(12-06-2015 02:26 AM)ClemVegas Wrote:  I think Oklhoama should be out b/c they lost to a bad Texas team on a neutral field, plus Texas beating Baylor, and they got both TCU and Baylor without their starting QBs and these programs are more about the offense than defense. lol

but i do blieve every league should have the same format, b/c players are risking injury in every game they play and wear and tear on their body. It is an advantage to not have to play a title game

I think they should be punished by dropping them down to #4.
Come to think of it that might not be too much of a punishment as it would provide them an easier path to the Championship game.

(12-06-2015 08:03 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 01:12 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 01:10 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 01:07 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 01:05 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Iowa and Oklahoma both played nine conference games, so how on earth was Iowa's CCG an "extra game"? Actually, it was a game they had to play to equalize with Oklahoma, not put them ahead of them.

Would it make you feel better if Oklahoma had played Illinois State today, like Iowa did earlier in the year? Then they'd have played the same number of OOC games too.

He means Iowa played a 13 game season, whereas OU played a 12 game season, not that Iowa played more conference games.

So as I said, would it have made him feel better if OU had played Illinois State today? That would have equalized them at 13 games.

Point is, folks who harp about the CCG act like the CCG is the extra game compared to schools in the Big 12. It's not. Since they both play the same number of conference games, the extra game is whatever OOC cannon fodder game the team from the CCG conference played earlier in the year.

Read my updated post. My computer froze up on me. The number of P5 OOC games wasn't the same. Iowa played Pitt and ISU. OU played UTenn. It's 11 P5 vs. 10 P5.

Well, that's not a CCG vs no-CCG issue. Michigan State also played ten P5 games. I don't hear anyone complaining about that.

Also, playing a P5 isn't necessarily better than playing a G5. E.g., LSU played Western Kentucky, who just won the C-USA title and is ranked #37 in the Massey Composite. Iowa State is #81. So WKU is better than plenty of P5 teams.

What should matter is overall SOS, and Oklahoma's is #19 (Sagarin) while Iowa's is a much softer #57, despite playing a CCG.

Take that up with the OP. I personally don't care one way or the other. I was just clarifying his point. Iowa factually played one more game than OU, and that game was a P5 game.

(12-06-2015 09:25 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 08:03 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 01:12 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 01:10 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 01:07 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  He means Iowa played a 13 game season, whereas OU played a 12 game season, not that Iowa played more conference games.

So as I said, would it have made him feel better if OU had played Illinois State today? That would have equalized them at 13 games.

Point is, folks who harp about the CCG act like the CCG is the extra game compared to schools in the Big 12. It's not. Since they both play the same number of conference games, the extra game is whatever OOC cannon fodder game the team from the CCG conference played earlier in the year.

Read my updated post. My computer froze up on me. The number of P5 OOC games wasn't the same. Iowa played Pitt and ISU. OU played UTenn. It's 11 P5 vs. 10 P5.

Well, that's not a CCG vs no-CCG issue. Michigan State also played ten P5 games. I don't hear anyone complaining about that.

Also, playing a P5 isn't necessarily better than playing a G5. E.g., LSU played Western Kentucky, who just won the C-USA title and is ranked #37 in the Massey Composite. Iowa State is #81. So WKU is better than plenty of P5 teams.

What should matter is overall SOS, and Oklahoma's is #19 (Sagarin) while Iowa's is a much softer #57, despite playing a CCG.

Take that up with the OP. I personally don't care one way or the other. I was just clarifying his point. Iowa factually played one more game than OU, and that game was a P5 game.

Since the OP never mentioned P5 vs G5, only that Iowa had played an 'extra game', you didn't clarify his point, you created a new one. My original reply to the OP's post did in fact address every point he actually raised. And my reply to you addressed the point you made about P5 vs G5, namely that this should be irrelevant, as there's nothing inherently superior about playing a P5 vs a G5, we should just look at the overall SOS.

So I don't think I have anything else to take up with the OP. If you want to discuss your point, and it is *your* point, about Iowa playing an extra P5 game, well then you can start by explaining why it doesn't matter that MSU only played ten P5 games as well.

I would just personally want to see a Big XII championship...it would be one more exciting game to watch on Championship Saturday

(12-06-2015 01:04 AM)leofrog Wrote:  You're only motive is to get into a P5 conference.

As. Big 12 guy, I think Oklahoma has done enough and earned CFP berth. Iowa should not be in the conversation at all, as they did not win a conference champion. Honestly, Ohio St has more of an argument, just by the fact that their division is much tougher.

I would not argue that Stanford deserves a bid, but they have two losses, and are now 3-2 against the CFP top 25, and that's if USC stays in. Oklahoma is 4-0. As the committee has proven, better wins mean more than poor losses.

This is exactly right. The motivation behind all the bitching about OU/Big12 is really about the fanbases of schools that believe they could be selected by the Big12, if the Big12 had to expand to have a CCG.

So first off, I agree the Big12 should have a CCG, but if the ACC and the Big12 are successful with changing the rules about divisions and the number of teams required for a CCG, expansion won't happen for that purpose. The Big12 will be able to hold a CCG with just 10 teams.

All that being said, the Big12 SHOULD expand. But for the purpose of creating a conference network, not for a CCG for the purpose of being on equal footing with other conferences, for CFP selection. A new Big12 conference network would need larger markets to be relevant, and sustainable/profitable. That is what will drive expansion, not rooting against Big12 teams, in hopes that your school will be begrudgingly included to have a CCG, and ultimately equal footing for a CFP slot.

