CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: medinabuckeye1 on January 10, 2023, 05:23:12 PM
-
(https://i.imgur.com/hMnthbP.png)
My method: I ranked by:
- Championships, then by
- Semi-Final wins, then by
- Appearances, then by
- Most recent appearance.
Alabama is a clear-cut #1 because they would be #1 no matter how you ranked the teams. They lead everything:
- Most Championships, by one over Clemson and Georgia
- Most Semi-Final wins, by two over Clemson
- Most appearances, by one over Clemson.
The two-Championship teams:
I have Clemson ahead of Georgia here because while they are tied with two Championships each, Clemson has a substantial lead in appearances (6-3) and has more semi-final wins (4-3).
The one-Championship teams:
I have tOSU ahead of LSU here because while they are tied with one Championship each, Ohio State has substantial leads in everything else. Ohio State has more appearances (5-1), more semi-final wins (2-1), and if we looked a non-CFP seasons Ohio State's lead would get even bigger because Ohio State has never missed the CFP by much. They have five appearances and four near-misses while LSU has one appearance, a few close calls, and some clunkers.
The one-time semi-final winners:
I have TCU ahead of Oregon here only because TCU's appearance was more recent. That said, you could make a strong argument for Oklahoma or even Michigan or Notre Dame over either of these two.
Teams with multiple appearances and no wins:
This seems pretty clear-cut. I have Oklahoma first because they have the most appearances followed by Michigan then Notre Dame and those two are only differentiated by when those appearances occurred.
Teams that have been there . . . but haven't won and have only been there once:
These four are simply sorted by recency:
- 2021 Cincy
- 2016 Washington
- 2015 Michigan State
- 2014 Florida State
The rich get richer:
The top four teams on this list have between them:
- Nearly three-fifths of the CFP appearances, 21 out of 36
- More than 80% of the Semi-Final wins, 15 out of 18
- Nearly 90% of the CFP Championships, eight out of nine
- Two-thirds of the CFP game appearances, 36 out of 54
- More than 85% of the CFP game wins, 23 out of 27
- Almost half of the CFP game losses, 13 out of 27.
Nearly all CFP games have involved at least one of Bama, Clemson, UGA, or tOSU:
2014:
One semi-final was tOSU/Bama the other did not involve any of the four. Ohio State won the CG.
2015:
Bama and Clemson each won a semi-final and faced each other in the CG.
2016:
Bama and Clemson each won a semi-final and faced each other in the CG.
2017:
One semi-final was Clemson/Bama and UGA was in the other one. Bama beat UGA in the CG.
2018:
Bama and Clemson each won a semi-final and faced each other in the CG.
2019:
One semi-final was tOSU/Clemson and the other did not involve any of the four. Clemson made the CG.
2020:
One semi-final was tOSU/Clemson and Bama won the other one. The CG was Bama/tOSU.
2021:
Bama and UGA each won a semi-final and faced each other in the CG.
2022:
On semi-final was UGA/tOSU and the other did not involve any of the four. UGA won the CG.
Twenty-four of the twenty-seven CFP games have involved at least one of the four (Bama/Clemson/UGA/tOSU) and only three total CFP games have been played without one of the four. All three were semi-finals and in each case the other semi-final involved two of the four.
-
Nice work
-
It is nice work. I still don't like the CFP.
-
It is nice work. I still don't like the CFP.
I'd like it if it was an actual playoff....as it stands...kinda sucks.
-
Very nice analysis
I wonder if a better tiebreaker, at least for those that have only appeared once and lost, is to use margin of victory (or actually margin of loss) instead, rather than ranking based on most recent appearances.
-
Yup very interesting, mb1.
Very nice analysis
I wonder if a better tiebreaker, at least for those that have only appeared once and lost, is to use margin of victory (or actually margin of loss) instead, rather than ranking based on most recent appearances.
That's not a bad idea. Might apply it to Oregon/TCU as well...
-
Very nice analysis
I wonder if a better tiebreaker, at least for those that have only appeared once and lost, is to use margin of victory (or actually margin of loss) instead, rather than ranking based on most recent appearances.
Yup very interesting, mb1.
That's not a bad idea. Might apply it to Oregon/TCU as well...
Thank you both.
This is definitely not a bad idea but more work than just using most recent. Also, what about the 0-2 teams? Would we use cumulative margin of loss?
If we did that, for the 0-2 teams:
- -29 Michigan lost by 6 to TCU in 2022 and by 23 to UGA in 2021
- -44 Notre Dame lost by 17 to Bama in 2020 and by 27 to Clemson in 2018
For the 0-1 teams:
- -17 Washington lost 24-7 to Bama in 2016
- -21 Cincinnati lost 27-6 to Bama in 2021
- -38 Michigan State lost 38-0 to Bama in 2015
- -39 Florida State lost 59-20 to Oregon in 2014
For the two 1-1 teams I assume you meant just the CG margin of defeat, right:
- -22 Oregon lost 42-20 to Ohio State in 2014
- -58 TCU lost 65-7 to Georgia in 2022
It doesn't actually matter if we make it cumulative with the semi-final, then Oregon would just be farther ahead of TCU:
- +17 Oregon beat FSU by 39 and lost to tOSU by 22
- -52 TCU beat M by 6 and lost to UGA by 58
So if we did all of that the new rankings would be:
- Bama
- Clemson
- Georgia
- Ohio State
- Louisiana State
- Oregon (up from 7)
- TCU (down from 6)
- Oklahoma
- Michigan
- Notre Dame
- Washington (up from 12)
- Cincinnati (down from 11)
- Michigan State
- Florida State
Frankly that doesn't seem like it was worth the effort. If the four-team CFP continued indefinitely I would want to use recency because the time becomes a bigger factor as the games are more spread out. However, it looks like this is only going to last another year or two and then we'll switch to a 12-team model.
-
Thank you both.
This is definitely not a bad idea but more work than just using most recent. Also, what about the 0-2 teams? Would we use cumulative margin of loss?
If we did that, for the 0-2 teams:
- -29 Michigan lost by 6 to TCU in 2022 and by 23 to UGA in 2021
- -44 Notre Dame lost by 17 to Bama in 2020 and by 27 to Clemson in 2018
For the 0-1 teams:
- -17 Washington lost 24-7 to Bama in 2016
- -21 Cincinnati lost 27-6 to Bama in 2021
- -38 Michigan State lost 38-0 to Bama in 2015
- -39 Florida State lost 59-20 to Oregon in 2014
For the two 1-1 teams I assume you meant just the CG margin of defeat, right:
- -22 Oregon lost 42-20 to Ohio State in 2014
- -58 TCU lost 65-7 to Georgia in 2022
It doesn't actually matter if we make it cumulative with the semi-final, then Oregon would just be farther ahead of TCU:
- +17 Oregon beat FSU by 39 and lost to tOSU by 22
- -52 TCU beat M by 6 and lost to UGA by 58
So if we did all of that the new rankings would be:
- Bama
- Clemson
- Georgia
- Ohio State
- Louisiana State
- Oregon (up from 7)
- TCU (down from 6)
- Oklahoma
- Michigan
- Notre Dame
- Washington (up from 12)
- Cincinnati (down from 11)
- Michigan State
- Florida State
Frankly that doesn't seem like it was worth the effort. If the four-team CFP continued indefinitely I would want to use recency because the time becomes a bigger factor as the games are more spread out. However, it looks like this is only going to last another year or two and then we'll switch to a 12-team model.
Heh, no doubt, you're right about that.
But it was an interesting exercise in picking nits, and that's something we all love to do around here.
-
One of the things I contemplate with this is which teams can catch or be caught.
For example, the tOSU/UGA semi-final decided #3 on this list. Had tOSU won they would have more appearances, more semi-final wins, and more Championships.
Bama:
Their spot at #1 is secure for at least another year. Even if they miss the CFP in 2023 and their closest contender (Clemson wins the NC) the Tide would still have more semi-final wins than the Tigers and they would have equal numbers of appearances and Championships.
