SOS and the CFP Committee

[charlie42s]

The computers had OSU with the higher rating. It was the voters, worth 2/3 of the BCS, that had Bama over Okie State.
I almost feel like the voters did this because they wanted a playoff, even if it was only 4 teams.

 

[4down20]

-
Not sure why that matters. Takign your theory to the next level:

Team A beats 11 ranked teams and loses to #100
Team B beats 0 ranked teams and loses to #1 in overtime

Team B is more deserving??

Because that isn't what happened. The differences in schedule strength between Alabama and Oklahoma St were extremely mild, but the teams they lost too weren't even close.

The other schools choked, deal with it.

 

[cane_man]

The computers had OSU with the higher rating. It was the voters, worth 2/3 of the BCS, that had Bama over Okie State.
I almost feel like the voters did this because they wanted a playoff, even if it was only 4 teams.

I honestly got the same feeling

 

[cane_man]

-
This will get sidetracked, but this highlights the nonsense of the BCS. The ever changing rules and guidelines that are part of the process. I would really just like a set of uniform rules that guide the decisions.

Yes

 

[WNY_FOOTBALL_DUDE]

. Do you realize the shitstorm you are about to start

If people want to challenge my points, by all means. Alabama avoided two major teams within their conference when they lost to LSU. That's a fact. I am not going to ask Bama Nation to return their trophy or anything like that. It's just that college football ran into major issues when they decided to put in Alabama over Oklahoma State.

 

[4down20]

If people want to challenge my points, by all means. Alabama avoided two major teams within their conference when they lost to LSU. That's a fact. I am not going to ask Bama Nation to return their trophy or anything like that. It's just that college football ran into major issues when they decided to put in Alabama over Oklahoma State.

So what if Alabama didn't play 2 other SEC teams? Oklahoma St didn't play them either.

 

[Boise4Life]

The computers had OSU with the higher rating. It was the voters, worth 2/3 of the BCS, that had Bama over Okie State.
I almost feel like the voters did this because they wanted a playoff, even if it was only 4 teams.

That's because the voters watched the games with their own eyes. Bama was the better team and when they kicked the snot out of LSU in the NCG, they just drove that point even further home.

 

[Boise4Life]

Meanwhile OK State was granted a miracle in the Fiesta when Stanford's freshman kicker completely choked away the chip shot, "game winning" field goal at the end of regulation. My feelings when the bowl games concluded remained the same as they were going in. Bama was absolutely loaded, they were the better team from the better conference. And again, I had no dog in the fight.

 

[Codaxx]

Meanwhile OK State was granted a miracle in the Fiesta when Stanford's freshman kicker completely choked away the chip shot, "game winning" field goal at the end of regulation. My feelings when the bowl games concluded remained the same as they were going in. Bama was absolutely loaded, they were the better team from the better conference. And again, I had no dog in the fight.

-
I probably would not argue, but that is not the pt. OSU was higher in computers and higher in SOS with the same record. 11 win record vs #2 SOS is more impressive than something in the 15-20 area. Using statistical data OSU was considered better and had traveled a harder road. Opinions believed that Bama was better. This is the crux of the problem. People were so arrogant to believe that their opinion trumped the data and by so much, as to to believe Bama deserved a second shot at LSU before OK State. I just do not see a logical or fact based reason for that decision. Your argument included.z

 

[4down20]

-
I probably would not argue, but that is not the pt. OSU was higher in computers and higher in SOS with the same record. Using statistical data OSU was considered better and had traveled a harder road. Opinions believed that Bama was better. This is the crux of the problem. People were so arrogant to believe that their opinion trumped the data and by so much, as to to believe Bama deserved a second shot at LSU before OK State. I just do not see a logical or fact based reason for that decision. Your argument included.

But it wasn't the same record. For the same reason why win% based SoS rankings are horrible(not saying that's what is being used here). Who the wins and losses come against have an effect.

If Alabama was playing Boise St type SoS, then I could see your point. But that wasn't the case. Saying it was better without looking at how much better is the problem here, just as trying to take both losses as even is a problem.

 

[Boise4Life]

I get the feeling you watch your fair share of college football, coda. I personally can't get enough. It's almost to the point where it's a bit concerning. So let me ask you. Put your biases toward your conference and everything else aside. They had identical records. When you watched OK State and Alabama play in 2011, when you watched them with your own eyes, who do you think was the better football team? Be honest with yourself. No offense intended but if you say OK State, then you are a fool.

 

[trojanfan12]

. Do you realize the shitstorm you are about to start

He's new. He'll learn.


Poor guy!!

 

[Codaxx]

But it wasn't the same record. For the same reason why win% based SoS rankings are horrible(not saying that's what is being used here). Who the wins and losses come against have an effect.

