one extra game being in a Conference Championship match. Which the Committee has said would weight in on the decision. Committee has shown that good wins are better than bad losses. Again, why should the team be penalized due to an injured player if they actually win out? A lot of people are saying OSU should leap frog TCU if they win out. So the only reason they wouldn't is because Barrett is injured. Yet their TEAM still won out, so that just shows you how good their team is that they can lose a player and still beat a very good Wisconsin Team.  You can make the point that the injured player hurts the team. I can make the point that you don't know that till you see them play again. That is an assumption I don't think the committee should make. I can also point out that if they win even with out their best player, that just shows you how good of a team they are. Really, it isn't who is the best QB gets in the playoff it is the best TEAM who gets in. Some teams rely more on their best player. Some teams have enough skill players to plug other players in and still be very good.  I guess some could say OSU has a chance next weekend to prove they can be a top 4 team with out Barrett if they handle Wisconsin. Yet, I am still really reluctant to drop a team that loses a player at the end of the season. Heck if TCU loses their QB on the last drive of the game next weekend. They still have a month to prepare the back up guy. Who is to say they would be any worse.  My point is, prove to me that the team wouldn't perform at the same level. No one in the committee can prove that because the team hasn't gotten a shot to prove it. So really the only thing you can do is judge a team on how they did up to the playoffs.

I see both sides, but there's really no point in arguing today because it's seems pretty clear (to me) that TCU deserves that 4th spot (for now) after what they did to Texas this week and considering they were 5th to start the week. Now, if OSU wins impressively next week and TCU wins and Baylor wins, that is going to make the committees decision really tough. I don't envy them. Still think FSU has a loss in them though.

[k-troop]

I see both sides, but there's really no point in arguing today because it's seems pretty clear (to me) that TCU deserves that 4th spot (for now) after what they did to Texas this week and considering they were 5th to start the week. Now, if OSU wins impressively next week and TCU wins and Baylor wins, that is going to make the committees decision really tough. I don't envy them. Still think FSU has a loss in them though.

Not being argumentative but the only reason TCU deserves to be ranked over Baylor this week is because they were last week. Baylor beat TCU. Otherwise TCU has an arguably marginally more impressive record, but he head to head should control their respective positions. Which only solidifies the point that any choice among TCU, Baylor, OSU, and Ore is guesswork. So therefore no one is getting screwed by being left out. Two teams are going to luck in. There is a concrete reason to downgrade OSU. Maybe it's not fair, but it is a legit reason to say they're not as good as they were last week.

[saevel25]

This is the only part of your post that's responsive to my question. So what you're saying is that the Big-XII is inherently disadvantaged because they only have 10 teams. All other things being equal, the B1G will always get the nod over the Big-XII team. Isn't that exactly the impression the committee is trying to avoid?

Nope all of my postings have been about things you have stated. I don't get why you just dismiss them, unless you just can't think of anything to refute them. You just can't post logic you are using and then just dismiss them when I refute them. That is kinda counter intuitive to a debate.

On the Big-12, yes they are at a disadvantage.

Ohio State is at 11-1, with one more game left. Both will basically play 9 conference games. Due to scheduling and being considered a non-regular season game. Ohio State would have played one more game than Baylor or TCU. That is an advantage. You can not discredit one extra game. Especially if that game is against a top 15 team.

It is a tough break for the Big-12, but basically they are going to have to play that much harder of a schedule to make their schedules closer to a teams schedule that plays one extra game. What level of competition does that mean, I have no clue. I have no clue how to quantify it. Still, it doesn't exclude the fact that all the conference champions from conferences with a title game play 1 extra game per year.

There is a concrete reason to downgrade OSU. Maybe it's not fair, but it is a legit reason to say they're not as good as they were last week.

It isn't concrete, you can't prove it is. You haven't proven in. Heck, I've debated it and you just dismiss anything i put down that you don't want to talk about, or claim you didn't even talk about.

Unless it is 100% certain that every time a team loses their QB they will have a huge drop off to the point they shouldn't be considered a top 4 team, then they can not make that assumption. It isn't a legit reason.

[teamroper60]

Nothing is 100% certain.   But you knew that and you also know that you really have no clue whether they can continue to play at the level they have done this year either, so your argument is no more "legit" than his.

What we do know is, Barrett's replacement has 17 attempts and less than 120 yards all season in game conditions.   The fact Urban had to tell everybody his name at the post game presser is pretty telling about how much experience he has up to now.  Maybe OSU comes out next weekend and plays just as good or better than Barrett and if that is the case then you can argue your point and whether or not OSU is just as good and deserves a place in the top 4.   But as of now, OSU just lost a guy responsible for 34 touchdowns and replaced him with a guy responsible for 2.   Say what you want but when you change QB's, you change the make up of that team if for no other reason than the change in production and experience (there is always a reason the backup is the backup).  Bottom line is the OSU team that will take the field next Saturday is NOT the same team they were this time last week and they should not be ranked this week as if they are.

[k-troop]

Quote:

Originally Posted by k-troop

Obviously it doesn't change what the team has done, but the playoff committee said unequivocally they want to pick the four best teams. They listed some factors they'd consider, but at the end picking the four best teams was their charge.

If you take away any team's best player, they're no longer the same team. Same would apply to Winston or Mariota. Look at what happened to Ole Miss when Treadwell went down.

Notice I said that if any team lost their star they would suffer in the "how good are they really?" judgment rating.  So, when you said this:

Why do Alabama, FSU, and Oregon get a pass on an injured player?