Clemson:
The Tigers could be surpassed by UGA but the Dawgs would have to make it three-straight Championships to do it because they can neither catch Clemson's appearances nor surpass Clemson's semi-final wins in a single season.
Georgia:
The Dawgs could be surpassed by tOSU but the Buckeyes would have to win the NC to do it. If they did, they would have an equal number of Championships and more appearances. However, if UGA was tOSU's CG opponent then the Dawgs would still have more semi-final wins.
Ohio State:
The Buckeyes could be surpassed by LSU but the tigers would have to win the NC to do it. If they did they would have more Championships but they still wouldn't have as many appearances and they would be no better than even in semi-final wins.
LSU:
The Tigers could be surpassed by any of the remaining teams on this list or caught by any other team in the country.
The remaining teams: TCU, Oregon, Oklahoma, Michigan, Notre Dame, Cincy, Washington, Michigan State, Florida State:
These teams could be surpassed by any team winning a semi-final and the last four could be caught simply by any team making the field.
-
Feels odd to weight the appearances so lightly compared to victories.
I guess it depends on how you define "CFP era performance," but I'm inclined to rank a team like Oklahoma with 4 appearances ahead of a team like LSU with only 1 appearance, even though OU has no wins. Being there seems like it ought to count for more. Being there in an elite field of 4 means something, and OU has done it half the time.
-
agreed
but 4 straight losses aren't probably as impressive as the 2 game run LSU had that one glorious season
-
Feels odd to weight the appearances so lightly compared to victories.
I guess it depends on how you define "CFP era performance," but I'm inclined to rank a team like Oklahoma with 4 appearances ahead of a team like LSU with only 1 appearance, even though OU has no wins. Being there seems like it ought to count for more. Being there in an elite field of 4 means something, and OU has done it half the time.
I'm torn on this. Getting there is an accomplishment but the 0-fer records of Oklahoma and the teams below them on my list is problematic because an argument can be made that gettingting there is largely dependent on the strength of your schedule and your league.
Maybe the ranking criteria should be:
- 3 points for a Championship
- 2 points for a semi-final win
- 1 point for an appearance.
A Championship season would be six points:
- 1 for getting there
- 2 for winning the semi-final
- 3 for winning the Championship
A Championship Game loss would be three points.
That wouldn't move Oklahoma ahead of LSU but it would make that close (6-4) and move the Sooners ahead of the Frogs and Ducks (4-3each).
-
....and move the Sooners ahead of the Frogs and Ducks (4-3each).
I think your list should bury the Frogs in a six-foot hole for.....whatever that was, Monday.
.....but then move Michigan even below that for losing to them :)
-
The SEC has won 13 of the last 17 NCs.
The B1G has won 13 of the last 82 NCs.
-
The SEC has won 13 of the last 17 NCs.
The B1G has won 13 of the last 82 NCs.
The B1G has won one of the last one Civil Wars.
-
The reason we're changing to a 12-team playoff:
CFP Records by conference:
16-5 SEC (14-3, if you remove SEC v. SEC)
6-5 ACC
3-5 B1G
1-1 PAC
1-4 B12
.
So we couldn't continue with the BCS because of the all-SEC rematch in 2011.
Now we can't continue with the 4-team CFP because of SEC dominance*.
.
I'll give you one guess what's going to happen in the 12-team playoff. Hint: history repeats itself.
.
.
.
*before you say it's all Bama-Bama-Bama, consider this: the SEC's wins are by 3 different schools, yet all of the other conference's wins are by 1 individual school (Clemson, OSU, Oregon, TCU).
-
The reason we're changing to a 12-team playoff:
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
-
Ed Zachery
and the SEC is gonna cash in like no other
-
How much does this differ from a ranking of the BCS era? I suspect quite a bit, USC, FSU, and Texas would be mentioned. FSU had two as did LSU and UF, and Bama had 3.
-
In the BCSNCG, the SEC had 2 losses.....but just 1 to itself.
8-2 SEC (really 7-1)
2-4 B12
1-3 Big East
2-2 ACC
1-2 B1G
1-2 PAC
.
Again, it's not just Bama-Bama-Bama here, with 4 different SEC schools winning NCs in this era. That's basically unprecedented depth. And this isn't me chanting SEC-SEC-SEC, either. I could be a Boise State fan and still marvel at the facts.
.
A certain conference dominates the 2-team playoff, the rest of the country pouts, and moves the goalposts. That same certain conference dominates the 4-team playoff, the rest of the country pouts, and now we have a 12-team playoff.
Guess what? The SEC is going to have 3 or 4 or 5 teams in it, and they won't be among the worst ones in. Regardless of seeding, if 4 SEC teams make it, they'll likely be among the top 6-7 teams in actuality.
.
It's like your food doesn't taste good, so you change the plate it's on. Then you change what you're wearing. Sorry guys, even in a 12-teamer, you're not going to enjoy your meal.
-
In the BCSNCG, the SEC had 2 losses.....but just 1 to itself.
8-2 SEC (really 7-1)
2-4 B12
1-3 Big East
2-2 ACC
1-2 B1G
1-2 PAC
.
Again, it's not just Bama-Bama-Bama here, with 4 different SEC schools winning NCs in this era. That's basically unprecedented depth. And this isn't me chanting SEC-SEC-SEC, either. I could be a Boise State fan and still marvel at the facts.
.
A certain conference dominates the 2-team playoff, the rest of the country pouts, and moves the goalposts. That same certain conference dominates the 4-team playoff, the rest of the country pouts, and now we have a 12-team playoff.
Guess what? The SEC is going to have 3 or 4 or 5 teams in it, and they won't be among the worst ones in. Regardless of seeding, if 4 SEC teams make it, they'll likely be among the top 6-7 teams in actuality.
.
It's like your food doesn't taste good, so you change the plate it's on. Then you change what you're wearing. Sorry guys, even in a 12-teamer, you're not going to enjoy your meal.
Stopping SEC dominance is not WHY they’re expanding the playoffs. There I figured it out for you.
-
In the BCSNCG, the SEC had 2 losses.....but just 1 to itself.
8-2 SEC (really 7-1)
2-4 B12
1-3 Big East
2-2 ACC
1-2 B1G
1-2 PAC
.
Again, it's not just Bama-Bama-Bama here, with 4 different SEC schools winning NCs in this era. That's basically unprecedented depth. And this isn't me chanting SEC-SEC-SEC, either. I could be a Boise State fan and still marvel at the facts.
.
A certain conference dominates the 2-team playoff, the rest of the country pouts, and moves the goalposts. That same certain conference dominates the 4-team playoff, the rest of the country pouts, and now we have a 12-team playoff.
Guess what? The SEC is going to have 3 or 4 or 5 teams in it, and they won't be among the worst ones in. Regardless of seeding, if 4 SEC teams make it, they'll likely be among the top 6-7 teams in actuality.
.
It's like your food doesn't taste good, so you change the plate it's on. Then you change what you're wearing. Sorry guys, even in a 12-teamer, you're not going to enjoy your meal.
Some interesting game theory. Florida is a great program, but is essentially irrelevant right now because they are in the SEC. Why stay?
-
why would Texas and Oklahoma join?
-
How many SEC teams would have made it last year? UGA would be a top 4 (1) pick. Tenn and Bama were just outside the top 4.
The next SEC team ws LSU at 17, they wouldn't be in it.
How about 2021? UGA and Bama are in it, and then Ole Miss at 8 is probably in. So, three again.
In 2019, LSU, UGA, Florida, and ... Auburn probably not at 12. 2018 about the same, 3.
So my guess is in most years, 3.
-
Stopping SEC dominance is not WHY they’re expanding the playoffs. There I figured it out for you.
Mkay.
-
How many SEC teams would have made it last year? UGA would be a top 4 (1) pick. Tenn and Bama were just outside the top 4.
