Overrated Conferences

[Fitbud]

It's been said that the SEC is always the best conference in football yet Texas is in the championship game in it's first year.

The Big 10 is probably always considered the second best conference in football yet Oregon is in the championship game in it's first year.

The Big 12 is probably the next best conference in football yet Arizona State is in the championship in it's first year.

The ACC is probably the next best conference in football yet SMU is in the championship in it's first year.

The PAC 12 was considered a weak conference and yet two of it's former members are in championships.

What say you?

 

[Clayton]

It's been said that the SEC is always the best conference in football yet Texas is in the championship game in it's first year.

The Big 10 is probably always considered the second best conference in football yet Oregon is in the championship game in it's first year.

The Big 12 is probably the next best conference in football yet Arizona State is in the championship in it's first year.

The ACC is probably the next best conference in football yet SMU is in the championship in it's first year.

The PAC 12 was considered a weak conference and yet two of it's former members are in championships.

What say you?

I think the idea that either Texas or Oregon being strong is some sort of underdog narrative is absurd. That would be my first thought.

I would say Saban and Harbaugh not being in college maybe flattens things out a little bit at the top.

 

[hatcher3333]

why Texas did so good...

 

[Nat Mann]

why Texas did so good...

View attachment 382082

Texas' strength of schedule is #9 in the country. There's 5 teams that were ranked when they played them, including last year's national champion Michigan and Georgia. Were they supposed to play Alabama the same year? Who do you think is missing from their schedule?

 

[hatcher3333]

Texas' strength of schedule is #9 in the country. There's 5 teams that were ranked when they played them, including last year's national champion Michigan and Georgia. Were they supposed to play Alabama the same year? Who do you think is missing from their schedule?

CSU, ULM, USTA
Played Two top tSEC and the rest bottom feeders

 

[Nat Mann]

CSU, ULM, USTA
Played Two top tSEC and the rest bottom feeders

CSU, ULM, USTA are cupcakes. It's normal for a team in a major conference to schedule two or three of them every year. For example, Alabama played Western Kentucky, USF and Mercer. Ohio State played Akron, Western Michigan and Marshall, and beat them by a combined score of 157-20.

It's all part of the cupcake system that supports most of college football. All the top level teams schedule 2 or 3 games at home against much less powerful teams. The cupcake games are part of the season ticket package, so they always sell out. The top level teams get an easy win and a chance to play the second stringers. Most importantly, the cupcake gets a huge payday. It's usually enough to support football, if not the entire athletic program. If it weren't for the cupcake system, a lot of colleges couldn't offer football.

I read an interview with a player on one of LSU's cupcakes. He said that it removed any delusions he may have had about playing in the NFL when he played players who were going to play in the NFL. His team took a beating, but the consolation was that one day he could tell his grandchildren about how he tackled Leonard Fournette. By then the part where two of his teammates were already trying to tackle him would have been forgotten.

 

[Gator]

It's been said that the SEC is always the best conference in football yet Texas is in the championship game in it's first year.
The Big 10 is probably always considered the second best conference in football yet Oregon is in the championship game in it's first year.
The Big 12 is probably the next best conference in football yet Arizona State is in the championship in it's first year.
The ACC is probably the next best conference in football yet SMU is in the championship in it's first year.
The PAC 12 was considered a weak conference and yet two of it's former members are in championships.

What say you?

You asked for it! Time to get on my soapbox...
How can anyone tell which conference(s) is/are over rated when they don't play meaningful games against each other?

First, imagine two nine-member P4 conferences, A & B. Each plays a round-robin conference schedule. "A" finishes up with records: 8-0, 7-1, 6-2, 5-3, 4-4, 3-5, 2-6, 1-7, and 0-8. "B" finishes up with all teams 4-4. This would suggest that there are four teams in "A" that are better than every team in conference "B". But with just this info, the committee would pick teams 8-0, 7-1, 6-2, and one of the 4-4 as an auto bid! Imagine the uproar for picking a 4-loss team over a P4 team with a better record than EVERY member of conference "B"!

