David Shaw: CFP should look at full schedules

[4down20]

Kind of. When the committee uses wins vs .500+ teams as a criteria you're more likely to have more teams on your schedule at .500+ when your league only plays 8 league games

When has the committee used wins vs .500+ teams as a criteria?

 

[4down20]

Maybe we should stop the beauty contest and just have a system where if you win you keep playing.

That's what we have now.

 

[rmilia1]

When has the committee used wins vs .500+ teams as a criteria?

Every year since they started. Its not a main criteria but it gets brought up all the time when they're talking to the committee chair about where teams are ranked

 

[nddulac]

Except the bar isn't lowered, as most any SoS metric will show.

Show me.

 

[Across The Field]

Shut the fuck up, you lillywhite poser. You have no idea how easy you have it.

 

[4down20]

Every year since they started. Its not a main criteria but it gets brought up all the time when they're talking to the committee chair about where teams are ranked

So how many .500 teams advantage did Alabama, Georgia and Clemson get as a result of 8 game conference schedule?

 

[4down20]

Show me.

Show you what? SoS is based on the quality of the teams played, not if they have some silly conference label attached to them. The SEC and ACC constantly pull in the best SoS's because they have a good amount of quality teams, and a good chunk of them play each other every year in addition to other quality OOC games.

When the quality of the conference is up, the SoS's go up with them - regardless of how many conference games they play. The Big10 is a clear cut example of this in recent history. It wasn't too long ago they were a much a weaker conference and they had the much weaker SoS's to go with it. Lately they've been improved overall as a conference and the SoS's have shown that.

Or even a more extreme example of this is just last year within the Big10 itself(and basically every conference), all the teams in the Big10 play the same amount of conference games, yet Wisconsin managed to play a much much weaker conference schedule than Ohio St. Because the quality of the teams in the conference is more biased towards the Big10 east. Next year Wisconsin will play a much tougher conference schedule, because they draw Penn St and Michigan from the east IIRC. So you can see the difference in 1 team with just 2 years.

The idea that 1 conference game is a deciding factor is just fucking stupid and for crybabies who need to make excuses because they can't handle the fact their teams just do not cut it on the field.

 

[nddulac]

The idea that 1 conference game is a deciding factor is just fucking stupid and for crybabies who need to make excuses because they can't handle the fact their teams just do not cut it on the field.

Alright. I agree that 8 conference games vs 9 conference games is unimportant for the top conference teams. And it is the top conference teams that will be considered for the playoff. However, that was not my point. My point is that "doing what you perceive as advantageous" (to paraphrase your comment) is not the mark of a strong competitor.

But be that as it may, your claim before was that a simple SOS analysis would prove that there was no advantage to playing an 8 game conference schedule rather than a 9 game schedule, if I understand correctly. So my request remains. I would like you to present an SOS analysis that backs up your claim.

 

[4down20]

Alright. I agree that 8 conference games vs 9 conference games is unimportant for the top conference teams. And it is the top conference teams that will be considered for the playoff. However, that was not my point. My point is that "doing what you perceive as advantageous" (to paraphrase your comment) is not the mark of a strong competitor.

But be that as it may, your claim before was that a simple SOS analysis would prove that there was no advantage to playing an 8 game conference schedule rather than a 9 game schedule, if I understand correctly. So my request remains. I would like you to present an SOS analysis that backs up your claim.

I said the bar isn't lowered by what the SEC does and you can just go look at the SoS metrics and see all the SEC teams near the top above teams that play 9 game conference schedules to see it.

And the mark of a strong competitor is winning. Every team out there adapts and takes whatever advantage they can get, that's the name of the game - maximizing advantages/strengths and minimizing disadvantages/weakness. Every team schedules in a way they think gives them the greatest advantage. No school is sitting around going "We're going to play these easy games to start the schedule because that's when they should be played and it makes us a strong competitor". They schedule those games so they can get in some tune up time and such because that is what they think gives them the greatest advantage.

So if they think what the SEC and ACC does provides an advantage, then they should do the same. But what they are actually asking for is for what they are doing now to be considered the advantage because of this notion that 9 conference games is tougher, and that's bullshit.

 

[AlaskaGuy]

Western Carolina > South Carolina (according to SEC math). If the SEC had any balls they'd play their own conference members.

 

[Deep Creek]

I said the bar isn't lowered by what the SEC does and you can just go look at the SoS metrics and see all the SEC teams near the top above teams that play 9 game conference schedules to see it.

And the mark of a strong competitor is winning. Every team out there adapts and takes whatever advantage they can get, that's the name of the game - maximizing advantages/strengths and minimizing disadvantages/weakness. Every team schedules in a way they think gives them the greatest advantage. No school is sitting around going "We're going to play these easy games to start the schedule because that's when they should be played and it makes us a strong competitor". They schedule those games so they can get in some tune up time and such because that is what they think gives them the greatest advantage.

So if they think what the SEC and ACC does provides an advantage, then they should do the same. But what they are actually asking for is for what they are doing now to be considered the advantage because of this notion that 9 conference games is tougher, and that's bullshit.

Not my guys. The high schools won't play us.

 

[rmilia1]

So how many .500 teams advantage did Alabama, Georgia and Clemson get as a result of 8 game conference schedule?

No clue but it's not my job to know lol. Common sense dictates that playing 4 OOC games results on a better chance to win 6+ overall though. That's why leagues do it

 

[Inquisitor95]

No clue but it's not my job to know lol. Common sense dictates that playing 4 OOC games results on a better chance to win 6+ overall though. That's why leagues do it

Yes. "Give Me a Break, Cupcake" week is a definite advantage for the SEC.

 

[blazer prophet]

I've often thought about a points system. Allow up to 3 OOC games and 9 conference games. As conference games are an odd number, preference cannot be given for home or road wins as teams would have an unfair advantage for that additional road win. Also, since you don't choose which conference teams you play, no extra points if they're a top 25 team. Just a simple x points for a win and x for a loss. The score matters not. A win is a win and a loss a loss.

Next, go to OOC games. Here you can fiddle with home or away, top conference schools, SOS, are easy OOC games being used as a 'bye' week... and have a fair matrix.

At the end of the season, the top 4 teams on points go to the BCS. Simple as that.

 

[Kaplony]

Another day, another "Our conference was stupid enough to schedule an automatic loss to half our teams by playing an additional conference game and it's not fair that the SEC & ACC weren't stupid too" thread.

 

[Wamu]

Shots fired!

 

[bamabear82]

He plays in one of the weakest conferences in the country. He's got the advantage of getting 9 games against those tards.

 

[7Samurai13]

So playing an FCS in week 3 and a bye in week 10 is ok but a bye week 3 and an FCS week 10 is a huge advantage against teams you are playing two months later?

 

[Deep Creek]

He plays in one of the weakest conferences in the country. He's got the advantage of getting 9 games against those tards.

Now, now bb...their football teams may be "tards". They don't allow "tards" in Stanford, Cal. Maybe nerds, weirdos, brainiacs, etc, but not "tards".

Disclaimer: Some of those Cal/Stanford types are geniuses, but some of them also have zero common sense.

 

[socaljim242]

So playing an FCS in week 3 and a bye in week 10 is ok but a bye week 3 and an FCS week 10 is a huge advantage against teams you are playing two months later?

You still get a bye and you get a win for beating Citadel in week 11.
Playing and FCS in week 11 and comparing it to a bye is like running a marathon and stopping on mile 20 for a rest but making up no ground and stopping on mile 20 and getting pushed in a wheelchair.