The next SEC team ws LSU at 17, they wouldn't be in it.
How about 2021? UGA and Bama are in it, and then Ole Miss at 8 is probably in. So, three again.
In 2019, LSU, UGA, Florida, and ... Auburn probably not at 12. 2018 about the same, 3.
So my guess is in most years, 3.
You could also look at it the other way.....in years Clemson (or whoever) dominates the ACC, ND isn't great, and the PAC has a 2-3 loss champ.......the math starts getting interesting.
-
In 2016 the SEC would have had only ONE team in a 12 teamer. So, if past history is any guide, we won't see four teams in very often at all.
-
Mkay.
Reasons they are expanding the playoffs, ranked.
1. $$$$$$$$$$$$$
2. $$$$$$$$$$$
3. $$$$$$$$$$
4. $$$$$$$$
5. $$$$$$
6. $$$$
7. $$$
8. $$
9. $
10. Something about conference fanservice.
-
You could also look at it the other way.....in years Clemson (or whoever) dominates the ACC, ND isn't great, and the PAC has a 2-3 loss champ.......the math starts getting interesting.
Has there been a year in the past 30 years where four SEC teams would have made it?
Remember, there will be one slot at least for a G5 team.
-
In 2012, there were 6 SEC teams in the top 11, before the bowls.
The conference champs were:
Alabama, OU/KSU, Stanford, Wisconsin, and FSU....Big East had a 4-way tie of crap salad, so I think we can omit them.
ND was #1.
NIU was the top G5 at 15.
1. #2 Bama
2. #5 Kansas St
3. #6 Stanford
4. #12 FSU
So right off the bat, this gets stupid. The 12th-ranked team gets a bye.
.
5. #1 ND
6. #3 Florida
7. #4 Oregon
8. #7 Georgia
9. #8 LSU
10. #9 A&M
11. #15 NIU
12. UR Wisconsin? #21 Louisville? #19 Boise State?
.
So in this fun dumpster fire of an idea, #10 South Carolina is SOL to let in a 2nd mid-major or an unranked team. Even worse, OU, who was a co-champion of the Big 12, is just sitting out, holding its maroon dick in it's hand.
5 SEC teams get in (I think), with a 6th one as the last one out.
-
If the 12-ranked team gets a bye, due to being one of the top 4 conference champs, it'll all need to be blown up, once again.
The people who come up with this stuff aren't bright. And if they are bright, they're not knowledgeable. It's as if possessing both qualities isn't an option.
-
One year in 30, or even two, strikes me as uncommon.
Their idea obviously is to reward conference champions. Every system will have issues. They COULD just go with the 12 top ranked teams, it'd be simple, but they would have the G5 issue to start. And yes, we could see a year where three "major" conference champions are 9-4 and two G5 teams are 13-0. And of course the conferences are in a state of flux now anyway.
My guess is the people who come up with this stuff are reasonably bright, but it's a committee, with competing agenda and requirements.
-
College Football Playoff expansion: How a 12-team field would have looked in each of last eight seasons - CBSSports.com (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/college-football-playoff-expansion-how-a-12-team-field-would-have-looked-in-each-of-last-eight-seasons/)
Here are two recent years with only one SEC team in a 12 teamer.
2015 season
Byes (Top-ranked conference champions)
1. Clemson
2. Alabama
3. Michigan State (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/teams/MICHST/michigan-state-spartans/)
4. Oklahoma
Rest of field (x-conference champion)
5. Iowa (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/teams/IOWA/iowa-hawkeyes/)
6. Stanford (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/teams/STNFRD/stanford-cardinal/) (x)
7. Ohio State
8. Notre Dame
9. Florida State
10. North Carolina (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/teams/UNC/north-carolina-tar-heels/)
11. TCU (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/teams/TCU/tcu-horned-frogs/)
12. Houston (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/teams/HOU/houston-cougars/) (x)
2016 season
Byes (Top-ranked conference champions)
1. Alabama
2. Clemson
3. Washington
4. Penn State
Rest of field (x-conference champion)
5. Ohio State
6. Michigan
7. Oklahoma (x)
8. Wisconsin
9. USC
10. Colorado
11. Florida State (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/teams/FSU/florida-state-seminoles/)
12. Western Michigan (x)
-
The SEC and Big Ten are about to go to 16 teams. Conference talk is becoming pretty meaningless. It's like arguing about the AFC v. the NFC. People do it, but mainly because it is something to talk about.
-
It's obviously all about Notre Dame getting a bid every season
even stronger God presence than the SEC
-
One year in 30, or even two, strikes me as uncommon.
That was just off the top of my head.
.
If we held the P5 on a certain plane, they should simply have the top 11 teams + 1 G5. If your champ isn't in the top 11, being a conference on that top plane, then tough shit.
-
but, P5 conference champs aren't always top 11
especially going forward with the Big 12 and PAC
-
Right.
Tough shit. Have a better champ. You're on the same plane as the other P5, earn it.
-
If the past is any guide, the SEC will have one rep in the playoff more often than four.
-
It's obviously all about Notre Dame getting a bid every season
even stronger God presence than the SEC
Somebody take a Bible belt to this man
-
If the 12-ranked team gets a bye, due to being one of the top 4 conference champs, it'll all need to be blown up, once again.
The people who come up with this stuff aren't bright. And if they are bright, they're not knowledgeable. It's as if possessing both qualities isn't an option.
Their idea is a hundred times better than yours, so if they aren't very bright, then that doesn't say much for yourself.
-
I think if we look back over the past 20 years we'd find ND NOT getting a bid much of the time, and they can never get a bye.
-
If the 12-ranked team gets a bye, due to being one of the top 4 conference champs, it'll all need to be blown up, once again.
The people who come up with this stuff aren't bright. And if they are bright, they're not knowledgeable. It's as if possessing both qualities isn't an option.
well, they will blow it up again regardless
they just like tweaking things
-
I'd guess within 20 years we'll go to 16, etc. Meh.
Somebody will always get left out. We're going to see some 9-4ish teams get in, and some G5 champion getting a bye some year. I don't know of course where the B12 and Pac end up, but it's likely not going to be all that pretty. Then you have the ACC which of late means Clemson and ...
And I don't think SEC teams are going to dominate the 12 annually.
-
Let's say the 12-team playoff lasts something around 16 years or so. Or 50. Or 100.
Assuming they never get a top-4 bye, how many national championships will the G5 programs win?
They'll need 3 consecutive wins over top 10/P5 conf champ teams.
On what planet is that yielding any NCs for them?
-
Who indicated they thought any G5 team had any chance at winning the playoff? (There is a chance, but it is obviously minimal. They are being included for legal reasons clearly.)
-
which system in the past has survived 16 seasons w/o changes?
the system from the 80's?
-
The "system" from say 1936 to around 1975 survived with very few changes, the bowls then started conference affiliations.
-
No one, I'm just asking the question.
.
But looking back at the tweaking, oh, how stupid it was. The BCS tweaking was embarrassing. Okay, we have this great system for identifying the top 2 teams! But when it spat out a list they didn't like, they tweaked it. When it spat out a list with consecutive teams with a head-2-head outcome they didn't like, they tweaked it again.
Just goes to show how they were either not smart or not savvy when it comes to these things. They could have included a simple proviso from the start about the h-2-h outcome between consecutively-ranked teams, but they didn't consider that. We're tweaking a billion-dollar industry's ultimate outcome, but they coudln't be bothered to simply spend enough time pondering it as to include that.
-
yup, and this 12 team system will be tweaked
conference champs get priority, until it doesn't suit them
top 4 get a week off until that isn't wanted - then its the top 2 or top 6
SEC isn't getting enough $$$ - tweak!
Notre Dame can't find a way in - Tweak!
-
They will still have an allowance to include a G5 team, unless there is a real split.
-
Everyone loves a
Cinderella story sacrificial lamb.