If Alabama was playing Boise St type SoS, then I could see your point. But that wasn't the case. Saying it was better without looking at how much better is the problem here, just as trying to take both losses as even is a problem.

2 things here. You are arguing over the magnitude of the difference in SOS. At worst OSU won the same amount of games vs an equal schedule. At best OSU won an equal amount vs a better schedule. The accomplishments of the season were at a minimum a wash, but OSU accomplished their 1st goal and Bama did not. That would be to win the conference. We also knew that Bama lost to LSU already and could not know OSU would win or lose vs LSU. Again I do not see a fact based argument for the decision. If you said it was based on opinion, rankings, or historical importance (this is probably the biggest factor IMO) than I am happy to agree.

 

[Codaxx]

I get the feeling you watch your fair share of college football, coda. I personally can't get enough. It's almost to the point where it's a bit concerning. So let me ask you. Put your biases toward your conference and everything else aside. They had identical records. When you watched OK State and Alabama play in 2011, when you watched them with your own eyes, who do you think was the better football team? Be honest with yourself. No offense intended but if you say OK State, then you are a fool.

I already said I agreed that I thought Bama was better. I will also say I thought Oklahoma had 0 chance vs Bama this yr. WHy would we play games if we are going to assume our eyes are the ultimate judge? There was nothing but opinion to support Bama and I think that is a very poor precedent.

 

[WhiteMamba]

Because that isn't what happened. The differences in schedule strength between Alabama and Oklahoma St were extremely mild, but the teams they lost too weren't even close.

The other schools choked, deal with it.

Well Oregon lost to Rose Bowl and conference champ Stanford n OT in 2012 ... while Bama lost to 6th place Sec team in ATM.

I,suppose that is different. Spin away Gump....

 

[Boise4Life]

Well Oregon lost to Rose Bowl and conference champ Stanford n OT in 2012 ... while Bama lost to 6th place Sec team in ATM.

I,suppose that is different. Spin away Gump....

That A&M team also finished 5th in the country, Mamba. Pretty powerful conference.

 

[WNY_FOOTBALL_DUDE]

So what if Alabama didn't play 2 other SEC teams? Oklahoma St didn't play them either.

Alabama didn't complete its conference obstacle course, and avoided upper crust competition within its own conference. That's a problem, at least in my eyes. Oklahoma State won its conference and played a better schedule than Alabama. Can't see why they deserved it over them.

So you're ok with teams skirting upper level competition within their own conference? I could say the same thing about Kansas in 2007, Michigan in 2011, and Oregon in 2012.

 

[WNY_FOOTBALL_DUDE]

That's because the voters watched the games with their own eyes. Bama was the better team and when they kicked the snot out of LSU in the NCG, they just drove that point even further home.

You're once again, stepping in bad logic. How do you know Alabama was better than Oklahoma State in 2011? Did the two ever face each other? No. Are you the world's greatest sports gamblers and can with 100% certainty predict how games will turn out ahead of time?

Alabama and LSU split their games in 2011, and we never got to see how Oklahoma State would have faced off against either LSU or Alabama.

 

[Boise4Life]

I already said I agreed that I thought Bama was better. I will also say I thought Oklahoma had 0 chance vs Bama this yr. WHy would we play games if we are going to assume our eyes are the ultimate judge? There was nothing but opinion to support Bama and I think that is a very poor precedent.

Well sure. Big 12 champion Baylor was supposed to smack UCF, right? I agree. That's why they play the games. The problem is all these teams can't play each other head to head. All we have to go on leading into the bowl match ups are two things - results and the eye test. That Iowa State result was an absolute embarrassment and when I watched those two teams play their games in 2011, it was clear to me that Bama was the better football team. Take nothing away from OK State. Damn good team, explosive weapons on offense, etc., etc. But that nasty ass Bama defense, the coaching, STUDS all over the place at every position flying around the field making plays, etc. - just a better team in my eyes. And after all that's all we have going into the bowl games - results and the eye test.

 

[Codaxx]

Well sure. Big 12 champion Baylor was supposed to smack UCF, right? I agree. That's why they play the games. The problem is all these teams can't play each other head to head. All we have to go on leading into the bowl match ups are two things - results and the eye test. That Iowa State result was an absolute embarrassment and when I watched those two teams play their games in 2011, it was clear to me that Bama was the better football team. Take nothing away from OK State. Damn good team, explosive weapons on offense, etc., etc. But that nasty ass Bama defense, the coaching, STUDS all over the place at every position flying around the field making plays, etc. - just a better team in my eyes. And after all that's all we have going into the bowl games - results and the eye test.

But results pointed to Oklahoma State. That is my problem. When Florida jumped Michigan in similar circumstances SOS was cited. That seemed logical. Identical records, let's pick the team with a higher SOS that did not lose to the other BCS Championship a Game participant already.