I know Im a American homer....but Im of the opinion that our top schools in this conference could compete with anyone in the top 10 right now who isn't Alabama.

(10-16-2017 10:20 AM)FonzKnight Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 09:33 AM)nobledictator1278 Wrote:  I know ECU is a flaming dumpster right now...but I have read alot of folks wanting to lessen out schedule. This is why the American can't do that. We need to be scheduling as many so called power games as we can so that when we do have a legit team....and that UCF team is legit they have a shot at a playoff. I mean even if we go to the swamp or to Alabama and lose.... our conference isn't going to lose that auto bid because we are so far ahead in my opinion of the other conferences. We should always be playing for a national championship even if it is a extremely high mountain to cross.

Or we can do what the SEC did in the late 2000s: everyone schedules nothing but cupcakes OOC (USF is way ahead of everyone on that already), beat up on them big, and get ranked by conference play. Then when we beat each other, the winner gets a big boost, and the loser doesn't fall very far.

Then the next season once those pre-season numbers get smaller, rinse and repeat, and you have a power conference. After 5 years of it, the conference and each school's prestige has risen so high it won't matter what we do.

[for the record I hate all of this]

You act like this is done on purpose. Do I wish Wisconsin didn't excercize a clause in the contract allowing them to reschedule this game, YES. Do I wish the hurricane didn't cancel the UCF match up against GT, YES.

As to your 2nd point about getting beat up in Confernce play, that hasn't happened either unless you call going 10-1 in AAC play

(10-16-2017 11:40 AM)SublimeKnight Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 10:16 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 09:51 AM)SublimeKnight Wrote:  It doesn't matter who we schedule, who we beat, our "SOS" will be deemed crap.

Really who do the "P5"s beat OOC? Usually G4s they schedule in 1 and dones, at home, where they also supply the refs. They can do that at 1-2 million a pop. Their SOS is built on them all buying wins against equal or lesser teams.

That's why it's good to look at computers, because they don't "deem" anything, all a computer sees are a bunch of numbers.

And right now, the numbers for us don't look good. E.g., according to Sagarin, UCF's current SOS is #103, USF's is #130.

And every time Maryland or Illinois loses, it gets worse for us.

Bottom line is by any standard, UCF has played a very soft schedule so far, USF even softer. That's not P5 bias talking either.

You're not getting it. The reason the P5 have such hard strength of schedule is because everyone beats cupcakes OOC... everyone. Not just alabama, not just clemson. Your wake's and vandy's need those crap wins, that's the most important part.

After those 3-4 OOC games, you enter a closed system. The mathematical value of those collective OOC victories are then amplified during conference play. Like you said, a computer doesn't know the SEC from the Sunbelt, so how is SEC SOS so much higher than a sunbelt team? Because all the SEC schools beat sunbelt teams at home, with SEC officials on the field and in the booth.

It's more complicated than that. First, lots of P5 schools have soft schedules. Right now, West Virginia's SOS is 82, Kansas State's is 70, Kentucky's is 89, etc.

Second, the system's aren't really closed, because with divisional play, even teams within a conference can play significantly different conference schedules - we see that in the AAC.

Third, yes, no question, most P5 vs G5 games are played at the P5 home, and yes, that skews the results in favor of P5. But by how much? I mean, this year, Auburn is playing Louisiana Monroe and Georgia Southern at home. Do you really think the results would differ if they were on the road? It's not much of an impact in the scheme of things.

Plus, look at how other Florida schools built themselves up - by scheduling up. In the early 1980s, before they won a title, Miami got on to the map by playing Notre Dame every year during the 1970s. FSU? Bobby Bowden was famous for "playing anyone, anywhere" to raise his program's visibility. When I first started watching college football in the 1970s, nobody had ever heard of Miami or FSU, but they grew their programs by traveling to traditional big-name powers.

Bottom line is that AAC schools won't get invited to the playoffs unless we do what Houston did last year.

(10-16-2017 01:28 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 11:40 AM)SublimeKnight Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 10:16 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 09:51 AM)SublimeKnight Wrote:  It doesn't matter who we schedule, who we beat, our "SOS" will be deemed crap.

Really who do the "P5"s beat OOC? Usually G4s they schedule in 1 and dones, at home, where they also supply the refs. They can do that at 1-2 million a pop. Their SOS is built on them all buying wins against equal or lesser teams.

That's why it's good to look at computers, because they don't "deem" anything, all a computer sees are a bunch of numbers.

