Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
The Athletic: CFP moves forward...Pac 12 purposal fall flat
Author Message
Jared7 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 436
Joined: Apr 2019
Reputation: 69
I Root For: TCU
Location:
Post: #141
RE: The Athletic: CFP moves forward...Pac 12 purposal fall flat
(06-25-2021 07:23 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  As soft as FSU looked, with escape after escape during the season, someone had to beat them in the playoffs to knock them off their pedestal. Otherwise they alone could say "we're the last man standing again, nobody has beaten us".
Interesting. That very same argument applies to Utah in 2008, but somehow you take the opposite position there. LOL

And the "withering" schedule that Auburn had in 2010 included the likes of Arkansas State, Louisiana-Monroe and Tennessee-Chattanooga, as well as Kentucky and South Carolina (twice). LOL

Do you still "stand by your statement" that only TCU fanboys disagree with you on anything now that you've had fans of other programs do so as well?

Your original arguments that G5's "just don't" provide good teams and that those picked by the committee are "far and away" better and clearly and obviously better are just as ludicrous as when you first made them and you are still backpedalling.
06-26-2021 06:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #142
RE: The Athletic: CFP moves forward...Pac 12 purposal fall flat
(06-26-2021 06:44 AM)Jared7 Wrote:  
(06-25-2021 07:23 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  As soft as FSU looked, with escape after escape during the season, someone had to beat them in the playoffs to knock them off their pedestal. Otherwise they alone could say "we're the last man standing again, nobody has beaten us".
Interesting. That very same argument applies to Utah in 2008, but somehow you take the opposite position there. LOL

And the "withering" schedule that Auburn had in 2010 included the likes of Arkansas State, Louisiana-Monroe and Tennessee-Chattanooga, as well as Kentucky and South Carolina (twice). LOL

Do you still "stand by your statement" that only TCU fanboys disagree with you on anything now that you've had fans of other programs do so as well?

Your original arguments that G5's "just don't" provide good teams and that those picked by the committee are "far and away" better and clearly and obviously better are just as ludicrous as when you first made them and you are still backpedalling.

Utah in 2008 was a non-AQ team. I said FSU had to be in the playoffs because they were the last unbeaten P5 team. Utah did have an outstanding team that year and deserved their final #2 ranking. I think the coaches had them a little low at #4. As I said, between 2008 - 2010, those Utah/TCU/Boise type teams were good enough to argue that the BCS should be expanded to four teams to give them a chance to play for the title.

As for Auburn vs TCU in 2010 schedules, here are the ranked teams each played, according to the final Massey Computer rankings:

Auburn:

#4 Oregon
#8 Alabama
#9 LSU
#11 Arkansas
#19 South Carolina
#19 South Carolina (played them twice)
#21 Mississippi State

As for TCU, they beat:

#12 Wisconsin
#22 Utah

.... and, that's it for beating top-25 teams.

So yeah, Auburn faced a withering array of good teams while TCU faced far worse competition. Not even close, which is probably why Auburn got every single AP vote, unanimous. There was and is no dispute over that or who the 2014 champ is, though there was a dispute over who was selected to the playoffs that year.

The claims I have a made about the G5 teams during the CFP era have been spot on, are totally correct, and as indicated before, I stand by them.

07-coffee3
(This post was last modified: 06-26-2021 10:19 AM by quo vadis.)
06-26-2021 10:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #143
RE: The Athletic: CFP moves forward...Pac 12 purposal fall flat
(06-26-2021 01:18 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(06-26-2021 12:46 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  
(06-25-2021 11:28 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(06-25-2021 11:31 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  In fact, Ohio St was Virginia Tech's 5th easiest game of the year, behind William&Mary, Western Michigan, Cincinnati, & UNC. 7 unranked opponents all played VT tougher than OSU.

Wait ... that claim is tickling my memory, and pushed me into looking up the box scores.

It was VT 34 - William & Mary 9, with W&M getting 193 yards of total offense, in a game that VT dominated from the second quarter and was playing players down its depth chart by the fourth.

Brewer had a better game than Barrett, and VT had earned its touchdown lead at the two minute warning on both sides of the ball, but the OSU game was in the balance until a 60+ yard interception return for a TD put it away in the last minute.

