(07-24-2014 10:45 AM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  I am not worried about an undefeated B12 team making the playoff, conference championship game or not.

If you are a traditional power in the P-5 and you are undefeated you are in.

After that it's a beauty contest.

Every year is different. What was it- 2007? when nobody could stay in the #2 spot for more than a week? That year, a 1 loss team would have been probably been enough to make the playoff, regardless of who they played. Other years, like 2010, if you weren't undefeated, you'd have a tough time making it.

(07-24-2014 10:34 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-24-2014 08:59 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  

(07-22-2014 08:16 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  Dodd is conflating two different issues come playoff selection time- the lack of a championship game and SOS. I don't think there is any doubt SOS will be an important factor in the committee's mind. But we've seen throughout the history of college football teams in leagues without a championship game have some of the strongest schedules. A championship game doesn't make up for a weak league, and the lack of a championship game doesn't all of the sudden make a strong league weak.

If the Big 12 is top heavy with a strong nonconference performance resulting in a couple of one loss teams and a couple more two loss top 25 teams, the lack of a championship game won't matter. In the minds of the committee, the champion is going to have several big wins, depending on their nonconference schedule. Similarly if the champion of a 14 team league has a poor SOS resulting from either a weak league showing nonconference or missing a few top teams in their conference in the regular season, a championship game is not going to make up for that weak SOS ( not to mention providing one more potential loss).

By the penultimate weekend all that SOS will basically have worked itself out, and teams will basically have positioned themselves accordingly. I do think there will be a situation where, based on the committee ranks just before the last weekend, a championship game win propels a #5 non Big 12 team over a # 4 Big 12 team. But I also think there will be a situation where a # 4 non Big 12 team loses their championship game, allowing a # 5 Big 12 in the playoff. I think those situations will basically cancel themselves out, so that a championship game is 6 one, half dozen the other.

Well said. Last year, most prognosticators bumped MSU ahead of Baylor (making up quite a distance in the rankings) on the last weekend because of the 13th game...an impressive win over #2.

But if it was 7-5 Wisconsin in the Big Ten title game against #2 OSU (Wiscy backed into the game in 2012) and they upset OSU, then Baylor would have BENEFITED from sitting at home on the last weekend, because they probably would have gotten in (1. FSU, 2. Auburn, 3, Alabama, 4. Baylor).

It can cut either way...

What would have been interesting is if Baylor had lost narrowly (like Bama did) instead of by a large margin. At that point I do not think MSU passes us. We'd have a higher SOS and would have lost to a better opponent.

How a 1 loss team loses matters.

disagree. Ohio St at 12-1 was better than Oklahoma St at 10-2 who was all the way down to 13 after their loss to Oklahoma last day of the season.

Also, looking at SOS, Baylor in AH on Dec 8 was at 46, MSU was at 41. In Colley, MSU was 71 Baylor was 65.

Also have to remember going into the last weekend- it's not like Baylor was way ahead of MSU. They were very close. And then MSU got a defining win.

(07-24-2014 10:57 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-24-2014 10:34 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-24-2014 08:59 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  

(07-22-2014 08:16 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  Dodd is conflating two different issues come playoff selection time- the lack of a championship game and SOS. I don't think there is any doubt SOS will be an important factor in the committee's mind. But we've seen throughout the history of college football teams in leagues without a championship game have some of the strongest schedules. A championship game doesn't make up for a weak league, and the lack of a championship game doesn't all of the sudden make a strong league weak.

If the Big 12 is top heavy with a strong nonconference performance resulting in a couple of one loss teams and a couple more two loss top 25 teams, the lack of a championship game won't matter. In the minds of the committee, the champion is going to have several big wins, depending on their nonconference schedule. Similarly if the champion of a 14 team league has a poor SOS resulting from either a weak league showing nonconference or missing a few top teams in their conference in the regular season, a championship game is not going to make up for that weak SOS ( not to mention providing one more potential loss).

By the penultimate weekend all that SOS will basically have worked itself out, and teams will basically have positioned themselves accordingly. I do think there will be a situation where, based on the committee ranks just before the last weekend, a championship game win propels a #5 non Big 12 team over a # 4 Big 12 team. But I also think there will be a situation where a # 4 non Big 12 team loses their championship game, allowing a # 5 Big 12 in the playoff. I think those situations will basically cancel themselves out, so that a championship game is 6 one, half dozen the other.

Well said. Last year, most prognosticators bumped MSU ahead of Baylor (making up quite a distance in the rankings) on the last weekend because of the 13th game...an impressive win over #2.

But if it was 7-5 Wisconsin in the Big Ten title game against #2 OSU (Wiscy backed into the game in 2012) and they upset OSU, then Baylor would have BENEFITED from sitting at home on the last weekend, because they probably would have gotten in (1. FSU, 2. Auburn, 3, Alabama, 4. Baylor).

It can cut either way...