And right now, the numbers for us don't look good. E.g., according to Sagarin, UCF's current SOS is #103, USF's is #130.

And every time Maryland or Illinois loses, it gets worse for us.

Bottom line is by any standard, UCF has played a very soft schedule so far, USF even softer. That's not P5 bias talking either.

You're not getting it. The reason the P5 have such hard strength of schedule is because everyone beats cupcakes OOC... everyone. Not just alabama, not just clemson. Your wake's and vandy's need those crap wins, that's the most important part.

After those 3-4 OOC games, you enter a closed system. The mathematical value of those collective OOC victories are then amplified during conference play. Like you said, a computer doesn't know the SEC from the Sunbelt, so how is SEC SOS so much higher than a sunbelt team? Because all the SEC schools beat sunbelt teams at home, with SEC officials on the field and in the booth.

It's more complicated than that. First, lots of P5 schools have soft schedules. Right now, West Virginia's SOS is 82, Kansas State's is 70, Kentucky's is 89, etc.

Second, the system's aren't really closed, because with divisional play, even teams within a conference can play significantly different conference schedules - we see that in the AAC.

Third, yes, no question, most P5 vs G5 games are played at the P5 home, and yes, that skews the results in favor of P5. But by how much? I mean, this year, Auburn is playing Louisiana Monroe and Georgia Southern at home. Do you really think the results would differ if they were on the road? It's not much of an impact in the scheme of things.

Plus, look at how other Florida schools built themselves up - by scheduling up. In the early 1980s, before they won a title, Miami got on to the map by playing Notre Dame every year during the 1970s. FSU? Bobby Bowden was famous for "playing anyone, anywhere" to raise his program's visibility. When I first started watching college football in the 1970s, nobody had ever heard of Miami or FSU, but they grew their programs by traveling to traditional big-name powers.

Bottom line is that AAC schools won't get invited to the playoffs unless we do what Houston did last year.

You have to have a willing participant to schedule up. I would love to get more high profile games. Not that easy.

(10-16-2017 02:23 PM)otown Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 01:28 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 11:40 AM)SublimeKnight Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 10:16 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 09:51 AM)SublimeKnight Wrote:  It doesn't matter who we schedule, who we beat, our "SOS" will be deemed crap.

Really who do the "P5"s beat OOC? Usually G4s they schedule in 1 and dones, at home, where they also supply the refs. They can do that at 1-2 million a pop. Their SOS is built on them all buying wins against equal or lesser teams.

That's why it's good to look at computers, because they don't "deem" anything, all a computer sees are a bunch of numbers.

And right now, the numbers for us don't look good. E.g., according to Sagarin, UCF's current SOS is #103, USF's is #130.

And every time Maryland or Illinois loses, it gets worse for us.

Bottom line is by any standard, UCF has played a very soft schedule so far, USF even softer. That's not P5 bias talking either.

You're not getting it. The reason the P5 have such hard strength of schedule is because everyone beats cupcakes OOC... everyone. Not just alabama, not just clemson. Your wake's and vandy's need those crap wins, that's the most important part.

After those 3-4 OOC games, you enter a closed system. The mathematical value of those collective OOC victories are then amplified during conference play. Like you said, a computer doesn't know the SEC from the Sunbelt, so how is SEC SOS so much higher than a sunbelt team? Because all the SEC schools beat sunbelt teams at home, with SEC officials on the field and in the booth.

It's more complicated than that. First, lots of P5 schools have soft schedules. Right now, West Virginia's SOS is 82, Kansas State's is 70, Kentucky's is 89, etc.

Second, the system's aren't really closed, because with divisional play, even teams within a conference can play significantly different conference schedules - we see that in the AAC.

Third, yes, no question, most P5 vs G5 games are played at the P5 home, and yes, that skews the results in favor of P5. But by how much? I mean, this year, Auburn is playing Louisiana Monroe and Georgia Southern at home. Do you really think the results would differ if they were on the road? It's not much of an impact in the scheme of things.

Plus, look at how other Florida schools built themselves up - by scheduling up. In the early 1980s, before they won a title, Miami got on to the map by playing Notre Dame every year during the 1970s. FSU? Bobby Bowden was famous for "playing anyone, anywhere" to raise his program's visibility. When I first started watching college football in the 1970s, nobody had ever heard of Miami or FSU, but they grew their programs by traveling to traditional big-name powers.

Bottom line is that AAC schools won't get invited to the playoffs unless we do what Houston did last year.