(12-06-2015 10:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 09:25 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 08:03 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 01:12 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 01:10 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  So as I said, would it have made him feel better if OU had played Illinois State today? That would have equalized them at 13 games.

Point is, folks who harp about the CCG act like the CCG is the extra game compared to schools in the Big 12. It's not. Since they both play the same number of conference games, the extra game is whatever OOC cannon fodder game the team from the CCG conference played earlier in the year.

Read my updated post. My computer froze up on me. The number of P5 OOC games wasn't the same. Iowa played Pitt and ISU. OU played UTenn. It's 11 P5 vs. 10 P5.

Well, that's not a CCG vs no-CCG issue. Michigan State also played ten P5 games. I don't hear anyone complaining about that.

Also, playing a P5 isn't necessarily better than playing a G5. E.g., LSU played Western Kentucky, who just won the C-USA title and is ranked #37 in the Massey Composite. Iowa State is #81. So WKU is better than plenty of P5 teams.

What should matter is overall SOS, and Oklahoma's is #19 (Sagarin) while Iowa's is a much softer #57, despite playing a CCG.

Take that up with the OP. I personally don't care one way or the other. I was just clarifying his point. Iowa factually played one more game than OU, and that game was a P5 game.

Since the OP never mentioned P5 vs G5, only that Iowa had played an 'extra game', you didn't clarify his point, you created a new one. My original reply to the OP's post did in fact address every point he actually raised. And my reply to you addressed the point you made about P5 vs G5, namely that this should be irrelevant, as there's nothing inherently superior about playing a P5 vs a G5, we should just look at the overall SOS.

So I don't think I have anything else to take up with the OP. If you want to discuss your point, and it is *your* point, about Iowa playing an extra P5 game, well then you can start by explaining why it doesn't matter that MSU only played ten P5 games as well.

No. YOU said that they played the same number of conference games so there was no extra game (i.e. "since they both play the same number of conference games"). That isn't true. YOU then claimed that the missing game was a g5 game (i.e. "...would it have made him feel better if OU had played Illinois State today? That would have equalized them at 13 games."). That isn't true. Like I said, I clarified the OP's post. If you disagree with it, take it up with him. If you disagree with math (i.e. 13>12, and 11>10), take it up with your 1st grade teacher.

You then rambled about SOS' and digressed into paranoia. Since neither SOS' or your paranoia is objective, and I don't really follow either team enough to know how good the teams on their schedule are in relation to each other in great detail, I have no interest in continuing this discussion.

(12-06-2015 02:21 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 10:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 09:25 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 08:03 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 01:12 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  Read my updated post. My computer froze up on me. The number of P5 OOC games wasn't the same. Iowa played Pitt and ISU. OU played UTenn. It's 11 P5 vs. 10 P5.

Well, that's not a CCG vs no-CCG issue. Michigan State also played ten P5 games. I don't hear anyone complaining about that.

Also, playing a P5 isn't necessarily better than playing a G5. E.g., LSU played Western Kentucky, who just won the C-USA title and is ranked #37 in the Massey Composite. Iowa State is #81. So WKU is better than plenty of P5 teams.

What should matter is overall SOS, and Oklahoma's is #19 (Sagarin) while Iowa's is a much softer #57, despite playing a CCG.

Take that up with the OP. I personally don't care one way or the other. I was just clarifying his point. Iowa factually played one more game than OU, and that game was a P5 game.

Since the OP never mentioned P5 vs G5, only that Iowa had played an 'extra game', you didn't clarify his point, you created a new one. My original reply to the OP's post did in fact address every point he actually raised. And my reply to you addressed the point you made about P5 vs G5, namely that this should be irrelevant, as there's nothing inherently superior about playing a P5 vs a G5, we should just look at the overall SOS.

So I don't think I have anything else to take up with the OP. If you want to discuss your point, and it is *your* point, about Iowa playing an extra P5 game, well then you can start by explaining why it doesn't matter that MSU only played ten P5 games as well.

No. YOU said that they played the same number of conference games so there was no extra game (i.e. "since they both play the same number of conference games"). That isn't true. YOU then claimed that the missing game was a g5 game (i.e. "...would it have made him feel better if OU had played Illinois State today? That would have equalized them at 13 games."). That isn't true. Like I said, I clarified the OP's post. If you disagree with it, take it up with him. If you disagree with math (i.e. 13>12, and 11>10), take it up with your 1st grade teacher.

You then rambled about SOS' and digressed into paranoia. Since neither SOS' or your paranoia is objective, and I don't really follow either team enough to know how good the teams on their schedule are in relation to each other in great detail, I have no interest in continuing this discussion.

I was wrong about the 'extra game' being a G5 vs P5 game, but in mentioning that you did NOT clarify the OP's post, because he never mentioned P5 vs G5, just that Iowa played an extra game, 13 compared to 12 for OK.

You created that distinction between P5 and G5, so i rightly responded to you about that.

I was also right about everything else, because I explained that playing an extra P5 game is a meaningless thing to point out.

I guess you want to claim I should discuss that with the OP (your claim you were 'clarifying' his post) because it's not a meaningful factor, but since he never made that distinction, no it's on you to defend it.

Good Luck.