-
It's not a matter of including some underdog, it's a legal issue they can't traverse without a real split.
The future of the Pac and B12 are very much in the air and their status longer term is ... something which could impact how the playoff plays.
At some point, a "P5" conference can add so many G5 programs that ...
-
The B1G took a G5 program for TV purposes. I hope that never happens again.
-
The B1G took a G5 program for TV purposes. I hope that never happens again.
I wouldn't call Nebraska a G5 program. :)
-
I wonder where PSU would be today had the Big Ten not taken them.
ACC? I'm not sure they would have wanted that hoops program back in those days.
-
Who indicated they thought any G5 team had any chance at winning the playoff? (There is a chance, but it is obviously minimal. They are being included for legal reasons clearly.)
Agreed. I've been saying this for a while. They have to give the G5 access for legal/political reasons.
-
Who's been the worst team in each conference/division, during the CFP era?
-
Just beginning to research it, I see a lot of teams had a very strong regular season, only to lose their CCG and bowl game, sort of mulling their perceived strength. So I think regular-season conference record will be more meaningful than their final record. I'll look for teams with 3+ conf losses.
2015 we have a Utah team winning the PAC South at 6-3.
2017 Stanford went 9-5, with 2,000-yd rusher Bryce Love, but they allowed more total yards than they gained. That's pretty bad.
2018 Pitt won some division of the ACC with a 7-7 record. They got their asses beaten by Penn State, UCF, and Clemson. Also outgained in total yardages for the season.
We may have a winner! 2019 Miami went 4-4 and won their division. 6-7 overall, and here are their final 3 losses: FIU, Duke, and Louisiana Tech. Yeeesh.
-
Who indicated they thought any G5 team had any chance at winning the playoff? (There is a chance, but it is obviously minimal. They are being included for legal reasons clearly.)
The one team that made it didn't do any worse than any non helmet P5 schools, aside from TCU this year. Hell, Cincinnati did better than Michigan in their same year, and MSU, Washington, FSU, Notre Dame, etc... from other years.
All the CFP has done is saved the teams who everyone knew were a top 2 team, but lost a stupid road game in October. Everyone knows the teams that don't have a chance. TCU over Michigan this year is probably the 2nd surprising result in a decade of these, after OSU over Alabama. Because college football, played with high stakes, on a neutral field, is fairly predictable. It was the fact that a random road game at Mississippi State, or Purdue, or Texas Tech, could ruin everything, made it interesting. That led to some shitty NC games, and excluded some very good 12-1 teams, but it's what kept the sport from being fairly predictable
-
TCU could have faced someone like USC or Penn St in the NCG and lost badly. Rising up and actually beating a Michigan becomes their Super Bowl and they are not getting back up with the same intensity again. 0% chance.
.
A 12-team playoff requires them to win 3 straight Super Bowls. It's silly.
-
TCU could have faced someone like USC or Penn St in the NCG and lost badly. Rising up and actually beating a Michigan becomes their Super Bowl and they are not getting back up with the same intensity again. 0% chance.
.
A 12-team playoff requires them to win 3 straight Super Bowls. It's silly.
But isn't that way more fun than the alternative? More teams playing their Super Bowls as opposed to random exhibitions? Seems like a no brainer to me.
-
So we're arguing FOR 65-7 bloodbaths? I guess? If you're into that.
Kinda kinky.
-
So we're arguing FOR 65-7 bloodbaths? I guess? If you're into that.
Kinda kinky.
We get that no matter the system. The only question is whether you want some great games along the way.
-
I liked the recent bloodbath
-
I guess I just don't understand being inclusive when it comes to this.
I know they're poorly and subjectively judged, but I consider college football to be a lot like diving or gymnastics or ice skating events. Before the season even begins, we can generally tell who has a tough schedule, an average one, and a weak one. Same as dives with certain elements have a ceiling on its score.....kinda like a G5 schedule. Before the season begins, even if they go 12-0, they haven't REALLY earned a shot at the NC. They maybe got 'up' for 2 games vs decent P5 teams, but the rest was a 3A Texas High School slate.
Not enough triple axles, sorry.
Not enough spins and flips and shit.
Just not enough to warrant the equity.
-
It's not a matter of including some underdog, it's a legal issue they can't traverse without a real split.
The future of the Pac and B12 are very much in the air and their status longer term is ... something which could impact how the playoff plays.
At some point, a "P5" conference can add so many G5 programs that ...
...the "Big East" becomes the "American."
The Big 12 is up to five G5s, while the Pac 12 has only had to add one. So far.
-
I guess I just don't understand being inclusive when it comes to this.
I know they're poorly and subjectively judged, but I consider college football to be a lot like diving or gymnastics or ice skating events. Before the season even begins, we can generally tell who has a tough schedule, an average one, and a weak one. Same as dives with certain elements have a ceiling on its score.....kinda like a G5 schedule. Before the season begins, even if they go 12-0, they haven't REALLY earned a shot at the NC. They maybe got 'up' for 2 games vs decent P5 teams, but the rest was a 3A Texas High School slate.
Not enough triple axles, sorry.
Not enough spins and flips and shit.
Just not enough to warrant the equity.
I guess it just comes down to whether you want good football or not. We could have had Michigan-Georgia, which probably would have been like a 35-17 win for Georgia and everyone could have gone down for a good nap. Instead, we got two classic games and one clunker. It's easy to turn off the clunker.
But, some people like boring.
-
Sports have run at light speed away from boring/competition towards fun/entertainment for years now.
College football is no different.
I can whine about it, as it continues. We'll eventually have a nearly-meaningless regular season like college basketball.
We'll get 1-3 weeks of excitement at the end of the year instead of an entire season's worth of excitement.
Hooray.
-
I imagine most of "us" at least think the G5s should just be chopped off, maybe you get one game a year against them. There would still be games against "Vandy" et al. Every game can't be like Ohio State vs Michigan. Granted, I don't watch Ohio State playing Akron, not many others do either, unless somehow I see the score close late.
The scheme seems to work overall, perhaps better than in other sports. Baseball seems to have excitement even with 162 game seasons for some fans. You're not going to attract many with a poor product.
-
I don't know where else to post this, but I don't think most people realize how amazing the top pass defenses are.
I may have posted something like this in the past, but maybe not. The point is that it's not just the legendary ones (97 UM, 11 Bama, but the top pass defenses in any given year.
Just look at some of these:
1999 KSU
37% comp, 5 TDs allowed, 21 INTs
.
2005 Nebraska
51% comp, 10 TDs, 32 INTs
.
2012 Boise State
Allowed only 4 TDs and nabbed 18 INTs
.
Idk, it's just pretty nuts. That is all.
-
Maybe those teams were so easy to run on not many attempted passes.
-
1999 K-St 11-1
2005 UNL 8-4 I have the defense at 13 INTs givin up 13 TDs
2012 Boise 11-2
-
Maybe those teams were so easy to run on not many attempted passes.
Enough pass attempts to throw ~20 INTs is plenty, lol
-
1999 K-St 11-1
2005 UNL 8-4 I have the defense at 13 INTs givin up 13 TDs
2012 Boise 11-2
They obviously were overall good teams, and the PD is definitely impressive. A 37% completion rate is remarkable.
-
this isn't the 70s any longer
pass defense probably more important than run defense
-
Most SEC teams try and stop/limit the run to make the opponent 1-D as a going in strategy, at least historically. I don't think any try and stop the pass today as a priority over the run. If you can change the opponent's game plan because he can't run the ball well, you're halfway home. Or at least that is what I hear.
-
yup, most college QBs aren't good enough to beat you with their arm if you know it's coming
Pelini used to play rather soft in the run game and get the offense a couple 4 yard runs, knowing they would still throw the ball on 3rd and 2.
-
One recent thing I find very interesting is UGA's defense under Smart.
Usually, for a defense to be great, you'd think they have a ton of sacks or a ton of INTs or both, probably because they either blitz a lot or drop 8, whatever.
