2014 NCAA Football

[teamroper60]

Thus far, I haven't seen anybody really look unbeatable.

Yes, Oregon looks good but beating Michigan St. doesn't look all that impressive when you consider the B1G is 1-9 so far this year against the power 5 conferences (3 losses to Big 12 teams today!).   It will be interesting to see just how they look when they get into the meat of the PAC 12 schedule.

South Carolina looked a lot more like the team everyone expected them to be today but then again, Georgia seems to struggle in Columbia, so who knows.    I expect Mizzou to be no where near the top of the SEC East this year.  They have a pretty tough schedule and the team doesn't seem as strong as last year.

Watching Oklahoma right now.   They look pretty damn good but then again, it is against Tennessee, so who knows..

As it stands right now, I will not be surprised if the 4 teams are made up of the SEC champ, PAC12 champ, Big 12 champ and the 4th being the 2nd place team in the SEC or PAC12 (whichever is higher ranked)..  I feel pretty certain the B1G will not have a rep there, even if their champ is undefeated in conference.

[RJH999]

USC Sucks. :banana: :banana:

[saevel25]

As it stands right now, I will not be surprised if the 4 teams are made up of the SEC champ, PAC12 champ, Big 12 champ and the 4th being the 2nd place team in the SEC or PAC12 (whichever is higher ranked)..  I feel pretty certain the B1G will not have a rep there, even if their champ is undefeated in conference.

Depends on how it all goes down.

Also you are not taking into consideration Notre Dame as well. They are ranked 11th in the nation. They usually play a pretty solid schedule. If they run the table or get one loss, I can see them above a 2nd place SEC or Pac 12. Especially if either of those teams have two losses.

That being said, a one loss OSU or a one lose MSU team could still make it. The argument can be said, if the only loss for MSU is AT OREGON! then I think that might be considered a good loss. Also Wisconsin, to loose at LSU at night, with Les Miles and his crazy history of having comeback wins in the 4th quarter.

Also the playoff is decided by a committee now, not the BCS standings. So it isn't all strength of schedule. There is probably a lot more going into it than we know about. Heck it could be what would make a better story. What if the paring would be Oregon versus MSU rematch. That is a story line that could vault MSU above someone else. It really is all up in the air now with humans making the picks.

Still the odds are much lower now for a big ten team, but it isn't an uncertainty. Heck I would say that a Big Ten team has a BIGGER chance now than if it was the BCS. They would be dead in the BCS with a one loss, especially with how people say the Big Ten is a weak conference. Throw in 4 spots, they have a bigger chance of getting a one loss team in, than having to run the table.

[teamroper60]

Depends on how it all goes down.

Also you are not taking into consideration Notre Dame as well. They are ranked 11th in the nation. They usually play a pretty solid schedule. If they run the table or get one loss, I can see them above a 2nd place SEC or Pac 12. Especially if either of those teams have two losses.

That being said, a one loss OSU or a one lose MSU team could still make it. The argument can be said, if the only loss for MSU is AT OREGON! then I think that might be considered a good loss. Also Wisconsin, to loose at LSU at night, with Les Miles and his crazy history of having comeback wins in the 4th quarter.

Also the playoff is decided by a committee now, not the BCS standings. So it isn't all strength of schedule. There is probably a lot more going into it than we know about. Heck it could be what would make a better story. What if the paring would be Oregon versus MSU rematch. That is a story line that could vault MSU above someone else. It really is all up in the air now with humans making the picks.

Still the odds are much lower now for a big ten team, but it isn't an uncertainty. Heck I would say that a Big Ten team has a BIGGER chance now than if it was the BCS. They would be dead in the BCS with a one loss, especially with how people say the Big Ten is a weak conference. Throw in 4 spots, they have a bigger chance of getting a one loss team in, than having to run the table.

I didn't discount ND.   I just don't see them running through their schedule unscathed.    And given the way the B1G has underperformed against other power 5 opponents, I really believe the second place team in the SEC or PAC 12 (with 2 losses) has a better shot at getting in than a one-loss B1G team.   And no, I don't see a rematch against Oregon getting MSU any real consideration.

Yes, having 4 spots instead of 2 does inherently increase the chances of a B1G team getting in due to doubling the number of teams but that is far from giving them an edge of any kind over any other one loss team (and some two loss teams).  Honestly, I think humans making the picks does more to reduce the B1G's chances than having the computer element did.   Human bias currently is strongly showing a belief the B1G is weak.  On field performance is thus far bolstering that belief.

