header pic

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 39   Go Down
Author

Topic: Playoffs! Did someone say Playoffs?

 (Read 36844 times)

ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 20320
  • Liked:
Re: Playoffs! Did someone say Playoffs?
« Reply #182 on: November 15, 2017, 05:39:47 PM »
Quote from: MrNubbz on November 15, 2017, 05:36:59 PM
Sorta of agree but clemson losing to Cuse is worse than losing to Iowa.Of course Dabo would have to lay another egg
They keep discussing how Bryant was hurt for that game, and I hate that.  I'm sorry but staying healthy or playing through injuries is part of winning a title.  Is it crap luck?  Sure.  But what's the downside to injuries then if we basically just discount any games impacted by them.  Do we ding Clemson because they needed a couple TDs late to pull away from Florida State playing without Francois?  Your resume is your resume, and Clemson getting a pass for that loss because a guy was hurt is BS.
Logged

MrNubbz

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 17150
  • Liked:
Re: Playoffs! Did someone say Playoffs?
« Reply #183 on: November 15, 2017, 05:47:46 PM »
Exactly ELA.Not a biggie but if I'm a voter The Sooners are ahead of Dabo.Not because of tOSU game but ISU has proved a much better squad than originally thought.Same can't be said for Cuse and FSU is a non factor in sos
Logged
Suburbia:Where they tear out the trees & then name streets after them.

ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 20320
  • Liked:
Re: Playoffs! Did someone say Playoffs?
« Reply #184 on: November 15, 2017, 07:23:12 PM »
Yeah, I had those as my 4, but Miami-Oklahoma-Clemson, in that order 2-4
Logged

Brutus Buckeye

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11238
  • Liked:
Re: Playoffs! Did someone say Playoffs?
« Reply #185 on: November 15, 2017, 07:55:32 PM »
Quote from: ELA on November 15, 2017, 05:39:47 PM
They keep discussing how Bryant was hurt for that game, and I hate that.  I'm sorry but staying healthy or playing through injuries is part of winning a title.  Is it crap luck?  Sure.  But what's the downside to injuries then if we basically just discount any games impacted by them.  Do we ding Clemson because they needed a couple TDs late to pull away from Florida State playing without Francois?  Your resume is your resume, and Clemson getting a pass for that loss because a guy was hurt is BS.
No kidding. Injuries are a part of football.

Besides. I seem to recall a team winning a Natti with their third string QB. 
Logged
1919, 20, 21, 28, 29, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 42, 44
WWH: 1952, 54, 55, 57, 58, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 67, 68, 70, 72, 74, 75
1979, 81, 82, 84, 87, 94, 98
2001, 02, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19

TresselownsUM

  • Red Shirt
  • ***
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 233
  • Liked:
Re: Playoffs! Did someone say Playoffs?
« Reply #186 on: November 15, 2017, 08:06:41 PM »
Quote from: Brutus Buckeye on November 15, 2017, 04:58:34 PM
OSU will be in the same boat as Wisconsin in 2019, when Cincinnati is their "big" non-Conference game.
2019 does suck, but if you look at the next 8-9 years they have some very difficult OOC, I would argue the best in the country. Back to back years we will play both Texas and ND in the same years, and I think one of those years we have Boston college as well. I don't know many programs willing to do that. The unfortunate thing is it will backfire,until the committee puts in a 2 loss team over 1 loss there's no benefit to schedule this way.

This is also why I think intent of who you schedule has to matter. There's no way going 3-0 against FCS school, Florida international and Oregon st should be treated the same as playing Texas ND and Boston college and going 2-1. The team that goes 2-1 has to be ranked ahead of the 3-0 team playing no one, and that's true even if say Texas is 5-7, Boston college 3-9 and ND 7-5. Why? Because the rosters of Texas and ND have enough talent that they can beat anyone on a given night,  where an FCS school has 0.2% shot of beating a top 10 team. That's why intent to schedule has to matter. It's why I'd give Bama the nod over TCU 10 times out of 10 for having the guts to play FSU vs the crap I see Washington play for instance, or TCU this year.

