SOS and the CFP Committee

[Bandwagonbo2]

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.

skirting? so playing the schedule that is dealt to you by your conference is skirting? Its not like Alabama decided they didnt want to play these teams themselves, its dealt by a rotation in the conference and that rotation has come back around to Florida on this years schedule. And to solidify the point of this, the only coach in the SEC that has been in favor of a nine game in conference schedule is Nick Saban and he has been vocal about it at the SEC meeting each year. Cant blame the team for who they played, all you can do is play who's up next on the schedule.

Here is a point that you fail to mention among your stats. Alabama that year had the top defense in the country and had a top 15 offense. Ok St had a top 5 offense and one of the worst defenses in the country at number 99 out of 120. Bama had a well rounded team and lost in overtime to the top team in the country, one that before the title game was being hailed as one of the best of all times possibly. No other team on Bama's schedule was in the game beyond halftime.

In contrast Ok State lost to a 28 point underdog in overtime and squeaked out wins over two other opponents. Its not like OK State had the world at its fingertips, they had a swiss cheese defense that couldnt hold anyone, now the offense was good, but the best defense it played all year was in the high 20's.

 

[WNY_FOOTBALL_DUDE]

skirting? so playing the schedule that is dealt to you by your conference is skirting? Its not like Alabama decided they didnt want to play these teams themselves, its dealt by a rotation in the conference and that rotation has come back around to Florida on this years schedule. And to solidify the point of this, the only coach in the SEC that has been in favor of a nine game in conference schedule is Nick Saban and he has been vocal about it at the SEC meeting each year. Cant blame the team for who they played, all you can do is play who's up next on the schedule.

Here is a point that you fail to mention among your stats. Alabama that year had the top defense in the country and had a top 15 offense. Ok St had a top 5 offense and one of the worst defenses in the country at number 99 out of 120. Bama had a well rounded team and lost in overtime to the top team in the country, one that before the title game was being hailed as one of the best of all times possibly. No other team on Bama's schedule was in the game beyond halftime.

In contrast Ok State lost to a 28 point underdog in overtime and squeaked out wins over two other opponents. Its not like OK State had the world at its fingertips, they had a swiss cheese defense that couldnt hold anyone, now the offense was good, but the best defense it played all year was in the high 20's.

Alabama didn't intentionally skirt anybody, but when they messed up against LSU, they ended up winning by losing. They did not have to face Georgia in the SEC championship game. LSU did. How do you know for sure they would have beaten Georgia?

Offense and defensive stats are very deceptive. They don't take into consideration quality of competition and how many stats were garbage time stats.

The only two teams Oklahoma State beat in 2011 by less than 10 points was Texas A&M and Kansas State. Everybody else they beat was a piece of cake. They beat Oklahoma by 34 points and Baylor by 35 points. How is that a bad thing?

I still haven't heard a single argument on how it would be impossible for Oklahoma State to beat Alabama or LSU that season. Not one.

 

[Boise4Life]

Of course it wouldn't have been impossible for OK State to beat LSU or Bama in 2011. Impossible? Who said that?

 

[WNY_FOOTBALL_DUDE]

Of course it wouldn't have been impossible for OK State to beat LSU or Bama in 2011. Impossible? Who said that?

You said Alabama was a better team than Oklahoma State. I responded by saying how do you know, if they never faced against each other.

 

[Boise4Life]

You said Alabama was a better team than Oklahoma State. I responded by saying how do you know, if they never faced against each other.

I did feel like they were the better team, but as you know the better team doesn't always win. Would it have been impossible for OK State to have beaten either LSU or Bama? Absolutely not. They were a damn good football team as evidenced by their EOY #3 ranking.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

You said Alabama was a better team than Oklahoma State. I responded by saying how do you know, if they never faced against each other.

Conversely, how do you know they weren't for the same reasoning. Here is one inescapable fact, its history and as such, not going to change.

 

[trojanfan12]

You said Alabama was a better team than Oklahoma State. I responded by saying how do you know, if they never faced against each other.

caneman tried to warn you about the impending shit storm!!

 

[WNY_FOOTBALL_DUDE]

I did feel like they were the better team, but as you know the better team doesn't always win. Would it have been impossible for OK State to have beaten either LSU or Bama? Absolutely not. They were a damn good football team as evidenced by their EOY #3 ranking.

I just don't get your arguments here.

Oklahoma State played a better schedule, won its conference, and produced a 92% winning.

Alabama failed to win its conference and division, produced a weaker SOS than Okie State, played its schedule without ever playing Georgia or South Carolina.

Yet in some strange world, you think Alabama deserved it more. I say, you got to be kidding with me. Now I look wouldn't mind if, we had a four team playoff with LSU, Oklahoma State, Alabama, and Oregon. That would be fine with me, but college football was being gravely unfair and inconsistent when it decided to give Alabama a mulligan.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

caneman tried to warn you about the impending shit storm!!

Yes but its a Boise Fan leading the charge for the opposition in the argument

 

[WNY_FOOTBALL_DUDE]

Conversely, how do you know they weren't for the same reasoning. Here is one inescapable fact, its history and as such, not going to change.

I never made any claims about teams being better or worse.

 

[trojanfan12]

Yes but its a Boise Fan leading the charge for the opposition in the argument

Which is definitely a new development!!

