THE BIG 10 THREAD

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

Alabama played an FCS school last year and FAU. They were the #1 seed. FSU played Oklahoma State, ND and Florida OOC. They were the #3 seed. Clemson goes undefeated they're in, unless every P5 champ is undefeated, but that isn't going to happen.

And Alabama got points for winning the SEC, while in general no one is looking at the ACC as a particularly strong conference, especially the way FSU choked against Oregon last year.

Which again, I am not predicting if it came down to a 2-loss Big Ten Champ Michigan vs an undefeated ACC Champ Clemson Michigan would get the nod, hell I'm not even saying that is likely! All I'm saying that from what we've heard how the committee operates it should surprise no one if Michigan gets the nod.

 

[ericd7633]

And Alabama got points for winning the SEC, while in general no one is looking at the ACC as a particularly strong conference, especially the way FSU choked against Oregon last year.

Which again, I am not predicting if it came down to a 2-loss Big Ten Champ Michigan vs an undefeated ACC Champ Clemson Michigan would get the nod, hell I'm not even saying that is likely! All I'm saying that from what we've heard how the committee operates it should surprise no one if Michigan gets the nod.

Yes it would be shocking if the committee picked a 2 loss big 10 champ over an undefeated Clemson/FSU. Hell they didn't even pick a 1 loss Big 10 Champ over an undefeated FSU last year. FSU was the #3 seed.

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

Yes it would be shocking if the committee picked a 2 loss big 10 champ over an undefeated Clemson/FSU. Hell they didn't even pick a 1 loss Big 10 Champ over an undefeated FSU last year. FSU was the #3 seed.

And FSU was the defending national champs with the previous years Heisman, which while yes played an FCS school, the remaining 3 OOC games were Power 5/ND. While Baylor had 2 Group of 5 schools (SMU and Buffalo) and TCU 1 (SMU again), with both also playing an FCS.

So while all three had an FCS, FSU didn't play any Group of 5 teams, while Baylor and TCU did. Which again, word from what happened in the committee was strength of schedule weighed heavily against TCU and Baylor, so maybe if they had more Power 5 teams on the schedule and/or even not an FCS school maybe they get in over Ohio State/FSU.

 

[ericd7633]

And FSU was the defending national champs with the previous years Heisman, which while yes played an FCS school, the remaining 3 OOC games were Power 5/ND. While Baylor had 2 Group of 5 schools (SMU and Buffalo) and TCU 1 (SMU again), with both also playing an FCS.

So while all three had an FCS, FSU didn't play any Group of 5 teams, while Baylor and TCU did. Which again, word from what happened in the committee was strength of schedule weighed heavily against TCU and Baylor, so maybe if they had more Power 5 teams on the schedule and/or even not an FCS school maybe they get in over Ohio State/FSU.

Yes schedule strength plays a factor. Not when discussing an undefeated P5 team against a 2 loss P5 conference champ. Michigan can win out and it won't mean shit. Which is what you're arguing for.

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

Yes schedule strength plays a factor. Not when discussing an undefeated P5 team against a 2 loss P5 conference champ. Michigan can win out and it won't mean shit. Which is what you're arguing for.

Which you missed the point. One of the biggest reasons for the switch from the BCS to the playoffs was to make strength of schedule a factor, and to stop rewarding schools for scheduling cupcakes like the FCS or Sun Belt. Picking a school like Clemson, who has those on their schedule sends the message that is ok to schedule cupcakes, because you will get in for pounding the shit out of teams that never stood a chance versus a team that played top level competition and while lost, lost close. Thus undermining that incentive to schedule other power 5 schools.

The point is to pick who they think is the best 4 schools, and while record is a significant factor, it shouldn't be the overriding factor.

 

[ericd7633]

Which you missed the point. One of the biggest reasons for the switch from the BCS to the playoffs was to make strength of schedule a factor, and to stop rewarding schools for scheduling cupcakes like the FCS or Sun Belt. Picking a school like Clemson, who has those on their schedule sends the message that is ok to schedule cupcakes, because you will get in for pounding the shit out of teams that never stood a chance versus a team that played top level competition and while lost, lost close. Thus undermining that incentive to schedule other power 5 schools.

The point is to pick who they think is the best 4 schools, and while record is a significant factor, it shouldn't be the overriding factor.