And don't tell me "well Arkansas was good when we scheduled it." Arkansas has in the last 20 years been at best a middle of the pack SEC team. I'm not saying it's a terrible game, but if that's what your hanging your hat on then that's not saying much.
Logged

Brutus Buckeye

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11238
  • Liked:
Re: Playoffs! Did someone say Playoffs?
« Reply #187 on: November 15, 2017, 08:17:38 PM »
Yeah, OSU always has at least one marquee opponent. 

I don't know what's up with 2019.

I don't mind Cincinnati and Miami(OH) being on the non-conference schedule, but not as the main course.

Hopefully they replace the Florida Atlantic game with, at the very least, a P5 team. 
Logged
1919, 20, 21, 28, 29, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 42, 44
WWH: 1952, 54, 55, 57, 58, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 67, 68, 70, 72, 74, 75
1979, 81, 82, 84, 87, 94, 98
2001, 02, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 25215
  • Liked:
Re: Playoffs! Did someone say Playoffs?
« Reply #188 on: November 15, 2017, 08:29:46 PM »
If FAU can hang on to Kiffin they will pose a challenge. Kiffin now is not Kiffin 2009. He's got that team playing really well.
Logged
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

bayareabadger

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 7851
  • Liked:
Re: Playoffs! Did someone say Playoffs?
« Reply #189 on: November 15, 2017, 08:35:56 PM »
Quote from: ELA on November 15, 2017, 05:39:47 PM
They keep discussing how Bryant was hurt for that game, and I hate that.  I'm sorry but staying healthy or playing through injuries is part of winning a title.  Is it crap luck?  Sure.  But what's the downside to injuries then if we basically just discount any games impacted by them.  Do we ding Clemson because they needed a couple TDs late to pull away from Florida State playing without Francois?  Your resume is your resume, and Clemson getting a pass for that loss because a guy was hurt is BS.
Here's my issue there: if it was someone like Watson who just missed a game, and the team looked awesome most of the rest of the way, I could see it as a tiebreaker of sorts. 
But Kelly Bryant is just and OK QB. And he's running and offense that has just been OK most of the year. And they were playing like trash when he was in. Shoot, if injuries count, UW can just rest easy because the next three losses will be excused. 
Logged

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: Playoffs! Did someone say Playoffs?
« Reply #190 on: November 16, 2017, 09:48:12 AM »
I'm curious how the committee will view big losses as compared to big wins.  Biggest losses by CFP top-25 teams:
  • Bama, n/a
  • Clemson:  by 3 at Syracuse
  • Miami, n/a
  • Oklahoma, by 7 vs ISU
  • Wisconsin, n/a
  • Auburn, by 8 at Clemson
  • Georgia, by 23 at Auburn
  • Notre Dame, by 33 at Miami
  • Ohio State, by 31 at Iowa
  • Penn State, by 3 at Michigan State
  • USC, by 35 at Notre Dame
  • TCU, by 18 at Oklahoma
  • OkSU, by 13 vs TCU
  • WSU, by 34 at Cal
  • UCF, n/a
  • MissSt, by 29 at Auburn
  • Michigan State, by 45 at Ohio State
  • Washington, by 8 at Stanford
  • NCST, by 21 at Notre Dame
  • LSU, by 30 at MissSt
  • Memphis, by 27 at UCF
  • Stanford, by 18 at USC
  • Northwestern, (tie) by 24 vs PSU and at Dook
  • Michigan, by 29 at PSU
  • Boise State, by 19 vs UVA

Ohio State's 45 point win over MSU is the biggest MoV over a top-25 team all year.  However, Ohio State's 31 point loss to Iowa is the 4th largest loss by a top-25 team all year.  Do those offset?  