About the only way I see the B1G having a rep in the playoff is if both the SEC and PAC 12 second place teams having more than 2 losses and MSU or OSU running the table from here out (which is more likely for OSU than MSU since they meet in Columbus this year) and VT losing today to E. Carolina makes that loss look pretty sorry.

[saevel25]

About the only way I see the B1G having a rep in the playoff is if both the SEC and PAC 12 second place teams having more than 2 losses and MSU or OSU running the table from here out (which is more likely for OSU than MSU since they meet in Columbus this year) and VT losing today to E. Carolina makes that loss look pretty sorry.

OSU plays MSU at East Lansing. Does seeing VT loose hurt, yea. But a lot of teams have the next week let downs after a big win. Honestly I never put much into week by week comparisons. Emotions, gameplan, match ups, it all varies. Heck I remember when UCLA had no right in beating USC about 6 years ago. Help send OSU to the NC game against LSU. Does that discredit how good that USC team was or that USC is worse than everyone UCLA beat that year, no. It just meant on that night UCLA got the better of them that night. Doesn't mean UCLA was actually a better team that year overall. All OSU can do is win out and see how the dice roll. No use in saying there is no chance or this or that. It's useless talking points.

[MS256]

Yep. Way too early to know very much. Looking around the SEC West I'm having a hard time figuring out who can have less than 2 losses.

[teamroper60]

OSU plays MSU at East Lansing.

Does seeing VT loose hurt, yea. But a lot of teams have the next week let downs after a big win. Honestly I never put much into week by week comparisons. Emotions, gameplan, match ups, it all varies. Heck I remember when UCLA had no right in beating USC about 6 years ago. Help send OSU to the NC game against LSU. Does that discredit how good that USC team was or that USC is worse than everyone UCLA beat that year, no. It just meant on that night UCLA got the better of them that night. Doesn't mean UCLA was actually a better team that year overall.

All OSU can do is win out and see how the dice roll. No use in saying there is no chance or this or that. It's useless talking points.

Misread OSU's schedule there.   Since that is the case, I would give the edge to MSU then.   And while it is true that sometimes the best team doesn't win, it is also true that when the better team doesn't, it's stock goes down and it is equally true that the overall impression of that team is affected by the play of the teams they beat and the teams that beat them.   So VT losing to a nobody is very bad for OSU.   At this point, their loss to VT looks a lot worse than MSU's loss to Oregon.    But I stand by my prediction that no team from the B1G makes the playoffs, regardless of their final record.   Their on field performance against other conferences and the percieved weakness of the conference is going to hurt them badly.

[teamroper60]

Quote:

Originally Posted by saevel25

OSU plays MSU at East Lansing.

All OSU can do is win out and see how the dice roll. No use in saying there is no chance or this or that. It's useless talking points.

Yep. Way too early to know very much.

Looking around the SEC West I'm having a hard time figuring out who can have less than 2 losses.

.

Yes.  That is going to be very tough but somehow I suspect at least one will.   Even if they don't, that same perception that believes the B1G is weak, also percieves the SEC West as very strong.  So two losses there (against other SEC West teams) is not as damaging..  I'm not saying this is right, but perception is reality and that IS the perception.

Making predictions now may be "useless talking points" in the eyes of some, but IMHO believing the B1G has a real chance of putting a team in the playoff this year is pipedreaming.

[saevel25]

.

Yes.  That is going to be very tough but somehow I suspect at least one will.   Even if they don't, that same perception that believes the B1G is weak, also percieves the SEC West as very strong.  So two losses there (against other SEC West teams) is not as damaging..  I'm not saying this is right, but perception is reality and that IS the perception.

Making predictions now may be "useless talking points" in the eyes of some, but IMHO believing the B1G has a real chance of putting a team in the playoff this year is pipedreaming.

I am a Big Ten fan, but I am not blinded by it. I know people say it is cyclical, but I am seeing it more as a trend. The Big Ten schools just have to start recruiting nationally more, and also get better assistants.

There are some really great schools in the Big Ten. The Big Ten ranks pretty high nationally in academics compared to the other power 5 conferences. They seriously have to promote themselves more.

What I don't get is how Michigan can't recruit well as Ohio State. I am an Ohio State fan and recruits always say that they like the atmosphere, the history, the tradition, the program, the facilities. Michigan has the MOST wins in NCAA football history. I mean, how can they not promote that and get recruits up there. Its just crazy to me. I understand some recruits want to stay in the south, but still. They should be able to compete yearly.

I do think bringing Urban in at OSU, and bringing Franklin to PSU will jump start the conference. Just because they are both relentless recruiters. It use to be you just recruited well enough to win your conference. I think this will force the Big Ten to have to step up.

I think we are seeing now that you need to recruit well enough to compete nationally with any team.