What would have been interesting is if Baylor had lost narrowly (like Bama did) instead of by a large margin. At that point I do not think MSU passes us. We'd have a higher SOS and would have lost to a better opponent.

How a 1 loss team loses matters.

disagree. Ohio St at 12-1 was better than Oklahoma St at 10-2 who was all the way down to 13 after their loss to Oklahoma last day of the season.

Also, looking at SOS, Baylor in AH on Dec 8 was at 46, MSU was at 41. In Colley, MSU was 71 Baylor was 65.

Also have to remember going into the last weekend- it's not like Baylor was way ahead of MSU. They were very close. And then MSU got a defining win.

1- Sagarin had us ahead on SOS.
2- "Going into the last weekend" was influenced by how we lost. My "what if" assumes a different outcome in that game.

Either way it would have been interesting.

(07-24-2014 11:35 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-24-2014 10:57 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-24-2014 10:34 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-24-2014 08:59 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  

(07-22-2014 08:16 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  Dodd is conflating two different issues come playoff selection time- the lack of a championship game and SOS. I don't think there is any doubt SOS will be an important factor in the committee's mind. But we've seen throughout the history of college football teams in leagues without a championship game have some of the strongest schedules. A championship game doesn't make up for a weak league, and the lack of a championship game doesn't all of the sudden make a strong league weak.

If the Big 12 is top heavy with a strong nonconference performance resulting in a couple of one loss teams and a couple more two loss top 25 teams, the lack of a championship game won't matter. In the minds of the committee, the champion is going to have several big wins, depending on their nonconference schedule. Similarly if the champion of a 14 team league has a poor SOS resulting from either a weak league showing nonconference or missing a few top teams in their conference in the regular season, a championship game is not going to make up for that weak SOS ( not to mention providing one more potential loss).

By the penultimate weekend all that SOS will basically have worked itself out, and teams will basically have positioned themselves accordingly. I do think there will be a situation where, based on the committee ranks just before the last weekend, a championship game win propels a #5 non Big 12 team over a # 4 Big 12 team. But I also think there will be a situation where a # 4 non Big 12 team loses their championship game, allowing a # 5 Big 12 in the playoff. I think those situations will basically cancel themselves out, so that a championship game is 6 one, half dozen the other.

Well said. Last year, most prognosticators bumped MSU ahead of Baylor (making up quite a distance in the rankings) on the last weekend because of the 13th game...an impressive win over #2.

But if it was 7-5 Wisconsin in the Big Ten title game against #2 OSU (Wiscy backed into the game in 2012) and they upset OSU, then Baylor would have BENEFITED from sitting at home on the last weekend, because they probably would have gotten in (1. FSU, 2. Auburn, 3, Alabama, 4. Baylor).

It can cut either way...

What would have been interesting is if Baylor had lost narrowly (like Bama did) instead of by a large margin. At that point I do not think MSU passes us. We'd have a higher SOS and would have lost to a better opponent.

How a 1 loss team loses matters.

disagree. Ohio St at 12-1 was better than Oklahoma St at 10-2 who was all the way down to 13 after their loss to Oklahoma last day of the season.

Also, looking at SOS, Baylor in AH on Dec 8 was at 46, MSU was at 41. In Colley, MSU was 71 Baylor was 65.

Also have to remember going into the last weekend- it's not like Baylor was way ahead of MSU. They were very close. And then MSU got a defining win.

1- Sagarin had us ahead on SOS.
2- "Going into the last weekend" was influenced by how we lost. My "what if" assumes a different outcome in that game.

Either way it would have been interesting.

the thing though is- yes, Baylor would have been viewed better- but then your loss wouldn't have been as good even. So when compared to a Michigan St team who just had beaten #2, not a good look at all.

(07-24-2014 11:40 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-24-2014 11:35 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-24-2014 10:57 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-24-2014 10:34 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-24-2014 08:59 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  Well said. Last year, most prognosticators bumped MSU ahead of Baylor (making up quite a distance in the rankings) on the last weekend because of the 13th game...an impressive win over #2.

But if it was 7-5 Wisconsin in the Big Ten title game against #2 OSU (Wiscy backed into the game in 2012) and they upset OSU, then Baylor would have BENEFITED from sitting at home on the last weekend, because they probably would have gotten in (1. FSU, 2. Auburn, 3, Alabama, 4. Baylor).

It can cut either way...

What would have been interesting is if Baylor had lost narrowly (like Bama did) instead of by a large margin. At that point I do not think MSU passes us. We'd have a higher SOS and would have lost to a better opponent.

How a 1 loss team loses matters.

disagree. Ohio St at 12-1 was better than Oklahoma St at 10-2 who was all the way down to 13 after their loss to Oklahoma last day of the season.

Also, looking at SOS, Baylor in AH on Dec 8 was at 46, MSU was at 41. In Colley, MSU was 71 Baylor was 65.

Also have to remember going into the last weekend- it's not like Baylor was way ahead of MSU. They were very close. And then MSU got a defining win.