Clemson also played Notre Dame and has South Carolina at the end of the year. How is that any worse than Ohio State scheduling Va Tech, 2 MAC schools and Hawaii? It isn't. Its the same, you could argue Clemson has a much more difficult OOC SOS than Ohio State.

Michigan has a shit OOC schedule next year. Guess you'll be changing your tune next year?

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

Clemson also played Notre Dame and has South Carolina at the end of the year. How is that any worse than Ohio State scheduling Va Tech, 2 MAC schools and Hawaii? It isn't. Its the same, you could argue Clemson has a much more difficult OOC SOS than Ohio State.

Yes, a South Carolina team that will likely end the season with a losing record and a Notre Dame who's only quality opponent was Clemson.........

The difference is Ohio State didn't play and FCS opponent, and plays in a better conference.

Michigan has a shit OOC schedule next year. Guess you'll be changing your tune next year?

Won't say it is the toughest of a OOC schedule, but two major notes: One, no FCS teams and two, in 2016 the Big Ten goes to a 9 game conference slat, so there are only 3 non-conference games, of which one is a Power 5 school (which yes Colorado isn't a particularly good Power 5). It's not like I'm saying every OOC game needs to be Power 5, but FCS should be avoided and Sun Belt is by far the weakest of the Group of 5. So Michigan's schedule next year > Clemson's this year.

 

[ericd7633]

Yes, a South Carolina team that will likely end the season with a losing record and a Notre Dame who's only quality opponent was Clemson.........

The difference is Ohio State didn't play and FCS opponent, and plays in a better conference.



Won't say it is the toughest of a OOC schedule, but two major notes: One, no FCS teams and two, in 2016 the Big Ten goes to a 9 game conference slat, so there are only 3 non-conference games, of which one is a Power 5 school (which yes Colorado isn't a particularly good Power 5). It's not like I'm saying every OOC game needs to be Power 5, but FCS should be avoided and Sun Belt is by far the weakest of the Group of 5. So Michigan's schedule next year > Clemson's this year.

Yes, I'm well aware the B1G goes to a 9 game conf. schedule. And Michigan plays Hawaii, UCF and Colorado OOC. And yes the Sun Belt is a weak conference. But they played Appalachian State, who appears to be the first or 2nd best team in that conference. If you're going to make fun of Clemson's OOC this year, you have to make fun of Michigan's next year, or you're a hypocrite.

 

[7Samurai13]

Yes, I'm well aware the B1G goes to a 9 game conf. schedule. And Michigan plays Hawaii, UCF and Colorado OOC. And yes the Sun Belt is a weak conference. But they played Appalachian State, who appears to be the first or 2nd best team in that conference. If you're going to make fun of Clemson's OOC this year, you have to make fun of Michigan's next year, or you're a hypocrite.

Did Art Briles become AD at Michigan? Colorado is your big OOC game?

 

[ericd7633]

Did Art Briles become AD at Michigan? Colorado is your big OOC game?

The current rank of Michigan's OOC opponents next year(according to Sagarin)

Colorado: 92
UCF: 126
Hawaii: 124

He makes fun of App State yet they are currently ranked 62.

 

[rmilia1]

This scenario would probably knock the Big Ten out of the playoff.

Nah. Iowa will be 13-0 either way

 

[ericd7633]

Yes, a South Carolina team that will likely end the season with a losing record and a Notre Dame who's only quality opponent was Clemson.........

The difference is Ohio State didn't play and FCS opponent, and plays in a better conference.



Won't say it is the toughest of a OOC schedule, but two major notes: One, no FCS teams and two, in 2016 the Big Ten goes to a 9 game conference slat, so there are only 3 non-conference games, of which one is a Power 5 school (which yes Colorado isn't a particularly good Power 5). It's not like I'm saying every OOC game needs to be Power 5, but FCS should be avoided and Sun Belt is by far the weakest of the Group of 5. So Michigan's schedule next year > Clemson's this year.

Michigan's 2016 OOC teams rank according to Sagarin:

Colorado: 92
UCF: 126
Hawaii: 124

Avg. Rank: 114

Clemson's 2015 OOC teams rank according to Sagarin:

Notre Dame: 9
South Carolina: 59
Appalachian State: 62
Wofford: 162

Avg. Rank: 73

So please go ahead and call yourself a hypocrite or STFU about Clemson's OOC schedule.

 

[Oney]

When all 3 of the 4 bluebloods are on one side that seems to be a problem to me.