You have to have a willing participant to schedule up. I would love to get more high profile games. Not that easy.

Exactly. Look at USF as an example, Michigan State, Wisconsin and Indiana all bought out or rescheduled their games with the Bulls this year

(10-16-2017 01:28 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 11:40 AM)SublimeKnight Wrote:  You're not getting it. The reason the P5 have such hard strength of schedule is because everyone beats cupcakes OOC... everyone. Not just alabama, not just clemson. Your wake's and vandy's need those crap wins, that's the most important part.

After those 3-4 OOC games, you enter a closed system. The mathematical value of those collective OOC victories are then amplified during conference play. Like you said, a computer doesn't know the SEC from the Sunbelt, so how is SEC SOS so much higher than a sunbelt team? Because all the SEC schools beat sunbelt teams at home, with SEC officials on the field and in the booth.

It's more complicated than that. First, lots of P5 schools have soft schedules. Right now, West Virginia's SOS is 82, Kansas State's is 70, Kentucky's is 89, etc.

Second, the system's aren't really closed, because with divisional play, even teams within a conference can play significantly different conference schedules - we see that in the AAC.

Third, yes, no question, most P5 vs G5 games are played at the P5 home, and yes, that skews the results in favor of P5. But by how much? I mean, this year, Auburn is playing Louisiana Monroe and Georgia Southern at home. Do you really think the results would differ if they were on the road? It's not much of an impact in the scheme of things.

Plus, look at how other Florida schools built themselves up - by scheduling up. In the early 1980s, before they won a title, Miami got on to the map by playing Notre Dame every year during the 1970s. FSU? Bobby Bowden was famous for "playing anyone, anywhere" to raise his program's visibility. When I first started watching college football in the 1970s, nobody had ever heard of Miami or FSU, but they grew their programs by traveling to traditional big-name powers.

Bottom line is that AAC schools won't get invited to the playoffs unless we do what Houston did last year.

"Building up" has no implication on a computer poll. A computer poll shouldn't know who played in leather helmets. "Scheduling up" isn't necessary. The P5's who's computer ratings we covet don't "schedule up". Let's concentrate on the line I bolded then.

I'm talking about closed to the conference. If you look at the average sagarin ratings for conferences you have the "P5"..."AAC"..."G4"
Why is the B1G, on average, rated higher than the MAC (significantly)? The B1G mostly play each other, but so does every team in the MAC. So the only external mathematical weight that differentiates the two conferences is what happens OOC. So conference play is a closed system, that draws its fuel from the 3-4 OOC games. So you better win those games. The B1G ensures everyone wins those games by slanting the playing field in their favor.

The AAC shouldn't look to "schedule up". They need to demand fair games with the "P5", with the same stipulation P5s negotiate with each other. Home and homes, where the away team supplies refs. And G4 games that we're highly likely to win. That's not just the top of the conference, that has to be the whole conference.

If we can't accomplish that, we are where we are today, in the middle.

(10-16-2017 12:42 PM)Sellular1 Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 10:20 AM)FonzKnight Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 09:33 AM)nobledictator1278 Wrote:  I know ECU is a flaming dumpster right now...but I have read alot of folks wanting to lessen out schedule. This is why the American can't do that. We need to be scheduling as many so called power games as we can so that when we do have a legit team....and that UCF team is legit they have a shot at a playoff. I mean even if we go to the swamp or to Alabama and lose.... our conference isn't going to lose that auto bid because we are so far ahead in my opinion of the other conferences. We should always be playing for a national championship even if it is a extremely high mountain to cross.

Or we can do what the SEC did in the late 2000s: everyone schedules nothing but cupcakes OOC (USF is way ahead of everyone on that already), beat up on them big, and get ranked by conference play. Then when we beat each other, the winner gets a big boost, and the loser doesn't fall very far.

Then the next season once those pre-season numbers get smaller, rinse and repeat, and you have a power conference. After 5 years of it, the conference and each school's prestige has risen so high it won't matter what we do.

[for the record I hate all of this]

You act like this is done on purpose. Do I wish Wisconsin didn't excercize a clause in the contract allowing them to reschedule this game, YES. Do I wish the hurricane didn't cancel the UCF match up against GT, YES.

As to your 2nd point about getting beat up in Confernce play, that hasn't happened either unless you call going 10-1 in AAC play

I was talking about a hypothetical for faking perception of 'power' conferences (trying to mirror the SEC's rise [from long enough back that I completely missed the time frame]), not sure what you are talking about.