Looking at other recent great defenses, this is normally the case.
But with UGA, they don't have that many sacks OR INTs.....yet they have great defenses. I sort of compare it to a baseball player that draws a lot of walks, but doesn't hit for much power. They lack the traditional threat for pitchers to avoid the strike zone, yet still draw lots of walks. Their batting eye is that good.
UGA's elite defenses lacking tons of sacks or INTs is just a case of being that good. Yes, they're great at run defense, so they probably still make that a priority, yet it doesn't come at the expense of pass D.
.
Just interesting and impressive.
-
The UGA Ds of late have been superior in/near the red zone. I have often fretted that another team drives down the field but then they often stall out or fumble or miss FG or make FG. And yes, they have been tough to run on generally, though LSU and OSU showed how they could be passed on. I thought it was a bit odd how often they played "zero" against Tennessee with single coverage and didn't do that as much against other teams, and they had six sacks against the Vols I think. I thought Hooker (Vol QB) often held the ball too long, he should have spotted or had a hot route, but didn't seem to.
The UGA offense gets overlooked as well.
But if you view allowing a FG as a "win" of sorts, you can limit the other team quite effectively, bend ...
-
FGs are funny, because it's points, and points are good....but if a team kicks 3 or 4 of them w/o any TDs, they'll start getting frustrated and start going for it on 4th down when they shouldn't.
Anyone who's ever been up 15-7 knows what I'm talking about: 5 scores to 1, but still a 1-possession game.
-
the only time you shouldn't go for it on 4th down is when you don't convert
-
the only time you shouldn't go for it on 4th down is when you don't convert
Thank you Yogi!
-
FGs are funny, because it's points, and points are good....but if a team kicks 3 or 4 of them w/o any TDs, they'll start getting frustrated and start going for it on 4th down when they shouldn't.
Anyone who's ever been up 15-7 knows what I'm talking about: 5 scores to 1, but still a 1-possession game.
I know this is only anecdotal but how many games can you think of where kicking a bunch of FG's ended well?
For my team, I can think of one, mid-2000's Marshall
- pause to go look it up -
It was NCST in 2004 (The Buckeyes played Marshall the following week so I was pretty close). Anyway, against NCST in 2004 the Buckeyes scored one TD and kicked five FG's and won 22-14. It wasn't really THAT close. NCST's first TD was mid-way through the third quarter and made it 16-7 so still a two-score game. Their second TD came with <2 minutes left to make it a one-score game at 22-14 but they'd have needed an onside kick, a TD, and a 2pt conversion just to get to OT.
The other way? I can think of a bunch of games where Ohio State was dominating (at least between the 20's) but being held to FG's and ended up losing because their FG's didn't add up to an insurmountable lead like TD's would have.
-
FGs have always made me nervous if they outnumber TDs.
UGA 16 UK 6
OK, the weather was not great and I could see Smart limiting the offense because it was pretty clear UK wasn't going to score again.
UGA 26 Mizzou 22 Four FGs in a row for the Dawgs and down 22-12 in the fourth, not looking good at all.
"Lucky" to pull that one out, I think Mizzou tired.
-
I know this is only anecdotal but how many games can you think of where kicking a bunch of FG's ended well?
For my team, I can think of one, mid-2000's Marshall
- pause to go look it up -
It was NCST in 2004 (The Buckeyes played Marshall the following week so I was pretty close). Anyway, against NCST in 2004 the Buckeyes scored one TD and kicked five FG's and won 22-14. It wasn't really THAT close. NCST's first TD was mid-way through the third quarter and made it 16-7 so still a two-score game. Their second TD came with <2 minutes left to make it a one-score game at 22-14 but they'd have needed an onside kick, a TD, and a 2pt conversion just to get to OT.
The other way? I can think of a bunch of games where Ohio State was dominating (at least between the 20's) but being held to FG's and ended up losing because their FG's didn't add up to an insurmountable lead like TD's would have.
The big example I recall was the 1990 NFC Championship game. The Giants beat the 49ers 15-14 on 5 Matt Bahr FGs. Those were 2 reeeeeally good teams.
.
For Florida, the obvious example is the 1992 Sugar Bowl vs ND. The Jerome Bettis game.
Florida was ranked 3rd and had a shot at the NC if both Miami and Warshington lost. Our kicker's name was Arden Czcyldkadfhalf (Sheh-chef-ski). He had the 1-bar facemask and was pretty good. Spurrier's offense passed up and down the field on ND, but had to keep kicking FGs. I think he kicked 6 if I'm not mistaken.
Anyway, Florida doesn't pull away and in the 4th quarter, Bettis takes two long TD runs right up the middle, untouched and the Gators lose.
It was so stupid. We should have been up by 20 points at halftime. But those damn FGs.
-
For shits and giggles I looked this up. There have been 13 games in WVU history where the Mountaineers have kicked 4 FG or more and they are 12-1 in those games. Some are pretty good wins in the school’s history. A 26-6 win over Florida in the 1981 Peach Bowl that was really Nehlen’s first notable win here. A 19-18 win over a top 20 Maryland team with Boomer Esiason where WVU stopped a 2 point conversion very late that would have won the game. And then in 2009 beating a top 10 Pitt team 19-16 with the 4th and final FG coming at the gun.
The one time I can remember an opponent kicking a bunch of FG to beat WVU was Miami in 2003. They kicked 5 FG to win 22-20 with the last one coming as time expired. Still one of the 5 most gutting losses I’ve experienced as a fan.
-
It can be done, and 3 obviously is better than 0. But it's a relative win for the defense, I think. It's interesting how a TD is usually 7 points, more than twice the value of a FG. I think this adds a lot to the game. A team gets how many possessions in a typical game, call it 12. A FG on every possession is usually enough to win a game.
The worst case of course is what LSU did this past season, have one blocked and returned for a TD.
-
Coach Osborne didn't care much for FGs
Especially 4th and less than 5, he'd just run the damn ball in that territory and play defense
Of course, most times it was vs an over matched opponent
Also, Osborne didn't have great kickers and therefore, not much faith
Great story about a friend of mine, Dale Klein, from Seward, NE. He lived in the same dorm and my roommate was from Seward.
Dale started the 85 season missing his first 3 FGs. Klein, a Husker walk-on kicker whose name is still in the NCAA record book, That day in Columbia, Mo., he was 7 for 7, helping the Huskers escape with a 28-20 victory over Missouri.
Scoring 22 points with an NCAA- record seven field goals and an extra point. Quite a day for junior who wasn't sure he was the Huskers' No. 1 kicker the weekend before and ended up kicking more field goals in one afternoon against Mizzou than the six career field goals he'd kicked leading up to that game.
_________________________________________________ ______________
Interestingly, even though Klein got the biggest headlines for that Oct. 19, 1985, kickers were getting mentioned all day long on national telecasts. Texas kicker Jeff Ward, for instance, scored all of his team's points that day after kicking five field goals to lift the Longhorns over No. 4 Arkansas, 15-13, in Fayetteville. In an even bigger game, Rob Houghtlin also accounted for all of his team's points when No. 1 Iowa beat No. 2 Michigan, 12-10, in Iowa City.
_____________________________
I was at the game in Iowa City.
-
The Iowa win over Michigan in 85 is one that still stands out in my mind as a kid. Don’t exactly know why but I can remember watching that one.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/hMnthbP.png)
Should we infer anything from this about Oklahoma?
-
nope
pretty easy to rack up a few losses vs that competition
-
I concur, and they "almost" beat UGA of course. They've been mostly competitive.
I still can't figure out the TCU thing.
-
even a blind horned frog finds an acorn once in a while
-
Should we infer anything from this about Oklahoma?
I'd infer the 'ol "defense wins championships".
Drive for show, putt for dough.
