CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: medinabuckeye1 on October 31, 2018, 11:34:31 AM
-
I already posted about the B1G Divisional races (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?topic=6314.0), here I'll discuss the other P5 races. I decided to post this when I realized that the SECCG could be set this weekend.
ACC-Atlantic:
It is effectively between Clemson and Boston College and will likely be decided when they play in Chestnut Hill in two weeks. Cuse and NCST are still mathematically in the race but they would need Clemson to lose out so, not happening.
ACC-Coastal:
This one is a lot more complex because at least five of the six teams are still in the hunt. Virginia (NCST), VaTech (GaTech), and Pitt (UNC) each only have one loss and they haven't played each other yet so they are clearly the front runners. Pitt/UVA is this week in Charlottesville while Pitt/VaTech is next week in Pittsburgh. UVA/VaTech is the day after Thanksgiving in Blacksburg. Those three games are key because those three teams control their own destiny and can get to the ACCCG by winning out. Miami (2-2) is still in the hunt as they have yet to play VaTech and Pitt. They would need UVA to lose twice but, as mentioned above, the Cavaliers still have to host the Panthers and travel to the Hokies. GaTech and Dook are mathematically in the running but practically eliminated.
B12:
There are no divisions in the B12, the top two teams simply play a rematch (it is always a rematch) in the B12CG. Texas (OkSU), Oklahoma (TX), and WVU (ISU) each have one loss. West Virginia still has to play the other two. All three control their own destiny. The key remaining games are WVU at Texas this weekend and Oklahoma at WVU on the Friday after Thanksgiving. Iowa State and Texas Tech are both 3-2 and very much in the race but they need help. OkSU, Baylor, Kansas, KSU, and TCU are all mathematically in the running but practically eliminated.
P12-N:
WSU (4-1) and Washington (4-2) control their own destiny and will meet in Seattle the Friday after Thanksgiving. Stanford (3-2) is in the race but they lost to WSU so they'll need help. Aside from the Apple Cup, the biggest remaining game is Stanford at Washington this weekend. Oregon, California, and OrSU are theoretically in the running but practically eliminated.
P12-S:
This is the messiest division in the P5. None of the teams are better than 4-2 (Utah) nor worse than 2-3 (Colorado, UCLA, ASU) so all six teams still have a legitimate shot. Utah is in the best shape both because they have the fewest loses (2) and because their losses were both to P12-N teams. If they can win in Tempe this weekend then they'll own every potential tiebreaker except Colorado which will be determined in a few weeks and will not matter if the Buffaloes' skid continues (they have lost three straight since starting 5-0 and head to Tucson to play Zona this weekend).
SEC-E:
The SEC-E is the only P5 division that will definitely be determined this weekend. The UGA/UK winner will play in the SECCG in Atlanta. UF, USCe, Vandy, TN, and Mizzou are all eliminated.
SEC-W:
Other than the SEC-E, the SEC-W is the only other division that *COULD* be determined this weekend. If Bama wins at LSU then the Tide will play the UGA/UK winner in the SECCG in Atlanta. If LSU wins it is a lot more complicated. aTm has a theoretical shot but it involves Bama losing three games so it isn't going to happen. MissSt, Auburn, and Ole Miss each have three losses and a mathematical chance but they are practically eliminated. Arkansas is mathematically eliminated.
-
Thanks for doing this, I know it's some work, and it is handy.
-
Awesome Medina.
It's a shame that the Big XII feels the need to have a Ccg when they are the only P5 Conference that still plays a round robin.
I could see maybe in the event of a tiebreaker, perhaps, if they aren't content with simply crowning the winner of the H-H.
In theory you could have a three way tie under the current system, and a team that would otherwise be "co-champs" would instead be left out of the Ccg altogether.
-
this is what happens when the SEC only plays 8 conference games and gets 2 teams into the playoff and the Big 12 is left out
craziness ensues
-
Awesome Medina.
It's a shame that the Big XII feels the need to have a Ccg when they are the only P5 Conference that still plays a round robin.