Now, imagine that the two conferences decide to play, at random, 4 teams from the opposite conference. In this case, conference "B" wins every game! In this scenario, "A" finishes with records: 8-4, 7-5, 6-6, 5-7, 4-8, 3-9, 2-10, 1-11, and 0-12. "B" finishes up with all teams 8-4. The teams in "B" are equally rated and the 8-4 team in "A" lost to every "B" it played! These data suggest that ALL 9 teams in "B" are better than the 9 teams in "A"!

I ask you, which games were more helpful in ranking the teams, the EIGHT in-conference games or the FOUR non-conference games?

The 15 P4 teams still in the running for the CFP played 65 OOC games. How many of those were against other teams under consideration?
Oregon played #15 Boise State (NON P4)
Georgia played #19 Clemson
South Carolina played #19 Clemson
Clemson Played #6 Georgia and #11 South Carolina.

How can you rank the teams properly when they DON'T play OOC teams of any value?

 

[dtgold88]

Texas' strength of schedule is #9 in the country. There's 5 teams that were ranked when they played them, including last year's national champion Michigan and Georgia. Were they supposed to play Alabama the same year? Who do you think is missing from their schedule?

Now I can agree not their fault some teams didn't live up to expectations. How it is. But the schedule did turn out to be kind of weak....same with IU. Played both title participants AND OSU. Not their fault UM and Washington fell off.

 

[dtgold88]

CSU, ULM, USTA are cupcakes. It's normal for a team in a major conference to schedule two or three of them every year. For example, Alabama played Western Kentucky, USF and Mercer. Ohio State played Akron, Western Michigan and Marshall, and beat them by a combined score of 157-20.

It's all part of the cupcake system that supports most of college football. All the top level teams schedule 2 or 3 games at home against much less powerful teams. The cupcake games are part of the season ticket package, so they always sell out. The top level teams get an easy win and a chance to play the second stringers. Most importantly, the cupcake gets a huge payday. It's usually enough to support football, if not the entire athletic program. If it weren't for the cupcake system, a lot of colleges couldn't offer football.

I read an interview with a player on one of LSU's cupcakes. He said that it removed any delusions he may have had about playing in the NFL when he played players who were going to play in the NFL. His team took a beating, but the consolation was that one day he could tell his grandchildren about how he tackled Leonard Fournette. By then the part where two of his teammates were already trying to tackle him would have been forgotten.

Agree.....UM and 3 cupcakes fine. Though I think better would be 9 game conference schedule but that's not Texas' choice.

 

[Gator]

Agree.....UM and 3 cupcakes fine. Though I think better would be 9 game conference schedule but that's not Texas' choice.

Why is playing 9 conference games better than 8 conference games + 1 OOC P4 team?

 

[dtgold88]

Why is playing 9 conference games better than 8 conference games + 1 OOC P4 team?

How about 9 conference games and 1 P4 team? That makes 10 P4 as opposed to 9 P4.

Now it is true might be years that extra game could be a bottom of barrel conference team no better than a G5.

 

[Gator]

How about 9 conference games and 1 P4 team? That makes 10 P4 as opposed to 9 P4.

Now it is true might be years that extra game could be a bottom of barrel conference team no better than a G5.

How about 8 and 2? Again, what is SOOOO special about 9 conference games?

 

[dtgold88]

How about 8 and 2? Again, what is SOOOO special about 9 conference games?

I get you think everything is an SEC slight but it's not. 8 and 2 would be great, too. 10 P4 opponents, preferably 1 tough OOC should be a requirement for a team looking to be a CFP team.

Tough to do, though, as schedules often made 7-10 years in advance.

 

[Gator]

I get you think everything is an SEC slight but it's not. 8 and 2 would be great, too. 10 P4 opponents, preferably 1 tough OOC should be a requirement for a team looking to be a CFP team.

