SOS debate

[4down20]

When did Roll Tide last play Penn State up there?
Didnt they used to play every year?

2011

No, don't think so. But there have been some legendary games in the past.

 

[Jonny Valtimore]

Isn't FSUs Sos worse than Ohio State? If people cared so much about it by this logic Ohio State would be #1 right now. If Auburn had blown everyone out and barely lost I think they'd have a stronger case, but despite all the excitement they're a 1 loss team and not a 3 loss team based on near miracles. Just not the strong case it's being made out to be, but I understand how the Auburn fan base is feeling and get why they'll be pushing this.

 

[4down20]

Isn't FSUs Sos worse than Ohio State? If people cared so much about it by this logic Ohio State would be #1 right now. If Auburn had blown everyone out and barely lost I think they'd have a stronger case, but despite all the excitement they're a 1 loss team and not a 3 loss team based on near miracles. Just not the strong case it's being made out to be, but I understand how the Auburn fan base is feeling and get why they'll be pushing this.

Yes, I've had Ohio St #1 for weeks. But this week I have them #2 because it thinks they will lose to Michigan St. If Ohio St wins, they will be back #1 again.

95% of my rankings are based on SoS.

 

[GreenNickle]

2011

No, don't think so. But there have been some legendary games in the past.

Now I remember the 2011 game Bama crushed them.

 

[trojanfan12]

But you lost to LSU. You can't compare SoS head up when you have lost.

Gotta disagree here to a point. If you have an unbeaten who played 1 ranked team and you have a team with 1 loss that has played 4 ranked teams the team with 1 loss still has a higher SOS and has beaten 3 ranked teams.

 

[4down20]

Gotta disagree here to a point. If you have an unbeaten who played 1 ranked team and you have a team with 1 loss that has played 4 ranked teams the team with 1 loss still has a higher SOS and has beaten 3 ranked teams.

Well there is some give and take here. However, way too much is put into "ranked" teams. It's not a big cliff once you get 25. It's not like #25 team is some big deal while the #26 team is a cupcake. Which is usually what happens when people want to cite "ranked" teams.

 

[smilesid]

2011

No, don't think so. But there have been some legendary games in the past.

Actually, this is not correct. Alabama almost never leaves the South for games. Before the trip to PSU in 2011, the last one was to Oklahoma in 2002, where they got smacked by the Sooners. They got humiliated even worse the next year in Tuscaloosa, so Alabama took a new tack, when the going gets tough, Alabama gets cowardly. Since then, the Tide has scheduled a virtual parade of bad teams to play OOC. Every year they do an FCS school, hell, this year they did two.

So, to get to those "legendary" games, one has to go back to the previous century.

 

[trojanfan12]

Well there is some give and take here. However, way too much is put into "ranked" teams. It's not a big cliff once you get 25. It's not like #25 team is some big deal while the #26 team is a cupcake. Which is usually what happens when people want to cite "ranked" teams.

True. I definitely think that where those teams were ranked makes a big difference. If it's 3 wins vs. the lower part of the top 25 with a loss to a top 10 team and the other is a win over a top 10 team, then that difference should be accounted for.

 

[Jonny Valtimore]

Gotta disagree here to a point. If you have an unbeaten who played 1 ranked team and you have a team with 1 loss that has played 4 ranked teams the team with 1 loss still has a higher SOS and has beaten 3 ranked teams.

The problem is that you're trying to rank teams using rankings that are in and of themselves biased and based completely from a top 25 that was made before the season started and had nothing but perception to go off of.

For example, Auburn jumped something like 13 spots in the polls for beating (still ranked) Texas A&M by 4 points, a team that finished the season with 4 losses-all top 25 teams. At the same time, Ohio State gets ragged on for beating Iowa (never ranked) by 10, a team that also finished with 4 losses-all top 25 teams.

A&M has good wins over 8-4 Vandy and 7-5 Ole Miss, while Iowa has wins over 8-4 Nebraska, 8-4 Minnesota, and 7-5 Michigan.

See where this starts getting fishy yet?

 

[occupant]

The problem is that you're trying to rank teams using rankings that are in and of themselves biased and based completely from a top 25 that was made before the season started and had nothing but perception to go off of.

For example, Auburn jumped something like 13 spots in the polls for beating (still ranked) Texas A&M by 4 points, a team that finished the season with 4 losses-all top 25 teams. At the same time, Ohio State gets ragged on for beating Iowa (never ranked) by 10, a team that also finished with 4 losses-all top 25 teams.