Honestly with all the money the Big Ten brings in through their own TV channel and the profit sharing from the bowl games. There is NO WAY they can't spend money to bring in some of the better coaches and assistants. That is why Brett left for Arkansas. Wisconsin kept loosing assistant coaches because they wouldn't shell out the money to keep them.

Do I think the Big Ten can compete with the SEC every year, no. There is no reason why they can't have 2-3 teams a year that can compete nationally. I know the SEC gets like 4-5, just because of the depth in recruiting they have. They should have at least 2 teams that can make a run for the NC yearly, maybe once in a cycle they can have 3 or 4 teams. I think that is possible for the Big Ten.

[David in FL]

I know it's the first year, and really too early to be whining about the play-off structure, but I'd REALLY like to see it 8 teams deep.  Add one more week to the year and really open it up and have some fun!

[MS256]

I know it's the first year, and really too early to be whining about the play-off structure, but I'd REALLY like to see it 8 teams deep.  Add one more week to the year and really open it up and have some fun!

I would like 8 as well but that's where I draw the line (but that's never where it stops). SMH!

I remember when the high school playoffs in this state were the top 4 teams. When I played it was the top 8 teams.

Incidentally we were ranked number 7 and we lost to the team ranked number 8 in the Championship Game so that doesn't say much for "rankings".

Now half of the teams that suit up make the playoffs. What a joke!!!! First round games are ridiculous mismatches that only provide another chance of injury.

I would also drop a regular season game and make sure it was one of the cupcakes.

[saevel25]

http://www.elevenwarriors.com/ohio-state-football/2014/09/40471/film-study-how-6-yards-of-shovel-passes-set-up-devin-smiths-50-yard-touchdown

Great blog for Ohio State. I really like when they break down plays, and how they set up for taking chances down field.

In the OSU v Kent State game, Urban dialed up the Shovel Pass. Basically its a run play in a different form. Urban called it twice in the same drive and then motioned the same guy again on a pass play. Basically turning the same look into a play action pass with out actually running a play action.

The blog article goes into more detail, but you can see how the play let a fast skill player from Ohio State get one on one with a Kent State DB and turn a simple corner route into a long TD.

Just an interesting wrinkle on the same old concept of setting up the run to throw the deep ball.

[teamroper60]

I am a Big Ten fan, but I am not blinded by it. I know people say it is cyclical, but I am seeing it more as a trend. The Big Ten schools just have to start recruiting nationally more, and also get better assistants.

There are some really great schools in the Big Ten. The Big Ten ranks pretty high nationally in academics compared to the other power 5 conferences. They seriously have to promote themselves more.

What I don't get is how Michigan can't recruit well as Ohio State. I am an Ohio State fan and recruits always say that they like the atmosphere, the history, the tradition, the program, the facilities. Michigan has the MOST wins in NCAA football history. I mean, how can they not promote that and get recruits up there. Its just crazy to me. I understand some recruits want to stay in the south, but still. They should be able to compete yearly.

I do think bringing Urban in at OSU, and bringing Franklin to PSU will jump start the conference. Just because they are both relentless recruiters. It use to be you just recruited well enough to win your conference. I think this will force the Big Ten to have to step up.

I think we are seeing now that you need to recruit well enough to compete nationally with any team.

Honestly with all the money the Big Ten brings in through their own TV channel and the profit sharing from the bowl games. There is NO WAY they can't spend money to bring in some of the better coaches and assistants. That is why Brett left for Arkansas. Wisconsin kept loosing assistant coaches because they wouldn't shell out the money to keep them.

Do I think the Big Ten can compete with the SEC every year, no. There is no reason why they can't have 2-3 teams a year that can compete nationally. I know the SEC gets like 4-5, just because of the depth in recruiting they have. They should have at least 2 teams that can make a run for the NC yearly, maybe once in a cycle they can have 3 or 4 teams. I think that is possible for the Big Ten.

I agree with pretty much everything you said here.   I know it would not seem it from some of my posts, but I like the B1G.   Academically, I think you would be hard pressed to find a better collection of schools.  I was really hoping Missouri would get into the B1G instead of the SEC.   I think they were a better fit in that conference in every way.  Sadly, the curators didn't seem to see it that way...