Tough to do, though, as schedules often made 7-10 years in advance.

I didn't see it as an SEC slight. As I mentioned, there needs to be MORE meaningful OOC games. As you pointed out, teams can slip from the scheduling date to game day. Therefore, schedule TWO P4 OOC opponents. Also, to be fair to G5 teams (they need quality OOC opponents as well) P4 teams should schedule 1 G5 team. As this game still contributes to overall SOS teams need to be wary of scheduling low end G5 teams especially if they are also scheduling FCS teams also.

I can't stand that douche bag, Franklin at PSU. He has been there for 11 seasons (including this one) and has played 32 OOC games. Not ONE OOC opponent has been ranked! His specialty is running up the score on bad teams. He did it last week, when he called a pass play as time ran out when PSU was up 37-7 to make it 44-7.

 

[Hornsstampede2.0]

TEXAS scheduled defending National champs and two time playoff selection Michigan on the road.
That was the team Texas chose to schedule voluntarily. Not some Las Vegas neutral site kickoff.....at the Big house....
When you schedule Michigan or any other blue blood elite program OOC on the road, you don't need to add more teams to your OOC.

But, Texas always schedules incredibly tough OOC opponents. They get the truly elite blue bloods.
Next year, they literally have to go play another true road game at Ohio State.

Who else does that? Schedules Alabama ('23), Michigan ('24), and Ohio State('25) in 3 consecutive years ALL TRUE ROAD GAMES????
And how come everyone else struggles with these "so called easy teams" that Texas played??

 

[Gator]

TEXAS scheduled defending National champs and two time playoff selection Michigan on the road.
That was the team Texas chose to schedule voluntarily. Not some Las Vegas neutral site kickoff.....at the Big house....
When you schedule Michigan or any other blue blood elite program OOC on the road, you don't need to add more teams to your OOC.

But, Texas always schedules incredibly tough OOC opponents. They get the truly elite blue bloods.
Next year, they literally have to go play another true road game at Ohio State.

Who else does that? Schedules Alabama ('23), Michigan ('24), and Ohio State('25) in 3 consecutive years ALL TRUE ROAD GAMES????
And how come everyone else struggles with these "so called easy teams" that Texas played??

I don't like to disagree with a fellow SECer but...

First, congrats to a 3 years streak, but I would like to point out that 2024 Michigan is NOT the 2023 team but is 7-5. 2025 hasn't been played so we don't know how good OSU will be next year.

Second, you say, "But, Texas always schedules incredibly tough OOC opponents." I can't say yet about 2024 as it isn't over, but I can talk about the past 34 seasons (from 1990 to 2023). Over that span UT played 8 Top 5 teams in 34 years, 11 Top 10 teams in 34 years, and 25 top 25 teams in 34 years. So one must ask, what constitutes "incredibly tough"? and what constitutes "always"?

Lastly, you are looking at only a portion of Texas' schedule. There is going to be great change in their In-conference schedule. Over the past 34 seasons Texas has played 16 top 5 teams, 39 top 10 teams, and 85 top 25 teams in-conference.
In ALL of their regular season games Texas played 24 Top 5 teams, 50 top 10 teams, and 85 top 25 teams in 400 games over the past 34 seasons.
Over that same span the AVERAGE SEC team played IN-CONFERENCE 33 top 5 teams, 57 top 25 teams. and 112 top 25 teams in only 277 games.
How long will Texas continue to schedule "incredibly tough OOC opponents" faced with an SEC schedule?

 

[Ron G]

Now I can agree not their fault some teams didn't live up to expectations. How it is. But the schedule did turn out to be kind of weak....same with IU. Played both title participants AND OSU. Not their fault UM and Washington fell off.