I could see maybe in the event of a tiebreaker, perhaps, if they aren't content with simply crowning the winner of the H-H.
In theory you could have a three way tie under the current system, and a team that would otherwise be "co-champs" would instead be left out of the Ccg altogether.
It’s ridiculous
-
the Big 12 has had the market cornered on "ridiculous" since it's formation
-
It was a knee-jerk reaction to a nonexistent problem.
Anyway, beating OU twice in the same season will be a lot of fun. :)
-
that's for sure
-
Replying to @Kris60 (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=79) and @Brutus Buckeye (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=31) :
I think the B12 pretty much had to add a CG for CFP purposes after what happened to them in 2014. The other four P5 Champions will always have a win on CG weekend over a high quality opponent. We saw what happened in 2014 when the B12's two CFP contenders didn't get that opportunity. Instead, Ohio State's 59-0 CG win over #13 Wisconsin propelled them into the CFP ahead of TCU and Baylor. That final weekend while Ohio State was steamrolling the Badgers the Bears had an 11 point win over #9 KSU and the Horned Frogs trounced ISU.
Ohio State, TCU, and Baylor games against teams listed in the final 2014 CFP Rankings:
- #5 Baylor: TCU lost on the road by a FG
- #6 TCU: Baylor won at home by a FG
- #8 MSU: tOSU won on the road by 12.
- #11 KSU: Baylor won at home by 11, TCU won at home by 21.
- #18 Wisconsin: tOSU won at a neutral site by 59.
- #25 Minnesota: tOSU won on the road by 7, TCU won at home by 23.
All told:
- tOSU was 3-0 with an additional loss.
- TCU was 2-1.
- Baylor was 2-0 with an additional loss.
One consistent thing that we have learned in the CFP era is that the concept of a "bad loss" has virtually disappeared.
- In 2014 they had both tOSU and Baylor ahead of TCU despite the fact that TCU's three point road loss to Baylor was VASTLY better than tOSU's and Baylor's losses to mediocre VaTech and WVU teams.
- In 2015 MSU's and Oklahoma's losss to a Nebraska and Texas teams that finished 5-7 did not keep them out of the playoffs.
- In 2016 Clemson's loss to a Pitt team that finished 8-4 did not keep them out of the playoffs.
- In 2017 Oklahoma's loss to an ISU team that finished 7-5 and Clemson's loss to a Syracuse team that finished 4-8 did not keep them out of the playoffs.
-
It was a knee-jerk reaction to a nonexistent problem.
I think Baylor and TCU fans would disagree with your charachterization of the problem as "nonexistent", see my above post. I know you think that "helmet" was the deciding factor there but look at my comparison above then add in a hypothetical win by either Baylor or TCU in a hypothetical B12CG.
- Ohio State would still have been 3-0 against ranked teams and they were impressive victories of 59 points at a neutral site, 12 points on the road, and 7 points on the road. Ohio State also had a bad loss.
- Hypothetical B12CG winner TCU would have been 3-1 with the only loss being a three point road loss later avenged at a neutral site in the CG.
- Hypothetical B12CG winner Baylor would have been 3-0 with an additional bad loss.
As it happened, I think tOSU>Baylor was pretty obvious. TCU had a much better argument but I think that the committee treated Baylor as the "B12 Champion" based on the H2H win over TCU. IMHO the comparison of Ohio State against hypothetical B12CG winner Baylor is a close call but the comparison of Ohio State against hypothetical B12CG winner TCU would go to TCU.
-
One consistent thing that we have learned in the CFP era is that the concept of a "bad loss" has virtually disappeared.
- In 2014 they had both tOSU and Baylor ahead of TCU despite the fact that TCU's three point road loss to Baylor was VASTLY better than tOSU's and Baylor's losses to mediocre VaTech and WVU teams.
Yes, the voters are dumb.
-
B12:
There are no divisions in the B12, the top two teams simply play a rematch (it is always a rematch) in the B12CG.
