(07-28-2014 10:28 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-28-2014 08:16 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-28-2014 08:04 AM)orangefan Wrote:  1-2-3 are easy based on the records and rankings. FSU and VT are 1-2, both undefeated and conference champs. #3 Nebraska is 11-1 and a conference champ.

Picking 4 is the challenge. # 4 Bama is 10-2 and SEC champ. #5 Tennessee is 9-2 and SEC East Division runner up. #6 KSU is 10-1 and Big 12 North Division runner up. #7 Wisconsin is 9-2 and Big Ten champion.

Tennessee beat Bama, but Bama is the conference champion. Edge to Bama.

KSU has a better record than Bama, but is ranked two slots behind Bama. It appears that this ranking may be the result of its decisive late season loss to Nebraska, whereas Bama's losses were earlier in the year. Agree or disagree, timing of losses matters to the pollsters, as does the decisiveness of a loss. Edge to Bama.

Wisconsin has the same number of losses as Bama. The higher BCS ranking would appear to give Bama the edge. However, Wisconsin was actually ranked #4 in the AP poll, with Bama 5th. (K-state was 7th behind Tennessee).

I think the only hard call is between Wisconsin and Bama. Edge to Bama based on the BCS rankings (4 vs 7).

Wisconsin/Bama isn't even close. Bama had the #1 SOS that year. Wisconsin was #75.. Committee I think would not be able to overlook what Wisconsin's OOC schedule was. Murray St, Ball St, and Cincy. Alabama had 3 7 win teams OOC. Houston, La Tech, and Southern Miss.

I'll give you the first three, then I break the tie between Bama and Wisconsin with a coin flip. I don't place much emphasis on OOC schedules, and in this case both teams just beat teams they were supposed to beat OOC.

And fair or not, does anybody think Marshall would have beaten any of the top ten teams that year (much less a top four team)?

I don't think they would but that does not mean they do not deserve a shot over two 2 loss teams who either lost at least one game by multiple scores or played an SOS outside the top 60 in the regular season.

Most of the nation did not expect many of the upsets that happen at bowl season annually.

Southern Miss was a top 20 team that year. To act like that shouldn't matter is a joke. OOC schedules do matter- Alabama playing 3 decent teams easily trumps Wisconsin playing 3 tomato cans.

If this was now, and the Committee took Wisconsin over Alabama- folks would howl- #1 SOS not getting in over #63 SOS with the same # of losses.

(07-28-2014 10:43 AM)stever20 Wrote:  Southern Miss was a top 20 team that year. To act like that shouldn't matter is a joke. OOC schedules do matter- Alabama playing 3 decent teams easily trumps Wisconsin playing 3 tomato cans.

If this was now, and the Committee took Wisconsin over Alabama- folks would howl- #1 SOS not getting in over #63 SOS with the same # of losses.

Sometimes OOC games matter, and sometimes they don't. If Bama played three teams that they should be able to beat with one hand tied behind their back, does it matter that their three cupcakes were better than the Badgers' three cupcakes?

On the other hand, if two Bama's OOC games were against Oklahoma and Notre Dame, and they won them both, then I could see giving weight to that factor. Otherwise, a cupcake is a just a cupcake.

(07-28-2014 10:53 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-28-2014 10:43 AM)stever20 Wrote:  Southern Miss was a top 20 team that year. To act like that shouldn't matter is a joke. OOC schedules do matter- Alabama playing 3 decent teams easily trumps Wisconsin playing 3 tomato cans.

If this was now, and the Committee took Wisconsin over Alabama- folks would howl- #1 SOS not getting in over #63 SOS with the same # of losses.

Sometimes OOC games matter, and sometimes they don't. If Bama played three teams that they should be able to beat with one hand tied behind their back, does it matter that their three cupcakes were better than the Badgers' three cupcakes?

On the other hand, if two Bama's OOC games were against Oklahoma and Notre Dame, and they won them both, then I could see giving weight to that factor. Otherwise, a cupcake is a just a cupcake.

A top 25 OOC game definitely matters.... Southern Miss was hardly a cupcake.

(07-28-2014 10:54 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-28-2014 10:53 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-28-2014 10:43 AM)stever20 Wrote:  Southern Miss was a top 20 team that year. To act like that shouldn't matter is a joke. OOC schedules do matter- Alabama playing 3 decent teams easily trumps Wisconsin playing 3 tomato cans.

If this was now, and the Committee took Wisconsin over Alabama- folks would howl- #1 SOS not getting in over #63 SOS with the same # of losses.

Sometimes OOC games matter, and sometimes they don't. If Bama played three teams that they should be able to beat with one hand tied behind their back, does it matter that their three cupcakes were better than the Badgers' three cupcakes?

On the other hand, if two Bama's OOC games were against Oklahoma and Notre Dame, and they won them both, then I could see giving weight to that factor. Otherwise, a cupcake is a just a cupcake.