A&M has good wins over 8-4 Vandy and 7-5 Ole Miss, while Iowa has wins over 8-4 Nebraska, 8-4 Minnesota, and 7-5 Michigan.

See where this starts getting fishy yet?

I SEE IT!

 

[sakau2007]

The problem is that you're trying to rank teams using rankings that are in and of themselves biased and based completely from a top 25 that was made before the season started and had nothing but perception to go off of.

For example, Auburn jumped something like 13 spots in the polls for beating (still ranked) Texas A&M by 4 points, a team that finished the season with 4 losses-all top 25 teams. At the same time, Ohio State gets ragged on for beating Iowa (never ranked) by 10, a team that also finished with 4 losses-all top 25 teams.

A&M has good wins over 8-4 Vandy and 7-5 Ole Miss, while Iowa has wins over 8-4 Nebraska, 8-4 Minnesota, and 7-5 Michigan.

See where this starts getting fishy yet?

look at who ole miss has beaten and lost to compared to nebraska, minnesota, and michigan.

it isn't close bro.

ole miss has 2 wins over ranked teams and 3 of their losses are to teams in the top 5. 3 of a&m's losses are also to top 5 teams.

and people act like these rankings are biased but the computers spit out virtually the same rankings for most of these teams. there is a huge gap in schedule strength.

and i love ohio state fans that are so sure they would run the table in the SEC when they haven't even played a top 20 team this season.

 

[Jonny Valtimore]

look at who ole miss has beaten and lost to compared to nebraska, minnesota, and Michigan ole.

it isn't close bro.

ole miss has 2 wins over ranked teams and 3 of their losses are to teams in the top 5. 3 of a&m's losses are also to top 5 teams.

and people act like these rankings are biased but the computers spit out virtually the same rankings for most of these teams. there is a huge gap in schedule strength.

and i love ohio state fans that are so sure they would run the table in the SEC when they haven't even played a top 20 team this season.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

If you aren't going to at least try to understand a post I give up. The fact that sec fans have sunken to hyping Ole fucking Miss is a complete joke.

 

[boxedlunch]

That's why the NCAA's SOS is the best one to use. It's based on W-L only. Nothing else.

I don't see why the fans of conferences that habitually schedule soft as kittens OOC games don't like it more than they do...

The NCAA's SOS is the lamest out there. There are better ways to use win loss records and not come out with a lame measure.

 

[sakau2007]

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

If you aren't going to at least try to understand a post I give up. The fact that sec fans have sunken to hyping Ole fucking Miss is a complete joke.

i'm not hyping ole miss. but the fact remains that they have beaten twice as many ranked teams as the 2 participants of the Big 10 Championship game have combined.

 

[Tharvot]

OK so alot of talk about Auburn having a superior SOS to OSU so I thought Id take a look at the history of SOS as it pertains to the 3rd ranked team vs the 2nd ranked team prior to the BCS title game. Went back to the 04-05 season and compared to see how often the 2nd place team had a superior SOS compared to the 3rd ranked team. SHOCKINGLY 6 of the last 9 years the 3rd place team in the BCS had superior SOS to the 2nd place team going into bowl season. Last year Florida had a better SOS than Bama, in 2011 OK State had a better SOS than Bama, in 2008 Texas had a better SOS than Florida, in 2007 Oklahoma had a better SOS than LSU, in 2006 Michigan had a better SOS than Florida and in 2004 Auburn had a better SOS than OU. That means in 67% of the last 9 years the 3rd place team has played a tougher schedule than the 2nd place team yet STILL was left out. Also in ALL those instances the 3rd place team had the SAME amount of losses as the 2nd place team ( not in one instance did they have MORE losses). So to sum up can we please please please stop pretending like just because a team plays a tougher schedule it somehow reserves them a spot in the title game?? History has shown us that the opposite is true and in those instances we were comparing teams with the same record NOT a worse record.

Thank you.

 

[Tharvot]

i'm not hyping ole miss. but the fact remains that they have beaten twice as many ranked teams as the 2 participants of the Big 10 Championship game have combined.

Fact remains it won't matter if FSU and OSU both win

 

[WABLTY]

The NCAA's SOS is the lamest out there. There are better ways to use win loss records and not come out with a lame measure.

Pretty sure NCAA SOS counts playing Fresno the same as playing Bama

 

[boxedlunch]

Pretty sure NCAA SOS counts playing Fresno the same as playing Bama

Given similar results against each team, then yes.