That has always been the case when a historically strong team has a bad year. An opponent schedules them 5 to 8 years in advance and then is accused of have an easy schedule when the historically is down.
Around 2002 to 2004 (I don't remember the exact years) Southern Cal was in the Championship game one year and not the other. Why, in one year Notre Dame (SC beat them both years in question) was 9-3 and then 4 and 8. SC was essentially punished for SOS in the year ND was down and rewarded in the year ND was up, go figure.
ND being an independent is a really good example. This year ND's SOS is hurt by SC, Floridia State being down, Louisville being average. The fact that Navy and Army are having great years does not help them because those team are red headed stepchildren in the eyes of those who calculate SOS. And yes, the SOS is done by computer, the algorithm is set by humans.

 

[dtgold88]

TEXAS scheduled defending National champs and two time playoff selection Michigan on the road.
That was the team Texas chose to schedule voluntarily. Not some Las Vegas neutral site kickoff.....at the Big house....
When you schedule Michigan or any other blue blood elite program OOC on the road, you don't need to add more teams to your OOC.

But, Texas always schedules incredibly tough OOC opponents. They get the truly elite blue bloods.
Next year, they literally have to go play another true road game at Ohio State.

Who else does that? Schedules Alabama ('23), Michigan ('24), and Ohio State('25) in 3 consecutive years ALL TRUE ROAD GAMES????
And how come everyone else struggles with these "so called easy teams" that Texas played??

To be fair it's only 3 straight years of true road as the roadie vs. OSU came first (home next year). To answer your question, though, I'd say OSU schedules like that for the most part. This year wasn't as our tough OOC turned out to be a BIG team...also not tough (Washington).

I think some others off top of my head who schedule tough true roadies are USC, UGA and seems like Oregon has done that lately?

 

[Gator]

Now I can agree not their fault some teams didn't live up to expectations. How it is. But the schedule did turn out to be kind of weak....same with IU. Played both title participants AND OSU. Not their fault UM and Washington fell off.

I don't mean to be rude but I believe that you are seeing things through rose colored glasses. You don't understand that last year was an anomaly for both Michigan and Washington.

In 2000 Washington was 11-1. In the 24 seasons from 2000 to 2023, UW has the 45th best W/L record at 166-131 or rounded 7-5 per year. In the past 24 seasons UW has won 8 or more games just 10 times. So scheduling UW you should expect a 7-5 team and this year they are 6-6. That's NOT much of a fall off. Last year they were 14-1 THAT'S the anomaly!

In 2000 Michigan was 9-3. In the 24 seasons from 2000 to 2023, UM has a W/L record at 208-98 or rounded 9-4 per year. In the past 24 seasons UM has won 9 or more games just 14 times. So scheduling UM you should expect a 9-4 team and this year they are 7-5. IF Michigan wins their Bowl game they will be 8-5. That's a 1 game fall off. Last year UM was 15-0 THAT'S the anomaly!

 

[dtgold88]

I don't mean to be rude but I believe that you are seeing things through rose colored glasses. You don't understand that last year was an anomaly for both Michigan and Washington.

In 2000 Washington was 11-1. In the 24 seasons from 2000 to 2023, UW has the 45th best W/L record at 166-131 or rounded 7-5 per year. In the past 24 seasons UW has won 8 or more games just 10 times. So scheduling UW you should expect a 7-5 team and this year they are 6-6. That's NOT much of a fall off. Last year they were 14-1 THAT'S the anomaly!

In 2000 Michigan was 9-3. In the 24 seasons from 2000 to 2023, UM has a W/L record at 208-98 or rounded 9-4 per year. In the past 24 seasons UM has won 9 or more games just 14 times. So scheduling UM you should expect a 9-4 team and this year they are 7-5. IF Michigan wins their Bowl game they will be 8-5. That's a 1 game fall off. Last year UM was 15-0 THAT'S the anomaly!

UM had been pretty good the past 3-4 seasons (true, lost their coach).....and not crazy to think you will get a tough game scheduling them or UM. should they expect 15-0 or even 11-2? Probably not. But what teams since 2000 could you expect that? OSU as well as maybe Clemson, UGA and Bama? and 3 of them have had long down stretches in that time of memory serves.