-
The weirdest one off the top of my head was 2008 vs. Wisconsin. MSU kicked 4 field goals and won 25-24. They were outrushed like 300-20, and turnovers were tied. But MSU had like a 100 yard edge in penalty yardage, including one that wiped out a long Wisconsin TD run, and a Bielema meltdown that gave MSU 15 free yards to put them near FG range at the end.
-
The weirdest one off the top of my head was 2008 vs. Wisconsin. MSU kicked 4 field goals and won 25-24. They were outrushed like 300-20, and turnovers were tied. But MSU had like a 100 yard edge in penalty yardage, including one that wiped out a long Wisconsin TD run, and a Bielema meltdown that gave MSU 15 free yards to put them near FG range at the end.
Looks like MSU has kicked 4+ FG in a game 22 times. 3 times they have kicked 5.
One was in a 36-0 win over Wisconsin in 1988. The other two times, both happened in 1998. One was a 29-5 (scoragami?) win over Northwestern. The other?
https://youtu.be/1Tfq1-oUgYE
-
The other?
Much appreciated. Helped send UW back to the Rose Bowl.
-
Should we infer anything from this about Oklahoma?
I agree with @FearlessF (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=10) :
even a blind horned frog finds an acorn once in a while
Going into a little more detail, here are Oklahoma's four CFP Semi-final losses:
- 2019: Blown out 63-28 by eventual champion LSU. It should be noted that LSU blew out Clemson by almost as large of a margin and that Clemson won a VERY close Semi-final over tOSU. I'd argue that LSU (at the end of that year) was just a LOT better than everyone else.
- 2018: 45-34 loss to Bama. This was a sorta-blowout. It only ended up as an 11 point loss but they were down 28-0 EARLY in the second quarter and never got closer than the 11 point final differential.
- 2017: 54-48 2OT loss to UGA. It should be noted that UGA went on to lose the CG in OT so that suggests that OU was at least close to equal with the NC that year.
- 2015: 37-17 loss to Clemson. The Sooners led 17-16 at halftime and were within one score deep into the third quarter but ultimately they got outscored 21-0 in the second half, ouch.
Considering the competition that isn't all that bad. Honestly it is hard to say because four isn't a large enough sample size.
-
giving up 63, 45, 54, & 37 is an argument for better defense, regardless of the opponent's offense
-
The four plus FG games that some of you have listed are interesting but I was thinking more in terms of impact than in terms of raw number of FG's.
One stat that I would like to see added to box scores is an efficiency measurement, yards per point.
The game I am thinking of here is Ohio State's CFP Semi-Final loss to Clemson in the 2019 season.
The Buckeyes moved the ball seemingly at will between the 20's, dominated long stretches of the game, and ended up with an impressive 516 yards but only scored 23 points (3 FG's, 2 TD's). That works out to almost 22.5 yards per point.
The Tigers had a LOT more trouble moving the ball . . . most of the time but when they DID move the ball, they got the most out of it. They scored only four times to Ohio State's five but all four were TD's plus they had a 2pt conversion for a total of 29 points on 417 yards. That works out to a little under 14.5 yards per point.
At one point in the game Ohio State had an advantage of over 200 yards and had scored FOUR times to Clemson's zero. This isn't to knock Clemson or diminish their victory. The point is that Ohio State simply did not get enough out of the period of the game when they were dominating everything but the score. If those four scores had all been TD's it would have been an insurmountable 28-0 lead. If they had been half TD's and half FG's it would have been a 20-0 advantage. Instead they were three FG's and only one TD so when Clemson scored two TD's late in the first half it was suddenly a two point game at 16-14.
-
The four plus FG games that some of you have listed are interesting but I was thinking more in terms of impact than in terms of raw number of FG's.
One stat that I would like to see added to box scores is an efficiency measurement, yards per point.
The game I am thinking of here is Ohio State's CFP Semi-Final loss to Clemson in the 2019 season.
The Buckeyes moved the ball seemingly at will between the 20's, dominated long stretches of the game, and ended up with an impressive 516 yards but only scored 23 points (3 FG's, 2 TD's). That works out to almost 22.5 yards per point.
The Tigers had a LOT more trouble moving the ball . . . most of the time but when they DID move the ball, they got the most out of it. They scored only four times to Ohio State's five but all four were TD's plus they had a 2pt conversion for a total of 29 points on 417 yards. That works out to a little under 14.5 yards per point.
At one point in the game Ohio State had an advantage of over 200 yards and had scored FOUR times to Clemson's zero. This isn't to knock Clemson or diminish their victory. The point is that Ohio State simply did not get enough out of the period of the game when they were dominating everything but the score. If those four scores had all been TD's it would have been an insurmountable 28-0 lead. If they had been half TD's and half FG's it would have been a 20-0 advantage. Instead they were three FG's and only one TD so when Clemson scored two TD's late in the first half it was suddenly a two point game at 16-14.
I think you should spend the weekend reviewing that 5 FG MSU upset of #1 OSU. Watch as many times as you need, until you come to an answer. :72:
-
Anyone have data on what level of defense is "average" for the eventual NC winner (leave out the past two years perhaps?)?
Who had the worst defense to win a CFP NC?
-
Anyone have data on what level of defense is "average" for the eventual NC winner (leave out the past two years perhaps?)?
Who had the worst defense to win a CFP NC?
SP+ defense by year (split between BCS and CFP eras)
- 2022 Georgia - #3
- 2021 Georgia - #1
- 2020 Alabama - #6
- 2019 LSU - #20 (#1 offense)
- 2018 Clemson - #3
- 2017 Alabama - #1
- 2016 Clemson - #6
- 2015 Alabama - #1
- 2014 Ohio State - #24 (#2 offense)
- 2013 Florida State - #2
- 2012 Alabama - #3
- 2011 Alabama - #1
- 2010 Auburn - #44 (#1 offense)
- 2009 Alabama - #1
- 2008 Florida - #6
- 2007 LSU - #7
- 2006 Florida - #3
- 2005 Texas - #10
So while you "largely" need a top 6ish defense. To win a national title, you need so much talent that even a meh defense can frequently just out talent you, if they are this good. And to have a #20, #24 and #44 sprinkled in there (granted I wonder how 2010 Auburn would have done in a CFP), actually makes me think it's less important than having a potent offense. Have that many mid offenses won a national title in that time? Hell, that Auburn team probably has the same profile, but flipped, from a 2013 Michigan State. The difference is 2013 MSU lost a September game at Notre Dame, and Auburn stayed undefeated. I think they probably would have fared similarly in a CFP.
-
That is more "top 6 Ds" than I would have guessed. Zounds. And the exceptions have a #1 or 2 offense.
-
That is more "top 6 Ds" than I would have guessed. Zounds. And the exceptions have a #1 or 2 offense.
I'd infer the 'ol "defense wins championships".
-
I think you should spend the weekend reviewing that 5 FG MSU upset of #1 OSU. Watch as many times as you need, until you come to an answer. :72:
I missed that game live due to a very inconsiderate relative scheduling a wedding that day but I've watched it plenty of times since. Just a crazy upset.
-
I missed that game live due to a very inconsiderate relative scheduling a wedding that day but I've watched it plenty of times since. Just a crazy upset.
We actually had my uncle in from Dayton on business Friday (I was a freshman in HS). We went to the UM game at noon (vs. Iowa?). Then we watched the start of the game, OSU was up plenty. My mom cooked a big dinner, he was planning on driving back after dinner, but suddenly MSU had made it a game. So he stayed til the end. It was the most awkward viewing experience because he was watching in Ann Arbor, with UM fans, but it was MSU, so we could sort of pretend we hated both teams equally, but couldn't really root for anything
-
I think you should spend the weekend reviewing that 5 FG MSU upset of #1 OSU. Watch as many times as you need, until you come to an answer. :72:
This reminds me of something else I was going to post.
On this board we've discussed consistency and that is the area in which Ohio State simply has no equal. While the Buckeyes have had the occasional clunker season they haven't had a prolonged downturn in a very, very long time. Even @rolltidefan (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=12) has expressed his admiration for the Buckeyes being almost always in the mix.