A top 25 OOC game definitely matters.... Southern Miss was hardly a cupcake.

Being ranked in the Top 25 doesn't mean you are one of the 25 best teams, any more than being ranked #1 means you are the best. Poll voters follow a formula, whether they admit it or not, that gives undue weight to pure number of losses.

My point, I guess, is that you point to #25 Southern Miss as your example of Bama's superior OOC schedule, despite the fact that the Tide beat them by three touchdowns. Yet you did not mention Louisiana Tech, which was not ranked, yet beat Alabama that year in Birmingham. So much for rankings and SOS calculations.

Southern Miss was really good that year- lost to Nebraska by 7 point in Lincoln.

Wisconsin's schedule though OOC was brutal. FCS, 0-11 Ball St, and 3-8 Cincy.

I just don't see a committee rewarding that type of OOC schedule in any fashion.

(07-28-2014 11:18 AM)stever20 Wrote:  Southern Miss was really good that year- lost to Nebraska by 7 point in Lincoln.

Wisconsin's schedule though OOC was brutal. FCS, 0-11 Ball St, and 3-8 Cincy.

I just don't see a committee rewarding that type of OOC schedule in any fashion.

I don't see them rewarding most OOC schedules. Why reward Alabama for scheduling teams that happened to do well in the year the game was played? Alabama didn't schedule them because they were good, or were going to be good. They scheduled them because they thought they could beat them handily and pad their resume.

If that turns out to be true, and Bama wins all their OOC games, why should they get extra credit for it? It's what they and everybody else expected. And if it's not true, and Bama loses one of those games, why give them a pass anyway because they beat some other teams that may or may not have been overrated? That's what people who pick Bama over Wisconsin are doing, essentially.

By the way, La Tech wasn't a patsy that year - they went 8-3. And they played tough OOC games that year, so even though they lost, they boosted the SOS of opponents like Bama who played them. Their 3 losses? Florida State (41-7), Texas A&M (37-17) and Southern Cal (45-19). The kind of scores you would have expected Bama to run up against them.

SOS is grossly overrated as a measure of relative strength. For that matter, so is poll rank. That just leaves one thing - were you a champion?

I see the committee punishing a team that schedules like Wisconsin. Big Time.

Also- I'm sorry- but the thing that drives me absolutely the craziest is when folks try to look at intent with regards to the schedules. And bottom line- Alabama's schedule was much better than Wisconsin.

Man, the argument over #4 on this one would have been super-controversial. It's either Tennessee or Alabama ... they're both a level above the other contenders for #4..


Anyway, the 1999 SEC Championship Game --- I still distinctly rememebr it. Not only did Alabama win 34-7 over a quality Florida team, that score was if anything an under-statement of just how much of a thumping it was.


Florida scored 4 plays into the game to make it 7-0. And then the Alabama D made sure the Gator offense was never again seen that evening. Freddie Millons and Shaun Alexander were dominant on the other side of the football.


So the committee would have had that front-and-center in their mind on selection day. Hard to ignore from the "eye test" POV. But there's also a Alabama home loss to Louisiana Tech (who was 8-3, not horrible, but still ...), plus the Tennessee head-to-head win over Alabama.


In the end, I think that Tennessee's win was AT Alabama and by multiple scores (21-7) gets the edge. Head-to-head does need to be rewarded at some point, and neither of Tennessee's 2 losses (at Florida, at Arkansas) is at a "home vs. Louisiana Tech" level.


#1 Florida State, #2 Nebraska (ahead of VT despite 1 loss versus 0 losses, much stronger schedule and much better "best win"), #3 Virginia Tech, #4 Tennessee

(07-29-2014 07:39 PM)NittanyLion Wrote:  Man, the argument over #4 on this one would have been super-controversial. It's either Tennessee or Alabama ... they're both a level above the other contenders for #4..


Anyway, the 1999 SEC Championship Game --- I still distinctly rememebr it. Not only did Alabama win 34-7 over a quality Florida team, that score was if anything an under-statement of just how much of a thumping it was.


Florida scored 4 plays into the game to make it 7-0. And then the Alabama D made sure the Gator offense was never again seen that evening. Freddie Millons and Shaun Alexander were dominant on the other side of the football.


So the committee would have had that front-and-center in their mind on selection day. Hard to ignore from the "eye test" POV. But there's also a Alabama home loss to Louisiana Tech (who was 8-3, not horrible, but still ...), plus the Tennessee head-to-head win over Alabama.


In the end, I think that Tennessee's win was AT Alabama and by multiple scores (21-7) gets the edge. Head-to-head does need to be rewarded at some point, and neither of Tennessee's 2 losses (at Florida, at Arkansas) is at a "home vs. Louisiana Tech" level.