The #1 dumbest thing in college football history. Scheduling a rematch before the season starts. FFS
-
Replying to @Kris60 (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=79) and @Brutus Buckeye (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=31) :
I think the B12 pretty much had to add a CG for CFP purposes after what happened to them in 2014. The other four P5 Champions will always have a win on CG weekend over a high quality opponent. We saw what happened in 2014 when the B12's two CFP contenders didn't get that opportunity. Instead, Ohio State's 59-0 CG win over #13 Wisconsin propelled them into the CFP ahead of TCU and Baylor. That final weekend while Ohio State was steamrolling the Badgers the Bears had an 11 point win over #9 KSU and the Horned Frogs trounced ISU.
Ohio State, TCU, and Baylor games against teams listed in the final 2014 CFP Rankings:
- #5 Baylor: TCU lost on the road by a FG
- #6 TCU: Baylor won at home by a FG
- #8 MSU: tOSU won on the road by 12.
- #11 KSU: Baylor won at home by 11, TCU won at home by 21.
- #18 Wisconsin: tOSU won at a neutral site by 59.
- #25 Minnesota: tOSU won on the road by 7, TCU won at home by 23.
All told:
- tOSU was 3-0 with an additional loss.
- TCU was 2-1.
- Baylor was 2-0 with an additional loss.
One consistent thing that we have learned in the CFP era is that the concept of a "bad loss" has virtually disappeared.
- In 2014 they had both tOSU and Baylor ahead of TCU despite the fact that TCU's three point road loss to Baylor was VASTLY better than tOSU's and Baylor's losses to mediocre VaTech and WVU teams.
- In 2015 MSU's and Oklahoma's losss to a Nebraska and Texas teams that finished 5-7 did not keep them out of the playoffs.
- In 2016 Clemson's loss to a Pitt team that finished 8-4 did not keep them out of the playoffs.
- In 2017 Oklahoma's loss to an ISU team that finished 7-5 and Clemson's loss to a Syracuse team that finished 4-8 did not keep them out of the playoffs.
I thought it was an overreaction to 2014 and, as we have detailed, the 13th data point was only part of the reason that Big 12 didn’t get a team in. It was far from the only reason. The very next season Oklahoma made the CFP comfortably without a CCG and would have last year too. In 2016, OU wouldn’t have made it even with a CCG win.
And that’s sort of what I’ve always thought. Some years a CCG would help you, some years it would hurt you, and some years it wouldn’t matter because a team would be too strong to leave out or weak to consider regardless of CCG result. Apparently, the Big 12 ran tens of thousands of simulations and determined a 13th game would help the conference get it in a little more than without one. So, whatever. That’s much more scientific than my gut feeling about them I guess.
But I hate it. Not only does it just not make sense because they already play a round robin but the Big 12 format now is brutal. It’s the only conference that plays a round robin, the only one that guarantees a rematch, and the only one that guarantees the top 2 teams will play in the CCG. They’ve made it too tough, IMO.
-
Plus it shortened their regular season by a week, as they used to play Conference games while the CCGs were going on.
-
and the only one that guarantees the top 2 teams will play in the CCG. They’ve made it too tough, IMO.
I think this point is really interesting. I like it in theory because I think it makes more sense than having effectively #1 vs #6. OTOH, you make a good point. There is almost no chance of an easy match-up in the B12CG.
In our current Power Rankings (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?topic=6273.0), for example, the top three teams are from the B1G-E and #4 needs help to win the B1G-W. If the season ended today the B1GCG would be #1 Michigan vs #6 Northwestern. That is a real break for Michigan as opposed to the B12 format where they would definitely get stuck with a rematch against a higher ranked team.
-
I like having different conferences doing different things. Run experiments, see what works.
-
I cannot recall a year where a conference (SEC) was decided so early in the season (since having divisions anyway). In the NFL, it would mean you were already in the playoff and thinking about resting folks. In CFB of course, you need to win every game (but one, maybe).