If a computer algorithm put that as W&M playing VT harder than OSU, the information content there is that the computer algorithm is not a perfect analyst. Is the computer algorithm perhaps assuming every team plays its best players every snap, even when leading by six field goals at the end of a third quarter against a team that can't get close to scoring a touchdown on you ... and with a relatively young team with a lot of players in the depth chart that could benefit from time in a game?

If a human analyst puts that as W&M playing VT harder than OSU did, it show that that humans are not perfect analysts either.

OSU when they played Virginia Tech was definitely not playing as well as they were later in the season, but in Virginia Tech's losses, it also seems like the later part of their season was a bit injury affected ... seems like it was only the Pirates that beat them with the same first string. They were much more effective than OSU in pushing Brewer into the parts of the playbook he hadn't mastered yet.

Other way around. W&M was one of 4 teams that VT had an easier game with than OSU.

Ah, OK, so that's saying ECU, Georgia Tech and five of six teams after they got banged up were tougher games for them.

The first two is probably fair, the OSU defense couldn't shut Tech's passing game down in the redzone and Georgia Tech did, while VT gave up over 7yds a carry to Georgia Tech's best runner, and Brewer never got going against the Pirates.

But the later season "tougher games" are not really apples to apples comparisons. They needed the month off before the bowl game to heal up a bit.

Bottom line for me is that Ohio State lost to VT on like September 10, at the start of the season. And they did pay a pretty heavy price for that. They dropped like a stone, from around #7 to like #23 or something, and they had to win for the next month to crack the top 20.

That loss really tagged that Ohio State team as "soft", and that pretty much hung around their neck the rest of the season, all the way up until they clobbered Wisconsin and won the B1G title.

So IMO they were punished plenty for it. They also lucked out, in that had the Big 12 had a CCG between Baylor and TCU, the winner of that game would have surely gotten in to the playoffs over them.

But that's the Big 12's fault.
06-26-2021 10:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PicksUp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,914
Joined: Mar 2018
Reputation: 135
I Root For: UTEP, Texas
Location:
Post: #144
RE: The Athletic: CFP moves forward...Pac 12 purposal fall flat
TCUs best win before the bowl game was against Utah. A team that ended the year with 3 losses. Thats it. Bunch of wins against Baylor, SMU and BYU. Barely over .500 teams.

They got what they deserved.
06-26-2021 10:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #145
RE: The Athletic: CFP moves forward...Pac 12 purposal fall flat
(06-26-2021 10:21 AM)PicksUp Wrote:  TCUs best win before the bowl game was against Utah. A team that ended the year with 3 losses. Thats it. Bunch of wins against Baylor, SMU and BYU. Barely over .500 teams.

They got what they deserved.

Yeah, in 2010 they arguably were fortunate to be voted #2 ahead of Oregon. Oregon lost only to Auburn and at the buzzer. Auburn was obviously the clear-cut deserving champ.

Now sure, had there been a 4-team playoff that year, TCU would have belonged. But given the final results, #2 was appropriate, maybe #3.
06-26-2021 11:09 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,299
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #146
RE: The Athletic: CFP moves forward...Pac 12 purposal fall flat
(06-26-2021 10:21 AM)PicksUp Wrote:  TCUs best win before the bowl game was against Utah. A team that ended the year with 3 losses. Thats it. Bunch of wins against Baylor, SMU and BYU. Barely over .500 teams.

They got what they deserved.

They were in the MWC. They beat the teams they could schedule.
06-26-2021 01:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #147
RE: The Athletic: CFP moves forward...Pac 12 purposal fall flat
(06-26-2021 01:38 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(06-26-2021 10:21 AM)PicksUp Wrote:  TCUs best win before the bowl game was against Utah. A team that ended the year with 3 losses. Thats it. Bunch of wins against Baylor, SMU and BYU. Barely over .500 teams.

They got what they deserved.

They were in the MWC. They beat the teams they could schedule.

True. But then again I don't think anyone is blaming TCU for who they played.