#1 Florida State, #2 Nebraska (ahead of VT despite 1 loss versus 0 losses, much stronger schedule and much better "best win"), #3 Virginia Tech, #4 Tennessee

You make a very cogent argument...and this exercise is teaching me NOT to overstate the importance of a CCG...but Alabama's win would create an avalanche of public support of Alabama following their CCG over Florida. Tennessee could be upset about this snub (for your excellent reasons above)...but this is precisely the case where a CCG title will trump head-to-head. These aren't just any old "13th game" of the season.

(07-28-2014 08:16 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-28-2014 08:04 AM)orangefan Wrote:  1-2-3 are easy based on the records and rankings. FSU and VT are 1-2, both undefeated and conference champs. #3 Nebraska is 11-1 and a conference champ.

Picking 4 is the challenge. # 4 Bama is 10-2 and SEC champ. #5 Tennessee is 9-2 and SEC East Division runner up. #6 KSU is 10-1 and Big 12 North Division runner up. #7 Wisconsin is 9-2 and Big Ten champion.

Tennessee beat Bama, but Bama is the conference champion. Edge to Bama.

KSU has a better record than Bama, but is ranked two slots behind Bama. It appears that this ranking may be the result of its decisive late season loss to Nebraska, whereas Bama's losses were earlier in the year. Agree or disagree, timing of losses matters to the pollsters, as does the decisiveness of a loss. Edge to Bama.

Wisconsin has the same number of losses as Bama. The higher BCS ranking would appear to give Bama the edge. However, Wisconsin was actually ranked #4 in the AP poll, with Bama 5th. (K-state was 7th behind Tennessee).

I think the only hard call is between Wisconsin and Bama. Edge to Bama based on the BCS rankings (4 vs 7).

Wisconsin/Bama isn't even close. Bama had the #1 SOS that year. Wisconsin was #75.. Committee I think would not be able to overlook what Wisconsin's OOC schedule was. Murray St, Ball St, and Cincy. Alabama had 3 7 win teams OOC. Houston, La Tech, and Southern Miss.

Alabama lost at home to Louisiana Tech and wasn't particularly dominant the rest of the time.
Wisconsin lost at a sub 500 Cincinnati squad in addition to Michigan early in the season but had several big wins over good teams in addition to big wins over bad teams.
KSU had one big loss, but to a good team and dominated nearly everyone else.

I think the committee would pick Alabama as #4, but it would be close. The conference championship tiebreak would get them picked over Tennessee among SEC schools. But I think I would pick Kansas St.

The author didn't even mention Wisconsin.

(08-01-2014 07:27 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  

(07-29-2014 07:39 PM)NittanyLion Wrote:  Man, the argument over #4 on this one would have been super-controversial. It's either Tennessee or Alabama ... they're both a level above the other contenders for #4..


Anyway, the 1999 SEC Championship Game --- I still distinctly rememebr it. Not only did Alabama win 34-7 over a quality Florida team, that score was if anything an under-statement of just how much of a thumping it was.


Florida scored 4 plays into the game to make it 7-0. And then the Alabama D made sure the Gator offense was never again seen that evening. Freddie Millons and Shaun Alexander were dominant on the other side of the football.


So the committee would have had that front-and-center in their mind on selection day. Hard to ignore from the "eye test" POV. But there's also a Alabama home loss to Louisiana Tech (who was 8-3, not horrible, but still ...), plus the Tennessee head-to-head win over Alabama.


In the end, I think that Tennessee's win was AT Alabama and by multiple scores (21-7) gets the edge. Head-to-head does need to be rewarded at some point, and neither of Tennessee's 2 losses (at Florida, at Arkansas) is at a "home vs. Louisiana Tech" level.


#1 Florida State, #2 Nebraska (ahead of VT despite 1 loss versus 0 losses, much stronger schedule and much better "best win"), #3 Virginia Tech, #4 Tennessee

You make a very cogent argument...and this exercise is teaching me NOT to overstate the importance of a CCG...but Alabama's win would create an avalanche of public support of Alabama following their CCG over Florida. Tennessee could be upset about this snub (for your excellent reasons above)...but this is precisely the case where a CCG title will trump head-to-head. These aren't just any old "13th game" of the season.

And Alabama beat Arkansas and beat Florida twice, the two teams that beat Tennessee. Alabama won the conference games they had to and Tennessee didn't. I don't think there's any controversy outside the state of Tennessee on Alabama beating out Tennessee. Its the Alabama/Wisconsin/KSU that would be controversial.

Marshall just didn't have a schedule that gave them a chance to prove themselves. They had a very good team and I think they deserved their ranking, but they weren't top 3. They could have beaten Cincinnati and Louisiana Tech (who beat Wisconsin and Alabama), but I don't think they would win more than 1 of 4 if they had Wisconsin, Alabama, KSU and Tennessee on the schedule.