Alabama has three games after this weekend, all at home, Miss State and Auburn and a pastry. I suppose two of those are half decent teams, up and down, potentially dangerous, but Bama will be 2 TD favorites plus. Alabama is a near lock to be 12-0. UGA faces Auburn at home, UMass at home, and GaTech, also all at home. So, they are likely to be 12-1 if they get by UK, but could lose to Auburn.
Obviously, this weekend decides the SEC, probably, barring an LSU upset, and medina's efforts will be simplified next week.
-
I like having different conferences doing different things. Run experiments, see what works.
As long as those differences benefit the SEC. :-[
-
I really have no idea what "benefits the SEC" and don't care whether something does or not, especially as I have zero control over such things.
I'm sure we all realize that money is at the bottom of all of this. Conferences do whatever they think will generate the most money.
-
If the season ended today the B1GCG would be #1 Michigan vs #6 Northwestern. That is a real break for Michigan as opposed to the B12 format where they would definitely get stuck with a rematch against a higher ranked team.
this could help Michigan get a win, but upsets happen
this could also hurt Michigan if they need an impressive win over a highly ranked opponent to grab the 4th spot in the playoff
-
Apparently, the Big 12 ran tens of thousands of simulations and determined a 13th game would help the conference get it in a little more than without one. So, whatever. That’s much more scientific than my gut feeling about them I guess.
I'd be surprised if the decision was made by any type of scientific means at all
-
As long as those differences benefit the SEC. :-[
There is nothing to stop all of the conferences from doing exactly what the SEC is doing right now. Is it a coincidence that the only two conferences to make every CFP so far are the two that play an 8 game schedule? Idk. Maybe, maybe not.
But there is no incentive to change how they schedule. It’s working. The other three can go to that anytime they wish and maybe they should to even the playing field a little.
-
I can recall when only 6 conference opponents were scheduled. That was before the forward pass I think.
Georgia Tech was in the SEC and did not play either Mississippi team for many decades. There also were times when nonconference opponents counted as conference games.
-
There is nothing to stop all of the conferences from doing exactly what the SEC is doing right now. Is it a coincidence that the only two conferences to make every CFP so far are the two that play an 8 game schedule? Idk. Maybe, maybe not.
But there is no incentive to change how they schedule. It’s working. The other three can go to that anytime they wish and maybe they should to even the playing field a little.
Totally agree with this. The SEC has figured out the best way to game the system. Every other conference could do the same thing.
And I also agree with CD about liking the fact that conferences are built differently, and decide things differently. So many college football fans seem to want to push for uniformity and end up with an NFL Lite. No, thanks.
-
Its going to be crazy in Baton Rouge tonight. I don’t understand how Alabama is favored by 14. Love the contrast between the coaches.
Go Tigers!
-
Alabama is favored by 2 TDs because of Tu'a (and they are Alabama). Watching them play is almost like watching perfection by some machine, they grind you into dust, and quickly. They would be favored by doubt digits against any team in the country not in the NFL.
Clemson won with a great QB a couple years back, Tu'a I think is better.
-
lucky for Bama to be down late in the NCG last season to the Dawgs?
otherwise would Tu'a have even had a chance to start this season?
-
Saban made the change at the half, so they weren't "down late". Tu'a made some boneheaded plays earlier in the second half and one in OT.
UGA had shut them out in the first half and Saban realized he had to make a change, to his credit. The Dawgs had a pretty good defense last year. This year, not so much.
-
Tua said if he had not played in the Georgia game that he probably would have transferred.
-
Alabama opens as a projected 2 TD favorite over the Dawgs, take Bama and give the points.
Bama plays MSU and Auburn at home (plus Citadel). I guess there is some chance one of them might upset them, but it is slim and that other guy.
UGA has maybe a 5% shot with a near perfect effort, somehow.
-
I took the Dawgs yesterday and gave the 9 points
still like the Dawgs, although I don't know if I'll take them vs Bammer
-
Bama likely would win something like 34-13. We might score some, but maybe not.