In any event, whether we can blame TCU for their soft schedule or not is really beside the point. Either way, we can't give them credit for or pretend that they played tough teams they didn't play. If we are going to use an "eyeball" standard and give them credit for whoop-arsing someone 40-3, we also have to take note if that team was any good or not.
(This post was last modified: 06-26-2021 06:57 PM by quo vadis.)
06-26-2021 06:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,892
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #148
RE: The Athletic: CFP moves forward...Pac 12 purposal fall flat
(06-26-2021 06:44 AM)Jared7 Wrote:  
(06-25-2021 07:23 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  As soft as FSU looked, with escape after escape during the season, someone had to beat them in the playoffs to knock them off their pedestal. Otherwise they alone could say "we're the last man standing again, nobody has beaten us".
Interesting. That very same argument applies to Utah in 2008, but somehow you take the opposite position there. LOL

And the "withering" schedule that Auburn had in 2010 included the likes of Arkansas State, Louisiana-Monroe and Tennessee-Chattanooga, as well as Kentucky and South Carolina (twice). LOL

Do you still "stand by your statement" that only TCU fanboys disagree with you on anything now that you've had fans of other programs do so as well?

Your original arguments that G5's "just don't" provide good teams and that those picked by the committee are "far and away" better and clearly and obviously better are just as ludicrous as when you first made them and you are still backpedalling.

That was a Spurrier coached South Carolina team who won the East and Auburn ran the West and beat Clemson to boot. And then beat Oregon to go 13-0. Undefeated seasons in the SEC are hard to come by. That's 10 P games and against what was rated at the time as a top 5 schedule in difficulty.
06-26-2021 07:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #149
RE: The Athletic: CFP moves forward...Pac 12 purposal fall flat
(06-26-2021 07:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(06-26-2021 06:44 AM)Jared7 Wrote:  
(06-25-2021 07:23 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  As soft as FSU looked, with escape after escape during the season, someone had to beat them in the playoffs to knock them off their pedestal. Otherwise they alone could say "we're the last man standing again, nobody has beaten us".
Interesting. That very same argument applies to Utah in 2008, but somehow you take the opposite position there. LOL

And the "withering" schedule that Auburn had in 2010 included the likes of Arkansas State, Louisiana-Monroe and Tennessee-Chattanooga, as well as Kentucky and South Carolina (twice). LOL

Do you still "stand by your statement" that only TCU fanboys disagree with you on anything now that you've had fans of other programs do so as well?

Your original arguments that G5's "just don't" provide good teams and that those picked by the committee are "far and away" better and clearly and obviously better are just as ludicrous as when you first made them and you are still backpedalling.

That was a Spurrier coached South Carolina team who won the East and Auburn ran the West and beat Clemson to boot. And then beat Oregon to go 13-0. Undefeated seasons in the SEC are hard to come by. That's 10 P games and against what was rated at the time as a top 5 schedule in difficulty.

Yes, the computers have South Carolina at #19 for the season. That's better than every team TCU played except Wisconsin, IOWs better than anyone TCU played during their entire regular season.

It's unfortunate TCU did not get a chance to play for the national title. In a four-team playoff they would have. But under the system in place at the time, there's no doubt Auburn had the best season and was the worthy national champion.
(This post was last modified: 06-27-2021 06:50 AM by quo vadis.)
06-26-2021 11:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CoastalJuan Offline
Business Drunk
*

Posts: 6,900
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation: 517
I Root For: ECU
Location: Right near da beeach
Post: #150
RE: The Athletic: CFP moves forward...Pac 12 purposal fall flat
(06-22-2021 02:01 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  Ah it never stops to amaze me how some guys on this board naively think the Conference of Champions is going away. Even worse, when somebody thinks a G5 like the AAC has any chance in taking the Pac-12 spot in the cartel.

lol

06-30-2021 02:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #151
RE: The Athletic: CFP moves forward...Pac 12 purposal fall flat
(06-30-2021 02:36 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  
(06-22-2021 02:01 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  Ah it never stops to amaze me how some guys on this board naively think the Conference of Champions is going away. Even worse, when somebody thinks a G5 like the AAC has any chance in taking the Pac-12 spot in the cartel.

lol

The thing about the PAC is, despite the massive problems of the past 8-9 years, including the abject flopitude of the PAC 12 Network, the PAC still grossed over $500 million last year and distributed $34 million to each school.

The PAC is fundamentally very sound, and lucrative.

07-coffee3
06-30-2021 05:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.