I do enjoy the fact that my Alma Mater is nearly always in the NC race at least every few years and BY FAR more often than any other school. The downside of that, however, is that Ohio State probably has more heartbreaking near misses than any other team.
In the 53 seasons from 1969-2021 (Stassen hasn't added 2022 yet) the Buckeyes had the best winning percentage by a fairly significant margin over #2 Oklahoma. Despite that, #2 Oklahoma (4), #3 Alabama (10) and #4 Nebraska (5) each have more NC's than Ohio State (2) in that time.
Ohio State's one blemish seasons from 1969-2021:
- 8-1 in 1969: Lost The Game which due to RB Only and No Repeat rules was for the NC.
- 9-1 in 1970: Lost RB to Stanford. The Buckeyes were #2 but #1 Texas lost so it was for the NC.
- 10-0-1 in 1973: Tied The Game as #1, ended up #2.
- 11-1 in 1975: Lost RB to UCLA despite easily beating that same UCLA team on that same field earlier in the season.
- 11-1 in 1979: Lost RB to USC by one freaking point as #1.
- 11-1 in 1996: Lost The Game and finished #2.
- 11-1 in 1998: See ELA's link to his favorite MSU game.
- 12-1 in 2006: Lost BCSNCG to Florida.
- 14-1 in 2014: Won NC anyway.
- 12-1 in 2015: Probably ELA's second favorite MSU game.
- 13-1 in 2018: Probably Beta's favorite Purdue game.
- 13-1 in 2019: The aforementioned FG-fest against Clemson.
- 7-1 in 2020: Lost CFPNCG to Bama.
This doesn't even include other title game or effective title losses that were #2 on the year for Ohio State.
I know it is a Helmet School Problem, but from fan experience I can assure you that it is a LOT of heartbreaking near misses.
-
Nobody is close to OSU in overall consistency. I don't know who might be second.
-
I know it is a Helmet School Problem, but from fan experience I can assure you that it is a LOT of heartbreaking near misses.
Husker fans have felt the pain from 1975 until getting the big win for Osborne in 94
and then there was 96, 99, & 2001
-
Nobody is close to OSU in overall consistency. I don't know who might be second.
USC.
I did a deep dive on this a long time ago and still have it so I'll list them here. My method:
- I included all of the "helmets" plus a few "near helmets".
- I entered records for each year from 1927-2021 (NOT updated for 2022).
- Then I calculated 10-year records for EACH 10-year period, ie: 1927-1936 then 1928-1937 . . . 2012-2021 for EACH school.
- Then I determined each school's worst 10-year period.
- Then I ranked the schools by their worst 10-year period.
Those rankings are:
- .632 Ohio State
- .554 USC
- .511 Oklahoma
- .510 Texas
- .509 Notre Dame
- .495 Michigan
- .492 Tennessee
- .476 LSU
- .476 Alabama
- .466 Florida State (doesn't start until 1947
- .446 Penn State
- .416 Clemson
- .388 Florida
- .374 Miami, FL
- .337 Nebraska
Sorry, I did this a few years ago and didn't include Georgia. If I were doing it now, I would.
USC is second but Ohio State is so far ahead that #2 USC is about as close to #9 Alabama as they are to #1 Ohio State.
-
The 1950s were pretty dim for UGA, but your decade would be 1947-1957, which was pretty bad anyway.
-
I have a theory that I think explains Ohio State's consistency:
LOCATION.
Specifically, location relative to recruits.
Ohio isn't the strongest recruiting area in the country but it is a very fertile recruiting area and the strongest one that only has one major school. Florida and Texas are both stronger but they also have UF/FSU/Mia and UT/aTm/OU*. Additionally, the stronger recruiting areas also generally have more nearby schools making inroads. Obviously Michigan and Notre Dame and to a lesser extent Penn State get some talent out of Ohio but when you look at Florida the competitors in border states include Georgia Georgia Tech (more historical than current), Alabama, and Auburn plus a bunch more not much further. It is the same with Texas, not only do the Longhorns have to compete with aTm, they also have the Sooners, the Huskers, and a slew of other teams in their backyard poking around.
*Yes, I know that Oklahoma isn't actually IN Texas but if you look at their roster you wouldn't know it. Remember that Dallas is half way between Austin and Norman so a whole lot of Texas kids grow up closer to Oklahoma Memorial Stadium than DKR.
I think that creates a REALLY high "floor" for Ohio State football because even when the Buckeyes aren't all that great, they still have a boatload of talented local kids who grow up as Ohio State fans so the talent never really gets all that bad.
On the other hand, Ohio State has less room to grow than some of the other schools for two reasons:
- There isn't much to pick up locally. Unlike say Florida which can muscle out FSU and Miami and become UBER-talented, the Buckeyes don't have a major local competitor so when they get stronger . . . there isn't much to pick up.
- There isn't much in the way of nearby fertile recruiting territory to expand into. Western PA is pretty strong but Ohio State gets a decent share of that even when they aren't all that good. The rest of PA isn't very strong. Michigan, Indiana, Kentucky, and West Virginia are all relatively weak (compared to Florida, Texas, California, Ohio anyway).
Compare Ohio State and Alabama under my theory outlined above:
When they falter:
Alabama gets hit hard. They lose local kids to their instate competitor, Auburn. Additionally, there are LOTS of local-ish helmets and near-helmets that swoop in to pick off Bama HS talent (the Florida Schools, UGA, LSU, TN). Finally, the nearby OOC kids lose interest and go to other nearby schools.
Ohio State doesn't get hit nearly as hard. Their strongest instate competitor is probably Cincy at least right now but they are nowhere close to what Auburn is. The Buckeyes do lose more often to Notre Dame, Michigan, and Penn State when they are faltering but that is it. On a down-cycle the situation isn't nearly as dire in Columbus as it is in Tuscaloosa.
When they shine:
Alabama has lots of room to grow. There is a ton of talent in neighboring Florida, Georgia, and Mississippi plus they can muscle out Auburn to take almost all of the local talent. As Bama's star burns brighter they get a larger share of that instate and nearby talent and you end up with uber-talented Bama squads.
Ohio State has LOTS less room to grow. The talent in PA, MI, IN, KY and WV pales in comparison to the talent in Alabama's neighboring states and there aren't any major local schools to muscle out to begin with.
-
The 1950s were pretty dim for UGA, but your decade would be 1947-1957, which was pretty bad anyway.
My decade would be whatever was the worst.
I didn't just do 1927-1936 then 1937-1946, I did them all:
- 1927-1936
- 1928-1937
- 1929-1938
- . . .
- 2012-2021
-
Ohio State doesn't get hit nearly as hard. Their strongest instate competitor is probably Cincy at least right now but they are nowhere close to what Auburn is. The Buckeyes do lose more often to Notre Dame, Michigan, and Penn State when they are faltering but that is it. On a down-cycle the situation isn't nearly as dire in Columbus as it is in Tuscaloosa.
Probably gonna have to add UW so long as Fickell is there. Ohio is a big priority for him and now he's at a better program.
.
Oh, and your writeup on OSU's consistency is great work. And probably spot-on.
-
My decade would be whatever was the worst.
I didn't just do 1927-1936 then 1937-1946, I did them all:
My god, are you a time traveler?
-
Nobody is close to OSU in overall consistency. I don't know who might be second.
Vanderbilt? Unless you mean consistently good
-
Probably gonna have to add UW so long as Fickell is there. Ohio is a big priority for him and now he's at a better program.
I have no doubt that Fickell will recruit Ohio hard but geographically (and sticking with the Bama comparison), that is like saying that Mizzou is a threat to Bama. Camp Randall is a 500mi drive from Cleveland Glenville High School.
I'm not saying you are altogether wrong, just that I think geography matters. A lot (most?) recruits want to play somewhat close to home so Fickell at Michigan or Notre Dame would concern me a lot more.