(10-16-2017 04:21 PM)FonzKnight Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 12:42 PM)Sellular1 Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 10:20 AM)FonzKnight Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 09:33 AM)nobledictator1278 Wrote:  I know ECU is a flaming dumpster right now...but I have read alot of folks wanting to lessen out schedule. This is why the American can't do that. We need to be scheduling as many so called power games as we can so that when we do have a legit team....and that UCF team is legit they have a shot at a playoff. I mean even if we go to the swamp or to Alabama and lose.... our conference isn't going to lose that auto bid because we are so far ahead in my opinion of the other conferences. We should always be playing for a national championship even if it is a extremely high mountain to cross.

Or we can do what the SEC did in the late 2000s: everyone schedules nothing but cupcakes OOC (USF is way ahead of everyone on that already), beat up on them big, and get ranked by conference play. Then when we beat each other, the winner gets a big boost, and the loser doesn't fall very far.

Then the next season once those pre-season numbers get smaller, rinse and repeat, and you have a power conference. After 5 years of it, the conference and each school's prestige has risen so high it won't matter what we do.

[for the record I hate all of this]

You act like this is done on purpose. Do I wish Wisconsin didn't excercize a clause in the contract allowing them to reschedule this game, YES. Do I wish the hurricane didn't cancel the UCF match up against GT, YES.

As to your 2nd point about getting beat up in Confernce play, that hasn't happened either unless you call going 10-1 in AAC play

I was talking about a hypothetical for faking perception of 'power' conferences (trying to mirror the SEC's rise [from long enough back that I completely missed the time frame]), not sure what you are talking about.

You specifically call out USF for intentionally scheduling "nothing but cupcakes"

(10-16-2017 02:23 PM)otown Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 01:28 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 11:40 AM)SublimeKnight Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 10:16 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 09:51 AM)SublimeKnight Wrote:  It doesn't matter who we schedule, who we beat, our "SOS" will be deemed crap.

Really who do the "P5"s beat OOC? Usually G4s they schedule in 1 and dones, at home, where they also supply the refs. They can do that at 1-2 million a pop. Their SOS is built on them all buying wins against equal or lesser teams.

That's why it's good to look at computers, because they don't "deem" anything, all a computer sees are a bunch of numbers.

And right now, the numbers for us don't look good. E.g., according to Sagarin, UCF's current SOS is #103, USF's is #130.

And every time Maryland or Illinois loses, it gets worse for us.

Bottom line is by any standard, UCF has played a very soft schedule so far, USF even softer. That's not P5 bias talking either.

You're not getting it. The reason the P5 have such hard strength of schedule is because everyone beats cupcakes OOC... everyone. Not just alabama, not just clemson. Your wake's and vandy's need those crap wins, that's the most important part.

After those 3-4 OOC games, you enter a closed system. The mathematical value of those collective OOC victories are then amplified during conference play. Like you said, a computer doesn't know the SEC from the Sunbelt, so how is SEC SOS so much higher than a sunbelt team? Because all the SEC schools beat sunbelt teams at home, with SEC officials on the field and in the booth.

It's more complicated than that. First, lots of P5 schools have soft schedules. Right now, West Virginia's SOS is 82, Kansas State's is 70, Kentucky's is 89, etc.

Second, the system's aren't really closed, because with divisional play, even teams within a conference can play significantly different conference schedules - we see that in the AAC.

Third, yes, no question, most P5 vs G5 games are played at the P5 home, and yes, that skews the results in favor of P5. But by how much? I mean, this year, Auburn is playing Louisiana Monroe and Georgia Southern at home. Do you really think the results would differ if they were on the road? It's not much of an impact in the scheme of things.

Plus, look at how other Florida schools built themselves up - by scheduling up. In the early 1980s, before they won a title, Miami got on to the map by playing Notre Dame every year during the 1970s. FSU? Bobby Bowden was famous for "playing anyone, anywhere" to raise his program's visibility. When I first started watching college football in the 1970s, nobody had ever heard of Miami or FSU, but they grew their programs by traveling to traditional big-name powers.

Bottom line is that AAC schools won't get invited to the playoffs unless we do what Houston did last year.

You have to have a willing participant to schedule up. I would love to get more high profile games. Not that easy.

Agreed, it's not easy. But it's what we have to try to do, if we are serious about the playoffs.