 

[WNY_FOOTBALL_DUDE]

caneman tried to warn you about the impending shit storm!!

I am not afraid of anybody, sir.

I am not attacking Alabama or SEC here. I am attacking the system.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

I just don't get your arguments here.

Oklahoma State played a better schedule, won its conference, and produced a 92% winning.

Alabama failed to win its conference and division, produced a weaker SOS than Okie State, played its schedule without ever playing Georgia or South Carolina.

Yet in some strange world, you think Alabama deserved it more. I say, you got to be kidding with me. Now I look wouldn't mind if, we had a four team playoff with LSU, Oklahoma State, Alabama, and Oregon. That would be fine with me, but college football was being gravely unfair and inconsistent when it decided to give Alabama a mulligan.

That whole line is subject to the same results that all teams are judged by, thus subjective at best. As I stated before, we will never know based on the fact they didnt play, but in my world, a championship team clearly doesnt have a 99th ranked defense and lose to a 28 point underdog. I know for a fact that Alabama beat all of its 28 point underdogs that year and was not in danger of losing to any team except for LSU in any game they played, Ok State cannot say that.

 

[Boise4Life]

I am not afraid of anybody, sir.

I am not attacking Alabama or SEC here. I am attacking the system.

It's getting better even though I'm not in favor of some stupid 13 person committee with people like Ty Willingham and Condy Rice deciding upon and seeding the four teams.

Once it gets to an eight team playoff it will be beautiful.

 

[Codaxx]

That whole line is subject to the same results that all teams are judged by, thus subjective at best. As I stated before, we will never know based on the fact they didnt play, but in my world, a championship team clearly doesnt have a 99th ranked defense and lose to a 28 point underdog. I know for a fact that Alabama beat all of its 28 point underdogs that year and was not in danger of losing to any team except for LSU in any game they played, Ok State cannot say that.

That is not true. Colley Matrix is not subjective. Winning a conference title is hardly subjective. The formula is on the site and readily reproduceable. 99th ranked defense is subjective in the sense you are using it. According to S&P+ Oklahoma State's defense was 13th. Total yards they were in the 100s, but that doesn't account for tempo or SOS. OSU saw 1089 plays that yr and Alabama faced 720. Tempo can be a bitch. I think S&P is a bit high and total defense way too low.

 

[trojanfan12]

I am not afraid of anybody, sir.

I am not attacking Alabama or SEC here. I am attacking the system.

Doesn't matter. That's not how some Bammers and SEC fans see it!! Have fun!!

 

[Codaxx]

That whole line is subject to the same results that all teams are judged by, thus subjective at best. As I stated before, we will never know based on the fact they didnt play, but in my world, a championship team clearly doesnt have a 99th ranked defense and lose to a 28 point underdog. I know for a fact that Alabama beat all of its 28 point underdogs that year and was not in danger of losing to any team except for LSU in any game they played, Ok State cannot say that.

I still don't get the fascination with the 28 pt underdog. If 2 skiers go down a double black diamond run does it matter if one falls in the mogul field and the other right at the base?

 

[trojanfan12]

I still don't get the fascination with the 28 pt underdog. If 2 skiers go down a double black diamond run does it matter if one falls in the mogul field and the other right at the base?

Yeah, I've never understood that either. If memory serves, the previous season the argument was SOS. Then the next season, when SOS didn't work for them, it was which team had the "better loss".

 

[WNY_FOOTBALL_DUDE]

It's getting better even though I'm not in favor of some stupid 13 person committee with people like Ty Willingham and Condy Rice deciding upon and seeding the four teams.

Once it gets to an eight team playoff it will be beautiful.

Better? Yes, but that's like saying I would rather drink spoiled milk than gasoline. The committee is going to be influenced by location of the semi-finals, team history, and size of fanbase to make their final decision. I highly doubt, they are going to give small conference teams a chance, even if they play at least 2 AQ opponents.

I am perfectly fine with 8 teams, even though 16 teams would be the best. But I think you would have to do the following:

- Give all the major conferences an automatic playoff spot. Why? Because the big 5 controls the system and will argue that their conferences brings home the most bacon to the system and plays a better schedule overall than any of the smaller conferences.

- Give the highest ranked minor conference champion an autobid as well. You do this in order to prevent anti-trust lawsuits, and help smaller schools and conference rise up the ranks.

- Pick two wildcards. You could throw in the rule of giving out auto playoff spots to Notre Dame or the 2nd highest ranked minor conference champion, if ranked in the top 6 or 8.

- Put the first two rounds on campus sites, not neutral ground, and the final round on a bowl site.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

I still don't get the fascination with the 28 pt underdog. If 2 skiers go down a double black diamond run does it matter if one falls in the mogul field and the other right at the base?

Not in skiing, but football is not skiing.

I place alot of emphasis on teams beating the teams they should and playing the others like they know how to play. In that season(and I watched alot of both teams) Bama looked like they had a handle on every game including the LSU game they lost. Ok St did not look as confident and poised in a few of their games and lucked out on a couple of wins(my opinion). Yes luck plays a part in football, but so does bad luck and losing late in that season was their gut check and they blew it. Of course this is all my opinion, but apparently its a widely shared opinion(atleast in the voters eyes).