I have always enjoyed watching the Michigan-OSU rivalry game, dating back to the "Ten year war".  I kinda thought that game might get good again when Michigan hired Fred Flinstone (Hoke).  He seemed like a good fit but it doesn't look so good now.   In my mind, OSU, Michigan, PSU, Nebraska are all "traditional powers" in the same sense as Alabama, USC, Texas and Oklahoma.  I wish they would get back to that level because I would like to see more parity among the conferences.    I do believe they will get back to prominence at some point but not until they find a way to lure some of those good southern players north.  Perhaps Urban can do that but I doubt he can on name recognition alone.   There are some damn good coaches in the south (Saban, Miles, Spurrier, etc...) who are sucking up the top recruits year in and year out.   If you are a school in the snow belt, it is pretty hard to compete with winning football, good weather, beaches and bikinis..

[Golfingdad]

The coin flip protocol in college football is stupid.  Saturday, in the UCLA/Texas game, the Bruins won the coin toss and chose to defer, then the captain for Texas chose to kick off.  That meant that UCLA was able to receive the kickoff to start BOTH halfs.

Not once on this earth has anybody ever not wanted to receive a kickoff**, so why even bother with that formality?  Why not just let the coin flip winner choose kick or receive to start the game, and the opposite happens to start the second half?  That's just dumb.

*Except for maybe that Marty Mornigweg fiasco in overtime in Detroit several years ago, but besides that.  (And yes, that is the only reason I even know that guys name)

[iacas]

The coin flip protocol in college football is stupid.  Saturday, in the UCLA/Texas game, the Bruins won the coin toss and chose to defer, then the captain for Texas chose to kick off.  That meant that UCLA was able to receive the kickoff to start BOTH halfs.

Not once on this earth has anybody ever not wanted to receive a kickoff**, so why even bother with that formality?  Why not just let the coin flip winner choose kick or receive to start the game, and the opposite happens to start the second half?  That's just dumb.

*Except for maybe that Marty Mornigweg fiasco in overtime in Detroit several years ago, but besides that.  (And yes, that is the only reason I even know that guys name)

Correct me if I'm wrong but in the NFL you get the choice to decide whether you want to kick/receive in the first half (the second half is always the opposite) OR which end of the field you want to defend (that similarly flips each quarter).

So team A could choose to defend the end of the stadium that gives them a helping breeze in the fourth quarter, and team B gets to choose whether they want to kick or receive in the first half.

It's different in college?

[Golfingdad]

Correct me if I'm wrong but in the NFL you get the choice to decide whether you want to kick/receive in the first half (the second half is always the opposite) OR which end of the field you want to defend (that similarly flips each quarter).

So team A could choose to defend the end of the stadium that gives them a helping breeze in the fourth quarter, and team B gets to choose whether they want to kick or receive in the first half.

It's different in college?

Yeah, at least as I understand it, in college you choose receive or defer.  If you say receive, the other team chooses the direction, and if you say defer, then they say receive, then you choose the direction.

Then second half comes, you say receive (no fricken doy!!) and then the other team chooses direction, or perhaps that just continues flip flopping from the first quarter.

[saevel25]

I agree with pretty much everything you said here.   I know it would not seem it from some of my posts, but I like the B1G.   Academically, I think you would be hard pressed to find a better collection of schools.  I was really hoping Missouri would get into the B1G instead of the SEC.   I think they were a better fit in that conference in every way.  Sadly, the curators didn't seem to see it that way...

I have always enjoyed watching the Michigan-OSU rivalry game, dating back to the "Ten year war".  I kinda thought that game might get good again when Michigan hired Fred Flinstone (Hoke).  He seemed like a good fit but it doesn't look so good now.   In my mind, OSU, Michigan, PSU, Nebraska are all "traditional powers" in the same sense as Alabama, USC, Texas and Oklahoma.  I wish they would get back to that level because I would like to see more parity among the conferences.    I do believe they will get back to prominence at some point but not until they find a way to lure some of those good southern players north.  Perhaps Urban can do that but I doubt he can on name recognition alone.   There are some damn good coaches in the south (Saban, Miles, Spurrier, etc...) who are sucking up the top recruits year in and year out.   If you are a school in the snow belt, it is pretty hard to compete with winning football, good weather, beaches and bikinis..

The problem is the population shift out of the midwest to the south. Majority of people like to stay near home. Most people don't uplift away from relatives and families to move across the country. It is pretty much built in to stay near family. So I think that has a lot to do with it, asking players to move hundreds of miles away.

[MS256]

The problem is the population shift out of the midwest to the south. Majority of people like to stay near home. Most people don't uplift away from relatives and families to move across the country. It is pretty much built in to stay near family. So I think that has a lot to do with it, asking players to move hundreds of miles away.

My theory is that the closer to the equator you live the faster you can run.

(Tongue in cheek).

But, hmmm...

High school teams from south Alabama are faster than teams from north Alabama. High school teams from Florida are faster than teams from Alabama. And watch those Jamaicans run!!!