(10-16-2017 03:29 PM)SublimeKnight Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 01:28 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 11:40 AM)SublimeKnight Wrote:  You're not getting it. The reason the P5 have such hard strength of schedule is because everyone beats cupcakes OOC... everyone. Not just alabama, not just clemson. Your wake's and vandy's need those crap wins, that's the most important part.

After those 3-4 OOC games, you enter a closed system. The mathematical value of those collective OOC victories are then amplified during conference play. Like you said, a computer doesn't know the SEC from the Sunbelt, so how is SEC SOS so much higher than a sunbelt team? Because all the SEC schools beat sunbelt teams at home, with SEC officials on the field and in the booth.

It's more complicated than that. First, lots of P5 schools have soft schedules. Right now, West Virginia's SOS is 82, Kansas State's is 70, Kentucky's is 89, etc.

Second, the system's aren't really closed, because with divisional play, even teams within a conference can play significantly different conference schedules - we see that in the AAC.

Third, yes, no question, most P5 vs G5 games are played at the P5 home, and yes, that skews the results in favor of P5. But by how much? I mean, this year, Auburn is playing Louisiana Monroe and Georgia Southern at home. Do you really think the results would differ if they were on the road? It's not much of an impact in the scheme of things.

Plus, look at how other Florida schools built themselves up - by scheduling up. In the early 1980s, before they won a title, Miami got on to the map by playing Notre Dame every year during the 1970s. FSU? Bobby Bowden was famous for "playing anyone, anywhere" to raise his program's visibility. When I first started watching college football in the 1970s, nobody had ever heard of Miami or FSU, but they grew their programs by traveling to traditional big-name powers.

Bottom line is that AAC schools won't get invited to the playoffs unless we do what Houston did last year.

"Building up" has no implication on a computer poll. A computer poll shouldn't know who played in leather helmets. "Scheduling up" isn't necessary. The P5's who's computer ratings we covet don't "schedule up". Let's concentrate on the line I bolded then.

I'm talking about closed to the conference. If you look at the average sagarin ratings for conferences you have the "P5"..."AAC"..."G4"
Why is the B1G, on average, rated higher than the MAC (significantly)? The B1G mostly play each other, but so does every team in the MAC. So the only external mathematical weight that differentiates the two conferences is what happens OOC. So conference play is a closed system, that draws its fuel from the 3-4 OOC games. So you better win those games. The B1G ensures everyone wins those games by slanting the playing field in their favor.

The AAC shouldn't look to "schedule up". They need to demand fair games with the "P5", with the same stipulation P5s negotiate with each other. Home and homes, where the away team supplies refs. And G4 games that we're highly likely to win. That's not just the top of the conference, that has to be the whole conference.

If we can't accomplish that, we are where we are today, in the middle.

About the two bolded parts ...

(1) By 'scheduling up', i mean playing good teams. You seem to think the notion of a good team is purely a scheduling anomaly, e.g., that Alabama really isn't better than Georgia Southern, it's just that Alabama gets to schedule UAB at home while Georgia Southern plays UAB on the road. That doesn't have any connection with reality.

(2) We can't demand that, because we, the AAC, aren't in a position to. Everyone wants to play home games because of revenue. Alabama isn't going to agree to a home and home with Tulsa just because Tulsa or you or I think that makes computer comparisons more 'fair and valid'.

So you do what you can, which is play them there.

(10-16-2017 05:06 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  About the two bolded parts ...

(1) By 'scheduling up', i mean playing good teams. You seem to think the notion of a good team is purely a scheduling anomaly, e.g., that Alabama really isn't better than Georgia Southern, it's just that Alabama gets to schedule UAB at home while Georgia Southern plays UAB on the road. That doesn't have any connection with reality.

(2) We can't demand that, because we, the AAC, aren't in a position to. Everyone wants to play home games because of revenue. Alabama isn't going to agree to a home and home with Tulsa just because Tulsa or you or I think that makes computer comparisons more 'fair and valid'.

So you do what you can, which is play them there.

It's better to schedule and beat Georgia State than schedule and likely lose to Alabama (especially if you schedule a one and done with everything in Alabama's favor). If you don't get that, you don't understand the system we're in and how the P5 manipulate and win in it.

(10-16-2017 05:26 PM)SublimeKnight Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 05:06 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  About the two bolded parts ...

(1) By 'scheduling up', i mean playing good teams. You seem to think the notion of a good team is purely a scheduling anomaly, e.g., that Alabama really isn't better than Georgia Southern, it's just that Alabama gets to schedule UAB at home while Georgia Southern plays UAB on the road. That doesn't have any connection with reality.

