just looking at the Palm projection, it's hardly a lock. His projection is by far best case scenario for Ohio St and yet they aren't that far ahead. Auburn will get even stronger in the computers next week.

Really my argument wasn't even about who should or shouldn't go to the national title. I just think that it's incorrect to keep painting the picture that Ohio State's schedule was far and away the weakest of the teams competing here. If you want to argue it's weaker than Florida State's you have an argument, but it's something that can definitely be debated over and not something the media should be just assuming.

(12-01-2013 10:48 AM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  The broader lesson here is that any system that relies so heavily on public opinion polling to determine its champion is antiquated and needed to be overhauled about 20 years ago.

In an eight or preferably a 16-team playoff we'd get to watch Auburn actually play Ohio State. We'd also get to see a team like Alabama actually play Florida State. But why have all of the best teams actually play each other when we can hypothesize about what might happen if they played and support those hypotheses with SOS data?

Insane.

Exactly!

(12-01-2013 11:39 AM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  If we apply the same metrics to Auburn then:

2 of Auburn's conference wins come over teams with losing records.
The combined record of Auburn's conferences foes are 57-28 and if they beat Mizzou rises to 68-30. Auburn's average margin over conference foes is just 7.6 points. Auburn's best non-conference win over a B-5 team is against 6-6 Washington State.

Lumber, this is a simplistic analysis, because you count wins in the ACC and B1G as equal to wins in the SEC, and they aren't.

For example, yesterday, the SEC went 3-1 against the ACC in head to head matchups. And it wasn't really the SEC that went 3-1, it was the SEC East that did, and the SEC East is CLEARLY weaker than the SEC West. Those 4 games featured the two teams that are easily the ACC's best, FSU and Clemson. In contrast, the SEC had at least 3 teams (Auburn, Alabama, Missouri) that were better than any of the SEC teams that played the ACC yesterday.

And yet the SEC still went 3-1.

Both FSU and OSU have played far softer schedules than Auburn or Alabama.

Look again at yesterday: Alabama was #1, and had played a schedule as tough as FSU, and yet to make the BCS title game, Alabama had to beat #4 Auburn and then #7 Missouri, whereas FSU only had to beat 4-7 Florida, and then Duke!

Is that absurd or what?

If FSU and OSU looked similar Against their schedules it would be one thing, but FSU looked absolutely dominate all year (Including on the road where they dismantled a very good Clemson team). OSU's two toughest games on the road were against Michigan and Northwestern, two teams that can generously be described as mediocre. OSU barely escaped with a win in both places. I look at OSU and think...if placed in the SEC west they are Texas A&M...a team capable of greatness on offense with a defense that would not stop anyone. A team that could beat anyone, but would not survive a tough schedule with less than a couple of losses.

(12-01-2013 11:02 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-01-2013 10:52 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(12-01-2013 10:48 AM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  The broader lesson here is that any system that relies so heavily on public opinion polling to determine its champion is antiquated and needed to be overhauled about 20 years ago.

In an eight or preferably a 16-team playoff we'd get to watch Auburn actually play Ohio State. We'd also get to see a team like Alabama actually play Florida State. But why have all of the best teams actually play each other when we can hypothesize about what might happen if they played and support those hypotheses with SOS data?

Insane.

I am actually in complete agreement with you. I don't necessarily think Ohio State is better than Auburn. I don't necessarily think Auburn is better than Ohio State.

The tournament next year will help out with this conundrum. It will be nice to start the tournament without the SEC folks being able to say they have an 8 year winning streak though.

Look at my thread posting earlier. I'm a (secondary) Auburn fan, but Auburn isn't undefeated and OSU is. OSU beats Sparty and they go.

But be careful what you ask for regarding a playoff.

Ohio State would be an underdog against South Carolina, Alabama, Auburn, Missouri, LSU, and I wouldn't be surprised if they lost to Mississippi, Georgia or TAMU. I wouldn't be shocked if they lost to Vandy either.

The SEC pushed for a playoff and the B1G opposed it.

I am ok with the Big Ten losing out in the first round of the playoff. If it happens then it happens.

As far as whom pushed for a playoff. The SEC pushed for a playoff based off of national rankings only. The Big Ten opposed that and in turn supported a playoff of conference champions. People seem to want to rewrite that historical narrative.

Yes, in the past the Big Ten has stalled the playoff decision due to the ideology of the Big Ten and adherence to tradition which means maintaining the Rose Bowl as it was for as long as possible.

Florida State
at Pitt (41-13)
vs Nevada (62-7)
vs Beth-Cook (54-6)
at Boston College (48-34)
vs #25 Maryland (63-0)
at #3 Clemson (51-14)
vs NC State (49-17)
vs #7 Miami (41-14)
at Wake Forest (59-3)
vs Syracuse (59-3)
vs Idaho (80-14)
at Florida (37-7)

nu #20 Duke (?-?)

Ohio State
vs Buffalo (40-20)
vs San Diego State (42-7)
at Cal (52-34)
vs Florida A&M (76-0)
vs #23 Wisconsin (31-24)
at #16 Northwestern (40-30)
vs Iowa (34-24)
vs Penn State (63-14)
at Purdue (56-0)
at Illinois (60-35)
vs Indiana (42-14)
at Michigan (42-41)

nu #10 Michigan State (?-?)

Averages
Points for
53.7 - FSU (2nd)
48.2 - OSU (3rd)
Points against
11 - FSU (1rst)
20.3 - OSU (18th)