Oh, and your writeup on OSU's consistency is great work. And probably spot-on.
Thank you, best explanation I can come up with. It has been going far too long to be explained by coaching so I looked at permanent factors and that was what I came up with.
-
I have no doubt that Fickell will recruit Ohio hard but geographically (and sticking with the Bama comparison), that is like saying that Mizzou is a threat to Bama. Camp Randall is a 500mi drive from Cleveland Glenville High School.
I'm not saying you are altogether wrong, just that I think geography matters. A lot (most?) recruits want to play somewhat close to home so Fickell at Michigan or Notre Dame would concern me a lot more.
I'd agree. Fickell with his Ohio roots will undoubtedly peel off a few recruits, but I'd also say Fickell at a helmet farther away would be more likely than Fickell at UW to snag the big fish.
I think Fickell will get some pretty good starters out of guys who otherwise would be backups at OSU.
-
Being THE prime U in a large state (historically) is clearly a factor. PSU would seem to be close to that but were not in a conference for eons. But even so, you'd think a bad set of coaches would have brought Ohio State down for more than a year here or there.
-
I'd agree. Fickell with his Ohio roots will undoubtedly peel off a few recruits, but I'd also say Fickell at a helmet farther away would be more likely than Fickell at UW to snag the big fish.
I think Fickell will get some pretty good starters out of guys who otherwise would be backups at OSU.
Narduzzi was a bigger deal than Dantonio in terms of Ohio recruiting for MSU. Particularly with the Catholic schools. Losing him I thin is why things slipped. Narduzzi really had his finger on the pulse of the truly underrated recruits.
And even with that, assuming Wisconsin can tap Ohio as well as peak MSU, getting a few high 3*/4* guys, and finding the right underrated guys, well, we've seen the ceiling.
-
I looked quickly, but for UGA
1958 4-6 (They were 10-1 the next year with Tarkenton)
1957 3-7
1956 3-6-1
1955 4-6
1954 6-3-1
1953 3-8
1952 7-4
1951 5-5
1950 6-3-3 (They were in the post season somehow)
1949 4-6-1
(I didn't know they played more than 10 games back then. In 1948 they were 9-2.)
Anyway, that's pretty dismal, 6 losing seasons in ten years.)
-
Anyone have data on what level of defense is "average" for the eventual NC winner (leave out the past two years perhaps?)?
Who had the worst defense to win a CFP NC?
19 LSU, 14 OSU.....going back further, 10 Auburn......those are by far the worst defenses for NC winners.
*I see ELA posted this already, but I was right, lol
-
Nobody is close to OSU in overall consistency. I don't know who might be second.
Nebraska from 70-00, but overall, it's OU.
-
UGA has been consistent from 2021-2022.
I don't think OU has been more consistent than Ohio State.
-
Nobody is close to OSU in overall consistency. I don't know who might be second.
USC.
USC is second but Ohio State is so far ahead that #2 USC is about as close to #9 Alabama as they are to #1 Ohio State.
i might go oklahoma. particularly if we're talking consistency within the ap poll (are we? not sure why i was thinking that).
can't seem to find it now, but ou seemed to edge out bama, mich, nd and usc as the fairly clear second most consistently highly ranked team. bama had the #1, but ou was just behind. osu and ou were almost tied for top 5 consistency, osu dominated the top 10, with ou distant second. same with top 25 overall, but mich and nd came into play. i'm sure usc was in the mix for those as well, just can't remember and can't find the data on quick search.
could probably make a case for all the blue bloods, really. some have few down periods and longer dominance, but down periods last a little longer (mich, nd). some have more down periods, but bounce back quicker (bama, ou). not sure where usc falls in those.
and then there's osu, that just doesn't have a down period. not like the rest of us. don't hit the heights, at least not quite as often, but they're always right there.
-
I have a theory that I think explains Ohio State's consistency:
osu doesn't miss on coaches. it's remarkable. there's a feedback loop, of course. good team in good location is gonna make a good coach look like a better coach. but osu has avoided the mismatch or mistake of a hc.
-
Luke Fickell
-
He was put in a tough spot. And never named coach. Interim only.
-
i might go oklahoma. particularly if we're talking consistency within the ap poll (are we? not sure why i was thinking that).
can't seem to find it now, but ou seemed to edge out bama, mich, nd and usc as the fairly clear second most consistently highly ranked team. bama had the #1, but ou was just behind. osu and ou were almost tied for top 5 consistency, osu dominated the top 10, with ou distant second. same with top 25 overall, but mich and nd came into play. i'm sure usc was in the mix for those as well, just can't remember and can't find the data on quick search.
Here is the site and it is great! Very intuitive and easily searched:
https://collegepollarchive.com/football/index.cfm
You are right, all time #1 appearances:
- 140 Bama
- 105 Ohio State
- 101 Oklahoma
- 98 Notre Dame
- 91 USC
- 72 Florida State
- 70 Nebraska
- 68 Miami, FL
- 45 Texas
- 41 Florida
Top-5 appearances:
- 453 Alabama
- 430 Oklahoma
- 421 Ohio State
- 318 Notre Dame
- 309 Michigan
- 296 Nebraska
- 284 USC
- 267 Texas
- 243 Florida State
- 204 Miami, FL
Top-10 appearances:
- 685 Ohio State
- 626 Oklahoma
- 616 Alabama
- 586 Notre Dame
- 549 Michigan
- 518 Nebraska
- 486 USC
- 453 Texas
- 399 Penn State
- 368 Florida State
All time poll appearances (20 for a lot, 10 for some, 25 recently):
- 966 Ohio State
- 903 Michigan
- 882 Oklahoma
- 857 Alabama
- 857 Notre Dame
- 803 USC
- 757 Texas
- 730 Nebraska
- 678 Penn State
- 649 LSU
-
Putting the above into perspective:
There have been 1217 polls:
- Ohio State has been ranked in almost 80% of them.
- Michigan, Oklahoma, Alabama, and Notre Dame have each been ranked in more than two out of three.
- Ohio State, Oklahoma, and Alabama have each been in the top-10 in more than half of the polls.
- Alabama, Oklahoma, and Ohio State have each been in the top-5 in more than one third of the polls.
- Alabama has been #1 in more than 10% of the polls.
Looked at another way, there were 16 polls in 2022. At that rate:
- It would take Ohio State more than two years of being #1 in every poll to catch Bama's appearances at #1.
- It would take Oklahoma more than two years of them being in every top-5 and Alabama not being in the top-5 for them to catch Alabama's top-5 appearances.
- It would take Oklahoma more than three years of them being in every top-10 and tOSU not being in the top-10 for them to catch Ohio State's top-10 appearances.
- It would take Michigan more than four years of them being ranked in every poll and tOSU being unranked for them to catch Ohio State's appearances.
-
osu doesn't miss on coaches. it's remarkable. there's a feedback loop, of course. good team in good location is gonna make a good coach look like a better coach. but osu has avoided the mismatch or mistake of a hc.
It is a Chicken and Egg question.
I agree that Ohio State has had a run of good luck in coaching hires really dating back to at least Paul Brown (pre WWII).
OTOH, the "floor" created by Ohio State's location helps. Even a mismatch/mistake of a HC still stumbles into enough talent to keep winning at a pretty good clip.
-
UGA has been consistent from 2021-2022.
I don't think OU has been more consistent than Ohio State.
He asked who was 2nd.
-
It is a Chicken and Egg question.
I agree that Ohio State has had a run of good luck in coaching hires really dating back to at least Paul Brown (pre WWII).
OTOH, the "floor" created by Ohio State's location helps. Even a mismatch/mistake of a HC still stumbles into enough talent to keep winning at a pretty good clip.
Lots of schools in similarly positioned locations have missed on coaches
-
He was put in a tough spot. And never named coach. Interim only.
He was still really, really bad against everyone except Bert.