The money and top 4 coaches are in the East. I can understand arguments of the West will come around but I call Bullshit when you have the the 4 historically best B1G teams on one side.

We already had the split of historical dominance in the Leaders and Legends, and it was a PR disaster, nobody could remember who was in each division without making up rhymes and rules. East and West is much easier to follow, grab a map and you could pretty much figure it out. I like playing against MSU and PSU every year. Wish we had a permanent crossover with Nebraska and Wisky.

Maybe when we get to 9 conference games we'll get a permanent crossover.

 

[Oney]

Michigan's 2016 OOC teams rank according to Sagarin:

Colorado: 92
UCF: 126
Hawaii: 124

Avg. Rank: 114

Clemson's 2015 OOC teams rank according to Sagarin:

Notre Dame: 9
South Carolina: 59
Appalachian State: 62
Wofford: 162

Avg. Rank: 73

So please go ahead and call yourself a hypocrite or STFU about Clemson's OOC schedule.

Quoting Sagarin right now is about the worst thing in the world, as he still has preseason weighting on everything. Massey ratings is a little closer without the abnormalities Sagarin has. He's no good till almost the end of the year.

 

[7Samurai13]

Quoting Sagarin right now is about the worst thing in the world, as he still has preseason weighting on everything. Massey ratings is a little closer without the abnormalities Sagarin has. He's no good till almost the end of the year.

Don't let eric or 4d20 hear that or they will lose their shit.

 

[ericd7633]

Quoting Sagarin right now is about the worst thing in the world, as he still has preseason weighting on everything. Massey ratings is a little closer without the abnormalities Sagarin has. He's no good till almost the end of the year.

With Massey Ratings:

Colorado: 95
UCF: 140
Hawaii: 157

Avg: 130.67

Notre Same: 9
South Carolina: 63
Appalachian State: 68
Wofford: 193

Avg: 83.25

Again, if he's going to blast Clemson for their OOC schedule he better as hell blast his own teams for next year because its substantially worse. If not, hypocrite.

 

[rmilia1]

Michigan is likely to be ranked higher in the first CFP poll this year than OSU was last year (16th). While I can't see a 2 loss Michigan getting in its not impossible

 

[ericd7633]

Michigan is likely to be ranked higher in the first CFP poll this year than OSU was last year (16th). While I can't see a 2 loss Michigan getting in its not impossible

It is interesting to go back and look at the first week rankings. They basically went all undefeated's, then all one loss teams then all two loss teams. It'll be interesting, for example, to see, if they rank an Oklahoma or Cal or a Memphis ahead of Michigan.

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

With Massey Ratings:

Colorado: 95
UCF: 140
Hawaii: 157

Avg: 130.67

Notre Same: 9
South Carolina: 63
Appalachian State: 68
Wofford: 193

Avg: 83.25

Again, if he's going to blast Clemson for their OOC schedule he better as hell blast his own teams for next year because its substantially worse. If not, hypocrite.

What part of no FCS don't you get?

That is the biggest drag on Clemson's OOC schedule. As for App State, I see you are going with the tallest midget argument. Even being the best team in a shitty conference still doesn't override that App State is a member of shitty conference.

And your math ignores the fact there is that 9th conference game, which gives a little wiggly room to not play as tough of a OOC schedule as a team that plays only 8 game conference slate, especially in a weaker conference.

That's the thing you are missing, I'm talking overall strength of schedule, and OOC is only part of that. If your conference slate is murderers' row, as Michigan's will be, playing in the Big Ten East, that buys one a little slack in the OOC. But even then not enough IMHO to erase the stain of playing an FCS. So for example, the SEC plays the Sun Belt a lot, which I'm not going to hold that as much against a team such as Alabama, because in it's conference schedule they play LSU, Auburn, and other stronger schools than Clemson plays in it's conference.

So if you are from a weaker conference, like the ACC, you should really avoid scheduling FCS, and try to get at least 2 Power 5 schools (which normally the South Carolina game is a good resume booster, but sorry, not this year).

 

[rmilia1]

It is interesting to go back and look at the first week rankings. They basically went all undefeated's, then all one loss teams then all two loss teams. It'll be interesting, for example, to see, if they rank an Oklahoma or Cal or a Memphis ahead of Michigan.

What I like about the committee rankings is they appear to be able to have more fluidity than the AP or coaches. They seem to be more able and willing to move teams around and not get stuck ONLY moving teans down when they lose