Based on history, my impression is that the committee puts more emphasis on wins than losses so I *think* that the huge win over MSU helps more than the huge loss to Iowa hurts but that is speculative, who knows.  
Logged

ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 20320
  • Liked:
Re: Playoffs! Did someone say Playoffs?
« Reply #191 on: November 16, 2017, 09:51:17 AM »
Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on November 16, 2017, 09:48:12 AM
Based on history, my impression is that the committee puts more emphasis on wins than losses so I *think* that the huge win over MSU helps more than the huge loss to Iowa hurts but that is speculative, who knows.  
I believe they have said this, at least as far as quality of win vs. loss.  We were so ingrained to compare losses.  If you had two 12-1 teams, the pollsters generally favored the team with the better loss, even if the team with the worse loss had many more good wins.  I'm not sure how they view it as far as margin of win vs. margin of loss.
Logged

PSUinNC

  • Red Shirt
  • ***
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 242
  • Liked:
Re: Playoffs! Did someone say Playoffs?
« Reply #192 on: November 16, 2017, 10:20:43 AM »
Quote from: Brutus Buckeye on November 15, 2017, 07:55:32 PM
No kidding. Injuries are a part of football.

Besides. I seem to recall a team winning a Natti with their third string QB.
Yes, Pitt did in 1976.  ANYONE could have handed off to Dorsett that year ;-)
Logged

PSUinNC

  • Red Shirt
  • ***
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 242
  • Liked:
Re: Playoffs! Did someone say Playoffs?
« Reply #193 on: November 16, 2017, 10:23:54 AM »
Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on November 16, 2017, 09:48:12 AM
I'm curious how the committee will view big losses as compared to big wins.  Biggest losses by CFP top-25 teams:
  • Bama, n/a
  • Clemson:  by 3 at Syracuse
  • Miami, n/a
  • Oklahoma, by 7 vs ISU
  • Wisconsin, n/a
  • Auburn, by 8 at Clemson
  • Georgia, by 23 at Auburn
  • Notre Dame, by 33 at Miami
  • Ohio State, by 31 at Iowa
  • Penn State, by 3 at Michigan State
  • USC, by 35 at Notre Dame
  • TCU, by 18 at Oklahoma
  • OkSU, by 13 vs TCU
  • WSU, by 34 at Cal
  • UCF, n/a
  • MissSt, by 29 at Auburn
  • Michigan State, by 45 at Ohio State
  • Washington, by 8 at Stanford
  • NCST, by 21 at Notre Dame
  • LSU, by 30 at MissSt
  • Memphis, by 27 at UCF
  • Stanford, by 18 at USC
  • Northwestern, (tie) by 24 vs PSU and at Dook
  • Michigan, by 29 at PSU
  • Boise State, by 19 vs UVA

Ohio State's 45 point win over MSU is the biggest MoV over a top-25 team all year.  However, Ohio State's 31 point loss to Iowa is the 4th largest loss by a top-25 team all year.  Do those offset?  

Based on history, my impression is that the committee puts more emphasis on wins than losses so I *think* that the huge win over MSU helps more than the huge loss to Iowa hurts but that is speculative, who knows.  
Maybe it's just me, but I think teams 5-13 are all very, very, very close in terms of how good they are.  I just don't see a lot of separation in that group of 8 teams.
Logged

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 25215
  • Liked:
Re: Playoffs! Did someone say Playoffs?
« Reply #194 on: November 16, 2017, 10:35:44 AM »
Iowa will likely win out and finished ranked so that loss, despite the margin, will probably be viewed differently than losing to a Syracuse, for example.

Iowa will also be viewed as a good win for any team that beat them.
Logged
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

rolltidefan

  • Global Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 2219
  • Liked:
Re: Playoffs! Did someone say Playoffs?
« Reply #195 on: November 16, 2017, 12:19:31 PM »
Quote from: ELA on November 16, 2017, 09:51:17 AM
I believe they have said this, at least as far as quality of win vs. loss.  We were so ingrained to compare losses.  If you had two 12-1 teams, the pollsters generally favored the team with the better loss, even if the team with the worse loss had many more good wins.  I'm not sure how they view it as far as margin of win vs. margin of loss.
a good win helps you more than a 'good' loss doesn't hurt you. or rather, a good win vs an average win is a big boost, while a 'good' loss vs an 'average' loss are both similarly detrimental. so, a loss is a loss, but a win isn't just a win, it can be a WIN.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 39   Go Up
« previous next »
 
Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.
Smokey Record Hoodie

Hidden Safe