(2) We can't demand that, because we, the AAC, aren't in a position to. Everyone wants to play home games because of revenue. Alabama isn't going to agree to a home and home with Tulsa just because Tulsa or you or I think that makes computer comparisons more 'fair and valid'.

So you do what you can, which is play them there.

It's better to schedule and beat Georgia State than schedule and likely lose to Alabama (especially if you schedule a one and done with everything in Alabama's favor). If you don't get that, you don't understand the system we're in and how the P5 manipulate and win in it.

I'm pretty confident that no G5 will ever make the playoffs with the OOC schedule that UCF and USF have this year. As long as we play those OOC games, our "poll ceiling" will be lower than #4.

I think that's the nature of the system we are in.

(10-16-2017 06:20 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 05:26 PM)SublimeKnight Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 05:06 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  About the two bolded parts ...

(1) By 'scheduling up', i mean playing good teams. You seem to think the notion of a good team is purely a scheduling anomaly, e.g., that Alabama really isn't better than Georgia Southern, it's just that Alabama gets to schedule UAB at home while Georgia Southern plays UAB on the road. That doesn't have any connection with reality.

(2) We can't demand that, because we, the AAC, aren't in a position to. Everyone wants to play home games because of revenue. Alabama isn't going to agree to a home and home with Tulsa just because Tulsa or you or I think that makes computer comparisons more 'fair and valid'.

So you do what you can, which is play them there.

It's better to schedule and beat Georgia State than schedule and likely lose to Alabama (especially if you schedule a one and done with everything in Alabama's favor). If you don't get that, you don't understand the system we're in and how the P5 manipulate and win in it.

I'm pretty confident that no G5 will ever make the playoffs with the OOC schedule that UCF and USF have this year. As long as we play those OOC games, our "poll ceiling" will be lower than #4.

I think that's the nature of the system we are in.

I think this is probably correct. Another factor that complicates this is that schedules are largely made years in advance. For example, USF has a game scheduled at Texas in 2024, when the kids who will be playing in that game are almost all in 7th to 10th grade. Given the ups and downs that can affect a team over an 8 year period, it's hard to know whether you should be scheduling for a chance at a playoff bid or a chance to get bowl eligible. USF is only 4 years removed from a 2-10 season, and scheduling at that time was unlikely to warrant calling up Oklahoma and scheduling a game. And Illinois is only a few years removed from a Rose Bowl appearance. It's a crap shoot scheduling right. If USF had built their schedule this spring, they'd have known to try to schedule for a playoff. Hindsight's 20/20.

USFFan

(10-16-2017 07:40 PM)usffan Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 06:20 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 05:26 PM)SublimeKnight Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 05:06 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  About the two bolded parts ...

(1) By 'scheduling up', i mean playing good teams. You seem to think the notion of a good team is purely a scheduling anomaly, e.g., that Alabama really isn't better than Georgia Southern, it's just that Alabama gets to schedule UAB at home while Georgia Southern plays UAB on the road. That doesn't have any connection with reality.

(2) We can't demand that, because we, the AAC, aren't in a position to. Everyone wants to play home games because of revenue. Alabama isn't going to agree to a home and home with Tulsa just because Tulsa or you or I think that makes computer comparisons more 'fair and valid'.

So you do what you can, which is play them there.

It's better to schedule and beat Georgia State than schedule and likely lose to Alabama (especially if you schedule a one and done with everything in Alabama's favor). If you don't get that, you don't understand the system we're in and how the P5 manipulate and win in it.

I'm pretty confident that no G5 will ever make the playoffs with the OOC schedule that UCF and USF have this year. As long as we play those OOC games, our "poll ceiling" will be lower than #4.

I think that's the nature of the system we are in.

I think this is probably correct. Another factor that complicates this is that schedules are largely made years in advance. For example, USF has a game scheduled at Texas in 2024, when the kids who will be playing in that game are almost all in 7th to 10th grade. Given the ups and downs that can affect a team over an 8 year period, it's hard to know whether you should be scheduling for a chance at a playoff bid or a chance to get bowl eligible. USF is only 4 years removed from a 2-10 season, and scheduling at that time was unlikely to warrant calling up Oklahoma and scheduling a game. And Illinois is only a few years removed from a Rose Bowl appearance. It's a crap shoot scheduling right. If USF had built their schedule this spring, they'd have known to try to schedule for a playoff. Hindsight's 20/20.

USFFan

Agree on all counts.