1- Sagarin had us ahead on SOS.
2- "Going into the last weekend" was influenced by how we lost. My "what if" assumes a different outcome in that game.

Either way it would have been interesting.

the thing though is- yes, Baylor would have been viewed better- but then your loss wouldn't have been as good even. So when compared to a Michigan St team who just had beaten #2, not a good look at all.

Beating OU would have been viewed as less than beating OhSt.
The team that beat us (OkSt) would have been viewed much better than ND.

At minimum it's a difficult discussion and possibly both push Bama out.

Plus, Baylor would have played 12 games total...and MSU 13. I don't know exactly how the SOS formula works for each computer...but I would hope that winning 12 of 13 would mean more than winning 11 of 12, if most of those 13/12 opponents were of comparable merit.

Again, if you're comparing Arkansas State's 13 games to Georgia's, well, that's not an apples to apples comparison. But if the two are basically the same...the team that went 12-1 usually should get the nod over the team that went 11-1.

also just looking- week before Baylor lost....
Baylor 4
Oregon 5
Clemson 6
Auburn 7
Missouri 8
Okla St 9
A&M 10
S Carolina 11
Stanford 12
Mich St 13

after the loss
Clemson 4
Auburn 5
Missouri 6
Okla St 7
Stanford 8/10
Baylor 9/8
S Carolina 10/9
Mich St 11

I don't know how much less of a drop Baylor would have had. Maybe 8th in both polls but they were going to get passed by Clemson, Auburn, and Missouri, along with Oklahoma St who had just beaten them. And when South Carolina beat Clemson, that gap between them and Mich St is gone.

(07-23-2014 05:42 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-23-2014 04:20 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  

(07-23-2014 03:44 PM)goofus Wrote:  

(07-23-2014 12:05 AM)bullet Wrote:  BTW, the history in the Big 12 is that a championship game has NEVER given the conference an extra shot at the title game and cost them the championship game 3 times and nearly two other times.

A couple of thoughts on this. First, Its a good thing when a team loses a CCG then ends up losing its chance to make the playoffs or formally the NCG. They should have to survive that test.

Case in point. Its good that Ohio State lost the Big Ten CCG last year because it proved 2 things. OSU not only did not deserve to play in the NCG, they did not even deserve the Big Ten campionship. Michigan State did. Everything worked out as it should have.

2nd, I think you are underestimating the impact of 14-team conferences and 7-team divisions. The likely hood that both division winners will have decent records is higher than a 12-team conference. Which means the winner of 14-team CCG is much more likely to make the playoffs. Just like Missouri would have made the playoffs if they beat Aurburn last year in the CCG. Of course there will still be exceptions like if Duke would have upset FSU last year, but the odds of that happening are lower now in a 14-team league.

goofus is spot on here! The Big12 reluctance to support a championship game is out of fear...not for purity of scheduling. The fact that the PAC and B1G finally embraced the concept while the big12 will not is very annoying for every other P5 fan. The Big12 is being penny wise and pound foolish here, and I predict it bites them in the #ss.

One of the dumbest posts of the month. Very goofussy. If Nebraska and one of the others were to come back, the ccg would be implemented immediately. The Big 12 dropped it because the SEC and Big 10 were greedy and took 3 of their teams in addition to the 1 the Pac 12 took. If other P5 fans are annoyed by it, petition your leagues to send Nebraska and 1 of those other 3 teams back to the Big 12.

Those schools left the B12 on their own to go to better conferences and to get away from LH lockdown, even OU and OSU tried to escape and Texas Tech wanted to escape with them. Therefore, greed had nothing to do with those schools leaving the B12....

(07-24-2014 11:58 AM)stever20 Wrote:  also just looking- week before Baylor lost....
Baylor 4
Oregon 5
Clemson 6
Auburn 7
Missouri 8
Okla St 9
A&M 10
S Carolina 11
Stanford 12
Mich St 13

after the loss
Clemson 4
Auburn 5
Missouri 6
Okla St 7
Stanford 8/10
Baylor 9/8
S Carolina 10/9
Mich St 11

I don't know how much less of a drop Baylor would have had. Maybe 8th in both polls but they were going to get passed by Clemson, Auburn, and Missouri, along with Oklahoma St who had just beaten them. And when South Carolina beat Clemson, that gap between them and Mich St is gone.

The point is...they are CLOSE in schedule. And MSU won one more game. And their loss was better (a controversial road loss to Notre Dame vs. Baylor's blowout loss at OK St.). MSU was so far down in the rankings b/c they play defense-first football...and the Big Ten was perceived weak again last year...and they lost early and were still climbing back up...whereas Baylor had video game scores all season and maintained a "title run" undefeated record.

And when you look at what happened in the actual post-season, it's hard not to agree with the selection committee (if they HAD hypothetically put MSU in ahead of Baylor). MSU beat top 10 Stanford...Baylor lost to top 15.

This is not going to be an exact science. Good article here... http://www.sbnation.com/college-football...-committee