You were arguing points I did not make.  I would give Bama a pass (more or less) because they don't have a single star player.  I also said this:

OSU isn't FSU, currently undefeated. They aren't Bama, the best team in the (consensus) best conference. They're on the outside looking in. If the committee is choosing between Bay, TCU, OSU, etc it's hard to not take the injury into account.

But if OSU puts up 300 yards passing and crushes Wisc next week then you've got something.

I'll add that I agree it's hard to distinguish #3 through #6 on this week's likely list. Bay should have been ahead of TCU for weeks based on the head to head.

I'll further add that your argument about quarterback by committee is weak. Aside from Tebow as a short yardage QB, I can't think of a team having BCS level success without a real quarterback.

Essentially meaning that OSU has a chance to prove they're still as good without their star QB.  So, when you said this:

Sounds to me you would have the committee just say, "Oh their QB is outside the top 20 in QBR, they are disqualified even though they have won all their games"

I say give the team a shot. You never know if someone will step up.

You're again arguing points I didn't make.  Which is why I said this.

You're arguing points I didn't make, so rather than continue that argument I'll just say this: why does OSU deserve it over Oregon or TCU or Baylor?

You responded with this long diatribe that contained exactly one reason why OSU deserves to be considered better than Baylor or TCU.  I've highlighted it.  The rest is more babbling about why the injury shouldn't hurt their ranking.

Because they would have the same number of losses. OSU theoretically would have won one extra game being in a Conference Championship match. Which the Committee has said would weight in on the decision. Committee has shown that good wins are better than bad losses.

Again, why should the team be penalized due to an injured player if they actually win out?

A lot of people are saying OSU should leap frog TCU if they win out. So the only reason they wouldn't is because Barrett is injured. Yet their TEAM still won out, so that just shows you how good their team is that they can lose a player and still beat a very good Wisconsin Team.

You can make the point that the injured player hurts the team. I can make the point that you don't know that till you see them play again. That is an assumption I don't think the committee should make. I can also point out that if they win even with out their best player, that just shows you how good of a team they are. Really, it isn't who is the best QB gets in the playoff it is the best TEAM who gets in. Some teams rely more on their best player. Some teams have enough skill players to plug other players in and still be very good.

I guess some could say OSU has a chance next weekend to prove they can be a top 4 team with out Barrett if they handle Wisconsin. Yet, I am still really reluctant to drop a team that loses a player at the end of the season. Heck if TCU loses their QB on the last drive of the game next weekend. They still have a month to prepare the back up guy. Who is to say they would be any worse.

My point is, prove to me that the team wouldn't perform at the same level. No one in the committee can prove that because the team hasn't gotten a shot to prove it. So really the only thing you can do is judge a team on how they did up to the playoffs.

Based on what I actually posted, I clearly didn't do this, which you're accusing me of.

Nope all of my postings have been about things you have stated. I don't get why you just dismiss them, unless you just can't think of anything to refute them. You just can't post logic you are using and then just dismiss them when I refute them. That is kinda counter intuitive to a debate.

On the Big-12, yes they are at a disadvantage.

Ohio State is at 11-1, with one more game left. Both will basically play 9 conference games. Due to scheduling and being considered a non-regular season game. Ohio State would have played one more game than Baylor or TCU. That is an advantage. You can not discredit one extra game. Especially if that game is against a top 15 team.

It is a tough break for the Big-12, but basically they are going to have to play that much harder of a schedule to make their schedules closer to a teams schedule that plays one extra game. What level of competition does that mean, I have no clue. I have no clue how to quantify it. Still, it doesn't exclude the fact that all the conference champions from conferences with a title game play 1 extra game per year.

It isn't concrete, you can't prove it is. You haven't proven in. Heck, I've debated it and you just dismiss anything i put down that you don't want to talk about, or claim you didn't even talk about.

Unless it is 100% certain that every time a team loses their QB they will have a huge drop off to the point they shouldn't be considered a top 4 team, then they can not make that assumption. It isn't a legit reason.

I essentially agree with you about the major point:  the 1-loss teams are virtually indistinguishable.  You have to try to justify, using facts and logic, which ones to exclude (or to bump over the others).  I'd say Baylor deserves to be ahead of TCU, wherever they fall in the order, based on the head to head win (I'm actually rooting for TCU in this process).

Basically the logic that an injury should be anywhere remotely considered by the committee is total BS.

This is the major point we disagree on.  The question is "who is the best team?"  OSU is either better than they were last week, worse, or exactly the same.  There are no other options.  Odds that they're exactly the same quality team are statistically very low.  So, are they better or worse?  It's a guess.  You have to use known facts, and make reasonable inferences based on assumptions.

You may conclude that OSU is better without their star quarterback because they've got a new better stud on the bench.  To believe that, you'd also have to believe:

1.  Urban Meyer is making eleventy hundred million dollars per year and doesn't know who his best quarterback is.

2.  Urban Meyer is making eleventy hundred million dollars and has been benching his best quarterback.

3.  People who make odds in Vegas don't care about money.

I don't believe any of those things.  I assume that OSU has been playing their best QB all season.  The dude who broke records.  I further assume that if the head coach had a better QB on the team, that dude would have been playing.  And I think the Vegas peeps will agree with me until OSU proves they're still just as good, which they very well may do next week against Wisc.

This is really a tangential point, but I'll make it anyway.  Saying Big-12 teams should be disadvantaged in front of the committee is BS.  It's a logical reason (the 13 wins vs. 12), but it's still BS.  And this is exactly the same argument my O-HI-O buddies used to make before the expansion when the final BCS rankings came out.  "We get disadvantaged because we haven't played in several weeks.  It's not our fault the Big-10 doesn't have a conference championship game."